Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAqua Barn Development Agreement - Amendments, Rezoning (11/13/2006) F *NOW ,MIPW CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 3 2 8 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (HIGHLANDS STUDY AREA) FROM RESIDENTIAL- 10 DU/AC (R-10) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RM-F), FILE NO. LUA-06- 128 (CPA 2006-M-6). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Land Use Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 known as the "Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Renton," as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described in Attachments A and B has heretofore been zoned as Residential- 10 du/ac; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was duly referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing having been held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and said matter having been duly considered by the Planning Commission, and said zoning request being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council having duly considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties having been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance 5285 on May 14, 2007, which changed the Comprehensive Plan land use designation for these properties from Residential Medium Density(RMD)to Residential Multi-Family (RMF); and WHEREAS, the RM-F zoning designation is consistent with the RMF land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan; vie ORDINANCE NO. 5328 *1011 4 WHEREAS, the RM-F zoning designation is consistent with the RMF land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential Multi-Family as hereinbelow specified. The Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Division is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to-wit: See Attachments "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Highlands Study Area). SECTION H. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 10th day of December , 2001. Bonnie Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 10 t h:day of December , 2007. . -A/C(76/ . eteltk Kathy Keol r, Mayor Approved as to form: CL7064.•.•414........e7t06 +- Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 12/15/2007 ( summary) ORD.1409:11/14/07:ch 2 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5328 u 3 NI 2'[11 NE 24th t / ,NE 23rd- D cNE 23rd I a� _w ' — J Pt z ,NE ( � � v . 1NE 22[ ENE 22nd a ; 6 Q fyE 22Q4 NE 23rd St — NE 2 r! a , j st St �' z m NE 22nd St �� cI� , , 1 o! I I�NE 21st St NE 20th. St - H J '©, LJF 20 l^ , �I �io� �. L,, 1 ---) w F L '. .Pye _) ,' NE 1 �11 i7th z ` <� , ' .n I lstn °� �. { I I, 0 16th S:I; L' y o Si �1�1J n 7 s o P ,, 13 fl Q - "�I ¢ a I— �-\ c 4Th " ; '' g 1 C o c • Y �� '¢ E r �— - 5 T I � iiI C / s .� 2F t4th-St `� 1. { ° c v =i U O` d C b I 'v- 12th St. ¢_ c? �__ ' I ' NE 12th St m g L o 6 U, _ B il{h� 4g' .�- r T,I I s. b i- i oli Ia ,�5 r NE lath St. z —d- H /? 900 I ?Jc� ("), 1dt1� 1 PI .NE tt t e to ,�� NE 1�th �r r E / NE teth'S PI �'\�i N ri J f Y ,i-`,-Ot Lr�t t rr'' ,'\ \ 1 / i NE._.Sth /0/h - �� NE iOthi. lij St 'i...'\\`� \tt 4J �/ r i !F 1 �I S t`t� I( 9th St.'.: i _. ti �� i °.. �LIL ! i ' 1 c),,hSt' !o s o uiNE9G. , \ \\ b �`l_L j , o \ j r:F 8th PI : o g NE 9th Ct. Q I'.°" NE Stti CI a C`__ ': ia NE 8th •St 1 1 `�L? ') NF Sit SC J NE 7th;St. I. .: ;Lt ,.o2 I r �, t U io Ij1 dma ds tfi'CI ! ' r 11ll ,� � e,�e..-�` Z �� _ ce. Cl �'-1 Z' �: n-.. — - Rezone from Residential-10 du/ac to 0 1000 2000 Residential Multi-Family 1 : 12000 ORDINANCE NO. 5328 HIGHLANDS REZONE REZONE FROM R-10 TO RMF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Attachment B The North five acres of the West half of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington; EXCEPT roads. December 10, 2007 ow Renton City Council Minutes Page 438 department divisions. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5325 An ordinance was read adopting the annual budget for the year 2008 in the total Budget: 2008 Annual City of amount of$234,638,924. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, Renton COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5326 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 1, Administration and Enforcement, Utility: System Development of Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code to allow for adjustments to Charges System Development Charges. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5327 An ordinance was read annexing approximately 2,406 acres of property Annexation: Benson Hill generally bounded by the City of Renton corporate boundary on the west and Communities, S 200th St& north, SE 192nd St. and S. 200th St. on the south and on the east, 108th Ave. 128th Ave SE SE, the eastern edge of Boulevard Lane Park, the western edge of Boulevard Lane Division No. 2, and 128th Ave. SE, if extended,but including Renton Park and Charles Lindberg High School; Benson Hill Communities Annexation. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5328 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain properties Planning: Highlands Study within the Highlands Study Area from R-10 (Residential - ten dwelling units per Area Zoning Correction, acre) to RM-F (Residential Multi-Family) zoning; LUA-06-128; CPA 2006-M- Monroe Ave NE 06. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT -iJtg 414 001 n THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5329 An ordinance was read adopting the 2007 amendments to the City's 2004 Comprehensive Plan: 2007 Comprehensive Plan, maps and data in conjunction therewith. MOVED BY Amendments BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5330 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 4-2, Zoning Districts - Uses and Comprehensive Plan: 2007 Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code to amend the Amendments, CN Zone regulations regarding the location of required parking in the Commercial Parking Regulations Neighborhood zone. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5331 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 4-2, Zoning Districts - Uses and Comprehensive Plan: 2007 Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code to amend the Amendments, Business regulations regarding the Rainier Business District Overlay and the decision Districts Regulations criteria for stand alone residential in the NE 4th, Sunset, and Puget business districts. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5332 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 4-2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Comprehensive Plan: 2007 Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code by allowing Amendments, Allowing RMH Residential Manufactured Home(RMH)zoning to implement the Residential to Implement RLD Low Density (RLD) land use designation. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. May 21, 2007 Renton City Council Minutes Page 180 The public is invited to provide input on the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan at an open house on May 30 at the Highlands Neighborhood Center. * The Renton Public Library is holding two public meetings this week to seek citizen input on the Library Master Plan: May 23 at the North Highlands Neighborhood Center and May 24 at City Hall. * The Duwamish Tribe is being honored at the Duwamish Art Mural Dedication on June 2 at the Henry Moses Aquatic Center. • AUDIENCE COMMENT Ruthie Larson, 714 High Ave. S., Renton, 98057, expressed concern regarding Citizen Comment: Larson - emergency vehicle access to Renton Hill, noting that access to that area will be Renton Hill Access compromised when the I-405 improvements begin. She asked that the City's Transportation Division review the matter. Mayor Keolker confirmed that the matter will be reviewed. Citizen Comment: McOmber- Howard McOmber, 475 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, 98056,pointed out that Highlands Area refinements are needed for the recently adopted Highlands-area ordinances, Redevelopment such as for the spacing between townhouse units. Saying that a lot of work f6,11,1 T.)\ needs to be done in the Highlands, Mr. McOmber noted that it is important for those who live and work in the Highlands to participate in the process. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 5/14/2007. Council concur. 5/14/2007 Appeal: Vineyards City Clerk submitted appeal letter filed by Cynthia Green, 5008 NE 2nd St., Construction Latecomer Renton, 98059, on behalf of Norma J. Randall whose property is located at 733 Agreement, Green, LA-06-002 Field Ave. NE, regarding the proposed assessment for the Vineyards Construction, LLC latecomer agreement for sewer main extension along NE 7th Pl. Refer to Hearing Examiner. AJLS: Renton River Days Fee Community Services Department requested the following: waiver of permit Waivers &Banner Installation fees for 2007 Renton River Days activities endorsed by Renton River Days Board of Directors; waiver of City Center Parking garage fees from July 27 to July 29; and authorization to install River Days banners on City light poles from June 11 to July 29. Council concur. Lease: Washington State Community Services Department recommended approval of a lease agreement University King County, 200 with King County, operating as Washington State University, King County, for Mill Bldg(1st Floor) space on the first floor of the 200 Mill Building. Expenditure required: $73,319.90; revenue generated over five-year lease: $754,899.12. Council concur. Police: Valley Special Police Department requested approval of an agreement with the Port of Seattle Response Team Interlocal and the municipalities of Auburn, Des Moines, Federal Way, Kent, and Tukwila Agreement to establish a Valley Special Response Team in order to provide a coordinated effort towards the effective resolution of high-risk incidents. Council concur. (See page 181 for resolution.) Police: Red Light School Zone Police Department recommended approval of the following for implementation Photo Enforcement Program of a red light/school zone photo enforcement program: cooperative purchasing agreement with City of Seattle; contract with American Traffic Solutions; and added City Code section regarding traffic safety cameras. Refer to Public Safety Committee. p C7 Hs o v, 0 K 0 '' c,i• rD a° O co O p b CO CA .0 b ,...„.. >. . . • cr Cr f !D a, < •w O N a iU to n co rn w K 7t" a w n O K O O ,.O " `G r- co co - -. O o a O �O K O O <' p ►�w1 J 0 70 n'or 4K .. X z- so a- CD..., o y 5 5• '-+ ►rJ �1 coCr co c> CD K O CD K X" -I a' 41x o *0 w m o•� <SD ~ c Ni B T CD `,,,,, °0 0 oab "n vo a o a o' _ 'd O-� v Uv w 0 - vp e o ° i a. Q w w �. o Z CD ^o o � — ° on CD x a cs O ° Iry n n w 0 co fID A F w per, w -I (� O • N dQ ,�'.' O in. C1Q (D 'O r'1' 10 GIP " O w UP Z (*) a Ln= CD CT n) t3 ititsf,, oN ° a.. a (� O x'a0 'S cn y Uo ° w 0 " " 'th• •• ° • OQ . ' ii ov *•• C r • � CD cn CD y'J- G Z. : • A i.0 .< a+0); y oco 0 0 • pro Cro CD c<D ,�„ s�'`i,•'O ........ ... • ,p`‘`'� � a�G FD ' N°COD (D -I . "it/ 4°°+��iiiiei'�° ,— (IQ 0 C.c CPp.:n $^: K m A, n m ^m ,•-� O R.� ,0 0 r5'. --^ a tr:,G ',IT be 95 o y 'z 0 ''' p7< n.' w❑ . cn ti 7 Fr. G G K K N • o u y -,.. i.�N G.G.-. ao ' c 3 0 c p,m g DA Fa• • c CD m .. ' M r,D C� p- %;rn ct o: u F. n o G. 0 n L• yy O cn.-'p z G s E=ri cn S b`o O co �0.'ti S O 10 t7 H 0- '-•� o P P O. n,d.0 2.U c� C"J� c G P ,d •co•‹ o Co 0 W ` � 'v, p:..'n 3 o WCH�•G g oJy 0 rro "! cr cnp G� i, two nP� " n Co'- ,yy j'wv G Fa °•Zt,., ] S.maa ` 0-`e• ^.'T 0 > 'rg -- �7U MT?t17] G c �z�5 '0',.....-`' O`C G • o 5 p'�y� n.0 o O4 c ron C zoo cD o 0 0 = . c;-, ^ 0to ,m -.4 r' C� r'' ]-. R.F.d.: Y 2 9-m :71'''Rw�"'j -''',` o tr:9,_ C'< ttt 5nUN• --o 0- c.-• CD R9ra. •'q O • on 5. roo.. -c- - Oc•-•cl]z.-3 o o to �w r n a=' %>o K;2.c -a cno�No a C-4>O 'ran SD Cj''CD ' ",w a Oy 'P '.� 0 CD C"",c:, n 0 CD r.>, - NOrc 5 ,�. 0 .a co p m O c m C • n rn.G G ��Co•' o G2'14 G .a G w o m './) 0 <-. . 0 o Mc CD d, atiG y v,�7.o n..o, K, p.o 'ra. , o o n','' o p r• o C':G o O G G .0 o Z 0 K :e c o 2.,r.' -e O 9.I_ o•.: co -' . ro.P.l3.,P cm.. v, b .? tr:❑-7,1, ? o -, n a C.D n90 8 ?m aP>c7to." 'o 5-'L c,t7 D' x`C ,'tsa -wi ronox='°0 o K �.c,-�,'-F �°ELa --- g 5-.m " � g3K ti -p1 m 8 X..Z 0 �T 1.° r r'(')-m m."6 p rn 1 .m m 1`000 y !C L. P•o 5 m z R 2 -.o c'y on'a o�ry �o �y-o o<" o ,L•-0s 0.� 0 0Cr C9. < w - asp a. V'g ' OKiC`n rtto n' cn 0,� r.-g . •- os-550 °saoK 0 �n`�"' N a'x"` n c G e �.e+ n eD a p b p w O O �'p'0.,--, "J 0 rJ.. h oG '- °.mac a'nCm C. 7, 'n0 ,P,7 P: m ,_ '-I rm P 0 n,D• 0 = '-'0 o ,-. c C�'F- G G N d_ °. c o r-�t,E o z DD v,0 G -.. co a- ] atoo F t- �,c-n0 G `t. — •�'0 '-rrtt . p ;c•- d O -.N~m m0 „'",� o Yo yfr•a� m-'xn o r-r-9 m ac: n p"^cc cc �yc0. OD c c-c'p p a-� •o G'9� co rDa3 tr'Z .,,0 2 0 04 G 0 o5 as K o coOD CD CD P n N Gy ^� n ] o as C�` 0 d .4 D C .fin..00 11'r: 0'n' D • r -- to c a c, 00 o��g x �cL�d xM �vc i :i 0 p - n 0 0 ac c 4; CD O D iD o • R-•=ow noiZ ,'G' a ry'G-o p, G �0.0 or'c. r m f 0" n s a' 0 C 0 O ao c 2 (D vo,TI P '-K,j T.ti�O SI 0' , F CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5288 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4260, THE "REVISED AND COMPILED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON," AND CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (HIGHLANDS STUDY AREA) FROM RESIDENTIAL- 10 DU/AC (R-10) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL MULTI FAMILY (RMF) ZONING FILE NO. LUA-06-128 (CPA 2006-M-06), AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Land Use Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 known as the "Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Renton," as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property described below has heretofore been zoned as Residential-10 du/ac (R-10); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was duly referred to the City Council for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing having been held thereon on or about November 13, 2006, and said matter having been duly considered by the City Council, and said zoning request being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council having duly considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties having been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; and WHEREAS, the City Council has had a series of development moratoria in place since May 2005, which has been extended from time to time, to allow City Staff time to 141110 ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 88 conduct a study of the Highlands study area and propose land use modifications for that area; and WHEREAS,the current development moratorium expires May 13, 2007; and WHEREAS,the city has expended considerable resources to conduct the study of the Highlands area during the moratoria; and WHEREAS, the City might lose the benefit of the studies conducted regarding the Highlands Study Area if the city waits to amend the zoning in the area described below until the next amendment cycle; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act requires that there be consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning designation for all property in the city's corporate boundaries; and WHEREAS, the current zoning in the Highlands study area needs to be changed to be consistent with the vision articulated in the contemporaneously adopted amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed modifications should be in place as soon as possible after the end of the development moratorium to prevent the vesting of new development that is inconsistent with the modifications; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential Multi Family (RMF) as specified in Attachments "A", "B", and "C" below. The Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Division is hereby authorized cpaord-zoning.doc 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5288 and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to-wit: See Attachments"A", "B", and "C" and attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Highlands Study Area). SECTION II. An emergency is hereby declared and this ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and immediately after its adoption. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14thday of May , 2007. Bonnie Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14th day of May , 2007. Kathy K olker, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 5/19/2007 (summary) ORD.1356:5/3/07:ch cpaord-zoning.doc 3 ATTACHMENT A '14111, ORDINANCE NO. 5288 '411° HIGHLANDS REZONE REZONE FROM R-10 TO RMF LEGAL DESCRIPTION All of Blocks 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Corrected Plat of Renton Highlands No. 2, as recorded in Volume 57 of Plats, Pages 92-98, records of King County, Washington. All situate in the Southwest quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. ATTACHMENT B ORDINANCE NO. 5288 .✓ HIGHLANDS REZONE REZONE FROM R-10 TO RMF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Blocks 4 and 5 of Fair View Terrace, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 60 of Plats, pages 65 & 66, records of King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 and 6 of Block 29, Correction Plat Renton Highlands No. 2, Replat of Blocks 12, 13, 14, 36, 37 and 38, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 57 of Plats,pages 92-98, records of King County. All situate in the Southwest quarter and Northwest quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5288 7-- -.-- iri iiiil - _5,... aii mw .11.114111 „.--, .i.. .. - Ian . €■=i:1 Nmou E ©' -W all •. lama i •• ■Yii■�r IM ilk �i ■ ��// 191V t• NM .■ros■ 11 ■1�1� E!� ■I 1■■ ■1111■E'■'l!I■fl■■■■■r\ • ,�� =-I di .ri�■ ■■ - -40 %Alf►t it /a sr*flg in �IIL�1S1L�j Fii :moll �R//7■� _ ©�EIDiiyL' 1 iELF'Q�E3��! ■ :N Bo F■ l minim ■xi t st St s = I��1K��N■■ t� H L "■. H . : : .�1111111 = wlb �;, ,■R /Cl/�/// II NE 20th.OI.a_.1I,11 I o•EiLvnr 1.mI llea.m. ...■ I■ ■s m�g /1m fipI,p 1pipa '.yam i0p4g1r1 110e nl,0-4, gi . 'i;ii=• �■�� m■ -tea 1G11111 ■■■■■i tps v■ . rl �` L■i rit l, atom d ■"�IP■nil as ■■■■■fit�, _me 11 `Q■I�c+ :�� ■■■■ L FP: ■■w■ efe �■■l .■■■y■ppiI.ii; // 11111 w _ _ i II I 21 us 9 Is. . NW ..i!,..' ■ 4 Now no riti no ' EILI'ri . ! iIPus !m .■ y ■ O n a ■siN INil 4 1 il nu%sm-wi —1-1-, 6-- NI! f,„,w ... ,„.,. ,,,, Aar, . . — „„ . , . III n oral =p Alm V" AO Bil Nis 4 an ..as .. _ MI AMEN . 'y c' EMIl 1hi1 6atthirinen \WO:1;if M mamma 11.__- Hipp tow v Ail Irma' -:-_—_-_nra mis mg col i.a __..16-7:44.-.-- --gm wm vr Emma =A .1 no: atm,Ill -til INN del ii ..E. am i 141 ma , IQilk.A . mamma E . ma. .. ■ l an Ell. �.0i) Illiki gig!! Jc .. ■ n rE Oth ■rn■cli . ..01 •W�ili 40 all■ n .1,40: gm dr . ., -,, ,-, el. °a Ilk tvii.0#4wl4,II Ilimulta °wl !CEird ItA� �ffld 11�111� I, / Omaky a■■•IIP �►�■ ► . ' „-- ' :i W. .ra t t r 1 =,i1aVfi■■■■ it: c,\ maw% •Ib i:11111111i ig: :C VV.:m r a■ t� `�E _ _-_ �' S t sworn �• c= 1■111111■■ 44_ ■II 11i11111'W wq,� 1Fi si. :7l�� . r. ■■■ fj�i II se ; �� gtir St • r>, . r>!. m .ri \ �'1 ��� Ii en IN ■ E. . OM OM v Sillti Mill.r. 1. , ■rli kiN c' i �EIM � ■ ti da PI fir 14- us :ma taw mew wilk�`\ o' �'ti<�'Z�� � • `" NE �t"1 St. -- . �'.__ -�,11 ♦ ;.101 y �A♦, ■`►� e r Im ICJ ■ am lipia 111, lye _i ,♦4♦40,I 6- in l 0,-„d ■��%� ■�1111:: ,�, v gem era . . ■Ago ♦ !�_ igig 17 r 1 Ai B. . rs rn'.r_ sr _ I,� ■,, •�� ■v Vs"■ F 11 I�JSYi i► del lam'■ ��'lsant��'� �}` ■ ♦ •�� Si .•■i•■ ■ �'■ 0 gi 1111, 1111! _ I6 t ■ E ■ p� Mil k I 1 ■ d w �i taw t i r'■ , 1111 1 lin in1ICl M' a. ■ /A r r u �s !M E■ r ■Ili' all Nov �����■ .�I� ■ .� Ill > ■ ■ pea 111n 111111111111P■cell■ �t .... / A� i■� �J:1l/NI1 ■MO 1� 'NA gi ■ices= = min �� =� \I w !PP'! ■ am`,, m "� III • nr■.Ii■ imil Ea MN INN NUM AS Highlands Subarea Study Area R-10 to RMF 0 1 000 2000 Task Force Proposed Rezone From R-10 to RMF ..,,.. i . • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning 1 12000 .0.i Alex Pictsch,Administrator "•` C.E.Faisal A .r• 08 November 2006 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 8 7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4260, THE "REVISED AND COMPILED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON," AND CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (HIGHLANDS STUDY AREA) FROM RESIDENTIAL-10 DU/AC (R-10) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL- 14 DU/AC (R-14) ZONING FILE NO. LUA-06- 128 (CPA 2006-M-06),AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Land Use Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 known as the "Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Renton," as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property described below has heretofore been zoned as Residential- 10 du/ac (R-10); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was duly referred to the City Council for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing having been held thereon on or about November 13, 2006, and said matter having been duly considered by the City Council, and said zoning request being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council having duly considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties having been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; and WHEREAS, the City Council has had a series of development moratoria in place since May 2005, which have been extended from time to time, to allow City Staff time to conduct a study of the Highlands study area and propose land use modifications for that area; and *40 irr+ ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 8 7 WHEREAS,the current development moratorium expires May 13, 2007; and WHEREAS,the city has expended considerable resources to conduct the study of the Highlands Study Area; and WHEREAS, the City might lose the benefit of the studies conducted regarding the Highlands Study Area if the City waits to amend the zoning of the area described below; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act requires that there be consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning designation for all property in the City's corporate boundaries; and WHEREAS,the current zoning in the Highlands Study Area needs to be changed to be consistent with the vision articulated in the contemporaneously adopted amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed modifications should be in place as soon as possible after the end of the development moratorium to prevent the vesting of new development that is inconsistent with the modifications; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential-14 du/ac (R-14) as specified in Attachments "A" and `B". The Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Division is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to-wit: See Attachments "A" and `B" and attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Highlands Study Area). cpaord-zoning.doc 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5287 SECTION II. An emergency is hereby declared and this ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and immediately after its adoption. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14thday of May , 2007. Bonnie Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14 t h day of May , 2007. Kettx, )6,-ek, Kathy KeOlker, Mayor Approved as to form: P. rence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 5/19/2007 ( summary) ORD.1354:5/3/07:ch cpaord-zoning.doc 3 ATTACHMENT A ''r'` ORDINANCE NO. 5287 `' j° HIGHLANDS REZONE 2006-M-06 REZONE FROM R-10 TO R-14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION All of Blocks 1-6, 45, 47, 50 & 51 and all of Block 46 except Tract 46A of the Corrected Plat of Renton Highlands No. 2, as recorded in Volume 57 of Plats, Pages 92-98; All situate in the Southwest quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. • Attachment B • _ —■ NE 2 4 f S iILL% I ![iiR '_ Inpumillgt1111111112 I in RN M■ .■ ■ Bo ■lli■Ei■INE1■i ■la �� �• E Sli II_ M-- im■ i■ MINI■ su111i111■■■i is si, ,i° ii. !flan m• xi m A /OP 4.4"Ailir4 im iiideilltir --11 Mi rida ra 111111111ENIM grilaanfill ve eh WV MP VIIIMINC. 10- _ - -i 1. .n i_ :■11111 En■ "1,st st f F , a"' © n • .,�..■ ■ ■ in on ` ■ _ ��■u//QED/� /// ■ IIL'! ri�� ��■11■LIME � NE Z0th F �� �� •11Millimm PL 'fi I liii . 11111 ;t '' ► ri �:gm fig M ll■■■.■ �s am °gal I OO■ ■■■■■ <` /a NN ■ "-' ■ ■—Pa , `N� , g ■ e■ • ■■irriJIi 11ii■:t , ' me _ 1 i fiQ���a :-■■,� !! iJs ,•� ■© E 1U�� w_ Fy .lb Illit Jig . NE mug jl1 .'. ' �i' - ■ ■ram "MUIn m : :: I!' II\i!LPI ��EA U �. �:� /� E. o1114141y ■ _m■ ■■ OP PIN ■ Rs. _ � �Ilyr Nii C� �� ■ •E�win la ail _��\� _` � � 01■■ 0a e Igm —I� Wall 411 i 6 i I I Pij I� S7 icsi Air� � kr:• 6 :r--,"•,' ...:' ,;:: 5',...ir,s'-, MI ,p AN 2 w --A a NI 1 ion N ill•:I(I11111 a .■ ■■�� j d = �j 4 ism OPP"— " al IIIIn es IWO A. • imi ;mow 900ie,ffilili ■.soffigiL II al am �4 , \� N ■atia■s■.■ I 11 0.611 ■lL .TrionI _ 1 tin .1" Inn r'---4 Ilion' Err p v I 1111111, MI fi III; MU 11:Norill 10,1; oNIE ■Oli.l 1111 1 . sr� St liU■ i _,,,, j/IIMIMMIllig II a ; ■ animal �elidre�► iN= _ — . IØ tea . in _ ■ .�y�,u[ UlilEil!■I■■ % i:� �i .. E , �� fr ■l■p a mp -� E t da0 r IIIgl�1M1� n ` ■ i.■ rlia im ,_11 � iII.aiu:wq iii . .� u� tram- 0 y . 11111111f■ ■: CO 2.pp so: a� '`� l I ��• Stl �Mii �_ ��.■ iLlI1 n"'M ■■■ ■ �. th St no al Ci IIIIEIIIII ■u■ ■I■ IIH1m11im viPik' 1111//0 Mi n■■i 5.—No ■:� ■ ■.■' c• hi lo liie ■1 =s �0 c 0 W1111 am OP ■ i■ ► M -i i 114 sit l d l l 1L ■s : iik Al ` = ■. �//, i1I NI=tiI_n o 1l i.` fillP� 0��- � � ram _ �� b �1 iln mImm i/rl ;s�►b„� '�•j .44144 5i' �tj l� -400 �� j k 1 m NE 't-1 St. - re v. ` :a alf li_ . .4. ■k7�, aki ,0; ""�"'`- l' r. I�; ,i O SSA �s w � •� rl� �i1 i_ s �m IFIN m ii i■0 4 i1 ■■ iron E t L11111no i ems• n Ku / V■ 4t; rilarl*till FRB ♦ i ■ II 111}11111 ■ IINNI Cr-+ Li is II 11 ■iga So la , I l l � ,. ��v`Ii� ���■v Xi 0111 � 1111NLY11/1 onion � co w■ V11110 ►��glia••ki li■ . ■/ 11/1111 STD ii1 1N l� \ / J 01, �� it,,,....,__ OR- 11111v ,1 i,\ ■S� � ■ 1— :HIT•LI I I I) q1■ it. Highlands Subarea —Studyea ci,, • R-1 o to R-14 0 1000 2000 Task Force Proposed Rezone From R-10 to R-14 mcwzmo C).•. Economic Development,Neighborhoods BE Strategic Planning 1 12000 . Alex Pietsch,Administrator. C.Eeme• OS November 2006 a Amends: ORDs 4963, 4999, '"� .... 5028, 5100, 5124, 5137, 5191, 5241 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5286 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 4-2, ZONING DISTRICTS — USES AND STANDARDS, CHAPTER 4-3, ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND OVERLAY DISTRICTS, CHAPTER 4-4, CITY-WIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, CHAPTER 4-7, SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 4-8, PERMITS- GENERAL AND APPEALS, CHAPTER 4-9, PERMITS — SPECIFIC, AND CHAPTER 4-11, DEFINITIONS, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY CHANGING THE ZONING REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE CENTER VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION, INCLUDING THE RESIDENTIAL-14 (R-14) ZONE AND CENTER VILLAGE (CV) ZONE, ENACTING DESIGN REGULATIONS, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the Vision in the Comprehensive Plan for the Center Village calls for the modification of the existing, low-density suburban land use pattern; and WHEREAS, Comprehensive Plan Strategy 319.1 requires the evaluation of commercial and residential development standards in the Center Village Land Use Designation to ensure better implementation of the Center Village policies; and WHEREAS, Comprehensive Plan Strategy 319.1 calls for the replacement of existing zoning that does not implement the Center Village Vision; and WHEREAS, the R-10 zone does not implement the Center Village vision for medium to high density residential development; and WHEREAS, the Center Village zone includes uses that are incompatible with high density housing; and ORDINANCE NO. 5286 WHEREAS, the Center Village Land Use policies promote high standards of design, pedestrian orientation, development of alleys, and the clustering of commercial and civic uses; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Housing Element promotes the provision of affordable housing for all income groups; and; WHEREAS, the City Council has had a series of development moratoria in place since May 2005, which have been extended from time to time, to allow City Staff time to conduct a study of the Highlands study area and propose land use modifications for that area; and WHEREAS,the current development moratorium expires May 13, 2007; and WHEREAS,the City has expended considerable resources to conduct the study of the Highlands Study Area; and WHEREAS,the City might lose the benefit of the studies conducted regarding the Highlands Study Area if the City waits to amend the Development Regulations; and WHEREAS,the Growth Management Act requires that there be consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and the development regulations for all property in the City's corporate boundaries; and WHEREAS,the current development regulations in the Highlands Study Area needs to be changed to be consistent with the vision articulated in the contemporaneously adopted amendment to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS,the proposed modifications should be in place as soon as possible after the end of the development moratorium to prevent the vesting of new development that is inconsistent with the modifications; Page 2 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 4-2-010.D of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment 'A'. SECTION H. Section 4-2-020.G of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts-Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: G. RESIDENTIAL- 10 DU/ACRE (R-10): The Residential-10 Dwelling units Per net Acre Zone(R-10) is established for the 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 flats. It is intended to implement the Medium Density Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. 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, aw 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(4)to ten (10) dwelling units per net acre. The zone serves as a transition to higher density multi-family zones. Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose statement, objectives and policy direction established in the Residential Medium Density Page 3 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU-157 through LU- 181 and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION III. Section 4-2-020.H of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: H. RESDIENTIAL-14 DU/ACRE (R-14): The purpose of the Residential-14 Dwelling Units Per Net Acre Zone(R-14)is to encourage development, and redevelopment, of residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of detached, semi-attached, and attached dwelling structures organized and designed to combine characteristics of both typical detached single family and small-scale multi- family developments. It is intended to implement the Residential Medium Density or the Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designations. Densities range from ten (10)to fourteen (14)units per net acre with opportunities for bonuses up to eighteen (18) dwelling units per net 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 allowed when they support the purpose of the designation. Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose established in the Residential Medium Density land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU-157 through LU-181, or the Center Village land use designation, Objective LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332, and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Page 4 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 SECTION IV. Section 4-2-020.I of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 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. 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 three(3) suffixes: a. "F" (Multi-Family): The RM-F suffix allows for the development of both infill parcels in existing multi-family districts with compatible projects and other multi-family development. It is intended to implement the Multi-Family or Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. Density ranges from ten(10)to twenty(20) du/acre. Interpretation of uses and project review in this suffix shall be based on the purpose statement objectives and policy direction established in the Residential Multi-Family land use designation, Objectives LU-JJ through LU-LL, Policies LU-182 through LU-192, or the Center Village Land Use designation, Objectives LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332. b. "T" (Traditional): The RM-T suffix 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. It is intended to implement the Urban Center—Downtown designation or Center Village Land Page 5 of 63 *010 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 Use Comprehensive Plan designation in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Density ranges from fourteen (14)to thirty five(35) du/acre. c. "U" (Urban Center): The RM-U suffix provides for high-density, urban-scale, multi-family 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—Downtown Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation or Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. Interpretation of uses and project review in suffix RM-U and RM-T shall be based on the purpose statement objectives and policies of the Urban Center—Downtown land use designation, Objectives LU-OO through LU-XX, Policies LU-216 through LU-264, , or the Center Village Land Use designation, Objectives LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332 and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. (Amd. Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002) SECTION V. Section 4-2-020.K of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts-Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: K CENTER VILLAGE ZONE(CV): 1. Purpose: The purpose of the Center Village Zone(CV) is to provide an opportunity for concentrated mixed-use residential and commercial redevelopment designed to urban rather than suburban development standards that supports transit- oriented development and pedestrian activity. Use allowances promote commercial and retail development opportunities for residents to shop locally. Uses and standards allow Page 6 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 complementary, high-density residential development, and discourage garden-style, multi-family development. 2. Scale and Character: The Center Village Zone(CV) is intended to provide suitable environments for district-scaled retail and commercial development serving more than one neighborhood, but not providing City-wide services. Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose statement, objectives and policy direction established in the Center Village land use designation, Objective LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332, Residential Medium-Density land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU- 157 through LU-181, or the Residential Multi-Family land use designation, Objectives LU-JJ through LU-LL, Policies LU-182 through LU-192, and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION VI. Section 4-2-060 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment `B'. SECTION VIL Section 4-2-070G of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment 'C. SECTION VIII. Section 4-2-070J of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment `D'. Page 7 of 63 VOW ORDINANCE NO. 5286 SECTION IX. Section 4-2-080A.22 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 22. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2-120A. In the CN Zone, fast food establishments are prohibited. In the CV Zone, no office and conference uses are allowed for parcels fronting, or taking primary access from, Edmonds Avenue NE. SECTION X. Section 4-2-080A.33 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 33. 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 and not a conditional use. Additional Restrictions within the CV Land Use Designation: Retail uses, eating/drinking establishments, and on-site service uses are prohibited in R-14 areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation unless they are accessory to a School, Park, or Entertainment and Recreational Use as allowed in RMC 4-2-060E, F, and J. SECTION XI. Section 4-2-080A.73 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 73. Within the Center Village Zone, Garden style apartments are prohibited. Ground floor commercial development at a minimum of 75% of the frontage of the building is required for all residential projects on parcels abutting NE Sunset Boulevard east of Harrington Avenue NE.. SECTION XII. Section 4-2-110F of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of Page 8 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment 'E'. SECTION XIII. Section 4-2-110G of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment 'F'. SECTION XIV. Section 4-2-120A of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment 'G'. SECTION XV. Section 4-3-095 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby deleted in its entirety. SECTION XVL Section 4-3-100 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: A PURPOSE: The purpose of this Section is to: 1. Establish design review regulations in accordance with policies established in the Land Use and Community Design Elements of the Renton Comprehensive Plan in order to: a. Maintain and protect property values; b. Enhance the general appearance of the City; c. Encourage creativity in building and site design; d. Achieve predictability, balanced with flexibility; and Page 9 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 e. Consider the individual merits of proposals. 2. Create design standards and guidelines specific to District 'A' (the Downtown Core)that ensure design quality of structures and site development implementing the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for its Urban Center—Downtown. This Vision is of a downtown that will continue to develop into an efficient and attractive urban city. The Vision of the Downtown Core is of mixed uses with high-density residential living supported by multi-modal transit opportunities. Redevelopment will be based on the pattern and scale of established streets and buildings. 3. Create design standards and guidelines specific to District 'B' (the South Renton Neighborhood)that ensure design quality of structures and site development implementing the City's South Renton Neighborhood Plan. The South Renton Neighborhood Plan, for a residential area located within the Urban Center—Downtown, maintains the existing, traditional grid street plan and respects the scale of the neighborhood, while providing new housing at urban densities. The South Renton Neighborhood Plan supports a residential area that is positioned to capitalize on the employment and retail opportunities increasingly available in the Downtown Core. 4. Create design standards and guidelines specific to the Urban Center—North(District 'C') that ensure design quality of structures and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for its Urban Center—North. This Vision is of an urban environment that concentrates uses in a "grid pattern" of streets and blocks. The Vision is of a vibrant, economically vital neighborhood that encourages use throughout by pedestrians. 5. Create design standards and guidelines applicable to the use of"big-box retail" as defined in RMC 4-11-180, Definitions. 6. Create design standards and guidelines specific to the Center Village commercial core (District"D")that ensure design quality of structure and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for the Center Village designation. Uses within the district include business and professional offices, services, retail, restaurants, recreational businesses, mixed-use commercial and residential building, and multi-family residential., This portion of the enter Village is intended to provide a vital business district serving the local neighborhood and beyond. 7. Created deign standards and guidelines specific to the residential portion of the Center Village(District"E")that ensure design quality of structure and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for the Center Village designation. A variety of housing options allows economic and lifestyle diversity in the Center Village, with design regulations to tie the range of styles and types together. 8. Establish two categories of regulations: (a) "minimum standards" that must be met, and (b) "guidelines" that, while not mandatory, are considered by the Development Services Director in determining if the proposed action meets the intent of the design guidelines. Set specific minimum standards and guidelines may apply to all districts, or certain districts only(Districts 'A', 'B', 'C', `D', or `E'), as indicated herein. (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) Page 10 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 B APPLICABILITY: 1. This Section shall apply to all development in the Urban Center—Downtown and Urban Center—North. For the purposes of the design regulations, the Center Downtown is District 'A', South Renton is District 'B', and the Urban Center—North is District .C.'Districts A through C are depicted on the Urban Center Design Overlay District Map, shown in subsection B4 of this Section. 2. This Section shall also apply to big-box retail use where allowed in the Commercial Arterial (CA), Light Industrial (IL), Medium Industrial (IM), and Heavy Industrial (III) zones, except when those zones are located in the Employment Area—Valley south of Interstate 405. Big-box retail uses within these zones, except in the Employment Area—Valley, must comply with design standards and guidelines specific to the Urban Center—North(District 'C'). 3. Where conflicts may be construed between the design regulations of this Section and other sections of the Renton Municipal Code, the regulations of this Section shall prevail. Where conflicts may be construed between the map in the Section(below) and the test in this Section, the text shall prevail. 4. Urban Design District: Page 11 of 63 C ORDINANCE NO. 5286 :1 III�C,TON i,, � _ . r --r II t3r i i i rI t ` _' „.- r " ,r Y :} y gyp * -r- __j.„2,-.-3,t',,fa., 2--,'C k7:-...` L. _ _ 5 i _ _ . . _ . kit' -' - .„_ _., , . . . _ ...: :.. i. ,, i -,_ IT , - .. k 4 1,, t.P of Urban Design Districts 1 CB.Teed- -' c' it KaMnAs Algt. Page 12 of 63 w ORDINANCE NO . 5286 5. This section shall apply to all development in the Center Village Land Use Designation as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. For the purposes of the Design Regulations, areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation zoned Center Village (CV) shall comprise District"D". Areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation zoned Residential Multi-family(RMF) and Residential-14 (R-14), area shall be in District "E". (Amd. Ord. 4991, 12-9-2002; Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) C EXEMPTIONS: The design regulations shall not apply to: 1. Interior Remodels: Interior remodels of existing buildings or structures provided the alterations do not modify the building facade. 2. Aircraft Manufacturing: Structures related to the existing use of aircraft manufacturing in District 'C'. (Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) D ADMINISTRATION: 1. Review Process: Applications subject to design regulations shall be processed as a component of the governing land use process. 2. Authority: The Reviewing Official shall have the authority to approve, approve with conditions, or deny proposals based upon the provisions of the design regulations. In rendering a decision, the Official will consider proposals on the basis of individual merit, will consider the overall intent of the minimum standards and guidelines, and encourage creative design alternatives in order to achieve the purposes of the design regulations. (Amd. Ord. 4991, 12-9- 2002; Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) E SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity throughout the district. 1. Site Design and Street Pattern: Intent: To ensure that the City of Renton Vision can be realized within the Urban Center Districts; plan districts that are organized for efficiency while maintaining flexibility for future development at high urban densities and intensities of use; create and maintain a safe, convenient network of streets of varying dimensions for vehicle circulation; and provide service to businesses. a. Minimum Standard for Districts 'A' and 'B': Maintain existing grid street pattern Page 13 of 63 IOW *00 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 b. Minimum Standards for Districts 'C' and `D': i. Provide a network of public and/or private local streets in addition to public arterials. ii. Maintain a hierarchy of streets to provide organized circulation that promotes use by multiple transportation modes and to avoid overburdening the roadway system. The hierarchy shall consist of(from greatest in size to smallest): (a) High Visibility Street. A highly visible arterial street that warrants special design treatment to improve its appearance and maintain its transportation function. (b) Arterial Street. A street classified as a principal arterial on the City's Arterial Street Plan. (c)Pedestrian-Oriented Streets. Streets that are intended to feature a concentration of pedestrian activity. Such streets feature slow moving traffic, narrow travel lanes, on-street parking, and wide sidewalks. (d)Internal or local roads(public or private). 2. Building Location and Orientation: Intent: To ensure visibility of businesses; establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways; organize buildings in such a way that pedestrian use of the district is facilitated; encourage siting of structures so that natural light and solar access are available to other structures and open space; enhance the visual character and definition of streets within the district; provide an appropriate transition between buildings, parking areas, and other land uses and the street; and increase privacy for residential uses located near the street. a. Minimum Standard for Districts 'A' ,'B',and `D': i. Orient buildings to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. ii. The front entry of a building shall not be oriented to a drive aisle, but instead a public or private street or landscaped pedestrian only courtyard. b. Minimum Standards for District 'C': i. Buildings on designated pedestrian-oriented streets shall feature "pedestrian-oriented facades" and clear connections to the sidewalk (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7a). Such buildings shall be located adjacent to the sidewalk, except where pedestrian-oriented space is located between the building and the sidewalk. Parking between the building and pedestrian- oriented streets is prohibited. ii. Buildings fronting on pedestrian-oriented streets shall contain pedestrian-oriented uses. Page 14 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 iii. Nonresidential buildings may be located directly adjacent to any street as long as they feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. iv. Buildings containing street-level residential uses and single-purpose residential buildings shall be set back from the sidewalk a minimum of ten feet (10')and feature substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and the building (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7b). v. If buildings do not feature pedestrian-oriented facades they shall have substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and building. Such landscaping shall be at least ten feet (10') in width as measured from the sidewalk (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7c)_ c. Guideline Applicable to District 'C': Sitting of a structure should take into consideration the continued availability of natural light (both direct and reflected) and direct sun exposure to nearby buildings and open space(except parking areas). d. Guideline Applicable to Districts `C' and `D": Ground floor residential uses located near the street should be raised above street level for residents' privacy. 3. Building Entries: Intent: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A' , 'B', `D',and `E': i. A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human scale elements. ii. Multiple buildings on the same site shall provide a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. iii. Ground floor units shall be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. iv. Secondary access(not fronting on a street) shall have weather protection at least four and one-half feet(4-1/2') wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. v. Pedestrian access shall be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots, abutting street intersections, crosswalks, and transit stops. b. Minimum Standards for District 'C': i. On pedestrian-oriented streets, the primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing the street. Page 15 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 ii. On non-pedestrian-oriented streets, entrances shall be prominent, visible from surrounding streets, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human-scale elements. iii. All building entries adjacent to a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, and/or landscaping. Entries from parking lots should be subordinate to those related to the street for buildings with frontage on designated pedestrian- oriented streets(see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7d). iv. Weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4-1/2')wide and proportional to the distance above ground level shall be provided over the primary entry of all buildings and over any entry adjacent to a street. v. Pedestrian pathways from public sidewalks to primary entrances or from parking lots to primary entrances shall be clearly delineated. c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'A', `B',and 'C': i. Multiple buildings on the same site should provide a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. ii. Ground floor units should be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. iii. Secondary access(not fronting on a street) should have weather protection at least four and one-half feet(4-1/2') wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. iv. Pedestrian access should be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots, abutting street intersections, crosswalks, and transit stops. v. Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows should be oriented to a street or pedestrian-oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features such as trellises, artwork, murals, landscaping, or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street-oriented facade. e. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'A' and 'D': i. For projects that include residential uses, entries should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area, terrace, common area, lobby, or similar feature. ii. Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows should be oriented to a street; otherwise, screening or art features such as trellises, artwork, murals, landscaping, or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street-oriented facade. Page 16 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 iii. Entries from the street should be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping. Entries from parking lots should be subordinate to those related to the street for buildings within District 'A'. f. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'B' and `E': Front yards should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area, terrace, or similar feature. g. Guideline Applicable to District 'C': For projects that include residential uses, entries should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area, terrace, common area, lobby, or similar feature. 4. Transition to Surrounding Development: Intent: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long- established, existing neighborhoods are preserved. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A' and 'D': Careful siting and design treatment is necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk and scale. At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: i. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased by the Reviewing Official in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; ii. Building proportions, including step-backs on upper levels; iii. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or iv. Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. b. Minimum Standards for Districts 'B' and `E': i. Careful siting and design treatment is necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk, and scale. At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: Page 17 of 63 111.0 *Me ORDINANCE NO. 5286 ii. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; or iii. Building articulation provided to divide a larger architectural element into smaller pieces; or iv. Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. c. Minimum Standards for District 'C: i. For properties along North 6th Street and Logan Avenue North(between North 4th Street and North 6th Street), applicants shall demonstrate how their project provides an appropriate transition to the long established, existing neighborhood south of North 6th Street known as the North Renton Neighborhood. ii. For properties located south of North 8th Street, east of Garden Avenue North, applicants must demonstrate how their project appropriately provides transitions to existing industrial uses. 5. Service Element Location and Design: Intent: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements(i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use(see illustration, RMC 4-3- 100E7e). ii. Garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed, consistent with RMC 4- 4-090, Refuse and Recyclables Standards, and RMC 4-4-095, Screening and Storage Height/Location Limitations. iii. In addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7f). iv. The use of chain link, plastic, or wire fencing is prohibited. v. If the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian-oriented space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum three feet (3')wide, shall be located on three(3)sides of such facility. Page 18 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 b. Guidelines Applicable to All Districts: Service enclosure fences should be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three. Page 19 of 63 *we 4110 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 6. Gateways: Intent: To distinguish gateways as primary entrances to districts or to the City; provide special design features and architectural elements at gateways; and ensure that gateways, while they are distinctive within the context of the district, are compatible with the district in form and scale. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'C' and `D': i. Developments located at district gateways shall be marked with visually prominent features(see illustration, subsection E7g of this Section). ii. Gateway elements shall be oriented toward and scaled for both pedestrians and vehicles (see illustration, subsection E7h of this Section). iii. Visual prominence shall be distinguished by two (2)or more of the following: (a) Public art; (b)Monuments; (c) Special landscape treatment; (d) Open space/plaza; (e) Identifying building form; (f) Special paving, unique pedestrian scale lighting, or bollards; (g)Prominent architectural features(trellis, arbor, pergola, or gazebo); (h) Signage, displaying neighborhood or district entry identification(commercial signs are not allowed). Page 20 of 63 w ORDINANCE NO. 5286 7. I lustrations. a. Pedestrian-oriented facades (see subsection E2b(i) of this Section). Pedestrian-oriented facade /` Property line' ')'41 ._,,, - ,,T \\ II x` ` Pedestrian-oriented facades: '\ • Primary building entry \� ,/t` -. must be facing the street ,. s k .transparent window area or window ,�; - i display along 75%of the ground floor \ ''\'� ,, between the height of 2 to 8 feet -`l r'\, above the ground �'� Y weather protection at least 4 14 feet wide '. ,'>/ along at least 75%of the facade -, b. Street-level residential (see subsection E2b(iv) of this Section). Raised planters provide privacy for residents while maintaining views of the street from units ��., t✓; Trees �" \ _--, t--,....„,_-,_1,,-- , r41. i�IF1,,r,, I.4 , ,_,,,.,, _.._ ,r ,. 1 ` to ;: fIv I+ _ + [ ! IG as • :f - ice, _ .a I' . --. . ;: �. , i1 . ••- 7.:iiiiik �_ - # i- . . ,tk , •l- � . --1 I mo# � __c. Buildings without pedestrian-oriented uses (see subsection E2b(v) of this Section). Page 21 of 63 , r too' vimi ORDINANCE NO. 5286 ' 'R-7-'s'\‘N:);- Combination of evergreen and Building deciduous shrubs and trees ( •°"'",1 • ,••"^"`- 'c''-'11' .-. 1.-- -`6\-?--- * Raised planter d. Building entries (see subsection E3b(iii) of this Section). ..so'" ii-----....„ i I \ 4„,..,..,ivek, a it miti I;_ . __--1,111rn:\ ....-7. ,. 411 , , ,. ii, - .1 1 lio‘,1,, 9. :ill r /I\:/ A. ,I 1 s' am/ ! r� � ^ retimmilA ����,.�1'�� 'sir\ 1'_�` 'I yi;1." �TIg !_ �Vil• i.J.._(r r r 'i .i 0.. Ir"=- it�I°�`�'�'� i.i , •' 'aS1ISr!��Mfir. `y ft.k\ r irt . •: affrii i f 1 _ mar 0 e. Service elements located to minimize the impact on the pedestrian environment(see subsection E5a(i) of this Section). Page 22 of 63 w.. ORDINANCE NO. 5286 SCREENED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT .� DUMPSTER LOCATED AT SITE REAR OF: 0• , > \ reil ie 61 • 'ASH p 47, 0)0, f. Service enclosure (see subsection E5a(iii) of this Section). Roof enclosure Landscaping to keep birds out _44* ¶411 * doors Trellis Concrete pad g. Distinguishable building form appropriate for gateway locations (see subsection E6a(i) of this Section). Page 23 of 63 *410 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 m 7— —m mmm m mmmm m Elevation a nnn — Balconies Turret Corner accentuating roof line Allli •=7—=—:----..• s_ - __ Plan IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ,,a J J J Nde:Ensure that budding does not block viewing triangle at intersections I111111III1111lll ll11111 u'u i100000 _ 00000 I4 Elevation 1 Distinctive use of materials Canopy Bay window i Plan IIUi. J milk J IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJ h. Gateway landscaping, open space, pedestrian amenities and signage that identifies the commercial area (see subsection E6a(ii) of this Section). a f Y, 1 ? r1. t as u ' t. x„ ill ',c ga,,x � �7{gu5y r,� ,g-, .., ma's Page 24 of 63 AMOK ORDINANCE NO. 5286 (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) F PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS: Intent: To provide safe, convenient access to the Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate various modes of transportation, including public mass transit, in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. 1. Location of Parking: Intent: To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A' 'B', and `D': No surface parking shall be located between a building and the front property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. b. Minimum Standards for District 'C': i. On designated Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: (a) Parking shall be at the side and/or rear of a building, with the exception of on-street parallel parking. No more than sixty feet (60') of the street frontage measured parallel to the curb shall be occupied by off-street parking and vehicular access. (b) On-street parallel parking spaces located adjacent to the site can be included in calculation of required parking. For parking ratios based on use and zone, see RMC 4-4-080, Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations. (c) On-street, parallel parking shall be required on both sides of the street. ii. All parking lots located between a building and street or visible from a street shall feature landscaping between the sidewalk and building; see RMC 4-4-080F, Parking Lot Design Standards. iii. Surface Parking Lots: The applicant must successfully demonstrate that the surface parking lot is designed to facilitate future structured parking and/or other infill development. For example, an appropriate surface parking area would feature a one thousand five hundred foot (1,500') maximum perimeter area and a minimum dimension on one side of two hundred feet (200'), unless project proponent can demonstrate future alternative use of the area would be Page 25 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 physically possible. Exception: If there are size constraints inherent in the original parcel (see illustration, subsection F5a of this Section). c. Minimum Standards for District `E': i. No surface parking shall be located between a building and the front property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. ii. Parking shall be located off an alley if an alley is present. d. Guideline Applicable to Districts 'A', 'B', `C', and `D': In areas of mixed use development, shared parking is recommended. e. Guidelines Applicable to District 'C': i. If a limited number of parking spaces are made available in front of a building for passenger drop-off and pick-up, they shall be parallel to the building facade. ii. When fronting on streets not designated as pedestrian-oriented, parking lots should be located on the interior portions of blocks and screened from the surrounding roadways by buildings, landscaping and/or gateway features as dictated by location. 2. Design of Surface Parking: Intent: To ensure safety of users of parking areas, convenience to businesses, and reduce the impact of parking lots wherever possible. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A', 'C',and `D': i. Parking lot lighting shall not spill onto adjacent or abutting properties(see illustration, subsection F5b of this Section). ii. All surface parking lots shall be landscaped to reduce their visual impact (see RMC 4-4- 080F7, Landscape Requirements). b. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'A', `C',and `D': i. Wherever possible, parking should be configured into small units, connected by landscaped areas to provide on-site buffering from visual impacts. ii. Access to parking modules should be provided by public or private local streets with sidewalks on both sides where possible, rather than internal drive aisles. iii. Where multiple driveways cannot be avoided, provide landscaping to separate and minimize their impact on the streetscape. Page 26 of 63 Amoy "00- ORDINANCE NO . 5286 3. Structured Parking Garages: Intent: To more efficiently use land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of structured parking throughout the Urban Center and the Center Village; physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages when they are located in proximity to the designated pedestrian environment. a. Minimum Standards for District 'C' and `D': i. Parking Structures Fronting Designated Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: (a) Parking structures shall provide space for ground-floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy-five percent (75%)of the frontage width(see illustration, subsection F5c of this Section). (b) The entire facade must feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. ii. Parking Structures Fronting Non-Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: (a)Parking structures fronting non-pedestrian-oriented streets and not featuring a pedestrian- oriented facade shall be set back at least six feet (6') from the sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping. This includes a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover. This setback shall be increased to ten feet(10') adjacent to high visibility streets. (b) The Director may allow a reduced setback where the applicant can successfully demonstrate that the landscaped area and/or other design treatment meets the intent of these standards and guidelines. Possible treatments to reduce the setback include landscaping components plus one or more of the following integrated with the architectural design of the building: (1) Ornamental grillwork(other than vertical bars); (2) Decorative artwork; (3)Display windows; (4)Brick, tile, or stone; (5)Pre-cast decorative panels; (6) Vine-covered trellis; (7)Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials; or (8) Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard. Page 27 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 (c) Facades shall be articulated architecturally, so as to maintain a human scale and to avoid a solid wall. Vehicular entrances to nonresidential or mixed use parking structures shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials (see illustration, subsection F5d of this Section). b. Minimum Standards for District `D': i. Parking structures shall provide space for ground-floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the frontage width (see illustration, subsection F5c of this Section). ii. The entire facade must feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. Iii Facades shall be articulated architecturally, so as to maintain a human scale and to avoid a solid wall. Vehicular entrances to nonresidential or mixed use parking structures shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials (see illustration, subsection F5d of this Section). c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'A' , 'C',and `D': i. Parking garage entries should be designed and sited to complement, not subordinate, the pedestrian entry. If possible, locate the parking entry away from the primary street, to either the side or rear of the building. ii. Parking garage entries should not dominate the streetscape. iii. The design of structured parking at finished grade under a building should minimize the apparent width of garage entries. iv Parking within the building should be enclosed or screened through any combination of walls, decorative grilles, or trellis work with landscaping. v. Parking garages should be designed to be complementary with adjacent buildings. Use similar forms, materials, and/or details to enhance garages. vi. Parking service and storage functions should be located away from the street edge and generally not be visible from the street or sidewalks. d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'B' and `E': i. Attached personal parking garages at-grade should be individualized and not enclose more than two (2)cars per enclosed space. Such garages should be architecturally integrated into the whole development. ii. Multiple-user parking garages at-grade should be enclosed or screened from view through any combination of walls, decorative grilles, or trellis work with landscaping. Page 28 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 iii. Personal parking garages should be individualized whenever possible with separate entries and architectural detailing in character with the lower density district. iv. Large multi-user parking garages are discouraged in this lower density district and, if provided, should be located below grade whenever possible. 4. Vehicular Access: Intent: To maintain a contiguous, uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating and/or eliminating vehicular access off streets within pedestrian environments and/or designated pedestrian-oriented streets. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'B' and `E': Parking lots and garages shall be accessed from alleys when available b. Minimum Standards for District 'C': i. Parking garages shall be accessed at the rear of buildings or from non-pedestrian-oriented streets when available. ii. Surface parking driveways are prohibited on pedestrian-oriented streets. iii. Parking lot entrances, driveways, and other vehicular access points on high visibility streets shall be restricted to one entrance and exit lane per five hundred (500) linear feet as measured horizontally along the street. c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'A' and 'D': i. Parking lots and garages should be accessed from alleys or side streets. ii. Driveways should be located to be visible from the right-of-way, but not impede pedestrian circulation on-site or to adjoining properties. Where possible, minimize the number of driveways and curb cuts. d. Guidelines Applicable to Area 'B' and `E': i. Garage entryways and/or driveways accessible only from a street should not impede pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk. ii. Curb cuts should be minimized whenever possible through the use of shared driveways. Page 29 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 5. Illustrations. a. Parking and vehicular access in District 'C' (see subsection Flb(iii) of this Section). Parking lots are accessed by s' a system of local access"streets" k %� Parallel parking \ ,fic � ' r on local access —"streets" Parking lots are sited Minimize access towards the interior of the block points from • Hi h Visibilit to the extent possible _ 9 Y �—Streets Parking lots are ,,cc s -, �� configured to allow '7 ` ' � future infill ' , development \ s \\ t I f Fs y� t } t sti E ¢� ' .� 4' ' •'i...- ° �`,- � ` Mid-block connections enhance -6-,r� -', `cet \ access and provide a good s; framework for future infill development "f Ys No parking lots or - driveways adjacent to a - \ pedestrian-oriented street Parking garage entrance \ designed to minimize impact on pedestrian environment b. Parking lot lighting (see subsection F2a(i) of this Section). Page 30 of 63 *MO NNW ORDINANCE NO. 5286 ricOFFEE E i . I J ii-Ap, , , DO THIS VIREO.-I L. CCFFF.. 041,- 1 itrt x� ; -_,-TE)p DON'T DO THIS c. Parking structure fronting on pedestrian-oriented street with pedestrian-oriented uses and facades along the ground floor(see subsection F3a(i)(a) of this Section). \_` _,� Parking garage on I second floor 'Nfr 44 .4"- "&."-IfildplA It. ---Pm- -4-.., ---__ 14114 kiiiiiiiii%1 _ . rl '•1 1'. ''.'3:-// ,, ,„ ,,.. 4 `'1'i , �'' ,/17 it -- —irr-At� ' '0'I- - ;' Ground floor commercial space - ) I-7/4` with pedestrian-oriented facade d. Parking structure designed to enhance streetscape (see subsection F3a(iiXc) of this Section). Page 31 of 63 IOW *NO ORDINANCE NO . 5286 Articulation of--- , r --- 7 facade components it to reduce scale 4 f ,i ! I. ;'`tj' „ ,, 'v and add visual Ar-I I 1 Ili j'i .0 interest r 1! I w�C2 �' ; f T PI' lilt l 'i', , ' 0",. AY12- -E- 1,-' .-‘ ':' ;, i iI ci I 1, ` 4r, ' \ ' Decorative trellis I -._ � ! b 4 ;' j p� _ +'ii. ��' I I structure for vines ' !I ; I'S i 1' �- j�;:' ' ti� I ` _` i ;+� ,J l ' II!t 1 � :t jl j'' �t�►19Q_1E l' � � y , 1 1- %{ Iwiirl r �, ''4,tal � i , I I ti u D' ��{ I `; iu�a��Nl v I f %%/,I ��� I� li I 1 �(I i i r Raised planting UI m+ rl •�l ,:' 1 ., = , _ bed adjacent to f '" i,I,5i9 gr; 1,7%- -- -1- -_vim _- sidewalk +- `tom-., `- (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) G. PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT: Intent: To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi-modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. 1. Pathways through Parking Lots: Intent: To provide safe and attractive pedestrian connections to buildings, parking garages, and parking lots. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'C' and 'D': i. Clearly delineated pedestrian pathways and/or private streets shall be provided throughout parking areas. ii. Within parking areas, pedestrian pathways shall be provided perpendicular to the applicable building facade, at a maximum distance of one hundred and fifty feet (150') apart (see illustration, subsection G4a of this Section). Page 32 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 2. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent: To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A' ,'C' and 'D': i. Developments shall include an integrated pedestrian circulation system that connects buildings, open space, and parking areas with the adjacent street sidewalk system and adjacent properties (see illustration, subsection G4b of this Section). ii. Sidewalks located between buildings and streets shall be raised above the level of vehicular travel. iii. Pedestrian pathways within parking lots or parking modules shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent paving materials (see illustration, subsection G4c of this Section). iv. Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: (a) Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings one hundred (100)or more feet in width(measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least twelve feet (12') in width. The walkway shall include an eight foot(8') minimum unobstructed walking surface and street trees (see illustration, subsection G4d of this Section). (b) To increase business visibility and accessibility, breaks in the tree coverage adjacent to major building entries shall be allowed. (c)For all other interior pathways, the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users. A ten to twelve foot(10' — 12') pathway, for example, can accommodate groups of persons walking four(4) abreast, or two (2) couples passing one another. An eight foot (8') pathway will accommodate three(3) individuals walking abreast, whereas a smaller five to six foot (5' —6') pathway will accommodate two (2) individuals. v. Locate pathways with clear sight lines to increase safety. Landscaping shall not obstruct visibility of walkway or sight lines to building entries. vi. All pedestrian walkways shall provide an all-weather walking surface unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. Page 33 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 b. Guidelines Applicable to All Districts: i. Delineation of pathways may be through the use of architectural features, such as trellises, railings, low seat walls, or similar treatment. ii. Mid-block connections are desirable where a strong linkage between uses can be established. iii. Decorative fences, with the exception of chain link fences, may be allowed when appropriate to the situation. c. Guidelines Applicable to District 'C' Only: i. Through-block connections should be made between buildings, between streets, and to connect sidewalks with public spaces. Preferred location for through-block connections is mid- block(see illustration, subsection G4e of this Section). ii. Between buildings of up to and including two (2) stories in height, through-block connections should be at least six feet (6') in width. iii. Between buildings three (3) stories in height or greater, through-block connections should be at least twelve feet (12') in width. iv. Transit stops should be located along designated transit routes a maximum of one-quarter (0.25)mile apart. v. As an alternative to some of the required street trees, developments may provide pedestrian-scaled light fixtures at appropriate spacing and no taller than fourteen feet (14') in height. No less than one tree or light fixture per thirty (30)lineal feet of the required walkway should be provided. 3. Pedestrian Amenities: Intent: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are inviting and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of activities, at all times of the year, and under typical seasonal weather conditions. a. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. On designated pedestrian-oriented streets, provide pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings, marquees, canopies, or building overhangs. These elements shall be a minimum of four and one-half feet (4-1/2') wide along at least seventy five percent (75%)of the length of the building facade facing the designated pedestrian-oriented street, a maximum height of fifteen feet (15') above the ground elevation, and no lower than eight feet(8') above ground level. Page 34 of 63 Ire "roe ORDINANCE NO. 5286 ii. Site furniture provided in public spaces shall be made of durable, vandal- and weather- resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. iii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. b. Minimum Standards for District `D': i. Provide pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings, marquees, canopies, or building overhangs. These elements shall be a minimum of four and one-half feet (4 '/') wide along at least seventy five percent (75%)of the length of the building facade, a maximum height of fifteen feet (15') above the ground elevation, and no lower than eight feet (8') above ground level. ii. Site furniture provided in public spaces shall be made of durable, vandal- and weather- resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. iii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. c. Minimum Standards for District `E' only: i. Site furniture provided in public spaces shall be made of durable, vandal- and weather- resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. ii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'C', `D'and `E': i. Transit shelters, bicycle racks, benches, trash receptacles, and other street furniture should be provided. ii. Street amenities such as outdoor group seating, kiosks, fountains, and public art should be provided. iii. Architectural elements that incorporate plants, such as facade-mounted planting boxes or trellises or ground-related or hanging containers are encouraged, particularly at building entrances, in publicly accessible spaces, and at facades along pedestrian-oriented streets(see illustration, subsection G4f of this Section). Page 35 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 4. Illustrations. a. Pedestrian walkways within parking lots (see subsection G1a(ii) of this Section). 00000 0 0 q�"r Q C 150' MAX - . 4:V 50z-v c " % Pedestrian •, 'V walkways V } b. Integrated pedestrian access system (pathways are shown in solid black lines) (see subsection G2a(i) of this Section). Page 36 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 Sidewalk along Pathways along building g6 /S—high visibility street facades are at least 12'wide and includes street trees ----1 1 Parking lot pathway ,\ i Mid-block pathway - connects uses and activity centers • .; ;: - A. t X,, s }+^ a r sired x Major local access ate \ "streets"are designed oe \ with sidewalks Pedestrian-oriented \--on at least one side street with wide sidewalks,and street trees % \'� Interior pathways that link storefronts,parking areas, --and residential uses c. Parking lot pedestrian interior walkway (see subsection G2a(iii) of this Section). Page 3 7 of 63 rrrf ORDINANCE NO. 5286 1 ta -r , _ — ---114W)•: ,,,'Z';‘141 ,--— iitl ar1,�.m �7„ �7l A4'�;� ��Ill 123 4i 91 I I I L.1 Al ler-\\*Ik d. Sidewalks along retail building facade (see subsection G2a(iv)(a)of this Section). Street trees and/or pedestrian street lamps every 30' Weather protection •.1yY . .. F Y :: ,rt :**'11,i,cri0-4,—. . - i f 8' min unobstructed width 12'min Total sidewalk width e. Through-block pedestrian connections (see subsection G2c of this Section). Page 38 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 \-----------------. c, wine ' ptonP Ana \l‘ri / / m II Pedestrian Comdor a Pedestrian Corridor illivnioninsinisappenrs* ! 41assimmiamipmws00-\ 1 I f. Pedestrian amenities incorporated into development (see subsection G3b(iii) of this Section). Recessed entry Seasonal landscaping Transparent windows Weather protection I •• Il Pedestrian �i�`� ty,nkrrX0, 4 oriented 4.-a--‘--_i-:.--4*--'1,'s---1131i1-1—W.ia-1.ir1i1.Nu-1I1-.IyM-:iI1l.14t-.,l.-..4 ,ir;:S--:i.,Ir\- ,--„4, . It,V`` "*—`04 space a ! ri, 1 �1l Ir `1 ` r_���. � i'1, �� Seating -� `- `am , i areas . , d W" 0.1.1 Trees and •$dl I1'it %Ir{� i,16 street j I 'I � !f 1�-, CP•0 mmi ,! ; , iIr liKili! used to _ +dt_ . ,._�i define _ :+•� LIcr pedestrian 'l, [ [l A_-�t' 'n`wil��i `! arm WDGE .'i'� ;"da _,�, i+.RIM. pill varied _ i pave men' t _4411X 7 -------- L Pedestrian i_. _ oriented r - I- signage t� (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) H LANDSCAPING/RECREATION AREAS/COMMON OPEN SPACE: Intent: To provide visual relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the Page 39 of 63 *IOW Nes, ORDINANCE NO. 5286 community. To have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers, and visitors; provide these areas in sufficient amounts and in safe and convenient locations; and provide the opportunity for community gathering in places centrally located and designed to encourage such activity. 1. Landscaping: Intent: Landscaping is intended to reinforce the architecture or concept of the area; provide visual and climatic relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; channelize and define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. All pervious areas shall be landscaped (see RMC 4-4-070, Landscaping). ii. Street trees are required and shall be located between the curb edge and building, as determined by the City of Renton. iii. On designated pedestrian-oriented streets, street trees shall be installed with tree grates. For all other streets, street tree treatment shall be as determined by the City of Renton(see illustration, subsection H3a of this Section). iv. The proposed landscaping shall be consistent with the design intent and program of the building, the site, and use. v. The landscape plan shall demonstrate how the proposed landscaping, through the use of plant material and non-vegetative elements, reinforces the architecture or concept of the development. vi. Surface parking areas shall be screened by landscaping in order to reduce views of parked cars from streets(see RMC 4-4-080F7, Landscaping Requirements). Such landscaping shall be at least ten feet (10') in width as measured from the sidewalk(see illustration, subsection H3b of this Section). Standards for planting shall be as follows: (a) Trees at an average minimum rate of one tree per thirty(30) lineal feet of street frontage. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least thirty five feet (35'). Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet (8') or two inch (2") caliper(as measured four feet (4') from the top of the root ball) respectively. (b) Shrubs at the minimum rate of one per twenty(20) square feet of landscaped area. Shrubs shall be at least twelve inches (12") tall at planting and have a mature height between three feet (3') and four feet(4'). (c) Groundcover shall be planted in sufficient quantities to provide at least ninety percent (90%) coverage of the landscaped area within three(3)years of installation. Page 40 of 63 "tow „rw ORDINANCE NO. 5286 (d) The applicant shall provide a maintenance assurance device, prior to occupancy, for a period of not less than three (3)years and in sufficient amount to ensure required landscape standards have been met by the third year following installation. (e) Surface parking with more than fourteen (14) stalls shall be landscaped as follows: (1) Required Amount: Total Number of Spaces Minimum Required Landscape Area* 15 to 50 15 square feet/parking space 51 to 99 25 square feet/parking space 100 or more 35 square feet/parking space * Landscape area calculations above and planting requirements below exclude perimeter parking lot landscaping areas. (2) Provide trees, shrubs, and groundcover in the required interior parking lot landscape areas. (3) Plant at least one tree for every six (6) parking spaces. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least thirty five feet (35'). Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet (8')or two inch (2") caliper(as measured four feet (4') from the top of the root ball) respectively. (4)Plant shrubs at a rate of five (5) per one hundred (100) square feet of landscape area. Shrubs shall be at least sixteen inches(16") tall at planting and have a mature height between three feet (3') and four feet (4'). (5) Up to fifty percent (50%)of shrubs may be deciduous. (6) Select and plant groundcover so as to provide ninety percent (90%) coverage within three (3) years of planting; provided, that mulch is applied until plant coverage is complete. (7)Do not locate a parking stall more than fifty feet (50') from a landscape area. vii. Regular maintenance shall be provided to ensure that plant materials are kept healthy and that dead or dying plant materials are replaced. viii. Underground, automatic irrigation systems are required in all landscape areas. b. Guidelines Applicable to all Districts: Landscaping should be used to soften and integrate the bulk of buildings. Page 41 of 63 Nmio ORDINANCE NO. 5286 ii. Landscaping should be provided that appropriately provides either screening of unwanted views or focuses attention to preferred views. iii. Use of low maintenance, drought-resistant landscape material is encouraged. iv. Choice of materials should reflect the level of maintenance that will be available. v. Seasonal landscaping and container plantings are encouraged, particularly at building entries and in publicly accessible spaces. vi. Window boxes, containers for plantings, hanging baskets, or other planting feature elements should be made of weather-resistant materials that can be reasonably maintained. vii. Landscaping should be used to screen parking lots from adjacent or neighboring properties. c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'B' and `E': i. Front yards should be visible from the street and visually contribute to the streetscape. ii. Decorative walls and fencing are encouraged when architecturally integrated into the project. 2. Recreation Areas and Common Open Space: Intent: To ensure that districts have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers, and visitors and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in convenient locations; create usable, accessible, and inviting open space that is accessible to the public; and promote pedestrian activity on pedestrian-oriented streets particularly at street corners. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A', 'C' and `D': i. Mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten (10)or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to fifty (50) square feet per unit. The common space area shall be aggregated to provide usable area(s) for residents. The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Director. The required common open space shall be satisfied with one or more of the elements listed below. The Director may require more than one of the following elements for developments having more than one hundred (100)units. (a) Courtyards, plazas, or multipurpose open spaces; (b) Upper level common decks, patios, terraces, or roof gardens. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to the site and are provided as an asset to the development; Page 42 of 63 Nifty ORDINANCE NO. 5286 (c) Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system; (d)Recreation facilities including, but not limited to, tennis/sports courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities; or (e) Children's play spaces. iii. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects, required landscaping, driveways, parking, or other vehicular use areas shall not be counted toward the common space requirement or be located in dedicated outdoor recreation or common use areas. iv. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects required yard setback areas shall not count toward outdoor recreation and common space unless such areas are developed as private or semi-private(from abutting or adjacent properties) courtyards, plazas or passive use areas containing landscaping and fencing sufficient to create a fully usable area accessible to all residents of the development (see illustration, subsection H3c of this Section). v. Private decks, balconies, and private ground floor open space shall not count toward the common space/recreation area requirement. vi. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects, other required landscaping and sensitive area buffers without common access links, such as pedestrian trails, shall not be included toward the required recreation and common space requirement. vii. All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses(excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian-oriented space(see illustration, subsection H3d of this Section) according to the following formula: 1%of the lot area+ 1%of the building area=Minimum amount of pedestrian-oriented space viii. To qualify as pedestrian-oriented space, the following must be included: (a) Visual and pedestrian access (including barrier-free access)to the abutting structures from the public right-of-way or a non-vehicular courtyard; (b) Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; (c) On-site or building-mounted lighting providing at least four(4) foot-candles (average) on the ground; and (d) At least three feet (3') of seating area(bench, ledge, etc.)or one individual seat per sixty(60) square feet of plaza area or open space. ix. The following features are encouraged in pedestrian-oriented space (see illustration, subsection H3e of this Section)and may be required by the Director: Page 43 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 (a) Provide pedestrian-oriented uses on the building facade facing the pedestrian-oriented space. (b) Spaces should be positioned in areas with significant pedestrian traffic to provide interest and security— such as adjacent to a building entry. (c) Provide pedestrian-oriented facades on some or all buildings facing the space. (d)Provide movable public seating. x. The following are prohibited within pedestrian-oriented space: (a) Adjacent unscreened parking lots; (b) Adjacent chain link fences; (c) Adjacent blank walls; (d) Adjacent dumpsters or service areas; and (e) Outdoor storage (shopping carts, potting soil bags, firewood, etc.)that do not contribute to the pedestrian environment. xi. The minimum required walkway areas shall not count as pedestrian-oriented space. However, where walkways are widened or enhanced beyond minimum requirements, the area may count as pedestrian-oriented space if the Director determines such space meets the definition of pedestrian-oriented space. b. Minimum Standards for Districts 'B' and `E': Attached housing developments shall provide a minimum area of private usable open space equal to one hundred fifty (150) square feet per unit of which one hundred (100) square feet are contiguous. Such space may include porches, balconies, yards, and decks. c. Minimum Standards for District 'C': The location of public open space shall be considered in relation to building orientation, sun and light exposure, and local micro-climatic conditions. d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'A' ,'C' and `D': i. Common space areas in mixed-use residential and attached residential projects should be centrally located so they are near a majority of dwelling units, accessible and usable to residents, and visible from surrounding units. ii. Common space areas should be located to take advantage of surrounding features such as building entrances, significant landscaping, unique topography or architecture, and solar exposure. Page 44 of 63 • *WO NOW ORDINANCE NO. 5286 iii. In mixed-use residential and attached residential projects children's play space should be centrally located, visible from the dwellings, and away from hazardous areas like garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, streets, and parking areas. e. Guidelines Applicable to District 'C': Developments located at street intersection corners on designated pedestrian-oriented streets are encouraged to provide pedestrian-oriented space adjacent to the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity(see illustration, subsection H3f of this Section). 3. Illustrations. a. Street tree installed with tree grate (see subsection H1a(iii) of this Section). fi b. Parking lot landscaped buffer(see subsection Hla(vi) of this Section). One tree per 30 lineal feet Parking, service, or storage areas Iitt ^.s_�...... 10' Landacaprrg� Buffer Page 45 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 c. Visible and accessible common area featuring landscaping and other amenities (see subsection H2a(iv) of this Section). �� L 1� .G -'\,4-----k .._0_,_ i ... 1,,---- gorl' _ 7 �� 1 I;I \ , _ fir `3 b� l i '•r AID "► d. Pedestrian-oriented space associated with a large-scale retail building (see subsection H2a(vii) of this Section). :r /, t '`r/ Recessed entry areas ��,../ can qualify as pedestrian- ,,•=• � _ - t '-/ oriented space if they ,7 \/ `` )t A f4.,.., meet requirements—, Centralized and visible \\ •• y ' , pedestrian-oriented space \\ 'dY° !t`.• located at major building \\ .,< r • .• > entry and crossroads rfi ,/�; ��� t - t' :"•`j _ may. r ; / • - i. T , • ",4 . ' , i,c. .-11 , NT.ri?'b 4 • - j (k —,N ,' vim, \ ,}4, ` , , r ,(.1 c, i%i ram, I,. . Div: 1, .) . 1` _ i Page 46 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 e. Pedestrian-oriented spaces, visible from the street, including ample seating areas, movable furniture, special paving, landscaping components and pedestrian-oriented uses (see subsection H2a(ix) of this Section).►il ►� i �IU�, h 1._ ,. ..._ , „... 1 : �1�� _� - LJiJiiIIIi . ....,, . ,.7 \ � Milli -iI z� L_�Ytl f 1 . � i inr,.. 1 imir.t....3,....„,"..,:.1. . ...;:t th, If, , , ,414 �. .,l�-ia —rr . vivo" ••13-. . ilratAit - 4 - r 4 f. Building setbacks increased at street corners along pedestrian-oriented streets to encourage provisions for pedestrian-oriented spaces (see subsection H2e of this Section). (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) Lt � L Corner building (7)\ soma . Comer en ' with increased ( setback �� Pedestrian-oriented space I BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Intent: To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. To discourage franchise retail architecture. Page 47 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 1. Building Character and Massing: Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale; and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public, are visually interesting. a. Minimum Standard for Districts 'A' and `D': All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). b. Minimum Standard for Districts 'B' and `E': All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than twenty feet (20'). c. Minimum Standards for District 'C': i. All building facades shall include measures to reduce the apparent scale of the building and add visual interest. Examples include modulation, articulation, defined entrances, and display windows (see illustration, subsection I5a of this Section). ii. All buildings shall be articulated with one or more of the following: (a)Defined entry features; (b) Window treatment; (c) Bay windows and/or balconies; (d) Roofline features; or (e) Other features as approved by the Director. iii. Single purpose residential buildings shall feature building modulation as follows (see illustration, subsection I5b of this Section): (a) The maximum width (as measured horizontally along the building's exterior) without building modulation shall be forty feet (40'). (b) The minimum width of modulation shall be fifteen feet(15'). (c) The minimum depth of modulation shall be the greater of six feet (6') or not less than two tenths (0.2) multiplied by the height of the structure (finished grade to the top of the wall). d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'A' ,'B', `D',and `E': i. Building facades should be modulated and/or articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. Page 48 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 ii. Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. iii. A variety of modulations and articulations should be employed to add visual interest and to reduce the bulk and scale of large projects. e. Guidelines Applicable to Districts ' B' and `E': Building modulations should be a minimum of two feet (2') in depth and four feet (4') in width. f. Guidelines Applicable to Districts A' and `D': i. Building modulations should be a minimum of two feet (2') deep, sixteen feet (16') in height, and eight feet (8') in width. ii. Alternative methods to shape a building such as angled or curved facade elements, off-set planes, wing walls, and terracing will be considered; provided, that the intent of this Section is met. g. Guidelines Applicable to District 'C': i. Although streetfront buildings along designated pedestrian streets should strive to create a uniform street edge, building facades should generally be modulated and/or articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. ii. Style: Buildings should be urban in character. iii. Buildings greater than one hundred and sixty feet (160') in length should provide a variety of techniques to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade or provide an additional special design feature such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering place to add visual interest (see illustration, subsection I5c of this Section). 2. Ground-Level Details: Intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human-scale character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: Page 49 of 63 err✓ ORDINANCE NO. 5286 (a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over six feet (6') in height, has a horizontal length greater than fifteen feet (15'), and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing; or (b)Any portion of a ground floor wall having a surface area of four hundred (400) square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. ii. Where blank walls are required or unavoidable, blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following(see illustration, subsection I5d of this Section): (a)A planting bed at least five feet (5') in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture, mural, or similar; or (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. iii. Treatment of blank walls shall be proportional to the wall. iv. Provide human-scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature along the facade's ground floor. v. Facades on designated pedestrian-oriented streets shall have at least seventy-five percent (75%)of the linear frontage of the ground floor facade(as measured on a true elevation facing the designated pedestrian-oriented street) comprised of transparent windows and/or doors. vi. Other facade window requirements include the following: (a)Building facades must have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be fifty percent(50%). (b)Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. (c) Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing. (d) Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective(mirror-type)glass and film are prohibited. Page 50 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 b. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'A', 'C' and `D': i. The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by incorporating a minimum of one of the following architectural features from each category listed (see illustration, subsection I5e of this Section): (a) Facade Features: (1) Recess; (2) Overhang; (3) Canopy; (4) Trellis; (5)Portico; (6) Porch; (7) Clerestory. (b)Doorway Features: (1) Transom windows; (2) Glass windows flanking door; (3)Large entry doors; (4) Ornamental lighting; (5)Lighted displays. (c) Detail Features: (1) Decorative entry paving; (2) Ornamental building name and address; (3) Planted containers; (4) Street furniture(benches, etc.). ii. Artwork or building ornamentation (such as mosaics, murals, grillwork, sculptures, relief, etc.) should be used to provide ground-level detail. Page 51 of 63 • lave Nuif ORDINANCE NO. 5286 iii. Elevated or terraced planting beds between the walkway and long building walls are encouraged. c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'B' and `E': Use of material variations such as colors, brick, shingles, stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. 3. Building Roof Lines: Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. a. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A' , 'C', and `D': Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles(see illustration, subsection I5f of this Section): i. Extended parapets; ii. Feature elements projecting above parapets; iii. Projected cornices; iv. Pitched or sloped roofs. (a) Locate and screen roof-mounted mechanical equipment so that the equipment is not visible within one hundred fifty feet (150')of the structure when viewed from ground level. (b) Screening features shall blend with the architectural character of the building, consistent with RMC 4-4-095E, Roof-Top Equipment. (c)Match color of roof-mounted mechanical equipment to color of exposed portions of the roof to minimize visual impacts when equipment is visible from higher elevations. b. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'B' and `E': i. Buildings containing predominantly residential uses should have pitched roofs with a minimum slope of one to four(1:4). Such roofs should have dormers or intersecting roof forms that break up the massiveness of a continuous, uninterrupted sloping roof ii. Roof colors should be dark. c. Guidelines Applicable to District 'C': Building roof lines should be varied to add visual interest to the building. Page 52 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 4. Building Materials: Intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings; and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. a. Minimum Standards for all Districts: i. All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. ii. Materials, individually or in combination, shall have an attractive texture, pattern, and quality of detailing for all visible facades. iii. Materials shall be durable, high quality, and reasonably maintained. b. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A' , 'C',and 'D': Buildings shall employ material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. c. Guidelines Applicable to all Districts: i. Building materials should be attractive, durable, and consistent with more traditional urban development. Appropriate examples would include brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass, and cast-in-place concrete. ii. Concrete walls should be enhanced by texturing, reveals, snap-tie patterns, coloring with a concrete coating or admixture, or by incorporating embossed or sculpted surfaces, mosaics, or artwork. iii. Concrete block walls should be enhanced with integral color, textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or incorporate other masonry materials. iv. Stucco and similar troweled finishes should be used in combination with other more highly textured finishes or accents. They should not be used at the base of buildings between the finished floor elevation and four feet (4') above. d. Guideline Applicable to Districts 'B' and `E': Use of material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding or patterns, or textural changes is encouraged. Page 53 of 63 NNW 44420 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 5. Illustrations. a. Building modulation and articulation (see subsection I1c(i) of this Section). I I I 1 1 1 1 ! I, I • — — — I — I ' I i i — 1 — I I I I 1 I 'll I 1 _ ••jl II 1• 1 I I I k >I< >I j INTERVAL j INTERVAL j b. Single purpose residential building featuring building modulation to reduce the scale of the building and add visual interest (see subsection Ilc(iii)of this Section). Articulated roottme-in this case a traditional cornice Windows and building surfaces = add visual interest and give the building a human scale 4. r�*• IU f t • �\t ,v- Building is"modulated" (goes in and out to relieve the ' 40 monotony of the wide wall e l' D � � cl �,;� 04._-_� , II �, 0 IC � v f A t 1 � [ LI ill' - ' - iii 0 - lij fl I 0 m , 1i 4 -,-. - w. :'-'";:" in 10 „ fi Ili! II,,,,,„ ,, . . II 0 .. • a rl „i„,,,.. ..4„ .... , ___„ _4,4 4,„ _,.,.,.._,,.4..,,..,L__„_, ..., ,_ n„,_. , .,„ ., „,,,,_,,r 1 1 ,l ! rci , �II i ;._., lg IV,4 _/ T �, , ¢A J it �'h.: "&.. *y. c. Reducing scale of long buildings (see subsection Ilg(iii)of this Section). Page 54 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 Ili? l°��111111IIIIIIIllluuIlllll1I i,IM 111Pl uj 160' Maximum facade length allowed I— W w O zlm &II I IP, uj 0 , — 4 i 4 ..4 -I & 1 to 5 Er ik More than 160' Facade is too long W1111"' i"IIII � 1!"11111IIIIlIllllll111"i7.14„1„ 111111111�� ������������� _ 160'or less 160'or less Meets guideline Meets guideline d. Acceptable blank wall treatments (see subsection I2a(ii) of this Section). Trellis with vines or 41 other plants pAr , ����' Artwork **Att.. itoiszi4 , Aiti -i44,-_,Ii: Alg *ow" tivt:40:: _ <_:,.it_ ,--4,-.4.1r 010474ir „Ito it . .,:, _111._..a.31$_, etzlpi 1.. _.,,se.....„441411.„ Min. 5'wide planting `sue bed and materials to cover 50%of wall within 3 years e. Building facade features (see subsection I2b(i)of this Section). Page 55 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 4'-6"min. I I d___ E RECESS OVERHANG CANOPY i EL i TRELLIS PORTICO PORCH f. Preferred roof forms (see subsection I3a of this Section). (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) Feature elements projecting Extended parapets above •-rat,,s .44.,,.. hOi*01.. , p Il N.- hil , 1 . , , ! Pj cted cornices Pitched or slo ed roofs \ / / i/ / -. ikil ==-, '„ /// /N '/'/k, Wit ' * *- - 1 . ../\` Page 56 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 J SIGNAGE: Intent: To provide a means of identifying and advertising businesses; provide directional assistance; encourage signs that are both clear and of appropriate scale for the project; encourage quality signage that contributes to the character of the Urban Center and the Center Village; and create color and interest. 1. Minimum Standards for Districts 'C' and `D': a. Signage shall be an integral part of the design approach to the building. b. Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. c. Prohibited signs include(see illustration, subsection J3a of this Section): i. Pole signs. ii. Roof signs. iii. Back-lit signs with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet (can signs or illuminated cabinet signs). Exceptions: Back-lit logo signs less than ten (10) square feet are permitted as are signs with only the individual letters back-lit. d. In mixed use and multi-use buildings, signage shall be coordinated with the overall building design. e. Freestanding ground-related monument signs, with the exception of primary entry signs, shall be limited to five feet (5') above finished grade, including support structure. All such signs shall include decorative landscaping (groundcover and/or shrubs) to provide seasonal interest in the area surrounding the sign. Alternately, signage may incorporate stone, brick, or other decorative materials as approved by the Director. f. Entry signs shall be limited to the name of the larger development. 2. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'C' and `D': a. Alteration of trademarks notwithstanding, corporate signage should not be garish in color nor overly lit, although creative design, strong accent colors, and interesting surface materials and lighting techniques are encouraged. b. Front-lit, ground-mounted monument signs are the preferred type of freestanding sign. c. Blade type signs, proportional to the building facade on which they are mounted, are encouraged on pedestrian-oriented streets. Page 57 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 3. Illustrations. a. Acceptable and unacceptable signs (see subsection Mc of this Section). Typical "can signs" Internally lit letters are not acceptable or graphics are acceptable BANK I� J I � I Plastic or J Sheet L Only the individual translucent metal letters are lit sheet box (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124,2-7-2005) K LIGHTING: Intent: To ensure safety and security; provide adequate lighting levels in pedestrian areas such as plazas, pedestrian walkways, parking areas, building entries, and other public places; and increase the visual attractiveness of the area at all times of the day and night. 1. Minimum Standards for Districts 'A' , 'C', and `D': a. Lighting shall conform to on-site exterior lighting regulations located in RMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior On-Site. b. Lighting shall be provided on-site to increase security, but shall not be allowed to directly project off-site. c. Pedestrian-scale lighting shall be provided, for both safety and aesthetics, along all streets, at primary and secondary building entrances, at building facades, and at pedestrian- oriented spaces. 2. Guidelines Applicable to Districts 'C' and `D': a. Accent lighting should be provided at focal points such as gateways, public art, and significant landscape features such as specimen trees. Page 58 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 b. Additional lighting to provide interest in the pedestrian environment may include sconces on building facades, awnings with down-lighting, decorative street lighting, etc. (Ord. 5029, 11- 24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) L. MODIFICATION OF MINIMUM STANDARDS: 1. The Reviewing Official shall have the authority to modify the minimum standards of the design regulations, subject to the provisions of RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures, and the following requirements: a. The project as a whole meets the intent of the minimum standards and guidelines in subsections E, F, G, H, I, J, and K of the design regulations; b. The requested modification meets the intent of the applicable design standard; c. The modification will not have a detrimental effect on nearby properties and the City as a whole; d. The deviation manifests high quality design; and e. The modification will enhance the pedestrian environment on the abutting and/or adjacent streets and/or pathways. 2. Exceptions for Districts A and B: Modifications to the requirements in subsections E2a and E3a of this Section are limited to the following circumstances: a. When the building is oriented to an interior courtyard, and the courtyard has a prominent entry and walkway connecting directly to the public sidewalk; or b. When a building includes an architectural feature that connects the building entry to the public sidewalk; or c. In complexes with several buildings, when the building is oriented to an internal integrated walkway system with prominent connections to the public sidewalk(s). (Ord. 5124, 2- 7-2005) M VARIANCE: (Reserved). (Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) N APPEALS: For appeals of administrative decisions made pursuant to the design regulations, see RMC 4-8- 110, Appeals. (Ord. 4821, 12-20-1999; Amd. Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) Page 59 of 63 111.0 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 4140 SECTION XVIL Section 4-4-080F.10e of Chapter 4, City-wide Property Development Standards of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended as shown in Attachment `H'. SECTION XVIII. Section 4-7-170F of Chapter 7, Subdivision Regulations of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended as follows: F. PIPESTEM LOTS ALLOWED: Pipestem lots may be permitted for new plats to achieve the minimum density within the Zoning Code when there is no other feasible alternative to achieving the minimum 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) 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. Walkways shall be paved for their entire width and length with a permanent surface and shall be adequately lighted at the developer's cost. (Amd.Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) Page 60 of 63 ORDINANCE NO . 5286 SECTION XIX. Section 4-8-120D.21 of Chapter 8, Permits- General and Appeals, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to revise the following definition: Urban Design Regulations Review Packet: A set of submission materials required for projects subject to the Urban Design Regulations in RMC 4-3-100: a. Site plan, land use review; b. Elevations, architectural; c. Floor plans, general; d. Narrative outlining how the applicant's proposal addresses the City's Urban Design Regulations. SECTION XX. Section 4-9-065D of Chapter 9, Permits- Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended as shown in Attachment `I'. SECTION XXI. The definition of"AFFORDABLE HOUSING" in Section 4-11- 010 of Chapter 11,Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Housing used as a primary residence for any household whose income is less than eighty percent (80%)of the median annual income adjusted for household size, as determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)for the Seattle Metropolitan Statistical Area, and who pay no more than thirty percent (30%)of household income for housing expenses. Affordable housing used to satisfy zoning requirements, whether for inclusionary or bonus provisions, must be secured to remain affordable in perpetuity, as determined by the City attorney. SECTION XXIL The definition of"DWELLING, MULTI-FAMILY" in Section 4- 11-040 of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV(Development Regulations)of Ordinance No. Page 61 of 63 NNW *40 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: DWELLING, MULTI-FAMILY: Dwelling, Attached: A one-family dwelling attached to one or more one-family dwellings by common roofs, walls, or floors. This definition may also include a dwelling unit or units attached to garages or other nonresidential uses. This definition does not include retirement residences, boarding and lodging houses, accessory dwelling units, adult family homes, group home I or group home II as defined herein. A. Flat: A residential building containing two (2)or more dwelling units which are attached at one or more common roofs, walls, or floors. Typically, the unit's habitable area is provided on a single level. Unit entrances may or may not be provided from a common corridor. B. Townhouse: A one-family, ground-related dwelling attached to one or more such units in which each unit has its own exterior, ground-level access to the outside, no unit is located over another unit, and each unit is separated from any other unit by one or more vertical common walls. Townhouse units are multi-story. C. Carriage House: One or more accessory dwelling units attached to a garage. The garage attached to the carriage house typically contains vehicle and/or storage for people living in another building as well as occupants of the carriage house. D. Penthouse: A single dwelling unit located at or near the top of a building containing other, non-residential uses. E. Garden Style Apartment: A dwelling unit that is one of several stacked vertically, with exterior stairways and/or exterior corridors and surface parking. Parking is not structured and may include detached carports or garages. Buildings and building entries are oriented toward internal drive aisles and/or parking lots and not street frontage. There is typically no formal building entry area connected to a public sidewalk and a public street. Site planning may incorporate structures developed at low landscaped setbacks. SECTION XXIII. An emergency is hereby declared and this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14 t h day of May , 2007. Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Page 62 of 63 ORDINANCE NO. 5286 APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14 th day of May 2007. K1"44, Kathy Keolker, Mayor Approved as to form: RA-4,-"e-i.A.-ce?.. ---e—KA%__ Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 5/19/2007 (summary) ORD: 13 5 7:05/11/07:ch Page 63 of 63 ATTACHMENT A ORDINANCE NO. 5286 D ZONES IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Designations are implemented by certain zones: OMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTING ZONES DESIGNATION Residential Low Density(RLD) Resource Conservation (RC)Residential— 1 DU/AC (R- 1)Residential—4 DU/AC(R-4) Residential Single Family(RS) Residential—8 DU/AC (R- 8)Residential Manufactured Home Park(RMH) Residential Medium Density Residential—10 DU/AC (R- RMD) 10)Residential Manufactured Home Park(RMH)Residential— 14 DU/AC (R-14) Residential Multi-Family(RM) Residential Multi-Family(RM-V, RM-I, RM-F) Urban Center Downtown (UC- Center Downtown D) (CD)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) ommercial/Office/ Residential Commercial/Office/Residential COR) (COR) enter Village (CV) Res-I-dent-tat--40 DU/AC(R 1-0)Residential Multi-Family Zones (RM-F, RM-T, RM-U), Center Village(CV) Residential- 14 DU/AC (R-14) ommercial Corridor(CC) Commercial Arterial (CA)Commercial Office (CO)Light Industrial (IL) Employment Area Industrial Light Industrial (IL)Medium EAI) Industrial (IM)Heavy Industrial (IH) Employment Area Valley(EAV) Commercial Arterial (CA)Commercial Office (CO)Light Industrial (IL)Medium Industrial (IM)Heavy Industrial (IH)Resource Conservation (RC) ommercial Neighborhood (CN)Commercial Neighborhood (CN) *or. ,,,,,. — N v) Z p V Q F- Q Z o v_ 0 (9 D Z Q Cl) - LIJ O a'O 2 U Q (7 Q Z 0 I 0Z U a O Q U Q^ Q C4 a I(jOr- Q W - Q _ UI co U Q 0 < - N U UI co Q Q v) - - _Q = 2 M O n 0 O Z C , n' Q rn U Z 2 CO Q N. Q 0 z _o a Q F- z - I a Q^ Q c Z _ cs 0 W 0 Qn a p F- ZQ"' � x <C o a Z co a)IliQ eO I ') .) 'n c,)) U N- 0 N p a a a I Q ¢ a Z (7 2 _ _ N- p ? Q' N 0 Q W Z - W Q O ao U - O N it cc 2 a a a co d vr- 0 CD .1 Q a < Cl) I �n �n in CS) caCO n 0 N- 0 a)W a CL a 2 a ¢ Q a N Z - W y p a I W a a a I a ¢n < Q^ a p Cl) m Z W < Q Q a I- '=co Q p L a rn -v C W W w Q >5 W o p E a) E p - 0) u) J .- c4 v () et c`u ca > a) c Tti Z (� Q p O Z i C i c- O O p U J W Z I- N ` api Q c cE coo C -a >, - C p Q = W 7 � s — ca - c6 � p Q Ccn � E H a� Z to '� oC Cl)N � � Jo -0 of o � cnE co o - w E tn p ^ rn o. o O apt E Z _ C .0 V 0 U .- p • Cr 7 0 th E � -° C ,n 0 co (IS x Q 60 Z i/� C9 22 D : Z 4- 3 s- , 3 L ru rum - w co a) a)a) a) ° fl aai W o Ems-• 4 O W Q rn m p Q c '� ca - 4- 0 .c 033 aa)) E aa)i c c n o 0i c) Ce ,g d� v NI m Q QZ m Q Q Q 0 m Y Y d u) U a IOW — tie— — N Z U co 0 a Q < a_ O a H • DZ ■, a ■_ Q Q a O O � ■, a ■- Q a Ili 0) Q U a UO ■1111■— Q a Q co U ° Ia ._ a a I CLCO 0 CO I Q a ui M M 2• 0 I a a a a a a Q a 0 oho U 0Z a I a ■ a 0 NI Q z < _ II Q U m ■„■— a N a to ml ci Z I a , a a a o) a a I Q a Z Z V. rn 0 0 0 U � � IT Q a Q a i Qm a CI_ s a a. a U a a 0 Q I 0 0 0? III 0 aco aa a = 0 Q Z II■ a a Q a a I Q in ■1111■ a a a a I Q = CL re ■„■_ a O Q a. a a Q0 = m C o J o C Q f4 W X CO C 0 N N f- 'c o `o rn a) Cl) co ui C ° E co N Z C co c0 Z Q v c � = � c� axi _j = ° ° ao a ° ° co o W F- a -0 — 0 rn c rn v _c _c Cl) o ti — — — 53 x W o Cl) 3 C m C _c C z - ai a_a) Cl) ai 1 LLI - a7 ID Cl) a`D) a) a ui o 3 CI) -- W L as u, o E E E }. -� HZ W 0 5 x N a) a� rn W = > > a a2 -a F- a w rn 0- 0- 0 0 a) a) 0 E-� 0Z cA a) ai mom' a) rn a� C us m y o E O o = C o o a2 o f E . O) �' N (q Q LL C) 2 2 2 _2 Q 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ CD u.i 4411W, — ..+_ — — N Z Z CO CO a a a rn rn °0' rn 0 U i i i x a x Q Z V Z n ■ I C9 Z x a- = a a a x N 0 x x Q cn- 0 0 a a ■■ a_ a 0 x x = Q x 0 Z0 Z I a a a a a Q I I = a x N 0 a) o, QU I a a a a a o I x I Q I a Q rn rn re U x a a a I a a Q x x I Q x LU E () x a ■ csia ■ a a Q I x x Q x 0 0o = a ■■ Cl. a Q I x I < x 0 N ■ kI d Q = x a a a x a a Q x x I Q° I = o U ? = a co a co a a a a x x I Q I = O — M Z J = a a a a a a Q I x i Q x bU _ al Z re I a ■■■ a a Q x x I < x 0. � � = a -. a a Q x I x Q x Q: a ■■■ a a Q x I I x 0 2 _ Z a ■■■ a a Q W x I x Q x Z _ H N a ■■■ a a Q U x I I Q x P a ■■■ a a Q U I I I Q x Ce y a ■■■ a. a. Q CO i i i Q x .-■■■ a a Q Z I I I I 0 o c 13 Q y c 1a >- aNi = �a CO lL 0 V 1_�'• r en 0.to v -J C C t01 O 7 7c O co 'c >+d 4 < - • c .c E E 2 = ••-' �° w £ = v z � � � � v c o .v w 7o � w c c c W c > c m R E E �, o c d w d � � w o Q. o Q s_ c =a o = o o O u_ �, N o w E E m E j o o t .� w C) > 4- .c V o - c c « E c V C9 m2 D2c' aim Hw " O Y .= cc ci = W C ' RN COv m d !� � w -o ' 'v ' s = .. O p p «� p 0> O O C u_ > > X yr E"+ Z W Q N t t V R y di d y i d C •O E .Z " . >+ >+ h 0 R F- 0 Cl) — ., - V i to. Cu co O E ,C> 0> O 7 = = C� •' N D Y Y O U) 1- u. a a Q. (9 U 0 CL cn d 0 0 7 V) Noe — — — — — Noto 0 0 Z ? rn rn Si rn co rn rn rn rn 0 U = a a a Q a. a a oQ 1- Q Z V = CL CL CL n m 0 coa0 = coN aao 0 DZa a < d a a Q U = a a a s a a I a a 0 Z = co a a a co a a I a a Q Z _J U a < n. Q CL co a Q Q IX V I CO a CL d d a d < d I LD d d 0N. a d a d < W N N N M 21 Cy1 C,J l() E (.) I 111 a a s 0 Q d a d Q O f- N Z N o QNU I a , < n I a J i = coCn co co 0) CO d U d I o CO N p Qa a a s a Qa Q a d a a Q O W f% _ = a co d co a d Q d I co oM d d c n 0 O U = a s a a Q .1. Z J I a a a a a s Q a I M o a a v U) '- al) a a 0_ a < as 4a CI CI) CI I , CV v Cs/ v = 0 _ 0 a Q_ a a Q III co I I IN co __ _ co o I II a = _ Z _ III N I III Z _ II a I I O = N III a W W _ _ _ I ce ix WI 1 °- M cc d re N o 0 0 W V N Z W Z p) a) aCl o Q -I ° 0L. a) o d to '�. F- co d U �0 12' C Cl = Y +�' i °' GI E N dr- W d w z N C d Rf V N rr c = 7 y r E G) W W c°� Z c°'i -a m` N — c m c c p o Z ., c may' N _ a d a CO ,> .c R 1 U) N d m in a d t V) •V ►+" = o R _U = CD N J +�' C N +-' C .—z. 19 (0 V�1 0' C `�' o w Z °)-o LT 422 V V d C Q ° "C 'to a) V W 7 N U) L d 0 O• H T3 d o O o � Z w t O c o v +; > Cr) ayi axi c :° :° > :t s E w d = •Q w Q 0 Cl) 0 2 0 2 O _ Q_m 0 co _2 2 re_ W r_> > a -, W < 0 0 — — — rr• — — Nile — — — N N Z O V a = I I a a a Q Z U' r- a� v v ao m z a.ao aoI coI a a a W _ _ _ U W O p a a a a a O Z O co co co N in co c v Z U a a co a a i a d O N 0 = = a a a a a a a -J o _Q Q N O a O ao W0 N N N N N O a 0_ a coceV a CL = a a Q = d W N N Q cN N N a N N N E 0 Q Q a a a! a s n 0 V zoo a a 00 N < Q a J ao co co = a s = a a aoo co co co co Q a a a a a O z Ce co co . W 0 - a s = a a a a a a a a acD U D ,n Z o co co co co co Co a co a0 a) co < Z J a a = a co a a a a a a a a N O N N a Z a Q ¢ O O a a H Q Z Q. r.. M a M a:0a I a Q = W ii o 0 C3 Q 0 _Z re = a = Z O co N ii a = Q J Q 'V' Z Ce I = o Q W I- 0 . a a a a a N W 0 Ce ix a = 0 o �_ C C 4= O O O co O = +-' 7 7 d AO W O. C 0 0 d O O C 'J L L X W 3 To ++ t+ C f'• CO 0) O K K _ 0) _ __ z Q C �.... C) L O O X C C) C .O 5 w V) N U W I— O i O N O tl) N O ea W 4- 4- C Y Y l0 C) C) ',7.," xi w R vi R •a c °' °' CO c C) c0 C W �' L O w co a) d P. C i) 'C O O L O O O O V N a 'y d d U U t9 O t 0= rs.+ a6 « . 14 O ., 7 7 0 ::. O w+ O �+ O > H v N v N N V) Q) Z d 0) a = O V) :D Hs.- N N 10 O O l0 f0 O f0 O 10 •0 Q' V C co C i. a) Y Q' E-� Z W V C) V 'C 7 f0 r l0 d V V C `1 .a d .a d W t0 V 00 0 d d w N W E-� O Cl) CO C o3 p 0. t0 c 0. R .c 00) 0 0 CC 0 0 •� m co a) ate) �6 0 o o • c . Q N D 0 CI (.0 _E u) v) Ce 0 0 2 Ce re Ct s cn a0 CO 12 O O — %M - — — — — — — — — — Csi co z O 0 0 O elN Z , CO 0 0 0 0 rn 0 0 U a a a Q a = a H C9 = Z Qom I co co co a a a 8 < = a a Ti N CIQ I a a a 8 0 = a I oi aa0 Cr) CD Z a in Nt a a in a o , a a a U a = a a aQU Q a Q U N . Ba = _ N aOO N O O ce U < 0_ a a I Cl- N CO CO 2 U a I a a a 8 a = a Q a CL a a °' 0 0 U 0 < < ■ a N N O = o 00 0 a a a Q N cr1 Jn O Q = coQN a d II = a s a a a a O a a z li a (D O N Q I U) O coQN a aaQ 1 a s a CO a a a a 0 VD a Zto J O N a M N n U7 ,,co M co O aCIO ) ? a a a Q a = a s ¢ a a a a a ozs z a c4 Z I_ 0190 1 I co ao _-I_ MIMI 0 Ce .- I MHO _ z _ �I_ 1101I MOM i i o I EOM co z Ce �0 0090 a IL CI C I 009011.1 I ONE 1 1 5 1.7 C0 -0 .0a73 =i L w � a) CD I a •v al J N E a) 0co C4 co 2 SSI t o c 0 < 'C O a�i E 0. 73 co I-1 o Z Y N O V — = 01 'Z V i+ J Q C C> V C01 O •D .0 I-W W d F. C R 0 0 CO c w N C CO N To 0 0 'C x a 0 N = N > �, V c4 d V = J Q' d N d O N CLO V y .L O v L ci d Ca e1/ E.P. a ca w •— 0 .c co h o To 5 E °�w E v a -a c V 0 - .- w 0 v co v 13 >, .o f0 cc = V, cc c 0 y cc o o > cn E c c co ,;a = N d 0 0 c U _+ .+ 0 = > 0 w >+ > d Z -0 0 c c ` O. c E c9 eo c O cn ig 0 Cl)w '1 N cc 0 ` COo -v .0 cc cc 0 O 0 0 c`v X N 2 ` RI U) o ccc U CO"AL cc D 'R 'R N = 0 0 < - 0 U. 2 U E —J m U w u 0 a. a. a a a f- • 03 Z M n 0> O V a a Q 2 2 fn „ O ■III■■■II_ I ' ll ■■ cO co a co co a III ' ll NJ 0 Q U ■ a „■ ■11111 Q W � ■ Iaa ■ aII_III � Q0� a2o O U ■ a , a a QiN , I I II Q I N IIt© I QZa = a a a a a © , a 2 „ Icsi p a a O U 2 2 I a a a a8 .= III 2 cv a a s 0 2 a a tIn of Z III II_ I_ II_ a a O 0 tr , .. ...--. .-III-.. W CL ,c2 I IllCD 2 z _ �-Ill I. i_i_il N co & III II_I_II Z ce ,U „■■■II_I_II U a v) vi to a) ai 'cc 4 0 c c 0 c c N 0. 0 0 '� O >. I—Lii ii O o c c 3 c z 3 - v ` L o a) R co t �. _ z Q .r J N N C R R C C N a) t !:' cam.. W ~ a) a) W �p 0) V d V = 7 7 y7, 0 d a) O ro vi c d p� O d W Q O re C c C p) !Q L C C el) V to a W = 'O al N �y rn o .a c W �, �, Z E �, o ca c� _ c o •� O E O = .r LI O 0 m = n Y c G) J C m O 0) d 0 W o E E OO N 0 V Q 7 a) 0 c O a) 0 a0+ V ` O +_+ U r _d _O 73 a) i9 a) •1`— C) N en c c 0 c 'a co" 13 - O l0_ N 0 a) 0 F"' Z W .-. = W Yj •X cv eo i9 0. Q - 0 w O 'o v01 v F-H 0 U) o `.. . V a) a)a) °' aa)i ` d ` L L. L ° R Q .o Q •� m . co N H ' '1- t Q N n H 1- 1 F- Q - Q Q I 12 2 I c 0 in > — — t N Z o 0 0 Z . O ci d a a H 11IU, 0 a a a L7 ClIll 0 co rn V = a a a _Z Or to Z V Q� Q a 0 Q a a p a J U Q — Q o 0 0o W V a a a cv co a W -2 > ¢I _, a 0 ono U U a c-4 '� I a a co co co r- r- co O a a o_ a a a CD CO ° CO = a o zco co CO 0> 0) 00 U j a a a a a co a I CO CLCO CL I _ Z Z J a a M M c00�, 7 o_ v a b�A a a d a a a co a.. Q Z re Ou" O F Q9 z Ni 0L� T W ' c CIIi Z W _ I Z Nco —Io: < .. F re Z -- W T _0 Q' N X I W D h L Z -a O 48 C. ai R Ill d d O Z L >+ 3 C c c 'p f. m to rL. ' N C V > -p -p -p ... .O O s0. O to co C W < Q C V O 7 7 V J ..0 ` ++ o C C C C d d G)) CO) o to G O O R to Q C W C G 0) C jq Vj d C G CC G C 0 Q- - fn Q' O �0 G to to 0 Q' y +, C) C 'C o 'C o 'C O C) V G o h f' c) ►=i F " >„'� — CA — ;i+ O H .` m"" 'C a_ r3 = 3 = 3 w 1) 0) N ! CC) V V 0 0 M %-�° - co a) - m` = 0 3 0 0 o " `° aNi o d E E� w > cma °E-r Z dz = ow Ex Ew oZ ogoCl) c i c :a >` >,;n (U wc 0 h '° 'a w o o m o Go co — a - i -a . co « GI y co — Ts m a v 0 63 Q N Z =_Q _U _U U Z J J M E E v) cC C co ire en z z V a CI¢ _ = Q a a Q O 0 H Z o T- N ui Z O , I Qaaa oU � _ = a ¢ I a =¢C9OI = a © vvon asv v v a < n 0Z U = ¢ < a ¢ J I _ co a ¢ © a co 0 U = I a s a Q = aI _ ¢ vo aa a a ao W ¢ = a Q v 0 co= v v a v v V = I a a a a I O oho 0 I 1 co a © aaU = I s a co vr co = Q N ¢ o = ii co co a � © aa a _ = aa a < CDZ re N cco v v v O) V v 4r U 111 _co =co a ¢ ©._ < <,,,,,-N. a a a a a < ¢ o < F .=1 g ¢ < cl Q I _ = a Q © co , vs- aa < 0Z i sa I I� �_ me(.., ass Elmo a) C9 fir . _ a ¢ © - ¢<0 v a a a to I . ¢ N 2 a 0 co a v v co ■ 0 0 Ce � , © ■ ¢ a a I ¢ (D Z ix = g . ._ a 1 Z v) v .4- co¢ 0 I in _ a Q IILLJ< a s a I ■ ¢ ,.... I _ vr I I a Q © O ■ Qco a s a i ■ W 0 IV (...) N o .1- .4- a) co V) U ce U v z c4 n 't M ) 0 y ix c U N N a) ILI CIO LIJ H a y C co C N p W CD -0 E .Q N CO m MC O U n. co Z Q = C C d C C O N C G :: " O Q Q U VJ N t } F- p co O _ 7 uJ f0 N C O `1 Q G1 I y ce LLJ fn •:II W V y a O R E d " N d d - >, ~ .3 '= H d 0 m N d Q 10 d O Q' L +.I co E co W L v! L L A ++ U 0 y M '� d 0md vi vi v; W � � w ') E ` EN o � o � W `onc°vd -0 a E.r Z W E n E 0 O 0 d O " '• :: w +L, ~ O -x O R C C +L�' W d N. C t W E-" 0 N .' p " m O �- « 0 co O C C d O w p CI) p CO O• v v ._ 3 _ F- N > O 0 W > > > a _J 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 Q ri * 2 z0 0 0 § Cl§ § f $ 2rj _ o o co § 0 = 2 E E 2 E' cD m E w e m n o ) 0 Q Ce 2 ± a Q o ® § 0 ® Z 0 m o n ) a) f / 2 0 2 E 2 °Df < o % c m § 0 3 y \ j o o_ a E } < # < a) « m co o core 0 y 0_ E 2 w \ 2 > § § § 0_ { o - ' ■ t 0 0 § § § § § / k G @ 0 j / O < — } § § ) k ? / co o 3 \ q q 2 E co§ 7 / \ CD k / § § / X » © . g q acl m 2 n § o m E / \\ 2 2 W 2 a a_ 2 2 ' / / fsO . o I %« . I _ o ,- Q 0 re � / § § § -0ƒ o m n o k UJ LL — y to E co§ \% o 2 r o ƒ @ 2 L. / J § - k� 0 co m / o n \ 12 N ce 2 o_ E to 2c tm _1 _ -- 0 a < f co co o m [� a �o I- Et 2 2 E 0_ 0, § E 4\ w _ CO r 0 m kV \o g to to J to � 2 /) 2ro k 4a 0 re re 2 E § \/ 0> cii _o a) — 7c w C ' o $ � 22 m § 2oc — 13 f j \{ / « c o o V ■ ■ e " J E 2 1- m § 2 •15 f / : q E CD k 2 0 /k &k / j/ 0 o — ce ■ @ � c � f c a =< U � 2 — ■ — — t � . H k 2 dE � 0 � � m � � k � � Eu, O q o m = r ■ o E E u E $9 ' N _d F- F- j? ATTACHMENT C ORDINANCE NO. 5286 4-2-070G RESIDENTIAL-14 DU/AC (R-14) Uses allowed in the R-14 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Natural resource extraction/recovery H ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Kennels, hobby AC #37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per dwelling unit or business AC establishment RESIDENTIAL Detached dwelling P #19 Semi-attached dwelling P #19 Attached dwelling P #50 Manufactured Homes Manufactured homes, designated P #19 OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND HOME OCCUPATIONS Adult family home p Group homes II for 6 or less p Group homes II for 7 or more H Home occupations AC #6 SCHOOLS K-12 educational institution(public or private) H #9 K-12 educational institution(public or private), existing P #9 PARKS Parks, neighborhood p Parks, regional/community, existing p Parks, regional/community, new AD OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC FACILITIES Community Facilities Cemetery H Religious institutions H Service and social organizations H Public Facilities City government offices City government facilities H Other government offices and facilities H RETAIL Eating and drinking establishments H #33 Horticultural nurseries H Retail sales H #33 ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Entertainment Cultural facilities H oftsie ATTACHMENT C ORDINANCE NO. 5286 Recreation Recreation facilities, indoor existing P #33 Recreation facilities, indoor new H #33 Recreation facilities, outdoor P #33 SERVICES Services, General Bed and breakfast house, accessory AD On-site services H #33 Day Care Services Adult day care I AC Adult day care II H #33 Day care centers H #33 Family day care AC Healthcare Services Convalescent centers H Medical institutions H VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Park and ride, shared-use P #108 UTILITIES Communications broadcast and relay towers H Utilities, small P Utilities, medium AD Utilities, large H WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD #46 _ Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P #44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P #19 Monopole I support structures H #45 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 development: one model home P #53 on an existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P #53 Temporary or manufactured buildings used for construction P #10 _ Temporary uses P #53 ATTACHMENT D ORDINANCE NO. 5286 4-2-070J CENTER VILLAGE(CV) Uses allowed in the CV Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL Service and social organizations H RESOURCES Public Facilities Natural resource extraction/recovery H City government offices AD City government facilities H ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Other government offices and facilities H Ken-nelobby AC#37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per AC OFFICE AND CONFERENCE dwelling unit or business establishment Medical and dental offices P#22 RESIDENTIAL Offices, general P#22 Attached dwelling P73 Veterinary offices/clinics P#22 Flats or townhouses (existing legal) P73 Conference Center H Gig+� nr+nurnhn ,sue n +n +h RETAIL P Adult retail use P#43 Drive-in/drive-through, retail AC#28 OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND Eating and drinking establishments P#22 HOME OCCUPATIONS Horticultural nurseries H Adult family home P Retail sales P#22 Congregate residence P Retail sales, outdoor P#15 Group homes II for 6 or less P Taverns AD Group homes II for 7 or more P Home occupations AC#6 ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Retirement residences P Entertainment Actin-eat@ftainme+t t3t1s3ne&S P#43 SCHOOLS Cultural facilities AD K-12 educational institution (public or H#9 Dance clubs AD#22 private) Dance halls AD#22 K-12 educational institution (public or P#s Movie Theatres AD private), existing Schools/studios, arts and crafts P#22 Recreation Recreation facilities, indoor existing P#22 PARKS Recreation facilities, indoor new P Parks, neighborhood P SERVICES Parks, regional/community, existing P Services, General Parks, regional/community, new AD Hotel P#22 Motel P#22 OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC On site services P#22 FACILITIES Drive-in/drive-through service AC#28 Community Facilities Day Care Services Cemetery H Adult day care I P#22 Religious institutions H Adult day care II P#22 USES: TYPE: Day care centers P#22 Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT D ORDINANCE NO. 5286 USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: Macro facility antennas P#44 Family day care AC Micro facility antennas P Healthcare Services Mini facility antennas P#44 Convalescent centers P#22 Minor modifications to existing wireless P#49 Medical institutions H communication facilities Monopole I support structures P#44 VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Monopole II support structures H#48 Gaf-washes P#22 Express-transportation-services AD#22 GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Parking garage, structured, commercial Accessory uses per RMC 4 2 050 and as or public P#22 defined in chapter RMC 4-11, where AC not otherwise listed in the Use Table Parking, surface, commercial or public P Park and ride, shared use P#ios Park and rides, dedicated P#106 TEMPORARY USE Vehicle fueling stations p Model homes in an approved residential development: one model home on an P#53 Vehicle service and repair, small PAD#2 existing lot Taxi Stand P Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P#53 -Transit Centers -P Temporary or manufactured buildings STORAGE used for construction P#10 Indoor storage AC#1 1 Temporary uses P#53 Guteeer-sterage AD#64 Self service-storage 1-4--#26 INDUSTRIAL Industrial, General Laboratories: light manufacturing AD#22 Laboratories: Research. Development and Testing — Solid Waste/Recycling Recycling collection station P UTILITIES Communications broadcast and relay towers USES: TYPE: Electrical power generation and cogeneration H#66 Utilities, small P Utilities, medium AD Utilities, large H WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H#48 Page 2 of 2 .r✓ -.. 0 L L Q a N Q] Q Q O C C Q L Cu C if) L t_ w Q - c a) a) a) v)_ co Q Q Q C LO xa) c 0 y) CO 2 N (r) C > c c N C C o o c n i6 ' nv. n C ti (nco o(vC `- a > o 7 O X X X "O 'a-o C 7 a) x C _O 0 (1.3 7 U O a) 7 CO (r- 7 (- 7 O O CO coN a) -- 7 L > 0 c6 y 00 LOL "p ? C : C (L C06 C 0 00 N LOL -0 ? cv6 H N U (06 Z L C a)t _c c'' • • a) U 0 7 c; c c y O C c L o)= -O C � -C_ O � _ j Tr. 1/ C a) 7 ,? C N 'C (/) a o 3 co_o OO - C -0 -0 C N O - Z l L . -O O 7 a) O `u Q - a) 0 r � o o C O a) a) - a) - c6 i- 0c , DC_ • U) 2 Qoa) a Q C o Q a) O E O 7 C Z (o •u) . c 7 - a) • O Cu Q (6 7 U' C -X . 0 0 u) > O U) D O Q a) O C - (I) O : V) -O cr • O C _c 7 (6 w (n c .. j o 7 O O _ •> c N a) v- . -0 =`-• 7 V) a3 O C �.-, C v 7 '-- 0 E E0 • � � E c z O O -OE o O O (NI Z 7 a) 7 • L y O >, .0 -o O Q O 0 (a O U o O `. • 0 0 O w N w Cu 22 It - CO a c c .-. a) a) L a) ct) N O J C •r C U N a) O ID ° O) .= r' W Qs_ c N dxC tea) � � -0O0 3 0 U Z y Q a) • O `) L a1 Q) O w C Qw c O p _O N >,-O rn U L C 7 " • a) ' CO CZ C a) V) d Q d (n 7 (6 a) Q O N i6 OL U E > a Q of c ° r 13 cw O o a) o o a�i QQ Cl- 0 a) �� c O L L ° — (n a) O ..... . a) C < v U .0 L L 0 IX L co L LL O. 7 W Q (6 CO 7 --. Q (6 Q U. w0 .�U. z a) Q i" �'' N O -o ) O a O () (6 O re O N v- (Q •u) a) •c a) -C 0 a oo0 " mac°)-- ° n �� D moo '" Z - C rno c 0 -- - 0 a) C � ° Qo_— -c < to n a) — c •X (7n L uj ° a __ 0 7 7 f- d C > a) C �t () j C .- N- a) C w -O a) w Q _ C N O ,6 O CO _- E ' O O C "O W d N (n c -0 C a ° �- N N L 0- C i o a) O .0 a) g Q � � > m duo ° � o � 000V) 0 — u ai a°i m � _ < • co J C Q - v) N E 7 CO > V O -- ,� 'O 'O U c J N cp N c 0 WW U. Cu Cu -O 5 03 ° 0 () C 0 cab li v0) a 'a Q D - IF, E ■ d CI 0) a) Q w "F c c = a) 7 CO f- Z Z S � 2 0 w 0 2 I 0 es 0 fn >, F- R Q y Z E - .U) i 1- N W 'E C x c _Qj c Q z O -O M U T Y (o ii5 a) O E o cv0) aa) '0 _C En _cO N -0 Ca N N a� D CO a) coc to C (� C O 4) u) O' u) O N c0 —_ a) a O o -c > E (0 a) a 4 a O (O Y E o 2 LO `) c co co U U N a C '� O Co D d (0 . c • a) fY Q a- .! C (0 (0 O p ° E co a) •a) ° 3 X C _c . O E a) N � > -O O O - ° a. N N C c,, C C U 3 _T C O CO a) c0 O v u) a) co ° E R0 O a) ° a C C Q CI CD O a Co Co a) > m a) Co 0 N N co co O C >as O v- L U .u) O u) C d.a) • U ..= u) O a) > o ° U N C o > > N 0 a a) N o N a) o Co . O O Z O N — C O in C Q o C°J ° 0 a w.N Co ° O N O w coC a U -C p w C T U to in coQ) a) N N 0 C u) O O toLi) ° Z a) w a- (n _c E V >TD p ° O O° - o o < E ° i- _O c ° �o :. T E p U s -o U m co Z -Oco Co "N E c'Cry c°j V1 O Co (A C Q) ° T a m 'V (0 a) m � � co co co U 'v—i D n .N Ct > RI � c o > D c Er c . co c d- ti F— ° L c p a) .c -00 cock o mom -0con.a co U (oN Q ° U ° QEU . aa0 c c co c a)a) a) Q. � Coa .... a) c (aw ° o �a) E ° c,) c C o a) o E - 0 t a) y .(6 a) p o °c) Co 7 N Z co o 0 O y Q co v0, Q 0 o U °) ate) ..0 -a v D O o (a � o rn.. m caN ° $ cam Moto "0oi iriE `o _ C a) ° O > t Co _ L N C = Q) ., U a) w N N Co U a) CO O a) cn t co a) 4 Q) .-. O (a N V 10 Co 'a C — O C U (n L L (o E N co a O O C v- c0 Z O Cl. R Q O L ° O O ° 0 O° L �O C o c0 Co t6 (o CO C O t a) w tt) O_ O - tO o Co .0 a) 'op 10D a) Cr)_ ,- 3 a) (o L _c -p c0 n. - U a) a, 3 N > C) N ''' .0 a) — C >_ E = � -0 a) a°) -o N ° °� N o E a>i (n N � °' > CD (tea N 3 � � 0 3 ° c N E .N o ca Nam °) v E m _ :a E -c p) ° o - ° U Q13 a) (n Cam N ,_ > - a (acia co CowN � �� 27y `" � SQ = E � ° E ° Oa ° > co (o -p c a) -- a) a (0 4- a) c c (n a) c a) co -C a) 7 O a) D ° o a) ° 13 _0 o o 'D CD _c > "a (o m -C _0 ._ o a) V- a) a) r., .� Q a) o .� co d +, O E o E , _ s s _0 U U > ' O ° a U "O D > (o ID X N ° X �, c0 ° — > O V C O (0 _C E N (o C ° Q) -0 ° w..-. c N a U C c O .� -o X c O t0 r" 2 N 7 a) d X . v- a) ° O u) . E . .aa co co co coca UocoE X w ` u. Ea .� 2 u. -arna) EoioE (nEm E Z w n zCO w Z VJ Cu F-- C/ d • wr Noe Q c Z 0 Z r- 7 oCrd ar >i • y `o a• CO a) o ca > o ) 0 -0 O Q Q 7 m 00 a) a) in V 1 >+ -• U C o �C) .OS E .X c o a) • - CO N a > $ us 7 Q O O (o N O moo UU -.6 _o aa') , aro .N N oo m uu)i O — C 4) - C C tN CLL_ 7 O (oco c 0) V N -0 U N _C 0) U C Co -o a) ,) (n 0) .0 o C w co o I na C N U O O O N O U a .m+ D -C C - . v) L asr o o m a) C 33 m U C O Q3 f/1 7 O N L(J L O 0 N t a) 45 M .N.+ a) O U a) Q _ = i. C X C C m X co Z •_( _O L- O CT 10 O 3 O m V- O a) Q C u) 0 N L. U) C �0) ~ a) a) w 'a a) _Z _ m aa) N O ( U p co co a' o c a m a) m — _ _ m _ C N m G) a < < d .".+ < • ,- .n a) -0co O o Ce 0 D C7Q v- N 1:3a) C w - O) N - O a) N 4- O (U a) O ` . C . � d . 4- O > 0 C •L L j N ° No O) O V O co- .m cv O d m o u) J E o . cu a) C C c N o (ten o -0 v u) do a a) 3 � ca � � N o 0 � o w cx � o No _ Ca av IX 5 i N 0 X -0 a) 1- .N O .O O .N 0 a) co w o N W (a c i a) L X 0 7 (o -) L O .c N - c .c E o O N w 0EO a To Q' � EcaDa� ° >, a) u, '6g) co .- >. 6v E .. ODy CD05 CycQ 0U cno O a) °ac aci3a) � 'C � mtea? a�iv0i 3mca E •`� ouui3 � YD ocao C c) o c o ° (v Q Z a) v -o .� o a) (n m .c c E N d = ) = co `r' co 0- a) a) ocic ° o)� o) > a' o _CN-cDrn E _ a' a a) — 3i/i .- L C C . N _ V) CO 7 C t C U .-. s � o U' >, co ( °�� a) � @ � 0aCDD0 ,, > (v -oo c0 -Ea'a cmo ) 7) ..m. a' .= •- a) C '� Z c a) to 0 0 0 O a) L- O a) "0 '5 -` CO a) N .0 O i d 3 o Q V a N o m J 0 -o (u .� 2 co _0 a) _o a) a. w aE .c o a O 0 aELL m 0V a J W W O N LL as ~ � Na Z 0 W +'' a) 0.)W re -JJ coo 0)= W - a rn E U Q Z C7 J g o 0 in N v= y - X X U (1) V- L M {. r O 4 • Q in co 0 o _ a) a) L _> V) . _>' V1 76 � C • y C • C) O C L Q = O 7 CD N Q in 7 c O N V C C C > - c cE E > '" cE E •c c a)V UU vi VOO D O_CCc D 0 O D . C LT. CO C LL O O V) -6 U C d u) O 'p C) N co 0 0 am 0 - O a) 0 - O C. C — -o0 CC) EOt - CO D - .c C a) D c O CNI, a-. ci) C C 3 R C) m C `0 z O o V o o C obi I- y O 0 'C o o - o Lll O O V) O S a) a) M +r O N vJ t co 4+ C O U C C X C C co X M y. C Zr) CCI3 a) 0 3 a) -- c LI a) O 3 is cD � X 0 Qate) I- _ a I-- ate) ai) w V � 0 ;° 'a I-0 w .o � w a Z t N C) .0 M L L L a) .0 0 t M a) O L. N a) M o_ ( '' Q E W r 0 -' -D 03 - Y .- U 0 U I U U)(D co w+ O Q cn O 0 a) 0_ Q Q i : V) 4' $ CD w, U rZ O D 0Q Q � te0 M < 0 < Qti d � L V i N N (D t Q O Nn COCD cD c C4 r >' a)-O ar d) w Q O ca 7 a) D E y 4- 4- N O O L 0 . 3 V) ,_ V) 0 0 0 O 4- �.— L. C') d- CO Q) N O ca ai .N C C 8. O V) V) a) -.- Q) 7 7 7 U C O E 7 cii `) d O O U '-' U '4' U co y Z a) Q+�. s C ._ in = 0) 7 Ca 7 ! 7 Q U) E a) U = O a) C 'N c- a- v- , i a) I 7 V) C A CD d C ` w = .-; in CO U) V. v) O i_ o Q-9 0 a y 3 O O co 0 up U- 0 e- . co O co O V O I— lL () 1-0 (J) Z 0 in CO " Y Z (n w o W o .-J 0 5 ', o 0 E= E p cD co 0 — co < N0 N0) 03 Q E O) I- E -c I- -c F— C T.) va 0 'C_ 0- c ^ W Q 2 v "'I 2 O v e- (/) • 11110.0. 4--. U) if; cn -C O O C v- C a) Ca N a) 'C O = w w 0 L := N � ° .. tclj � w 7 y s x '3 :_. c') N O N Zr- co co N N 0 3 -- `- C Q O v) w --a--) ;� X X F- > .. 7 ' = d O C ` ,� X 7 N O Cn a- .' w Q ° O , ) a) O 7 7 7 C 17 N U O Cr) (n v) — a) N r 7 7 t To a) O d co .E is 7 C D• F- Lt. D C > C w - - - - O a O Q O H Q 7 N (ii 0 ; .0 O `- r ) U>I O CAa) .' N' CI' n N'' U) a)CA o a N Y -C C6 Y (a a V ` (B O O 7 13 L ` L 7 ° 7 L o ctco �, C (a O U (a O 1 w- a) �, O d a) U C 0. -0 Q.., o U -6 U .r �_ ,L 7 fa . co �.I `•- O w a) .. +L' p 0 i d i C `' N CO 3 7 = L6 7 R 7: Z13 4r n a) OC a' d M •' `O ° N Cl > -O O -0 V 2 d LU ,- a) 0 d wL- O d � •r' V r- O V L c- (a L 'G t 0 t d • (0 al to d N a) a) t 15 CO ('o E io E - - -C E 0 z E = .n c ti w a) O co CD -0 ca E 4-d � 4a CO V a)c to c - U a) o -o L ° N d O Z O a s O 7 +U) .0 p O N al co H N C O U _ C > UN C > _c •. C > cN C > Q a) > c o C 3 (o z is caoi = toQ , 7 ? w 70 a) - n. t Q a) Q -° av, a - - 0v) C -ca X a3 3 �. V v o) Z C d C a) 0 a) a) r a) a) C i N C m d (a 0 0 c�i CI) o 0 co N. v = (`a a) cc c Et E . a°i � ° m a 0 ) d W 0vs CD (a o CI as an' Q 0. • c° < 0 O o ca . Q �� Q C. w. Cl� U � E � ,- � � 0 w i ,co O N O -a `' p i O 4 V N, a) N a) O No = ° as cm M- v � -.-- as N fa � O 7 N � Uco O CAO -04ONL a) U O) () (o ++ C U 7 a) Q (a a) O 'n 4 a 3 o b CO c - N aa)) �' U .. (`a (0 - 2 CO_c•_ a ++ co r V 2 C .` ` N O a) rn a) a) 3t O c a d e- d � ` co `O Q 4- � N' L3 V Y a - C6 U v= U) e- U '— > -p a) ` v= U a) a) .Y-' O C. �� `L Y ° 0 (a `- __ t < C Q = U (a U . N L (a o Vj 0 U '° d Q 2Q2 CI- (II vim--- - (a 3 >, c DU» N C 0 U w I— CO o a) -0 a) Y -C w 2 ELL in V t� =) E m Co m D t Q E _ E a 1— E _ c .ad wV= L_ � (.0Q 2 >- 2 >- c � � - ( ' 7 C \ / r \ Cr\ , . . . \ a n / § \ < / 2 2 LI- 2 & % a / 0 \ m $ { Oe@ 2cNfea) E ® c / ? . / . / . / . tea '- © a tW � (U $ £ 2 � � ( ` £ 6 • @IEcJa) / 2 / 3 / -- / \ \ � \ % 2 � / / k \k � \ �� 2 /� E8 £ . cn,-6 6 ma6 » 7a \ & w ° ° ' aEc) ®11 $ ° ° aw 2 � _ _ & 2 \ / � \ RI CD CD CDk % / CAA ® 2 ± .- � % 3 / -D , •- 22Q > a . = £ a £ £ aaa = a = faT C2 \ $ S0Eo � IJ � \ a W o ■ 0 9 a « $ 5 $ 5 $ 5 ° e ° « ° t o = e e c ( _ A co t C2f \ ± 04 = 4 = 4 -222 'rj$ = JSE % ƒ 2E� n / b � � � m - � � � � � � � � � � 2 � £ � 2o2f § Qa - [ age G22 / / 2 / \ \ \ / / / � \ / \ / \ $ JGG7 \ .g2 \ U)k ƒ Ce / / \ c / >, o a a (NI- ƒO #_ _ / a)§a) » a) \ _c / Z \ . % § / / o « / / k / f COI CO 0 / \ 0.4 \ t 2 E ƒ CD / Z vfAli U rr / \ / w 2 3 0 & ƒ 0 Z II) as o. ca : a 2 © o (2 ° - @ < cn 2 .@ & 2 W ( .§ £ , E. y $ \ $ / E c / O o ° o o ■ £ N 7 U Z » li "0 .2 o aco � o % fm92 \ ^• ce ) 0 - - ,_ § 0 n / / \ . 0 / U f k / / e W 2 .- E 7 0 4 2 c o f E © . E 9 ^ � � = / -0 T. f \ ƒ = « CO0o = / C 0 w 0 UCO Y _ � U 1< 03 W « m • ai U) 4- CD -O r Y .C u) (n CAN Q cc — U as a CD a).` OT C O C tn � t 0 O N O — . > U a) O N in Nt � g o — m rn (6 '0 � CO CO j - — 'o a) a) Q. 9- � Ct o To _C c Qa) o in c N N -C4 -O U E Cn co co X (6 p X X a) O c ID X X X () 4- V) , 4- 4- Cu N C a) w-, 44- 44-- tri - 6 _fD 7 0 U � _C -O (6 � 7 VJ U) = 7 N O O O O uJ U) CA O H LL C > L M 0 o D F- EL O _ O _ CO O .-- w _ _ = u) O N 0 a) . 7 C a) v- _o O N co . u) In (6 • D c b •, = C a) .: r U a) C a) C ' > O d U) 6 .q. 0 N -C a) E -- - m N Q) N 3 25 L .c d .-.E. a) mew m 0 3 O _0)0 a - 03 0 u) o _c • • - a > � � C O < D E ... (a o u a) a) t � Q C > E D ± C cu) X -o c .� N a • • c U -0 a) a)ti) p .� to C) -O co E ' L E O C a) d- 4- a) O Q 0) • t6 Q 8 O Q • O . O _c Cr) 4- (6 to CO E 0) Cu r a) Cu - cCO 2 Z O a) O 0 • w U a O CO COc CO E V) 0) O N co 2 (0 cn Q v) v) v C Cr N as+ .c+ p O .c > m w u U '� co a) Lnl 3 y -aa) coEu) RI u -> c � '"—) cn U Q (6 D a) N V) N 0 (p Ul Z Cl)i d "occ0 � Ecu co U c6 � d � m W ? • C (`6 CO co U Cl VJ OM = O Z 4-- _� 00 N Cu o N 0) 4-w co - ON O - N (6 U) Q +. a+ co C _ 23 w 0 O O -o a+ C6 U C O1 Z C C 0 .� O C6 (U CO 0) p) w C N C C N a (6 V) uj Cu d 0) O O C (n U O C6 d fU 3 4J d a a , •• is E .c v 'L E .` CC vi -- CuN , UvcoiRs c C c ,:- () ° "> E ° UO O � LL C9 (6 .o O (6 4 3 C) cu -c c .O O Q' N 0 U e- U N O 0 N Y Cu a) a) O >' a) a) a) U > c E O -p O a) _o Y a) 2 Q C as O(nC6 � - V —1OCOUO U L._ C C a) r- , — a) a) M E O i 6 v VE u L .0 .- C V) .� O t E vC .c 6Ya . O Cu ,Ov4 >, -U > N �° v `� to 0) ca � w ) i � U QQ c): � : .� E E a � QE a a en t0 _U � C 0 )O Cu E �o .3 E � c N D 0) .E c Cl CO " a ' v0o (° N ) ( 4= a c N U) > Ci) hi ) (t) a D -(13 6 (6 a) a) u V £ - Q a ( 3 N 4= (� !_' Y > Y 6 U (6 - .F. a) O (NI C u) V) O C O O O o C U (6U O U C CO C u E U C a) O (_ `- a)C6 CO 7 Q. (6 U CO ` CD ,D Q 2 N N O n Q Q.0 V w a) E O u) ° CuU c O -c 'O N Q 0 z co 11J d _C .- 0)_ F— m CU Q ai2N E -o _° � >EL CO aN iZ C d a) 3 C - a) t X_ (� E G LL � Z Z (6m X (n - E Tv) °N' o U 7 > a �o g .T a °'_ ) � _ IS --I E O Et _U -2 C H .0 E o C C = As - m 441W NNW N c C6 4-- p -2 ca E D >, C�• U _0) = C6 �t 0 O _ X_ O d- L O C O O U `� o 0 i w U o 0 > N CO C a O c H 4 -� N 0 x g — c - a) c S •a c aa) c a .a c 2 � o tY U) 3 N , CO E _, CV O 5 Ca) Z p C U ca - o ' O a) 0) 2c IP ,� E a) : U) 0W 0 ui Cn . c O 'a 2 O A cB is O c6 ;, c as o c a) _o >, .9 CC) O _ C O C6 U Cn ° C C O CO N a w U ` t V >, a O -N c) O 0 7 U _0 0 ,_ -- C C CO O O p O .E a) U a) - al 'j CO> 5 _ p Cn .CT N CO 3 E .E. To O Y -o a) cc? z � cmn -a � co U O Ni av) ECD0E coo wa) v -0 '� c . rn � ma O O o E - cv co c rn o co _o o � � c v C U a0 -0 O � c-6 .EDU E c -0 O o O ° 0 � U � n io O Q c -o "> .0 CO co „ O L ui m j O c _ m al c c E c) o o a � Cl c C � t C o o `� rn^ o > j 2 0-Y O v •i L (n co U a c o > O a N N C 0 O 3 o U E .0 • 0 - •0 Y -c -0 p v L C C o -c O cB O O O O N 0 to O 0 C N CQ (a _C u) ` U O 4- Ca O U .c ` CO -o ..-. D _p .a O N _, 0 CO _ N _ . cu Co CBco E > > 'c C 0 O co c 0 c o O O C C 0 L y ca 0 0 0 0 N O C O).`� .L. C y > • cB -0 60)-2 c mo a p N "= 0 Ca > "C C O O so ` N -00 (a0 y C Q' C U 0 C a) 'D O O 5 > U E U O0 a) _o 0 to C 0) 0 v- N a O .' C .� a V N n O 10 O cc, w N - 0 •= •3o O Z -oD • 1' Na) > -o .- 7to0co O0 -0C cE0) o U i D a c _c a) a as ce E• p _D , c a) E is o o �as -io � crf E o CO Q 0 rn o CO 4- ov Ca c0 �a .> U > To o c o � v '_E o cLi v O > 0 0 0 .c 0) E o t „) L cc �- , 0 o L c "' � o Ca Z y C fl V O a O c O U C U N CO -o • to v� @ O U) C p_ -p Q Q a a�i 3 � � > c c oc � ca � � m a) v> � > 2 our = , E E C3 E a3 > � •aa) O ca) � � co � a ° a i2 ,- -a — a) w2 w. ocvoo o _ca) c d > u) cQ it's N i� E 92 o) co U ct o U -o .E o 0 o a) v C 0 0 U rz � z cn Z CI Q 0 Z c Q w s C o I- C F 0) o to (I) a) w iw � o 0 cn a) 2 Ew "EU) J Z 0 = a d a d 0) p 0) Q E E = a —i •c F -ii > E fj � Q E ,° ciui m m ' 03 w O a) -o (aa c a) hi .- c W (a c O O\ O\ O a) co (n Ln C) 0 (— (- co a) I K X X 7 >.0 3 0 7 "X E o) N en en () o 0 Q \ Z Z �•.' EL E '.d' _c O (a 0 Cl) i V) 0 C CO ., C (a O rn E .o _c L LL x U a) C . p �n a .- C N c v) ., C 0 E (a 0 ' O o) E c • O N a) y EC a) O V y 1— O ° X 0 N ai N O > d c o r) (n O �0 co (o U a) 3 a") — N 0 a c 0 4- a) Gt c� o (II ca CL CD_ .. N � (o 0NY c C c 'cu) ate) c 2 "- (a rn N a)(11 2 a) D CO 3 = C C c Co d CLe- ` a) o .O (a ,- 7 a y C 0 m O d N y C o oo ' o o m o y C — I- Lr) >,I- r 0) cc oo xa) Ea"- w dL . O u C U 0.) 0aE 0 > -0o X o (aOaN (n c- (o (- cc) co >, a > • -0 � (`a a) �. a) co c a) Q w ai ap Q C o .5 ((V O a) .E 0 y a) (o O a) > • >+o 0 > .c a) C 2 a) C I > N f- O O E .N a) d C >' C 2 O L (o m C � Y � > m c � > - rn a) a) > C . — _o E — N (n p a) C :. is 4 > « c D N z In-a) ca • , ", o '— is rn iowit; cn ' 0) 3 . u U 3 O C o W V a) • a) O L co a) L N a) L • d cn U y 0 LL O O U Q O w E a E \ y y j o = j 0- 00 d . a) y ct ct 0 CO C 0) z cn o a) N x o 0 •- o• 1- ( (a o c 0 V — CI U c 0 3 .c co) = • D 13 c) a) y £ m o -0 O 0 c') c� t 'C a) a Q -- .0 >, •C to O o f a) o E N 0 ' •+D _0 "— W �. C - O 3316 D a) -cEDI- a`) 0. ooaa) E V .-- a a"512 > 0 ,- (00 1.6 0 U F— _ m (a Cl (n 0 0 -0 _ < � (0 D ao o)O I— - o (n .c o 0 o 4) - a) E 0 = a) 0 .4770 y .0 C 0 0 0 U Lg � o � Yw CI z a)Q C co Ce z o 7Li Q p Z Q 0) cm w F— C _ I-- (.0 •v Z = 3 w Z N N m m = d N O H p a' .r EL E '- ._ x 0) •x > Q m n`. -- (om CU0 I "E"- >` a) U if 0 (13 4) o a a) v wN0_ Q -a a co o a) N (0 _� O Q a) O co (n 0 O O = N OC a) 0 U 4) tp � U C 'a C U N O U yx-_ U N a) E (o (o a) C O a O co C U) C) O) C) O a) (n C Q) a O U O O (o O C O 9 9 a (n v= (o C in .c 'a O O a) co- 0 Co .O �t 1- d to 3 -- D _" it -O -O a) a) M C Ca (N ,- c -0 O d .t — �t L O f- V) (o a) 0 N � a) > 9 a) C a) Q a) • Q O N v) (o U U U C � -0 a)c - 03 -` = CL 0v) � aa) a � Y •- , D CD 2 2 2 E cao coN3a) o 0 a) (0o 7 aii4--. h Ct CC - X D Dcc o > o -CID 0 -U) . 51-. a) a) a) W a . Q (n co o -c -00 a ti 2. .D Et 0 . a) .c) c o cc) co cn a) c C �, ° co _c U _c n aki : c as 0 - -aO a) - p cJN(n a O -aO r- co a) O o a) La M 2 0 N -a . C sue-. a) .t .> E �. a) o � D coA E � a) • CD a) D (A ` C Co - a) 0 - 0 ° = J .0 5 (o -IQ .0 a E _E u) a U _c Q O - O C (n a _ C_ C xc y (n 0 Qco E �' "_ co _o �I 0 �° y 0 0 tom c o CV V O N C C L C W . (o - o N o c- '- Co E .N a) O -0 .> oa) ••- � 3 dC � N Z v) a) -C co V -cn -- a) .- '- coo .0 C U) O C) w 0 O �o �� w 0 v i- 4 o co Q �o ,� Ea 0 �. 0Y 2 :.- w � _o aa) ° C a) p d c Co m n °p o 03 o � 2 2 2 2 n CC :0 a) E coE Co � E0 .- ... • D O v) 0 ; E (n 'c �r E - t 0 a) a) a) Z ceH w 0 . E _JEt o � < > cn cn U) Q U) w Ce -0 Q0 o o co Z o � m (o ( '0n _0 a (o Q) co In O Q O C a) o co C.) o 0) w o +=' c c`oo 0 c a) N c 9 v J O L -6 cow -oo ° �° 0a > `o o (° U U o U U a) Inc�) � o (0..)o-- c) V N coo w ID aZ aa) 'E i ac x co ,) .> a) ai ai00LI ) � 45a) co °) v U) U)Q U CI >- Q 0 w v w E- Z m a) -a CC tca I- CO n. ca z = o � � aN w Z �' �' CrU Z ° o ° 0 H cn ° r++ V = ° a co 0 �o W � � °' � a E c - a) Q J (oa Z m Ce 01 O a.°° a E Eta H m `m E J CD V 7 IX Cr 3 a0i 0 = c O Q 2 _ w (9 u) cn 8w0 cc ix 2 .� a a -o E > �, a) O — o) a) a) rn c° d � a) cam a) c0wE a) `� °) Ea) co a) lij C i (° • a)� O N U a) to C p CD �� c `)) � oacio a) � � ` as C � ao a)— • CC 0 N c _ O N c6 7 C a) N C 7 lf) a) mw � '� ago -13 -003 � _ � .- 7 � � >, o �.761 co � a) o ,a U Q U o 0 a) 7 C 7 N O c° CON rnL c° E c aL � a) o � d ao T. a � D U 0 `� ` C r - '- co O co C 0> (° ` O` 7 L i w tT C -� -� to c° a) c >, c p c° c° ai c c° tY a) a) 0 co o i. 0.-c - a) i a) 7 — E c 7 E E N - - a) >, a) a) o C N — CO D O — w - 0 � a) •c O O '� .� LL. cap C O a) O O N Q O _ LL. N .� > U. t° 0 Q w i) v`- O O _ to O (/) (/) O d .C- .a a) U C C c C c0 L' c -o O o c ` a) a) to cp L +;. Q t, a) tV C t° u) w C O co Z Z Fii t -a > O 0 O a) E ` .Q C • O C . O a s o to x° CV. V a U d o 0):0 O c° — E 0 O a) • O a) C) M a) O M U C C L C t° .0 _Ofa c 0 c w O . , cn 't32 rn � 2,i N 5 - to Y • O m o o U to t° C V) c a 07, 2 io 0 (° cll U i a) c Y D J - = c° a) U • -0 7- O U 7 U C C o i c N o) 0 C U a) 7 • 2O u) (o _0 O �O _o I C a) Y O • U V) Q. ' 1 U n3 a t° O E • a) C C a) a w Q (° N c° V) a — - -a a) E a) Co) -OO a) > . y > � d a) > (° X > (6 cn to a) C to a)? C � � a a) . C C o cRS d W0 •? .cc 'a o- 2i c _ 0 c° O ? a) .• o ton �' O Z . ' to c to ; a) a -c w c c -c(13 a) Q' E C) v AO Q t5 C c° c6 ID o c) o C a) Z OEE 7 � a0) cEE `� °) D c00 U 0 c00 cc O Ct E o � E o o U)C o m � 2 o � � a Q CB T a) E a) a) O 7 7. • O ao � C om °) a) a) mo>) 2 ,_ a`) as ii 113 a) v . ai a) o 'P - 0 v) U -o c° 1L °} c° Yr-0 - - • • Q > cA t!) u) Q > cn rn -a pU : a, Vi C co .0 a) >, co a M O ` ,_ oo c° ) _c ° `) �- E ° ccE c c-O -C.,- >, u)- > V ` ."w x(I) > Ec c a) ) 0- c ->C a) ( ° O >, N _c toa a) Et..) a) Y O a a' a) c° E O O -- ° Oc t C y N "- C 0 O OCO 0- C -0 .aC0 ° aa) . aaC "O o to C a V -E O a) cA O L C -o C a) o a) -0 > N 4 a) a) O U 7 iZc° � a) > 7 °' E co E ° cn a�i a`) 0 0 Q i° � co I > a) cacco) c -- oNacomoccD 2 2 0 daC _ - c° C a) L O N o o O7 7 UlY NE a o `° c > aa)) a) - °' o > o > oo � (° o a) a) o ,. a) c �'c° — c° Co ot_ oit_ a) C tT a) a) o Q o l/) tL to >,.— i° a.E. 7 -o E -a o_-o n a..a .. `)To U) v) o F— u) Z a. •0 MIN_Z c W (9 w Z 0 Ce w I— co c Q GI w m , -I a) J J I dY mY u) C) Q U a t`o Z ToF- `o U o Q a re w (n O V (D WO 01 C O > . � a u? o3 0 ID w upic � � o � cocE -2coou) : 0 0 c ono 0 0 � o v> ccoo oo � c c coi coot a) ca0 w o � mt 0 0 � � � a�C a�i � o � � 44111169 Ea, a, (o 12 C C w a O (o v., C L o C D (B a) a) N U 0 V uicocco '4 � Uoa _ oo Qio0) c aoo P2 .-C): ca) p O) 8 > o a c .- c > i� to C c - o a _04- a) - 0 c, ( • o o '> � 0 0 O � .°� � � u;_� 6 �•cc cy a) , '0 acitj ( ° a) o `m -0 o -c c o 0 0 0 C 0-.a o aoi oU "0 O O O_ to a) a) C L Q) O Y E C U to 0 a) vn ._— 4-- ._ C C < C co (o o ui ` c0 c O O a) C o a 0• (6 L 0) Oa c E w �_ > = O)O 0 O) U O O O _ _ co - U 'E.-) O) 0).0 C > 0 O w 4= c a) o O > 0 a) C a) C 0 co .Q :O c > .0 .> c a— N co V aa. -0 -0Uc U)CL v) -0 E Ca a Za 0V u) Q uo) -� aN a a. c _02 co O 0 N a) _ - C (p a) V N Q U )c N 0 U O a (6 � � to � O (13 0) 0 — C i C a) 000a) � a) U O a) - a) O) L) U) COI O Q) O) C C t0 -0 v- c a) c p 0 > - - N a) a) C o Y N (f) X O to > > TIC) a O Q. OL LO Z cn coQY c L a) o w c .«-- 0 co a)t E N U 0 (U o (II Z a) c c 0 a) o 0 a) _Z _c 'o 0i) oc C (o 0) L > o 0 CL :EN a) o o a) 0C •— C L m U Z 0 0 - g_ 0 < 0 C (o p 0 0 0 .0 'O a) to c0 co T `•- O co c O C ou ai > c o g p c Co V s 0 0 o a) _ 0 0 V 3 C 0" . . to N > a•` &" o � � o > a) a) u) c o •� o -0 0� o mo o a) P a) N a) > -0 a) 92 N N a) . .O .• O) 0 N rn N > 0 O h M C O a) n c a o) a3 p O 0 N t c • co -c .O 0 x C v> o O > N N o o a) c co-.' 0 m voi O ate) C) t 3 0 E cn ° co (o o m Dui n o m o � c o U V Co co .N C 0 o a) a) ` o 5 5 a) a ) a) 3 .S 0) O O '~ or-_0 al _c a) C C _C > O 4 o ID C -- ) O o C 0 O - _c o 'C s_ c ,_ Vi o E 0 N cw C 5- •c � _c a�) c a) if) -0 c o •>'V - �Y.w Co� � U o� � co 0 3 oU 3 0 o > co-( c•- 5 0) 0)4- Q) 0 0) o E ' C oQ o co w (n >, I_ >. 0 o `n `n o -p a) o cc c Q o o '�, o .� ac oma) 3 - a) o • .00 • a) 0 a) o a) ,_ c c p >O O a O V a) c 0 - 0) a) .N (/) -o cn > �v-, > c Co w .0 3 ° in u) Co a 3 c 0 c Z -oa oU -o . "vc-) Co o aa)) Co c Co a U a 2 fn rn w F.- Z a) Z 0 J cw - V w W F C.) w F- X d o Q w a -1 Ire w Cl.) — 0 N w co Q)V N C N w O 2 O 0) a) N 7 U p Q p O a) C -0 L N § > Q U O C 3 L N L L 03 C 0 co (o a) p) a) 0 O _7 o a) 3 j L L IX a) O .a U O c) N p 0 0 N D (� a) > O a) _IX c p N (o > — C > U X C L — N (6L w E. L E p > O L N C (o U U >, p 0 7 N O c ._ a N Q) C co co >• x oco N) c E N U)) O2 3 m C � C co - co co CI) O co O a) a) a) a) E ` 0 mx C o co 1:3 L a, E 0 a s io co 4- L -C U L w- U L c -J al"- L O L as (0 U �. t.f) H a N co N E O Q N o § = O N ,L- co O co U O O CV -E a) _ C O N N 4- O D w co �). co �° _ O N Q) a) 7 c y� (o •� m � �Lcl) EP. •c 2a) 3 o � cc > n - as - E O n n c U a) o a) o c > L .E . Ot "a N § 0 a > U O O — c0LL (13 L N (I . c2 � crn: a) 8acr, N � -� S -0 � 2Ev cU Q) as z NT � N _scL O Co oQ O UO OOp _ � . joo LOco _o c � ►- N E L E N U N c ow N o c a) c N Q 2 = 4 ` oDN No >, a) LcOu ,� lZ Ewo Om NcEN NOC O . a) 5 -0 > 0 - c EUco _ _cNE cc '. coO COo �c c0 Com � `° Ua (Uo (�2coU HQiEo < UoQ coA a) ow a U L a O C U N L CO Z • CD C U a) U o p 0 N p O U N N N L x .L.. c Ix) —Iw 4- p).N in a) .N O O Q O C_ 4) (� O Li a _ L O Q) CO Z F- a) u E .- a) c _ c 3 4- w Z L 0 .0 a) •C p 0 U W N .� :0 _c O (71 co Q U I� X L O N co N a) Q (/) L O as 0 0 N N JE a) E NO rn — co Z W 5 co L ` C „c >.70 N C E CU U CU co -a O C O d �� o O E — o L m X 0_ P co aw — ` _Cg d aso p � CO E NQv jo - LO.. ( > N -CLL O (o co C '— N O N C2. F- Q o � a) p v 0 co (o L CZ Z N ,... O 0a) co p co C D O U 122 0 w a) O •C E ?.0 C LL r p co o) U x O V co N a) CA C O a) O -' O V) C i ci 0 p vi E a) O N ._ a) ... a) a) U C Q N Q N c'- He 7 HCUULO. Qo Z CI Z 0) Q 0 U) Z 0 F- Q .- re Z O w a LIIICOo O 2 u. w M Z E Z o Z 2 zOvo Ca = E Q H C O C W to X Q 4 -J C9 1 2 0 CI) .0 o 3 w o -o c6 m $ o C 4- o CO a) w L 7,5 0 c 'O p O (0 C a) N s L a) E LO -o _3 p O (`6 c w cn 92 +-' > >, (0 O 2 O O E w c E 7 L j L o c6 (6 N _c 0 0 E co a) O)-0 _ 0 0 zt a) '_' _ a N (0 (0 • 0 0 0 U a) O .,_. - a r w C -0 c (6 ° a) w a) N (0 a) in — Y fl p) O a) a) O CU 03 CD a) o (n en _c v) U a) 2 c -- E C 'N E o - U) . D c .� U 2 o c EE a . 3 -0 � g) c c >, ° . oY >,c (6 � c 0) 0 � `- a_`)) c c -2 ui c6 � ,-`. a) a to O a) a) vi C N (6 ` (0 O O) 0 L p a) p O c a) > ai C a) O , a) O O)o (n .E a) -- a) >+O 7 a) N a) T c to 0 -U "O L '- U O o 7 a) (2) a) >, 0) C (0 a) rf a) Ow N7O 6 OO 7 - a) ON (6 6 N 0 LV0 a) L 7 L ' ,.' O 7 E-.F. a Z En v ro .0 ..c a (n 0 a (n a (n aN a) U to .- n co _c) c a 0 a (n a N E L a) 7 L 0 a) -c w (n E O •(n .- c) L _O O C a) C (n O co c a) a.- 7 CCU0) a) °' ` a) 3E ' .N >, C C U (6 ,_a) O (0,- Y C 3 O O a) O (6 U Oa p a Z O a) w a) c6 0 a) (0 O a) (n a vs _C p C .W C . a) ~Q U ` O a) C C >,'6 (n 0 Z o a2 a } 2 c a) (0 a v- C9 (° 7a) a) 7 � � Nn. LTtn � E O in Cr cr.,. m O 0 CU (0 7 0 W Z (n (n M _o L ci . 0 E O LO 0 0 N _ Za) a) 7 C O a) 7 L' 7 �I 0 D .(0 E .a) 1 �,— w (n E a) , O (n V U _ a) 0 >, ai (n N o -c P. as as . 2 nF as (u — c° J N a) (0 N 7 .0 00 .t a) 0 a) 7 -a (6 O Q � .c >, CU (nv- -0 7 >, 0 Nv- .p j co Z 1- d p O) c6 us al Cr) CU O• > o O W W O N Y C OL O p Y C o (0 N Z V O a) v (6 > N a 3 (0 N a a) < V) L. v`- ` O O-r. O •- O L O a` - O 0) O -- co Z a)C 0- E cs �a) � QE C n 0 �+ L_ C (6 O 7 .- CO (0 O 7 - 0)_ Ce >- 0 7 0 -' (n 0. E C a) - (n n. E C L J 0- a) L L - 'O i L 7 D O E N a) 3c0al -- 0 a) 3COC .co a) GI a0 E > aa) E > F- Q c N a 0 ui w -� E � r w � � ooE5 . L a) 70 0- I g 'a 3 (n o aco o 0 0 o Q. ao a) re .0 v7 (o c6 -'0 p a) O (6 t6 Y ` O O m a o aa) � � CO o` v�i a) 0 fin QS _ o u. w+ O (0 a) - 0 a) a) N a) 'a n 0 a) a) o to 7 w O C 0 c L a) 0 Ce _p 3 0 cot0 7 N (0 0 a v co E .0 _ 3 _ E O (0 "- C a) O 7 '� O a) w 00 7 Q Z >, co (0 (6 ..0 "O L (n co (0 (0 _0 -O L (n 0 Z Q I- (I) I- Z W CO E a. "a F. O m CtS w >- >- I- J >-l1J 00 = a) W 0 E V u. in E X E E E U 2 t CaE E_ E I— a .2 Q (6I 0 2 2 2 Q2 > 33 (a . _ • - a, E 2 - \ ( k ' o ' -- w 7 � % 2c- 2 f . 000b _ % � - 2U o § » » m &£ m = oe22 co aEk \ f ° 2A � � \ / � 4 f CD -0 0) o 2 A r 2 § - 0 * / ± ° J § \ / § bas = � 6 Ba - � £ ason 00 • c � 0 % m \ f07E7 # cJ � < 6 a> en a� a 0 & « Z 3 # f g f / ƒ 4 — ® .gem \ -o / ( � \ ate \ ® % 3c4 / Cl) eon % # tQQ o z a. = & m7 » A 0 E ° m > \ / � 4 i o = 2 ° ` f 0 G c c £ @ - « g o > & e - _ 2 6 Z = o 0 ° ° g ° o CC c o \ fE2 co E / :afa of Ili S3 / 2 Z J7 / qf ? / - CI O Z Z c 0co �% m - ƒ ƒ Z 0. p 2 - 0 m 2 $ / < ask � c ° Z w � 00 6 a CC f \ / CD O � k o0 4 < } 2 -aw. 0 w « 6 \ / ƒ JT- \ % tea f 22 4 = = n co # ( - 9 E t U $ f2 / IX o a- � CC � / C , 2 a) a) < m £ \ » m z « I— w E <IV Cl) a 22 -J vm m W U.I— > .0 � P. ce -0 k E U) cn I o § 2 & U < 22 / % - C Fate _ a § I- coIma 0 0 a) c) — e UG a = mf m / £ f & - ci. \ o e % / n C / « 7 / \ \ § ƒ ƒ $ _ // / % / £ / 4 2 b § / / a 2 « c / % / 2 2 2 � \ 7 � � � ca a) ......,-- (N � o � n ° 9oO m $ eg £ cam eg ,C— g ° £ cn •� ± ± c » � 2 ' � na ® O . E7c 2 « . 2 .- c gc) �.2 - 5 � $ au - 0 � �k § / � 0 .- � \ � f \ / LL $ af � $ et x77 / s & k / jj7eee± - \ £ E _ ƒ Z (I) 0) \ } W2 / - \ �/ \ 2 § � ® g & _ _ 4- 0) ° Imo ao c © @ Cm ° 6� g > a � $ _ ® ® m UJ 0 7 $ 7 \ c aW = � cGemq •- co 0 o B / D- f \/ Z mJ \ ¥ $ 07 % \ § w 0 c o U � 0 3III Z Z e $ 5 • m k 0 m b � c c . / _Z N � @ = b2 W 3 _ L 7 < > / - C C � = 6 \ O 0 6 / 7 $ ` \ } — 5 e \ . re � ® \-0 D @ a co % e f = f a 2 $ \ § 2 9 / J ® � / 0 / $ ' . i q \ k $ / \/ § % \ � / k 2 ƒ c o_ u. § ® / 0 n 2 � f @ _� /- - E _2 � 2 � 7 / -- E C o) « U a 2 \\ � 7 _ § 2 / -- - 2 \ \ a) \ ® R c / � 7k / / \ V) c) 0 O \ m 5 § % E I— o Z o 0 c a o = w > J ■ o# W ■ � o a V Zk \ k � � / 7 f 0 Z Neto 280 d ■ 2 @ 0E Ec w E W ° � �_ 7 J E ECI I- w 2 Z - 0 k � O oCD CL X � � CI _Ek \ 22 -a I � � 2at k Eu E E 2 / ' ■ 2 D § § < - ° z . E 1Y el w E « 4 CI K • Ntime 'VW' 2 k � � $ a) ) \ / / - \ ( 7 £ 3J00 - � D MI a) ° oc » 0a \ m24 E < / \ 2 -a-- \ CD © m a.U k E E e o k % ƒ � / _k / 0 m c o k � � § � % x < c j / ck F- k �0� \ ± ° % / \ / / w % co a ® R > a £ 12 C —.--C ? O ƒ 4 / 2 ƒ f // � k � / 3k / ± o = % k z If' . a c a) 4 0 . E § $ k w 3 N � £ a -om $ E / 7 � � , f / / % f ƒ ƒ E & O � � � � 0 ( a) /� LE . _ _ \ m f & / Rom ± o o I- - a / % 550 - ! - q !IIIII , C.- t)a33u) $ ■ E E as $ E GI E a) . 0)0) E 22 "E -CD \ U E , o / E e £ « $ CI e E - E a\ 7 U m z / ¥ $ 0)0u) in / a / 0 >0cuoSa a _ o a) u = / \ e £ fba222 / w 2 co co a o 12 0 > >- >- z 0 Y 2 2 Ts u- s Q § E E / W c f cE « k 2 2 'Aso *Isiof � o ii _i o N c a - +a 1° e- � L o a) V U (O `, O ii a_ 7 7 c L O w a - O O Cr .� w0 O ). " O , i0 a) — O ` ... () 7 E. to 7 O o C > N a) N c � U O w cfv, �, . > U 0 ri � v Za ° a>> 3 a�i to aim `' . , Sc a) � W - p0 a) L c aCV c0 C Q13 O0 i6s () c Z c O (a N e- _C • a) 1- p a) C N r_ C O - CO N O a) , C Zr-; "O a L ' co Q � Y � � a X N N � X 'L � C � C U C � Z CV 0 O � a� � Y � � O O .7lY d O Ca0 ACV O 4 N co Q to G7 7 a) t0 a) wN„ - �i C ,ate U '. w � O C cA O W cO O > O V O 4= E c o tY o O Net c a) 0 a) O c v) o a) L O Q) 0 0 O •a a) Z 'O E ' > N el 0 O O Q) Z O a_ co .�`. Z CO L �T fO L LL - O -- 03 O Z (O m O) 01 W (D Y ii o <L 0 - a) a� � c �� U) � o c c`O � Z J .= Q) O O O a) co N IY 2 Cai .O o d Q > > o c c o' o a0i 0 E ai Q-N .- ' a) 1° N °1 F a) .D -•> „ p UV ocOa) acL ) OC coio` o � o XO2 � � O � LQ' aE m 4- - W Y � a) acn " -CY alY >`, a) w .- '4" G) 4 C E1 @ E C c) -c � � '� a) 00) -- - tea) ai2 °� � C � V -p . O` Ot •c - C a) LID ti= ID 0- C CO IO O o m . o m ° O o V o '-' 'c y et C +LD+ m o i o U OW L - a 3 U) .)o ow a Z o Z 6 TsI'D e- C cA (V o Z = U .c a) 0 , p c0 �c � � � o a � — COLI a w 0O o0 1 e� N p � _CO aY 4) co CO a) ce • Z c�o c o cOL E a� a ` 'C � � a) t Noo s °� > coN a) O U E O a) L co a) cn o c a) o o O o ce > 3 ` U c a) 0 CI E a •§- N "O = X O - X N i.+ +° w •O L c0 C p 0 >, < U C p) O cn ° a) V 0 7 7 W y �' O U D -C U "O m a) H co Oa a) Y o . c0 a) ai_0 LW � C2 v .a - a) O E a) a N -Q LO > O (O -) ° ca. o co N U O ^ N " " C 7 .0)w O (n O X U Z Oi -c -8 as o 2 o U) a Z o oc[ o Z O13 d ' ' c = mo a) r� O c° o x as L � � V) _c (V -0O Z E c a) w 0 p co,- co Q 803 e- o v v F_- _O c W �Y co coa LT. O t9 0o v >- �_ o) > ins >- a0N 1- oW aa'i � �421 ai a Q "� 2 6 — cLy CC 6 c _Z C� � co d cs U � � � 0 mwd Q = E E J E o E 1- O _C O C_ C_ d X y a) Q Q E u. ,e 0 m 2 < 0 in Nile Now 22 � � 0 Cl) 2 5 ? .. - $ A Vi 5 & c .0 £ / \ f $ � = a ¥� o � _ I � � E « »r 50 � � @U) ° � � 2c ° 6 $ _ & . n 0 = @4 0i Cl) we £ ° 0e . Gt « - o L 7 - 6 m / G0 « f8U GO O 04- col / � » a0 ( 2 « a $ 0cGC k / Q $ � m / ° C £ ° C4 a) 0 ° me oo -0 a) 0) r a) 2@ :/ 4 £ L = � £ i � = . cc k/ 7 cc � 0CoGff2 - w _� n ® now - _ £ - � o £ r ) - 03 � c777 o k e - m ƒ / 31) c - \ - / � 503 / _± ) 0 � � m / � �2 � G co 0 « 0 2cn / § ° $ 0 $ o / \ \ � § � , �® \ $ � / © \ c UG3m c f $ c0 � 3@ % a) ec2o / LLI & a $ % fl kcom / a / $ / ..c - c -02 / / / 4 CV / — c4 o f z a � \ 0 > » ° ® 7 k N 0t \ \ o a < > _ « e D n 0 CIX c - - _To \ 111 a) $ 6 E co 0 0 Z ƒ / 0D / 0 0 a) _ -o a- 2 U. 2 / ® § G) 2 c - \ J $ ) 0 c CO R ° / C c a 0 F- o C n _ CI oo ® a0 6 # 5 met � � § ® \ IX 2 = 2 - f E o c o o = 0 - \ $ a © & � � EC = } ƒ - _0 0 _c - c E > w `' o z k/ � } o2 � � k/ » � a) 0 _ a) \c 270. 2E E / ƒ \ $ « k /\ / ƒ f2 'Ck I- DC" m = = C)RU) aDE0 co = ¥ Enemb � 111 E ° 2 EL 03 0 0o c -J CD 0 o j en k z 2 �CI a) a) w OC E E < � 0 0 I Elk CO � k $ $ .1f1 « 2 « D m -I 'fir/ `ier 0 -c ? _ 0 0 O ._ (n (n 0) 0 C O -0 2 V •� CO •U u) a) UO 4- a) V, c W U 0 0 c (V O z N U 0 c 0 .(7) N �` L O as O c O L() a to 0 (U (6 Z Q .c a > O 0 0 ca � N(13 O, M "O � V 0 _c -- 5 .0 c L F- c- C 'a 0) UO c m .zt N co P (6 = c 0 Q U O 0 '(13 C C 7 7 0 i O O 0 (3 a 0 a) O CO c Co a (0 m a M a c 70 c w E L Q (vco _ or) oOo (na> ` E - 3 O co N ajOEco— 0OU W4- O > a`) � -0 0) 7 a) -c _ -0 _c c u) a a ..Ua>) a) -� O o � O -0cO7OO � (n c -,- � a) a) a) -0 rn1 z � -0I- a aau_ cnCL c6 '- ao _o -oODF- ca w 0 L 0 Z • c o (O U v N0 � c Oa�ci 0 c 0 O) _o � 3 Q Co 0 a) � E �M 0 0) Z N 3 07 -0 ,) a) � _csa o -0a) .c .coa'5 � _ c c c1:3o _ 0 (n c _ CC QV 5t c o a) -L ° co ao a>> a) cv -00 0 c re 0 W c6 — c 0 _,,W 0 x p c a �_ c .c E c 0 0 0 ,4. D a) (n c a vi 2 o25 0 0 _o 0 ° - () 3• L (n E 3 mO w O COCO H � (�n7 � ir O � c) a) co 7ca) O � OO 7 a Q - o a Ce c C 0 c O 0 0 0 a . a W - 3 � 0 vi p) a N - (n "0 v -> > V7 Q V 0 U (n as a 0 (a O 0 O 0 U - 0 0 0) m a) c 0) 'a_c a) m Q O N CLI) a 3 •C - C C O O C I- .- o a M• 0 .c 7 co co E N u) 5 o a c) 0 0 > o t_ -°) ._ U) .D " a) t 0 in .0 c a) 0 I— c V) i c- 0 (n 'O Ca O (n 7 -0 C Z W Emi a. ° tWCe JO 0 Q0 a) U' W Z ._,a) -c w d .� tm (o y Q-C I- W 0.. y C O) () .a CO .. J n. c Q' Z O Q C � C .. i- .C _ O 'Oo0 W U O 0Q C O a) u- .10 ... Nii U Q 3 c.) ° ° E . aC) � m J E J Ce u) E J w Q c U Q N W 0 a) c vi a) _ cn � >, _ Cl- ca O - V) V) a) c a a) L c O c j (6 E O) 'p C U O O . u) 0 cn N _U > .�- 2 `� -O -0 O 0) a) N O Z L a) _c 7 .c U d -p c W 0 L a) L U L O N Q.- C >, ` o Z y -o O -o w O) E Co a) 'z' -o Q c (B 7 ca L o C co U a .- c w >,Z -O 7 D .- fl- u) Q c c cu coin u> c2 u) _c •> oc m � � ) � � pc o cn2 E � s , OZ0 o a. aNi -0 -o a) o •arn2 � 2 c _ cn p `o M m co 'i � as o al p 1• or) N .0 a) � •N .Ct co o c 0 0) O in .� a) -1- Q 7 a) Nei � .- N - N < C c > > 0 a) c cn .� a) s_ a) c c c cn N o a) N cn p c? c o co z a.g2 u) m a) - -o U O • N - O ,_ a) N w m (� ? X 7 v) O �. co co cv 0 ON -LE > c- - ."' Ua) ooU -. -_c 4 a) a) 0 U04. Li-) � a) a) � 0 .� .cCc) a) .-- �) a) c ` C.) :-cock 0 W caa)) D' ow2 cncLoa `- a) wcn � NWc°'i _ � ccpi � m Z 0 c6 QaiL � ct — _0 -0Q ca �o -oF— ca aau_ cn °' -� m .� aXi 3 a aXi � (DI w 0 o U ate) a) v c � co Z z p • �' n a) co c1 l O a) Z 0 o wU t o > 0..-> cD L co o . O o Q > COc " ne � c 43 co l5 CO_c = fr Q U U — .—tii 3 c „_ CO CO a) a a c — al a) Lc orn -c cr a) 7c (� o `- c N_c a vi X O ,- a) 3 v_) :rQ t5 E 0) 0 cn L 5 E .: N -i) c U 7 3 N _ E 2 4- 7 c :- 0 U .a2 > U w a) O co .N O c) N c f- a) OL 0 a) U c- > O L3 .- 0 Co O to w U X a) w m3 Q � 0) 2- a�) cca6 a) LL a) ca a) N n > co .— U o a > a) o_ Lam "-- � -a r� Z • cC c in . a 00 QU a) a) -a) 3 c � � _o a) a) � 0 c) C E 70 coc cQ m >,w Ech 0 U U � Z L Q co p co L O- cn fy Q < O)0 N 3 cn :_ N 7 E p) O cn c v) �t Cr) o > U 4- 7 c :._ , co .fl- o > V rn- U F- r ) Q � .N O a) - 0 a) o to a) E � Z > Uv .- O v) - Q ch -C _ LL w co .4r L O Q a) w L R ue toO LO c CC � x _c d I- W c F. -I a- d a) jx 0 Z W C1 _jai 10 w7a0 = to v) a •U ti d a) 7 O • = jL � m C� 1 I = �- � � as F- •c •a E •o c .- w W v) •, Q 23c.) QNCL pL = 2 = a' a -p cNovo ISO' G L EK � .a) cn -o 7 c U c ° W .`-. • (6 U Qk _N U M W -0 5 O (n O ‘- Z c , 0 Z Q p 0 O a) (n er OV 4 v oo .° M c- ° � j � Q U 0 U 0 Q. c0 CV 0 a) a) a) a� c w a) O c) co co cn cn 'at c4 < uo) ZI MI w 0 c o 2 • — o .0 ti U co r ° " -a E o - a) Z Z C7 a �, :. a� 3 o) c .c Q co _Z 0 rn rn o ccoo aa)i � ;= m ° 0 0 0o m e L a� � c � � a O CC V U �t c c c ° L Q ,, o., ce 0 0 0 UU " -0 a°) o ° " ° w ° .5 g c ct c 22 v ._ , , c 5 c D oc m 5 g a) a) a) a) -0 C ° -0 `o D c"a J15 .n , UO cn U) (I)) U (cu ce cc _o D a O is n as cc E O 0 co U C rn rn ' o co ' Q O O O o v �t QU -a- v o � C] 0 0 0 U U z cK cC c EC< I- U) C))) U) U) co ZI W c O in >+ O ` 0 mQ r � ""ti c 42: W o •f °) (cc my 4- a) `° o (9 > -c c c rnO o v (a v . 0E (� .. Lcc(°iexo I- pW _ „ _Z (-4) E ao •= � w 'c a) 0 LLJ 0 Z J (0 O O R w.r 3 w Q: J Eya7W L:2N • umaciEaa 0z •8 I gv, dw 8LO10, EE8E 0CD �a I- 0 '`- as N m 12) O 7 c o• o•d CD o' d Qa. d a> c`a Q EsLL Ocr5. vo evwwF- w r4 C9 re a. 1 larrise Nb✓ COO a) _ v _c (Q > O C L C O C -U C U C O 5 c N L D • O O w. a) O O rn M "O N a N _2 mu) Y U O LL m 4 c6 V) C O 'er-' -O "OO (0 c � H _ O U c Q C u) 3 c0 o: O V U 0 a) d 0 N O a) V a) 0cc N ~ co "0 O O> t - c N Ti5 a) -p N c Q >.: O ` L E C iT, Q— > c (/) (6 (0 ccv (9 0 > 00 �° a) 5 C . cn Q ID in O C L N C -0 Q O a) a) U (0 Wa) Q12 'a _Nc -0 E =_- EC_ � .`r E U Q a) c 6 c O 5 O -0 cv 7 L a) Z Q .c O O c� w N as tI U) O OI (� v- 0 Z U , O Q p ' w a)ID w a) �i U a) -v -a t C r o) Z N v !'J cOc0jo ai a) o ai o "� U N 1111.1il ' Ill:or':' aN O a) U -) a) CrrO U U a) . c`v to ca u) 0 c._ d a) wce 0 `�U a) a) +`- as ` CCC N d E (B rn _� Oc6O w O c6 -0 D m M .r cE c c c _�2 a) ! '� E - c6 -0 0 -c i °) _ °) W = �Un 3 coUd o � cn 3 2 a) O (n � ch O Jo O C Y C cm U) _0 faO al , 0 N 33 .` Z -c LE = 0 c pC_ >E , -g) N v • V 0 o L ' l ccQa - O d) � E � a Z to " -0 a a O Cv> 0 Q V ' (6 0) ,-- 0) C� N • QC > OOQD =C 0 .. 0 aL) — _o N ca Q O a C "cam N ° "E2 aw w w a U JO a 0 > Z Z 0 Q w H I a o d w c Q C. 0 Nue *woo 0) _ c -/ _ U 7 / v) c � \ _ / � S2 — o � cCC IH ra / / \A m o U) k % c4 / £ fact 6 u & § 0 � \ kj/ / � � � \ 0-) ƒ k \ ƒ < ® oa) LL 22 / \ ± ® w % 6 05 < U ® �f 0 0 cco $ 2 c � f 2 E c a) 2 2 � m ® 6 / ( / "E7--- / $ / / / 0 $ d 5 $ a) ® � 4 $ $ b a § A c c m � � e ma £ � Er co m ± a_ m4 4- 0 z / , — � � 4 / Z Z 20 / 2 0 _/ 0 / aa) - \ d / k co y a = 22 � » ¢ c Q > / / — � er + f A O OQ # co0mom _ # 4 � J c c w / / (1 0 / �ƒ ka3f0) o < / E Ct ± @ - 3 v" W ± g -5O d E a) ao [ - 3 /iiIxa, a) ao o ƒ U)C N + � ƒ a) / ƒ / Q— 2 ce a) U- 6 5 - CC / 0 6 d p / / \ /& nU . ? gE / \ p °co N72 _1 on- lad 7 co o U O = - c � 0 o U < Cr Ck � / � � ± o � Et 7 ® m oa [ £ / 2 -�D a) a) R / / ? k± b ) � � � / / z zw — w 0 m O Y ■ O % 0 < 0 � 11.1 O § «U C -1 I— w ca a k Q n z > UJ RJ < w E _2 C m re 3 Z 2@ a. c o _� © I- ■ Q m ■ ■ � — 1 § O NI $ i a) 2 ( « o « 0 0 O ATTACHMENT H ORDINANCE NO. 5286 e. Parking Spaces Required Based on Land Use: Modification of these minimum or maximum standards requires written approval from the Planning/Building/Public Works Department(see RMC 4-9-250). (Ord. 4517, 5-8-1995; Amd. Ord. 4790, 9-13- 1999; Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 4982, 9-23-2002; Ord. 5030, 11-24-2003; Ord. 5087, 6-28-2004; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) USE NUMBER OF REQUIRED SPACES Mixed occupancies: The total requirements for off-street (2 or 3 different uses in the same building parking facilities shall be the sum of the or sharing a lot. For 4 or more uses, see requirements for the several uses computed "shopping center" requirements) separately, unless the building is classified as a "shopping center" as defined in RMC 4-11-190. Uses not specifically identified in this Planning/Building/Public Works Section: Department staff shall determine which of the below uses is most similar based upon staff experience with various uses and information provided by the applicant. The amount of required parking for uses not listed above shall be the same as for the most similar use listed below. Detached and semi-attached dwellings: A minimum of 2 per dwelling unit. Tandem parking is allowed. A maximum of 4 vehicles may be parked on a lot, including those vehicles under repair and restoration, unless kept within an enclosed building. Bed and breakfast houses: 1 per guest room. The parking space must not be located in any required setback. Manufactured homes within a A minimum of 2 per manufactured home manufactured home park: site, plus a screened parking area shall be provided for boats, campers, travel trailers and related devices at a ratio of 1 screened space per 10 units. A maximum of 4 vehicles may be parked on a lot, including those vehicles under repair and restoration, unless kept within an enclosed building. Congregate residence: 1 per sleeping room and 1 for the proprietor, plus 1 additional space for each 4 persons employed on the premises. ATTACHMENT I '" ORDINANCE NO. 5286 Attached dwellings in CD, RM-U, RM- 1.8 per 3 bedroom or larger dwelling T, UC-N1, and UC-N2 Zones and CV unit;1.6 per 2 bedroom dwelling unit;1.2 Zones— per 1 bedroom or studio dwelling unit. RM-T Zone Exemption: An exemption to the standard parking ratio formula may be granted by the Development Services Director allowing 1 parking space per dwelling unit for developments of less than 5 dwelling units with 2 bedrooms or less per unit provided adequate on-street parking is available in the vicinity of the development. (Amd. Ord. 5018, 9-22-2003; Ord. 5087, 6-28-2004) Attached dwellings within the RM-F 2 per dwelling unit where tandem spaces Zone: are not provided; and/or2.5 per dwelling unit where tandem parking is provided, subject to the criteria found in subsection F8d of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) Attached dwellings within the CV Zone: I per dwelling unit is required. A maximum of 1.75 per dwelling unit is allowed. Attached dwellings within all other 1.75 per dwelling unit where tandem zones: spaces are not provided; and/or 2.25 per dwelling unit where tandem parking is provided, subject to the criteria found in subsection F8d of this Section. Attached dwelling for low income 1 for each 4 dwelling units. elderl : may... l , trA '`E Attached dwellings: 1 per unit. Attached dwellings for low income 1 for every 3 dwelling units. elderl : Drive-through retail or drive-through Stacking spaces: The drive-through service: facility shall be so located that sufficient on-site vehicle stacking space is provided for the handling of motor vehicles using such facility during peak business hours. Typically 5 stacking spaces per window are required unless otherwise determined by ATTACHMENT H ORDINANCE NO. 5286 the Development Services Director. Stacking spaces cannot obstruct required parking spaces or ingress/egress within the site or extend into the public right-of-way. Banks: A minimum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area and a maximum of 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area except when part of a shopping center. Convalescent centers: 1 for every 2 employees plus 1 for every 3 beds. Day care centers, adult day care (I and 1 for each employee and 2 loading spaces II): within 100 feet of the main entrance for every 25 clients of the program. Hotels and motels: 1 per guest room plus 2 for every 3 employees. Mortuaries or funeral homes: 1 per 100 square feet of floor area of assembly rooms. Vehicle sales (large and small vehicles) 1 per 5,000 square feet. The sales area is with outdoor retail sales areas: not a parking lot and does not have to comply with dimensional requirements, landscaping or the bulk storage section requirements for setbacks and screening. Any arrangement of motor vehicles is allowed as long as:• A minimum 5 feet perimeter landscaping area is provided;• They are not displayed in required landscape areas; and• Adequate fire access is provided per Fire Department approval. Vehicle service and repair (large and 0.25 per 100 square feet of net floor area. small vehicles): Offices, medical and dental: 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area. Offices,general: A minimum of 3 per 1,000 feet of net floor area and a maximum of 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area. Eating and drinking establishments and 1 per 100 square feet of net floor area. taverns: Eating and drinking establishment 1 per 75 square feet of net floor area. combination sit-down/drive-through restaurant: Retail sales and big-box retail sales: A maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area, except big-box retail sales, which is allowed a maximum of 0.5 per ATTACHMENT Ii ORDINANCE NO. 5286 100 square feet of net floor area if shared and/or structured parking is provided. Services, on-site (except as specified A maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of below): net floor area. Clothing or shoe repair shops, furniture, 0.2 per 100 square feet of net floor area. appliance, hardware stores, household equipment: Uncovered commercial area, outdoor 0.05 per 100 square feet of retail sales area nurseries: in addition to any parking requirements for buildings. Recreational and entertainment uses: Outdoor and indoor sports arenas, 1 for every 4 fixed seats or 1 per 100 auditoriums, stadiums, movie theaters, square feet of floor area of main auditorium and entertainment clubs: or of principal place of assembly not containing fixed seats, whichever is greater. Bowling alleys: 5 per alley. Dance halls, dance clubs, and skating 1 per 40 square feet of net floor area. rinks: Golf driving ranges: 1 per driving station Marinas: 2 per 3 slips. For private marina associated with a residential complex, then 1 per 3 slips. Also 1 loading area per 25 slips. Miniature golf courses: 1 per hole. Other recreational: 1 per occupant based upon 50% of the maximum occupant load as established by the adopted Building and Fire Codes of the City of Renton. Travel trailers: 1 Ier trailer site. All uses allowed in the CD Zone except 1 space per 1,000 square feet of net floor for the following uses: area. Excepted uses follow the standards Excepted Uses: Convalescent center, applied outside the Downtown Core. drive-through retail, drive-through service, hotels, mortuaries, indoor sports arenas, auditoriums, movie theaters, entertainment clubs, bowling alleys, dance halls, dance clubs, and other recreational uses. Shopping centers (includes any type of A minimum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of • Nw' •✓ ATTACHMENT H ORDINANCE NO. 5286 business occupying a shopping center): net floor area and a maximum of 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area. In the UC- NI and UC-N2 Zones, a maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area is permitted unless structured parking is provided, in which case 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area is permitted. Drive- through retail or drive-through service uses must comply with the stacking space provisions listed above. Airplane hangars, tie-down areas: Parking is not required. Hangar space or tie-down areas are to be utilized for necessary parking. Parking for offices associated with hangars is 1 per 200 square feet. Manufacturing and fabrication, A minimum of 0.1 per 100 square feet of laboratories, and assembly and/or net floor area and a maximum of 0.15 packaging operations: spaces per 100 square feet of net floor area (including warehouse space). Self service storage: I per 3,500 square feet of net floor area. Maximum of three moving van/truck spaces in addition to required parking for self service storage uses in the RM-F Zone. Outdoor storage area: 0.05 per 100 square feet of area. Warehouses and indoor storage 1 per 1,500 square feet of net floor area. buildin's: g QM t ,a : . Religious institutions: 1 for every 5 seats in the main auditorium, however, in no case shall there be less than 10 spaces. For all existing institutions enlarging the seating capacity of their auditoriums, 1 additional parking space shall be provided for every 5 additional seats provided by the new construction. For all institutions making structural alterations or additions that do not increase the seating capacity of the auditorium, see "outdoor and indoor sports arenas, auditoriums, stadiums, movie theaters, and entertainment clubs." Medical institutions: 1 for every 3 beds, plus 1 per staff doctor, plus 1 for every 3 employees. Cultural facilities: 4 per 100 square feet. ATTACHMENT al. ORDINANCE NO. 5286 Public post office: 0.3 for every 100 square feet. Secure community transition facilities: 1 per 3 beds, plus 1 per staff member, plus 1 per employee. Schools: Elementary and junior high: 1 per employee. In addition, if buses for the transportation of students are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. Senior high schools: public, parochial 1 per employee plus 1 space for every 10 and private: students enrolled. In addition, if buses for the private transportation of children are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. Colleges and universities, arts and crafts 1 per employee plus I for every 3 students schools/studios, and trade or vocational residing on campus, plus I space for every schools: 5 day students not residing on campus. In addition, if buses for transportation of students are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. ,.0 N an .. a) .0czl -0 0 0 -0 a) 0 as o ° a) o a).� = -0 ._ C :fl '� 4 -0 o �0 6 o Nr io ,O 'b a) > = o �? 0 0 ;.a) 0 0 g 'b .�" a) Y 'b t7:11:::::›C Oyu a) ,o Fzi .s •v) .cp `� _o � ¢ l ,"0 a) i.. cd O c� •aA t7 . 0 a) V Z i - Sa, c1..- - cct N ".-� i (IDi 0 a) a) rsi I +� ,'411":" V) Cl.) --. U U a� 00 � N � � O �, c N _o -o -o 3 ,� -0 a� �. �, o ,... "0 as E dZ ..d a H Q.. "n 3 0 ° G1 �f o t° -L o. i. c L1 c t a. G1 _ 0 30 ° � .� Y o a o a d 00 �, v�i ••_7, 0O `� n o Cl) 0 H M O O a) 5 ta. a) s.. ••- v) V •U N• - c'" K g O ¢ . , bal) RJ 00 W i •- E a o,�s -• 00 0 o a) 3 0 c i a 0 v O E , Uc i) .� = 0 A: al St, 4-o `i'. a ") .0 cC CD ;A 0 a ° j" . ▪ a +..c f � al 3 f 0 ;V) O 0 • Q. WU a.) _ O Nb ' EL) '� v L cz$ + • a) .. a) (1) 0 abA o (DO V) a) .- :-� > 0 a�) aHAn a, o. � -0 3 ° b cd0 cd z � � w ' cn '3 C Tv' d Oo .•'� � o boa 0.11-4 �' +r C C, "" '�^ ai d AH A0ma, ' a Q �. • low *00 00 -b -0 ,4. a) �' cC a) •� y •_O tJ O N . O a a; > O O .Y t1 . cd O Cn at U 3 a. cG rn — «S i. O -8 aS "0 '.7-% s. fl Q • O ccta� a 00 N t O z W 0 N tko ¢ c z a, O H z W U H H E cv a) a) d d z z z z a, o <I ._ as o ._o as • c i _ a) a) o - ct9 a : c� U iU z t1. ch . ) p E o .. p 0 c0 c Q a d U �1 ab p V U .� E ..... 4. 4. W (1) U O :Qz Qn F.L fi : O 4 i 00 3 ° ° •> 0 b 3 ' 7)' ^ U U o 4. .4 0 p o ?Di)-b ,, . a-p 3-, o = .,..0 b 4�, U — [s 2 ,r, a) 0 , o . . a' = cd ' y °°• as o . l, E 0 • . te, E — a H0 cd °° 7,1 _ ° ro CIA czt a) fl -� U .- 0 U z a) o . Q .SO al . �° E—, W a) au U E e'l C MI o Y ?� ai 0 E cd 01) y ebio Ad'd' .� 15= • . a) cd O � v) fYIQ ,.� °�°. C_ Q - .. 0 -j 4.z 4., :... '4o 0 y 0oti a o a w ' ,: r x _ 7rC.) QUo �z Q er , E o t z a G 0 w 4. 4cii O U O Ocd Li,o GA a)a) �0 vO '7 , f Q .- v, a) cd >O U A ¢ cO cn - U p E � . O G b S. r' CI a) U 0 O cC•3 b sU. a) as bcci �A U . b >, O o 00 cd aa)q v sl. -- a>i o >, `� a) o o :.., 3 -b "' -b cd a) cd :- >� L1) v) A" cd o cd O 0 v a�i o • ai nQ. p. >o, CD ° .0 aa)i . E" p..4. .o > o > 0 3 - is .b a, O a) . a) - 'o O cn o �_ U cd o cd O U cy�, N 5 'U O U to cd ▪ t-. N .0 . r. > U ..Z 'o w .�.� x x N U W o CO . cd W .4 = u. ca. 0 .4 Cr. ta) _O c� l O O c; C O O O 4-+ fa. v a) ou O x 4� �. Q. O U U • • • • • • H z w U d H H d . • ' 4 '44Uire 'Mile 00 N 0 z w W 0 U �n z tA z a � p i . _ N CCI -0(1) Q � O4• 'd J � cd _yj• U at v U$ .-o O = zbo>,. n( c vi .flO V "CI • N c O U U N a) bA cn U° y cd .<Q, ^JG U Oi ° °-_ _NO v �1c U +-' S U bA N ° E = cUpCdc, -., U y.. d i., — cd +� Ov) N 'O c "' OUUd bA J, cd ¢ O0 4 a N .- CO O U4) A N • j ° ' cd c ? G }' Upr + Ji . � 0N �bff � � .� � � w � N ti p t •� O cO O . . � ° UO � 40 N $ ...0 U tO, L U ,, °n _ � c O V" A j y0 ¢ . CD ..0 � ¢ w W O fa., O c) q . ..0 dq V) Cti = )) ° 0 c '° ° '-' ? > cl >y -.. [- 4 w U ¢ H H ¢ CZ • O ti) r.41 > cC - C o a) o a. E 4, cC a U a) E o aai ��} ° n I U U qq > U U D O 'CS a) C • 7/1a) a) E 2N _� °a. 0 Y cu �,/ ) . 4. .Y + Fsi a) c� U .+ v) o U ..CCI) Li) 3 b > • 0 on ct a, w U a) 00 N N 0 VD z 4. W o z z a v) °° o °' x o � � y s� a) ono 3-4 • .• a) a) on al • 4-4 C 0 77 . $ N .S] p a) a) • • ' O O v N v) U cd O v� cd O O 8 U a) - . . 5 a) O U. v A a) a) bq Qom) 0 y„ O C.) cC . cC U a � ..5 1.) U cci •� a al �Oi) c�C a. 3 C.) 'bA • (CS 0 H z z w x C C.) � &. CA H °' > H C7 a CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 285 AN ORIIINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING, ON AN EMERGENCY"BASIS. THE HIGHLANDS STUDY AREA AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MAPS AND DATA IN CONJUNCTION THEREWITH,AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Renton has heretofore adopted and filed a "Comprehensive Plan" and the City Council of Renton has implemented and amended said "Comprehensive Plan" from time to time, together with the adoption of various codes, reports and records; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has heretofore fully recommended to the City Council, from time to time, certain amendments to the City's "Comprehensive Plan"; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton, pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act, has been required to review its "Comprehensive Plan"; and WHEREAS, the City has held public hearings on this matter on November 13, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made certain findings and recommendations to the City Council, including implementing policies; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly determined after due consideration of the testimony and evidence before it that it is advisable and appropriate to amend and modify the City's "Comprehensive Plan"; and WHEREAS, such modification and elements for the "Comprehensive Plan" being in the best interest for the public benefit; and Itime ORDINANCE NO. 5 28 5 440. WHEREAS, the proposed modifications were reviewed as part of the 2006 annual "Comprehensive Plan"update cycle; and WHEREAS, an appeal of the Environmental Review of the proposed modifications prevented the adoption of these modifications during the regular "Comprehensive Plan" update cycle; and WHEREAS, the City Council has declared by Resolution that adoption of these modifications is an emergency and may occur outside of the regular "Comprehensive Plan" update cycle; and WHEREAS, the City Council has had a series of development moratoria in place since May 2005, which have been extended from time to time, to allow City Staff time to conduct a study of the Highlands study area and propose land use modifications for that area; and WHEREAS,the current development moratorium expires May 13, 2007; and WHEREAS, the city has expended considerable resources to conduct the study of the Highlands Study Area; and WHEREAS, the City might lose the benefit of the studies conducted regarding the Highlands Study Area if the City waited to amend the Comprehensive Plan until the next amendment cycle; and WHEREAS, the proposed modifications should be in place as soon as possible after the end of the development moratorium to prevent the vesting of new development that is inconsistent with the modifications NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5285 SECTION I. The above findings and recitals are found to be true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The "Comprehensive Plan," maps, data and reports in support of the "Comprehensive Plan" are hereby modified, amended and adopted as said "Comprehensive Plan" consisting of the following elements: Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Land Use Map, as shown on the attached Exhibits A and B and incorporated herein as if fully set forth. SECTION III. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to make the necessary changes on said City's "Comprehensive Plan" and the maps in conjunction therewith to evidence the aforementioned amendments. SECTION IV. An emergency is hereby declared pursuant to RCW 36.70A.13 0(2)(b) based upon the recitals herein and this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is adopted at a time other than the annual amendments. SECTION V. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file this ordinance as provided by law, and a complete copy of said document likewise being on file with the office of the City Clerk of the City of Renton. SECTION VI. An emergency is hereby declared and this ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and immediately after adoption. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14th day of May 2007 . f80-744eu. Bonnie Walton, City Clerk 3 ORDINANCE NO. 5 28 5 APPROVED BY THE MAYOR thisl4th day of May , 2007 . Kathy Kedlker, Mayor Approved as to form: Oret4.04...,_4_4e714;(4-4-AA%--- Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 5/19/2007 (summary) ORD.1355:5/3/07:ch 4 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 LAND USE ELEMENT GOALS 1. 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. 2. Minimize risk associated with potential aviation incidents on the ground and for aircraft occupants. 3. Promote annexation where and when it is in the best interest of Renton. 4. Maintain the City's natural and cultural history by documenting and appropriately recognizing its historic and/or archaeological sites. 5. Pursue the transition of non-conforming uses and structures to encourage more conforming uses and development patterns. 6. Develop a system of facilities that meet the public and quasi-public service needs of present and future employees. 7. Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: a) Contribute to a strong sense of community and neighborhood identity; b) Are walkable places where people can live, shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; c) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; d) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; e) Are varied or unique in character; f) Support "grid"and "flexible grid"street and pathway patterns where appropriate; g) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; h) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and i) Provide a sense of home. 8. Develop well-balanced attractive, convenient, robust commercial office, office, and residential development within designated Centers serving the City and the region. 9. 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. IX-1 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 `41100 10 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. IX-2 Exhibit A ,.. ORDINANCE NO. 5285 w I. REGIONAL GROWTH POLICIES 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 result in sprawl and discourage redevelopment of inefficient or out-dated land uses, while insufficient capacity can make development difficult due to high land cost. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan should provide sufficient direction to achieve a balance between excessive and insufficient capacity, in order to avoid difficulty in implementing the Plan. Responsibility for implementing the objectives and policies of the Regional Growth section of this plan lies primarily with the City of Renton. 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 (PAA). Policy LU-1. 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: 1) 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. Policy LU-3. Provide for land use planning and an overall growth strategy for both the City and land in the designated PAA as part of Renton's regional growth policies. Discussion: The Growth Management Act and the Countywide Planning Policies establish urban growth areas where urban levels of growth will occur within the subsequent 21-year period. These areas include existing cities and unincorporated areas. Within the Urban Growth Area, the Potential Annexation Area(PAA) is designated for IX-3 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 future municipal expansion and governance. Policies guiding annexation and provision of services within the PAA 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 2001 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: 1) 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: 458 jobs Policy LU-5. Amend growth targets as annexation occurs to transfer a proportionate share of Potential Annexation Area targets into Renton's targets. 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-one years (2001-2022). Policy LU-7. Plan for residential and employment growth based on growth targets established in the Countywide Planning Policies, as a minimum. (See Housing Element Goals and Capacity section and Capital Facilities Element, Policy CFP-1 and Growth Projection section. Policy LU-8. 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. Policy LU-11. Minimum density requirements shall be established to ensure that land development practices result in an average development density in each land use designation sufficient to meet adopted growth targets and create greater efficiency in the provision of urban services. IX-4 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-12. Minimum density requirements should: 1) Be based on net land area; 2) Be required in residential zones, with the exception of the Resource Conservation, Residential 1, and Residential 4 zones, 3) Not be required of individual portions or lots within a 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 additional development. Policy LU-14. Parking should not be considered as a land reserve for future development, except within the Urban Center. Policy LU-15. Amend capacity estimates as annexation and re-zonings occur. Objective LU-D: Maintain a high ratio of jobs to housing in Renton. Policy LU-16. Future residential and employment growth within Renton's planning area should meet the goal of two jobs for each housing unit. Policy LU-17. Sufficient quantities of land should 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-18. 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 daytime activity, a high demand for infrastructure, a high tax base, and a high volume 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 will increase the discrepancy between jobs and housing units within the City. However, the number of housing units in the unincorporated areas within Renton's Potential IX-5 Exhibit A ✓ ORDINANCE NO. 5285 400, Annexation Area is 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. IX-6 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 • II. AIRPORT AIRPORT COMPATIBLE LAND USE POLICIES Goal: Minimize risk associated with potential aviation incidents on the ground and for aircraft occupants. Discussion: In order to meet a mandate of the Growth Management Act, the City of Renton has developed a set of objectives and policies to address land use compatibility between the Renton Municipal Airport and an area of the City known as the Airport Influence Area(see RMC 4-3-020). Renton's approach to planning for minimization of risk associated with potential aviation incidents was to analyze four primary categories of aviation operations in relation to land use compatibility. The categories used are, 1) general aviation safety, 2) airspace protection, 3) aviation noise, and 4) overflight. A "compatibility objective"was developed for each, with strategies to meet the objective, and measurement criteria to ensure that the objective is met. The objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, with the implementation included in the Development Regulations (RMC 4-3-020)meet the state requirement of GMA and the goal of this section. Responsibility for implementing the Airport Compatible Land Use objectives and policies is shared by the City of Renton,proponents of projects within the Airport Influence Area, and the aviation community. General Aviation Safety Objective LU-E: Minimize risk associated with potential aviation incidents. 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. IX-7 Exhibit Ar ORDINANCE NO. 5285 4100 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-25. 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. Policy LU-27. Residential use and/or density of new structures should be limited, within the Runway Protection Zone and the Runway Sideline Zone to reduce negative impacts on residents from aviation operation noise. Implementing code will be put in place by November 2007. Policy LU-28. Non-residential use and/or 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 of land 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. IX-8 Exhibit A ..»" ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-31. At the time of land use approval (i.e. subdivision of land) avigation easements should be granted to the City in areas of Renton subject to negative aircraft overflight impacts. Policy LU-32. At the time of land use approval (i.e. subdivision of land) 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 forums, 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. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption date of GMA update. IX-9 Exhibit A lome ORDINANCE NO. 5285 401 III. ANNEXATIONS Goal: Actively pursue annexations. Discussion: The growth of the City through annexation is expected to continue throughout the planning cycle. The policies in this section are intended to guide the annexation process. The City recognizes that fiscal impact is only one of many criteria to be evaluated, and must be balanced with other annexation policy goals, such as transition to urban land use, protection of sensitive areas, provision of public service, governmental structure, provision of infrastructure, aquifer protection, and community identity. Responsibility for implementing annexation objectives and the policies lies primarily with the City of Renton. 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-35. The City will 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 of the 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, live, work 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. IX-10 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 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. 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: I) 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 of the neighborhood between City and County jurisdictions; and 5) Inclusion of natural corridors either as greenbelts or urban separators between the City and adjacent jurisdictions. Policy LU-44. Existing land uses and developmentor redevelopment potential should be considered when evaluating a proposed annexation. Policy LU-45. Commercial uses that do not conform to Renton's land use plan should be encouraged to transition into conforming uses or to relocate to areas with compatible land use designations. 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. IX-l l Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 N 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 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies and City of Renton development standards. This policy should be implemented within five years of the adoption date of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-51. 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-52. 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-53. 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 of the annexation proposal. Policy LU-54. Appropriate zoning districts should be designated for property in an annexation proposal. Zoning in the annexation territory should be consistent with the comprehensive plan land use designations. Policy LU-55. Larger annexations should be encouraged, when appropriate, in order to realize efficiencies in the use of City resources. Policy LU-56. 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-57. The City should respond to community initiatives and actively assist owners and residents with initiating and completing the annexation process. Policy LU-58. 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-59. The City should work with potential annexation proponents to develop acceptable annexation boundaries. IX-12 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 — 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 each area proposed for annexation. IX-13 Exhibit A 410.0 ORDINANCE NO. 5285 IV. HISTORICAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES IGoal: Maintain the City's cultural history by documenting and appropriately recognizing its historic and/or archaeological sites. Discussion: Renton has a rich and interesting history as a community. It was the site of an established Native American settlement and changed through the years of early European immigration into a pioneer town. The City incorporated in 1901 and later became a major regional employment center and residential area. The following policies are intended to guide efforts to recognize and integrate Renton's past into future development as the City evolves into a dynamic urban community. 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. Cultural resources should be identified by project proponents when applying for land use approval, as part of the application submitted for review. Policy LU-63. Potentially adverse impacts on cultural resources deemed to be significant should be mitigated as a condition of project approval. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-64. The City should work cooperatively with King County by exchanging resource information pertaining to natural and cultural resources. Policy LU-65. 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 site development proposals should be encouraged to incorporate displays about Renton's history, including prominent families and individuals, businesses, and events associated with downtown's past. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. IX-14 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO 528.5 •.• V. NON-CONFORMING USE Goal: Pursue the transition of non-conforming uses and structures to encourage more conforming uses and development patterns. Discussion: As a community grows, changes in land use policies sometimes result in "non-conforming uses"as remnants of an earlier land use pattern. Some of these non- conforming uses can retain a viable economic life for long periods of time and even become desirable reminders of the evolution of the City. These policies are intended to guide decision-making about non-conforming uses and structures in the context of current land use policy. Responsibility for implementing the objectives and policies of this section lies primarily with the City of Renton. 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. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 standards should be implemented in a manner that recognizes the overall character of the neighborhood. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. IX-15 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ,4400 Policy LU-70. Evaluate permits for non-conforming uses, based on the following criteria: 1) Relationship of the existing non-conforming 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) 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 substantial 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 due to current market conditions would not impede or delay the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Objective LU-Q: Ensure that the effects of non-conforming structures on character of the conforming patterns of Renton's neighborhoods are minimized. Policy LU-71. Evaluate applications to repair or expand non-conforming structures based on the following factors: 1) Whether it represents a unique regional or national architectural style or an innovation in architecture, use of materials, or functional arrangement, and/or is one of the few remaining examples of such a style or innovation, 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 of the site with a conforming 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. IX-16 Exhibit A %.r ORDINANCE NO. 5285 VI. PUBLIC FACILITIES Goal: Develop a system of facilities that meet the public and quasi-public service needs of present and future employees. Discussion: The purpose of these policies 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. (Renton Technical College and Valley Medical Center are also addressed in the Commercial Corridor section of the Land Use Element.) Responsibility for implementing this objective and the following policies lies primarily with the City of Renton. 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 LU-73. Primary vehicular access to sites should be from principal or minor arterial streets. Policy LU-74. Internal site circulation should be primarily pedestrian-oriented. Policy LU-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 or ownership. Policy LU-77. Surplus public sites should be considered for alternative types of public use prior to sale or lease. Policy LU-78. 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-80. 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. IX-17 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ,4110 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. 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 LU-85. 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 special locational 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 LU-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. IX-18 Exhibit A `.. ORDINANCE NO. 5285 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. 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 of these more intensive uses. Policy LU-94. Post secondary(beyond high school) and other regional educational facilities that require sites larger than five acres should be located in the Employment Area—Industrial, Employment Area— Valley, CommercialOffice/Residential, or the Urban Center designations. Policy LU-95. 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 LU-97. The City and the school district should jointly develop multiple-use facilities (e.g. playgrounds, sports fields) whenever practical. Policy LU-98. Community use of school sites and facilities for non-school activities should be encouraged. Policy LU-99. School facilities that are planned for closure, should be considered for potential public use before being sold for private development. Policy LU-100. Elementary schools should be located near a collector arterial street. Policy LU-101. Safe pedestrian access to schools should be promoted(e.g. through pedestrian linkages, safety features) through the design of new subdivisions and roadway improvements. Policy LU-102. 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-103. Health and/or medical facilities larger than five acres should be located in portions of the Commercial Corridor designation mapped with Commercial Office zoning, Employment Area—Valley, Commercial/Office/Residential or the Urban Centers designations. Smaller scale facilities should locate in the Commercial Arterial portions of Commercial Corridor. 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. IX-19 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ,4000 Policy LU-104. When locating in predominantly residential areas, religious facilities should be on the periphery of the residential area rather than the interior. Policy LU-105. Parking should be provided on-site and buffered from adjacent uses. Policy LU-106. Large-scale facilities should be encouraged to locate contiguous to an existing or planned transit route. Policy LU-107. Religious facilities should be located on and have direct access to either an arterial or collector street. Objective LU-Y: Accommodate large, commercial recreational uses that depend on open land and are intended to serve regional users. Policy LU-108. Commercial, regional recreational uses should be located contiguous to a principal arterial in areas with immediate access to an interstate or a state route. Policy LU-109. Commercial recreational uses should be located outside of the trade area of other commercial recreational areas offering similar recreational opportunities. Policy LU-110. Vehicular access to a commercial recreational site should be from a principal arterial street with the number of access points minimized. IX-20 Exhibit A w ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ....,,: 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 Residential Low Density Designations or on vacant land in commercial areas. Current policies recognize these existing uses and encourage them as cultural resources where they may be appropriate. Responsibility for implementing the objectives and policies of this section lies primarily with the City of Renton. Objective LU-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. Allow sale of products produced on site. Policy LU-111. Prohibit commercial agricultural uses that are industrial or semi- industrial in nature, and create nuisances such as odor or noise that may be incompatible with residential use. Policy LU-112. Limit access of large domestic animals to shorelines and wetlands. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-113. Control impacts of crop and animal raising on surface and ground water. Policy LU-114. Encourage public and private recreational uses in agricultural areas. Policy LU-115. Allow cultivation and sale of flowers, herbs, vegetables, or similar crops in residential areas, as an accessory use and/or home occupation. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-116. Recognize and allow community gardens on private property, vacant public property, and unused rights-of-ways. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Objective LU-AA: Maintain extractive industries where their continued operation does not impact adjacent residential areas, the City's aquifer, or other critical areas. Policy LU-117. Extractive industries including timber, sand, gravel and other mining within the City's Potential Annexation Area should be mapped and appropriately zoned IX-21 Exhibit A ► ORDINANCE NO. 5285 upon annexation to the City. Policies governing these sites should be consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. Policy LU-118. Mining and processing of minerals and materials should be allowed within the City subject to applicable City ordinances, environmental performance standards. Policy LU-119. Extractive sites, when mined out, should be graded and restored for future development compatible with land use designations for adjacent sites. Implementing code will be in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-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 LU-121. Hours of operation of extractive uses should be based on impacts to adjacent uses. Policy LU-122. The City should apply conditional use permits or other approvals as appropriate for mineral extraction and processing 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. IX-22 Exhibit A .*r.. ORDINANCE NO. 5285 VIII. RESIDENTIAL POLICIES Goal: Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: j) Contribute to a strong sense of community and neighborhood identity; k) Are walkable places where people can shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; 1) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; m) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; n) Are varied or unique in character; o) Support"grid" and "flexible grid" street and pathway patterns where appropriate; p) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; q) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and r) 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.) Responsibility for residential objectives and policies lies with the City of Renton for implementation and the development community, which should propose projects that meet the residential goals, objectives, and policies of the City. Objective LU-BB: Manage and plan for high quality residential growth in Renton and the Potential Annexation Area that: 1) Supports transit by providing urban 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; IX-23 Exhibit A 14imv ORDINANCE NO. 528.5 *le 4) Infill in existing multi-family areas; and 5) Mixed-use projects and multi-family development in Commercial/Office/Residential and Commercial Corridors Land Use designations. Policy LU-124. Promote the timely and logical progression of residential development. Priority for higher density development should be given to development of land with infrastructure capacity and land located closer to the City's Urban Center. Policy LU-125. Encourage a citywide 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 land capacity should occur in multi-family housing in parts of the City and PAA located outside of the Urban Center. Policy LU-127. Infrastructure impacts of the 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-128. Multi-family unit types are encouraged as part of mixed-use developments in the Urban Center, Center Village, Commercial/Office/Residential, and the Commercial Corridor Land Use designations. Policy LU-129. Small-lot, single-family infill developments and plats 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 LU-130. Adopt urban density of at least four(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. IX-24 Exhibit A '""' ORDINANCE NO. 5285 RESIDENTIAL LOW 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 larger-lot housing stock, at urban densities of 4-du/net acre, to its inventory. Lands that are not appropriate for urban levels of development are designated either Resource Conservation or Residential Low Density, with Resource Conservation or Residential 1 zoning. Lands that either do not have significant sensitive areas, or can be adequately protected by the critical areas ordinance, are zoned Residential 4. Responsibility for residential objectives and policies lies with the City of Renton for implementation and the development community, which should propose projects that meet the residential goals, objectives, and policies of the City. Objective LU-DD: Provide opportunities for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas of the 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 of the City where environmentally sensitive areas such as 100-year floodplains, floodways, and 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 (Resource Conservation) to 1 home per acre (Residential 1) on Residential Low Density (RLD) designated land with significant environmental constraints, including but not limited to: steep slopes, erosion hazard, floodplains, and wetlands or where the area is in a designated Urban Separator. Density should be a maximum of 4-du/net acre (Residential 4) on portions of the Residential Low Density land where these constraints are not extensive and urban densities are appropriate. Policy LU-135. For the purpose of mapping four dwelling units per net acre (4-du/ac) zoned areas as contrasted with lower density Residential 1 (R-1) and Resource Conservation (RC) areas, the prevalence of significant environmental constraints should be interpreted to mean: 1) Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area; 2) Developable areas are separated from 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 IX-25 Exhibit A tiftio ORDINANCE NO. 5285 vimo 5) Application of the Critical Areas Ordinance setbacks/buffers 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. Implementation of this policy should be phased in within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-137. Warehousing, outdoor storage, equipment yards, and industrial uses should not be allowed. Where such uses exist as non-conforming uses, 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. Implementation of this policy should be phased in within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 conservation easements, trail easements or other public benefits through agreements with private parties. Objective LU-EE: Designate Residential 4 du/acre zoning 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 du/acre zoned 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-145. 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 IX-26 Exhibit A NoeORDINANCE NO. 5285 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 as well as innovative site planning. Criteria should include: 1) Attractive residential streetscapes with landscaped front yards that are visible from the street; 2) Landscaping, preferably with drought- resistant 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 for surface water runoff; and 6) Significant native tree and vegetation retention and/or replacement. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Land designated Residential Single Family is intended to be used for quality detached residential 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 of less than one acre (43,560 sq. ft.) in single-family designations. Allow a reduction in lot size to 4,500 square feet on parcels greater than one acre to create an incentive for aggregation of land. 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. IX-27 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 4,400 Policy LU-150. Required setbacks should exclude public or private legal access areas, established through or to a lot, and to parking areas. Policy LU-151. Maximum height of structures should not exceed two (2) stories in single-family residential neighborhoods. Policy LU-152. 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-152.1: Variances to standards in LU-152 should not be granted to facilitate additional density on an infill site. Policy LU-153. 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 identified to notify residents of future roadway connections. Policy LU-154. Interpret development standards to support new plats and infill project designs incorporating street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes that address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. Policy LU-155. 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-156. 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 of this 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 infill development, encourage use of transit service, and promote the efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. ix-28 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 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. Policy LU-157. Residential Medium Density designated areas should be zoned for either Residential 10 dwelling units per net acre (R-10), Residential 14 dwelling units per net acre (R-14), or new zoning designations that allow housing in this density range. Policy LU-158. Residential Medium Density neighborhoods may be considered for Residential 10 (R-10) 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 zoning for flats or other low-density multi-family use; 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 '/ 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-159. Areas may be considered for Residential 14 (R-14) zoning where the site meets the following criteria: 1) Adjacent to major arterial(s); 2) Adjacent to the Urban Center, Highlands Center Village, or Commercial Corridor 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 LU-161. Support residential development incorporating a hierarchy of streets. Street networks should connect through the development to existing streets, avoid "cul- de-sac" or dead end streets, and be arranged in a grid street pattern (or a flexible grid street system if there are environmental constraints). IX-29 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 410 Policy LU-162. Development densities 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-14 zoned portions of the Residential Medium Density designation, a bonus density of four(4) additional dwelling units per 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 four(4) 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 LU-165. 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. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-167. A range and variety of lot 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 amenities for passive recreation 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; IX-30 Exhibit A ... ORDINANCE NO. 5285 4) Each dwelling unit should have an identifiable entrance and front on streets rather than courtyards and parking lots; 5) Fences may be constructed if they 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. 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-171. Buildings should front the street rather than be organized around interior courtyards or parking areas. Policy LU-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 maximum lot coverage by the primary structure of fifty (50) percent. Policy LU-175. 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 transition to and blend with existing development patterns using techniques such as lot size, depth and width, access points, building location setbacks, and landscaping. Sensitivity to unique features and differences among established neighborhoods should be reflected in site plan design. 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 of a 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 of the building has a small scale multi-family character, rather than that of a large, garden-style apartment development. IX-3 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 140 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. Policy LU-181. Mixed-use development in the form of civic, 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-family and 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 (RMF)zoning. Objective LU-JJ: Encourage the development of infill parcels with quality projects in existing multi-family districts. Policy LU-182. Residential Multi-family designations should be in areas of the 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. IX-32 Exhibit A r.. ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-184. Expansion of the Residential Multi-family designation is limited to properties meeting the following criteria: 1) 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. Policy LU-185. Development density in the Residential Multi-family designation should be within a range of ten (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. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-188. Evaluate project proposals in Residential Multi-family designations to consider the transition to lower density uses where multi-family sites abut lower density zones. Setbacks may be increased, heights reduced, and additional landscape buffering required through site plan review. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 an environment that contributes to a high quality of life for future residents, regardless IX-33 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 of income level. Implementing code will be put in place within two years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-189. Support project design that incorporates the following, or similar elements, in architectural design: 1) Variation of facades on all sides of structures visible from the street with vertical and horizontal modulation or articulation; 2) Angular roof lines 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. Policy LU-190. Support project site planning that incorporates the following, or similar elements, in order to meet the intent of the 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. Implementation of this policy should be phased within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-191. Residential Multi-family projects in the RMF 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. IX-34 Exhibit A `.., ORDINANCE NO. 5285 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 and 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 and 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-195. 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. IX-35 Exhibit A Noe ORDINANCE NO. 5285 .4000 Policy LU-196. Designate Centers in locations with the following characteristics: 1) A nucleus of existing multi-use development; 2) Potential for redevelopment, or vacant land to encourage significant concentration of development; 3) Center locations should be located on major transit and transportation routes; 4) 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 of land 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-201. 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. Policy LU-205. Identify major natural features and support development of new focal points that define the Center and 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. IX-36 Exhibit A %or- ORDINANCE NO. 5285 — Policy LU-208. 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 of the project. Policy LU-210. Connect residential uses to other uses in the Center through design features such as pedestrian access, shared parking areas, and common open spaces. Objective NN: Implement Renton's Urban Center consistent with the "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 I-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-213. 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-215. Site and building design should be pedestrian/people oriented with provisions for transit and automobiles where appropriate. IX-37 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 _ 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, infill 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 LU-217. Development and redevelopment of Urban Center- Downtown should strive for urban density and intensity of uses. Policy LU-218. 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, 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 heights (maximum 10 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. IX-3 8 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 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 multi-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 du/ac 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-Wells 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 IX-39 Exhibit A 'fir ORDINANCE NO. 5285 4000 (i.e. retail goods and services) in order to generate and maintain continuous pedestrian activity in these areas. 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 of low- (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-235. Parking should be structured whenever feasible. Accessory surface parking is discouraged. Policy LU-236. The existing supply of parking should be 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. IX-40 • Exhibit A `r, ORDINANCE NO. 5285 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. 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-245. 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-250. Pedestrians should be given priority use of sidewalks within the Urban Center—Downtown designated pedestrian areas. Policy LU-251. Block lengths and widths should be maintained at the pedestrian- friendly standards that predominate within the downtown. Policy LU-252. Where right-of-way is available and bicycle demand justifies them, bicycle lanes should be marked and signed to accommodate larger volumes of bicycle traffic on select streets designated by the City. Policy LU-253. 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-254. Strong visual linkages should be created between downtown Renton and neighborhoods using landscaped arterial streets and connectors. IX-4I Exhibit A 'ttie ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-255. 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 of low-rise structures to avoid creation of the "canyon effect" (e.g. preserving historic façades, stepping façades back above the second or third floor). Policy LU-256. Downtown gateways should employ distinctive landscaping, signage, art, architectural style, and similar techniques to better delineate the downtown and enhance its unique character. Policy LU-257. 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-258. 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-259. 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 IX-42 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Center is anticipated to attract large-scale redevelopment greater than that in the Urban Center-Downtown, due to large areas of land available for redevelopment. In addition, 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. Policy LU-265. Support more urban intensity of development(e.g. building height, bulk, landscaping, parking standards) than with land uses in the suburban areas of the 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. Policy 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-275. 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 physical buffer between redevelopment and continuing airplane manufacturing operations. Policy LU-276. Support extension of Park Ave. to Lake Washington. IX-43 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 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 in the Urban Center-North. 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. Policy LU-281. 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-285. 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 of the 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. IX-44 Exhibit A *mar ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policies for Surrounding Residential Area (North Renton Neighborhood, south of N 6`h 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 supports populations in adjacent residential areas as well as new development within 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-295. Support a partnership with community stakeholders such as the Renton School District to provide a transition for public properties adjacent 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 redevelopment of properties addressing the needs of employees or residents of the Urban Center. Policy LU-296. Recognize the Renton Municipal Airport as an Essential Public Facility. (See section on Airport Compatible Land Use policies). 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 of range, 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 of these uses would require substantial infrastructure improvements. More extensive development, ultimately anticipated with the future development of District Two, will likely require even more significant infrastructure upgrades. IX-45 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Redevelopment in both districts of the 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 of the 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 underutilized land north of N. 8`h Street creates an immediate redevelopment opportunity for a first phase of development in District One. However, the industrial character of the surrounding developed properties, both within District Two 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 of low-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. Building facades, 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 IX-46 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Nwi►" 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. 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 uses. 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_ IX-47 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 sew Policy LU-301. Ensure that big-box retail functions as an anchor to larger, cohesive, urban-scale retail developments_ Policy LU-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. 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-305. 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 viable. Policy LU-307. Support development of parking structures using private/public partnerships when the market will not support structural parking without subsidy. Policy LU-308. 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. IX-48 Exhibit A `r.- ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ... Vision -District Two Ongoing Boeing airplane manufacturing is supported by the City and expected 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 Renton Municipal 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 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 environments 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 natural environments 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 of N. 8`h 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. 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. IX-49 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 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 should 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 lake shorelines. Policy LU-316. Should The Boeing Company elect to surplus properties in District Two support the redevelopment with a range and variety of commercial, office, research, and residential uses. 1) 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 of N. 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 IX-50 Exhibit A `... ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ...0, 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 providing for 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 provide 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. Policy LU-318. Implement the Center Village Designation using multiple zoning designations including Residential 10 14 (R-1-014), Center Village (CV), and Residential Multi-family zones (RMF, RM-U, RM-T). 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 Subarea Plan is expected to occur over within a 2—5- year period from the 2004 GMA update. remain ;dons._ se. The area north of 1241 S, ntl ed 1 10 is t„ residential use. Policy LU-320. Allow residential density ranging from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 80 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 to maximize pedestrian activity and minimize automobile use for circulation within the Center Village. Policy LU-323. Accommodate parking within a parking structure. Where structured parking is infeasible due to site configuration, parking should be located in the back or the side of the primary structure. Parking lots between structures and street rights-of- way shall not be permitted. Policy LU-324. Use alley access where alleys currently exist. Encourage designation of new alleys in redevelopment projects. IX-51 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-325. Encourage shared parking to use urban land efficiency. Policy LU-326. Develop design guidelines to provide direction on site design, building design, landscape treatments,parking, and circulation components of new development projects. Implementation of this policy should be phased within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 Centers. 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 and/or 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. IX-52 1 Exhibit A ,... ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ..a X. COMMERCIAL Goal: 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) Commercial Corridor; 2) Commercial/Office/Residential; and 3) Commercial Neighborhood. These commercial areas range from intense retail corridors to major office parks to neighborhood scale business districts. Many commercial areas are located along arterials where the high volumes of daily traffic provide a substantial customer base. COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Commercial Corridor 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 Commercial Corridor 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. Commercial Corridor 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. Commercial Corridor 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 Commercial Corridor 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; 4) Uses dependent upon or benefiting from high-volume traffic; IX-53 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 vs 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 Commercial Corridor Land Use designation should be mapped in areas with the following characteristics: 1) Located on, and having access to, streets classified as principal arterials; 2) High traffic volumes; or 3) Land use pattern characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. Policy LU-334. The Commercial Corridor designation should be implemented through Commercial Arterial, Commercial Office, or Light Industrial zoning. Policy LU-335. Increased demand for commercial uses should be accommodated primarily through redevelopment and intensification of existing business area designations rather than expansion of those areas. Objective LU-EEE: Create opportunities for development and re-development of land in portions of the Commercial Corridor 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, and residential uses. Policy LU-336. Portions of the Commercial Corridor 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 has 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-FFF: Create opportunities for intensive office uses in portions of Commercial Corridor designations including a wide range of business, financial, and professional services supported by service and commercial/retail activities. IX-54 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 .r 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 Commercial Corridor 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 of the services offered should be located in areas of the Commercial Corridor 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-345. Height bonuses of five (5) stories may be allowed for office buildings in designated areas of the Commercial Office zone, under appropriate conditions, where sites provide additional public benefits such as plazas, parks, exceptional landscaping, and/or public art. Objective LU-GGG: Guide redevelopment of land in the Commercial Corridor designation with Commercial Arterial zoning, from the existing strip commercial 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. IX-55 Exhibit A , ORDINANCE NO. 5285 4.000 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; 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. Policy LU-350. New development in Commercial Corridor designated areas should be encouraged to implement uniform site standards, including: 1) Minimum lot depth of 200 feet; 2) Maximum height of ten (10) stories within office zoned designations; 3) Parking preferably at the rear of the 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 defined activity nodes should be subject to additional design guidelines as delineated in the development standards. Policy LU-353. Structures at Commercial Corridor 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. Commercial Corridor intersections frequented by pedestrians, due to the nature of nearby uses or transit stops, should feature sidewalk pavement increased to form 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-355. 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 Commercial Corridor areas that front sidewalks abutting the principal 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-357. 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. Objective LU-HHH: Support methods of increasing accessibility to Commercial Corridor areas for both automobile and transit to support the land use objectives of the district. IX-56 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ...� Policy LU-359. Support routing of the citywide transit system to Commercial Corridor 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 Commercial Corridor areas. Policy LU-361. Public transportation transit stops located in Commercial Corridor 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 Commercial Corridor 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. IX-57 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Renton Auto Mall Discussion: 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. Objective LU-KKK: Provide support for a cohesive Commercial Corridor 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. Policy LU-371. The Renton Auto Mall should be primarily located along SW Grady Way, between Oakesdale Ave. S.W. and Williams Ave. S., but may be expanded beyond this area as warranted. Policy LU-372. The objectives and policies of the Commercial Corridor designation should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning within Auto Mall District A and by the underlying zoning in Auto Mall District B. Objective LU-LLL: In order to further 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-375. 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. IX-58 I Exhibit A 4191r ORDINANCE NO. 5285 " 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 LU-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. NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor Discussion: The NE 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 NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor at two stories or below, a scale that is generally consistent with the various forms of residential along the corridor. Objective LU-000: A special district should be designated along NE Sunset Boulevard. The purpose of this area 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. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption date for the GMA update. Policy LU-382. Within the NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor, a"Business District" should include the commercial properties along NE Sunset Blvd. from Duvall Ave. N.E. to west of Union Ave. N.E. Policy LU-383. The NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor, due to its location on the east boundary of the City, should include City gateway features. Policy LU-384. The NE Sunset Boulevard 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 Center Village. IX-59 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-385. The policies of the Commercial Corridor designation and the NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Policy LU-386. Vehicle sales businesses existing in the NE Sunset Boulevard Business Corridor should be encouraged to relocate to the Renton Auto Mall District. Northeast Fourth Corridor Discussion: The Northeast Fourth 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 housing projects has increased the market area for the Northeast Fourth Corridor considerably in recent years. Objective LU-PPP: A special commercial area should be designated along Northeast Fourth Street. The purpose of this area would be to enhance the commercial environment to increase revenue of local businesses and the City's tax base. Policy LU-387. Within the Northeast Fourth Corridor, the"Business District"should be bounded by Queen Avenue NE (on the west) and Field Ave N.E. (on the east). Policy LU-388. The policies of the Commercial Corridor designation and the Northeast Fourth Corridor Business District should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Objective LU-QQQ: The Northeast Fourth Corridor Business 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 a key entrance to the City from the east, the Northeast Fourth Corridor Business District should include gateway features. Policy LU-390. The Northeast Fourth Business District 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 Corridor Business District should feature street- facing building facades located a maximum of fifteen (15) feet setback from the non-curb edge of sidewalks abutting the principal arterial. Policy LU-392. In the Northeast Fourth Business Corridor Business District, where buildings are set back more than fifteen (15) feet from the principal arterial, new development or redevelopment should: IX-60 Exhibit A '� ORDINANCE NO. 5285 `�'' 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 Corridor Discussion: The Rainier Avenue Corridor is one of the 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. Objective LU-RRR: A special commercial area should be designated along Rainier Avenue. The purpose of this area would be to enhance the commercial environment to increase revenue of local businesses and the City's tax base. Policy LU-393. Within the Rainier Avenue Corridor, the"Business District" 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 Commercial Corridor designation and the Rainier Avenue Corridor Business District should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Policy LU-395. Uses in the Rainier Avenue 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 Corridor, vehicular access and egress safety should be a primary consideration. Policy LU-396. In the Rainier Avenue 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 Corridor should be uniform in size, content, and location to reduce visual clutter. Monument signs are the preferred type. Policy LU-398. New billboard signs should be disallowed in the Rainier Avenue Corridor Business District due to the large scale of the signs in relation to the scale of the district. Existing signs should be well maintained so that visual impact is reduced. Objective LU-TTT: The Rainier Avenue Corridor Business District should be enhanced to improve efficiency, safety and attractiveness to both potential shoppers and pedestrians using the public transportation system. IX-61 I Exhibit A tow ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-399. In the Rainier Avenue Corridor Business District, 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 corners whenever redevelopment occurs. Pavement should be increased for added pedestrian safety. Policy LU-400. On corners having high-volume pedestrian traffic, the paved sidewalk area should be increased in size. This may require a larger building setback at the corners of buildings when building facades abut the sidewalk. Policy LU-401. Pedestrian corners should include urban street furniture such as benches, an information kiosk, and a 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 Corridor Business District is one of the 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 Corridor should feature gateway elements to the extent made possible by redevelopment. Policy LU-405. Signage in the Rainier Avenue Corridor Business 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 public destinations. IX-62 • 1 Exhibit A "— ORDINANCE NO. 5285 S any ;DPI^ I _ _ s a� uIP 4 d Nf � I 5' Be, lys S oAy slam o0 I is aly suJeq I . ! T -d- ii!,\N P , ,_., . msay}Uu i EaPr - i Ca o %aV N- m H ' .. O O L - ,6 .‘, Orly �lao�I�a 4 x IN i -. I U 2 E E., k 2 E S \\�`NI ®�� �a Pd li o 0 Q �o(d • ie, �� FT P ��\\,, st. 1 Q tie ® eD I v o p ir MS i any sewogl \ ` r MS 'any ilaMod r,_ iz 1 I O Ave SW" a 1 Ookesdale ( m L_,g 0 IX-63 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 *1100 j'r! ;9A w p:19!J Q I �i1\-7 JfOAng 3 . ., U 1 ,,e 9 t „4 �Pd. , S ts '' E s i i c. �:z israts dk nrl,i �� TA rc tot -1-_, i ii ?1'y `' s� I > j t a W1 • - , y •mi 03 .4)_.. . N ii,,,,,..-.1....,„!.•-,,h n ____.._,....,„....,,, _ ric; ti.! ii CS) .' 3 1- N .....� 1 J`` �j3 ii U) _ —+J ' ri es,131 g Ise 9 a r 3 4 - ! q P ' ,y 'f] Q aaT / # U 1 U it xQ � C ia a�N 9AV uo+I9US ' ,- I . ill i- I I 11 I. . 1 IX-64 • I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ••••10" 1 _ 1.• tE: 12' rl _, ,,, :,,,„f I' ' 1 33 ,, -Ni A g ,.` ��a :. - _ :- -' tiv� o � ' I U s3x� Rw t;:tY ,'i.. a ; E. pnnG]N ny Iiacp n ®. ad } al co '' . { ' -, i .__1 as a t 43S . 4 ,, _ Sys 5 _ F ; # 14 4 r� � � Nan uo}aau�aa8 I £: x � n £ ` I'yz 'cr � � i_ if ,.. t €� � ` �,..�` ` , � � otf7 -}.3t ci ' rG1,aita-; apt �€ ' f 3 h x.?III "s ; C::Ya ' tlh, _ �/ s YY I __ jj ¢ e } r , £ Z ! CD i f. o-r i' CO € . �44 Q S: Asa Z 05 IX-65 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 ,ve ✓icfor_ cA` , �� C`A p„,,,,,,,,,,,,,v,40 t 3 S 2nd St SIN• On tv La 114 el4 £,"; rszf • 1 12#Ts 1 �} `fl-w a p wat Il 3 3 S, G 3 h.i- h f $ - _ sAEv.fa:.aL.,.1,<w»�w3sAa.„.-x:. a z r xx "1 .r, T i g 1 - (�� If rft F a vFa `V 1, , Y,,1 1 j i � c A:. a;v d'`t;x a 1 { 'f ' t 1 ' } sA},�r 5 i = �_ I i 7- -/ v sn eE x .r tg T s f Y'' } _! yy F r' s 1a;, i�i �1� € � 4p3i�a ac a,-1 - j �� F i <- } ‘ ! '.ma ` ^d C- 1 g A — r , 5t� �. �r f?icF�rYt ��, - 4 f;4'.it .1. a#r t c y 7 G , 1 tP 2''' >`1 r c>V� , ram_ S ' t6t') SW 7th St C CAS ,, S f i�Fl i C;A Rainier Business District ,A lo t. o lk4but•4eods k St atg lc Plumb, �. .. .-+� Business District IX-66 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 `r' COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) designation provides opportunities for large-scale office, commercial, retail, and multi-family 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 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. Policy LU-406. Designate Commercial/Office/Residential in locations meeting the following criteria: 1) 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 location criteria, Commercial/Office/Residential 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-408. Uses in Commercial/Office/Residential designations should include mixed-use complexes consisting of office, and/or residential uses, recreational and 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 CommerciaUOffice/Residential 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. IX-67 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 44000 Policy LU-411. Individual properties may have-a single use if they can be developed at the scale and intensity envisioned for the COR designation, 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. If lack 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-415. 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. Commercial/Office/Residential 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, Commercial/Office/Residential 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. Commercial/Office/Residential developments should have a combination of internal and external site design features, such as: 1) Public plazas; IX-68 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Now 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. IX-69 I Exhibit A 110, ORDINANCE NO. 5285 taw COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Commercial Neighborhood 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: Commercial Neighborhood 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 Commercial Neighborhood designation should be implemented by Commercial Neighborhood zoning. Policy LU-423. Commercial Neighborhood designated areas should be located: 1) Within one-quarter mile of existing and planned residential areas; 2) To the extent possible, outside of the 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. Commercial Neighborhood designated areas should not increase in scale or size to the point of changing the character of the nearby residential neighborhood. Policy LU-425. The small-scale uses of Commercial Neighborhood 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 Commercial Neighborhood designated areas. Policy LU-427. Commercial Neighborhood 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 Commercial Neighborhood 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. IX-70 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-430. Commercial structures in Commercial Neighborhood designated areas should be compatible with nearby residential areas in height, front yard setbacks, lot coverage, building design, and use. IX-71 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO."52'85 4.40 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 divers, 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 LU-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-YYY: 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. IX-72 I Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-435. 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: The Employment Area-Industrial designation is intended to provide continued opportunity for manufacturing and industrial uses that create a strong employment base in the City. 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 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 ensure that industries do not impact their neighborhoods with noise, traffic, and other nuisances and hazards. For these reasons, although commercial areas may see more diversity and mixing of uses, industrial areas will remain somewhat isolated from other uses. 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-436. The primary use in the Employment Area- Industrial designation should be industrial. Policy LU-437. A mix of offices, light industrial, warehousing, and manufacturing should be encouraged in the Employment Area-Industrial classification, with conditions as appropriate. Policy LU-438. Industrial uses with a synergistic relationship should be encouraged to locate in close proximity to one another. Policy LU-439. 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-440. 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. IX-73 Exhibit A *r ORDINANCE NO. 5285 voile Policy LU-441. 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-442. 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-443. Light industrial uses that result in noise or odors, should be located in the Employment Area-Industrial designation. EMPLOYMENT AREA-VALLEY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Employment Area-Valley designation is to allow the gradual transition of the Valley from traditional industrial and warehousing uses to more intensive retail service and office activities. The intent is to allow these new activities without making industrial uses non-conforming and without restricting the ability of existing businesses to expand. Objective LU-AAAA: Provide for a mix of employment-based uses, including commercial, office, and industrial development to support the economic development of the City of Renton. Policy LU-444. 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-445. Non-employment-based uses, such as residential, are prohibited in the Employment Area - Valley. Policy LU-446. Multi-story office uses should 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-447. 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-448. Uses such as research, design, and development facilities should be allowed in office designations and industrial designations when potential adverse impacts to surrounding uses can be mitigated. IX-74 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Policy LU-449. 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 regulatory processes by allowing a variety of zoning designations in the Employment Area-Valley designation. Policy LU-450. 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-451. Commercial Arterial (CA) should be supported only when the proposed commercial use has access to SW 43rd Street, and/or East Valley Road south of SW 27th Street or is located north of I-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-452. Zoning supporting industrial uses should be established when a mix or wider range of uses is not yet appropriate for a site. Policy LU-453. 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-454. Commercial Office zoning should be supported where a site has high visibility,particularly in those portions of the Valley that are gateways and/or along the I- 405 and SR 167 corridors, where larger sites can accommodate more intensive uses, and where sites can take advantage of existing and/or future multi-modal transportation opportunities. Objective LU-CCCC: Ensure quality development in Employment Area-Valley. Policy LU-455. 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-456. Vehicular connections between adjacent parking areas are encouraged. Incentives should be offered to encourage shared parking. Policy LU-457. Site design for office uses and commercial, and mixed-use developments should consider ways of improving transit ridership through siting, locating of pedestrian amenities, walkways, parking, etc. Policy LU-458. 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-459. New development, or site redevelopment, should conform to development standards that include scale of building, building façade treatment to reduce perception of bulk, relationship between buildings, and landscaping. IX-75 Exhibit B 40, ORDINANCE NO. 5285 HIGHLANDS CPA 2006-M-06 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM RMD TO RMF LEGAL DESCRIPTION The North five acres of the West half of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. Exhibit B ORDINANCE NO. 5285 HIGHLANDS CPA 2006-M-06 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM RMD TO CV LEGAL DESCRIPTION That portion of Corrected Plat of Renton Highlands No. 2, as recorded in Volume 57 of Plats, Pages 92-98, records of King County, Washington, lying northerly of the centerline of NE 16th Street. All situate in the Southwest quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. Exhibit B ORDINANCE NO. 5285 Nilo HIGHLANDS CPA 2006-M-06 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM RMD TO CV LEGAL DESCRIPTION Blocks 4 and 5 of Fair View Terrace, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 60 of Plats,pages 65 & 66, records of King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 and 6 of Block 29, Correction Plat Renton Highlands No. 2, Replat of Blocks 12, 13, 14, 36, 37 and 38, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 57 of Plats, pages 92-98, records of King County; and TOGETHER WITH that portion of the east half of Harrington Ave NE, lying southerly of the centerline of NE 9t Street extended westerly, and northerly of the centerline of NE 7th Street extended westerly; and TOGETHER WITH that portion of the south half of NE 9th Street lying westerly of the east line of said Block 5 of the plat Fair View Terrace extended northerly, and easterly of the easterly right of way margin of Harrington Ave NE; and TOGETHER WITH that portion of NE 8th Place lying westerly of the east line of said Block 5 extended southerly, to the south right of way margin thereof, and easterly of the easterly right of way margin of Harrington Ave NE; and TOGETHER WITH that portion of NE 8`h Street lying westerly of a line beginning at the SE corner of Block 4 of said plat and terminating at the NE corner of Lot 1, Block 29, of said plat Correction Plat Renton Highlands No. 2, and easterly of the easterly right of way margin of Harrington Ave NE; and TOGETHER WITH that portion of the north half of NE 7th Street lying westerly of the east line of Lot 6, Block 29 of said plat extended southerly, and easterly of the easterly right of way margin of Harrington Ave NE. All situate in the Southwest quarter and the Northwest quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. ORDINANCE 5285 ;N._ s_s• . P — Ii' NIaJ,. .i I ry hi * r ___r go—,._.,__ • • — ,— .i_ ,Jtt ® JN t. (:: ------'-----) ff s I ®/A. : ,at !L� PP 0114 ® y4, E N` `gii i r r sus I 1 tea,,. ► �i i(ti lira .. .. i it. lam 4r � 7 ,i taloi„ibtwi-rlgi.a-oitr.no=o ®p¢1 �:,i5 _ fltrr_s•t1t - :4 ® +++UJ IF( ° 7 °li• • ', ' ,,,.g,,1.t.:1.i1..c0 4. 4m to�7 /fNi■ll4 1 = ,1 1,ae rA, 1 , ,.:1'. .... a...air _ ....„ ,.. s, „; Win FFBIONp :: '.'' it W�o[rtc , 11,1 �,_ ,\ it _ ,7�I �___ • ° .. 1.7—,....;., .,...I.;t ;1- it f OPPOI ' \ r .1.61.1.... � -J "-4 _ .J . �> `� �IIAI! �Yaa .� L r= I v�� , r I I igt5yi�' r _, i g ! In J I-ii I ..... _• I' .-, , LAME DESIRE _ r I a, ti,,„ , '-'1-,,'ifIEE'.h';'-''..- :: l \ 1 � �I I • , •1 ., PAN ilitst ;f, -,;.. 1. 1I — nt ,_ 4.1 i k1 .,i — aI 1 , } -7 '-_ ' ii l !.� � i (l1 1 --1-,-- r _ , 4000 8000- - 1 City of Renton RESIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT AREA DESIGNATIONS Residential Loin Density I I Employment Area-Industrial I I Residential Single Family I I Employment Area Valley Comprehensive Plan I I Residential Medium Density IResidential Multi-Family Land Use Map COMMERCIAL DESIGNATIONS -.I Commercial Neighborhood CENTER DESIGNATIONS I;.- 1 Conmercial,Oil IResidenfial �Y I I Center Village ® Commercial Corridor Oti O EDNSP I I Urban Center Downtown + '+ PB/PW Technical Services I_____I Urban Center-North C'tyLmIa ala MacOnie,Visneski l' ' o Adopted May 14,2007 Now Ner CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 8 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (HIGHLANDS STUDY AREA) FROM RESIDENTIAL-10 DU/AC (R-10) ZONING TO CENTER VILLAGE (CV)ZONING; FILE NO. LUA-06-128. WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Residential-10 du/ac(R-10); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the City Council for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about November 13, 2006, and the matter has been considered by the City Council, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Center Village (CV) as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to- wit: 1 V ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 8 2 40'' See Attachments "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Highlands Study Area) SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14 t h day of May , 2007. tc)62.1tirt- Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14 th day of May , 2007. l Kathy Ke•lker, Mayor Approved as to form: awrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 5/19/2007 (summary) ORD.13 01:11/16/06:ma 2 viro- ATTACHMENT A .1 ,_ ORDINANCE NO. 5282 HIGHLANDS REZONE REZONE FROM R-10 TO CV LEGAL DESCRIPTION That portion of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington, lying southerly, westerly, northwesterly and westerly of NE 15th Street and NE 15th Place. i Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5282 . au ass, ■ ■ d+ ■■ �� — 2 mom s, . €■ MI A If Lille Olio 1_ C h t / r■■■ ill ■111■ ■■ ■■ ■:IIV WA i r■•�„11�C�'..■ M: :■ 3r ■ia',►o/ ::, L ? r f liLili. © /��il Isunnighonfi i 2 r i I= � .ilim.�111':, � � M :1st St a. G dunw■r't gill' 1 :a �♦ ♦ N._.... v_ r$ ndl , , I1 I6us;■�■■1■ Ado II: ie. NE loth '��III . Ir.- ■ ■■.. LLIl■ ■■ SNo„Ho, 1 °� a= TEMIIII Tr/ 4 illiison ;.� ilipill ■■■■I. �♦ I!d � C : =J iY�1ti .■■■ 3 i ► /\ J■ ■t ak I lmql■\►i ■■■■■�■ ■� /i R = - — ... �■ ■■ -Ia .E ■. ■ PELim ■ ♦' 16th MINI Iilii :"'�� III 6�h im •� a j! lIL& III■ �0■1 ■ ■ E '■ ■ti ■ � ? elisf-- Tru mg - ELF kg ■ . ■1 /. �IF mo• ■ o 1. 1 1I =mr,Min ill Lem ■� ■ ai i lin �%-� _ !n a gni �., ,� iLv�`±' 1r ■ NINE M■ ■1111■IO ■ C.� ai lima .� CO 5II alignImo I I .`p■■ s�� .6 -1_ IV Am ' -,Tr - ---- ....F-- n ®® ( NE � ti Ai JisE. rr. "q! ■�iiJr* I • !Mi... , 1 ' nu ■►�,■u■'�c', ai is -401.1 ill rip c." 4A-i 01 N,E ,oth ....,70. 1, ERA*ad% i 9°' ,, 4,,,,,..,;,.... ors , qz ■■■■■■■■ 61:602 ■d"►s ea rr 0 lift _ *wipe: Q ; ,, . N uteg Lik -14. a III■ a i \\I E 1 at �� F.mom t o impiC119�1■IIL'1l it,„im 1 �' i ■ I.i. .. C ■C1a■■■■ a mow F- ;== :E zz: : I 11 \rE 111 = 11 1 stl 1 l l b� I■1' IlL a. ,�o C:L�1Sl]I�r. mu ■■■ : , tih St r c 1�1111ul�l ■■■ 1 Illllu11�■ r . r Fes- sty ui .si IIMS t �\Jill■• l.mat. ci: �,� IJjI I�. •■■ .� 8 _ Fs,la =morn NZ 0�► m, s. t Ji. D■ isirlifilleill: V '■■ v"kgf o . ■�-��i ■■ )4,11* t .l 1 la ..,, 1tl� i�■■ or MI II- 410% Ni o. 4046;6 SOO 4 d iviu.iiiiiii ... . ,,,,..„,,, 1... .11 toe Ali., y .: Lim . .+♦ ■ ■.■wa ti■ o Lu'.nlsulL,���s•y,►- �� CC- P lag ■. f ♦ IA •♦� v� N 6.; Ali O .4 MI Al emu rililltri ♦ \- ask� Its. •- ■■ z ""' '" _ .■ ma .�\IIIIAA �,���I,�,�Q - ...�� 1� a t I1111 f II l 11 J g 111■!M!il '..� �� �i�■■IIIL1 l� �� llIID ems r.� eniiil E cl Mao �����O�4 Ve a ��� h (.. � _ p i 41, Highlands Subarea Study Area Effill R-10 to CV 0 1000 2000 S. Task Force Proposed Rezone From R-10 to CV T0Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning 1 . 12000 Alps Pictach,Admini.uatar C E.Fa.ol '. - 08 Novcmba 2006 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 81 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (HIGHLANDS STUDY AREA) FROM RESIDENTIAL MULTI FAMILY (RMF) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL-14 DU/AC (R-14) ZONING; FILE NO. LUA-06-128. WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts —Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Residential Multi Family (RMF); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the City Council for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about November 13, 2006, and the matter was considered by the City Council, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential-14 du/ac (R-14) as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to wit: 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 81 See Attachments "A" and "B" and attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Highlands Study Area) SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14 t h day of May , 2007. L tdatie9ri' Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14th day of May , 2007. KaAVI-0-eKathy Keolker, Mayor Appro ed as to form: •� Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 5/19/2007 (summary) ORD.1312:11/21/06:ma 2 ATTACHMENT A*".' ORDINANCE NO. 5281 HIGHLANDS ZONING REZONE FROM RMF TO R-14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION All of Block 41 and Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 in Block 42, Corrected Plat of Renton Highlands No. 2, as recorded in Volume 57 of Plats, Pages 92-98, records of King County. All situate in the Northwest quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. i Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5281 -- iim ■■ ■'11 i A' ..■■■ ... .■era/ / a■��"iSB armlir ■■ ■r ■■1 ounk'S a1 ��1 �■ ■intr t 0' ■ Yej arr� ■ ■ ari■ ■I1■ IIINIM !!11►•. �■ CL'■IL'IJl11 �"I II MII ■111 ■13h.'■i ■lla am■i■■■■Ii1�■■■�� A. ■ ■ �I�Z��� III ia�„111 Pl■ .■ ■■ ■ M ■ui�!■�rll�■■�gla `A Pea G l e 6 Meg s lE LIt■ L�IIR 3 :r re l■ RE Ilnu�/1111s Id Sri`�• ��� Film -4 , ,�1 �■ D:. ; \■ .�� V r= aa■� ©1110 iar■IIIf/■ Rf177 . ■R � •ti ,�� o .. � a�■311Lt' �A �.nta�Fi ■lllllll\� li 6mmulE m mai vi firova W2 is ■/1■ sa rfe 1 ommi mg ■■■■umm ■■ r w arm rid ill G IIIIIY►at114011 : 11 =n MN E■111111111■� MI 1st St r.r. .� NE 2 nldl LW:ir ■/ 1:41_ /1 t ral oral mu kV/ der zi, uIliPiiibi !iW miff ma MI .i11t•r� = I ` io :um lb F,IMIri ■ /ro ; — = ■_ ,,,,, ♦ u © ter!ub- .� :•R:Ib�P �� pr.-I -PA /"�� ■■ U11F-a .■ ■■ ■■t� 0 igi� ra I a ■—����� �■ ■■ ■.■� � ��% � � /Imp _snow �s� g Elle .. ■a : ■1' ■�!!E .. teal Ill 110M-91159RM an Mill ■n■inn ■lr.iI1U1iLi1 _ - 41I1IIp . __iris ■ ■� ■� ■■■ ! Gam:,, oIi ■■w li ■! im mi.IL'!II. I1Iti111LI; ilk av mi, Amm immi �. � • a =�� ��1,41 & ` p v 4 'NI, gymm m■\ : ai d,-- • or L so p w t, "NI1h 1,r laW = ■� isd '■/ '0W■■■■ 1 i m -■ ■♦�,r -I■■ - ■i■� �����■ 4. Wm MO. WW1 p ■ 0."Zi 0 tit cipQ *14 NEI ON dlit 913° _ ■.■..... ■1■2I as . t . ., 11W ■ err �, �, ■■ • Q ifin :i ra_ 11 `4i1 - ' 7411 : a st:� .� ■u■■�� i I:����woe 4�i ■ 111I•IIJLIlIi!■I■� t . ■ i� Nunn, 14 "�{) 'f'[•l l 1riijnl■■■ um •iii, o IIIIIIIII J ;;;a'! !r' `' �' �: �' re/■ ■■■ t I 1 �,=MEI■■ mmln • IMIU 1/■1 !!INU�.07 min GNso pig♦ it !!'áILU1 yAIgiii1'zigrin Nii‘ terv,a/�,p� _, a■ . �� 40 ► � gnat .1►��NZ wpm �� �i � ♦ o 1n11abi ■I■ ■ ■ ► ■� :a/�i ♦♦♦I �, �'�' ■11 ■ ! �� .to: --e-- imia::::44 :-s.... 0. wog• of. 11�.'IIIIIII ,gl1liT ! '� Ra,�� Ii n■ III I A 00111LIIISII\� s v��r- j j�V■1 �� uJw . ♦ p N , rt�!/��I1 �� •�j/�ji �I SIM 66-F■ NFI 6�R' �♦' 1.`�'�� dli�iv�.1 ,9 7f'Id ■�I'f1�'�� aA MI i r■ W� Gt1 ■1/11!■ la mum 11 ��111r0) .\4� 04 , m ■I ■■ .TI IN ���• a "I►`L©iI7lI1f ■ ■■ 7rj I mjo Al 04 Billilion.... U:17.■■rral•� 1 ♦ ��>�,,w0t*4't 4 by m ..MN mgi♦►i * war\� a_ •AI —■r mom Highlands Subarea —Study Area RMF to R-140 1000 2000 Task Force Proposed Rezone From RMF to R-14 • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning 1 : 12000 •re� w Alm Pictish,Administrator m•- C.E.Easel • 08 November 2006 • y110, CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5280 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (HIGHLANDS STUDY AREA) FROM RESIDENTIAL MULTI FAMILY (RMF) ZONING TO CENTER VILLAGE (CV)ZONING; FILE NO. LUA-06-128. WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington", and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Residential Multi Family(RMF); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the City Council for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about November 13, 2006, and the matter was considered by the City Council, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Center Village(CV) as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to wit: 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5280 `'11 See Attachments "A", "B", "C", "D", and "E" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Highlands Study Area). SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14th day of May , 2007. Bonnie Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14 t h day of May , 2007. Kathy Keolker, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 5/19/2007 (summary) ORD.1311:11/21/06:ma 2 ATTACHMENT A ORDINANCE NO. 5280 HIGHLANDS ZONING REZONE FROM RMF TO CV LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 6, Renton Highlands, as recorded in Volume 46 of Plats, Pages 34-41, records of King County. All situate in the Northwest quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. ATTACHMENT B *00 ORDINANCE NO. 5280 HIGHLANDS ZONING REZONE FROM RMF TO CV LEGAL DESCRIPTION All of the lands contained within the Sir Cedric Condominiums, as recorded in Volume 42 of Condominiums, Pages 16-20, records of King County. All situate in the Northwest quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. • ATTACHMENT C ORDINANCE NO. 5280 HIGHLANDS REZONE REZONE FROM RMF TO CV LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 1 and 2 of City of Renton Short Plat No. 020-91, as recorded under King County Rec. No. 9303039001, records of King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH the North half of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M.; EXCEPT that portion of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton,- King County, Washington, lying southerly, westerly, northwesterly and westerly of NE 15th Street and NE 15th Place. Except roads. All situate in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. ATTACHMENT D '' *NW ORDINANCE NO. 5280 HIGHLANDS REZONE 2006-M-06 REZONE FROM RMF TO CV LEGAL DESCRIPTION That portion of the West half of the Northwest quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington, lying southerly of the southerly right of way margin of NE 12th Street, easterly of the easterly right of way margin of Edmonds Ave NE, northerly of the northerly right of way margin of NE Sunset Blvd and westerly of the following described line: Beginning said line at the intersection of the southerly right of way margin of NE 12TH Street and the Northeast corner of Lot 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. 023- 80, as recorded under King County Rec. No. 8101120505; Thence southerly along the east line of said Lot 1, to the Southeast corner thereof; Thence westerly, southerly and westerly along the south line of said Lot 1, to the Northeast corner of Lot 21, Block 46 of the Corrected Plat of Renton Highlands No. 2, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 57 of Plats, pages 92-98, records of said county; Thence southerly along the east line of said lot, to the southeast corner thereof; Thence easterly, to the southwest corner of the Harrington Place Condominiums, according to the condominium thereof, recorded in Volume 56 of Plats, pages 52-56, records of said county; Thence southwesterly, along the southwesterly extension of the northwesterly line of said condominium, to the most northerly northwest corner of Tract 46B of said plat; Thence South 30°56'11" West, a distance of 99.11 feet along the northwesterly line of said Tract 46B; Thence South 58°24'13" East, a distance of 100.21; Thence South 31° 24'45" West, a distance of 186.09 feet; Thence North 86°34'36" West, a distance of 6.03 feet; Thence continuing North 86°34'36 West, to the easterly right of way margin of Harrington Ave NE; ATTACHMENT D ORDINANCE NO. 5280 Thence southerly along said right of way margin and its southerly extension, crossing NE 10th Street, to the most northwest corner of Lot 35A of said plat; Thence easterly and southeasterly along the northeasterly line of said Lot 35A, and the southwesterly right of way margin of NE 10th Street, to an intersection with the northerly right of way margin of NE Sunset Blvd, and the termination point for the hereinbefore described line. Attachment E ORDINANCE NO. 5280 ,A&Li limo s Jrt — -.L- 1_;,-T. _ _ I I I I IX . MI �I 1�m wiring. Zlllim Mg --11 •1. �.G. z3r� s' .'is► -rig�. ©7� 10�� Ent �� a.IIE! U ■ to la 1st St � .��rr o N 12 nldl I I •LI„ - ,gar.-r�ki w ._�:.ry �■� ; ��:— s I ��t!sl (I ■ II I"a"idno ■ a.11■ ■1 NE loth ........ z IL' _ z $br;II IItJF if — • !!! t ' 'Ail x 1I ¶i!IP1i PION. r MINIM Moe um is ■ . ■■ i i■ Mik II 16 t hiT . i: ■L■ v)r' J-LL— _ill. -■cs ■ •!Ji!i ;� ��1 �`-� OI L: - �rwl; o p e �3 ■■ p ■ 44,, 1 Ilmumenimmili. • • 1, rm .RI go in AR. __ w '' 4 a_ ,-:., E ,_,' .T % no 1p ___ _ j WI Mr - �� .� Ira IWI 41s • 900 ' n2/L tee, A� ��I ri ■ � WWII. a �Jc 1qui � f � p oil asna s� al,ii ,, .— rAimi -0Aotil ■■aal.3ii�ia ■ t_ f, fir ,m_ , ;.., wkIllin N. G Q ` il�Fnl fi ! 18 I 'al =i i= \�.El ft � E S i �� 1.■ rw R Ctilt� ft A 4 � lq i . .n . o11n lw! ��'� :■i;_ iMMUS No 1411717t — gtir st im_NC c■Mall 1111��11111 8 1L 111111PW . \ ___ NIMI ell NE I 1 =1 14,11 Stt 1 \ ii y aMy=�11: ,i-4111 ref = Q r�um at ail��am AIN■i `f� i.. IIIIN11, V• 9 . .M ui m p I iacs■zedieii "wor. c IY�+■s 1100 0 i 1 NE Mtn St. _ ' .. =► ■dge St!" v.,l`� Egg� tiy�; � :��������a� :r ow =' lad W# ■LLB ,���. or4 [sawn 01, Luigiarm. r1 .,� WSW / /�� 111L111L111\�1r���it���s : 11�� 111 Ala �■ ♦�A■ " fv F■ N 6. 1►� : /1� • ■ir itailikk� ,iailn r?A �1 •■ ■� �Oal�� as rs. �/A �a \III ■► �U �,1, • MP I:' NE a NI'': 6 a IIIICi9 � 111�'`'a wa ‘� 1 �j���/11 ,4/: i. t W: 1111111 —(11111111111)��_ No Emilio.111■ ! �� a� 5 11 0aim == It[IIJ �• 1 w ■I ter) s _ _ o Jim i 1 1 ��`AA"`r • " r-- /F E H ,,mIw Highlands Subarea Study Area EMI RMF to CV 0 1000 2000 Task Force Proposed Rezone From RMF to CV .. ,....._ .....................•...,.. t T • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning 1 . 12000 ®= Alex Pieach,Administrator C.E.Feasel • 08 November 2006 ' day 14,2007 Renton City Council Minutes Page 173 Ordinance#5284 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification for approximately Annexation: Leitch, R-4 14 acres, generally located south of the south side of SE 136th St. on the north, Zoning west of the middle of 140th Ave. SE, if extended, and on the east side of 140th Ave. SE to 143rd Ave. SE on the east, annexed within the City of Renton from R-4 (Urban Residential-four dwelling units per acre, King County zoning) to R- 4 (Residential-four dwelling units per acre, Renton zoning); Leitch Annexation. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5285 h An ordinance was read adopting, on an emergency basis, the Highlands Study Comprehensive Plan: 2006 Area amendments to the City's 2004 Comprehensive Plan, maps, and data in Amendments, Highlands Study conjunction therewith, and declaring an emergency effective date of 5/14/2007. Area MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5286 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 4-2, Zoning Districts - Uses and Planning: CV Comp Plan Standards, Chapter 4-3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, Designation, R-14 &CV Chapter 4-4, Citywide Property Development Standards, Chapter 4-7, Zones, Design Regulations Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 4-8, Permits - General and Appeals, Chapter 4-9, Permits - Specific, and Chapter 4-11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code by changing the zoning regulations implementing the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation, including the Residential-14 (R-14) zone and Center Village (CV)zone, enacting design regulations,and declaring an emergency. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5287 An ordinance was read amending City Code and changing the zoning Rezone: Highlands Study classification of certain property within the City of Renton (Highlands Study Area, R-10 to R-14, CPA Area) from R-10(Residential-ten dwelling units per acre) to R-14 (Residential- 14 dwelling units per acre)zoning, and declaring an emergency(LUA-06-128; CPA 2006-M-06). MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance #5288 An ordinance was read amending City Code and changing the zoning Rezone: Highlands Study classification of certain property within the City of Renton(Highlands Study Area, R-10 to RM-F, CPA Area) from R-10 (Residential-ten dwelling units per acre) to RM-F (Residential Multi-Family) zoning, and declaring an emergency(LUA-06-128; CPA 2006- M-06). MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Mayor Pro Tern Nelson noted that with the adoption of the ordinances related to Planning: Highlands Area the Highlands area concerned parties may now move ahead. Redevelopment, Study Area In response to Councilmember Corman's inquiries, Councilmember Briere Zoning&Land Use Changes confirmed that the Highlands-area moratorium has expired, the new zoning is now in place, and a duplex can be rebuilt as it is a conforming use. Councilmember Persson thanked the Planning and Development Committee for their efforts on this matter. Councilmember Briere announced that phase 2 of the Highlands Task Force is being formed, and a letter was sent to interested citizens that includes an application, which is due by May 23. She stated that if anyone is interested in serving, information can be obtained from the City's hay 14,2007 Avow, Renton City Council Minutes ,,,,, Page 174 website or the Council Liaison. Ms. Briere explained that the task force's charter includes reviewing issues within the Highlands area itself, identifying and prioritizing needs, and receiving education regarding what the City can and cannot do. AUDIENCE COMMENT In response to the inquiry of Howard McOmber,475 Olympia Ave. NE, Citizen Comment: McOmber- Renton, 98056, Councilmembers confirmed that the moratorium in the Highlands Area Moratorium Highlands area has ended. Citizen Comment: Pham- Shelley Pham, 13633 6th Pl. S., Burien, 98168, spoke on behalf of The Seattle Official Newspaper Times on the topic concerning designation of The Seattle Times as the City's official newspaper. Ms. Pham pointed out that readers do not have to subscribe to The Seattle Times to be able to read the public notices on the newspaper's website. She noted the flexibility of the publication deadlines as the newspaper prints seven days a week. Regarding the publication rates, Ms. Pham indicated that The Seattle Times reaches a larger audience. EXECUTIVE SESSION MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL RECESS INTO AND ADJOURNMENT EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR APPROXIMATELY 40 MINUTES TO DISCUSS TWO ITEMS OF LITIGATION WITH NO OFFICIAL ACTION TO BE TAKEN AND THAT THE COUNCIL MEETING BE ADJOURNED WHEN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS ADJOURNED. CARRIED. Time: 8:14 p.m. Executive session was conducted. There was no action taken. The executive session and the Council meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. `J. 4da Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann May 14, 2007 May 14, 2007 Renton City Council Minutes •_ Page 172 floor commercial development at a minimum of 75% of the frontage of the building is required for all residential projects on parcels abutting NE Sunset Blvd. east of Harrington Ave. NE." The Committee further recommended that the ordinances implementing these proposed changes be presented for adoption. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See later this page and page 173 for ordinances.) Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval of Finance: Vouchers Claim Vouchers 259338 - 259841 and two wire transfers totaling $4,218,498.29; and approval of Payroll Voucher 142, one wire transfer, and 675 direct deposits totaling $2,128,589.72. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following ordinances were presented for first reading and advanced for ORDINANCES second and final reading: Rezone: Highlands Study An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain property Area, RM-F to CV, CPA within the City of Renton (Highlands Study Area) from RM-F (Residential 1`��;y ?tun -o Multi-Family) to CV (Center Village)zoning; LUA-06-128. MOVED BY �'��"I BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5280 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Highlands Study MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT Area, RM-F to CV, CPA THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Rezone: Highlands Study An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain property Area, RM-F to R-14, CPA within the City of Renton (Highlands Study Area) from RM-F (Residential Multi-Family) to R-14 (Residential-14 dwelling units per acre) zoning; LUA- 06-128. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance #5281 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Highlands Study MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT Area, RM-F to R-14, CPA THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Rezone: Highlands Study An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain property •Area, R-10 to CV, CPA within the City of Renton (Highlands Study Area) from R-10(Residential-ten dwelling units per acre)to CV (Center Village)zoning; LUA-06-128. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5282 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Highlands Study MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT Area, R-10 to CV, CPA THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#5283 An ordinance was read annexing approximately 14 acres of property generally Annexation: Leitch, SE 136th located immediately south of the south side of SE 136th St. on the north,west St& 140th Ave SE of the middle of 140th Ave. SE, if extended, and on the east side of 140th Ave. SE to 143rd Ave. SE on the east; Leitch Annexation. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. • May 14,2007 Nay Renton City Council Minutes .� Page 171 Separate Consideration Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Item 8.f. recommended approval of a memorandum of understanding with Highline EDNSP: Small Business Community College, Renton Technical College, and Renton Chamber of Development Center, Highline Commerce regarding development of a Small Business Development Center in Community College& Renton Renton. Approval was also sought for a budget amendment authorizing the Technical College & Renton City's $25,000 contribution. Chamber of Commerce Councilmember Persson stated that the Small Business Development Center is a great idea. He pointed out that Council offered enough budget flexibility when the 2007 Budget was adopted that a special appropriation for the $25,000 expenditure is not necessary. Mr. Persson relayed that the Finance Administrator agreed and said that if later in the year the department needs another $25,000, Council can review the matter at that time. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL APPROVE THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH HIGHLINE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, RENTON TECHNICAL COLLEGE, AND RENTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REGARDING DEVELOPING A SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER IN RENTON, AND LEAVE OUT THE APPROVAL FOR THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE $25,000 CONTRIBUTION.* In response to Councilmember Clawson's inquiry, Chief Administrative Officer Covington explained that the funds in the existing department's budget were identified during the 2007 Budget process as having a specific purpose. This action could result in some reprioritization, and if the department is not able to complete its 2007 work program as a result,he noted that it appears as though Council will be amenable to staff coming back and requesting a budget appropriation. *MOTION CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Planning& Development regarding the Highlands Subarea zoning and land use changes. The Committee Committee recommended concurrence with the report and recommendation of the Planning: Highlands Area Highlands Zoning Task Force, which propose a series of zoning and land use Redevelopment, Study Area changes in the Highlands Study Area. The Committee further concurred with Zoning&Land Use Changes the staff recommended changes to the task force's proposal: pti • To keep the task force recommended RM-F (Residential Multi-Family) zoning in the Harrington "tail" between NE 7th St. and NE 9th St., but to change the underlying land use designation to CV(Center Village), in compliance with the land use designation policies in the Comprehensive Plan. • To add a note restricting office and conference uses in the CV-zoned property on Edmonds Ave. NE. Note 22 in City Code RMC 4-2-080A should read as follows: "22. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2- 120A. In the CN zone, fast food establishments are prohibited. In the CV zone,no office and conference uses are allowed for parcels fronting, or taking primary access from, Edmonds Ave. NE." • To revise the note that requires commercial development along Sunset Blvd. NE. Note 73 in RMC 4-2-080A should read as follows: "73. Within the Center Village zone, garden style apartments are prohibited. Ground • • May 14,2007 ,.r Renton City Council Minutes v.r Page 172 floor commercial development at a minimum of 75%of the frontage of the building is required for all residential projects on parcels abutting NE Sunset Blvd. east of Harrington Ave. NE." The Committee further recommended that the ordinances implementing these proposed changes be presented for adoption. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See later this page and page 173 for ordinances.) Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval of Finance: Vouchers Claim Vouchers 259338 - 259841 and two wire transfers totaling $4,218,498.29; and approval of Payroll Voucher 142, one wire transfer,and 675 direct deposits totaling$2,128,589.72. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following ordinances were presented for first reading and advanced for ORDINANCES second and final reading: Rezone: Highlands Study An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain property Area, RM-F to CV, CPA within the City of Renton (Highlands Study Area) from RM-F (Residential Multi-Family)to CV(Center Village)zoning; LUA-06-128. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance #5280 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Highlands Study MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT Area, RM-F to CV, CPA THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Rezone: Highlands Study An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain property Area, RM-F to R-14, CPA within the City of Renton(Highlands Study Area) from RM-F(Residential Multi-Family)to R-14 (Residential-14 dwelling units per acre)zoning; LUA- 06-128. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5281 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Highlands Study MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT Area, RM-F to R-14, CPA THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Rezone: Highlands Study An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain property Area, R-10 to CV, CPA within the City of Renton(Highlands Study Area) from R-10(Residential-ten dwelling units per acre) to CV(Center Village)zoning; LUA-06-128. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5282 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Highlands Study MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT Area, R-10 to CV, CPA THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#5283 An ordinance was read annexing approximately 14 acres of property generally Annexation: Leitch, SE 136th located immediately south of the south side of SE 136th St. on the north, west St& 140th Ave SE of the middle of 140th Ave. SE, if extended, and on the east side of 140th Ave. SE to 143rd Ave. SE on the east; Leitch Annexation. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. • tr":771.7;77) i PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Cs ,u�C JWWiL COMMITTEE REPORT Date '5/y .Wc'7 May 14,2007 Highlands Sub Area Zoning and Land Use Changes (March 14, 2005) The Planning and Development Committee recommends concurrence with the report and recommendations of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force, which propose a series of zoning and land use changes in the Highlands Study Area. The Committee further concurs with the two staff recommended changes to the Task Force's proposal: • To keep the Task Force recommended RMF zoning in the.Harrington "tail" between NE 7th Street and NE 9th Street, but to change the underlying land use designation to CV, in compliance with the land use designation policies in the Comprehensive Plan • To add a note restricting office and conference uses in the CV zoned property on Edmonds Avenue NE. Note 22 in RMC 4-2-080A should read: 22. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2-120A. In the CN Zone,fast food establishments are prohibited. In the CV Zone,no office and conference uses are allowed for parcels fronting,or taking primary access from,Edmonds Avenue NE. • To revise the note that requires commercial development along Sunset Boulevard NE. Note 73 in RMC 4-2-080A should read: 73. Within the Center Village Zone,Garden style apartments are prohibited. Ground floor commercial development at a minimum of 75%of the frontage of the building is required for all residential projects on parcels abutting NE Sunset Boulevard east of Harrington Avenue NE. • The Committee further recommends that the ordinances implementing these proposed changes be presented for adoption on May 14, 2007. Terri Bri e, Chair rs Dan Clawson, ice • Marcie Palmer,Member cc: JAR Alex Pietsch Neil Watts Gregg Zimmerman May 7,2007 Renton City Council Minutes w Page 160 REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 5/14/2007. CARRIED. Comprehensive Plan: 2006 An ordinance was read adopting,on an emergency basis, the Highlands Study Amendments, Highlands Study Area amendments to the City's 2004 Comprehensive Plan, maps, and data in Area conjunction therewith, and declaring an emergency effective date. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 5/14/2007. CARRIED. Planning: CV Comp Plan An ordinance was read amending Chapter 4-2,Zoning Districts - Uses and Designation, R-14 & CV Standards, Chapter 4-3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, Zones, Design Regulations Chapter 4-4, Citywide Property Development Standards, Chapter 4-8,Permits- General and Appeals, and Chapter 4-11, Definitions, of Title IV(Development Regulations)of City Code by changing the zoning regulations implementing the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation, including the Residential-14 (R-14)zone and Center Village (CV)zone, enacting design regulations,and declaring an emergency. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 5/14/2007. CARRIED. Rezone: Highlands Study An ordinance was read amending City Code and changing the zoning Area, R-10 to R-14, CPA classification of certain property within the City of Renton (Highlands Study Area) from R-10(Residential-ten dwelling units per acre) to R-14 (Residential- 14 dwelling units per acre)zoning, and declaring an emergency (LUA-06-128; CPA-2006-M-06). MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 5/14/2007. CARRIED. Rezone: Highlands Study An ordinance was read amending City Code and changing the zoning Area, R-10 to RM-F, CPA classification of certain property within the City of Renton (Highlands Study Area) from R-10 (Residential-ten dwelling units per acre)to RM-F (Residential Multi-Family)zoning, and declaring an emergency(LUA-06-128; CPA-2006- M-06). MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 5/14/2007. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for first reading and advanced for second and final reading: Vacation: Field Ave NE, ESM An ordinance was read vacating a portion of Field Ave. NE, north of NE 2nd St. Consulting Engineers, VAC- (Petitioner: ESM Consulting Engineers). MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED 06-004 BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5278 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Vacation: Field Ave NE, ESM MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE Consulting Engineers, VAC- ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. 06-004 The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#5279 An ordinance was read amending Section 4-1-180 of Chapter 1, Administration Development Services: Fee and Enforcement, of Title IV(Development Regulations) and 9-14-8 of Chapter Revisions(Franchise Permit, 14, Vacations, of Title IX(Public Ways and Property) of City Code by Plan Review& Inspection, adjusting fee schedules. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, Vacation) COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. May 7, 2007 Renton City Council Minutes � ✓ Page 158 Earthworks, Inc., in the amount of$1,181,670(budgeted amount $1,150,000). Refer to Utilities Committee for discussion of funding. Vacation: Field Ave NE, ESM City Clerk reported receipt of$6,850 compensation paid by petitioner, as set by Consulting Engineers, VAC- Council on 3/12/2007, and recommended adoption of the ordinance to finalize 06-004 the ESM Consulting Engineers vacation of a portion of Field Ave. NE, north of NE 2nd St. Council concur. (See page 160 for ordinance.) Appeal: Puget Colony 1 Short City Clerk reported Hearing Examiner's Stipulation and Order regarding the Plat, SHP-06-147 Puget Colony 1 and 2 short plats,and reported all parties agreement to the stipulation and order to consolidate the hearings of the appeal of Puget Colony 2 Short Plat, SHP-06-.146, previously referred to Planning and Development Committee on 2/26/2007, and the appeal of the Puget Colony 1 Short Plat (SHP-06-147). Refer the appeal of the Puget Colony 1 Short Plat to Planning and Development Committee. Plat: Kristen Woods, Benson Development Services Division recommended approval, with conditions, of the Dr S, FP-06-142 Kristen Woods Final Plat; 20 single-family lots on 3.81 acres located at the 3200 block of Benson Dr. S. Council concur. (See page 159 for resolution.) Development Services: Development Services Division recommended acceptance of a deed of Thomas Short Plat, ROW dedication for additional right-of-way at the corner of Park Ave. N. and N. 34th Dedication,Park Ave N St. to fulfill a requirement of the Thomas Short Plat(SHP-06-089). Council concur. Airport: Northwest Seaplanes Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an addendum to the Lease, LAG-91-005 airport lease LAG-91-005 with Northwest Seaplanes, Inc. to increase the ground rate from$30,026.95 to $33,633.84 annually, which will remain in effect through 12/31/2011. Council concur. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Planning and Development Committee Vice Chair Clawson presented a report Planning& Development regarding the Highlands Subarea zoning and land use changes. The Committee Committee recommended concurrence with the report and recommendations of the Planning: Highlands Area Highlands Zoning Task Force, which propose a series of zoning and land use Redevelopment, Study Area changes in the Highlands Study Area. The Committee further concurred with Zoning& Land Use Changes the two staff recommended changes to the task force's proposal: 1 p� • To keep the task force recommended RM-F (Residential Multi-Family) �`�`,Y►�t Y zoning in the Harrington "tail" between NE 7th St. and NE 9th St., but to change the underlying land use designation to CV (Center Village), in compliance with the land use designation policies in the Comprehensive Plan. • To add a note restricting office and conference uses in the CV-zoned property on Edmonds Ave. NE. The Committee further recommended that the ordinances implementing these proposed changes be presented for first reading. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 160 for ordinances.) Community Services Community Services Committee Vice Chair Palmer presented a report Committee regarding the Maplewood Golf Course golf cart lease-purchase agreement. The Community Services: Golf Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve a Cart Lease-Purchase formal 48 month lease-purchase agreement with Northwest Yamaha Golf Carts Agreement, Yamaha for 50 gasoline powered golf carts. Fifty carts from the current fleet will be A^PFIOV !DV PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE C /COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT Date 5-7_ May 7, 2007 Highlands Sub Area Zoning and Land Use Changes (March 14, 2005) The Planning and Development Committee recommends concurrence with the report and recommendations of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force, which propose a series of zoning and land use changes in the Highlands Study Area. The Committee further concurs with the two staff recommended changes to the Task Force's proposal: • To keep the Task Force recommended RMF zoning in the Harrington "tail" between NE 7th Street and NE 9th Street, but to change the underlying land use designation to CV, in compliance with the land use designation policies in the Comprehensive Plan • To add a note restricting`office and conference uses in the CV zoned property on Edmonds Avenue NE The Committee further recommends that the ordinances implementing these proposed changes be presented for first reading on May 7, 2007. Um/tici Tern Briere, Ch it Dan Clawson, Vice Chair Irl ya, Marcie Palmer, Member cc: Jay Covi1 t�t Alex Pietsch Neil Watts Gregg Zimmerman Highlands.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh Report and Recommendation Of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force November 8, 2006 se (AC) C1ornplete. &Can/le,tDn "'I& rats t?1-if �lerl� AIMEE 1.1 = pi rad on wai :,- :i.:-.: A:k*til*:-Nr. wir.ip- .,_,-r..:r.. .:..r .-. '',:i,-. ,.:r:': . A.:•. :•,:f.:•..:::,•,..... ... „... ...::, ow ►� �1� jI :��1 NE !J1 iii ii!L1•.. a ; 1h = a■ ■ �� p 1.71r� 4�I t�i no quisiglijii gip ■■- 111 �L:! :�: :: ;� ■■■■Mil� ■IIINI E■I1II;II■■■■■ ■ : ►k —LIIIII —111nI'M -��■ KITmi.'■ IIQ�- 1111�■111111� Ma , � r ©]I Ip(. ag■Ad1 Itd i i . ■ �R�177 ■R �. ♦ u��'sllL ..■ �..�F: ;Illllllr� S1 J�G�Q�iQili , ,, �� ���1111�■■■■■■ 11 111.�IIIM kle 11►�►�� C.1 ■ ilmomm■1� �$ a ■IIIII�r_� Iii a ■ra �� 1st St ,5; t � (. ilighlkNall 11111a-- ■■� .�M■ .o =mu ■I1111111111ma iiIr�ai ■`mml �liJmil L6 -fmum � �� �11/1111111 r Y wwmaid --1 11■ri.iIN.: i Ci NE 20th h • 11■u113.1111111 �■■■ 1�i1.11%.-11441 ii'mi ■■■■■� ■I�I"� `71��eJ1'i1i1i!i Milani ii!I OIL :.rill a1018 ■ 1 k4■aa_ 1111� um 11111.11111 li, ' rei III■ ■■ ■■ ■Iw■ Mr •l 1111110 A ■� � i`i 3 ,� I, . um ■■.• as ■,:a ■'Nol M ■ bIIii111. 1 ir� �, II WI �■WI mmilM s■ ar.■ ■■1.1 IIIIII ■ .mom .■ x = Ic I ■ 1111'. 11111 �■ ■1111■ .:■ H 1 �i�l ■■ �Illllll �� ■a .. EN ��� 1 r-11@I1 ��'�71 � III® asi M I•1•FtV' Ii' glit.‘.4 1..„ .1.ra ppipeo"-- -11...,„419 „_,,_,:'::.i,:---,:',_:,.,,,,11„,:;,,r,.„.i:,,,:r:.i:::.•"-.,,,,,,!.:77.:,:ivp%714:1.,..414Lc.:1::!1,.,!_r:r:r.,.;,:ti,,,:::,,atimia ! mitriazt zaminra.rifil rimmumuomo maiiiiitsizi ligittil .....• ell ai ■ 111.. .:... :. _, ,::,..: ...•.:,:....„. r r'- •:':,:':r''''.'r:::::•:'-:':'.,r,;'1:7.'1::•',=LI' ::':.-':r E:74 ri:.t:L4::fr4:4457g ;t'Lrr L-:i':•'L:L %I ,.. � i■ ■■■a► - ��\■1 �° ► � h ■� aI�■EM .1;1�i■Rr■■nil■■■■■ ■Ian . .� ■11■ae■■aa�■■■■■ �,�■a■■■1 �uC■■ia11■■C ►� :ram / / ��'Ilillllli pp �L is ci F:!E!!t: r111 �Yi:u�ilii•. �.■■■■■I. � 7■ ■■■ ,_ : .. ■■■ 1■ II�IIIII�a.• '`� n. t7 ' ►9 � ■■ ■ !!■ �: C Y i'.Iiiit W 11 I■■ �.� ■■ Un1Ya ■ ■■ 11111III� , : ■ -- 0■ ��. 9thITO -� ar . i c i , N • / E/ /. g ~t� = ■■WLi .Ial;11IIIIinu; I::wen .■ w■ /tea' ^ t Ir HEM �11•1 </ NO /E tit ibl. E� ■■■IIR'II:!n!IIrn11■1■! Y L���at ;r111� ■iiEtt!J: :i / M lir..■_ ■W a a .LEA ip IIte lint ■ �� i•0,41.0 ■. .niii�el1�!:1 :: A�w lrinct-lp:4411:4818ain�1 �on:� 1■IP■J�,I,�gai �11` ri N 11�!la sa 6 let �/ � IG'�LT�1l t� 1� �� �. � •� Aed .'�f'dh1 :11,41:11:;:gital4: 1� ■• • Gl ■> ram 1�1!11lllln��� so t. N U L1` ■ ♦ �A 4* • E 1►1.1�]l1i1i► �A�l1 ■ ♦j,,•A �.r�I ■■ Ss ■ tsi 1111AR91E3 111111}IIIII 1111GI■ i. 0 CIA �a:P i\0�- ■g 5 E•■ E 11111r<11i1! IIIIL'11'Y1111 1111Cia w. \IIII� �111/j1 ��►j�11a1♦*Ail lid Lw � ■�.� ► ,■'� \ 1s� • ./ w q,� ra �0I 1♦■■ ■■ ■■ / Ei _�. C mD.� ar. im II_A„immalimmil mo .\ it 4 ‘ ‘ ° 11113r a rat° 5' 41 Highlands Subarea , RLD RS o 1000 2000 1 I RMD Proposed Land Use - Task Force 10 RMF 1 : 12000 �< mi o Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning cV Alex Pietsch,Administrator mil CC E.Feasel �FNT0Z 03 November 2006 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 6 7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2006 AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS OF PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON. WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington," as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, property located within the City of Renton has been zoned as various zoning classifications; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission have held numerous public hearings and made its recommendation to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Planning and Development Committee have held public meetings to consider the zoning classifications to be assigned to various properties within the City of Renton; and WHEREAS, the City Council established an amendment process as part of its greater Growth Management Act process; and WHEREAS, numerous individuals availed themselves of the amendment processes; and WHEREAS, the City Council having considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties having been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The zoning map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" on a single sheet, and Exhibit "B" as a bound Map Book, are hereby adopted as the zoning map for Vie ORDINANCE NO. 5267 the City of Renton, and the zoning categories shown on these maps for the various properties located within the City limits of the City of Renton are hereby designated as the zoning designations for those properties. Rezone ordinances adopted after this ordinance shall amend the official zoning map. SECTION II. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to make the necessary changes on the City's zoning maps, to evidence the adoption of the new zoning map. SECTION III. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file this ordinance as provided by law and to keep a copy on file with the office of the City Clerk. SECTION IV. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five(5) days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 19th day of March , 2007. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 19th day of March , 2007. r/ Kathy Ke. ker, Mayor Approved as to form: * r .. J Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 3/24/2007 (summary) . ORD.1337:2/27/07:ma 2 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 6 5 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (KENNYDALE BLUEBERRY FARM) FROM RESOURCE CONSERVATION (RC) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL 4 DU/AC (R-4), FILE NO. LUA-05-159 (CPA 2006-M-2). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Resource Conservation; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of the property. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential 4 du/ac as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and 1 I . IGO ORDINANCE NO. 5265 directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to- wit: See Attachments "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Kennydale Blueberry Farm). SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 5th day of March , 2007. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 5th day of March , 2007. r k� Kathy Keolk r, Mayor Appr d as to form: � * 1c6, GIN-�PM,�te G i .vt�,� �`' ��—„-j �" Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney r • Q." , c Vt Date of Publication: 3/10/2007 (summary) (r • ORD.1330:2/2/07:ma 2 ATTACHMENT A .. ORDINANCE 5265 BLUEBERRY FARM REZONE 2006-M-02 REZONE FROM RC TO R-4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Tract 285 of C. D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle Division No. 4, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 11 of Plats, Page 82, records of King County. All situate in the SE quarter of Section 5, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. i Attachment B ORDINANCE 5265 • L = _ cp 77 II 1 / . o _ (._)1, 1 V c > ) CI)-0 N.,, _ \ - 2 - - j i \ Z--tn i I L 1 J I ( J-,< 11 I i ,25 r c LI • \ I 2Ct ' S-,. Vi i--ip"iiipiii, Ma , IUi j In ii um Ate• �iii ,< 2-- . „„.11,0„ alp/0 iii. ,------ 7-z- . .1 1 . D Qc_• '' _ _ u mimi�■ 1Ji I. 16t- „S Lnu N‘11-Ti . -ills WE Blueberry Farm RC to R-4 0 400 800 LUA 05-159 CPA 2006-M-0211111 RC to R a -4 pt � - ax..�rm March 5,2007 `... Renton City Council Minutes Page 76 Ordinance#5264 An ordinance was read amending the 2007 Budget by transferring funds in the Community Services: Parks amount of$259,000 from the 2007 designated Capital Reserve Fund for Parks Maintenance Facility Sublease, Maintenance Facility, to the Parks Maintenance Facility Account, in order to United Rentals Northwest, provide for a temporary Parks Maintenance Facility. MOVED BY LAW, Budget Amend SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5265 �L An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain properties Comprehensive Plan: 2006 rf within the City of Renton (Kennydale Blueberry Farm) from Resource Amendments, Kennydale T Conservation(RC)to Residential - four dwelling units per acre (R-4) zoning; Blueberry Farm File No. LUA-05-159; CPA-2006-M-2. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: SIX AYES: NELSON, CLAWSON, LAW, BRIERE, PALMER PERSSON; ONE NAY: CORMAN. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Councilmember Palmer announced that Julia Patterson, Metropolitan King King County: Transportation County Councilmember for District 5, will host a town hall meeting at the Spirit Town Hall Meeting of Washington Event Center on March 12 concerning transportation issues that will be on the ballot this fall. AUDIENCE COMMENT Raymond A. Breeden, Sr., President of the Wonderland Estates Mobile Home Citizen Comment: Breeden- Park Cooperative Association, 15279 Maple Dr., Renton, 98058, expressed his Wonderland Estates Mobile appreciation to the Council and the City for helping the residents in their Home Park endeavor to save the mobile home park. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 7:36 p.m. i Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann March 5, 2007 February 26,2007 :_ Renton City Council Minutes Page 68 Citizen Comment: Rider- Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, thanked Councilmember 2006 Comprehensive Plan 7. f Corman for voting against the Kennydale Blueberry Farm rezone. She also Amendments, Kennydale I thanked all Councilmembers for listening to everyone's concerns, and asked for Blueberry Farm support in protecting the wetland on the property. Citizen Comment: Puckett- Jerry Puckett, 15260 Oak Dr., Renton, 98058, invited everyone to the Wonderland Estates Mobile Wonderland Estates Mobile Home Park's Saturday pancake fundraisers, saying Home Park that Councilmembers could tour the property. Additionally, he noted the attention the mobile home park has received from the media. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 9:05 p.m. tec-wnAz, vJ. Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann February 26, 2007 February 26,2007 Renton City Council Minutes ..,r Page 66 Resolution#3859 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute CAG: 03-160, 2006 Local Amendment#4 to the Suburban City contract between King County and the Hazardous Waste Management City of Renton for the 2007 Local Hazardous Waste Management Program. Program, King County Grant MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Resolution#3860 A resolution was read authorizing the temporary closure of SW 34th St. Streets: SW 34th St Closure, (between Lind Ave. SW and Oakesdale Ave. SW)to all through traffic. SW 34th St Culvert MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE Replacement Project RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the Council meeting of 3/5/2007 for second and final reading: Annexation: Perkins, SE 95th An ordinance was read annexing approximately 15.47 acres of property P1 & 128th Ave SE generally located along and south of SE 95th Pl., if extended, and mostly west of Union Ave. NE (132nd Ave. SE); Perkins Annexation. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 3/5/2007. CARRIED. Annexation: Perkins, R-4 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification for approximately Zoning 15.04 acres, located primarily west of 132nd Ave. SE and north of SE 98th St., if extended, with one parcel east of 132nd Ave. SE., annexed within the City of Renton from R-4 (Urban Residential - four dwelling units per acre, King County zoning) to R-4 (Residential - four dwelling units per acre, Renton zoning); Perkins Annexation. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 3/5/2007. CARRIED. Finance: Impact Fees, Issaquah An ordinance was read changing the impact fee collection on behalf of the & Kent School Districts school districts within the City of Renton from $5,115 per new single-family home to $6,136 per new single-family home in the Issaquah School District and implementing an impact fee of$4,928 per new single-family home in the Kent School District. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 3/5/2007. CARRIED. Community Services: Parks An ordinance was read amending the 2007 Budget by transferring funds in the Maintenance Facility Sublease, amount of$259,000 from the 2007 designated Capital Reserve Fund for Parks United Rentals Northwest, Maintenance Facility,to the Parks Maintenance Facility Account, in order to Budget Amend provide for a temporary Parks Maintenance Facility. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 3/5/2007. CARRIED. Comprehensive Plan: 2006 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain properties Amendments, Kennydale within the City of Renton (Kennydale Blueberry Farm) from Resource Blueberry Farm y>( I_ Conservation (RC) to Residential - four dwelling units per acre (R-4) zoning; 1 I File No. LUA-05-159; CPA-2006-M-2. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 3/5/2007. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and adoption: February 26,2007 ,, Renton City Council Minutes Page 65 Replacement Project. The road closure will remain in effect 24 hours a day for approximately ten weeks from June 2007 through October 2007, with exact dates dependent on work progress. The Committee further recommended that the resolution regarding this matter be presented for reading and adoption. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 66 for resolution.) Planning& Development MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REMOVE Committee THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT Comprehensive Plan: 2006 REGARDING THE KENNYDALE BLUEBERRY FARM Amendments, Kenn dale COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM THE TABLE. CARRIED. Blueberry Farm L� [T Planning and Development Committee Vice Chair Clawson presented a report regarding the Kennydale Blueberry Farm Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone request. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to deny the request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan map. The property should remain in the Residential Low Density land use designation. The Committee also recommended the following: • The property be rezoned to Residential-4 units per acre (R-4); • Special attention be paid to protecting the critical areas on this site at such time as this property applies for development permits; and • Special attention be paid to impacts from those nearby parcels upon the critical areas on this property as the parcels around this property apply for development permits. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 66 for ordinance.) Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chair Clawson presented a report recommending Latecomer Agreement: concurrence in the staff recommendation to grant a final 15-year latecomer Wyman, Sewer Extension (SE agreement to Kevin Wyman for sewer main extension along SE 132nd St. The 132nd St), LA-05-003 Committee further recommended that staff be authorized to finalize the latecomer agreement per City Code. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3857 A resolution was read rescinding a moratorium on sewer availability for new Utility: Sewer Moratorium in subdivisions within the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. East Renton Plateau PAA MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Resolution #3858 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an Utility: Benson Rd S Water interlocal agreement with Washington State Department of Transportation for Line Relocation, WSDOT designing the relocation of a water line in Benson Rd. S., entitled "Utility Preliminary Engineering Agreement UT01130 Work by Utility." MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEEE REPORT ' C1 ,- t , ,2(v, February 12, 2007 Kennydale Blueberry Farm Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Request (Referred June 5, 2006) The Planning and Development Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to deny the request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan map. The property should remain in the Residential Low Density(RLD) land use designation. The Committee also recommends the following: • The property be rezoned to Residential-4 units per acre (R-4); • Special attention be paid to protecting critical areas on this site at such time as this property applies for development permits; and • Special attention be paid to impacts from those nearby parcels upon the critical areas on this property as the parcels around this property apply for development permits. The Committee further rew_mmends that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading on February 2007. \;:gte/04/ Terri Briere, Chair 01-4. Dan Clawson, Vice Chair Marcie Palmer, Member cc: Larry Warren Alex Pietsch Rebecca Lind Neil Watts Greg Zimmerman February 26,2007 Renton City Council Minutes `✓ Page 61 Citizen Comment: Hope- Jerry Hope, 17016 128th Ave. SE, Renton, 98058, indicated that there is strong Benson Hill Communities support for the Benson Hill Communities Annexation, noting that annexation of Annexation, S 200th St& this area to Renton is in the best interests of the community, King County, and 128th Ave SE Renton. Citizen Comment: Reiter- Tom Reiter, 18001 113th Ave. SE, Renton, 98055, described the effort that has Benson Hill Communities been made towards the annexation of the Benson Hill communities to Renton. Annexation, S 200th St& Mr. Reiter said the signatures for the annexation petition were quickly obtained, 128th Ave SE and he thanked the City for its consideration of the matter. Citizen Comment: Linton - Richard Linton, 17041 130th Ave. SE, Renton, 98058, stated that Renton has Benson Hill Communities grown over the years and has the potential to be even more fantastic than it is Annexation, S 200th St& now. Mr. Linton indicated that he and others in the Benson Hill and Renton 128th Ave SE Park areas are interested in annexing to Renton. He noted that the turnout at the election would be very good if the issue were to be placed on the ballot. Citizen Comment: Leviton - Jay Leviton, 18204 143rd Ave. SE, Renton, 98058, speaking on behalf of the Multipurpose Events Center Renton Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, conveyed the chamber's (Sonics & Storm Basketball), enthusiasm for Renton being chosen as the preferred site for the Sonic's Chamber Support Resolution multipurpose event center. Mr. Leviton read a Renton Chamber of Commerce Board Resolution, which supports the concept of Renton becoming the future home of the Seattle Supersonics and Storm basketball teams and urges the Mayor and Council to continue to support this project while exercising due diligence. Citizen Comment: Johnson- Steve Johnson, Renton Chamber of Commerce Vice President, 139 Union Ave. Multipurpose Events Center NE, Unit 1, Renton, 98059, stated that the siting of the Sonic's multipurpose (Sonics & Storm Basketball), event center in Renton will benefit the business community, and he asked Chamber Support Resolution Council to pursue this opportunity while exercising due diligence. Citizen Comment: Rider- Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, expressed her desire that the 2006 ComprehensivePlan City base its decision regarding the Kennydale Blueberry Farm rezone on facts. Amendments, Kennydale She displayed photographs of the area showing the development occurring on Blueberry Farm Fri property across from the blueberry farm and the damage to that property's wetland. Ms. Rider indicated that due to the lack of hydrology studies, the extent of the wetland is unknown. She stressed that accurate information is needed prior to a decision being made on the rezone, and asked the City to keep track of activities in this area. Citizen Comment: Puckett- Jerry Puckett, 15260 Oak Dr., Renton, 98058, reported that the New Life Wonderland Estates Mobile Church is making progress in obtaining signatures for the annexation-to-Renton Home Park, Annexation and petition for his area. He further reported that the owner of the Wonderland Permit Process Estates Mobile Home Park property, where he resides, has started the permit process in King County to build homes on the site. Mr. Puckett inquired as to whether the permit process will conclude in King County or be taken over by Renton if the property were to annex to Renton. Planning Manager Lind stated that if the area is annexed and a King County- approved preliminary plat exists, Renton will recognize the plat. Up until the time of preliminary plat approval, Renton would start over again with the review process. In response to Councilmember Corman's inquiries regarding the annexation process, Ms. Lind said the annexation proponent is using the property owner petition process. She noted that residents of the mobile home park cannot participate. Ms. Lind reported that signatures are currently being gathered for the 10% annexation petition. February 26,2007 ,,ftp, Renton City Council Minutes',quo. Page 60 Mayor Keolker assured that no commitments have been made regarding City investment in the facility. She stated that if the City can be assured of new revenue to the City, the Council will be asked to consider making an investment at a level proportionate with those new revenues, as done with other economic development projects in the City. Mayor Keolker indicated that a dialogue with the community has started and will continue in order to consider the opportunities, challenges, and impacts that the facility poses. She noted that information about the potential events center is available on the City's website. The Mayor reported that as an initial step, a consultant will be hired in the amount of$20,000 to conduct an economic analysis, and a strategic advisor will be retained for the amount of$10,000. She stated that working with the neighborhoods most impacted by the development is another significant component during this evaluation process. Mayor Keolker pointed out that Council will discuss the proposed neighborhood study during its upcoming retreat. She indicated that regardless of the final outcome, the City is benefiting by being selected as the preferred site. AUDIENCE COMMENT Karen Finnicum, 1302 Aberdeen Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, spoke on the topic of Citizen Comment: Finnicum- the Kennydale Blueberry Farm rezone. She displayed photographs of the area, 2006 Comprehensive Plan and expressed concerns regarding the accumulation of water and the damage to Amendments, Kennydale * the wetland. Saying that the wetland damage must stop, Ms. Finnicum asked Blueberry Farm that zoning decisions regarding the farm property not be made until the situation 714 is fully understood. Citizen Comment: Collins - Jet Bill Collins,420 Cedar Ave. S., Renton, 98057, voiced concern regarding the Center at Airport proposed jet center at the Renton Airport. He stated that since specific types of aircraft cannot be excluded from using the airport, the likelihood of extremely loud jet aircraft take-offs and landings is certain. Mr. Collins asked that Council consider the noise impacts on the community when making a decision on the matter. Citizen Comment: Hicks - Barb Hicks, 10402 151st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, expressed opposition to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan rezone of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, noting the following: the rezone is Amendments, Kennydale solely for the personal gain of the applicant, R-4 zoning has not ensured Blueberry Farm protection on adjacent property, the exact location and extent of the wetland on the site is unknown, a majority of citizens have spoken against the rezone, and .urisdictional wetlands are protected by the federal Clean Water Act. Ms. Hicks stated that this resource and its protection should be valued higher than the benefit received by one property owner. Citizen Comment: Gabrielson - Karol Gabrielson, 2001 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, displayed photographs of 2006 Comprehensive Plan the Kennydale Blueberry Farm and adjacent property, expressing concern Amendments, Kennydale p regarding the accumulation of water. She stated her fear that rezoning the farm Blueberry Farm property to R-4 will not protect the wetland, as R-4 zoning has not protected other areas in the artesian system. Ms. Gabrielson asked that the City become more familiar with the area and deny the rezone request. Citizen Comment: O'Connor- William O'Connor, 10402 151st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, stated that rezoning 2006 Comprehensive Plan the Kennydale Blueberry Farm property to R-4 will only raise expectations for Amendments, Kennydale ore development, resulting in the City being pressured to issue variances and Blueberry Farm aivers. He indicated that the property is appropriately zoned at Resource Conservation. rr bn /t/ce og h 1oroes ondertCC " -"- 1o7 °1101 Wild Fish Conservancy CITY OFRENTON FEB 2 2 2007 RECEIVED February 21, 2007 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Renton City Council 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Blueberry Farm/Upper Kennydale Rezone, CPA 2006-M-02 Dear Honorable Councilmembers: The Wild Fish Conservancy respectfully offers the following comments on the subject proposed rezoning. We are concerned that the rezone may not result in adequate protection of the resources of the upper Kennydale Creek watershed. City of Renton staff noted at a July 19, 2006 Planning Commission meeting that this area contains wetlands and is the headwaters of Kennydale Creek. The stream was characterized as a non fish-bearing, intermittent stream (Class 4), and according to the meeting minutes, staff stated that it is questionable whether critical areas (e.g., wetlands) even exist on the site. However, there is considerable evidence that the stream and wetland are much more valuable. At the July 19, 2006 meeting, Mr. Richard Gersib, a certified wetlands scientist, noted that the wetland may be a rare and valuable peat bog and that while other types of wetlands can be "created," peat bogs cannot. Letters of October 12, 2006 and October 19, 2006 from Larry Fisher of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to Erika Conkling, City of Renton, state that the stream is perennial and supports fish and aquatic invertebrates. This is consistent with our experience over the past twelve years that water-typing maps are often erroneous and that field surveys repeatedly reveal resources that merit much greater protection. Even though the wetland and stream may be degraded, they are likely valuable and rare resources in an area that has suffered tremendous loss of wetlands and headwater streams. We recommend that a wetlands delineation and water-typing survey be conducted in order to better characterize the resources and assist the Council arrive at a decision based on sound science. Please contact Mark Hersh of my staff if you have any questions. Sincerely, 66 ; Pia yor e oa f', Kurt Be dslee glQy ®vipplD'' Executive Director Rfex Oefschi 'ed e cca Lirtd P.U.Box 402 Duvall,WA 98019.425-788-1 167•Fax 425-788-9634•wildfish,iwashingtontrout.org•www.wildtishconservancy.org P R P S P R 5 P .. ,. T E T P S T 0 F. • .<Y T£ � feSD04of a' STA o� � •�.�ry (�r' ffee o te1l0/e may" �yo , -PLV• f L/V 7 State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Region 4 Office:16018 Mill Creek Boulevard-Mill Creek,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311 February 20, 2007 env OF RENTON Renton City Council FEB 2 1 2007 Renton City Hall, 7th floor CITY CLERK'S RECEIVED 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Honorable Councilmembers: SUBJECT: Proposed Kennydale Blueberry Farm Rezone, File Number CPA 2006-M-02, Kennydale Creek and Its Associated Wetlands, Tributary to Lake Washington The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) wants to take this opportunity to encourage due diligence as the Renton City Council considers the fate of the proposed rezone and its potential impacts on this very sensitive and valuable watercourse. WDFW believes a wetland delineation and evaluation would be very beneficial to support the decision making process. It would provide a more substantial and informed basis when contemplating the future of the site. WDFW also wants to encourage the City to consider alternatives to further development of the site and believes the site would be much more valuable if it were restored to a fully functioning wetland status, rather than intensively developed. Grant money is available from a variety of sources to pursue such an endeavor. WDFW appreciates the cooperation of the City of Renton in our efforts to preserve,protect, perpetuate, and manage the fish and wildlife resources of the state of Washington. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions. please contact me at(425) 649-7042 or fisheldf@dfw.wa.gov. Sincerely, Larry Fisher Area Habitat Biologist LF:lf:C ORBlueberryFarm3 s.doc cc: WDFW: SEPA Coordinator, GMA Biologist WDOE: Robohm C'c : maw/ lleoller daiAlex Pie f 9 h�� �4 `67'NS P February 12,2007 Renton City Council Minutes Page 43 * Tickets are now on sale for The Winter Kids Concert Series to be held at Carco Theatre. Enjoy storyteller Nana Kibbi on February 20, and a performance of"Goin' Someplace Special"by Book It Repertory Theatre on February 23. • The City of Renton has been recognized for excellent financial reporting by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada for its fiscal year 2005 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT REGARDING THE KENNYDALE BLUEBERRY FARM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. CARRIED. Planning& Development Planning and Development Committee Vice Chair Clawson presented a report Committee regarding the Kennydale Blueberry Farm Comprehensive Plan amendment and Comprehensive Plan: 2006 rezone request. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff Amendments, Kennydale recommendation to deny the request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Blueberry Farm Plan map. The property should remain in the Residential Low Density land use -P 14 designation. The Committee also recommended the following: • The property be rezoned to Residential-4 units per acre (R-4); • Special attention be paid to protecting the critical areas on this site at such time as this property applies for development permits; and • Special attention be paid to impacts from those nearby parcels upon the critical areas on this property as the parcels around this property apply for development permits. The Committeefurther recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading.* (See page 47 for action.) At the request of the Planning and Development Committee, Associate Planner Conkling conducted a presentation on the matter. She reviewed why the property owner applied for a rezone to R-8 or R-4 from Resource Conservation (RC), and described the land use changes that have occurred over the years in the surrounding areas. Ms. Conkling explained that the RC zone was created in 1992 to protect and preserve lands for semi-rural use. The farm was rezoned RC in 1993 to protect the agricultural use from land use changes. In 1995,the RC zone was amended to minimize the effect of agriculture on urban land uses. Ms. Conkling reported that a mapped wetland is shown on the property, that a Class 4 stream runs along the east and north sides, and that the headwaters of Kennydale Creek, which runs into Lake Washington, are attributed to this area. She pointed out that limited, disturbed wetlands have been delineated in portions of the mapped area north of the farm,but no formal delineation or analysis has been done on the blueberry farm site. Ms. Conkling indicated that any wetlands on the site would likely be classified as Type II; therefore, the mapped wetland and buffer would leave 1.15 developable acres on this 3.4-acre parcel. Continuing, Ms. Conkling stated that staff recommends denial of the Comprehensive Plan map amendment from Residential Low Density (RLD) land use designation to Residential Single Family (RS) and subsequent zoning to R-8. She said none of the purposes of the RS designation would be served by rezoning the farm and R-8 zoning could not be achieved on this parcel. Ms. Conkling explained that the purpose of the RLD designation is the development February 12,2007 Renton City Council Minutes Page 44 of lower intensity residential uses where land is constrained by sensitive areas. The RC, R-1, and R-4 zones implement the RLD designation. Ms. Conkling reviewed the mapping criteria for the RLD designation,pointing out that Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-135 guides the mapping of RC and R-1 zones in situations where developable area is non-contiguous, or allowed density could not be expressed due to critical areas. The blueberry farm developable area is consolidated and could reasonable be developed for one to four dwelling units, depending on the extent of the wetland once delineated. Ms. Conkling stated that the purpose of the R-4 zone is promotion of single- family residences in urban neighborhoods with amenity open spaces. She noted that a minimum density is not required in the R-4 zone. She compared the R-4 zone to the RC zone. Features of R-4 zoning include: development standards application will likely result in one additional dwelling unit, property will have to subdivided to build another unit, and subdivision will result in full delineation of the wetland and it would be set aside as a Native Growth Protection Easement. Ms. Conkling reviewed the features of RC zoning, as follows: an accessory dwelling unit(ADU)that is not limited in size is allowed, the ADU could be built without invoking the subdivision regulations and the protections of a Native Growth Protection Easement, and uses that may be undesirable such as professional dog kennels or commercial stables are allowed. She stated that the property does not meet the criteria for R-1 zoning, pointing out that at either RC or R-1 zoning, the undevelopable area is likely to be treated as a very large yard. In conclusion, Ms. Conkling relayed staffs recommendation to rezone the blueberry farm property to R-4. In response to Councilmember Corman's inquiries, Ms. Conkling indicated that a Native Growth Protection Easement prevents development of the wetland, and ownership of that wetland area depends on what happens with the subdivision process. AUDIENCE COMMENT There was general consensus to separate the audience comment regarding the Kennydale Blueberry Farm from audience comment on other topics, and to allow those speakers to talk first. Citizen Comment: Rider- Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, indicated her desire for a 2006 Comprehensive Plan hydrology study for the Kennydale Blueberry Farm property, saying that a Amendments, Kennydale zoning decision is being made without knowing the extent of the wetland. Ms. Blueberry Farm Rider questioned why R-1 zoning was acceptable for the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area, which requires a wetland study to justify requests . for rezoning to R-4. Emphasizing that critical areas ordinances are not providing adequate protection, Ms. Rider stated that development is taking precedence over wetland protection. Citizen Comment: Hicks- Barb Hicks, 10402 151 st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, objected to the rezone of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Kennydale Blueberry Farm from RC to R-4,pointing out that the rezone is for Amendments, Kennydale the personal gain of the applicant and is not in the interest of the citizens of Blueberry Farm Renton. She inquired as to why a wetland study was not required for the rezone application. Ms. Hicks noted there was need for code enforcement efforts on R- 4-zoned property contiguous to the blueberry farm for unauthorized activities, and expressed concern that the blueberry farm wetland will suffer the same fate. She pointed out that a majority of the concerned parties object to the rezone. In response to Councilmember Corman's inquiry regarding protection of the property, Economic Development Administrator Pietsch agreed that the risk is February 12,2007 �... Renton City Council Minutes Page 45 the same whether zoned RC or R-4. Councilmember Clawson pointed out that the wetland will be protected if the property is set aside as a Native Growth Protection Easement. He stated that the City has no authority to force the applicant to conduct a wetland delineation. Mr. Pietsch noted that the property is unique; however, he expressed concern regarding expending public funds on a study that only benefits this specific property owner. He stated staffs preference that the study occur if and when a subdivision proposal comes forth. Citizen Comment: O'Connor- William O'Connor, 10402 151st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, questioned why the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Kennydale Blueberry Farm owner cannot be forced to conduct a wetland study, Amendments, Kennydale when property owners in the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area are Blueberry Farm required to do so if they want to rezone. He noted that those against the rezone far outnumber those who support the rezone. Mr. O'Connor indicated that R-4 zoning raises the expectation of the potential buyer of the property, and the potential owner will seek as much density as possible. Citizen Comment: Finnicum- Karen Finnicum, 1302 Aberdeen Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, objected to changing 2006 Comprehensive Plan the Kennydale Blueberry Farm's zoning without having more knowledge about Amendments, Kennydale the critical areas. Pointing out that the blueberry farm is still viable, she said the Blueberry Farm property should remain zoned at RC. She stressed that the property must be protected, as the effect of its loss to the environment is great. Citizen Comment: Cowan- John Cowan, 1830 NE 24th St., Renton, 98056, noted that Kennydale Creek, 2006 Comprehensive Plan which empties into Lake Washington, is the only creek in Renton where the Amendments, Kennydale headwaters are located in Renton. He stated that the Kennydale Blueberry Farm Blueberry Farm should not be rezoned without sufficient wetland studies. Mr. Cowan indicated that the City should pay for the study since it will benefit future generations. Citizen Comment: Cave- 2006 Robert Cave, 1813 NE 24th St., Renton, 98056, voiced his doubt that R-4 Comprehensive Plan zoning for the Kennydale Blueberry Farm will protect the wetland any better Amendments, Kennydale than the current RC zoning. Mr. Cave urged Council to vote against rezoning Blueberry Farm the property to R-4. Citizen Comment: Linda Middlebrooks, 510 Seneca Ave. NW, Renton, 98057, stated that after Middlebrooks-2006 learning more about wetlands and the critical areas on the Kennydale Blueberry Comprehensive Plan Farm property, it does not make sense to her that the property would be better Amendments, Kennydale protected if it were upzoned to R-4. Blueberry Farm Mayor Keolker noted the completion of the testimony regarding the Kennydale Blueberry Farm for those who signed up to speak. It was noted that additional citizens wanted to comment on the topic. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ALLOW FURTHER COMMENT ON THE TOPIC OF THE BLUEBERRY FARM AT THIS TIME TO BE FOLLOWED BY THOSE WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON OTHER TOPICS. CARRIED. Councilmember Corman voiced his favor for protecting the wetland on the Kennydale Blueberry Farm property, noting that portion of the property could potentially be brought into public ownership at an affordable price. Citizen Comment: Petersen - Inez Somerville Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, stated that R-4 zoning 2006 Comprehensive Plan is not the answer for the Kennydale Blueberry Farm; the answer is a tighter RC Amendments, Kennydale zone to prevent it from being used for dog kennels. She claimed that the 2006 Blueberry Farm Comprehensive Plan amendments public hearing at the 9/20/2006 Planning Commission meeting was not valid. Ms. Petersen expressed her frustration in being unable to obtain minutes of the Planning Commission meeting, as well as February 12,2007rrr Renton City Council Minutes , Page 46 the Commission's report to Council regarding its recommendations. Without the report, she said any related adopted ordinances are illegal. Ms. Petersen stated that the matter of the blueberry farm needs further study, and she asked that the ordinance not be adopted tonight. Citizen Comment: Johnson - Arland "Buzz" Johnson, 334 Wells Ave. S., #306, Renton, 98057, stated his 2006 Comprehensive Plan preference for R-4 zoning for the Kennydale Blueberry Farm because of the Amendments, Kennydale possibility that the property could be used as a dog run or stable under its Blueberry Farm current zoning. Mr. Johnson questioned why the City cannot have the property owner conduct a wetland assessment before a decision is made on the zoning. Citizen Comment: Natelson - In response to the inquiry of Debbie Natelson, 801 Renton Ave. S., Renton, 2006 Comprehensive Plan 98057, regarding requiring a delineation if the zoning does not change, Amendments, Kennydale Councilmember Corman indicated that the future purchaser of the property will Blueberry Farm want to ascertain the wetland boundary. He commented that the sooner the study occurs, the less risk there is that the area will be damaged. Mr. Corman inquired about the possibility of an informal or approximate delineation. Economic Development Administrator Pietsch stated that informally it is known that a wetland is present on the property, and he noted that the exact boundary is not needed to determine the zoning. He explained that at the time of subdivision, the City has the mechanism to require a delineation. Mr. Pietsch estimated the cost of a wetland study to be $5,000 to $10,000. Continuing with her comments, Ms. Natelson emphasized that the cost of a delineation is small compared to the cost of regional flood and salmon control. She pointed out that low-impact development is mimicking the functions of a peat bog, which is already present on the property. Ms. Natelson stated that the Kennydale Creek headwaters need protection, and she urged Council to think about the big picture, as a wetland and peat bog cannot be created again. Councilmember Corman indicated that the solution of breaking off the sensitive area seems ideal. He stated that although it would be nice to have a mechanism in place to require a wetland delineation when a property rezone is requested, adding that condition now is unconstitutional. Councilmember Clawson commented that the Planning and Development Committee's recommendation on this matter directs staff to pay special attention as to how the non-critical area portion of the property is developed. He stated that the Committee is concerned about the property, and believes that R-4 zoning is the best way to protect this property given the current laws. Mr. Clawson expressed concern that a precedent will be set if the City pays for a delineation. He noted that the potential City purchase of the blueberry farm has been referred to Committee of the Whole. He further noted that the issue of hydrology needs to be taken into consideration in future City regulations. Councilmember Palmer indicated that given the current circumstances, R-4 zoning provides the best protection. She expressed her desire to protect the blueberry farm, and noted the difficulty of the decision. Councilmember Law said he wants more time to explore the following questions: 1) Should the City conduct the study given the uniqueness of the property; and 2) Should the City acquire some of the property. Councilmembers Corman and Persson agreed that the City should pursue the possibility of purchasing the wetland portion of the blueberry farm. Mr. Corman noted that the delineation could be offered as part of the compensation. February 12,2007 „ Renton City Council Minutes Page 47 Council President Nelson pointed out that the City will have to maintain the blueberry farm property if purchased. Councilmember Clawson noted that if the property is set aside as a Native Growth Protection Easement,not much maintenance is required and restoration of the property is possible. *MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL TABLE THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT REGARDING THE KENNYDALE BLUEBERRY FARM UNTIL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING AND IN THE MEANTIME THE COMMITTEE WILL MEET AGAIN ON TOPIC.* Councilmember Palmer suggested that the matter be referred to Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Corman expressed his support for further information and discussion regarding delineation of the property, saying that the property needs to be protected while it is in its current state. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL AMEND THE MOTION TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AND TABLE THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT REGARDING THE KENNYDALE BLUEBERRY FARM UNTIL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. CARRIED. *MAIN MOTION CARRIED AS AMENDED. Citizen Comment: McCammon Dave McCammon, 17221 125th Ave. SE, Renton, 98058, a resident of the - Benson Hill Communities Benson Hill communities, voiced support for annexation of the area to Renton. Annexation, S 200th St& Expressing hope that financial aid from King County and the State will assist 128th Ave SE the City in this regard, he asked Council to adopt a resolution as soon as possible so that the issue can be placed on the November 2007 ballot. Citizen Comment: Charnley - Don Charnley, 15291 Maple Dr., Renton, 98058, thanked Council for Wonderland Estates Mobile supporting the residents of the Wonderland Estates Mobile Home Park in their Home Park, Annexation effort to change the property's zoning and to annex to Renton. He invited everyone to the mobile home park's Saturday pancake breakfast fundraisers. Citizen Comment: LaRosee- Bernard LaRosee, 16204 114th Ave. SE, Renton, 98055, speaking on behalf of Benson Hill Communities the Benson Hill Communities Progress Group,pointed out the positive response Annexation, S 200th St& of most residents towards annexation of the area to Renton. He noted the 128th Ave SE timeliness of the matter, and expressed support for Council's approval of the annexation resolution. Citizen Comment: Carpenter- Tom Carpenter, 15006 SE 139th Pl., Renton, 98059, referring to quality of life East Renton Plateau PAA, issues in regard to the East Renton Plateau,posed the following question: Quality of Life Under growth management, what is the role of the potential annexing city when an area is unincorporated inside the urban growth boundary. He discussed the provision of services, annexation funding issues, and the roles of the counties and cities. Mr. Carpenter said he is the chair of the Four Creeks Unincorporated Area Council, which represents residents of the unincorporated areas. He reported that the Four Creeks Council is meeting with King County officials regarding the build out of the area and the permitting processes. He encouraged Renton not to step too far back from this matter, as the City still needs to be involved in the question of what role it plays as a potential annexing city. Citizen Comment: Walker- Kristie Walker, 3233 NE 12th St., #301, Renton, 98056, introduced herself as a McKnight Middle School an 8th grade teacher at McKnight Middle School, and reported that a history History Day Competition day competition took place last week. She explained that 48 students spent two months creating 27 history projects on topics of their choosing,which were judged by community members. Ms. Walker announced that 29 students with ,,,r r "rrr PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE APP,'(WED .: COMMITTEEE REPORT Cif CIL Date w . February 12, 2007 Kennydale Blueberry Farm Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Request (Referred June 5, 2006) The Planning and Development Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to deny the request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan map. The property should remain in the Residential Low Density(RLD) land use designation. The Committee also recommends the following: • The property be rezoned to Residential-4 units per acre(R-4); • Special attention be paid to protecting critical areas on this site at such time as this property applies for development permits; and • Special attention be paid to impacts from those nearby parcels upon the critical areas on this property as the parcels around this property apply for development permits. The Committee further recommends that the.crdinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading on February 12,2007. k. Terri Briere, Chair (-C)6/A/ e-,--w•-- Dan Clawson, Vice Chair W.eJSA,,eZL,___________ 11) Marcie Palmer, Member cc: Larry Warren Alex Pietsch Rebecca Lind Neil Watts Greg Zimmerman Blueberry Farm Rezone City Council Briefing February 2007 6� .{'� Background "��` ;Application for Rezone All lands designated Residential Low Density(RLD)were The applicant's rezone request is based on: reviewed last year RC zoning has failed to protect the farm from During the review,the Blueberry Farm owners stated surrounding land uses their intention to discontinue operation of the farm consideration of a rezone was tabled until formal Current spot zoning application was made Comprehensive Plan Vision directs development Owners applied for a rezone to R-8 or R-4 in December at higher densities than one unit per ten acres 2.005 Farm owners have found that blueberry farming SEPA appeal was filed in November 2006,so the issue is no longer a viable business for them in this was tabled by the Planning and Development Committee location SEPA appeal was withdrawn in January 2007 1 ,�i, Y Resource Conservation Zone f Pitit9Land Use Changes Changes Development:has occurred at R.-8 intensity -In 1992 the RC zone was created to protect and There has been an increase in impervious preserve lands for semi-rural use surface and storm water runoff Blueberry Farm was zoned RC in 1993 to New sewer infrastructure was installed and protect the agricultural use from land use Higate lift station removed g Cam West dewatere"d their parcels in order to Chan es construct the Heritage Glen plat In 1995 the RC zone was amended to minimize Hydrology changes may have affected the the effect of agriculture on urban land uses viability of the agricultural use Potential Critical Areas Potential Wetland ,.; Mapped wetland shown .—f t- Limited,disturbed wetlands have been on the property,but no [2:Li . delineated in portions of the mapped area north formal delineation done r ; l of the Farm, Class four str im,rums in U.' .� along east and north Imo l More than half a century of agricultural use has i sides of the property iav r 3 '; likely compromised the mapped wetland area Headwaters of Kennydale „ ®ikF 1-g —- 1; WSDOT aerial photo analysis suggests the Farm Creek;which njns to Lake ,� - i Washington,are 1 '.` may be restorable to peat wetland conditions attributed to this general - I area i�"I -} No formal delineation or analysis has been done �+ - on the Blueberry Farm site 2 . .... ..... .. .. .. Mapped Developable Area Residential Single Family Land Use Designation Any wetlands on site Purpose of this designation includes: building would likely be clas"sifted large subdivisions, rehabilitating existing as Type II because they _ housing, providing infill are less than 10 acres in size and�part-r f»th None of..the purposes of the RSF designation Heal-Mates of l ennydale YY _would be served by rezoning the Farm Cr R-8 zoning could not be achieved on this parcel If type two,the mapped wetland and buffer leaves Recommend denial of request for RSF land use 1.15 developable acres and R-8 zoning, Residential Low Density Land Use Mapping Criteria for the RLD Designation Designation Purpose of the RLD designation: development of Policy LU-135 guides the mapping of RC and R-1 lower intensity residential uses where land is zones in situations where developable area is constrained by sensitive areas non-contiguous,or allowed density could not be Three zones implement the RLD designation: expressed,due to critical areas RC, R-1, R-4 Blueberry farm developable area is consolidated and could reasonably developed for one to four dwelling units,depending on the extent of the wetland once delineated. 3 • • -- lik- R.-4 Zoning R-4 Zoning vs. RC Zoning Purpose of the R-4 zone: promotion of single Application of R-4 RC zoning allows for an family residences in urban.neighborhoods with development It in onees whichaccchsis not dwelling unit, � will likely result in is not limited in size amenity open spaces • additional dwelling unit ADU could be built without Property would have to invoking the subdivision R-4 allows for lower intensity residential uses to be subdivided to build regulations and the provide maximum protection for critical areas, another unit protections of a Native subdivision would result = Growth Protection while still achieving urban densities in full delineation of Easement No minimum density requirement in the R-4 wetland and it would be RC zoning allows for uses zone set aside as a Native that may be undesirable: Growth Protection professional dog kennels, Easement commercial stables,or professional B&B Why not R-1 zoning? Recommendations It doesn't meet the criteria for R-1 zoning according to Deny Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Policy LU-135 Blueberry Farm-the property best meets the Due to the likely size of the wetland area,the R-1 zone policies of the Residential Low Density Land Use functions essentially the same as the RC zone because designation there is no potential for subdivision Rezone the property R-4,which best complies At either RC or R-1 zoning the undevelopable area is with the Comprehensive Plan and provides the likely to be treated as a very large yard-which Is more best options for protection of the potential likely to result in progressive loss of the potential wetland resource,than if the property were subdivided natural resources on the site and the wetlands put into a Native Growth Protection Easement 4 February 12,2007 Renton City Council Minutes Page 51 Resolution#3856 A resolution was read approving the Victoria Pointe Final Plat; approximately Plat: Victoria Pointe, Wells 1.69 acres located in the vicinity of 3701 Wells Ave. N. MOVED BY Ave N, FP-06-148 CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the Council meeting of 2/26/2007 for second and final reading: Human Services: Advisory An ordinance was read amending Section 2-12-3, Appointment,of Chapter 12, Committee Member Increase Human Services Advisory Committee, of Title II (Commissions and Boards)of to Eleven City Code by adding two new members. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 2/26/2007. CARRIED. Airport: Advisory Committee, An ordinance was read amending Section 2-17-2, Membership,of Chapter 17, Two Additional Voting Airport Advisory Committee, of Title II(Commissions and Boards) of City Members Code by adding two new voting members. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 2/26/2007. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#5258 An ordinance was read amending Section 5-1-7, Aquatic Center Admission Community Services: Henry Fees, of Chapter 1, Fee Schedule, of Title V(Finance and Business Moses Aquatic Center Fees Regulations) of City Code by setting 2007 rates and fees for the Henry Moses Aquatic Center. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER Planning: Minimum THE ISSUE OF MINIMUM ANNEXATION SIZES TO THE COMMITTEE Annexation Sizes OF THE WHOLE. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Diane Paholke, 243 W. Perimeter Rd., Renton, 98057, said at a previous Citizen Comment: Paholke- Council meeting she expressed concern regarding the erosion of the ridge she Downed Trees, Erosion resides on in the Liberty Ridge development. Ms. Paholke reported that City staff investigated the matter,provided her with a list of trees to plant, and apprised her of the ownership of the property, which is her homeowners association. She indicated that she was well treated, and the information will help her to take care of the matter. Citizen Comment: Petersen - Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, thanked Council for the discussion 2006 Amendm 1s, Kennydale concerning the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, expressing her happiness that the B ueberry Farm issue will be revisited. Ms. Petersen stated that she will forward to Council case ? ' law from the Growth Management Hearings website concerning critical areas. EXECUTIVE SESSION MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL RECESS AND ADJOURNMENT INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR APPROXIMATELY 30 MINUTES TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL LITIGATION WITH NO OFFICIAL ACTION TO BE TAKEN AND THAT THE COUNCIL MEETING BE ADJOURNED WHEN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS ADJOURNED. CARRIED. Time: 9:52 p.m. RECEIVEd { DEC 0 7 2006 RENTON CITY COUNCIL ` -QY1d V � � � ""I ctrr o R r FEB 0 9 2007 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE • ta4r-ects • Dcdrtce eall184141) MicL LULL ck412-f-€-(•L° ZO o (t, • kl- '' .,„, • • z. , N»',- ,, r� �' ' y, r�. r...a _ - Q x • f- ''k. �x R^- "¢, ems,'"" • ,art; • . r - - l . , .....„ ,......,, 200Co 4 \ 1,•‘.,-„,., ,, . . „. , ea1 1 - e- _, ,..., , • . K . . . ..-, ! \,,,1 V ..'...'„, ..• ' •1'.1+:: /'.',.'il,. ' • ,''f'',.::**‘,..' ''',I.: ' •\•0!1•1.': itel,; '• ; ' ' ';: wi:','..0::: `'..,--...; "i.I— ' : . ti4.,,, C. c-6:3 Q-- c ". 4 {� tr0 ,� . . USEd --- c)°,....._\ ,. ..... o2usi a is '::, 0 0 ex- A _„ .c\xyA li � � �� c10 -RO ne,- - , . .. , . - ... ,.., . .. . , . . # . ..,..., . , . ‘,„', tj : •• 1.44 '. ' • i,.4, F 1 . ' w `fir, 4= . e I ',OW 'Vie .................. . . 4. • .• ' •IF 1 Ii ,,, , , l i ,.. ,t1 ... , , , .4147 -`:•,i, . ,,, 1,1 ,, ", ;',:3 1 f-,H:,.'J-.,,,,,-c-,•.'I .d4 A),,,.‘.'. .;,-,'',-'---.'',:'I,1'--‘1/4-'";.:.,;..'.;.1•'..st te0,,lt't.i',...y'NIi,.i\":,v•.•'/.-.'' -1I'',F,',I., ..•-..g,.''.',‘,.,'Iil;C;t..;t4i,.•'‘':'tIlft.t.':''','P,''.-.1..„"t:,:,--1;.•:::.,-'1:'...'-?'.,":-'', iO-,' 4 i,1 " t tr ‘ iJ i 4.2',,'.,'k''•4 0,-, 4••' • ,. '-' . .. ' :-., • ' ..,...,... , , ... 1 1.74 . . ciAA-. dciEC . _. _,..... ;.,„,„.=.7-• L, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, \() n ai e____j ..,. ,.., _ ...... , ___,..._ II 1 ''''''. 1 I ' ; ' ' 1 V.4(1 L ., , ''•I't-' 4 } t ,,l''' it, •' i ' 't ' 1 Pc 1 . i 1 1 '° i',.. 'till)'1 II ' ''" 11 1 1.4'' '••• , I • 1 ., i 41/1 ' ''''' ' • ' '1 ' ' ' L i IP : ' '...•: 1 l'i) '', 1. : 41- - I, ‘t '' . -. , 1 i 1 3 i 1 • AI' r , 1 ' ...,, oil • ' • ' I I) i -; • -: •III• 4:01• '1' 1 t IL, ., 01;'I ' 1,i,.. . i Amow • • voile 1. • • • Z J . 1 « , } * ,, ' '" 'k ,, Y ?, 'yp,.' 1. i � e .'.''4 yam" , " .,.r ,fit *5 m' e 'h' at ,ems.p-u . 4tT 9 1 .. ,p.' J Alli Y S t. E � �.. ' isC 4." £ ' �' ,' ,,-ss -� ,.; ,- i #rm h � l4 E a F fib J a '� F ., „ '' :,1+� 1 r . ‘.41'''*elf*. il ' „ 9 �' T,�+, ♦ % ,441. � _ ' stk " � ,. .ol f.' \`,a "is,t4' •f A > a°',', 3 . :�. • • pia • :� .... '. . • t .. • a t • 23 € s. •,% ,�,h 4 ➢ A, • • , , • • • . • • ♦r • • • • Watershed Program Manager Environmental Services Office Washington State Department of Transportation Mail Address: PO Box 47331 Olympia, WA 98504-7331 Office Location: 310 Maple Park Ave SE Olympia, WA Phone: 360.705.7477 Fax: 360.705.6833 Email: gersibd@wsdot.wa.gov ---Original Message---- From: Erika Conkling [mailto:EConkling@d.renton.wa.us] Sent:Thursday,April 27,2006 11:38 AM To: Gersib, Dick Subject: Information on Wetland/Bog Kennydale area Renton Mr. Gersib- I am a land use planner for the City of Renton. I have been assigned to staff a rezoning proposal for the area known as the Kennydale Blueberry Farm on NE 20th and near Jones Avenue in Renton. There are a variety of contentious issues regarding this proposal. I am emailing you in pursuit of documentation and information on one of them. The area in question was thought to be a wetland at some point,and wetland characteristics have been documented in some areas, but decades of development have eliminated or degraded what may have been present in the early 1900s. One of the neighbors of the farm. Ms. Rider, gave me your name and email address. She communicated with you sometime last year regarding this area. In the communications you discussed the historical presence of a peat bog in this area and the potential for restoration. You also mentioned that you had done a brief field assessment. I am writing to see if you would share any documents,assessments,field reports, or other information about the existence of a wetland in this area. It would also be helpful to have an indication of the professional qualifications of the people invovled in producing the information. Often,this information is included in formal reports, but not field notes or other less formal documents. It is important that I carefully document the information that I receive, because regardless of the recommendation that I send forward,the final decision on the rezone is likely to be appealed by some party. Thank you for your time and for sharing any information that you might have on this subject. Erika L.Conkling Associate Planner voice: (425)430-6578 fax: (425)430-7300 City of Renton Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning 1055 S.Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 8/12/2006 From: Gersib, Dick[Gersibb sdot.wa.govj ..., Sent: Thursday,April 27,2006 4:32 PM. To: Erika Conkling Subject: RE:Information on Wetland/Bog Kennydale area Renton Attachments: blueberry fami.pdf;RESUME 2_06.doc Hi Erika, Thanks for the email and your quest for information. The wetland restoration site you reference is called W75 in our watershed characterization report that we completed for the North Renton segment of I-405. The report and appendices can be accessed at our WSDOT website that follows: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/environment/watershed/watershed charcter.htm I originally identified W75 through photo interpretation of color stereo-paired 1:12,000 aerial photos. The site was later field verified by me through a site visit via the adjacent public road. I am the senior author of this watershed characterization work and have attached my resume for your reference. The only on-the-ground field work on this site was conducted by Senior Wetland Biologist, Dr.William Null, PhD. Bill retired about a year ago so I do not have a resume for him. However,the following information was provided by his supervisor, Bob Thomas, (360)705-7405. Bill is a Professional Wetland Scientist and served as a Senior Wetland Biologist for Washington State Department of Transportation, He has extensive experience in the delineation and function assessment of wetlands throughout the State of Washington and has authored WSDOTs Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects, June, 2000. Please contact Bob Thomas if you need addition background information. I have attached a scanned copy of Dr. Null's original field notes for W75. I asked Dr. Null to complete a potential wetland mitigation site evaluation for this site and a selected number of other potential wetland restoration sites within our study area. There is no date on the form, but my recollection is that Dr. Null's field work was completed in the fall of 2003. His notes indicate that the site was, in 2003, a jurisdictional wetland. He also notes that the site has potential for restoration, enhancement, and preservation. I recall a conversation with Bill where he told me that he had gotten permission from the landowner(Darrell and Sue Kinzer)to walk the site and dig some soil pits but that they were not interested in doing any wetland restoration work and would sue if WSDOT tried,thus the references to"stay out of court" in his notes. While I must defer to Dr. Null regarding whether all or part of the site is currently a jurisdictional wetland, I have 30 years of experience in the restoration of wetland systems, and I consider this site to have high restoration potential. Peat systems are rare, even in western Washington, and having a peat wetland in an urban area provides unique opportunities for natural resource education, recreation, and community pride. Peat wetland systems require very special conditions to develop, are difficult to restore, and are considered virtually impossible to create because they require special conditions and long periods of time to develop. One publication by GB Rigg, 1958, in Peat Resources of Washington notes that peat soils develop at a rate of about one inch per 40 years in western Washington. In this case, site W75 appears to have maintained it's wetland hydrology,,albeit altered by drains and ditches. it is my professional judgment that this combination of soils and hydrology indicate that this site retains much of it's potential for restoration. However, restoring a wetland is much easier than waiting the 30 to 50+ years that will be required to begin to see the true restoration of a peat bog wetland. I will stop at this point and allow you to review the information provided. I apologize for the quickly written email but I will be out of the office nearly all of next week and wanted to get you something as soon as possible. If you have questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me anytime. Richard A. Gersib 8/12/2006 Thanks for faxing information on the Kennydale rezone paper. Planning Commission staff have put an interesting spin on this. My thoughts follow: 1)While they note that the City does not need a wetland delineation to rezone, it appears that the City really doesn't want to know how much of the site is jurisdictional wetland. This would seem important for potentially keeping it in it's current zoning designation, if that's what they wanted to do. 2)The good news is that regardless of how the site is zoned,the landowner is required to delineate all wetlands on the parcel prior to development. This means that sooner or later,the site will need to be delineated and if the wetland area is greater than currently mapped,then the City will need to deal with it accordingly. 3) I was surprised that there was less focus placed on the fact that the site contains peat soils and a high water table. These are two attributes that spell potential problems if developed for homes. It's hard for me to believe that the City didn't heed these "red flags". Just ask Thurston County if they regret allowing residential development in high water table areas. I thought good planning was intended to avoid problems, not create them. 4)The City is focused on protecting existing critical areas and yet has minimized the importance of the wetland. They consistently talked about the site as being degraded and providing reduced functions. In their efforts to "hold the line"on existing wetland area, as required by their critical area ordinance,the City is missing an opportunity to restore this wetland (or facilitate the restoration of the site) and actually improve the natural resources in the area. Unfortunately, it's just not the City who has missed opportunities..it's happening throughout the Puget Sound area. 5) Here's the good news...you and the rest of the neighborhood are on the City's "radar screen"and they know that you are wetland and open space advocates. That's a good thing. I continue to think about how we can be proactive, rather than reactive. The current property owners are likely only looking to get the most value from their land, so whether they sell to a developer or a neighborhood association or conservation group is likely not a big issue, as long as the price is right. I won't be able to do this on WSDOT work time, but I'll explore water quality grant funds that might be available for acquisition and restoration. It's a very long shot, but its worth me looking again. If we find potential options, I might be able to do some simple modeling of how flows and pollutant loading have changed over time in Kennydale Creek. I can't use work resources for this, but I'll see if I can access public domain flow and pollutant loading models from my home computer. If we can document the benefits of a restored wetland to the stream and Lake Washington,we might have the foundation of a grant proposal. Our daughter is getting married in early August so my next three weeks are going to be pretty crazy, but after that I might have some time to work on this more. Don't get worried...I see my role as providing you with options and it's your call and that of your neighborhood to make any decisions on how to proceed. Thanks again for the status report, Dick Richard A. Gersib Watershed Program Manager Environmental Services Office Washington State Department of Transportation Mail Address: PO Box 47331 8/12/2006 Neir tI T'P;''�' e ;F89 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Northwest Regional Office e 3190 160th Avenue SE•Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452•(425) 649-7000 October 16, 2006 Ms. Erika Conkling, Senior Planner City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms Conkling: RE: Comments on SEPA DNS for Kennydale Blueberry Farm Rezone, LUA05-159 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed DNS dated October 2, 2006, for a rezone of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm property from Resource Conservation(RC) to R-4. The Department of Ecology believes that the proposed rezone will pose a significant risk of adverse impacts to wetlands on this property, and to the beneficial functions that the wetlands provide to the watershed. The DNS does not adequately evaluate this risk. The SEPA checklist attached to the DNS notes that the lower two-thirds of the parcel is covered by 1 to 5 feet of"soft peat." The Soil Survey of King County Area(Snyder et al. 1973) maps this soil as Shalcar muck, a hydric (wetland) soil. Evidence indicates that the site holds a large remnant of an important wetland system maintained by shallow groundwater and by a spring that flows out of the adjoining greenbelt on the east. As the SEPA checklist notes, the surface water from this spring flows north via a ditch just inside the parcel's eastern border and ultimately through Kennydale to Lake Washington. A "Special Focus Issue Paper on the Kennydale Blueberry Farm" (Issue Paper) was included in the information packet for the Renton Planning Commission meeting of November 2, 2005. This Issue Paper noted that the "soft soils" covering about two-thirds of the parcel would have to be "removed and replaced with suitable fill" in order to build homes on the site. The Issue Paper states that "a wetland area mapped over a portion of the Blueberry farm" is the basis for requesting a wetland evaluation. After discussing the site's potential for residential development, the issue paper cautions: "Depending upon the results of a wetland analysis, this type of activity may not be allowed under current regulations." The paper concludes that existing information on drainage or wetland conditions is outdated and that updated information is needed before a zoning decision can be made. We agree. m Ms. Erika Conkling `'imuov 'taro September 16, 2006 Page 2 Unfortunately, the proposed DNS says nothing about the updated information that the issue paper said was needed. The proposed action could very well lead to the destruction of wetlands, including replacement of organic soils by fill. Muck and peat soils are extraordinarily effective at improving water quality by removing toxins and other pollutants. They also retain disproportionate volumes of stormwater and release it slowly. Such functions are vital to the health of the watershed, the municipal infrastructure, and Lake Washington. A delineation, rating, and function assessment of wetlands on the parcel should be a prerequisite to any land-use decision that could affect their fate. The wetland study should also evaluate the effect of"improvements in drainage of the property," including "a major dewatering in 2004," which the issue paper said the property owner reported. What was the nature of the dewatering? Could it have resulted in adverse impacts to aquatic resources or other sensitive areas? Did it involve work below the ordinary high water mark or divert or change the natural flow? Thank you for taking these concerns into account. Please call or e-mail me with any questions or for further discussion. I can be reached at(425) 649-4447. Sincerely, Richard K. Robohm Wetland Specialist RKR:rc cc: Anne Fritzel, Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development Pam Erstad, Washington Department of Fish& Wildlife Jeff Davis, Washington Department of Fish& Wildlife Donna Bunten, Ecology CAO Review Coordinator Erik Stockdale, Wetlands Specialist, Ecology Northwest Regional Office �a6srnr�o� .94 ieae State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Region 4 Office: 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard-Mill Creek,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311 October 12, 2006 Erika Conkling, Senior Planner City of Renton Economic Development Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Ms. Conkling: SUBJECT: Proposed Determination of Non-significance; Kennydale Blueberry Farm Rezone, File Number CPA 2006-M-02, Kennydale Creek and Its Associated Wetlands, Tributary to Lake Washington The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has reviewed the above-referenced Proposed Determination of Non-significance, and offers the following comments at this time. Other comments may be offered if the project progresses. A Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA; RCW 77.55.021/WAC 220-110; to be issued by WDFW) would be required for activity affecting the natural bed or flow of the stream or its associated wetlands. The stream on the property is the upper end of Kennydale Creek and should be classified at least as a class 2 perennial stream. It supports crayfish and other unidentified fish species. The wetlands are a rare peat soil based system of very high value, especially if restored and given adequate buffering. WDFW believes it is imperative to preserve and protect these wetlands, as directed by the Growth Management Act(GMA), and it would be contradictory to the GMA to rezone this property and allow dense residential development, particularly without a carefully planned and implemented mitigation plan. Development of the property without such a plan would result in disruption of the natural drainage and the degradation of the quality of the stream and wetland system. WDFW also notes the buffers widths being considered are inadequate to protect this very sensitive system. Furthermore, WDFW believes it would be premature to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed rezone without a proper wetland delineation and a full biological evaluation. The SEPA checklist is lacking key information concerning fish and wildlife use of the site and the area near the site. A variety of wildlife species (including great blue herons, osprey, pileated woodpeckers, deer, ducks, and shorebirds) have been observed using this area for habitat, but Ms'Conkling October 12, 2006 Page 2 that is not mentioned in the SEPA checklist. Nor does the checklist even mention the existence of the wetland. As it is, there is no scientific basis by which to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed rezone on the wetland or stream system or the fishlife and wildlife which use it for habitat. This proposal should not proceed without further study and a plan to restore the wetland and its buffers. WDFW appreciates the cooperation of the City of Renton in our efforts to preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the fish and wildlife resources of the state of Washington. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions, please contact me at(425) 649-7042 or fisheldf@dfw.wa.gov. Sincerely, Larry Fisher Area Habitat Biologist LF:lf:CORBlueberryFarm.s.doc cc: WDFW SEPA Coordinator It W�=7�:• Nei;�i leee State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Region 4 Office: 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard-Mill Creek,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311 October 19, 2006 Erika Conkling, Senior Planner City of Renton Economic Development Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Ms. Conkling: SUBJECT: E-mail Concerning WDFW Comments on Proposed Determination of Non- significance; Kennydale Blueberry Farm Rezone, File Number CPA 2006-M- 02,Kennydale Creek and Its Associated Wetlands, Tributary to Lake Washington The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has reviewed the above-referenced e-mail received from you on October 18, 2006. The e-mail provided further information related to the Proposed Determination of Non-significance (DNS). The e-mail stated the WDFW comments were based on"...a clear assumption that the City is planning to allow full development on the site...". That statement is inaccurate. WDFW comments were based on the information provided in the checklist and accompanying site plan map showing the potentially proposed buffers around the blueberry production(wetland) area. Thank you for providing the information documenting the basis of the City's analysis and staff recommendation for the proposed DNS and rezoning. Based on the City's own analysis, it is evident that the proposed rezone is completely inappropriate, since it is based on speculation that a purchaser of the property would not continue its use in agriculture. Therefore, WDFW now requests the proposed DNS be withdrawn and considered only after the property is sold and it has been documented the property would no longer be farmed. Also, the City needs to amend the stream classification. The stream is perennial (The spring source of the stream is shown on a diagram which accompanied the SEPA checklist.) and should be classified to class 2 or 3 per the City critical areas ordinance to reflect this. The wetland classification is probably also incorrect. The Blueberry Farm area appears to be a part of a larger peat bog wetland which extends north and south of NE 20t" St. and should be classified as such. As stated in the earlier WDFW comments, this proposal is premature and should not proceed Ms:Conkling October 19, 2006 Page 2 W..• without further study, as has been recommended by the Washington Department of Ecology . Contrary to what was stated in the City's analysis (page 3, paragraph 2 of the Amendment 2006- M-2 —Blueberry Farm), development which has been allowed in the area has degraded and reduced wetland features, functions and values, but it has not eliminated them. Furthermore, if the property were to be rezoned,the available information indicates that R-1, not R-4 and certainly not R-8, would be the appropriate designation. This is because the City's critical areas regulations would not adequately protect the stream and wetland on the site. This can easily be observed from the damage to critical areas occurring near the site and elsewhere in the City where development is ongoing. (One example is to the wetland northeast of the Blueberry Farm where a violation occurred and was permitted after the fact, rather than corrected.) This damage is actually a key part of the basis for the request for the rezone. The configuration of the property outside of the likely critical areas buffers may not even be amenable to formation of additional building lots, since access to additional lots may be unavailable due to the narrow width of the developable area. This would be even more evident if the appropriate buffers, after the wetland is properly classified, were included on the site plan. WDFW appreciates the cooperation of the City of Renton in our efforts to preserve, protect, perpetuate. and manage the fish and wildlife resources of the state of Washington. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 649-7042 or fisheldf@dfw.wa.gov. Sincerely, Larry Fisher Area Habitat Biologist LF:if:CORBlueberryFarm2.s.doc cc: WDFW: SEPA Coordinator, GMA Biologist WDOE: Robohm SMITH & LOWNEY, P. L.L. CI, Nero 231 7 E, JOHN ST. SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 9@ 1 22 (206) 860-2976, FAX f206) 860.41137 September 19, 2006 . • Renton Planning Commission 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Subject: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Update #200611/1-2 Members of the Planning Commission: • This letter includes the comments of Bill O'Connor and the Kennvdale Critical Areas Alliance ("Alliance") on the proposed Map Amendment to change the designation of the blueberry farm and residence at 1733 NE 20th St. from Resource Conservation to Residential Single Family land use with R-8 or R-4 zoning. For the reasons stated herein, we ask that the City maintain its existing Resource Conservation zoning on this parcel of property. In addition to these comments, Bill O'Connor and the Alliance incorporate by reference the comments previously submitted to the record and the evidence and comments submitted in opposition to the rezone by members of the community and other Alliance members. The owners of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, Susan Larson-Kinzer and Darrell Kinzer, cannot demonstrate that the R-4 or R-8 zoning is appropriate for this unique parcel of property, and the rezone must therefore be denied. Pursuant to the zoning code, "The Resource Conservation Zone(RC) is established to provide a very low-density residential zone that endeavors to provide some residential use of lands characterized by extensive critical areas or lands with agricultural uses, ,,. 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." The Blueberry Farm fits this RC Zoning. It contains extensive critical areas and is characterized by agricultural uses. As the attached documents show,the blueberry farm has produced a good crop and was open for harvesting this year. The site's owner advertised the blueberry farm this year and received numerous visitors for the U-pick harvest. The facts demonstrate that the attempts to convert this site to residential result from the profit to be made from conversion, not from the unsuitability of the site as a blueberry farm. While the owners' desire to relocate is beyond question, they have made no attempt to find a new owner for the working blueberry farm. Instead, the goal appears to be to maximize profits by converting the property to higher-density residential uses. The existence of agricultural land cannot be negated merely by the desire of its owners to convert the land to residential. Such a standard would undermine the policies of the Growth Management Act, which have been incorporated into the Renton.Municipal Code and Comprehensive Plan. By an objective standard, this site continues to be appropriately zoned for production of food and agricultural products. •z tscluayuaic\-1.1611.41 titeas Alliance Page 2,9/20/2006 • Changing this site to residential zoning would change the taxable value of the land and all but guarantee that agricultural production would cease and conversion would take place. The current zoning should be maintained to facilitate the sale of the farm to another farmer, thereby preserving this rare and cherished agricultural facility. The site is properly zoned a RC also because it contains an extensive wetland system and stream. The wetland a Category'! or Category 2 wetland, It is a rare peat wetland that constitutes the headlands of Keruiydale Creek. As such it is irreplaceable and has local significance. The wetland is over 2.65 acres in size according to a reconnaissance conduced by the Washington State Department of Transportation. There.is no indication that the wetland has reduced in size since that reconnaissance was conducted. We would note, moreover, that the City's actions in increasing drainage from the wetland was likely improper and cannot form the bases for reducing the protection of this wetland system. As a category 2 wetland, it is deserving of 50 foot buffers. If the wetland is category 1, the buffers are 100 feet. Because of the unique'nature of this wetland, a strong argument can be made that even greater buffers are required under the Renton Environmental Sensitive Areas Ordinance. The property also contains a Type 3 stream. There can be no'genuine dispute as to this categorization, As the attached documentation proves,this stream flows all year around in years of normal rainfall. This is aptly shown by the photos and testimony showing that this creek flowed throughout this summer, which had less than normal rainfall. A 75 foot buffer is required for this stream. Pursuant to Policy LU-134 of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, "Base development densities should range from 1 home per 10.acres (Resource Conservation)to 1 home per acre(Residential 1) on Residential Low Density(RLD) designated land with significant environmental constraint, including but not limited to: ... wetlands..." The existence of a stream certainly also constitutes an environmental constraint. "Density should be a maximum of 4-du/net acre (Residential 4) on portions of the Residential Low Density land where these constraints are not extensive and urban densities are appropriate." Id. Policy LU-135 clarifies that RC or R-l zoning is to be applied where"Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area." There is no question that this standard is met in this case. We would note that the applicant's statement that only 1/3 of the site is encumbered with wetlands appears to be based upon the fraudulent manipulation of wetland maps. Specifically, the wetland map upon with this statement was based was transposed to misrepresent the percentage of the site covered by wetlands. The wetland was shown extending into the hillside rather than its actual location 011 the blueberry farm. Whereas it may generally be true that a rezone need not be supported by wetland delineation, this is not the case in the instant situation. Here, the existing zoning is based in part upon the wetland encumbrance of the property and in order to demonstrate the rezone's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant must show that a significant percentage of the property is not encumbered by critical areas. Thus, in this specific rezone situation the applicant must provide an accurate professional wetland delineation and such delineation must be reviewed by the City pursuant to the Municipal Code. • Finally, we would note that the wetland and the creek are especially important because this site is in an aquifer protection zone. The rezoning of this property is contrary to the goals of aquifer protection and this interest is not adequately protected by the critical areas ordinance, ;ILcruiyuulc Areas AlllarnCe Page 3,9/19/2006 There are a number of other concerns that we have, First, we are concerned that it appears that this decision-making process is not supported by adequate review under the State Environmental Policies Act. The conversion of this unique facility to residential is a significant environmental impact that should be supported by an environmental impact statement. We are also concerned that there has been inadequate notice of this proposal. The public notice provides no indication that this parcel contains wetlands or a working farm and does not adequately identify the parcel in question so that members of the public understand the significance of participation. Finally, we believe that this rezone is a quasi-judicial decision that is protected by the appearance of fairness doctrine, Councilmember Dan Clawson has spent time at the home of the applicant and the applicant has had numerous ex parte meetings with decision-makers from the City. We thank you in advance for your consideration of these comments and we urge you to maintain the existing RC zoning of the Blueberry Farm. Please provide future notices regarding this application, including notice of the decision, to me at the address below. Very Truly Yours, SMITH & LOWNE.Y, P.L.L.C. • • By Knoll D. Lowney Attorney for Bill O'Connor and. Kennydale Critical Areas Alliance City Planning Commission Members I am writing this in support of retaining the existing Resource Conservation zoning on the Kennydale Blueberry Farm at 1733 NE 20 ST. This area has been an important wetland and wildlife corridor for all my years as a Renton citizen. I feel that the City's stated goals of guarding environmentally sensitive areas from development would preclude any changes in protection for this very unusual and vulnerable site, and should actually trigger a grant proposal of some kind to provide for public ownership. This would be the most effective way to ensure that it remains protected into the future, and is consistent with Renton's Comprehensive Plan. Our quality of life depends on preservation of our open spaces, parks, and environmentally fragile areas. Please be open- minded about the possibilities at hand, and envision something more for our wonderful community than just a few more big houses. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to create something spectacular for everyone who lives here, and something city leaders can be proud of for years to come. The Kinzers have put a lot of work into this beautiful oasis, and they should not have to develop it to get a fair price. It is much too valuable in its current status as one of the only farms in the city. We are counting on you to be the best and brightest, and leave us all the richer for it- in ways that money well spent can do for generations to come. Thank you very much for this opportunity. Linda Middlebrooks 510 Seneca NW Renton , WA 98178 City Planning Commission Renton City Council I feel that I must express my dismay at the direction the City of Renton is headed. The utter disregard of the citizen's best interests, in the rush to become the Federal Way of Lake Washington, will be the basis for the coming voter uprising. We voters hire you to protect us and our critical areas from unwise and illegal development decisions and we have a right to expect that you live up to your promises to do so. Anything less is a betrayal of every resident who counts on you to uphold these environmental laws, and we will not let this situation continue indefinitely. We will be actively supporting candidates who share our vision of a city that is truly "Ahead of the Curve", as evidenced by their dedication to true environmental defense, not just empty rhetoric and emptier promises. The time to take a stand is NOW, before there is nothing left to protect. Save the Blueberry Farm and the underlying peat bog. Save the Kennydale wetlands from further destruction, and save our city from the greed and shortsighted development that has ruined so many other once- beautiful towns. Over 98% of our urban wetlands are already gone. If we do not start being more proactive, it will be too late. Forever. Signed Kristi and Gerald Hand 517 Smithers Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 fir. *erne Renton Planning Commissioners RE:Kennydale Blueberry Farm Testimony from hearing of 9/20/06 Although there has been an increase in illegal activity in our beautiful neighborhood,the police cannot help us.These violations of our laws are being committed by people in suits who hide behind the loopholes in our"No Net Loss"policies and critical areas regulations.How can we trust that one of our most amazing and rare places will be protected when the adjacent wetlands are being starved of water from erroneous drainage designs,then filled and bulldozed before the rush grasses have even died? Retaining Conservation zoning is the best hope we have of preserving this important part of our groundwater system.The well just downstream is one of the City's most productive, the extensive underground springs which feed the blueberry bushes also feed our aquifer,and peat wetlands not only absorb incredible amounts of runoff water,they are also literally irreplaceable.They and their natural flood control and purification functions cannot be duplicated. In the rush to build houses on ANY undeveloped land-no matter how unsuitable-we must not equate value with developer profits.The blueberry farm is totally unsuitable for anything other than its current use as an historic agricultural area,whether the current owners are the ones farming it or not.It is encumbered by steep slopes,extensive wetlands and springs, and there is absolutely no justification for lessening the protection that RC zoning confers. The Growth Management Act specifically prohibits financial considerations from entering in to Best Available Science decisions on environmental protections.The City's own rezone conclusions from November of 2005 discuss the farm's lower elevation,storm water retention functions,and peat soils.They also refer to the need for more wetland studies BEFORE being able to come to any decision on this rezone.So far we have not heard anything except the Kinzer's scientific opinions,as relayed to Ms.Conkling. Do we have proof that the farm is not viable? That the hydrology has changed substantially? That the buildable land is contiguous? That there is any buildable land if the category II wetland buffers are subtracted,per Renton regulations? This rezone has tremendous negative implications for the peat bog and the entire neighborhood,and benefits no one but the property owner who wants to sell it to a developer. Please consider the long-term viability of our wetland resources, and be cautious when deciding our children s future. Thank you for your consideration of these issues. S.Rider 1835 NE 20 ST Renton,WA 98056 RENTui July 21, 2006 Dear, Randy Cormar � City of Renton Council President CE itt I'm writing in regard to the proposed rezoning of a portion of upper Kennydale brought eaol about by the request to rezone the Blueberry farm property from RC to R-8 or R-4, I Council- attended the Planning Commission meeting on July 19, 2006 and came away with more e: questions than answers. I have spoken with Renton's City Planners and they have always responded quickly,but their answers seem ubiquitous to me. I feel that the Blueberry farm request for rezoning is being used to address other issues at the expense of the property owners in the proposed rezone area. Property owners whose property taxes have risen greatly due to the high-density building, which has taken, place. My property taxes have risen 183% in 8-years. Of that increase the City taxes has risen 161%, Land value have increased 288%. If there is no other underlying motive than responding to the Blueberry farm owner's request to rezone their property, it should be addressed without taking this shotgun approach based upon the stated concern of spot zoning. The Blueberry farm is already spot-zoned RC. It could be rezoned to R-8 the same as the surrounding properties. The wetland requirements would greatly limit the number of homes, which are built on this property, end of issue. State and other experts state that the Blueberry farm property is a peat bog and no additional building should be allowed on it.As one expert stated" if the bog is ten feet deep, it took in excess of 5,000 years for the bog to reach its present condition and it cannot be replaced, such as wet-lands can. I strongly urge you as City Council President to quickly resolve this contemptuous issue and cancel the August 23, 2006 Upper Kennydale R-4 Rezone meeting. Notify all property owners, which have already strongly opposed the rezoning of their properties at the Planing Commission meeting and that the area rezone issue being removed from consideration. One possibility for the Blueberry property could be the purchase by the city as a public park, pea-patch or other public use, which would not damage the property and the peat bog and allow it to continue as a buffer for seasonal run-off. Sincerely, Harry A. Kodis 2619 Jones Ave N.E. Renton, WA 98056 425-226-9477 Kodis--BPS@att.net Hello, Renton Commissioners. Please consider my objection to the zoning change for the blueberry farm. I do not think there is any good reason to change it, and there are MANY good reasons to leave it alone. Keep building houses on every scrap of land you haven't covered already, but at least make sure they are not in a rare peat bog. If you don't even take care of this, why even have any wetland protection laws? This whole land was sacred to my ancestors. I hope at least this tiny bit is to you, too. Lisa McBain 304 N Wells Apt # 4 Renton, WA 98055 • September 16, 2006 Lisa Perry 12440 169th Ave SE Renton, WA 98059 Dear City of Renton Planning Committee: Many other municipalities have had the foresight to preserve comparable wetland areas for the benefit of their citizens, providing recreational opportunities along with the obvious benefits like storm water retention, ground water protection, open space and habitat restoration. I beg you to be more imaginative, and take this opportunity to create an agricultural wonder that will attract families from the entire area and add to the many fine destinations in the great City of Renton. Thank ou for allowing me to have the opportunity to be heard. 1-e/e.)2.e/d— Sincerely, • r *iris Nur✓ Dear City of Renton Planning Committee: I feel it is important to speak out on the potential rezoning of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, It is appalling that the city could be jeopardizing this very rare wetland. Not only is it a local treasure, but also it supports very important hydrologic functions. Such places are meant to be protected by our land use policies promising city ownership and stewardship of our most critical areas, and the city should be pursuing finding sources for this purpose. Thank You, Georgia Mattson 164 Monterey PINE Renton, Wa 98056 w > r Proposed Rezoning of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm I have many friends and relatives in the Kennydale area, and they are universally opposed to the rezone of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm as I am. The future of our children depends on the choices we are making now, which is why these areas are called critical. We must protect them better, and not be so quick to make unwise decisions that we will regret later. Destroying our most irreplaceable natural resources is a permanent mistake, for a very limited and temporary benefit. Actually, I see NO benefit to those of us who love this city and want it to be a wonderful place for generations to come. Please vote against this shortsighted proposal. Bridgette rennan 18335 120th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 To: City Planning Commission I cannot believe that the city would let this rezoning go through on the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. The developers are destroying this city with their greed and disregard for our quality of life and we are sick of it. Every law the city has about their wetlands, their aquifer, and their responsibility to the citizens of Renton — says this area should be protected at the highest level. To even consider rezoning it to allow houses is a complete abdication of the leadership we have been promised by this current Council and the Mayor, and we will be paying close attention to how this is handled. I fail to see any advantage to the people of this city who you purport to represent. Please consider this carefully before taking any action. -(44/?y Cecc /4421.4Aite Ray and Heather McElice 2701 NE 20th St Renton, Wa 98056 Renton, So Larson Kinser buys the kennydale farm for less than most people were paying for a house, pays the lowest rate of taxes for twenty years, and now that's she's ready to "move on" She wants the city to help her screw up the best wetland in the city on her way out the door? Give me a break! The farm is NOT dying, as all those happy customers out there this summer can attest to, and if only getting 15 times what she paid for it is a "hardship" then boo hoo. Remember her speech to the council about how important it is to protect our open space? Was she promoting developing wetlands as the best way to do that? You people need to do your own fact finding. Don't just take her word for eveything. Brian Gabrielson 2201 ne 16111 St Renton wa (11 February 5,2007 Renton City Council Minutes Page 33 reading. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 34 for ordinance.) CAG: 05-165, NE Sunset Council President Nelson presented a Committee of the Whole report Blvd/Duvall Ave NE recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to transfer$430,000 Intersection Improvements, from the 2007 Duvall Ave. Widening Project to the construction phase of the Sanders General Construction, NE Sunset Blvd. (SR-900)/Duvall Ave. NE Intersection Improvements Project. Fund Transfer The Committee also recommended that Change Order 1 to the intersection improvements project contract(CAG-05-165)with Sanders General Construction Company be approved in order to perform additional work necessary to complete the project,to extend the completion date by 21 working days,and to increase the construction contract cost by $157,132.51. The Committee further recommended that the budget amendment for this matter be presented as part of the 2006 Carry Forward Ordinance. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services Community Services Committee Chair Corman presented a report Committee recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve Mayor Appointment: Library Board Keolker's appointment of Amy Pieper to the Library Board for a term expiring 6/1/2012. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Appointment: Municipal Arts Community Services Committee Chair Corman presented a report Commission recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve Mayor Keolker's appointment of Britt Peterson to the Municipal Arts Commission for an unexpired term expiring 12/31/2009.* Councilmember Corman introduced Ms. Peterson who was present in the audience. *MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chair Clawson presented a report recommending Utility: Initial concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the utilities cooperation Infiltration/Inflow Reduction, agreement with King County for the Initial Infiltration/Inflow Reduction King County Project, which allows King County to implement flow reduction repairs within a portion of Renton's sewer service area. The Committee recommended that the Mayor and City be authorized to execute the agreement. The Committee further recommended that the resolution regarding this matter be presented for reading and adoption. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 34 for resolution.) Planning&Development Planning and Development Committee Vice Chair Clawson announced that the Committee Kennydale Blueberry Farm Comprehensive Plan amendment item will be Comprehensive Plan: 2006 reported out at the next Council meeting. Amendments Kenn dale Blueberry Farm 4 RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES February 5,2007 , Renton City Council Minutes w Page 30 and Benson Hill with residential development, which connect the communities. He detailed how the two communities are connected, pointing out that Benson Hill residents work, shop and play in Renton, and he explained why Renton should take action on the issue now. Mr. Flynn noted that any delay raises the risk of increased opposition. Assistant CAO Wine stated staffs intent to bring the item before Council at its February 12 meeting. She noted that Council has until March 19 to take action on the annexation petition. Ms. Wine indicated that if this goes forward on the February 12 or February 26 Council agenda, it may be possible to place the issue on the November 2007 ballot. Citizen Comment: Hickling- Jan Hickling, 1919 Talbot Rd. S., Renton, 98055, expressed her opposition to Jet Center at Airport the proposed jet center at the Renton Airport. She referred to a publication that indicated that microjets will begin to enter the active fleet in 2006 reaching 4,950 aircraft by 2017. Saying that it is unreasonable to assume a lot of these planes are going to make Renton their home, Ms. Hickling pointed out that the older, loud jets will use the airport. She noted that once the jet center is open, the City will not be able to control the time, height, or the number of jets landing and taking off from the airport. Ms. Hicks voiced her support for leaving the airport the way it is. Citizen Comment: Hicks - Barb Hicks, 10402 151 st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, expressed concern pertaining 2006 Comprehensive Plan t i-) to the notification regarding the Kennydale Blueberry Farm Comprehensive Amendments, Kennydale Plan item listed on the Council meeting agenda under Unfinished Business. She Blueberry Farm stated that a number of parties of record would like to speak on this topic, and the matter should be deferred to the next Council meeting. Council discussion ensued regarding the notification process, and the notification made for the Planning and Development Committee meeting held on February 1 concerning this matter. Citizen Comment: O'Connor- William O'Connor, 10402 151st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, stated that although 2006 Comprehensive Plan the Planning and Development Committee report regarding the Kennydale Amendments,Kennydale Blueberry Farm Comprehensive Plan amendment was listed on the Council Blueberry Farm meeting agenda, the related ordinance was not. Therefore,he did not expect that any action on the ordinance would take place this evening. Mr. O'Connor requested that the matter be deferred until the next Council meeting. Citizen Comment: Grimit- Kari Grimit, 11437 SE 180th Pl., Renton, 98055, voiced support for the Benson Hill Communities annexation of the Benson Hill communities to Renton. She asked that Renton Annexation place importance on proper community planning in the area, as there has been a lack of planning by King County in regards to traffic. Ms. Grimit stated her hope that Renton will want to annex the area, and will also carefully review the area's issues related to zoning, traffic,police, fire, and parks. Citizen Comment: Stevens - Elizabeth Stevens, 353 Taylor Ave. NW, Renton, 98057, expressed her Airport-Related Noise frustration regarding obtaining information concerning the corporate jet noise at the Renton Airport. Ms. Stevens stated that she was provided information that she had previously asked for; however, her request for an additional document has not yet been fulfilled. City Clerk Walton indicated that the matter will be addressed. Citizen Comment: Harris- Kristen Harris, 10945 SE 168th St., Renton, 98055, stated that she is a member Benson Hill Communities of the Benson Hill Communities Progress Group, and pointed out that Annexation development will continue to occur in Benson Hill whether the area is annexed or not. She suggested that Renton accept the annexation with the existing King • ?iaiirn9nioq Pe vi op1'1 --tot Lavinillec REcEivEd I I ')4)Cil JAN 3 12007 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, RE�vTc,v c_ay ( 11.. NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT o • CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM FEB 0 9 2007 CENED O ITY CLERKS OFFICE DATE: January 30, 2007 TO: Terri Briere, Committee Chair Members of the Planning and Development Committee CC: Kathy Keolker, Mayor Members of the Renton City Council Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Alex Pietsch STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind SUBJECT: Review of the Blueberry Farm CPA and Rezone AMENDMENT 2006-M-2 — BLUEBERRY FARM DESCRIPTION: The owners of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm have requested rezone from the current Resource Conservation (RC) zoning to either Residential four units per net acre (R-4) or Residential eight units per net acre (R-8). A rezone to R-8 would require an amendment to the Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan from a designation of Residential Low Density(RLD) to Residential Single Family(RS). Review of the proposal was put on hold in November 2006 pending resolution of an appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's Determination of Non-Significance. The appeal has been withdrawn and final review of the proposal can now proceed. ISSUE SUMMARY: What is the appropriate zoning and land use designation for the Blueberry Farm? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: The request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to RS land use should be denied. However, the Kennydale Blueberry Farm should be rezoned from RC to R-4 within the RLD land use designation. ANALYSIS: The Kennydale Blueberry Farm was originally planted in the 1940s and has been in service as a u-pick farm ever since. Sue Larson-Kinzer and Darrell Kinzer, the current owners of the farm, have owned and operated the farm for the last two decades. They approached the City in Fall 2005 about rezoning their property. Since the Blueberry Farm was already part of a larger City-initiated review of lands designated as RLD, staff notified neighbors and began a preliminary analysis of the proposed rezone. Several interested parties submitted comments both for and against the potential rezone of the property. It was not possible to complete a thorough analysis prior to end of the h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc Terri Briere January 30,2007 Page 2 of 11 year, so the issue was held for formal application and consideration during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle. The Blueberry Farm owners submitted a formal application. Their request for rezone is based upon the argument that the farm is currently spot zoned, and the current RC zoning has failed to protect it from incompatible land use changes in the surrounding area. Also, the applicants argue, the Comprehensive Plan Vision directs development at higher density than is allowed in the RC zone. There has been a fair amount of land use change in the area surrounding the Blueberry Farm in the last two decades. Development around the farm has been allowed at the R-8 zoning standard. Increased impervious surface has increased storm water runoff. Development of the Heritage Glen plat, immediately northeast of the Blueberry Farm, required a major dewatering in order to construct basic infrastructure. The City eliminated the Higate Lift Station and installed new sewer infrastructure. At the Blueberry Farm, the property owners allege that these changes have affected the viability of the blueberry bushes and made it difficult to continue the operation of the farm as a business. RC zoning was created in 1992 as a way to protect and preserve lands for semi-rural agricultural use. Protection of critical areas and public open spaces was mentioned,but the primary purpose of the zone was to protect agricultural lands from adjacent uses which may interfere with the continued use of land for the production of food. The Blueberry Farm was appropriately zoned RC at this time, based upon its agricultural use for the production of food. However, the purpose of the RC zone has changed over time. Protection of critical areas and open spaces is the primary purpose of the zone today. The continuation of small-scale farming operations is mentioned,but the language requiring the protection of agricultural lands from adjacent uses was repealed in 1995. In fact, the Comprehensive Plan now directs the City to minimize the effects of agriculture on adjacent residential uses (Policy LU-139). At present time, the RC zone is only appropriate for the property if it continues to operate as a small-scale agricultural operation,public open space, or to protect a critical area. Property owners have concluded that their small"u-pick"business is no longer feasible in this location. Public open space may be a viable option if the City, or other community group,purchased the property and devoted the time and funds necessary to continue the use of the property as a public amenity. The City Council, however, has indicated it does not support purchasing the property, and no other public entity has emerged as a potential buyer. Absent the continuation of the use as a farming operation or a public amenity, however,the only purpose for which the property can remain zoned RC is for the protection of critical areas. Critical areas are likely to exist on the property. The headwaters of Kennydale Creek, although not shown on any map, are attributed to this area of upper Kennydale. A Class 4 stream runs through a hand-dug ditch along the east and north sides of the property. According to critical areas regulations, a Class 4 stream requires a 35 ft. buffer. In the City's mapping inventory, a potential wetland area is shown, covering a little more than one-third of the property. The mapped wetland encompasses nearly all of the stream area h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc Terri Briere January 30, 2007 Page 3 of 11 on the Blueberry Farm property. However, the map also shows the potential wetland covering a much wider area, including several parcels in both the Higate and Heritage Glen plats, as well as covering about 350 ft. of NE 20th Street. Clearly, the exact location and extent of a wetland in this area is in question. A fair amount of work has been done to classify and delineate that portion of the wetland that lies north of the Blueberry Farm and NE 20th Street. In 1987, the Pohl short plat across the street from the Blueberry Farm noted the presence of a wetland and the generally poor drainage conditions. Regulations at that time did not require delineation of the wetland. In 1990, the environmental checklist from a City-initiated culvert replacement did not characterize the area of the culvert, which takes the stream under NE 20th Street, as environmentally sensitive. A 1994 application for a long plat across the street from the Blueberry Farm by WA Developers, Inc. references a wetland report which found a Category III wetland on that property. Work done in 1999 and 2000 for the elimination of the Higate Lift Station found some Category II wetlands on the north side of NE 20th Street as well. No wetland was found in the area of the Heritage Glen plat, but a native growth protection easement was set aside for the buffer of the wetlands previously delineated on adjacent property. There has never been an actual wetland report or delineation done south of NE 20th Street in the area of the Higate plat or the Blueberry Farm. The Higate plat was fully developed before wetland protection was required. A sizable utilities and open space easement, about an acre in size, was created as part of the Higate plat. It shares almost the entire eastern property line of the Blueberry Farm. There doesn't appear to have been any regular maintenance or upkeep of this easement and a wintertime visit revealed that the easement appears to collect some of the area's storm water. The Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT) did a preliminary evaluation of the Blueberry Farm property for use as off-site wetland mitigation as part of the Interstate 405 widening project. Based on aerial photos and observation from NE 20th Street, an experienced biologist with WSDOT indicated that the Blueberry Farm may contain a rare peat wetland habitat, or at the very least, has preserved some of the original peat and has conditions favorable to restoration. A geotechnical report on the property, done in 1983 for Schneider Homes, Inc. did find the presence of peat soils and a high water table, and the WSDOT analysis is consistent with this. The Blueberry Farm does contain a pond near the back of the property, located out of the mapped wetland area. However, it is important to note that the WSDOT biologist did not visit the site, take soil samples, or do any formal classification or delineation of the property. Given this information, the following conclusions can be drawn. This area of Kennydale probably had many wetland features prior to residential development. Those features and functions have been lost over time as the land has been put to use for housing, roads, and agriculture. Small areas of wetlands do exist on some properties, but they have been classified as Category II and III, meaning that they have been disturbed and have reduced function. There may be a wetland on the Blueberry Farm, but without a formal delineation it is difficult to determine exactly how much of the property could be a wetland and what type of wetland it may be. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc Terri Briere January 30,2007 Page 4 of 11 Wetland determinations are not required for rezones or Comprehensive Plan amendments. However, calculating the developable area of a parcel using the mapped data is standard review procedure. The mapped wetland area is highly problematic and clearly does not accurately represent the wetlands in that area. It likely over-estimates the size of any wetland area on the Blueberry Farm. On the map, the wetland area is shown as consolidated on the property- taking up most of the eastern half of the parcel. Since the property has been in use for agriculture for more than 60 years, any wetland on the property is likely to be disturbed and have limited functionality. If the entire mapped wetland area was considered a Category III wetland, it would be required to have a 25 ft. buffer, leaving a developable area of 1.5 acres. If the entire mapped wetland area was considered a Category II wetland, it would be required to have a 50 ft. buffer, leaving a developable area of 1.15 acres. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc Terri Briere January 30,2007 Page 5 of 11 j ;� I ( ' L' 1 r \i ; i Blueberry Farm: 25'Buffdevelopableer-t5oland acres of 0 200 400 .,....: - 50'Buffer-1.15 acres of developable land .1 :2400 Based on the available information on critical areas, the Comprehensive Plan Residential Single Family(RS) designation is not appropriate for this property. It is the purpose of the RS designation to build larger subdivisions, rehabilitate existing housing, and provide infill development. None of these purposes would be served by rezoning the Blueberry Farm. Alternatively, the purpose of the RLD designation, the development of lower intensity residential uses where land is constrained by sensitive areas, suits the property perfectly. Thus, since the property is already in the RLD designation, a Comprehensive Plan change for the Blueberry Farm property is not warranted. Three zones implement the RLD Comprehensive Plan designation: the RC zone, the Residential one unit per net acre (R-1) zone, and the Residential four units per net acre h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc 400 Terri Briere January 30,2007 Page 6 of 11 (R-4) zone. Policy LU-135 in the Comprehensive Plan provides guidance for the mapping of these three zones. For the purpose of mapping four dwelling units per net acre (4- du/ac)zone areas as contrasted with lower density Residential 1 (R-1) and Resource Conservation (RC) areas, the prevalence of significant environmental constraints should be interpreted to mean: 1) Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area; 2) Developable areas are separated from 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 setback/buffers 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. The Blueberry Farm has not been designated as an urban separator in the Countywide Planning Policies, so criterion four does not apply. Mapped critical areas cover about 35 percent of the gross area of the property. However, even accounting for possible buffers, the mapped developable area is a consolidated chunk of land including the entire west half of the parcel. There is potential access to over an acre of contiguous, developable land. Given the consolidated nature of the mapped wetland, buffering and shielding of the critical area as required by the Renton Critical Areas Ordinance, should adequately protect it. Thus, the application of the Comprehensive Plan designation criteria suggests that R-4 zoning, and not RC or R-1 zoning, would be the best fit for this parcel. The purpose statement of the RLD land use designation notes that lands that can be adequately protected by critical areas regulations should be zoned R-4. R-4 zoning of the Blueberry Farm also meets the purpose of the zone as established in RMC 4-2- 020 D. This section notes that the R-4 zone is established to promote single-family residences in urban neighborhoods with amenity open spaces. It is appropriate, then, to consider rezoning the Blueberry Farm property to R-4. R-4 zoning has no minimum density requirement. This means that the upzone does not entitle the property owner to any minimum number of units. If, upon formal delineation, critical areas were found to encumber the entire property, there would be no entitlement to more intense development. However, if a formal delineation showed there was additional space for development, then it would allow the property owner that opportunity. Under an R-4 standard, between one and four dwelling units per acre would be allowed on the potentially developable portion of the property, according to the analysis of the mapped critical areas. Field examination of the property reveals that the west side of the property is higher and drier than the rest of the property. This area roughly correlates with the portion of the property outside of h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc Terri Briere January 30, 2007 Page 7 of 11 the mapped critical area. In light of this information, and with the application of R-4 zoning standards, it is most likely that only two units could be built on the property. Several uses could be allowed on the property under RC zoning that would not be allowed if rezoned to R-4. Professional dog kennels and commercial horse stables are two such uses that would probably not be welcome in the neighborhood, but are allowed in the RC zone. A professional bed and breakfast house could also be allowed under the existing zoning. The RC zone is also the only zone that allows Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Since the City's development regulations do not impose size limitations on ADUs (other than the regular zone standards), another full-size home could be possibly be built on the property, but the property could not be subdivided. (See Attachment A for a complete breakdown of the differences between the RC, R-1, and R-4 zone). Given this scenario, the undeveloped portion of the property would function as a very large private yard. Property owners are allowed to make many vegetation changes without a required permit. Removing a few trees a year, putting in a new lawn, bringing in some topsoil, fencing an area to keep an animal, and other such changes do not(and should not) require a permit. However, these incremental changes could alter the functions and values of nearby critical areas. These types of changes have historically altered the functions and values of what was probably an extensive system of critical areas in the Upper Kennydale area. Under R-4 zone standards, the property would have to be subdivided in order to add another dwelling unit. Subdivision regulations would trigger a full wetland delineation and critical areas analysis. Protected areas would be set aside in a Native Growth Protection Easement, which would prohibit all future development in the critical areas and protect the potential wetland area in perpetuity. These are important safe guards that make R-4 zoning the best choice for this property. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: The Blueberry Farm property currently contains a single dwelling unit. Given a likely critical area constraint that would leave approximately 1.15 net acres, under R-4 zoning, the property would have capacity for approximately four dwelling units under standard analysis. When the size and shape of the potentially developable portion is analyzed according to R-4 development standards, though, the most likely scenario for development is about two units. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed rezone supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan. Objective LU-DD, and the policies that accompany it, call for the Residential Low Density designation to support a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to lands constrained by critical areas at urban levels of development when possible. ZONING CONCURRENCY: This request complies with the decision criteria for rezones in RMC 4-9-180. It is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc Terri Briere January 30, 2007 Page 8 of 11 zoning is consistent with the adopted policies for the RLD land use designation. Although the Blueberry Farm property was reviewed during the 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle, the issue of its rezone was specifically held over until this year. Zoning of the property and the surrounding neighborhood has not been considered since 1992, when the Blueberry Farm was zoned RC. CONCLUSION: The Blueberry Farm does not meet the policies in the Comprehensive Plan for the Residential Single Family land use designation. It should remain in Residential Low Density Land Use. Unless the Blueberry Farm property was to continue to be used for agriculture, or to be used as an open space, it does not fit with the RC zone. If it is to be sold and redeveloped, as has been indicated by the current owners, the property best meets the policies and purposes of the R-4 zone t , 4 6 Blueberry Farm RC to R-4 0 400 800 LUA 05-159 CPA 2008-M 02 i RC a 13.4 -- t:4800 r h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc Terri Briere January 30, 2007 Page 9of11 ATTACHMENT A- Differences in Use Types in the Residential Low Density Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-4 USE ZONE ZONE ZONE Agriculture P P Kennels AD37 Commercial Stables AD37 AD37 Accessory Dwelling Unit AD7 Group Homes II for 6 or less AD P P Group Homes II for 7 or more H H Retirement Residences H K-12 Educational Institution (public or private) H9 H9 Cemetery H H Social and Service Organizations H H City Government Offices AD AD Horticultural nurseries, new H Golf Courses (new) H P H Marinas P Recreational Facilities, Indoor, new H Bed and Breakfast House, professional H AD Adult Day Care II H Day Care Center H25 Medical Institutions H Park and Ride, shared use P108 Model homes in an approved residential development P53 P53 Notes: 7. Subject to the development standards applicable to primary structures. 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. 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. 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. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc • Terri Briere ' January 30,2007 Page 10 of 11 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. IM Zone—Kennels and Hobby Kennels: Within the area south of I-405 and north of SW 16th Street only indoor kennels or indoor hobby kennels are permitted. 53. Provided a temporary use permit is obtained consistent with the provisions of RMC 4-9-240, Temporary Use Permits. 108.Permitted on existing parking required as accessory parking for a nonresidential use. Definitions: ADULT DAY CARE/HEALTH: A program designed to meet the needs of adults with functional impairments through an individualized plan of care. It is a structured, comprehensive program that provides a variety of health, social, and related support services in a protective setting during any part of a day for a minimum of four(4)hours, but less than twenty four(24)hour care. While beds may be provided for rest periods, adult day care/health uses are not intended to function as residential facilities. A number, where specified, is the maximum number of clients present at any one period of time during the program operation. Adult day care/health programs are subclassified as follows: A. Adult Day Care/Health Category I: A maximum of four(4) clients upon a property containing a residential use; and a maximum of twelve (12) clients upon a property in nonresidential use. B. Adult Day Care/Health Category II: Five (5) or more clients upon a property containing a residential use; and thirteen (13) or more clients upon a property in nonresidential use. BED AND BREAKFAST HOUSE, PROFESSIONAL: Overnight accommodations and a morning meal in a dwelling unit with four(4) to ten(10) guest rooms provided to transients for compensation. Professional bed and breakfast houses are proprietor- occupied, or the proprietor lives on a contiguous property, and morning meals are provided to the house residents and the overnight guests only. This definition does not include congregate residences, accessory bed and breakfast houses, hotels, or motels. DAY CARE CENTER: A day care operation licensed by the State of Washington (WAC 388-73-014), for thirteen (13) or more children in any twenty four(24)hour period, or any number of children in a nonresidential structure. This definition does not include adult day care/health. DWELLING UNIT, ACCESSORY: An independent subordinate dwelling unit contained within a single family detached dwelling or its accessory detached garage. An accessory dwelling unit houses family members related to the property owner or an employee of the property owner. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc • vase Terri Briere Nero January 30, 2007 Page 11 of 11 GROUP HOME II (PROTECTIVE RESIDENCY): A facility or dwelling unit housing persons, including resident staff; unrelated by blood or marriage and operating as a group family household. Staff persons provide care, education, and participation in community activities for the residents with the primary goal of enabling the resident to live as independently as possible. A protective residency may include disabled(mentally and physically)persons, foster child care, abused women shelter, orphanages and other uses where residents are deemed vulnerable and/or disabled and are not a threat to self or to public health or safety. This definition does not include congregate residential or secure community transition facilities. (Amd. Ord. 4982, 9-23-2002) KENNEL: A commercial facility for the care and/or breeding of dogs and/or cats. MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS: Facilities providing physical or mental health services, in-patient accommodations, and medical or surgical care of the sick or injured. This definition includes hospitals, clinics, hospice, and holistic health centers. This definition excludes medical and dental offices, convalescent centers,retirement residences, and group homes I and II. RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, INDOOR: A place designed and equipped for the conduct of sports and leisure-time activities within an enclosed space. Examples include gymnasiums, amusement arcades, health and fitness clubs, indoor tennis and racquetball courts, bowling alleys, and indoor swimming pools. This definition excludes indoor sports arenas, auditoriums, and exhibition halls. RETIREMENT RESIDENCE: A building or group of buildings which provide residential facilities, including a common kitchen and dining room but without full kitchen facilities (sink, oven or range, and refrigerator) in each unit, for residents sixty two (62) or more years in age, except for spouses for whom there is no minimum age requirement. This definition excludes multi-family(attached) dwelling units, boarding and lodging houses, convalescent facilities, adult family homes, and group homes I and II. 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. 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. CC: Kathy Keolker,Mayor Members of the Renton City Council Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to p&dc.doc Page 1of1 pia111'l If?C D� �e ( m i � 1 Julia Medzegian - Blueberry Farm Comp Plan Amendment Meeting, 2/1, 2:00 pm From: Julia Medzegian To: bobndina@comcast.net; hdburch@comcast.net; heylow@comcast.net; KD7GTE@comcast.net; kodis-by@att.net; levator_rico@hotmail.com; Marcie@ marciemaxwell.com; rdier@att.net; rgersib@comcast.net; robcanon@juno.com; rontonfire@yahoo.com; stefano4178@hotmail.com; wc_pohl@msn.com Date: 1/24/2007 5:39 PM Subject: Blueberry Farm Comp Plan Amendment Meeting, 2/1. 2:00 pm Please note in the attached notice that the meeting date is now February 1, 2006, at 2 pm. I had originally told several people that it would be on 2/15 and I wanted to make sure you were tracking the date change. Please let me know if you have questions. Sincerely, Julia Medzegian City Council Liaison 425.430.6501 jmedzegian@ci.renton.wa.us file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 1/24/2007 Page 1 of 2 Citizens to Council - Re: Councilmembers -Wetland Designation vreom From: Citizens to Council To: 'Karol Gabrielson' Date: 1/17/2007 11:42 AM Subject: Re: Councilmembers -Wetland Designation Dear Ms. Gabrielson, I want to thank you for taking the time to outline all of your concerns for Council and to assure you that they have been immediately forwarded to each Councilmember. I have just scheduled the code amendments for this area on the Planning & Development Committee agenda for 2/15/07, at 2 pm in the Council Conference room. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Julia Medzegian City Council Liaison 425-430-6501 >>> "'Karol Gabrielson"' <heylow@comcast.net> 1/12/07 10:59:41 AM >>> Dear Renton City Councilmembers, If you just received an e-mail from me prior to this one, please disregard it and read this one. I was proofing the e-mail when I hit ctrl-w by accident and it disappeared. Not sure if you received it, so I'm sending it again and including my address. Thank you. My name is Karol Gabrielson and I live at 2001 NE 20th Street, Renton WA 98056. Four days ago on Monday evening I attended a City Council Meeting. I came as part of a support group who have been working very hard to save the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, the peat bog system, and surrounding wetland areas. I didn't speak that evening as I wasn't signed up: but would like to have this one last opportunity to share my views before you make a decision on the development of the Blueberry Farm. I appreciate your taking the time to read this letter. On Monday evening, a representative of the Black River Alliance and from Herons Forever stepped to the podium and thanked the city and Councilmembers for all of their efforts in saving and restoring the Black River area and for protecting the herons. A thank you was also given for recognizing the wetland areas on the East Renton Plateau. I desperately wanted to be an individual who could also step to the podium and thank the City of Renton for protecting and preserving an important and rare critical area, however I was not able to do this. For some reason, Renton has turned its back on the area at the Blueberry Farm. I understand that it isn't as large as the SpringBrook wetland area that has been preserved and noted in the news recently, and it doesn't attract near as many herons as the Black River area (although there are some there), but this should not be a reason to destroy it. Studies have been done that clearly designate wetland. The City classified the area as critical as well. It is a critical area. It combats flooding. It contains characteristics and attributes that cannot be replaced or rebuilt, quite the contrary for a house. There are developments going up all around my home and around the homes of the residents who have banded together to try to save this extraordinary place. We have watched houses go up one after the other and have understood that developing must occur. However, we are fighting hard on this one for good reason. You can't replace this system. Also, I'd like to point out that the Blueberry Farm is an historical site and a truly unique part of our City. Many people know of it and it should be even more widely advertised and integrated into children's programs who live in the area. It is my strong belief that a development where the Blueberry Farm now sits will not act as a strong attraction or attribute. I don't think residents will make a special trip to drive down NE 20th Street on a yearly basis to see the wonderful unique development that sits there. I'd be amazed if you heard, "Wow! Look at those four new houses!What a unique and wonderful development, and how rare!" Four new houses are everywhere and can be built (as is currently being done) nearly everywhere. Wow...four new houses where a unique irreplaceable system and a Blueberry Farm once existed. Ahead of the curve? file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 1/24/2007 Page 2 of 2 NNW I've met many people new to Renton who are surprised that the Blueberry Farm exists and will make a trip just to go there. The beauty of Renton and its natural attributes is what has attracted so many of its residents here in the first place...not a concrete jungle and senseless development. This is a development request you have the responsibility to say"no"to. Balance is important. Balance is in your plan. The area from the NE 20th Street Blueberry Farm and the properties across the street all the way to NE 24th and Jones Road has been highly overlooked. At one time (recently) at the corner of NE 24th and Jones Avenue NE, there existed a natural pond. Ducks would come to the pond up until the time it was destroyed. I remember the "Proposed Land Use" sign going up when this land was going to be developed. Many of the neighbors remember it as well. We didn't fight against the development as we believed the City of Renton would develop in such a way as to preseve the natural beauty of the pond and build around it. Not so! The pond was filled in and 7-9 houses sit over and around it. A friend who had been out of town drove down Jones Road shortly after the development was finished. Ducks sat on the concrete with nowhere to go. She pulled to the side of the road and wept. What a tragedy. I believe the City of Renton is convinced that because of the mistakes it has made in the past with the allowing of developing in this area, that the wetland system is destroyed and no longer exists...so why not just go ahead and build the rest? This is not true. It does exist. Contrary to comments that have been submitted to the Council, the Blueberry Farm is lush and green and is not dying. Please do not take the attitude that it is already too late and justify the prior mistakes by going ahead and wiping out the entire system. That is not the responsible thing to do! The responsible thing to do is to stop it now, understand some things could have been handled differently, and preserve what is left! There's much left...it isn't gone...until you destroy it. This issue has been on the table a long time. Development is not supposed to be occurring until the issue is resolved, yet the property owners across the street from the Blueberry Farm have removed all the Poplars and another property owner has filled in areas of the wetland. The City has allowed this to happen even though the greenlight for development has not been given. This makes no sense. Please step up to the plate today, right away, and take pride in this valuable resource we're so lucky to have in the midst of our city. Act quickly and stop any further damage. Protect and promote this valuable City of Renton asset. Thank you, Karol Gabrielson This email request originated from the following link: http://rentonwa.g_ovlgovernment/default.apx?id=3212 file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 1/24/2007 Page 1of1 Citizens to Council - Re: Councilmembers Jan 8th Meeting From: Citizens to Council To: 'Helen Burch' Date: 1/17/2007 11:45 AM Subject: Re: Councilmembers Jan 8th Meeting Dear Ms. Burch, I would like to thank you for sharing your concerns with Council and assure you that your message was immediately forwarded to each Councilmember. I would also like to let you know that this issue has been scheduled for the Council's Planning & Development Committee on Thursday, 2/15/07, at 2:00 pm in the Council's Conference room on the 7th floor of city hall. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Julia Medzegian City Council Liaison 425-430-6501 >>> "'Helen D Burch' <hdburch@comcast.net> 1/8/07 3:20:58 PM >>> Jan. 8th Dear Councilmembers, Please spare the ONLY natural peat bog remaining, in this area. Renton has already destroyed many of the natural erosion controls and flood control systems. The rezoning is placing some of our most fragile slopes, streams and natural filtration systems in jeapardy. Please stop the infill you must leave some open space and preserve critical areas. Every piece of open space was NOT intended to be built on.... Thank you, Hele Burch This email request originated from the following link: http://rentonwa.gov/government/default.aspx?id=1084 file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 1/24/2007 Page 1 of 1 Citizens to Council - Re: Councilmembers - Kennydale Wetlands Rezone r,,;�iu';,� ,m,., ,n,.e9,��':: ..6�.. .,:: y io✓, G,F,.., ,;; �'„ ..... .,., e.,.( From: Citizens to Council To: 'Dina Davis' Date: 1/17/2007 11:48 AM Subject: Re: Councilmembers - Kennydale Wetlands Rezone Dear Ms. Davis, I would like to thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with Council and to let you know that the code amendments for this area will be on Council's Planning& Development Committee's agenda for Thursday, 2/15/07, at 2 pm. This meeting will be held at city hall on the 7th floor in the Council conference room. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Julia Medzegian City Council Liaison 425-430-6501 >>> "'Dina Davis' <bobndina@comcast.net> 1/8/07 1:25:08 PM >>> Dear Councilmembers, Unfortunately, I will be unable to attend tonight's council meeting to speak in person on the topic of the Kennydale wetlands rezone. I am submitting the following letter in hopes that it can be read during the meeting as a public comment. Thank you in advance for your attention to this request. Please feel free to call me with any questions, 206-300-3288. Upper Kennydale Wetlands Rezone Issue (Blueberry Bog) I would like to see the city of Renton take a more pro-environment approach to their zoning practices. Many Renton residents are dismayed at the fast paced over-development of our city at the expense of our natural environment. Renton is way behind the curve when it comes to protecting our environment. I am particularly dismayed that the city does not currently employ an environmental expert on their staff. Critical environmental decisions are left to a committee of three or four non-experts such as the fire chief, the director of Planning/Building/Public Works, the head of the Economic Development, Neighborhoods &Strategic Planning department, and Community Services department. Protection of this city's environmental treasures such as the headwaters to Kennydale Creek and its blueberry bog should begin with our local government. The federal government cannot be relied upon to protect our lesser known environmental assets. The devastation of the heron rookery in the name of development is an eye-sore example of recent careless stewardship of Renton's environment. It is too late to correct the damage done to the heron rookery. Fortunately, residents who love the wetlands in Upper Kennydale know what's at stake if the blueberry bog is allowed to be rezoned to anything other than environmentally critical. Dina Davis 433 Cedar Ave S Renton,WA 98057 This email request originated from the following link: http_//rento_.nwa,govIgovernment/default.aspx?id=3212 file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 1/24/2007 Page 1of1 NOW 'WOO Citizens to Council - Re: Councilmembers 4.:'':'.iE Sck,aO.: G�kieiY.2l,.u,,,.,3,?,xt�a fl:•.�'. >-z-.sue "' „E'S. R.."+F.i' .NEE.s'51.;',z' 'u...4..4\�3\\44$4a,:� S .,-s-.s..i', .r, „u;i j"_ Fw„>a`:s..i"�`\\ x`� Y==. From: Citizens to Council To: 'Steve NE' Date: 1/17/2007 11:50 AM Subject: Re: Councilmembers Dear Mr. Mckillop, I would like to thank you for sharing your concerns with Council and to let you know that the code amendments for this area is scheduled for Council's Planning & Development Committee's agenda on Thursday, 2/15/07, at 2:00 pm. This meeting will be held in the Council conference room on the 7th floor of city hall. Please let me know if I can be of furthe assistance. Sincerely, Julia Medzegian City Council Liaison 425-430-6501 >>> "'Steve Mckillop-1820 Monterey Ave NE"' <stefano4178@hotmail.com> 1/8/07 12:42:52 PM >>> Dear Council members, Thankyou for your time in support of issues effecting our city. Please consider protecting the zoning which prohibits developement of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm(LUA05- 159)Wetland and habitat biologists see the uniqueness of this peat bog.For 26 years my family has seen this neighborhood slowly lose it's Renton charm to developement. We have pushed the deer and racoon away ....please help stop it pushing people next. Thankyou....The Mckillop family This email request originated from the following link: http://rentonwa.gov/government/default.aspx?id=3212 file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 1/24/2007 • Page 1of1 Citizens to Council - Re: Blueberry Farm Rezone From: Citizens to Council To: 'Julie Bray' Date: 1/17/2007 5:47 PM Subject: Re: Blueberry Farm Rezone Julie, I just wanted to let you know that Council's Planning& Development Committee will be meeting on Thursday, 2/15, at 2:00 pm to discuss the code amendments for this area. Julia Medzegian City Council Liaison 425-430-6501 >>> "'Julie Bray"' <rentonfire@yahoo.com> 1/7/07 5:18:04 PM >>> I have lived two doors east of the Blueberry Farm for over 18 years. I find it deplorable that the City would allow the Blueberry Farm to be destroyed in order to allow more development. This is the only natural peat bog in the Renton area. In addition, I receive the runoff from everyone else's property due to my location -what happens when that natural bog, that absorbs all that water, is gone? I already have had a large lake in my backyard the last few weeks with all the storms going through. In addition, to what I understand, the Farm has enjoyed protected status for years as a wetland/protected area - is the City so desparate for development that it would choose to disregard the status it has bestowed on this particular piece of property? I strongly urge the Council to deny the rezone on the Blueberry Farm due to the sensitive nature of the property. Julie Bray, 1901 NE 20th St, Renton,WA 98056. 425-271-7449 This email request originated from the following link: http://rentonwa.gov/government/default.aspx?id=3212_ file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 1/24/2007 , , _ % \ 0_ 2 / � % � a. k k E ƒ / a) \ 2 k in a) E 2 a) E a / k % k f a) E -o \ E E of % \ c \ f E E ƒ E « \ f \ ° S f o = E e % \ S •l E / E S / & � / \ o 7 m g $ % oo % ° a E2 m & o 3 E } / _CD \ ± January 8,2007 ,�,, Renton City Council Minutes ,,, ,, Page 7 prezoning process: R-1 is an appropriate urban zone; it is illegal for government agencies to make zoning decisions based on impact to property values; prezoning is not property or parcel specific -those issues are handled during the permitting process; and the critical areas ordinance is not a substitute for appropriate zoning designations. Mr. Carpenter explained that the purpose of prezoning is for the City to establish what the intended land use will be based upon the characteristics of the land. He indicated that the City should halt all development in the area, upon annexation,until the Renton Comprehensive Plan is updated. Responding to Councilmember Corman's inquiry regarding inverse condemnation claims related to downzoning of property, City Attorney Warren explained that the purpose of an inverse condemnation action is to receive compensation for the elimination of all development potential on a parcel. He stated that as long as the process is followed and Council uses its discretion to establish area-wide zoning, there is no liability upon the Council. Economic Development Administrator Pietsch reviewed the East Renton Plateau PAA prezoning process. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan's Residential Low Density designation allows three zones for this area, and noted that the R-1 zone boundary line was drawn where environmental constraints exist. Mr. Pietsch pointed out that upon annexation,property owners can apply for rezones, which will be considered on a parcel by parcel basis. Noting that a majority and minority report will be issued by the Planning and Development Committee, Mr. Pietsch described the difference between the two reports. He stated staffs position that zoning the area R-1, where there is limited development potential,better aligns with what the critical areas ordinance should protect. (See page 10 for Planning and Development Committee reports.) Discussion ensued regarding the area's current King County zoning, how the critical areas ordinance applies in relation to the zoning ordinance, the deduction of environmental constraints from buildable property, the potential availability of bonuses, and the intent to continue work on the development regulations for the R-1 and R-4 zones. Citizen Comment: Rider- Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, stated that the Kennydale 2006 Comprehensive Plan Critical Areas Alliance withdrew its SEPA appeal of the Kennydale Blueberry Amendments. Kennydale Farm Comprehensive Plan amendment. She explained that with the Blueberry Farm downzoning of the surrounding area, many residents have been asked to forego ..f maximum profit in developing their own properties in order to protect the peat bog in Kennydale Creek headwaters. Ms. Rider expressed concern regarding the City's efforts to upzone the farm wherein the actual peat wetland and headwaters lie, which will increase the value of the property. She quoted passages from Renton land use policy documents, and described how they apply to the blueberry farm's environmental characteristics. Ms. Rider concluded that the applicant for the amendment has not shown that the rezone is appropriate and timely. Citizen Comment: Natelson- Debbie Natelson, 801 Renton Ave. S., Renton, 98057, spoke on the topic of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Kennydale Blueberry Farm rezone, voicing concern regarding the City helping Amendments, Kennydale the owner to potentially make a large profit on the property. Ms. Natelson said Blueberry Farm this peat bog property is an incredible resource, and she stressed the importance of wetland protection and stormwater management. She pointed out that what happens with the property affects not only the local neighborhood,but the entire region. In conclusion, she stated that even if the peat bog has been degraded by January 8,2007 ,Iry Renton City Council Minutes „„0/ Page 8 • past construction, a degraded peat bog is better than a housing development in regards to the ecological value. Citizen Comment: Eberle - Pete Eberle, 18225 SE 147th St., Renton, 98059, speaking on the East Renton East Renton Plateau PAA Plateau PAA prezoning, expressed support for annexation to Renton, and for R- Prezoning 1 and R-4 zoning as outlined by the majority report of the East Renton Plateau Citizen Task Force. Citizen Comment: O'Connor- William O'Connor, 10402 151st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, urged Council to 2006 Comprehensive Plan reject any rezone of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, saying that the property is Amendments, Kennydale correctly zoned as Resource Conservation. Blueberry Farm Citizen Comment: Bryant- Ronda Bryant, East Renton Plateau Citizen Task Force Member, 6220 SE 2nd East Renton Plateau PAA Pl., Renton, 98059, noted the desire of some people for larger lots for large Prezoning homes in the Renton area. She indicated Renton has more than enough buildable land right now to meet Growth Management Act mandated population. Ms. Bryant stated that R-1 zoning is warranted in the East Renton Plateau PAA due to the topography and hydrology of the area. She stressed that the task force spent many hours discussing where to draw the boundary line for the R-1 zoning. Encouraging approval of the prezoning proposal, Ms. Bryant pointed out that individual property zoning can be reviewed in the future. Citizen Comment: Cave-2006 'Robert Cave, 1813 NE 24th St., Renton, 98056, pointed out that the reason the Comprehensive Plan owner of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm is requesting a rezone is to increase the Amendments,Kennydale value of the property. Mr. Cave indicated that a rezone of the property will lend Blueberry Farm to the appearance that it can be developed resulting in more meetings and community members opposing development. Mr. Cave asked that Council reject the rezone. Responding to Councilmember Corman's inquiry regarding the status of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm rezone, Economic Development Administrator Pietsch reported that the matter was appealed prior to the issuance of the Planning and Development Committee's recommendation. Now that the appeal has been withdrawn,he indicated that the matter will be rescheduled in Committee. Mr. Pietsch noted that the property owner originally requested R-8 zoning, and after working with the owner, staff and the Planning Commission recommended R-4 zoning. Citizen Comment: Hicks- Barbara Hicks, 10402 151st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, spoke against the rezone 2006 Comprehensive Plan of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. She stated that the property should remain Amendments,Kennydale zoned Resource Conservation,which will protect the wetland. Ms. Hicks Blueberry Farm indicated that an upzone will detrimentally affect the well-being of this natural resource. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. At the request of Councilmember Persson, item 7.d. was removed for separate consideration. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 12/11/2006. Council concur. 12/11/2006 Appointment: Civil Service Mayor Keolker appointed Richard Fischer, 833 SW Sunset Blvd., Unit D19, Commission Renton, 98057,to the Civil Service Commission for a six-year term expiring 12/31/2012. Council concur. Appointment: Advisory Mayor Keolker appointed the following individuals to the Advisory Commission on Diversity Commission on Diversity: Antonio Cube, Sr., 17711 160th Ave. SE, Renton, 'v Z CO C4 C~ "' o ff 0 °- 7C H &D n o c, w T `' IV CA .0 'a' . 'ci: > lk 0. , -0 o �• o o' Cd IlCrJ C (1) Ci" ,-- Ct. < • Ilk CD n as r) 1-1 a Eh 0 CD CD r) 0 rnC an o 'tO" o. x , oO ti• o Cn a (IQ w o p o n w w CD �' Co ° n = ax mm Cu co ` D u cA (IQ co wo oo5 < o „vc 'an . x , D cD A' w CM a o co co cr r p n•(TQ ..� rri .-p (D �I • goi n. = d m LS B C /�� �' �• "fit CM 4� o p> in• CD 0 O O "A • E W CD N .-t a. p p VQ CCDD O7 .^S'CM < N' ) CD CD . --A H '�",CM O- N a G i • 0 cco �_'. "ems 0' = O• t - "., v 0. CD (D CM CD (D CM 7 �..a o a2 4 Ccx�"cv� W5 �.v`0 O -� G � �, aim 5 o �'©t_ -.� �,. O O w'� .P ❑ ... ter'+ a ro . re & P C;S' " cr;, .,0 MI r•r "FC w�'tC' . 3 o wr c:r400 r) tt rNwy'aa71go, ,a a ,< = ttlri - 7 ti r•x Vy F ter , z trot c+o >'s ,., n•o r <-,- CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 3 4 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (UPPER KENNYDALE AREA) FROM RESIDENTIAL 8 DU/AC (R-8) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL 4 DU/AC (R-4) ZONING; FILE NO. LUA-06-122 (CPA 2006-M-8). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Residential 8 du/ac(R-8); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION L The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential 4 du/ac (R-4) as hereinbelow specified. The Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Division is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to wit: 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5234 See Attachments"A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Upper Kennydale Area) SECTION IL This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 27th day of November , 2006. a Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 27th day of November , 2006. tiLe Kathy Keolker, Mayor Appr as to f Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 12/1/2006 (summary) ORD.1308:11/17/06:ma 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5234 ATTACHMENT A UPPER KENNYDALE REZONE 2006-M-08 REZONE FROM R-8 TO R-4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION All those lands contained within the following described boundary: Beginning at the Southeast corner of Tract 291 of the Plat of C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle Division No. 4, recorded in Volume 11 of Plats, Page 82, records of King County, Washington; Thence southerly along the southerly extension of the east line of said Tract, to an intersection with the centerline of NE l6th St; Thence westerly along said centerline to an intersection with the centerline of Jones Ave NE; Thence southerly along said centerline of Jones Ave NE to an intersection with the easterly extension of the south line of Tract 320 of the Plat of C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle Division No. Five, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 11 of Plats, Page 83, records of said county; Thence westerly along said extension and the south line of said Tract to its intersection with the easterly right of way margin of Interstate 405; Thence northerly along the various courses of said easterly margin to the south line of Lot 4 of the Plat of Eldon Acres, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 11 of Plats, Pages 86 A&B, records of said county; Thence easterly along the south line of said Lot 4 to the Southwest corner of Lot 8 of the Urch Subdivision according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 88 of Plats, Page 79, records of said county; Thence northerly along the west line of said Lot 8 and the northerly extension thereof to the centerline of NE 27th Ct; Thence east along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Jones Ave NE; Thence north along said centerline to an intersection with the easterly extension of the north line of Tract 278 of said Plat of C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle Division No. 4; ORDINANCE NO. 5234 ATTACHMENT A vow ► Thence easterly along said easterly extension and said north line to the Northeast corner of Lot 4 of City of Renton Short Plat#00-067 as recorded under King County Rec. No. 20010426900009; Thence southerly along the east line of said Lot 4 to the Southeast corner thereof, said south east corner being a point on the south line of said Tract 278; Thence westerly along the south line of Tract 278 to the Northeast corner of Lot 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment#86-010 as recorded under King County Rec. No. 198609229011; Thence southerly along the east line of said Lot 1 to the Southeast corner thereof; Thence southerly crossing NE 26th Pl. to the Northeast corner of Lot 2 of said lot line adjustment; Thence southerly along the east line of said lot to the southeast corner thereof, said Southeast corner being a point on the north line of Tract 295 of said Plat of C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle Division No. 4; Thence easterly along the north line of said Tract 295,to the northeast corner thereof; Thence southerly along the east line of said Tract 295,to an intersection with the north line of the South 150 feet of Tract 282 of said plat; Thence easterly along said north line, to its intersection with the westerly right of way margin of Kennewick Ave NE; Thence southerly along said westerly margin to an intersection with the westerly extension of the northerly line of Lot 1 of the Plat of Sunset Hills, recorded in Volume 169 of Plats, Pages 51-55, records of said county; Thence easterly along said extension and the north line of said Lot 1 to the northeast corner thereof, said Northeast corner being on the west line of Lot 11 of said plat; Thence northerly along said west line to the Northwest corner of said Lot 11; Thence easterly along the north lines of Lots 11, 12 & 13 of said plat, to the Northeast corner of said Lot 13; Thence southerly along the east line of said Lot 13 and its southerly extension crossing NE 24th St to the southerly right of way margin thereof; Thence westerly along said southerly margin, to the east line of the of the West 63 feet of the East half of the North 200 feet of Tract 273 of said Plat of C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle Division No. 4; ORDINANCE NO. 5234 ATTACHMENT A ... ,,,, Thence southerly along said east line, to the south line of the North 200 feet of said Tract 273; Thence westerly along said north line, to the west line of Tract 283 of said plat; Thence southerly along the east lines of Tracts 283 & 284 of said plat to an intersection with the north line of the South 80 feet of Tract 272 of said plat; Thence easterly along said north line to the east line of the West 126 feet of said Tract 272; Thence southerly along said east line and its southerly extension crossing NE 20th St, to the southerly right of way margin thereof; Thence westerly along said southerly margin, to the northeast corner of the tract of land identified as "UTILITIES AND OPEN SPACE EASEMENT" on sheet 2 of 3 of the Plat of Higate, as recorded in Volume 113 of Plats, Pages 44-46, records of said county; Thence southerly along the various courses of the easterly boundary of said tract of land to the Southeast corner thereof, said southeast corner being on the northerly right of way margin of NE 17th Pl; Thence along the various courses of the southerly boundary of said tract, to its intersection with the west line of said tract, said west line also being the west line of Tract 270 of said Plat of C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle Division No. 4; Thence northerly along said west line of Tract 270 and 271 to the Northwest corner of said Tract 271, said Northwest corner also being a point on the southerly right of way margin of NE 20th St; Thence westerly along said southerly margin to the Northeast corner of Tract 292 of said plat; Thence southerly along the east lines of said Tracts 292 & 291 to the beginning. LESS roads. All situate in Section 5, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., City of Renton, King County, Washington. ORDINANCE NO. 5234 Attachment B .. H ' ' ' I �6� �� siso M Iii. [41' •_ i 01 \ St �/����"� '�� th :,; .tail III •, ', >- Ii r,,,.ram 1 r� 1■ al lit AlrA + . 1 o ' a P_, .... . _ „, • . . _ 0 , ._,, , 0 M: III — - \E 2i .t. c.� in o \ 4th 11� ii III -- Ear ii o / II 0 _ 1 T I�Zi dIlllr - o MI . , o- !elm. -i ` I — III , t El ' ■ t iNM 6 r/ 4IIIIIIII —I > Aii In siamon !Willi' immosou lop- lilt ,. - it ) 11,It ■ 16tn ■ II. I_ T -I t 1 I' EN Lo Qr -��4 - - r' 4 Ili" \ \E 12t St. ---) p III . ... f . , lib ,I I 1 I 1! I I I I - Upper Kennydale Rezone from R-8 to R-4 0 600 1200 LUA 06-122 CPA-2006-M-8 t i • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning +0� c Alex Pietsch,Ate ` ` ® Rezone R-8 to R-4 1 : 7200 ''- .t• 06 xovember 2006 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDNANCE NO. 5 2 3 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON'S POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA (FORMER AQUA BARN PROPERTY) AS RESIDENTIAL-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE (R-14) ZONING. (CPA 2006-M-7). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has not been zoned in the City of Renton; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton shall bear the following zoning designation once annexed to the City of Renton: Residential-14 dwelling units per acre (R-14) as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods 1 r ORDNANCE NO. 5233 and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to wit: See Attachments "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Former Aquabarn Property) SECTION H. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 27th day of November , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 27th day of November , 2006. Kathy Keolker, Mayor App d as to f fi r Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 12/1/2006 (summary) ORD.13 07:11/16/06:ma 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5233 ATTACHMENT A , vie AQUA BARN REZONE REZONE FROM KING COUNTY R-12 TO CITY OF RENTON R-14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 1 & 2 of King County Short Plat L99S3019, as recorded in Vol. 147, Pages 104, 104A, 104B and 104C, under recording number 20010831900002, records of King County; All situate in the Southwest quarter of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington. ORDINANCE NO. 5233 iv -448 - ,r 9- C 11► *hsa�� Pi Ars i tIt 4,km . '��' III• 5 off,"-o -S NI nonoorAvis si IN i►♦•♦,��t r ,�♦ =-C�i 3' strut, dp i'� ip►i @� �i 3 o = I 2 �tur1/►2 Pant L gip.,% ins► . CaII w ,e �I1•.111142•armgir ?VI PS Ali 8 .� IIIu�1�i1�1'11�11ttLEG/��-anion _mak, c�►�1�i������FI O 0 I•..e■1011i]GUtJ■Itr►Er c• p♦�►i �. ,,� �' ff g IV i 11 mor ' ���ttttr.�.. •♦�I�•♦•I*1,I 4'' ' 1 CT isticSor I: a) ti II 0," * Air A•mkr4IIV toil • • it toa � at • • ♦♦lt•al fr*t. - it; �V van r•Ao 1 .0 (ID .E hil dim/ ',4111e..r. I k itEn_ gar 4Th rola, 4M --.... .7 r„ ..,,,.... ....... ima m. Osi 2 , X k 4 0. '%la:r• II 1151A lir iiii ,,e b 0 ib- int 0. m r,.1 ,,,w11011 wpm I 0 I let gems imr, 0 AB Slatrp I il.kai ii in I fe, ri kti,Etiplo u„g:ii ire taw 44._ 44 vils al J� '' 'CD �: �c - • • nl l . • : : g;. � -"-iun num GI 0 v7nrI1^!i Imo u�gin►il:c2 a ����" TI 119 it 12 OW aft I i lb;e 4 Bo& I 16111 0_ -X id" ,5 1 i•rittilwettly go AIN..4111.6,46. b . , : • Ir"Pill A y VLF 'D ii.iIV -_1LU. I,M* ,4I Li a' LS.-. • D�id. !y iI1■o■■11111111 ':., iitAtt morwilpirr FIA1111111111151111111111 I as41111116 xi 1 1 Minimums nu • i-k ::: t•...) E-AHLIA ..' f OAMIIIIIIM, 141 ,.r. u c) 1 ow vim ran $1414V iThr16 er tagerAg aurigim Op gft V wise" st) „,„,,,, ,,,...1., ::: ,„ .....,t-ti tvw .. di, ..... .... . , „,.... .. tall di Np i NSEMO. . op.- .. ! 0 eiii,„,. 'We Am iii - 1.1 a m 1 1.2 J, 41 a top. s s agora *4 0 um • oo Mid;L '`�y ..'t ,IN !EU 02 ""i111- .1 ���5 ���it_%a t i i11Ei CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 23 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON'S POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA (FORMER AQUA BARN PROPERTY) AS COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL (CA)ZONING. (CPA 2006-M-7) WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has not been zoned in the City of Renton; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton shall bear the following zoning designation once annexed to the City of Renton: Commercial Arterial (CA) as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning ORDINANCE NO. 5232 Department Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to-wit: See Attachments "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Former Aquabarn Property) SECTION IL This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 27th day of November , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 27th day of November , 2006. Kathy Keotker, Mayor A r dastof Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 12/1/2nn6 (summary) ORD.1306:11/16/06:ma 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5232 ATTACHMENT A �.. " AQUA BARN REZONE REZONE FROM KING COUNTY NB TO CITY OF RENTON CA LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 3 & 4 of King County Short Plat L99S3019, as recorded in Vol. 147, Pages 104, 104A, 104B and 104C, under recording number 20010831900002, records of King County; All situate in the Southwest quarter of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington. ORDINANCE NO. 2_ ai� ' D O N um,ill ■el 111.1J.aim �1 f� �4/4�,►,�♦� IP t:41, 1/1111111=� !issb .��� �•#� : .11111► 4Qow•� pp p 2 .11111♦♦�of is•I ��jo/�1se, tri 1 0.-4.-, ... I. 44 440 A.1111 ad I. fl.. 4' • da ZS al 0' ' (j's 4.4 .1, r o-CD �Ilfl����1'�1►��1i�1i� �1 �1 cr' �AA,�♦♦i♦iS N �c � 1 1�� i ✓CFI 1 9) C ill Illy P a K ♦ al .:; r �n 1111114a• 1s v 1/1i1►1♦ 1•4i` �'fi 4,411"'y -, :to may" - ib z".." IP Cs • 4r w4♦ #4>_ 1 pp Sir a ��,t, v� -1 !4♦♦♦j�♦♦�.. .411111111,cmgeoll Atli.• .4- op �����` ni �z �A%► Air �min�`� �m. ►���C• ': wta CO: rt,•rr�►i:C tar: um �iInii-It �� -ft.r. 4401421 fa ..., �.•ill ♦�. fl��g�i EG,1 0F14. 41/iILV-At A! . III VISO IN z Ikagelb1/ et a.At ---r. oat AV Aim vurpnv A.; oleo 6: 2 co c ^ ek / tPrrippiim u 2 ase rilip., ..,,, A.- ft gam= , daraitizapel II Atia......,.. .....,1 ro.70,74 : . ."40 , , 071 'I_i _r iffineW161111441,* id11:111141111:111711111 1 �, ��•� , 111 •�► i ■ ••'i ♦ ^ ey r 11■■■■11111111N *'4 � j%i otkilsorimin WiliA111111 Mg i,. , t-1•�a11,r12 o: Z'-p o ' 11:lEl wm a ■ ILM KIM 0 Irk‘ All "IV 1 on a &up 401 _1•11=1 rani :LIs .41 - 1 ip f Iryt : �NNE a .... 111:f, ar r AivaI Nal ii f .Ian :!am ,--- ,,t, - '1►�a - -Ss ___ ___l v m:ski■ iiII.s ,.me�1m • CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 31 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (PUGET COLONY HOMES) FROM RESIDENTIAL 8 DU/AC (R-8) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL 4 DU/AC (R-4) ZONING, FILE NO. LUA-06-120 (CPA 2006-M-5). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Residential 8 du/ac (R-8); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter has been considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential 4 du/ac as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and 1 `ere ORDINANCE NO. 5231 '410 directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to- wit: See Attachments "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Puget Colony Homes) SECTION IL This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 2 7 t h day of N o v Pmh e r , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 2 7 t h day of November , 2006. Kathy Keollker, Mayor Appr as to f Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 12/1/2006 (summary) ORD.1300:11/16/06:ma 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5231 ATTACHMENT A PUGET COLONY HOMES, CPA 2006-M-05 REZONE FROM R-8 TO R-4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The West half of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington; EXCEPT roads. -�° LLhh cc}}-- c 'E,�TTAHNIENT B � i C = nth S J WH _ - iliji T— . '[ I I 1 , I, I 4 ��♦rX -- �, I� _ 1111 E .. I mit NI � n�� IN �I Mill �i _ ��lop , '`� I NMI A E 2 n d St WV PM ...• J1 _ LI ji i 2 - ;i 11�I rvPligrAl , .tt ! ,_ -1-'I I ,k i _ :N�����M lb ° 1 or, ' ; um <, ,, , , . . 1,) Aak MN [-LJ ?II < , II * i <impinim L Qv ii lalLll�u SIAll 4111.0110011 O� SE 2n d PI *** © 110 lift ` ��,. N��� i. Ili 4 IPA S= 139t I Yam- F 141 S� , , t .� i , N_ 1Mr KV Q 01111 f'' �r 1 imin (0 { . Senal11111111 kiki 1 AI lir4 . -,—. Apn mmilain El -0. 0,. njwiLl — Vta At& Nom nom _ Puget Colony Homes CPA 2006-M-05 0 600 1200 Rezone from R-8 to R-4 ON R-8 to R-4 o 04, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning From Residential Single Family to • * Alex Pietsch,Administrator Residential Low Density C.E.Feasel '�N ro� 17 November 2006 Renton City Limits CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 3 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES PROPERTY) FROM RESIDENTIAL 10 DU/AC (R-10) ZONING TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE ZONING(CO), FILE NO. LUA-05- 158 (CPA 2006-M-4). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Residential 10 du/ac (R-10); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Commercial Office as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and 1 V ORDINANCE NO. 5230 directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to- wit: See Attachments "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Springbrook Associates Property) SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 27th day of November , 2006. • Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 27th day of November , 2006. Kathy Keolker, Mayor Appr as to f Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 12/1/2006 (summary) ORD.1303:11/16/06:ma 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5230 ATTACHMENT A.r.. .... SPRINGBROOK REZONE 2006-M-04 REZONE FROM R-10 TO CO LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 4 of City of Renton East Valley Medical Park Short Plat# 77-113, as recorded under Rec. No. 7808151009, records of King County. All situate in the Southeast quarter of Section 30, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. ORDINANCE NO.5230 edE ci) u--) 1 ‘60, cf) 4400 = co it �' �� _H-, u, ri , � y CO 1KCI) n CD 4' E Vclley Rd Fer 0) 0 En rn N O Aili O , 3 ,4 ' Netri , .1 al III attill Iftil way._ nisi! ow 41.2 C) �\ a ri <\.( 7 -.- . iiia 4 ills \--A-Te---s------- - -a o 1°*"Qa� f I4A,li -, ' \vyi i 0 f -----C. c.,, o r c� ill s'I ) /1 /7 A .01 .ailIlla , \ ri! LJ CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 2 9 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (CARR ROAD PROPERTIES) FROM RESIDENTIAL 8 DU/AC (R-8) AND RESIDENTIAL 10 DU/AC (R-10) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL 14 DU/AC (R-14),FILE NO. LUA-05-163 (CPA 2006-M-3). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts —Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Residential 8 du/ac (R-8) and Residential 10 du/ac (R-10); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential 14 du/ac as hereinbelow specified. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5229 directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to- wit: See Attachments "A," "B" and "C," attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. (Carr Road Properties) SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 27 t h day of November , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 27th day of November , 2006. /1 Kathy Keolker, Mayor Appr ;. as to ft Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 12/1/2006 (summary) ORD.1299:11/16/06:ma 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5229 ATTACHMENT A RIVERA REZONE 2006-M-03 REZONE FROM R-8 TO R-14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The West half of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 32, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M.; LESS road, (Carr Rd.). All situate in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. ORDINANCE NO. 5229 ATTACHMENT B RIVERA REZONE 2006-M-03 REZONE FROM R-10 TO R-14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The East half of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 32, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., lying westerly of the westerly right of way margins of Mill Ave S and 103rd Ave S; LESS that portion lying southerly of the south line of Lot 2 of City of Renton Lot line Adjustment#014-088, as recorded under King County Rec. No. 198904079001; LESS road, (Carr Rd.). All situate in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. ORDINANCE NO. 5229 Attachment C th i� 8 1 N Amin Q- 77.411 \ U1111111 . I Mill 1 1 I 1 I l iTirl.PPI Ii �/ 1L Frill •wi S179thS / t l q ♦Cs v • 43\ St I Q) II I illir 11...i / LT.- ,_ I I , , ii , i i. \ �iiI 16 111111111/ 4 i , U I \ I I fi I i Carr Rd Properties Rezone to R-14 LUA 05-163 CPA 2006-M-03 0 500 1000 t, 0... Y • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning 1 Itmsesssasi tiR . Alex Pietseb,Administrator el — — Renton CityLimits MI Rezone to R-14 �N•rO> 26 26 October 2006 A;onds: ORD 5099; ORD 5181 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 2 8 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2006 AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MAPS AND DATA IN CONJUNCTION THEREWITH. WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Renton has heretofore adopted and filed a "Comprehensive Plan" and the City Council of Renton has implemented and amended said "Comprehensive Plan" from time to time, together with the adoption of various codes, reports and records; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has heretofore recommended to the City Council, from time to time, certain amendments to the City's"Comprehensive Plan"; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton, pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act, has been required to review its"Comprehensive Plan"; and WHEREAS, the City has held a public hearing on this matter; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made certain findings and recommendations to the City Council, including implementing policies; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly determined after due consideration of the testimony and evidence before it that it is advisable and appropriate to amend and modify the City's "Comprehensive Plan"; and WHEREAS, such modification and elements for the"Comprehensive Plan" are in the best interest for the public benefit; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 1 tow ORDINANCE NO. 5228 SECTION I. The"Comprehensive Plan," maps, data and reports in support of the"Comprehensive Plan" are hereby modified, amended and adopted as said"Comprehensive Plan" consisting of the following elements: Capital Facilities, Community Design,Land Use and Land Use Map, and Transportation as shown on Attachments A, B, C,D and E and incorporated herein as if fully set forth. SECTION H. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to make the necessary changes on said City's "Comprehensive Plan" and the maps in conjunction therewith to evidence the aforementioned five amendments. SECTION HI. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file this ordinance as provided by law, and a complete copy of said document likewise being on file with the office of the City Clerk of the City of Renton. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 27th day of November , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 27th day of November , 2006. L.6, kj Kathy Keolker, Mayor 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5228 Appr ed as to form: a.A.A.,,ea........e7AA k-e-k. Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 12/1/2 0 0 6 (summary ) ORD.13 04:11/20/06:ma 3 December 4, 2006 ``r+ Renton City Council Minutes '..1111e Page 432 AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen,PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, expressed concern about the denial Citizen Comment: Petersen - of Jeff Colee's request for an over-height fence variance. Additionally, she Colee Fence Height Variance, claimed that the public hearings conducted for the 2006 Comprehensive Plan 2006 Comprehensive Plan p1.1-- amendments are invalid due to lack of due process; therefore,the resulting Amendments adopted ordinances relating to the amendments are also invalid. Council: Public Hearing Council President Corman voiced his intention to have public hearing Notification notification be a topic of discussion at a future Committee of the Whole meeting. He noted that staff is working on an e-mail notification feature for the City's website, which can supplement the outdated notification process of publishing in the newspaper and posting on telephone poles. Mayor Keolker stated that although the public hearing notification system may seem somewhat outdated, it must be done in order to comply with State law. She indicated that staff proposes to do some things in addition to the State requirements. EXECUTIVE SESSION MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL RECESS AND ADJOURNMENT INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR APPROXIMATELY 45 MINUTES TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL LITIGATION AND PROPERTY ACQUISITION WITH NO OFFICIAL ACTION TO BE TAKEN AND THAT THE COUNCIL MEETING BE ADJOURNED WHEN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS ADJOURNED. CARRIED. Time: 8:26 p.m. Executive session was conducted. There was no action taken. The executive session and the Council meeting adjourned at 10:16 p.m. G( ale. 7IJ Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann December 4, 2006 December 4,2006 `r.►' Renton City Council Minutes _ Page 428 kick-off event on December 7, at the project site (800 SW 27th St.). The project will re-establish and enhance more than 130 acres of wetlands in the Renton area. * During December, the City of Renton will be conducting a community telephone survey in Renton and surrounding areas to identify current and future residents'needs and interests related to cable television operations and programming. The survey is part of the City's cable television franchise review process. * Two Salvation Army "Giving Trees" are on display with gift tags at Renton City Hall and the Renton Community Center. Select a gift tag and experience the joy of giving by returning it taped to an unwrapped gift,to either location,by December 18. AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen,PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057,praised the Communities in Citizen Comment: Petersen - Schools of Renton organization and the 40 Assets program. She announced the Various Highlands Community Association's Christmas Family Sock Hop on December 16 at the Highlands Neighborhood Center. Additionally, she said the recent appeal filed will have no bearing on duplex owners who want to improve their duplexes. Ms. Petersen displayed photographs showing an unimproved duplex and a duplex that has undergone improvements. Citizen Comment: Daniel- Due to the limited English of Khaimou Daniel, 4014 NE 7th Ct., Renton, Violation Notice re Pigeon 98056, Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington explained that Mr. Daniel's Keeping received an order to correct from the City due to the keeping of pigeons. Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman clarified that City Code sets a limit of three pets in the zone where Mr. Daniel's lives; therefore, Mr. Daniels is asking for Council's consideration of the matter. Council President Corman noted the confusion regarding the intent of City Code for situations such as the keeping of four fish in an aquarium or four birds in a cage. Mayor Keolker stated that the Administration will investigate the matter and report back to Council. Citizen Comment: Rider- Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, speaking on behalf of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan (' Kennydale Creek Areas Alliance,thanked Council for making the decision to Amendments, Kennydale protect the peat wetland system. She disagreed with a suggestion made by a Blueberry Farm citizen at last week's Council meeting to raise the appeal fee to $500, saying that the high fee would prevent her and others from having a voice in City affairs. Requesting that Council deny the rezone of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, Ms. Rider stated the current Resource Conservation zoning is the most appropriate for this unique and fragile property, which is the heart of the wetland system. Citizen Comment: McOmber- Howard McOmber, 475 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, invited everyone to East Renton Plateau PAA the Highlands Community Association's Christmas Family Sock Hop on Future Zoning December 16. On another topic, Mr. McOmber stated that R-1 zoning is not realistic for the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. He indicated that a developer wants to build 70 units on 30 acres in the vicinity of 171 st Ave. SE and SE 138th St., and suggested that Council keep an open mind when reviewing the prezoning for the area. Citizen Comment: Livengood- Elaine Livengood, 511 S. 19th St.,Renton, 98055, expressed concern about the Airport-Related Noise increase in noise if more corporate jet traffic is allowed at the Renton Municipal Airport. Noting that she lives at the top of Talbot Hill, she asked that the effect of the noise on residents be taken into consideration. 0 r• k C./a H CD L.) 0 r• zi ''''., Cr II,, . • t•-..) ct v, Z ' noo � ca ?; �' � r c , < NI, a c cD C7 0 m c c w 0 1 o f °c a o ,7 5' = ; - a• a <' o Z t'il o �.r) CI o c c w P -0 o coo y O C7 xli ,.C4., R '' ,-, a C-• in CD N C p cc:A' c`,'o ccD l 1 O /'' CD 7T x n co Q 1-3= ^ --, o, D �• roa o - _ p c° a O c�D CD 0 C"cm _ 0 �-+ w ri (� CD < n or CD C ,, p o - c- n o o n . (7• CCD = co = PUCJ CD N ° �- • c ' g ° c O • . a. UQ P CD I�1 -fi e ' • CIO 0 O C7 CD ;O O `t CM ^�^ O �" N c n'CD U. O c O 0 u-o co 7 < (D X 9 ram' r. A) p ,..; H, a�G N CCD COD OCD CD - m bQ vx5 cr wr � ` 'o 4 030' c ,, o36 S , •--. 747 v> O c 5 ry 8a:71 C.� - g oo . C '5. L .* n o C :o ° T , u o O y n o Z6 -' > ° m - m Kos o Co 0 0 • • >o .. --. a 0 `C � 5 . a�n ,� 5 6w`� , 9e ' - �- ° ?-Cfl C aq � c° CC? coo — ti c ora oar9 o � op °. c 'CI ]8 ..0C � rcor. = ' odtio a m od''� o � •. m ,.o0 0 �s m c 7taC o o .o oro�* no o . Z 0. 9.. n' try----, <. o oo O re : C ' 0 �; ,,m n97� m 7�0 . v. o C oy , [ vC0. a ra9 ' ho ° - ,. o0 Kio g `c ~' hrn9 m -"o, H. ° -°o o ,o: - - u n j yra . " � 0 I 7x ni c ° 5.0 Cl c , o. , o`,-ono;ttc'roy . �; 'co5.xtrJ o .. M ,.. .c -'-c,,..o2_c o •m .n - T aa 6 co .c .. L. } o7 m 7r.a Co• -6 c _yO 7•• o " �7ao �0 a4 w 7ra ra r. yr 0 .r C!QC 7 • ra a .O p °'�7 ooC o ° 6'C � 9 o 0o o - r' '. n-, C:C r~ n .- •pi R.p re m "'>'W+ 0 •O "i'� •.y *0 O 6 .w'<.• rA„��w-, c0 O �. O^ :.. ''d o to to O;. o y oo`o -._, n Coo0p 2 co >c-U�6 a - 5-�rnaq o o<;aQ? 5 0 7+"'+F(�anaQ_o m .4-an? av ntnC ✓ r ts9 !narC7C r �m naC 179 tro C-'F C*):ra -0 `�0 m y y w 5 i o:� m m, s `CD r P; > p m oP o } <tU 9 ,•° K a�o p9 F ?- G yci r c•8 a'} r o x' �yo 4.-o . -a v' ° m•4*'- 2,.5. x' '° c, •a'o hm - y..T, ,'J P. Oy ` <, :l.-..•„ ;1<'5' n y 0 C.Q' k.O w n"fir-'-, .i `c-o: c`n-of C `� M o f�.. .5. d rt J"R O o c o b Z o . '..� o .b m•• - 0 0'� b 8•Z' . c O m..b o' ,_ .. n aao r 9 c o•o m m o 0 0 :c C c•o 0 0 0 C'_ n > o �• •re • • F conQ '-3� 7 ,, .y0D) N ooy - nm7 '4� p ''°..ono o D'� cyND y iD ¢+moco 00 ° c,.7oc'° oo C_v ' c7Oo o < m ° *o o o c O -,mzO O OCmn9 Mo 0 �a4 � � �� y° � - c nc0 n. 5 �o rrn x9 ?7x Corn , 6'_n '2 C Ootr .?�c .;n 7 �% Co m a. o 7 p; _- Ut='n-'=.�_' 7 ,m .n r -° o n ;mp T o- , m _'7 • ~ �, . � T �ti ° G n0 C nP -" ' Oo o✓ Ah; �7 :n c � v�C7 m 5. ct ° " O C 8, oaaco ma CC < • Cx2 - p o o � . aa •°0)~.. j . w 8 0 •a '' p� OD ` ` i. oi� ' wroG ' mLm '�° `3reP „ .- mC . _,'0 o-0 ' '"Cr c � od ° • -•py cn a2 '� C m C" . ocqQ ' c 40w m mp 'b 8 ? rp ° ? 8 m o ' Cc'` N m ' '° o v � o ° d m o�,, o •-, o noy '.b ° g . ^ ro aK P � o o • Bo0om .o o m o ' rnn .•• rn,nl : 9aao - as •K -o ,- .c - cram ! m �*1 tic: o:9>v° o c,-,P. ,c n v ..L.r rp o r�tU 74 cv� tx ^•oho o O.•V, tsi 5.,'70 5 0,0.m c"'D i. 0 rD "t �..00. ''1 0 ''� . 0 m co •• 0 C m E.x"�O-a c, re w 9 'n -,5, Y'., 0. p U -I i v o c 'S 'J r t-i�..•g• m O ✓ .5•. ft 2 ce`"',< .7_'° '� „ a:4 8'. 'a ^s c '„.n 0, �3 c Cm `. ma Cm o m 5 gym-.' 5•�'7'8 R'm P' .b P do4 JV o` o n.bus O m ,n C.P 5•=r• V nX✓.a • "G ° P • a oa ", r' -�''' c o FD ° - .7 *.O C-.'..' p'R Y 8:o'TQ p O ,-, 0 - '1 X. R o o-.� o a Z w.� ,-y G, ti • ? o C'0 r o 0-m _ • 7•� r 7,07o '�5 o-S`".',r 0, o..9'..p �' - a r D -, -y . •-,4 O ✓^a.r O ay.', `o.. g 5 G,✓ o O ,.N.n y O, C .•o ,'cor, Z--L,cr%D"ay� bor 'C �o cr"' o Vic.° n. • 5-Y �7jo cC 7✓�i° ✓ •flr c �' 2 �o ^x° »� °hr� a o �o ° o , � ,i p'cPCra' o o i'' c:. ate, o o,CD 7 =x'a o 0,8• c on O c o 7 ' cnr -.. a4 ,.�7 .-,m m 7 a4 _o o' '7 u' �' ,v.v d _m ie C''p n o ,:vwo 0 9 '' 'r. o o CJ0,5" o rm 6.•2 m o' C-� v ti 2 ' a a•o] U 000a a `• - oo•ro re'... .°"w U o c,rnpc m 5, C "+ o 0 0. m a r p O ° G a.G C., p o m t' c 0 '� , 6! .0 o n � c o0:c �� � o " _, O 'm ,o O o�' Cao . � O ` O ' = JO0-o or � ,*a 61 oo O 7.m -, o o .•o"c on o � -•Nv...-.c ovro r0 o, c.., , o coaQ U ? oo° 6 o" c c m wa4. • 0't c o.)Cl1> rip ipr tri z o-"8 5"a O c f m � 51'6i x on 0 >r HIIU x t''Y oam J D'yr'Fn e-F.8 •cn c%-•o D -1---. . , rj =a'�_• �a p- m .� " ^o m }. o,J p "' D o' r c..,,m o r D T° C K 3"CS . 7 -. O cr.- CS r' o ?7 K '•.O _ c ^S an1-.. U'd o ,- �IQ (.5 o 0 0 ,5 = �0 o C' O nDy O z'J. • � � ha^ 'C o C�` rno � ? oo ? c ca �'5, 0� te569 A-- c a. • s � z- " . c " R c' c e C o - m , Nr ` 0 u o m�co �. � . 0 . o c mao m ... o ' riac0 co -w oo - ° y- o `o c '" 7o r n c c 0,, oa Jy ° t. o on, n - *O o ,74a o ti 6 o m ,R,cc o 0Cc o ' ym' ,� c . c p p .0 ¢,� Oyo Cia ° otit'TO''o • '8zO -c ° y? o co• 9• Q -.a 2 a.. tt J`n Os n cQ n p '1 O 0 ., n •o • 5. -�"r y -• ._ ° '<° om -t 0 c 77 `,!°• Nrn �,o ac e sa = ow • O� x o � bCr ° � mo'O ° o •on , •q 7rc o• y ' co ro " o � � � c no "oa a ° r o ! . � om ocDro a • 't= mao t3 � ' 5 m e a » r. mc ' �oo � �a � aa c h mo ;, m0nma 5a , m o fi..... .o?N on .� -• U' _ • ,, t o tv a'C.P -.O6'O �c" 7o o c •uq O Y''. Oo r. cbit": =r cn 5' O D ° '<: In CD,.-,P._ aOOoJ O a November 27,2006 .,., Renton City Council Minutes Page 419 y �ti Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning)to R-8 (Residential - 8 dwelling units per net acre, Renton zoning); Hudson. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5238 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification for approximately Annexation: Hudson, R-10 6.6 acres, located in two sections, the smallest some 1.9 acres, on the western Zoning side of 108th Ave. SE,and the largest, some 4.7 acres, on the east side of 108th Ave. SE,both south of SE 168th St., if extended; annexed within the City of Renton from R-18 (Urban Residential- 18 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning), R-12 (Urban Residential- 12 dwelling units per acre,King County zoning) and R-8 (Urban Residential- 8 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning) to R-10 (Residential- 10 dwelling units per net acre, Renton zoning); Hudson. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5239 An ordinance was read amending the 2006 Budget to authorize $35,000 from Community Services: Park increased revenues to offset increased overtime and labor costs due to weather Fund Budget Increase, Staffing related crowd control and the extended Sockeye season. MOVED BY LAW, Expenses SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5240 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 1, Administration and Enforcement, Utility: Public Works of Title IV(Development Regulations) of City Code by increasing public works Construction Permit Fees construction permit fees. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5241 An ordinance was read amending Chapters 2,4,and 11 of Title IV Development Services: (Development Regulations) of City Code by permitting wireless communication Wireless Communication facilities within public rights-of-way in residential areas and to incorporate three Facilities in Residential Zones pre-existing administrative determinations that clarify the wireless regulations. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CANCEL Council: Budget Workshop THE BUDGET WORKSHOP SCHEDULED FOR 11/29/2006. CARRIED. Cancellation Council: Committee on Council President-Elect Nelson announced that the Committee on Committees Committees will be comprised of herself and Councilmembers Law and Corman. AUDIENCE COMMENT John Cowan, 1830 NE 24th St., Renton, 98056, speaking on the subject of the Citizen Comment: Cowan - rezone of the upper Kennydale area, indicated that he attended the related public 2006 Comprehensive Plan pi+ hearings and addressed the Planning Commission on the matter. He explained Amendments, Upper that he owns a 0.5 acre property in the area, which lacks wetlands, and is Kennydale Area adjacently located to four higher density developments. He questioned why the Planning Commission's recommendation not to rezone the area was reversed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee. Pointing out that the members of the Planning Commission are volunteers, Mr. Cowan expressed concern that their recommendations do not carry much weight and can be arbitrarily reversed. Stating that the Planning Commission is an advisory board,Mayor Keolker explained that the decision authority rests with the City Council who can choose to accept or reject recommendations from the Planning Commission or any other board and commission. November 27,2006 Renton City Council Minutes ,r,r. Page 420 Mr. Cowan expressed concern about the process,pointing out that a Council sub-committee rejected the Commission's recommendation, and that tonight, first and second reading of the ordinance was held. Stating that he is vice chair of the Planning and Development Committee, Councilman Clawson emphasized that the recommendations of the Planning Commission are given a lot of weight. He reviewed the reasons why the Committee recommended that the upper Kennydale area be downzoned from R- 8 to R-4 zoning, including the area's hydrology and the fact that the area is the headwaters of Kennydale Creek. Mr. Clawson noted the compelling arguments on both sides of the matter, saying that the decision was a difficult one for him to make. Pointing out that his property is located outside of the wetland area, Mr. Cowan indicated that he wants to build houses on the property. He explained that as he an ordinary citizen and not an attorney, he was unaware of how the process worked and is now unable to file an appeal. Councilwoman Palmer stated that she is a member of the Planning and Development Committee, and indicated that the Committee reviewed all of the information, including the number of people for and against the matter. Pointing out that she was very sensitive to people's opinions on the issue, Ms. Palmer emphasized that the decision was not an easy one to make. Discussion ensued regarding the options available to Mr. Cowan now that the ordinance has been adopted. Mayor Keolker advised that he review the matter with Economic Development Administrator Alex Pietsch. Citizen Comment: Petersen- Inez Somerville Petersen, PO Box 1295,Renton, 98057, claimed that since the 2006 Comprehensive Plan public hearings held on November 13 and September 20 regarding the 2006 Amendments Comprehensive Plan amendments are invalid due to lack of due process,the ordinances adopted this evening are also invalid. Noting that a number of appeals were filed related to the amendments, Ms. Petersen stated that she wants the community to grow but in a legal way. She displayed photographs of houses with small yards,and questioned whether this is the kind of housing Renton families with children would want. Councilwoman Palmer indicated that what weighed heavy in her mind in the making of her decision regarding the downzone of the upper Kennydale area were the small "cookie cutter" lots. She noted the importance of having the ability to choose bigger lots. Citizen Comment: Moore- Kirk Moore, 1901 Harrington Circle NE, Renton, 98056, said public hearing 2006 Comprehensive Plan notices can be short, and he pointed out that it is up to citizens to be active in Amendments,Appeals government. Mr. Moore expressed disappointment with the appeals that were filed related to the Comprehensive Plan amendments. He indicated that the Highlands Zoning Task Force's recommended plan for the Highlands area contained significant differences from the original plan. Mr. Moore suggested that the City review the appeal structure and raise the appeal fee from$75 to $500. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:07 p.m. Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann, November 27,2006 November 27,2006 Renton City Council Minutes 4..re Page 417 area. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Resolution#3844 A resolution was read approving the Windstone II Final Plat; approximately 3.6 Plat: Windstone II,Mt Baker acres located in the vicinity of NE 17th St. and Mt. Baker Ave. NE. MOVED Ave NE, FP-04-124 BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for first reading and advanced for second and final reading: Comprehensive Plan: 2006 An ordinance was read adopting the 2006 amendments to the City's 2004 Amendments -7 14 Comprehensive Plan, maps and data in conjunction therewith. MOVED BY I CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5228 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Comprehensive Plan: 2006 MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE Amendments ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Rezone: Carr Rd Properties, R- An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of the Can Rd. 8 &R-10 to R-14 properties from R-8 (Residential -eight dwelling units per acre)and R-10 (Residential-ten dwelling units per acre)to R-14 (Residential- fourteen dwelling units per acre)zoning; LUA-05-163, CPA 2006-M-3. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5229 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Carr Rd Properties, R- MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT 8 &R-10 to R-14 THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Rezone: Springbrook An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of the Springbrook Associates, S 37th St, R-10 to Associates property from R-10 (Residential - ten dwelling units per acre)to CO CO (Commercial Office)zoning; LUA-05-158, CPA-2006-M-4. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5230 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Springbrook MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT Associates, S 37th St,R-10 to THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. CO Rezone: Puget Colony Homes, An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of the Puget Colony NE 2nd St, R-8 to R-4 Homes property from R-8 (Residential- eight dwelling units per acre)to R-4 (Residential - four dwelling units per acre)zoning; LUA-06-120, CPA 2006-M- 5. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5231 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Puget Colony Homes, MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT NE 2nd St, R-8 to R-4 THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Comprehensive Plan: 2006 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification of the former Aqua Amendments, CA Zone for Barn property within the City of Renton's Potential Annexation Area as CA Aqua Barn Property, Maple (Commercial Arterial)zoning; CPA 2006-M-7. MOVED BY CLAWSON, Valley Hwy SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. November 27,2006 ,, Renton City Council Minutes , Page 418 Ordinance#5232 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Comprehensive Plan: 2006 MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT Amendments, CA Zone for THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Aqua Barn Property,Maple Valley Hwy Comprehensive Plan: 2006 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification of the former Aqua Amendments, R-14 Zone for Barn property within the City of Renton's Potential Annexation Area as R-14 Aqua Barn Property, Maple (Residential - 14 dwelling units per acre)zoning; CPA 2006-M-7. MOVED BY Valley Hwy CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5233 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Comprehensive Plan: 2006 MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT Amendments, R-14 Zone for THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Aqua Barn Property, Maple Valley Hwy Rezone: Upper Kennydale, An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of the upper Jones Ave NE, R-8 to R-4 Kennydale area properties from R-8 (Residential- eight dwelling units per acre) to R-4 (Residential- four dwelling units per acre)zoning; LUA-06-122,CPA 2006-M-8). MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5234 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Rezone: Upper Kennydale, MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT Jones Ave NE, R-8 to R-4 THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Utility: 2007 Rates An ordinance was read amending Chapter 2, Storm and Surface Water Drainage; Chapter 4,Water; and Chapter 5, Sewers; of Title VIII(Health and Sanitation)of City Code by increasing utility rates. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ordinance#5235 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was Utility: 2007 Rates MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: FOUR AYES: CORMAN, NELSON, CLAWSON, LAW; TWO NAYS: PALMER, PERSSON. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#5236 An ordinance was read annexing approximately 14.63 acres of property Annexation: Hudson,Benson generally located west, south, and east of the existing City of Renton boundaries Rd S & S 168th St defined by a peninsula of land immediately east of 108th Ave. SE, and south of SE 168th St. (Hudson). MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5237 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification for approximately Annexation: Hudson, R-8 5.83 acres, located in two sections,the smallest some 2.02 acres,on the south Zoning side of SE 168th St. in the easternmost part of the annexation,and the largest, some 3.81 acres, on the west side of 108th Ave. SE, in the northernmost portion of the annexation site; annexed within the City of Renton from R-18 (Urban Residential- 18 dwelling units per acre,King County zoning), R-12 (Urban Residential - 12 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning) and R-8 (Urban RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting November 27,2006 Council Chambers Monday, 7 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL OF RANDY CORMAN, Council President; TONI NELSON; DAN CLAWSON; COUNCILMEMBERS DENIS LAW; MARCIE PALMER; DON PERSSON. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILWOMAN TERRI BRIERE. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER,Mayor; ZANETTA FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; ATTENDANCE BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; TERRY HIGASHIYAMA, Community Services Administrator; ALEX PIETSCH, Economic Development Administrator; MARTY WINE, Assistant CAO; CHIEF I. DAVID DANIELS, Fire Department; CHIEF KEVIN MILOSEVICH, DEPUTY CHIEF TIM TROXEL, and COMMANDER DAVID LEIBMAN, Police Department. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Utility: Sewer Moratorium in accordance with local and State laws,Mayor Keolker opened the public hearing East Renton Plateau PAA to consider extending the moratorium on sewer availabilities for new subdivisions within the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area(PAA) for an additional six months. The current moratorium expires 12/5/2006. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL 12/4/2006. CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE Assistant CAO Marty Wine reviewed a written administrative report REPORT summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2006 and beyond. Items noted included: * Following the official Clam Lights lighting event on December 1 at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park,watch for the Rainier Yacht Club's "Parade of Boats," with each lighted boat decorated in the spirit of the season. * The annual K9 Candy Cane 5K Fun Run and Walk will be held on Sunday, December 3. AUDIENCE COMMENT Kirk Moore, 1901 Harrington Circle NE, Renton, 98056, identifying himself as Citizen Comment: Moore- the chair of the Highlands Zoning Task Force, expressed concern that some 2006 Comprehensive PlanI14 citizens are questioning the independency of the task force in the matter of the Amendments, Highlands task force's report and recommendations regarding the Highlands area zoning. Zoning Task Force Mr. Moore stressed that the task force worked hard on behalf of the residents of the Highlands, City staff,and City Council to produce reasonable and expedient policies for growth and protection in the Highlands. On behalf of the City, Mayor Keolker expressed her appreciation for the work of the task force. Citizen Comment: Petersen - Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, spoke about the multiple appeals 2006 Comprehensive Plan that were filed related to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments. She Amendments,Appeals pointed out that what is proposed for one neighborhood affects all neighborhoods, specifically in regards to high density. Ms. Petersen stated that she supports the work of the Highlands Zoning Task Force,but does not support what the City did with the work of the task force. She indicated that the public November 27,2006 Renton City Council Minutes r Page 415 • f • hearing process pertaining to the Comprehensive Plan amendments was invalid, and voiced her support for the appeals that were filed concerning environmental issues and the public hearing process. Ms. Petersen emphasized that citizens should not be forced to spend their money on legal services in order to do what the City should already be doing in regards to these matters. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 11/13/2006. Council concur. 11/13/2006 Appointment: Municipal Arts Mayor Keolker reappointed Kristi Hand, 517 Smithers Ave. N., Renton, 98057; Commission Marie McPeak, 409 Jefferson Ave. NE, Renton, 98056; Evelyn Reingold, 833 SW Sunset Blvd., L-56, Renton, 98057; and Eleanor Simpson,418 Wells Ave. N., Renton, 98057, each to the Municipal Arts Commission for a three-year term expiring 12/31/2009. Council concur. Annexation: Preserve Our Administrative, Judicial and Legal Services Department recommended approval Plateau, SE 128th St of a resolution regarding the Preserve Our Plateau Annexation election requesting that King County produce a voter's pamphlet, authorizing election steps, and transmitting the ballot title. Council concur. (See page 416 for resolution.) Community Services: Henry Community Services Department recommended approval of the proposed 2007 Moses Aquatic Center Fees Henry Moses Aquatic Center fee schedule. Refer to Committee of the Whole. Community Services: Facility Community Services Department recommended approval of the proposed 2007 and Recreation Fees& Rates facility and recreation fees and rates schedule related to athletic field fees, Carco Theatre rental rates, Community Center rental rates, and park picnic shelter fees. Refer to Committee of the Whole. Development Services: Boeing Development Services Department recommended adoption of an ordinance Subdistrict 1 B Planned Action regarding the Planned Action for Subdistrict 1 B of the Boeing Renton Plant property; approximately 51 acres bounded by Logan Ave. N.,Garden Ave. N., N. 8th St., and N. 6th St. Refer to Committee of the Whole; set public hearing on 12/11/2006. Development Services: Development Services Division recommended approval to remove restrictive Removal of Restrictive covenants imposed in 1984(R-83-033)on the Dalpay properties located on Covenants on Dalpay Union Ave.NE between NE 12th St. and Sunset Blvd. NE, as the covenants are Properties, Union Ave NE now outdated and in conflict with the goals of the current Comprehensive Plan. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Plat: Windstone II, Mt Baker Development Services Division recommended approval of the Windstone II Ave NE, FP-04-124 Short Plat as a Final Plat; nine single-family lots and one tract on 3.6 acres located north of NE 17th St. at Mt. Baker Ave.NE. Council concur. (See page 417 for resolution.) Council: 2007 Legislative Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Priorities recommended adoption of the proposed 2007 legislative priorities. Refer to Committee of the Whole. Annexation: Maplewood Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Addition, Maple Valley Hwy recommended a public hearing be set on 12/11/2006 to consider the proposed Maplewood Addition Annexation and associated zoning; 60.5 acres located at 130th Ave. SE and Maple Valley Hwy. Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes ..+ Page 407 Development Services: An ordinance was read amending Chapters 2,4, and 11 of Title IV Wireless Communication (Development Regulations)of City Code by permitting wireless communication Facilities in Residential Zones facilities within public rights-of-way in residential areas and to incorporate three pre-existing administrative determinations that clarify the wireless regulations. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/27/2006. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER THE Transportation: Downtown ISSUE OF CONNECTIVITY TO DOWNTOWN FROM THE LANDING Connectivity to The Landing, AND DIRECTION SIGNAGE FOR DOWNTOWN TO THE Downtown Direction Signage TRANSPORTATION(AVIATION)COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Finance: Business License MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER A Billing Cycle BRIEFING ON THE NEW BUSINESS LICENSE BILLING CYCLE TO FINANCE COMMITTEE. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, inquired as to which fund the$1.5 Citizen Comment: Petersen - million set aside for Highlands study area infrastructure improvements is in. Various Regarding the Comprehensive Plan amendment concerning the upper fY NIA Kennydale area, Ms. Petersen expressed concern that citizens were not given the opportunity to speak publicly on the matter and the decision to adopt R-4 zoning was a result of a staff recommendation. Councilman Clawson clarified that the decision was based on more than the staff recommendation, and he pointed out that public hearings were held on the matter. Continuing, Ms. Petersen inquired as to how Highlands Community Association events such as the upcoming Christmas dance can be City-sponsored. On another topic, Ms. Petersen stated that City staff did not grant Jeff Colee a fence height variance, and he must remove the fence he erected to keep cats out of his backyard. Noting that Mr. Colee is wheelchair-bound, she pointed out that the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act)requires cities to modify their zoning to accommodate the disabled. Stating that he read the staff decision, City Attorney Larry Warren explained that staff has criteria on when a variance may be granted that has been established by the Council. He indicated that the fence did not meet the standards as established by City Code, and that the original reason for Mr. Colee to build the over-height fence no longer exists, as the adjacent neighbor who was responsible for the cat problem has now moved. Citizen Comment: Lorenz- Stephanie Lorenz, 13515 SE Maple Valley Rd., Renton, 98058, expressed Tree Hazard, Maple Valley concern that cottonwood trees growing on the sloughing slope along Maple Hwy Valley Hwy., west of Riverview Park and east of the former Stoneway Concrete Plant site,may fall across the road and hurt someone. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THIS MATTER TO THE ADMINISTRATION. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: McOmber- Howard McOmber,475 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, asked that the City Various review Jeff Colee's fence situation(discussed by previous speaker Petersen), as the problem does not seem to be totally solved. Mr. McOmber also issued an invitation to the Highlands Community Association's Christmas party,which will be held on December 16. Councilman Clawson pointed out that Jeff Colee can appeal the staffs decision. '''November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes .., Page 404 • Comprehensive Plan: 2006 Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Amendments regarding the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments, concurrent rezonings, r IT and implementing zoning text amendments. The Committee recommended •concurrence in the staff and Planning Commission recommendation to approve the'2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments as shown on the matrix entitled "2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments" and on the Report and 01-6 Recommendation of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force(dated ��,y� i 11/8/2006) with the following changes from the original recommendations: Set Gt 1SD "" rIA ti'd 1) Application 2006-M-6, Map Amendment for the Highlands Study Area- - UDly ef is The area known as "the tail" on Harrington Ave. NE between NE 9th St. , rn and NE 7th St. to be shown in the Comprehensive Plan as Center Village {,� di�163� ( �Y � 'j, with multi-family zoning in order to comply with adopted mapping criteria for multi-family land use. 2) Report and Recommendation of the Highlands Task Force, Zoning Text Amendments—Notes and conditions section of Title IV will include a zoning use note restricting commercial office uses on properties fronting Edmonds Ave. NE, Sunset Blvd., and NE 12th St. 3) Application 2006-M-3, Rivera—The zoning use table in the R-14 zone will include a zoning use note restricting signage for commercial uses in the R- 14 zone to monument signs. The applicants and the land use map/text amendment requests listed on the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments matrix, are as follows: • 2006-M-1 —Wan Chee; Map amendment to change Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial. • 2006-M-2— Susan Larson-Kinzer; Map amendment to change Kennydale Blueberry Farm from Residential Low Density to Residential Single Family. • 2006-M-3 —Manuel Rivera; Map amendment to change Residential Single Family to Commercial Corridor. • 2006-M-4—Springbrook Associates; Map amendment to change Residential Medium Density to Commercial Corridor. • 2006-M-5 —City of Renton; Map amendment to change Puget Colony from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. • 2006-M-6—City of Renton; Map amendment for the Highlands Study Area. • 2006-M=7—City of Renton; Map amendment to change the former Aqua Barn site from Neighborhood Business in King County's Comprehensive Plan to Commercial Corridor to be consistent with Renton's Comprehensive Plan. • 2006-M-8—City of Renton; Map amendment to consider changing the designation for a 49-acre area of upper Kennydale, south of NE 28th St. and NE 16th St. from I-405 to approximately the boundary of the Heritage Glen Subdivision from Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning. • 2006-T-1 —City of Renton; Text amendment to update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent school district Capital Facilities Plans. • 2006-T-2—City of Renton; Text amendment to update the Land Use Element to reflect changes in the Center Village. • 2006-T-3 —City of Renton; Text amendment to Land Use and Community Design elements with housekeeping changes. • November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes , Page 405 • 2006-T-4—City of Renton; Text amendment to update the Transportation Element to reflect changes in capital projects. • 2006-T-5 —City of Renton; Text amendment to update the Land Use Element to allow Residential Manufactured Home zoning to be an implementing zone with the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation. The Committee further recommended that the development agreement for application 2006-M-7 (former Aqua Barn site) be referred to the City Attorney for review and approval, and that the Mayor be authorized to execute the agreement upon approval by the City Attorney. The Committee further recommended that Application 2006-T-5 and Application 2006-M-2 be held in Committee until resolution of the pending SEPA(State Environmental Policy Act) appeal on these issues. MOVED BY BRIERS, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* Referring to the amendment concerning the upper Kennydale area(2006-M-8), Councilman Clawson pointed out that the Committee agreed with the staff recommendation to downzone the area to R-4, and not with the Planning Commission recommendation to keep the existing R-8 zoning. He noted the environmental constraints of the area, and the need to balance the rights of area residents and the rights of those who want to develop. *MOTION CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval of Finance: Vouchers Claim Vouchers 253809 -254369 and four wire transfers totaling $8,923,702.22; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 66410 -66587, one wire transfer, and 641 direct deposits totaling $2,015,422.36. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services: Park Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report regarding the 2006 Budget Fund Budget Increase, Staffing amendments for intermittent parks and recreation staffing expenses. The Expenses Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the transfer of$35,000 from the General Fund to Fund 101 to offset increased overtime and labor costs incurred due to weather related crowd control and the extended Sockeye season. The Committee further recommended that the budget amendment ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 406 for ordinance.) RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3841 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an Finance: Fiber Optic interlocal agreement, entitled "Addendum#27 for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects Interlocal Installation Projects," with the City of Bellevue, City of Kirkland, City of Agreement, Eastside Fiber Renton, Lake Washington School District, Renton School District, University Consortium of Washington, Bellevue School District, and Evergreen Hospital, to provide an alternative to the King County I-Net and to better serve additional areas within the City of Renton. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. P"777.0VED BY Date PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT November 20, 2006 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Concurrent Re-zoning, and Implementing Zoning Text Amendments (June 5, 2006) The Planning and Development Committee recommends concurrence in the staff and Planning Commission recommendation to approve the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments as shown on Attachment A, 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Matrix and Attachment B, The Report and Recommendations of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force with the following changes from the original recommendations. 1) Application 2006-M-6 Map Amendment for the Highlands Study Area a. The area known as "the tail" on Harrington Ave between NE 9th St. and NE 7th St. to be shown in the Comprehensive Plan as Center Village with Multi- family zoning in order to comply with adopted mapping criteria for Multi- family land use. 2) Report and Recommendation of the Highlands Task Force, Zoning Text Amendments a. Notes and Conditons section of Title IV will include a zoning use note restricting commercial office uses on properties fronting Edmonds Ave. NE Sunset Blvd and NE 12th St. 3) Application 2006 M-3 Rivera a. The zoning use table in the R-14 zone will include a zoning use note restricting signage for commercial uses in the R-14 zone to monument signs. The Committee further recommends that the Development Agreement for Application 2006 M-7 be refererd to the City Attorney for review and approval and that Mayor be authorized to execute the agreement upon approval by the City Attorney. The Committee further recommends that Applications 2006 T-5 and Application 2006 M- 2 be held in Committee until resolution of the pending SEPA appeal on these issues. L\Cr.9itG� Terri Briere,rhair P&D Report.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh losiv Dan Clawson, Vice Chair Marcie Palmer, Member cc: 'Vex Pie/sch Rebeeea Lind Larry Warren P&D Report.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh Z C a) 0 , O C C 0 H O w .Sw T m CZ E �c .o co 3 ZZW1 Q WW < ° c m . c o m 0 u -o acsY v� 2F- 0 c c o c C - o c :0 .c 0 C c77t F- c E as Za Z ° o ' 0 •0 o ' ca E a .o 'E o o ' .~- a) a) -0 cu a O5W ' (nRs � o �c � y0cccc � yo0 � c03 EacicLa ZJm2 .c 'E co 0 w •Ec 0 ca a) -c •EU � -c • - mom w E E 0 Q >O ' 3 E 0 c).0 2 a 3 E 0 •c0 wrn 3 E c) e i 3 E a c' c 3 c°) � .- ..FWC) p i- O E c`u o as L O E E E- c L oc 0 0 L o Ec aa) L c O aC W cV E Q.� � CL ¢ � V E a,? o my cU oaE E cU E 00 c c 0 3 � O al 0 a a O W O O a N (n C C a E E c a= O Q 3 •C C i _c .-- cc O ("-n 2 CO c 2U) O v� E CO - o v7) U ("-n wUUUin E wJ cov Li. c -W o •CO V. RS � -� N � 2 o C c .�- can N 0 (Nca o 2 U o > C 0 w O co 0 L O 0 " cC pZ cn = � o a0_ r0F3 � Q yF3 oc (,� 0 (n c = = o o' a c +. C c 0 * C as c E O 0 0cO O Oco O 0) O ZW c .- � _ � � ° T Ca 77 c�-0a ID � -00 o. � Z— = a _+. C 0 0 C LoC L C . . C L C ,. C 0 C a � V E i s 0 0 0 a) 0) 0 0 o a) a) a) o a) = a) a ,� Z0 E a) •� E y E c E -c E m E •t E a) E yc < :3 O = o) E 0 c E — N E O E E o E 0 E .g .. a00 0 o «s O o •- 0 0 0 0 o ao 0 o ao 0 O 0cn a z c0cOa) . Occ 0.O. c , a coat c � cc N N L C L O O O L L O L (n L F- L O .. Z CD O "0 _c Z (0 — L zU�/)� w• O O 0 O 0 0 0)� Z im � 'O = -0 = '° -0 "O "O 0 (n 2 a) C as C co C as C 0 C cC C N o A. 0p ° E ° E cE cE E cEwt - - - - Q- - a cc < cH H H H lij H ¢ L _cca c ca •c 0) •c° a) o c a) FO o Oc 0 �� c c0 c N >,E. > o - � 0 o•_ o EZ° — E U) >, i car ¢ c to N o L C N a �N .a N La) 00 E c o o > O M C C).0 Nm w 0 a) 2 ,- c) E a) C.) a) c_) 0 o .c z .�, E3c 'a) 2 .5 0 Y CC7E coo :0 ,. o � L p ca o NZ c cOv . ° c a) 0 . c L cn 0 >, ° >,..- � .a CO N c t O U c ' ° 0 3 _ 0 I I- 0 `a E o-3 '° E m o >,� � 7 o co a 0 2a co 0)7.Z � 0 ZO O li aN0 0 00 .L.. C a) N N �,ca 2 _E- UO a) E O F _ a) " Wm aC CD cc O O � o E OG: 'E � � C .. ¢ a) _r' 22 -c .o •c cc E � c cV ° ° N E co C Q ° c 0 >, ,- c CO,_, c L (vtgcaca ca c cn •0 'tE •� Caciiu caa) Ic wca — •- V Rs LL p y) 0 Z c E m o Z c > o WN i i i �'-- � a) 3 o .E2 —_ o ° E 0 cn 3 3U pY cti C � a) a) a) 00 m . c >,c0 -C o - E '0Ja -- cac) as 0 E E E 0 c�u O `V- O += ` Ncrs a) ° a) 'p 0) r0 O U 0 ,� a EEEc0 � � 0cU0Nc 0 20 75 a. CWo � CO00000cm WC (nE0)Lc3ca a— c -COAL caZ CO O C) 0 O C o ON IT) C J O N .r o O v7 c C ;C (� O N a) != 0: octt � >,U cUc C 0) c13 c 0cc c C 0 ¢ QU CO L o .. c .c as ' _c c • ° _O .aa .00 a) aa)) E m �0c > can >,N o. > 0 0 a) k- O 0 • 75)>,m � ..c .c E Y o 0 >, `o o co 0)0 °c) o CC (a c)•>'.n E c) C = c c a) .2.22E a) CO 3 Co a c 'v) > C a- E _c as E 0 L -0 • U O ..• 0a) T0 _ca) O 0 a- cS0000 a- ° = _c as . _ccua) o Z mv) ZZZO F- CCJ 0 $ ¢ a_0 -0 .0 Ni ¢ w 3 ULL `1CC 022 N LU 0 ZN 0 Q 0 .A >, O o 0 Fs 0 c a w w c >,,- c 1- c E c'>•, c c c) C c ec 2 CQ c CO aL) cu0. 0u_ .0 E cc c a � - a Q -c W 0 IL E ° �, 3 a) O as L O •N L ° 2 'y L a' 2 z QOC ° a) E ° L o o � o 0 0 O 0 0 0 z < ° 2 53 c .+ 0 -2 "-' cc -D "� E CC "- < 0 Si-F- c c c � L c >, � coo "a' >. 0 a wZ 0 cU a) C as a) cU 0 nO 0 ,.- ° 0 = CD > � 1 o 8 0 c00c ca3 .� cac) 0 co •E - ID c d 0 1 E a) — y a) 0 :,� ` 0 0 .E 0 o ca v7 0 y z ZW Ec 0c E -o 0 :0 E 0 0 E E 0 E0a a) Ec Q ¢ -0E -0 ¢ >,CCcn ¢ aE ¢ = E ¢ •- 00 ¢ al a LU_ .J < cO'ate) o 'a) ca a) o cc 0 0 o 0 ate) o ca 0)-a) 3 c 0) 0 cc 2Z0Z 2Y CCU 2 2U 2Q_ (AJ M2 a. o 0 F- _ ?0O Z C 5 .vim U c c Q 0 a) C c c o O (D N > as CO Y o .. C E CM -ICC n: 0 C L a C.) C v a) `i t "- E O. C 0 7 c .y L C C •0S) „,,>,N O o CZ Z co 2 ..2 ¢ cn ¢ � > UU U LU E 2o ,- N c? 1 In (.O c)# 2 2oa) 0) 2 2 2 2 US Q u. o O C () Q. 0 0 0 0 W © 1- _O o o n� �..a c m w 3 c o c .,...pc ai a) E c 0 co ZZWI-- E. aE � � � � o � `� ooaaiN moo � � N < WW4 = crnU O cnacn o nd o n2 .- a) s ,r CL � c ' a) rn 0 +d c O U € N W ct a) c c c o o L r c N O c c c co 4. OaPZ o 0) a) � 0 •3 0't co0N a) a) .o o E 'C ro i = o 0 o v) 0 o c rn 0 O a 20e� ' c me c n. c ors • EQ :. � o > � E 'er � � c N " ci ZW2 0 cc of. `z o ° o a) c o o Ec o cu o o 0 cLcl 0- ( c E c rno •E 2 ,� �, 0 cO1 .al. > 0. NO .0caco 3Ea) �? iE 3 ornLCNEowN 3Ea) :J�W00. i_ oEoa) ao >, Ec � a) vEEyao � oE �:0 W N ciV Ec E aoi � E � nOCCU E � M � V E cc c = o � ca 3 00 0 o o 4tc aa)) 8 0 � o 0 a) 0 0 -S F as o U w TUUa caO < o0 � -c 2 = 3 U can 2 H = c a 0 • O ZW a7 � cc a) 0"� ' oo a o w y a 0- a U O = 0 t 3 3 C7 .. 0 Z 0. . e •c c c c 0Q N0 � ctI 3c o � ZW c pia vi»- a a c z,V � moaci = corm E .::a 2Et0E � v) EEE E 0 ad c O na0 -.E. a) 0 6 O 0 � x � 0 O � cne iu .0i.12 0 1_ Z ZO CD ZH 0 ZCD NC c o • 0 0 0 0 Z.N Z o c :r w, - < 2 =_- o as � c CII acCa rc• c J > U O co o (n o co o ao E E E p � a 0 .. aE C? C) oor- E a) E of a) re W m 7 N O V 0 0 0 0 U Uc"n02 Q � cc $ Qm m o -c co Z ' 0) >, m cr cz as - "c E •- E a as c O. o c� 2 3 0 0 N o L O W a) E 2) ..- - -0 � N U) p N c .- y f0 c ._. L L cN f) '3 °-Z 2 0 = a) 0 CD v) n C- _C Z c, _›LO.. > N A, i o fd C c >3,, C)a O E •E0 ¢ ccE .. nEop � � ._ :. o a ,— LL cu ou 0 0 UUaJ c c o 7 U +. L c = i co 0 a) crs Ww� = U2 c O o E -°O i O �i y 3 >,L. :E et � g � � � � " E E o c0 w of cti To :E. :E W •ca •c E E ac o o E ° 3 E w C. W = c � 0 •° •- � c a) 0 0 a . m E c aa)) U O co cc ca N >' m � cn U o •.-� o E o 7 c � co o [L CO cc ca '� .� cc g -E. voi o .� E a o cc c) N 1_ . O LL .S C cu 0 7 c tq O o 0) 0 O 0 N W =75 c ° 3cLL c IN (c_)� a E N Q) no Z c � � cn >; o w cv3 2 cog 2 -0 .E a) -c c o - o a) •- E ca o - o- n- a) o c c 0 a) ca — cc E EE I— L .as «. :Fs L L O (/� 3o c (aEti 0 y m ' m :° c c a) 0? 3 c m 2 � t o o '- m rn° m :00 o c� c CI' wa▪ a) aoCV � :«' ca) 0 - CD i c c 7a Z2 CC !A .- c5 - U C.. CC U i) CCCC O 3 N < co as r O 0 •�' 8 0)I— 5 ;5W .� L O C c N O O '> LL L ." O E CO cL) Em c o m c O c'o a) Z_ o oc 0) 0 3 3 E o o 2 'CC CC 0m o ,E :°0) al 0 oa 0 a' o' 0 a) ccn 0 .5 0W c a¢_ aI- c c. .-6 E c 'm = � .r na) c.) NW E o .>- () > Ea o 0 0 • >,C3 c� m aN)F. cY o 0 < .00 cz w O cz 'nr a) a) a) c '( -0 - R` c o 0° m CC) m - 3 m m N a(0 a, C.0 O a) c 0 0 a) c Z CL cL � (C � r E f4 NI CC oLL co cOL E EW < oz 0 aE y a.< 5) 0 >,Z o a) cccC •}-� chQau nn JQ °I o � Eo Eo c Eo 0 m ca ca a� EL c •� •a `O c g O L m o c n O • o O O ca o m mom .:= .5UU UU � U V Y cc as 30 N HU = y CO 0 I- w Z c O c c d O O E m m m N J' CC CC M a o 0 0 Q _ c 0 0 0 as E N. 00 . o L 2 2 F a J co �o co z z 0 0 0 0 C Z a) 0I- i4.0.+ `w+w+' Z Z W F= Li' p ch W m ` Q.. W c c c m C"32I- w 0 0- 0 O— o ° a Q Z � - ZOO vi �u COi o ZW02 '§ C SEC = EC a) °a J;UW U,, 3 E 3 o E 3 o E ` LLJ U U QO CO CO� COoic) oW U2 Uv) o Uc"n ? 2U) 0W 0 O 'ccc N w �p) O � 0_o2U 2 C C •0 >- ocpcU al -0 a) O"Z a � c co � m • o w E ) Q :Ea. vi c6 .-. o - :- •CoZW c cc -ao .. '`po. °oQV E mE aE `ncc -) o 0 E a) E .c }. d. D 0 0 C O )C 0 up 0 = a) a Z Z O L' in 2 0 -c z a) O a U O ( O Q • LL Z 5 a C C C C C o N O o 0 0 ZNZ C CC C C C set Z � _ C.403CcnC 0C 0C Q00 oE •°) E , E , E nE C) V uEa) ELE ° E uE cp W v v p 0 U v v v 0 0 - aE' c2' a �' a �' afL' _0 Ts Y (d C a. E v- 0 0 p .pC a) = 0) ° cA E 7 w — ...- y O c >. C) p C O no � a Oo cc 'c• yc CO Eo N .' N ,_ Nt� O O Y ., Z o p Y t w L o E c O J 0 U co .-• O N •.� C)-p •p N oC C C O y o c� N asin Q Q t ;- C 0 c3 ^ 0 .0 ` ° C ` ...... C U Wcc Cl) 0 U 0) '3 O ~ a) 2 c 'C c 2a •° E �° •000 Magi wcaE cTs m m � NEY y0 � >- o2p ° 2 .E V =' o0c maE) al c U .� a) U ) W. I- c � N C `) �n CW ~' -0 E a) 0 0 ° m 11. C C N o O ) - cc N c O ` cl IL ct_ n°i c � hoc E2 Ec 0E Cl) ? bj ) c o � `� � Coa, o `n IL.' m � ° � a ooUo ° a) iZ-0 iJ C a) - • E -p a >2 O c� 0 c +�. M a) `+ C C Y T. O _ • E 000- 0 - ca ' > C > C 4 > C > > as •E •N o > C En cn m O 0 = o 0) O o 0 o p) c �.,N. a nE Qcn c� 0. c n. a'v) cu co0 0 'CO < W .E <D o Ca. 0� E ¢'Od Cl) c 0 M O L c 0 N � a) °� c m 0 •= a) m X W 0) cC o 0 'p 0- co C) 0- iC 0 .E ¢ W = a) »r C c 0 -0 0 'p .- ..c F_ a) Q © r= 7 C N J a) O C .p. ' '§ C C g a � OOO -c oyo OWY oa) UOpa) � Q o c� Li- .•.. C) •C 'a' C) 0 .- 0 .c _ o C .0 C N a. 0 W.Z cT) 0 W cn a) -0 a) C 0 a) W O N a) a) o v)W QE0o) E 'c Eta Emm p) •7) 0 a 0 c p 0 '3 a O c 'p cn c C .. c c 0 = cC C E 0 0 1 c cC C t co p O E op U a) m v� a) � m �, c ZW ) EC v E o C a E C EC aci N 0 F C) c"u v .� � -0E a) �? JtiEa�Ei � 0) co Q N 0 0 "- - a) c °) .c a) .• .- o o m ° p 0 o 0 a 6 F- -c 2 > I- c1 L1Ik... O-F- CC = E .J U D 0 0 0) I- Z aa) 4 0 0 0 0 U aa)i a) m m m C CC CC CC CC o, 0 0 0 0 C) 0 C.) U a E o N c? d Li' C oaO W b (I) (I) c0O cp Cl) LL O O O O C y 4 0 Report and Recommendation Of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force November 8,2006 S•cSY 0 vA The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force was appointed by Mayor Kathy Keolker on October 9,2006 Task Force Members: Kirk Moore, Chair Steve Beck Theresa Elmer Mark Gropper Jennifer Hawton Bimal Kumar Howard McOmber Colin Walker Scott Weiss Sandel DeMastus,alternate The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force was composed of a group of citizen volunteers, appointed by the Mayor, and approved by the City Council. Task Force members were recruited from the Party of Records list from the Renton Highlands Sub Area zoning action, from the Highlands Community Association, from the Renton Housing Authority, from neighborhood business owners, and through general public notice. Task Force membership was chosen to reflect commercial,community,property owner, and resident interests within the areas of the Highlands affected by proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning changes. Purpose The purpose of the Task Force was to provide additional citizen and property owner input into the zoning decisions within the Highlands study area. This Task Force convened for a limited time with the specific purpose to review the draft land use and zoning changes. This included review of proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments,proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendments,proposed Zoning Map Amendments, and proposed Zoning Text Amendments. After reviewing the proposed changes,the Task Force was charged with putting together a set of recommendations for City Council review. This report contains the recommendations of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force. It lists issues of concern that Task Force members identified, and proposed solutions. Task Force proposed Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments are attached to this report in the following appendices: • Appendix A- Task Force Proposed Land Use Map • Appendix B-Task Force Proposed Zoning Map • Appendix C-Task Force Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments • Appendix D- Task Force Proposed Zoning Text Amendments Process Since the Task Force was formed members have met twice a week with City staff. In the first phase of the process, staff briefed the Task Force on the current zoning regulations in effect in the Highlands study area, as well as the proposed changes. Initial briefings also included review of the Comprehensive Plan land use policies in effect for the neighborhood. During the second phase, each Task Force member developed his or her own zoning map for the study area. Individual zoning concepts were consolidated into • three small-group concepts by consensus. From these three maps, the Task Force consolidated the information into a single mapping proposal. Throughout the process of the briefings and the mapping exercise, a number of issues surfaced regarding land use policy and zoning regulations. These issues were collected throughout the first two phases of the process and brought back to the Task Force for discussion and recommendation in the third phase of the process. Decisions during this phase were also made by consensus of the Task Force. Staff provided additional information as requested and provided further assistance in interpreting the details of zoning and land use regulation. 1 Although the recommendations of the Task Force were formed through consensus, there was always the option to create a minority report. Given that there has been a fair amount of contention in the Highlands study area over proposed land use and zoning changes, the City Council authorized the creation of a minority report if necessary. A minority report allowed the opportunity for a group of at least three Task Force members to present an alternative recommendation from the rest of the group. Thus, if there were areas in which the Task Force just could not agree,there would be a series of alternative recommendations. Task Force Recommendations Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations and Policies All zoning is required by law to be consistent with the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan. The Task Force completed a land use map for the study area. Implementation of the Task Force proposal requires some Comprehensive Plan Text and Land Use Map Amendments. Appendix A contains the Task Force Proposed Land Use Map. This map shows the proposal to include the residential area north of NE 16th Street in the Center Village (CV) land use designation. It also includes the recommendation to include the multi-family areas south east of NE 12th Street and Monroe Ave NE, and east of Harrington Avenue NE between NE 7th Street and NE 9th Street in the Residential Multi- Family(RMF) land use designation. Appendix C contains the Task Force Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments. The Task Force recommended that Residential- 14 (R-14), Center Village(CV),and the Residential Multi-family(RM-F,RM-U, and RM-T)zones implement the Center Village Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. Zoning Map Rezoning of property in the Highlands Study Area is a very important issue to the residents and property owners there. The Task Force completed a zoning map for the study area. A modest up-zone to Residential-fourteen units per acre(R-14)was recommended for much of the current Residential-ten units per net acre (R-10) zoning in the study area. R-14 zoning was also recommended for the duplexes north of Sunset Boulevard in the vicinity of Glenwood Avenue NE and Harrington Avenue NE. Center Village(CV)zoning was expanded along Sunset Boulevard, in a few parcels adjacent to the existing commercial area, and the Houser Terrace and Evergreen Terrace properties owned by the Renton Housing Authority. Rezoning to Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) was recommended for three strips of properties: a strip along Kirkland Avenue NE, a strip south of NE 12th Street, and a strip along Harrington Avenue NE. Appendix B contains the Task Force Proposed Zoning Map. Non-Conforming Uses Past zoning proposals for this area included the possibility of implementing zoning that did not allow existing residential uses, such as duplexes and single-family homes. In such situations, the existing use is considered a legal non-conforming use. Legal non- conforming is the technical term for"grandfathered in". It means that the use is allowed to continue but may not expand or enlarge. Several members of the Task Force wished to ensure that the zoning proposal allow existing residential uses to remain legal and conforming. The recommended zoning proposal eliminates the issue of non-conforming 2 uses. All existing use types (duplexes, single-family uses) are allowed uses in the proposed zoning package. Property Redevelopment One of the most debated issues in the package of proposed zoning changes was a requirement that when properties came in for subdivision, the existing unit had to be removed. This would only affect those applying for division of their properties, and not to other changes like remodels or additions. However, the Task Force felt that property owners should not be required to remove existing units in order to subdivide their property. In lieu of requiring the removal of existing units, the Task Force indicated that property owners should be required to upgrade the existing units. Unfortunately,building and related codes make this impossible to implement without declaring the unit a hazard. The Task Force did not wish to create a situation in which existing units were declared hazardous. However, the Task Force did recommend deleting the provision that required the removal of existing units upon subdivision. Affordable Housing Keeping the neighborhood an affordable place to live for people in all stages of their lives was important to the members of the Task Force. In the R-14 zone, there is an allowed density bonus of 18 units per net acre. The Task Force recommended keeping the proposed incentive of creating two units of affordable housing as one of the options to achieve the density bonus. The Task Force also recommended implementing an incentive geared toward public agencies and non-profit organizations whose mission is to provide affordable housing. An incentive was recommended that would allow a bonus of 30 units per net acre for any project, of at least two acres, in which a minimum of 50%of the units developed would be affordable to those with incomes of 50%of the Area Median Income. Limits on Commercial Development While the Task Force liked the flexibility of the R-14 zone,there was general concern that it could allow some small commercial uses in a residential area. To prevent this, the Task Force recommendation specifically prohibits on-site services,retail, and eating/drinking establishments in this area unless they are accessory to a community, school, or recreational use. This would allow the possibility for a small business like an espresso stand or bicycle rental to locate in a park or the Community Center. A hearings examiner conditional use permit would be required. The Task Force also recommended that new, indoor recreational uses should be allowed in the R-14 zone to allow for redevelopment of the North Highlands Community Center property. Commercial Development Amendments in the Center Village Zone The CV zone is primarily oriented toward commercial development. Residential uses are allowed, but some limits must be put in place to ensure that as the area begins to redevelop, residential uses will not dominate this zone. As a result, the Task Force recommended increasing the minimum residential density in this area to 20 dwelling units per net acre. This will prevent lower density residential-only redevelopment from occurring in the commercial area. The Task Force also recommended a standard which 3 • requires commercial development in properties fronting on Sunset Boulevard. This proposes that commercial development occupy a minimum of 75% of the frontage on Sunset. Another Task Force recommendation was to allow a ten foot height bonus in the CV zone for properties that have first floor commercial development. This allows building of four stories of residential over first floor commercial development, an important incentive for the development of mixed use commercial and residential buildings. R-14 Zone Density The Task Force recommended raising the minimum density in the R-14 zone to ten units per acre to comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the Center Village Land Use Designation. The Task Force also recommended keeping the current bonus system in the R-14 zone that allows densities up to 18 units per net acre. In order to receive the bonus, however,the proposed development would have to offer one of the following desired items: alley access, open space,or affordable housing. Design Regulations The Task Force recommended implementation of Design Regulations for all properties within the Center Village land use designation. The regulations consist of standards and guidelines that would be applied to new development. Minimum Lot Size for Detached Residential Development The Task Force recommended that the minimum lot size for single-family detached residences in the R-14 zone be set at 5,000 square feet. Next Steps The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force has recommended a complete package of land use and zoning changes. These proposed changes are currently in environmental review and the City's Environmental Review Committee is expected to issue an environmental determination on November 13,2006. November 13th is also the scheduled date for a City Council public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan changes included in this recommendation. Upon completion of the environmental review and the public hearing processes,the City Council should consider the Task Force recommendations for adoption. Beyond possible adoption,the Task Force identified a number of issues beyond their immediate scope of work. Issues that the Task Force feels merit further consideration by the City, include: - Implementation of a minimum property maintenance code that would address potential life safety issues in existing units - Affordable housing strategies for the Highlands, and the City as a whole, including zoning incentives, tax incentives, and possible fee reductions - Consideration of storm water regulation implementation in the Highlands - Development of properties for parks and recreation uses by the City - Completion of a full sub area plan for the study area 4 - Consideration of implementation of Cottage Housing standards in the Highlands and Citywide. In addition to addressing these issues, the Task Force highly recommends that the City continue to work with a Citizen's Task Force in the revitalization and redevelopment of the Highlands Study Area. 5 APPENDIX A 1mu- —- j1i Dam " ' 'L AMI ■.IiI, NE I1r�i77tos_ �ti - . .11 sp. l.Y11141 11 ■■/11■/// �� i.it1 ,!?iIiIi!!JI$iJIii1!!. iiIai Or ipo 1111111 Alill/Cc:, li l Arai . 11� „my a ty. ,� t_ca1151.4 . ■. .or a� .i111111111�� tst St -�f .�. N• �. .I .k ken min, Millalli =figitS.lL�!�.�i ;; 11i i a NE 20th _ iller It *�. L �� �� ■u1E E[�EYII11 2411 11111/ III ■11I �UZ l n■ ■e .11s - : :_ �Num � am ow •no ME i••■■.ams Ems. :Um 1■■Ic. �■■■ EIr�i/111i1 11111 I��_ ir:. `iniQiYC/ am NM ■ ■rm. A ale �■ ■1 1■ Q: A.■7 J - ■Naomi�' ' r �imi �i anium IF m =III► . ! .m ■■ .�� ■■■e� ra mil NA l 11111 Milli/) Illy II �i im i1 i�rrl fit' •�`�li imam!' �� = room 1111 Eft lio ■■ IN -■*li I■,1 It ;,�,l 1311111Raill m E �■ sa Ira mom ism 11.0.711 •WO: Rs•111>I IitiIiI rA , 711 �i■�� erne stall/ Mid CA �� R ��/illIF- •� _ � ILI,nilP■!�i---A. i pi: ■ sum_ sw •0 ;I .n i R+ 2 Imp_LI a "; LI t■� ■tom — .a� ■e e!,41 tt w� �� :11� .. .... - - "Ill sra uII iEc.v siasrw ; ;i! `dm■r , mite 1 ml A/ v. i as ■ ■T ■Tr111 ■GI■ C. =13m ` • €'• ■aiam +t11■ ■Nlrr: � ..■ .1!'trts �■u /igi t>r i ■■■■■■■■ ■R■V1 1 1a rim ■gi kali No s ■■� - •r�� �wmi11 ..b-mi Elm�r, i ■_ \\nI/�.. j yCaYik�■Lyor air ... ,'" i 114 1111111 �1 as 411 .'• . is V IIIi1Gi1i1 111111 11131111� IIAIII .i■ no .a ol■ • �■ iIIi1L'iI1I .111iYiYI.Yi1111� ��.� .71,tipiii,�LlIJSIII:. ■t: .Ii ;rn : mi r� iiliiiiili ..I III 1111.111/111Chle#1147411 a,,, .t, .IN 1.9 MI MIM III ■ A _.�. Ma ra 9th \ -‘aA4II1Il-1 Ii1 m ,al = i^-.i ¢ ■liPbS.t. , r■ ■; mown ■. ■IN I ig yvu, ►,• g• • ■ m / E■ �, .■■■nTli?hlrnioarp `a ■ 1pTi- i •t,i IN tMr,„4„Si,,t,„. ,./•,•ah 1. 16.1 //II Duna 4y4r. ;... o . ei/ ■p E7.. E : .tlllll.. r►.sn • _ . ► if..' •� Em t. �. �� .r .►71gyp,*ligtI�y��•* 4% ;�i010 00% 0 '. fit�B1 �1'�"al `� '. ���. ■D .. ;.. ��rlllly 2„Iv:��' I�.�� •1 ■I RP1E!! ►� 1112111SY1►111.•r• sw-- r-. t9 g: °:A4ri ,ate t;n,� f%#4w 4. .1��0 �*,w klMiii17 r.♦`/` ■. *�V,� ,C . �A��1►`'17t+J ♦♦R 10 [1L 1�1!1/l11f-"_4 .• i % c� u ►a r1!!fal . . . — . '442 re,..4 -. E, vs•■ IIiLIWlYiii► xi1t•a1l il1. .._.4•, m 111A : MII �`� iWA�L� I�i ♦♦ sA MN ■ 111111,1:11§1 111111T11111 I11111I C':-- cl u1�� isi i *��•,11 eln [�'i IIIIY�11i1! IIIIL'afY111i i111i1a IIIM w: n �= '\. a •��1/-� III.�la //i F ill gem i111111i1 11�W!'. �/iG ,i. so Nis .g e.,, , —ml a - I�J7i1if ■■ ■■ ? 441 , �� , _ Ili g h l a n d s Subarea NHA RLD 0 1000 2000 I IRS Proposed Land Use - Task Force I I RMD Mi RMF 1 : 12000 Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning CV 4 Alex Pietsch•Administrator k C.E.Feaset CC tV f 03 November 2006 MIN L J APPENDIX B á1AJP'1IiIIi\ il Ira 1 —— Tr 11 �N A < -� I411ainsi i=:ILINE ■ llSrailemirlam: NH. ■■n11■11\ / I��III Ulft mois op 4iit in • „"I sa■sal ■.-IN ■ Nina. ■uL/.41:isin■i t._ r►'ittli: imaidaii..._•11,10_4\\<.: li_ikirela mucks r a� �E�11,. m .■ min ■�1 LIRE r---- ___�-.._.__��/ Y la , ... .a•�1/� /�+�■ �IIiJlSUJiiI • ,„ . _ Ilan 211/1 :Il.■�111 11111111ria ■■■■�1�i'� �' �i�%A� w ���111�l11!■1111 a. 111111 p n11u■sn //w n 1st St += V �IC1.1"2 '1411111 1_ ® ili'�i�iL �:i %Ai Ili i NE 20th ■ Ili =I:-�iN �: = '( 11E111111 �11 11 ■■i 1 1 11■ 11111,1 111111 p` .° ■4 / _ ll� ��. :_ ■■■■ ■i �m. - I in I Iall II ` an Ft.ile !1 anal Er a M� � � 1� � • out MEI EMI ,a ter\ ■�■ ■. L'tiit'1 iilt;4t1 b= ;, w sal 11119Pelt. ,-.3i MI Mg 2 Elam as !pip mo so Erma a ®11■ sa ,ra s� ■ ■,.�:limp .■ 'al ■ ■� to �rl /eiluic, IiIH1iLIi______ �a mil cal &Amer "Imill Mill. hie imr ,S � ,I : a ■ I Iwil � lIll C C t®s�n ", . I► ■iij :F aranpsiHIIIENS . wriArao: -;:ger..m ovum -,F.,-4, - Vs Qom 0:700A/ a is ® �\ ' A is ■re■rnm■ CZ 4 rag 1.1 tar. ,p,„ a . :rEM 121611, 1- :fir t�/rY ■ i?i P UI � ��■ems■,!■ e� Asa IL: �\■!/1. urr>,�.ri■a<saa■ ��� �r:Iiii-lirliI�� will1111: Iu■� .� e. ■a�.i■■■■A t I 1111G1111 . ; -.N■N■■ s,‘..sosir,t4:•if 1111C1111 • r'N . I I I I I I Ni11 1i/n ._1 _ 9thG� ii 1( 'i ;.„.,„Ai ! 11 5tril 4•�1 "' NE t 1 St.�yY •!! - ■� .e :TAIL®oolll to ��i914 oft lsa0 �YAy1� ■11 ■ ■„flop,arip. NNW ftV l�, 1 ,'11'1"—MN ^-24 'I`'"1 1r.�.f-• •`,�j� ® •ttlrop 3J�u117 to of.� x 111111111E^`i ® 1.I. ' ilk emir lF i ' � �� ■ r a,1 4a� •IU `� r 1ldgJJ2 ■ a .r � �� rr •. ■�1!,�t ®®� �� �, I. W■ ,,,, - 1lJ.Ilir!liii� i►i�i►II�� .. n�7 rt� / � • ,4 y Q "43'I'� :94� mail ii a tam♦ . A �.�4 �- .o., IIII�t011 ! 11111173,111111 1111'1N 'IPZ" a IMP' * 11 4 2,P4.tit t!�a s/x i• -! �- 111111i01i:1 11i1ia4V/111 ' . 7-3111111ri,arril21 �►�� s . ,› 111E1111 11l% w_ r� � �• �1. :� W !ia11fla il��e g ff. ,` ' � ax�■Cfi7 1i{t► :.: � �1,.,1 ► aal ra Noill11111111 ighIands Subarea Proposed Zoning - Task Force ® RC ® R-14 0 1000 2000 WI R-1 ® RM-F : :; Economic development Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning I I R-8 CV ��� Alex Pietsch,Administrator I I R-10 CN 1 : 12000 C.E.Feasel NT 03 November2006 APPENDIX C 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 Iemployment 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 I Renton to Newcastle-to and Issaquah. While development is envisioned at a smaller scale than expected in the Urban Center, the Village Center will still focus on urban Imixed-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 and 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-195. 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. Policy LU-196. Designate Centers in locations with the following characteristics: 1) A nucleus of existing multi-use development; 2) Potential for redevelopment, or vacant land to encourage significant concentration of development; 3) Center locations should be located on major transit and transportation routes; 4) 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 of land 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-201. 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. Policy LU-205. Identify major natural features and support development of new focal points that define the Center and 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. Policy LU-208. Consolidate access to existing streets and provide internal vehicular circulation that supports shared access. w 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 of the project. Policy LU-210. Connect residential uses to other uses in the Center through design features such as pedestrian access, shared parking areas, and common open spaces. 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 I 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 providing for compact urban development,transit orientation,pedestrian circulation, and a community focal point organised around an urban village concept. Objective LU-CCC: Develop Center Villages, characterized by intense urban I development supported by site planning and infrastructure that provides a pedestrian scale environment. I Policy LU-317. Apply the Center Village dDesignation 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. Policy LU-318. Implement the Center Village Designation using multiple zoning designations including Residential 4-0- 4 (R4 -014)), Center Village(CV), and the Residential Multi-family zones (RMF,RM-U,RM-T). 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-Subarea Plan is expected to occur ems-within a 2—5-year period from the 2004 GMA update. . . re . • Policy LU-320. Allow residential density ranging from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 80 dwelling units per acre in the Center Village Dewdesignation. 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 Village. Policy LU-323. Accommodate parking within a parking structure. Where structured parking is infeasible due to site configuration,parking should be located in the back or the side of the primary structure. Diseeur-age-Pparking lots between structures and street rights-of-way shall not be permitted. Policy LU-324. Use alley access where alleys currently exist. Encourage designation of new alleys in redevelopment projects. Policy LU-325. Encourage shared parking to use urban land efficiency. Policy LU-326. Develop design guidelines to provide direction on site design,building I design, landscape treatments,and-parking,and circulation components of new development projects. Implementation of this policy should be phased within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 Ioutside the Centers. 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 and/or 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. APPENDIX D CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 4-2,ZONING DISTRICTS—USES AND STANDARDS, CHAPTER 4-3,ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND OVERLAY DISTRICTS, CHAPTER 4-4,CITY-WIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, CHAPTER 4-8,PERMITS-GENERAL AND APPEALS,AND CHAPTER 4-11, DEFINITIONS,OF TITLE IV(DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS)OF ORDINANCE NO.4260 ENTITLED"CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON"BY CHANGING THE ZONING REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE CENTER VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION,INCLUDING THE RESIDENTIAL-14(R-14)ZONE AND CENTER VILLAGE(CV)ZONE,AND ENACTING DESIGN REGULATIONS. WHEREAS, the Vision for the Center Village calls for the modification of the existing, low-density suburban land use pattern; and WHEREAS, Comprehensive Plan Strategy 319.1 requires the evaluation of commercial and residential development standards in the Center Village Land Use Designation to ensure better implementation of the Center Village policies;and WHEREAS, Strategy 319.1 calls for the replacement of existing zoning that does not implement the Center Village Vision; and WHEREAS, the R-10 zone does not implement the Center Village vision for medium to high density residential development;and WHEREAS,the Center Village zone includes uses that are incompatible with high density housing; and WHEREAS, the Center Village Land Use policies promote high standards of design, pedestrian orientation,development of alleys,and the clustering of commercial and civic uses; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Housing Element promotes the provision of affordable housing for all income groups; and; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Page 1 of 58 SECTION I. Section 4-2-010.D of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts —Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment'A'. SECTION II. Section 4-2-020.G of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title N (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: G.RESIDENTIAL- 10 DU/ACRE(R-10): The Residential-10 Dwelling units Per net Acre Zone (R-10) is established for the 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 flats. It is intended to implement the Medium Density and Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. 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, aw 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(4) to ten(10) dwelling units per net acre. The zone serves as a transition to higher density multi-family zones. Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose statement, objectives and policy direction established in the Residential Medium Density land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU-157 through LU-181 or t e Center village land use designation, Objective LU CCC, Policies LU 317 through LU 332 and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Page 2 of 58 SECTION III. Section 4-2-020.H of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: H.RESDIENTIAL-14 DU/ACRE(R-14): The purpose of the Residential-14 Dwelling Units Per Net Acre Zone (R-14) is to encourage development, and redevelopment,of new-residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of detached, semi-attached, and attached dwelling structures organized and designed to combine characteristics of both typical detached single family and small-scale multi-family developments. It is intended to implement the Residential Medium Density or the Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designations. Densities range from eight (8)ten (10) to fourteen (14) units per net acre with opportunities for bonuses up to eighteen(18) dwelling units per net 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 reside„tial development allowed when they support the purpose of the designation. Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose established in the Residential Medium Density land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU- 157 through LU-181, or the Center Village land use designation, Objective LU-CCC, Policies LU- 317 through LU-332,and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION IV. Section 4-2-020.I of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: Page 3 of 58 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.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 three(3)suffixes: a. "F" (Multi-Family): The RM-F suffix allows for the development of both infill parcels in existing multi-family districts with compatible projects and other multi-family development. It is intended to implement the Multi-Family or Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation.Density ranges from ten(10)to twenty(20)du/acre. Interpretation of uses and project review in this suffix shall be based on the purpose statement objectives and policy direction established in the Residential Multi-Family land use designation, Objectives LU-JJ through LU-LL,Policies LU-182 through LU-192, or the Center Village Land Use designation,Objectives LU-CCC,Policies LU-317 through LU-332. b. "T" (Traditional): The RM-T suffix 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. It is intended to implement the Urban Center— IDowntown designation or Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Density ranges from fourteen (14) to thirty five (35) du/acre. c. "U" (Urban Center): The RM-U suffix 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 Page 4 of 58 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 — Downtown Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation or Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. Interpretation of uses and project review in suffix RM-U and RM-T shall be based on the purpose statement objectives and policies of the Urban Center—Downtown land use designation, Objectives LU-OO through LU-XX, Policies LU-216 through LU-264, , or the Center Village Land Use designation, Objectives LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332 and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan.(Amd.Ord.4971, 6-10-2002) SECTION V. Section 4-2-020.K of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: K CENTER VILLAGE ZONE(CV): 1. Purpose: The purpose of the Center Village Zone (CV) is to provide an opportunity for concentrated mixed-use residential and commercial redevelopment designed to urban rather than suburban development standards that supports transit-oriented development and pedestrian activity. Use allowances promote commercial and retail development opportunities for residents to shop locally. Uses and standards allow complementary, high-density residential development, and discourage garden-style, multi-family development. The Cen4er Village Reside"+'* B Di tfiet 2. Scale and Character: The Center Village Zone (CV) is intended to provide suitable environments for district-scaled retail and commercial development serving more than one neighborhood,but not providing City-wide services. Page 5 of 58 Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose statement, objectives and policy direction established in the Center Village land use designation, Objective LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332, Residential Medium-Density land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU-157 through LU-181, or the Residential Multi-Family land use designation, Objectives LU-JJ through LU-LL, Policies LU-182 through LU- 192,and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION VI. Section 4-2-060 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment`B'. SECTION VII. Section 4-2-070G of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment`C. SECTION VIII. Section 4-2-070J of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment`D'. SECTION IX. Section 4-2-080A.33 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts —Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: 33. , to-se esidential-development-in-the-R I4zone. 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 and not a conditional use. Page 6 of 58 411100 Additional Restrictions within the CV Land Use Designation: Retail uses, eating/drinking establishments, and on-site service uses are prohibited in R-14 areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation unless they are accessory to a School,Park,or Entertainment and Recreational Use as allowed in RMC 4-2-060E,F,and J. SECTION X. Section 4-2-080A.73 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts— Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: 73. Within the Center Village Zone, ," " arden style apartments are prohibited. , Ground floor commercial development at a minimum depth of 30 feet and a minimum width of 75%of the length of the building is required for all residential projects on parcels abutting NE Sunset Boulevard. Parcels west of Harrington Avenue NE and east of Edmonds Ave NE may cluster the required commercial development as long as there is commercial development greater or equal to 75%of the sum of the ground floor areas of all the buildings proposed for the site. SECTION XI. Section 4-2-110F of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment`E'. SECTION XII. Section 4-2-110G of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts —Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment`F'. SECTION XIII. Section 4-2-120A of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment`G'. Page 7 of 58 SECTION XIV. Section 4-3-095 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby deleted in its entirety. SECTION XV. Section 4-3-100 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: A PURPOSE: The purpose of this Section is to: 1. Establish design review regulations in accordance with policies established in the Land Use and Community Design Elements of the Renton Comprehensive Plan in order to: a. Maintain and protect property values; b. Enhance the general appearance of the City; c. Encourage creativity in building and site design; d. Achieve predictability,balanced with flexibility; and e. Consider the individual merits of proposals. 2. Create design standards and guidelines specific to District'A'(the Downtown Core)that ensure design quality of structures and site development implementing the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for its Urban Center—Downtown.This Vision is of a downtown that will continue to develop into an efficient and attractive urban city.The Vision of the Downtown Core is of mixed uses with high-density residential living supported by multi-modal transit opportunities.Redevelopment will be based on the pattern and scale of established streets and buildings. 3. Create design standards and guidelines specific to District'B'(the South Renton Neighborhood)that ensure design quality of structures and site development implementing the City's South Renton Neighborhood Plan. The South Renton Neighborhood Plan,for a residential area located within the Urban Center—Downtown,maintains the existing,traditional grid street plan and respects the scale of the neighborhood,while providing new housing at urban densities.The South Renton Neighborhood Plan supports a residential area that is positioned to capitalize on the employment and retail opportunities increasingly available in the Downtown Core. 4. Create design standards and guidelines specific to the Urban Center—North(District'C')that ensure design quality of structures and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for its Urban Center—North.This Vision is of an urban environment that concentrates uses in a"grid Page 8 of 58 err'' Notie pattern"of streets and blocks.The Vision is of a vibrant,economically vital neighborhood that encourages use throughout by pedestrians. 5. Create design standards and guidelines applicable to the use of"big-box retail"as defined in RMC 4- 11-180,Defmitions. 6. Create design standards and guidelines specific to the Center Village commercial core(District'D') that ensure design quality of structure and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for the Center Village designation. Uses within this district include business and professional offices,services,retail,restaurants,recreational businesses,mixed-use commercial and residential buildings,and multi-family residential. This portion of the Center Village is intended to provide a vital business district serving the local neighborhood and beyond. 7. Create design standards and guidelines specific to the residential portion of the Center Village (District`E')that ensure design quality of structure and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for the Center Village designation. A variety of housing options allows economic and lifestyle diversity in the Center Village,with design regulation to tie the range of styles and types together. 8. Establish two categories of regulations: (a) "minimum standards"that must be met,and(b) "guidelines"that,while not mandatory,are considered by the Development Services Director in determining if the proposed action meets the intent of the design guidelines. et specific minimum standards and guidelines that may apply to all three-districts,or certain districts only (Districts 'A', 'B',er C', `D', or'El,as indicated herein.(Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7-2005) B APPLICABILITY: 1. This Section shall apply to all development in the Urban Center—Downtown and Urban Center— North.For the purposes of the design regulations,the Center Downtown is District'A', South Renton is District'B', and the Urban Center—North is District'C.'Districts A through C are depicted on the Urban Center Design Overlay District Map, shown in subsection B4 of this Section. 2. This Section shall also apply to big-box retail use where allowed in the Commercial Arterial(CA), Light Industrial(IL),Medium Industrial(IM),and Heavy Industrial(III)zones,except when those zones are located in the Employment Area—Valley south of Interstate 405.Big-box retail uses within these zones, except in the Employment Area—Valley,must comply with design standards and guidelines specific to the Urban Center—North(District'C'). 3. Where conflicts may be construed between the design regulations of this Section and other sections of the Renton Municipal Code,the regulations of this Section shall prevail. I4. Urban Center Design Overlay District Map: Page 9 of 58 ,...., ,......- , ..i.,__,.......7.iii. ,...,.4.1........11111111.: t •Willi" .,, . ..„.,._:, . , ILt ! IV; - i• .t. . '.,•'•• f,.....4,—.7,,,-• 1.•...,••,, -4 • g , , °•!.!i". - "--"7-'""'";1FM i 4111M 'Aix ti.":. f‹•'iii. . 1 11114M1'.1' -\ . _ . Ili.•.•11.1.,11•11•11111t...inn,,,...„„„A.Fii.,,,7,...,..„,ihr, tr, ,le_ri,... ,_-- ,L-,..,,,,,..,,-,r,:— ;4.7un.C.Z.;'11111 '' \'''' 4, ,, ,-__ ;= .1",)11,v;' gIE ,....-,41,.1.,„ , 1.. .... -...4-1111 EL., giiilif,FIT.P.,--rti;i'.4:;:IiiiKekt4 '''lika-,...z ..,... ••t1•'•Iii...ism:rime-ass il :iiiikt't77.i„,t.'",•;*711 I ‘ w .... .!v.,.ze rittlli r.!ale:..., A.=1.--,••=1.:!---p--,. . .1.,:i.....==== ... .1.-•4 .,nrit•••*IiIiiiii. *V.!, .;:vi tztillinlilz : t rt.;•-1111'2:21111110 illigilli .'7i r:3-1151111911 ••••••'N••.,,.•:1• > :j as r;:eiry.i.2"iiik" :.--fi-itii--r-.;.!To IIPAA-i....1,..,:411.sitt•iligi. ....... .• It.*.---I'lli,titift 11111111 WV17!lizr F.17,grilMilli =In::::11!,-.: ria waft ig•,,, ,,m4tp.;;,\_.lig .,r '•".1'-..:„--1..., • .,,,T:4, L.vi.,,,,„ -2,11tissimii , ,00:.•,,-„11 .a,,k, initlt..44: """ 1471q.1'."'" 1 . , .t., • -- t.'=111.1,1,-,W ear---:!..1•41111 . a ?-•:••.•• ., ... I , ‘ii‘? ; . , - 1 ,......,„.,, ‘., 7.: , r : '1.14.0.4mViti "1.411,.t,iiIIIII1 ...*11114: -A.,.....s.,ky..g.'ri• "41 ',..%,,. .. i=7,•,_.. ..... 7.1.,“.jii 'RP.'"'tir ,... 04;i 11•12i:*•'111111,. iiq.,.. ,- . .. j "0 , .111',.1Fti 1111Eici .,_:E...7 -1. '0...,..„. --.1.'' .'''u•;sr • dip 4.SiiiIIIFT 71,-;;:i.-...s1....'....;• !tit:1.*::::.WA:i : • • Ili. .•-...1,.,,... '41Mo MFrrie ritliiii.1-::-;.1.71. • , .....i•i: ----1m:sip ilf:VP-111104iTO il- ',i'.:.4 14ll I 40, if.-./'•• 4."-',... . --- `<` .-lib •..... : , -,,,,t- — .....NNW, /II',......jujltri-it pity* .4-Ai 4 ILL,a.4„,lzgx oar wi ,t 1., lig,;1•0•1 - ii," ' 4',sral 6d'od "' 'V uo..,.: -41•I-..-...... , . •• ...,1 ---- •„,, s•., "1r--P7"" .,„ gt;a r:/f fe, is,": '..----471' iiletr....14,1,•' -E: l's.).._0# /11111ash, 1... . *...16 I:1'.".•"'....,ii:1:11.4.1 Alt% r.l':-• *7 1. 0,".:•a, 1 1., 1••••4,,,111:111116.i tin agr. ,,,, 7:-,661:1. ..ii,31:: ...i.,„ i.r.--....,-Sok 111r,Ii. .• • ;166 :•••••-• '• • /.7•.i1111111!mez.,41,4, ,, R,- -._.. iii,mir:" , ,.—,. •...,...... t- r.„...,\ ., .. ...,•,...,?„..2.:_..-....-p.7.7...t.,-•2 ,:•:- ,•aPlIa".••,11111.1.!.11 ,,,,, .,I.11.411!.....111,1.11. •. .' \ ' ''''''.....' "...;.!V.I.!.,..7. . ••i•.....it.VI.•t,tit xi...r.; ,-....,.. ,„, . 1 t'l' 1 .air.. .,.„,, .......,.,_„.. „id._ .4051a:1!::=.•1,,;;;IiNY.iti : . ,t•„,... 1: r : .,:.,,,E..., =....s.,..,•• Tr;--,...:iL:;%;•.74.....1 Y1./;:;:444:111111111k 0.0 rir!Illifilin;;.:e .;,,,Li , -;::,-.*-•,i':',U!,--; ami I • "•,‘ ''','"tiii'i-•,'72:i'F'.:7,,,,-,;..!2%;,!•••••-,,,.._...,' ,..1.4‘_--,..,.... .. ,,, . .,. ,... ..,,„ i, '1,%-,.E.;•,i-.-,7,,;•i,-,-4,..,,,,,'-'w.r.,74...-,::„:',I.:I' ,,,i1,,,70,-„;:i-1,11....-E-;•."f;ii4t.:,.",. 1!.•%4 -.',i1111LiO. ,..,111 •,.: ,1 Vtg ;11.1],-...;,•,: ,;: ,,•itA.,1,i,-..11,--;.1..ei;i. !T:IFfil.:-..‹:,.-i;:;17-a- t'.'',.-iitiiq'i-i*•"::.; i-`, :.. il'il.iii i',i1 11.111,1t,,itti• ..........,:l.: ',....0,0.I'., .^41,11,... F.,11;1E:it!! r ,..,,T:v.„,,,.......,,,,..........4.,„, ,..: i,. ..11M rin,..111111•11 1 i 111 iri-.::,•';115'li , ::.-q,i1,,:i:,,,,:i.,.:,...-d:..i IF"l •-•:-IE':: %::! -. ./ ,..,;:"*.;•:',;;; '.."17,11;"'".=*:."411111: allikk;FTLialHfe=r,"116=1 .ilf: srt4NitIts.‘77.4 IV trp .;;_e•it,,,,„A',:*•.'i.2113 gle 0,5V,11:;."':`,..4g•?. ..:r.. II ..rt .'''el''r4C'.PPte :41.-.;..":`i'r". TIMID ,--iii igc.:01::-,,k1 , ' - . '-- • ' ,41,.!:-4, -.:,.....- '1:1.7.!,-, siivirs.I 41, ,,r,.,..:-,48.y.,..!....5,!.„,„„...,..1 ' s.....- 4. op, 1,-.;....---.,. emssits...s.s.i...... 6 1111111tal --- 111 assCul'iskr::-:... ;ariird.r!.-.7 r 1 oP 1111111 Ti 1.2rt, ! -rj17 gar 17.1.., 'i..• fkiiii: .,7,:ji 11111...'Y'''•ir.V- *1 .....,...,.."*f';."...' ::1.''. I, „...... .3.,...„,,,, ,,,, ,, ,:„,,:„.. L..... Efia....._,..........rea...i 111.1, -43::i-F.... 11.,,_:.1.-'...ia NOP. 111'10,74.0ri; I :4.:1....7f.t,1%,:',:,,, i MY, 1"&"Iliftli.70,4 Ill rT4r1 qi11.17.1.':F....., ,... f::: .r._-..i• IN it•im --elt• -..-''rt'..• jr,•..m." 'g-- -7•-.1, -,--r1F.1-IW• ;.11.friet• '' -'..,-...tit,':1! i . ip:... .: -4..F. ,..=.!..., -!t•T....,-..r- . 4414 y• 1111111110! ,,,,,,!::::Ii.,* f 10111117CN it :•".•"'1,-,:feli!"-i: '..,41.1",, .., IS ii:g..,./... ait. Ilk . • ...-_,...f.:•5110, '1711r..C.:•...41..-+CAV . I 'f.'''.;:"...,.---,---......f....7--;_.........„„sosms,......." zi ":;"' :,,,;tir,i7K4•1` miff__ - • . , 111.=IF -, ,(..,.., ,, i-,•-..,...r.- "M • ' 'a•ill ,, zi,•'.; Fr.,:=:,,-,,,, .:.,,.,..,„.—,.., tr.--74-g-iier,-wit c,...„_,•=:k1 2 ':111!;,,..yez,...p- .iir....-11, --",,,..-„!:-. •..,„org rg.-, r,. ',,,..Z.LiCi.,•'!,r, AO .*•.4.;:z.41.;,: -- 1.)„,-..--.7:777,1'„`.rr.:;-,:::',:g.'"!'`.- .,421 '.-,,,,,N. ,..Ng....k.h. -'-,,,..,:..z.....1,..z.,..„,..A... ,,,....,- --; 1 • 40,"7:. .17, . - 11::.zi r'.. :11'."-::47 v7 A'''.4,:.--1.. 4 N.- ----, 't-• N, 1 ' •i r.E.I.--:-- ,..1-1'.:,.. IP: '..A:7,...,r4,'..r-''..--'" ,-,:,...S '1 '1...i., ',.. , ,:.11.4,111111.,(111,iir,r, 1 -...-,.2. • i '4.-, 'U Ifitr•'. '".:1:77' -' f'.' in .•.."-:`1.15! '''-`4,, lb _....._-...ss...., ...z;_Tiu.st,,,,-., ..‘ .... ....,..; ,, I— :,,,,,,-,,61, :-z.--,T,ri,-- :.,-;., r:-,;;;-...'.I.... -::-,,A ,,,,,, `0';'..:-t',...$'L' „. We'...,, ...,_...--,-, ,,,ii,r-:::,-.i f-i ,--:. 1,--i--,... .,-;. id.!., ,'44' --..., lik,...A...1r,,-4.,... , i iri.,:,-,..i-..,-/ -7 ,=Aj if 27,Fr.i.t. ....04 4 W/11111111EIM lerAlsg,'.:A,.1 .-15,i70 4pif ..;:`-',...i.inn,"4:,.:iirZtr, s 1, kliali).4,"4.41.;': fi 41.11 latilkkillr I I , • . --• mil Igo, ,,•• 7:-• t*.- 2. .,,,..,,,,,,,..,.. ..,,,,_...,„. ,.. z.--......irrlia.11-•:_ ' ,`;V.4:::•10 -41160 .,_. IIII 01 ' ift 14,:e.:zr tri \7 4,.7:',.-::-,s,,." „IN\iii.30. •---... ---:i ,'' ,- .00 - mos i . ,....,ay - •••1_,,...---... Wags ef„i1':, Illr 0111 P ..41 \ -----------'. ok'," •:, 1 \ "i :::...::4,,,..,,,,,„, 1 .mlij • ?fir ,, . rig etillig, s,11 I \'''' I .4t.:43 ,,y ,'",>. k#1",..691 -11VA .1.•:" -,..„.........../. .1-`0,'N'2-ii:.7 I: I•c—in , iti..'1',;. :•,-.It'!).c":,----,,,,-,z.,...., :,..-4.... ....4. „ ,.. ,i,or.,......,,,,...t.t..0. 1 : tillIf=Mt... Urban Center Design Overlay District Map ...........aly Limits EGISC440 Dardavirest.)telthbarticail soilltvivelo?bolo I....'.D—., Ab-,,,...tio"."1 ". -•i;.' fillitwoomm Page 10 of 58 ' 5. This section shall apply to all development in the Center Village Land Use Designation as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. For the purposes of the Design Regulations,areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation zoned Center Village(CV)shall comprise District"D". Areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation zoned Residential Multi-family(RMF) and Residential-14(R-14),area shall be in District"E". (Amd. Ord.4991, 12-9-2002; Ord.5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7-2005) C EXEMPTIONS: The design regulations shall not apply to: 1. Interior Remodels:Interior remodels of existing buildings or structures provided the alterations do not modify the building facade. 2. Aircraft Manufacturing: Structures related to the existing use of aircraft manufacturing in District 'C'. (Ord.5124,2-7-2005) D ADMINISTRATION: 1. Review Process:Applications subject to design regulations shall be processed as a component of the governing land use process. 12. Authority:The eviewing Official shall have the authority to approve,approve with conditions,or deny proposals based upon the provisions of the design I regulations.In rendering a decision,the Director Official will consider proposals on the basis of individual merit,will consider the overall intent of the minimum standards and guidelines,and encourage creative design alternatives in order to achieve the purposes of the design regulations.(Amd. Ord.4991, 12-9-2002; Ord.5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124,2-7-2005) E SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment;so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity throughout the district. 1. Site Design and Street Pattern: Intent: To ensure that the City of Renton Vision can be realized within the Urban Center Districts;plan districts that are organized for efficiency while maintaining flexibility for future development at high urban densities and intensities of use;create and maintain a safe,convenient network of streets of varying dimensions for vehicle circulation; and provide service to businesses. a. Minimum Standard for Districts'A' and'B':Maintain existing grid street pattern Ib. Minimum Standards for Districts'C' and `D': i. Provide a network of public and/or private local streets in addition to public arterials. Page 11 of 58 • ii. Maintain a hierarchy of streets to provide organized circulation that promotes use by multiple transportation modes and to avoid overburdening the roadway system.The hierarchy shall consist of(from greatest in size to smallest): (a)High Visibility Street.A highly visible arterial street that warrants special design treatment to improve its appearance and maintain its transportation function. (b)Arterial Street.A street classified as a principal arterial on the City's Arterial Street Plan. (c)Pedestrian-Oriented Streets. Streets that are intended to feature a concentration of pedestrian activity. Such streets feature slow moving traffic,narrow travel lanes, on-street parking,and wide sidewalks. (d)Internal or local roads(public or private). I s- 2. Building Location and Orientation: Intent:To ensure visibility of businesses; establish active,lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways; organize buildings in such a way that pedestrian use of the district is facilitated; encourage siting of structures so that natural light and solar access are available to other structures and open space;enhance the visual character and definition of streets within the district;provide an appropriate transition between buildings,parking areas,and other land uses and the street;and increase privacy for residential uses located near the street. a. Minimum Standard for Districts'A'ands'B',and 'D': i. Orient buildings to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk ii. The front entry of a building shall not be oriented to a drive aisle, but instead apublic or private street or landscaped pedestrian only courtyard. b. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. Buildings on designated pedestrian-oriented streets shall feature "pedestrian-oriented facades"and clear connections to the sidewalk(see illustration,RMC 4-3-100E7a). Such buildings shall be located adjacent to the sidewalk,except where pedestrian-oriented space is located between the building and the sidewalk.Parking between the building and pedestrian-oriented streets is prohibited. ii. Buildings fronting on pedestrian-oriented streets shall contain pedestrian-oriented uses. iii. Nonresidential buildings may be located directly adjacent to any street as long as they feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. iv. Buildings containing street-level residential uses and single-purpose residential buildings shall be set back from the sidewalk a minimum of ten feet(10')and feature substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and the building(see illustration,RMC 4-3-100E7b). Page 12 of 58 *4440, v. If buildings do not feature pedestrian-oriented facades they shall have substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and building. Such landscaping shall be at least ten feet(10)in width as measured from the sidewalk(see illustration,RMC 4-3-100E7c). c. Guidelines Applicable to District`C': i. Siting of a structure should take into consideration the continued availability of natural light(both direct and reflected)and direct sun exposure to nearby buildings and open space(except parking areas). d. Guideline Applicable to Districts 'C' and`D": ii. Ground floor residential uses located near the street should be raised above street level for residents'privacy. 3. Building Entries: Intent:To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access,and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'and-,'B', `D',and`E': Entrunee4zeeatieni. primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street._Such yes-shall be prominent,visible from the street,connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk,and include human scale elements. ii. Multiple buildings on the same site shall provide a continuous network of_pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. iii. Ground floor units shall be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. iv. Secondary access(not fronting on a street)shall have weather protection at least four and one-half feet(4-1/2')wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. v. Pedestrian access shall be provided to the building from property edges,adjacent lots,abutting street intersections,crosswalks,and transit stops. b. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. On pedestrian-oriented streets,the primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing the street. ii. On non-pedestrian-oriented streets,entrances shall be prominent,visible from surrounding streets, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human-scale elements. iii. All building entries adjacent to a street shall be clearly marked with canopies,architectural elements, ornamental lighting, and/or landscaping. Entries from parking lots should be subordinate to those related to the street for buildings with frontage on designated pedestrian-oriented streets(see illustration,RMC 4-3- 100E7d). Page 13 of 58 • iv. Weather protection at least four and one-half feet(4-1/2)wide and proportional to the distance above ground level shall be provided over the primary entry of all buildings and over any entry adjacent to a street. v. Pedestrian pathways from public sidewalks to primary entrances or from parking lots to primary entrances shall be clearly delineated. Ic. Guidelines Applicable to-All Districts 'A', `B',and'C': i. Multiple buildings on the same site should provide a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. ii. Ground floor units should be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. iii. Secondary access(not fronting on a street)should have weather protection at least four and one-half feet(4-1/2)wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. iv. Pedestrian access should be provided to the building from property edges,adjacent lots, abutting street intersections,crosswalks,and transit stops. v. Features such as entries,lobbies,and display windows should be oriented to a street or pedestrian- oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features such as trellises,artwork,murals,landscaping,or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street-oriented facade. de. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A' and'D': i. For projects that include residential uses,entries should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch,landscaped area,terrace,common area, lobby,or similar feature. ii. Features such as entries,lobbies,and display windows should be oriented to a street; otherwise, screening or art features such as trellises,artwork,murals, landscaping,or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street-oriented facade. iii. Entries from the street should be clearly marked with canopies,architectural elements,ornamental lighting, or landscaping.Entries from parking lots should be subordinate to those related to the street for buildings within District'A'. I ef. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and `E': Front yards should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch,landscaped area,terrace,or similar feature. €g. Guideline Applicable to District'C': For projects that include residential uses,entries should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch,landscaped area, terrace,common area,lobby,or similar feature. Page 14 of 58 Nisie 4. Transition to Surrounding Development: Intent:To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long-established,existing neighborhoods are preserved. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A' and `D': Careful siting and design treatment is necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height,bulk and scale.At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: i. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased by the Reviewing Official in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; ii. Building proportions,including step-backs on upper levels; iii. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments;or iv. Roof lines,roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. Ib. Minimum Standards for Districts'B' and`E': i. Careful siting and design treatment is necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height,bulk,and scale.At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: (a)ii. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; or (b)iii.Building articulation provided to divide a larger architectural element into smaller pieces;or (e)iv.Roof lines,roof pitches,and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. c. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. For properties along North 6th Street and Logan Avenue North(between North 4th Street and North 6th Street), applicants shall demonstrate how their project provides an appropriate transition to the long established,existing neighborhood south of North 6th Street known as the North Renton Neighborhood. Page 15 of 58 ii. For properties located south of North 8th Street,east of Garden Avenue North,applicants must demonstrate how their project appropriately provides transitions to existing industrial uses. 5. Service Element Location and Design: Intent:To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements(i.e.,waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas,and screening them from view in high visibility areas. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use(see illustration,RMC 4-3-100E7e). ii. Garbage,recycling collection,and utility areas shall be enclosed,consistent with RMC 4-4-090, Refuse and Recyclables Standards,and RMC 4-4-095, Screening and Storage Height/Location Limitations. iii. In addition to standard enclosure requirements,garbage,recycling collection,and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors(see illustration,RMC 4-3-100E7f). iv. The use of chain link,plastic,or wire fencing is prohibited. v. If the service area is adjacent to a street,pathway,or pedestrian-oriented space,a landscaped planting strip,minimum three feet(3')wide, shall be located on three(3) sides of such facility. b. Guidelines Applicable to All Districts: Service enclosure fences should be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three. 6. Gateways: Intent:To distinguish gateways as primary entrances to districts or to the City;provide special design features and architectural elements at gateways; and ensure that gateways,while they are distinctive within the context of the district,are compatible with the district in form and scale. Ia. Minimum Standards for Districts'C' and 'D': i. Developments located at district gateways shall be marked with visually prominent features(see illustration,subsection E7g of this Section). ii. Gateway elements shall be oriented toward and scaled for both pedestrians and vehicles(see illustration, subsection E'7h of this Section). iii. Visual prominence shall be distinguished by two(2)or more of the following: (a)Public art; (b)Monuments; Page 16 of 58 (c)Special landscape treatment; (d)Open space/plaza; (e)Identifying building form; (f)Special paving,unique pedestrian scale lighting,or bollards; (g)Prominent architectural features(trellis,arbor,pergola,or gazebo); .(h)Signage,displaying neighborhood or district entry identification(commercial signs are not allowed). 7. Illustrations. a. Pedestrian-oriented facades(see subsection E2b(i)of this Section). Pedestrian-oriented facade • Property line i > Pedestrian-oriented facades: - • `,. Primary building entry \ N' • • must be facing the street ' transparent window area or window display along 75%of the ground floor between the height of 2 to 8 feet above the ground I weather protection at least 4%feet wide along at least 75%of the facade nAi_ b. Street-level residential(see subsection E2b(iv)of this Section). Page 17 of 58 • Raised planters provide privacy for residents while maintaining fir' ' views of the street from units '�`, Trees .iir,, ...........f• ,c...,".._,......_,, ..--.---..•,-, it. '1:f=` _mi.............-Ir, --.1. 'I daJ ,.... .-,,, ,,,,,,:\, 6, _,101,111-- 1 , --- 'tik. rir.' iiii t o iviiiii;.;- _,- a.- , ' ; y c. Buildings without pedestrian-oriented uses(see subsection E2b(v)of this Section). Combination of evergreen and Building A.,a, .....„. deciduous shrubs and trees i` - .: 7,.. , I 1 , . ,,,A ..,,,f..1//A el,,,,. .I i. •••••0.4.I ! -- _-� *� �j, jig`, //A /9/ ' ,e Raised planter d. Building entries(see subsection E3b(iii)of this Section). Page 18 of 58 %gre Nierf ,;t , ;M1111 \\\1 .41.4.t HMI.if ii ij 1#1# i Ij- IPdMNOW . ,m.,- "Amprilveirwer pi.1114 I 2. ;i31.�all ,fir% sjilizziit, r - kr. +� IN ,..ram it, ;° *,4., , i !� 411: to .. t l e. Service elements located to minimize the impact on the pedestrian environment(see subsection E5a(i)of this Section). SCREENED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT �� DUMPSTER LOCATED AT REAR OF ��� SITE • �,�� /� 1(:),0 Ali R4Jfr 0I S/ 1 \___ , IF i ' *# f. Service enclosure(see subsection E5a(iii) of this Section). Page 19 of 58 Roof enclosure Landscaping to keep birds out 41* ... : ------1 --6"' Iiiiiti4i45.1„..:,.. 1-i. <... Self-closing t: doors Trellis ', Concrete pad g. Distinguishable building form appropriate for gateway locations(see subsection E6a(i)of this Section). III Il iiII III II IIIIIIIII CO lL u mmm Ea ❑7 in w CO m m Elevation ■ II■Iiliiil ■ I ■ II Balconies Turret Corner accentuating roof line Ajl - Plan - J J 1 Note:Ensure that budding does not block viewing triangle at intersections 0 0 0 0 0 in 11 11111 11 111 9 11 111 11 11 4' . . I rM: 0❑000 18 Elevation MI MI 1111111111 ells =1 Distinctive use of materials Canopy Bay window i -_ Plan ...] . II 1 IIUH N 111I 111111111 11Ilii+ Page 20 of 58 1INue h. Gateway landscaping,open space,pedestrian amenities and signage that identifies the commercial area(see subsection E6a(ii)of this Section). Y q M ' (Ord.5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7-2005) F PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS: Intent:To provide safe,convenient access to the Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate various modes of transportation,including public mass transit,in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided,while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas;allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages,without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. 1. Location of Parking: Intent:To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. Ia. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'and-'B',and `D'\: No surface parking shall be located between a building and the front property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. b. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. On dDesignated Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: Page 21 of 58 (a)Parking shall be at the side and/or rear of a building,with the exception of on-street parallel parking.No more than sixty feet(60')of the street frontage measured parallel to the curb shall be occupied by off-street parking and vehicular access. (b)On-street parallel parking spaces located adjacent to the site can be included in calculation of required parking.For parking ratios based on use and zone,see RMC 4-4-080,Parking,Loading and Driveway Regulations. (c)On-street,parallel parking shall be required on both sides of the street. ii. All parking lots located between a building and street or visible from a street shall feature landscaping between the sidewalk and building; see RMC 4-4-080F,Parking Lot Design Standards. iii. Surface Parking Lots:The applicant must successfully demonstrate that the surface parking lot is designed to facilitate future structured parking and/or other infill development.For example,an appropriate surface parking area would feature a one thousand five hundred foot(1,500)maximum perimeter area and a minimum dimension on one side of two hundred feet(200'),unless project proponent can demonstrate future alternative use of the area would be physically possible. Exception: If there are size constraints inherent in the original parcel(see illustration,subsection F5a of this Section). c. Minimum Standards for District`E': i. No surface parking shall be located between a building and the front property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. ii. Parking shall be located off an alley if an alley is present. ed._Guideline Applicable to MI-Districts `A', 'B', `C',and `D':In areas of mixed use development, shared parking is recommended. ID . Guidelines Applicable to District'C': i. If a limited number of parking spaces are made available in front of a building for passenger drop-off and pick-up,they shall be parallel to the building facade. ii. When fronting on streets not designated as pedestrian-oriented,parking lots should be located on the interior portions of blocks and screened from the surrounding roadways by buildings,landscaping and/or Igateway features as dictated by location. 2. Design of Surface Parking: Intent:To ensure safety of users of parking areas,convenience to businesses,and reduce the impact of parking lots wherever possible. Ia. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'-and=,'C',and `D': Page 22 of 58 i. Parking lot lighting shall not spill onto adjacent or abutting properties(see illustration,subsection F5b of this Section). ii. All surface parking lots shall be landscaped to reduce their visual impact(see RMC 4-4-080F7, Landscape Requirements). Ib. Guidelines Applicable to All-Districts 'A', `C',and`D': i. Wherever possible,parking should be configured into small units,connected by landscaped areas to provide on-site buffering from visual impacts. ii. Access to parking modules should be provided by public or private local streets with sidewalks on both sides where possible,rather than internal drive aisles. iii. Where multiple driveways cannot be avoided,provide landscaping to separate and minimize their impact on the streetscape. 3. Structured Parking Garages: Intent:To more efficiently use land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of structured parking I throughout the Urban Center and the Center Village;physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages when they are located in proximity to the designated pedestrian environment. Ia. Minimum Standards for District'C' and `D': i. Parking Structures Fronting Designated Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: (a)Parking structures shall provide space for ground-floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy-five percent(75%)of the frontage width(see illustration,subsection F5c of this Section). (b)The entire facade must feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. ii. Parking Structures Fronting Non-Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: (a)Parking structures fronting non-pedestrian-oriented streets and not featuring a pedestrian-oriented facade shall be set back at least six feet(6)from the sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping.This includes a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs,and ground cover.This setback shall be increased to ten feet(10)adjacent to high visibility streets. (b)The Director may allow a reduced setback where the applicant can successfully demonstrate that the landscaped area and/or other design treatment meets the intent of these standards and guidelines.Possible treatments to reduce the setback include landscaping components plus one or more of the following integrated with the architectural design of the building: (1)Ornamental grillwork(other than vertical bars); (2)Decorative artwork; Page 23 of 58 (3)Display windows; (4)Brick,tile, or stone; (5)Pre-cast decorative panels; (6)Vine-covered trellis; (7)Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials; or (8)Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard. (c)Facades shall be articulated architecturally,so as to maintain a human scale and to avoid a solid wall. Vehicular entrances to nonresidential or mixed use parking structures shall be articulated by arches,lintels, masonry trim,or other architectural elements and/or materials(see illustration, subsection F5d of this Section). b. Minimum Standards for District`D': i. Parking structures shall provide space for ground-floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy-five percent(75%)of the frontage width(see illustration, subsection F5c of this Section). ii. The entire facade must feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. Iii Facades shall be articulated architecturally,so as to maintain a human scale and to avoid a solid wall.Vehicular entrances to nonresidential or mixed use parking structures shall be articulated by arches, lintels,masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials(see illustration, subsection F5d of this Section). • • • c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A'and-,'C', and `D': i. Parking garage entries should be designed and sited to complement,not subordinate,the pedestrian entry.If possible,locate the parking entry away from the primary street,to either the side or rear of the building. ii. Parking garage entries should not dominate the streetscape. iii. The design of structured parking at finished grade under a building should minimize the apparent width of garage entries. I Iii:iv Parking within the building should be enclosed or screened through any combination of walls, decorative grilles,or trellis work with landscaping. Page 24 of 58 ivy. Parking garages should be designed to be complementary with adjacent buildings.Use similar forms, materials,and/or details to enhance garages. I vi. Parking service and storage functions should be located away from the street edge and generally not be visible from the street or sidewalks. Id. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and `E': i. Attached personal parking garages at-grade should be individualized and not enclose more than two (2)cars per enclosed space. Such garages should be architecturally integrated into the whole development. ii. Multiple-user parking garages at-grade should be enclosed or screened from view through any combination of walls,decorative grilles,or trellis work with landscaping. iii. n „ arking in this dis,riet ch,ould beseeimed wi decorati„e doors_ 491j. Personal parking garages should be individualized whenever possible with separate entries and architectural detailing in character with the lower density district. iv. Large multi-user parking garages are discouraged in this lower density district and,if provided, should be located below grade whenever possible. • 4. Vehicular Access: Intent:To maintain a contiguous,uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing,consolidating and/or eliminating vehicular access off streets within pedestrian environments and/or designated pedestrian-oriented streets. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'B' and `E': Parking lots and garages shall be accessed from alleys when available: b. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. Parking garages shall be accessed at the rear of buildings or from non-pedestrian-oriented streets when available. ii. Surface parking driveways are prohibited on pedestrian-oriented streets. iii. Parking lot entrances,driveways,and other vehicular access points on high visibility streets shall be restricted to one entrance and exit lane per five hundred(500)linear feet as measured horizontally along the street. Ic. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A' and`D': i. Parking lots and garages should be accessed from alleys or side streets. Page 25 of 58 ii. Driveways should be located to be visible from the right-of-way,but not impede pedestrian circulation on-site or to adjoining properties.Where possible,minimize the number of driveways and curb cuts. Id. Guidelines Applicable to Area'B' and `E': i. Garage entryways and/or driveways accessible only from a street should not impede pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk. ii. Curb cuts should be minimized whenever possible through the use of shared driveways. 5. Illustrations. a. Parking and vehicular access in District'C' (see subsection Flb(iii)of this Section). Page 26 of 58 IOW "460 tyck, '.i., Parking lots are accessed by s. a system of local access"streets" 4,if X4 • `�•-. cc� , #r Parallel parking �,, ;; - on local access . �r "streets" • - • ` ,.. Parking lots are sited ',.' ` V. Minimize access y ( points from towards the interior of the block , \ ,: ®--- High Visibilityk4., r`4 _} 4 `- r ` A. Streets ter . " Parking lots are ��t configured to allow ! k V, , , , / g y v l ! development � � kv / - N. ....` ,;.. 0 l. i3x,4"-"i -1., -- ' /- , , / /9 , ? 1, \" ,„ ty•ter't ''' ,‘,,.,..,i...=...•.:.:=,.t,',,- ',,-‘,.. : k ` `(yam.. : 44 { c l9 s 1 y/ / ' o� <'g r-. k t, cot Mid-block connections enhance o.� • `- .`. ,;8- - 5�` ` access and provide a good framework for future INN development P'f iii•` f -4 ., No parking lots or :1. drivewaysadjacent to a ' ,.l pedestrian-oriented street 'r ;y Parking garage entrance designed to minimize impact on pedestrian environment b. Parking lot lighting(see subsection F2a(i)of this Section). Page 27 of 58 • 4r Am, 'h h :i. M1. :1 IIIIII iiiiili�'a ..,:•�,r r.., Ali DO THIS •=o r E � iii l i DON'T DO THIS c. Parking structure fronting on pedestrian-oriented street with pedestrian-oriented uses and facades along the ground floor(see subsection F3a(i)(a)of this Section). _ I Parking garage ort second floor di - No sr-r-- 011111 _lipiiiri ir,„„„„„„,r.4%..... „„ . ir )r 4 kiiiki II -.1%44 `-. -4114, II% 1 4_4 , _ , ,ir ,:aisii,A, k t'ir — 1...„-_,41.... ,:r. -- - _ \, ,..,,,, ,..,....4...,, , , -,........„.. ,.... ,..., ,yii ....,••11,',4„41 0 'Y.—I Tr&'gill--' 11 I:\ '%.A 1 i 7I''''' -Iii. 4, i 5 r r:�' �il'-"''w. Ground floor commeraal space 9�j /%%/// with pedestrian-oriented facade d. Parking structure designed to enhance streetscape(see subsection F3a(ii)(c)of this Section). Page 28 of 58 Articulation of -. -,.� ,- facade components r , / �`T to reduce scale :1 I11�� ►� A. ':...dry and add visual ' '�;� z. �' ,i, interest �� • ', I 1 ;i `t''`y , \ ,� 1 _ r. .._ . ram, -.�,- . _-=.011-1,-It, 7- • r ...,.. • ii Decorative trellis - _ 3- 111a4i!, structure for vines k i j �! K �,' - - 44� ,y p fir'" ,...,,- , 'l - •;,, it - / �l I, �I �' I {ii .� i .'�•. r U1� a >• % U ��P : w'�frf soijl�• � / Ipr� �'�"11 ,'.WI bIic 14 Raised planting - �p���,.> ran bed adjacent totf = �, i . _ -i c .w r rn- - sidewalk ;. �"` __r---- (Ord.5029,11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7-2005) G PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT: I Intent:To'enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village-by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient,comfortable,and pleasant to walk between businesses,on sidewalks,to and from access points,and through parking lots;and promote the use of multi- modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. 1. Pathways through Parking Lots: Intent:To provide safe and attractive pedestrian connections to buildings,parking garages,and parking lots. Ia. Minimum Standards for Districts'C' and 'D': i. Clearly delineated pedestrian pathways and/or private streets shall be provided throughout parking areas. ii. Within parking areas,pedestrian pathways shall be provided perpendicular to the applicable building facade,at a maximum distance of one hundred and fifty feet(150)apart(see illustration,subsection G4a of this Section). 2. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent:To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'and;'C'and `D': Page 29 of 58 i. Developments shall include an integrated pedestrian circulation system that connects buildings,open space,and parking areas with the adjacent street sidewalk system and adjacent properties(see illustration, subsection G4b of this Section). ii. Sidewalks located between buildings and streets shall be raised above the level of vehicular travel. iii. Pedestrian pathways within parking lots or parking modules shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent paving materials(see illustration,subsection G4c of this Section). iv. Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: (a)Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings one hundred(100)or more feet in width(measured along the facade)shall provide sidewalks at least twelve feet(12)in width.The walkway shall include an eight foot(8)minimum unobstructed walking surface and street trees(see illustration,subsection G4d of this Section). (b)To increase business visibility and accessibility,breaks in the tree coverage adjacent to major building entries shall be allowed. (c)For all other interior pathways,the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users.A ten to twelve foot(10'— 12)pathway, for example,can accommodate groups of persons walking four(4)abreast,or two(2)couples passing one another.An eight foot(8)pathway will accommodate three(3)individuals walking abreast,whereas a smaller five to six foot(5'-6')pathway will accommodate two(2)individuals. v. Locate pathways with clear sight lines to increase safety. Landscaping shall not obstruct visibility of walkway or sight lines to building entries. vi. All pedestrian walkways shall provide an all-weather walking surface unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. b. Guidelines Applicable to All Districts: i. Delineation of pathways may be through the use of architectural features, such as trellises,railings, low seat walls,or similar treatment. ii. Mid-block connections are desirable where a strong linkage between uses can be established. iii. Decorative(Fences,with the exception of chain link fences,may be allowed when appropriate to the situation. c. Guidelines Applicable to District'C' Only: i. Through-block connections should be made between buildings,between streets,and to connect sidewalks with public spaces. Preferred location for through-block connections is mid-block(see illustration, subsection G4e of this Section). Page 30 of 58 fir'" `o . ii. Between buildings of up to and including two(2)stories in height,through-block connections should be at least six feet(6)in width. iii. Between buildings three(3)stories in height or greater,through-block connections should be at least twelve feet(12)in width. iv. Transit stops should be located along designated transit routes a maximum of one-quarter(0.25)mile apart. v. As an alternative to some of the required street trees,developments may provide pedestrian-scaled light fixtures at appropriate spacing and no taller than fourteen feet(14)in height.No less than one tree or Ilight fixture per sixty(60)thirty(30)lineal feet of the required walkway should be provided. 3. Pedestrian Amenities: Intent: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are inviting and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of activities,at all times of the year, and under typical seasonal weather conditions. Ia. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. On designated pedestrian-oriented streets,provide pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings,marquees,canopies,or building overhangs.These elements shall be a minimum of four and one-half feet(4-1/2)wide along at least seventy five percent(75%)of the length of the building facade facing the designated pedestrian-oriented street,a maximum height of fifteen feet(15)above the ground elevation,and no lower than eight feet(8)above ground level. ii. Site furniture provided in public spaces shall be made of durable,vandal-and weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. iii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. b. Minimum Standards for District`D': i. Provide pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings,marquees,canopies,or building overhangs. These elements shall be a minimum of four and one-half feet(4 Y2')wide along at least seventy five percent(75%)of the length of the building facade,a maximum height of fifteen feet(15')above the ground elevation,and no lower than eight feet(8')above ground level. ii. Site furniture provided in public spaces shall be made of durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. iii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. c. Minimum Standards for District `E' only: Page 31 of 58 i. Site furniture provided in public spaces shall be made of durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. ii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'C. `D'and 'E': i. Transit shelters,bicycle racks,benches,trash receptacles,and other street furniture should be provided. ii. Street amenities such as outdoor group seating,kiosks,fountains,and public art should be provided. iii. Architectural elements that incorporate plants,such as facade-mounted planting boxes or trellises or ground-related or hanging containers are encouraged,particularly at building entrances,in publicly accessible spaces,and at facades along pedestrian-oriented streets(see illustration, subsection G4f of this Section). 4. Illustrations. a. Pedestrian walkways within parking lots(see subsection Gla(ii)of this Section). • Page 32 of 58 // /.#/:/./1///.�////fir-o !//// 7Z 6a. \. . 01 t I _ Ts 1 50' MAX - N Ai ) vi, () I () 4, 144:1 NC) S..,-) + ,, Pedestrian jwalkways \ w b. Integrated pedestrian access system(pathways are shown in solid black lines)(see subsection G2a(i)of this Section). Page 33 of 58 , , Sidewalk along Pathways along building �' _ ` '' ;' high visibility street facades are at least 12'wide ` . . and includes street trees , < • - ..i Parldng lot pathway '•' 4. 'r• fs `. '> . Mid-block pathway s . v�'� i ' /\i`f connects uses and .. _� • , ,, -< . `� activity centers 'It''t t fi , , 4,, "' „ t.4 it A r' �` 41:, ' •'• •-- A 0, ,ice ♦ +$-' XEqu fi7 2 e c ' •.,f 1 :` 0 (� y r ti' 'j1.0 I''' 4 'LS'," ' , . f."--". 3;44 7‘.. - • .,,,,krt, ''',,._ ' ,,,,"',,,,.5i;,,t,.., , "..- ',-;441"-:,-.% . -<I-..-.):,-,,„".";',4 i 7 . t ] r 1,1i ` Major local access "* "streets"are designed F • rt. '` 1, with sidewalks Pedestrian-oriented ' • ® . . \'., on at least one side street with wide 1. sidewalks,and street trees a ` Interior pathways that link � '� storefronts,parking areas, and residential uses c. Parking lot pedestrian interior walkway(see subsection G2a(iii)of this Section). Page 34 of 58 141110* NNW I Y I 1 1- 'i ! �5 Jam..„. ) ious 11116.4-TAV:7'''''''‘Ir 1111.10 /.----- 1. t r IltiO 1 Ainstik.\\‘‘‘N,,.. -r r , Ilk d. Sidewalks along retail building facade(see subsection G2a(iv)(a)of this Section). Street trees and/or pedestrian street lamps every 30' Weather protection— •:,t ,1 8'min j, 7 unobstructed width 12'min Total sidewalk width e. Through-block pedestrian connections (see subsection G2c of this Section). Page 35 of 58 \,— -!- e00 7 _________i>j, i m Pedestrian Corridor 1 Pedestrian Corridor E ii r r f. Pedestrian amenities incorporated into development(see subsection G3b(iii)of this Section). Recessed entry Seasonal landscaping Transparent windows VVdeather protection ft ' :�"� � ' Pedestrian `. ■1 ` % �,`=_ .r:' + oriented .�► �� _ a��.��ol � �� ace ra _ � �` ��`�� 1 Seating Fillilii; — !•1 — rr- -`}Aii \. , areas a�+ 1(1l�0� P Trees and .1. /t�l i1 hilMliAlglit:1 street fiti !: ,�� %ffetes�'� � �' �L.L. j j11� ��•�. used to �. �*r,� . ti!1i� !+ i"+�• define 6 ,�ii2,1 s �- Jr074,: pedestrian �� �I� t'NJ rr_.j,_l't r is,lf;__ $ . area FUDGE -III :rt�—'`-';,�.r+..rll�i/ri,.■rr �a - ., ! - = M`' hiliW varied pavement + ` Pedestrian ,„,,••0!''''''.____--- tipp.- --...---::--------000 j '1. oriented - ----- signage (Ord.5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7-2005) H LANDSCAPING/RECREATION AREAS/COMMON OPEN SPACE: Intent: To provide visual relief in areas of expansive paving or structures;define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community.To have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents,workers,and visitors;provide these areas in Page 36 of 58 *ow 4410 sufficient amounts and in safe and convenient locations; and provide the opportunity for community gathering in places centrally located and designed to encourage such activity. 1. Landscaping: Intent: Landscaping is intended to reinforce the architecture or concept of the area;provide visual and climatic relief in areas of expansive paving or structures;channelize and define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. All pervious areas shall be landscaped(see RMC 4-4-070,Landscaping). ii. Street trees are required and shall be located between the curb edge and building,as determined by the City of Renton. iii. On designated pedestrian-oriented streets,street trees shall be installed with tree grates.For all other streets,street tree treatment shall be as determined by the City of Renton(see illustration, subsection H3a of this Section). iv. The proposed landscaping shall be consistent with the design intent and program of the building,the site,and use. v. The landscape plan shall demonstrate how the proposed landscaping,through the use of plant material and non-vegetative elements,reinforces the architecture or concept of the development. vi. Surface parking areas shall be screened by landscaping in order to reduce views of parked cars from streets(see RMC 4-4-080F7,Landscaping Requirements). Such landscaping shall be at least ten feet(10)in width as measured from the sidewalk(see illustration,subsection H3b of this Section). Standards for planting shall be as follows: (a)Trees at an average minimum rate of one tree per thirty(30)lineal feet of street frontage.Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least thirty five feet(35').Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet(8)or two inch(2")caliper(as measured four feet(4)from the top of the root ball)respectively. (b)Shrubs at the minimum rate of one per twenty(20)square feet of landscaped area.Shrubs shall be at least twelve inches (12")tall at planting and have a mature height between three feet(3')and four feet(4'). (c)Groundcover shall be planted in sufficient quantities to provide at least ninety percent(90%)coverage of the landscaped area within three(3)years of installation. (d)The applicant shall provide a maintenance assurance device,prior to occupancy, for a period of not less than three(3)years and in sufficient amount to ensure required landscape standards have been met by the third year following installation. (e)Surface parking with more than fourteen(14)stalls shall be landscaped as follows: (1)Required Amount: Page 37 of 58 • Total Number of Spaces Minimum Required Landscape Area* 15 to 50 15 square feet/parking space 51 to 99 25 square feet/parking space 100 or more 35 square feet/parking space *Landscape area calculations above and planting requirements below exclude perimeter parking lot landscaping areas. (2)Provide trees, shrubs, and groundcover in the required interior parking lot landscape areas. (3)Plant at least one tree for every six(6)parking spaces.Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least thirty five feet(35').Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet(8)or two inch(2")caliper(as measured four feet(4)from the top of the root ball)respectively. (4)Plant shrubs at a rate of five(5)per one hundred(100)square feet of landscape area. Shrubs shall be at least sixteen inches(16')tall at planting and have a mature height between three feet(3)and four feet(4). (5)Up to fifty percent(50%)of shrubs may be deciduous. (6) Select and plant groundcover so as to provide ninety percent(90%)coverage within three(3)years of planting;provided,that mulch is applied until plant coverage is complete. (7)Do not locate a parking stall more than fifty feet(50') from a landscape area. vii. Regular maintenance shall be provided to ensure that plant materials are kept healthy and that dead or dying plant materials are replaced. viii.Underground,automatic irrigation systems are required in all landscape areas. b. Guidelines Applicable to all Districts: i. Landscaping should be used to soften and integrate the bulk of buildings. ii. Landscaping should be provided that appropriately provides either screening of unwanted views or focuses attention to preferred views. iii. Use of low maintenance,drought-resistant landscape material is encouraged. iv. Choice of materials should reflect the level of maintenance that will be available. v. Seasonal landscaping and container plantings are encouraged,particularly at building entries and in publicly accessible spaces. Page 38 of 58 vi. Window boxes,containers for plantings,hanging baskets,or other planting feature elements should be made of weather-resistant materials that can be reasonably maintained. vii. Landscaping should be used to screen parking lots from adjacent or neighboring properties. Ic. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and 'E': i. Front yards should be visible from the street and visually contribute to the streetscape. ii. Decorative walls and fencing are encouraged when architecturally integrated into the project. 2. Recreation Areas and Common Open Space: Intent:To ensure that districts have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers,and visitors and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in convenient locations; create usable,accessible, and inviting open space that is accessible to the public;and promote pedestrian activity on pedestrian-oriented streets particularly at street corners. Ia. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'2 and-'C' and and 'D': i. Mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten(10)or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to fifty(50)square feet per unit.The common space area shall be aggregated to provide usable area(s)for residents.The location,layout,and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Director.The required common open space shall be satisfied with one or more of the elements listed below.The Director may require more than one of the following elements for developments having more than one hundred(100)units. (a)Courtyards,plazas,or multipurpose open spaces; (b)Upper level common decks,patios,terraces,or roof gardens. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to the site and are provided as an asset to the development; (c)Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system; (d)Recreation facilities including,but not limited to,tennis/sports courts,swimming pools,exercise areas, game rooms,or other similar facilities;or (e)Children's play spaces. iii. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects,required landscaping,driveways,parking, or other vehicular use areas shall not be counted toward the common space requirement or be located in dedicated outdoor recreation or common use areas. iv. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects required yard setback areas shall not count toward outdoor recreation and common space unless such areas are developed as private or semi-private (from abutting or adjacent properties)courtyards,plazas or passive use areas containing landscaping and fencing sufficient to create a fully usable area accessible to all residents of the development(see illustration, subsection H3c of this Section). Page 39 of 58 v. Private decks,balconies,and private ground floor open space shall not count toward the common space/recreation area requirement. vi. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects,other required landscaping and sensitive area buffers without common access links, such as pedestrian trails, shall not be included toward the required recreation and common space requirement. vii. All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand(30,000)square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas)shall provide pedestrian-oriented space(see illustration, subsection H3d of this Section)according to the following formula: 1%of the lot area+ 1%of the building area=Minimum amount of pedestrian-oriented space viii.To qualify as pedestrian-oriented space,the following must be included: (a)Visual and pedestrian access(including barrier-free access)to the abutting structures from the public right-of-way or a nonvehicular courtyard; (b)Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; (c)On-site or building-mounted lighting providing at least four(4)foot-candles(average)on the ground;and (d)At least three feet(3)of seating area(bench, ledge,etc.)or one individual seat per sixty(60)square feet of plaza area or open space. ix. The following features are encouraged in pedestrian-oriented space(see illustration, subsection H3e of this Section)and may be required by the Director: (a)Provide pedestrian-oriented uses on the building facade facing the pedestrian-oriented space. (b)Spaces should be positioned in areas with significant pedestrian traffic to provide interest and security— such as adjacent to a building entry. (c)Provide pedestrian-oriented facades on some or all buildings facing the space. (d)Provide movable public seating. x. The following are prohibited within pedestrian-oriented space: (a)Adjacent unscreened parking lots; (b)Adjacent chain link fences; (c)Adjacent blank walls; (d)Adjacent dumpsters or service areas;and (e)Outdoor storage(shopping carts,potting soil bags,firewood,etc.)that do not contribute to the pedestrian environment. Page 40 of 58 xi. The minimum required walkway areas shall not count as pedestrian-oriented space.However,where walkways are widened or enhanced beyond minimum requirements,the area may count as pedestrian- oriented space if the Director determines such space meets the defmition of pedestrian-oriented space. I b. Minimum Standards for Districts'B' and `E':Attached housing developments shall provide a minimum area of private usable open space equal to one hundred fifty(150)square feet per unit of which one hundred(100)square feet are contiguous. Such space may include porches,balconies,yards,and decks. c. Minimum Standards for District'C':The location of public open space shall be considered in relation to building orientation,sun and light exposure,and local micro-climatic conditions. d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A',and-'C'and`D': i. Common space areas in mixed_use residential and attached residential projects should be centrally located so they are near a majority of dwelling units,accessible and usable to residents,and visible from surrounding units. ii. Common space areas should be located to take advantage of surrounding features such as building entrances, significant landscaping,unique topography or architecture,and solar exposure. I iii. In mixed_use residential and attached residential projects children's play space should be centrally located,visible from the dwellings,and away from hazardous areas like garbage dumpsters,drainage facilities,streets,and parking areas. e. Guidelines Applicable to District se:Developments located at street intersection corners on designated pedestrian-oriented streets are encouraged to provide pedestrian-oriented space adjacent to the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity(see illustration,subsection H3f of this Section). 3. Illustrations. a. Street tree installed with tree grate(see subsection H1a(iii)of this Section). Jp lo `�,..., ._. •. r ' fir .::?.•• , r. ft: -Tr'l'ter i err rr-`.' -.:`r6-•'' ;. '..... ' itr. '- i�0-- a a, • "S Wes._'"-s'3L\, Z J,�� � \\\ =fry =-,-� S: Page41 of58 b. Parking lot landscaped buffer (see subsection H1a(vi)of this Section). One tree per 30 lineal feet Parking, service, or storage areas lir" a ar'r� ' sh . ' 10' j, 71/Landscaping'i Buffer c. Visible and accessible common area featuring landscaping and other amenities(see subsection H2a(iv)of this Section). !rid � I [ ; 1. , ?41 _- - i, k,--- Id A • .1. r 1-11. .._. :14 't• =wales ',all a %LT, `1/4"-,..- 1.666:0, I•gi , _- - ''--\-, El 6104 ______,-- x J d. Pedestrian-oriented space associated with a large-scale retail building(see subsection H2a(vii) of this Section). Page 42 of 58 3 /l �� \ ♦ i 4 Recessed entry areas ' r� can quality as pedestrian- i,".. 3 $a�/ oriented space if they J ., /• cv meet requirements i °i .40ii • r�� pedestrian-oriented zedand Nsible i - space # * located at major building s<';, ' ; • ' ikkit e(reiK`" entry and crossroads rt: 0 j 4e, ir r •f i0 s..; )' vi,•.• k .,tk 1 t'' AO v Yr 'vv.- - ,4 ' alitAt --,_,--- (4- ,,,4F, , ,i i \: / '. - .•.>. \' .'-!. , -r t- ,,, 4... - 2, ,,,--,., .. / ,( ‘-, /\-) * '-- f f e?.''''..• ,/\ '.:, , . . ;',=, 1..,: e. Pedestrian-oriented spaces,visible from the street,including ample seating areas,movable furniture,special paving,landscaping components and pedestrian-oriented uses(see subsection H2a(ix)of this Section). _1111111111 1I .. -,7*:illI 1 7 l.... t\ . - -11111 11.1a.t. `-----;14.-,__--- 11-1- l'qllf 11111 - '' 411� Wun 11"1111111170 ' l tifliiiii \ , I ,‘.v-,, .1 to,. ...,,,,,,Iillt;i414.-Z1 ;Is'lyNkt.., 71 r • ---- s rv,3-- lig,', `:: ,,1 . 't-4i:.:'' ..i.—1 t ■ II rt =r K ~ %� ,N, r•+ 'tatx:, i�g.pAl :. � ! / :' , ;J . ,�.�, s t� r� i4/ _ it — l s_ �. -/e—.� - __ f. Building setbacks increased at street corners along pedestrian-oriented streets to encourage provisions for pedestrian-oriented spaces(see subsection H2e of this Section). (Ord.5029,11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7-2005) Page 43 of 58 ,.... ........ F 410 ,:,:,::::„.:..\ ..\, . . . . . . . T.Cj Corner .........914' entry 1 i•- with increased r- setback Pedestrian-oriented space I BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Intent: To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character,comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate.To discourage franchise retail architecture. 1. Building Character and Massing: Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale;and ensure that all sides of a building,that can be seen by the public,are visually interesting. a. Minimum Standard for Districts'A' and `D':All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet(40'). I b. Minimum Standard for Districts'B' and `E':All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than twenty feet(20'). c. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. All building facades shall include measures to reduce the apparent scale of the building and add visual interest.Examples include modulation, articulation,defined entrances,and display windows(see illustration,subsection I5a of this Section). ii. All buildings shall be articulated with one or more of the following: (a)Defined entry features; (b)Window treatment; (c)Bay windows and/or balconies; Page 44 of 58 (d)Roofline features; or (e)Other features as approved by the Director. iii. Single purpose residential buildings shall feature building modulation as follows(see illustration, subsection I5b of this Section): (a)The maximum width(as measured horizontally along the building's exterior)without building modulation shall be forty feet(40'). (b)The minimum width of modulation shall be fifteen feet(15'). (c)The minimum depth of modulation shall be the greater of six feet(6)or not less than two tenths(0.2) multiplied by the height of the structure(finished grade to the top of the wall). Id. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A'and-LW,`D',and`E': i. Building facades should be modulated and/or articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings,break up long blank walls,add visual interest,and enhance the character of the neighborhood. ii. Articulation,modulation,and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. iii. A variety of modulations and articulations should be employed to add visual interest and to reduce the bulk and scale of large projects. e. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A B' and `E' :Building modulations should be a minimum of two feet(2)in depth and four feet(4)in width. If. Guidelines Applicable to Districts A'and `D"BI: i. Building modulations should be a minimum of two feet(2)deep,sixteen feet(16)in height,and eight feet(8)in width. ii. Alternative methods to shape a building such as angled or curved facade elements,off-set planes, wing walls,and terracing will be considered;provided,that the intent of this Section is met. g. Guidelines Applicable to District'C': i. Although streetfront buildings along designated pedestrian streets should strive to create a uniform street edge,building facades should generally be modulated and/or articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings,break up long blank walls,add visual interest,and enhance the character of the neighborhood. ii. Style:Buildings should be urban in character. iii. Buildings greater than one hundred and sixty feet(160)in length should provide a variety of techniques to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade or provide an additional special design feature Page 45 of 58 such as a clock tower,courtyard,fountain, or public gathering place to add visual interest(see illustration, subsection I5c of this Section). 2. Ground-Level Details: Intent:To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human-scale character of the pedestrian environment;and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks,or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited.A wall(including building facades and retaining walls)is considered a blank wall if: (a)It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over six feet(6)in height,has a horizontal length greater than fifteen feet(15'),and does not include a window,door,building modulation or other architectural detailing; or (b)Any portion of a ground floor wall having a surface area of four hundred(400)square feet or greater and does not include a window,door,building modulation or other architectural detailing. ii. Where blank walls are required or unavoidable,blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following(see illustration, subsection I5d of this Section): (a)A planting bed at least five feet(5)in width containing trees,shrubs,evergreen ground cover,or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b)Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c)Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d)Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture,mural,or similar; or (e)Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. iii. Treatment of blank walls shall be proportional to the wall. iv. Provide human-scaled elements such as a lighting fixture,trellis,or other landscape feature along the facade's ground floor. v. Facades on designated pedestrian-oriented streets shall have at least seventy-five percent(75%)of the linear frontage of the ground floor facade(as measured on a true elevation facing the designated pedestrian-oriented street)comprised of transparent windows and/or doors. vi. Other facade window requirements include the following: Page 46 of 58 (a)Building facades must have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building.However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency.The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be fifty percent(50%). (b)Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise,rather than permanent displays. (c)Where windows or storefronts occur,they must principally contain clear glazing. (d)Tinted and dark glass,highly reflective(mirror-type)glass and film are prohibited. b. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A'ate,'C' and `D': i. The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by incorporating a minimum of one of the following architectural features from each category listed(see illustration, subsection I5e of this Section): (a)Facade Features: (1)Recess; (2)Overhang; (3)Canopy; (4)Trellis; (5)Portico; (6)Porch; (7)Clerestory. (b)Doorway Features: (1)Transom windows; (2)Glass windows flanking door; (3)Large entry doors; (4)Ornamental lighting; (5)Lighted displays. (c)Detail Features: (1)Decorative entry paving; Page 47 of 58 (2)Ornamental building name and address; (3)Planted containers; (4)Street furniture(benches,etc.). ii. Artwork or building ornamentation(such as mosaics,murals,grillwork, sculptures,relief,etc.) should be used to provide ground-level detail. iii. Elevated or terraced planting beds between the walkway and long building walls are encouraged. I c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B'and`E': Use of material variations such as colors,brick, shingles,stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. 3. Building Roof Lines: Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. I a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'and-,'C',and `D':Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles(see illustration, subsection I5f of this Section): i. Extended parapets; ii. Feature elements projecting above parapets; iii. Projected cornices; iv. Pitched or sloped roofs. (a)Locate and screen roof-mounted mechanical equipment so that the equipment is not visible within one hundred fifty feet(150)of the structure when viewed from ground level. (b)Screening features shall blend with the architectural character of the building,consistent with RMC 4-4- 095E,Roof-Top Equipment. (c)Match color of roof-mounted mechanical equipment to color of exposed portions of the roof to minimize visual impacts when equipment is visible from higher elevations. Ib. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and `E': i. Buildings containing predominantly residential uses should have pitched roofs with a minimum slope of one to four(1:4). Such roofs should have dormers or intersecting roof forms that break up the massiveness of a continuous,uninterrupted sloping roof. ii. Roof colors should be dark. Page 48 of 58 c. Guidelines Applicable to District'C': Building roof lines should be varied to add visual interest to the building. 4. Building Materials: Intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings;and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. a. Minimum Standards for all Districts: i. All sides of buildings visible from a street,pathway,parking area,or open space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials,detailing,and color scheme,or if different,with materials of the same quality. ii. Materials, individually or in combination,shall have an attractive texture,pattern,and quality of detailing for all visible facades. iii. Materials shall be durable,high quality,and reasonably maintained. b. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'aid- 'C',and `D': Buildings shall employ material variations such as colors,brick or metal banding,patterns,or textural changes. c. Guidelines Applicable to all Districts: i. Building materials should be attractive,durable,and consistent with more traditional urban development.Appropriate examples would include brick,integrally colored concrete masonry,pre-finished metal, stone,steel,glass,and cast-in-place concrete. ii. Concrete walls should be enhanced by texturing,reveals, snap-tie patterns,coloring with a concrete coating or admixture,or by incorporating embossed or sculpted surfaces,mosaics,or artwork. iii. Concrete block walls should be enhanced with integral color,textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or incorporate other masonry materials. iv. Stucco and similar troweled finishes should be used in combination with other more highly textured finishes or accents.They should not be used at the base of buildings between the finished floor elevation and four feet(4')above. I d. Guideline Applicable to Districts'B' and'E':Use of material variations such as colors,brick or metal banding or patterns,or textural changes is encouraged. 5. Illustrations. a. Building modulation and articulation(see subsection I1c(i)of this Section). Page 49 of 58 I 1 I 1 0 I Q I i i • ELI Zoi. 0 Dip 111:11 _117:t ., , : ! fil r xx , x i ?x 5%xj k i kr c �iv SAS '}? k. 1 INTERVAL i(INTERVAL1 b. Single purpose residential building featuring building modulation to reduce the scale of the building and add visual interest(see subsection I1c(iii)of this Section). Articulated rodline-h this case a traditional cornice Windows and building surfaces add visual Interest and give the r. s building a human scale Build'ngis'modulated' '� (goes In and out to relieve the , ,,. �x�• monotony cf th a wide wall it � : ( ,�.� ` , � r � � 1 t. g �t 'Ilr R .. i ._ 1 . r R n • — 3C 1 iiirkNik �� . 3 11 ^c f 1 r [i kc, - e _.._.�$ lr✓,, .. :- f '} �}P-� 4� it '. c. Reducing scale of long buildings(see subsection I1g(iii) of this Section). Page 50 of 58 NW Nile a '''llIl11IIIIIIIIl1II11III11IIIIPliii''160' Maximum facade length allowed t— W O o Z u9 M E..7: Ak j A A At tt et More than 160' Facade is too long f- Z s_�1��1 pill' +����I 11�ill. W w Illlllinu einumuni 160'orless 160'orless Meets guideline Meets guideline d. Acceptable blank wall treatments(see subsection I2a(ii)of this Section). tAr. ►` Trellis with vines or other plants IP,t; Artwork 14, 4.10, ii.10, ,4 11. ,►•.,.,1-1.41",e <11E,-111.N. ril . c � FI 0 Min.5'wide planting '�? ` bed and materials to -s cover 50%of wall within 3 years e. Building facade features(see subsection I2b(i)of this Section). Page 51 of 58 4'-6'min. i' 6 ', , . k---;;,,,A ,:tH' 40 '''.- ,,., t - -- ii, ; ,ti... _c L t i RECESS OVERHANG CANOPY f , TRELLIS PORTICO PORCH f. Preferred roof forms (see subsection I3a of this Section).(Ord.5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7- 2005) Feature elements projecting Extended parapets above •ara. ,1111, sti-/-44.y ili � J s Projected cornices Pitched or slo•ed roofs 01 A *Hichi,, Tr4 /A I*1 reg. \,.. 14111_ 416 ._ L f,,, `'. , ., ,Nitro 4 Iliik �/ J SIGNAGE: I I Page 52 of 58 1 *ale Ntif Intent: To provide a means of identifying and advertising businesses;provide directional assistance; encourage signs that are both clear and of appropriate scale for the project; encourage quality signage that contributes to the character of the Urban Center and the Center Village; and create color and interest. 1. Minimum Standards for Districts'C' and `D': a. Signage shall be an integral part of the design approach to the building. b. Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. c. Prohibited signs include(see illustration,subsection J3a of this Section): i. Pole signs. ii. Roof signs. iii. Back-lit signs with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet(can signs or illuminated cabinet signs). Exceptions:Back-lit logo signs less than ten(10)square feet are permitted as are signs with only the individual letters back-lit. d. In mixed use and multi-use buildings,signage shall be coordinated with the overall building design. e. Freestanding ground-related monument signs,with the exception of primary entry signs,shall be limited to five feet(5)above finished grade,including support structure.All such signs shall include decorative landscaping(groundcover and/or shrubs)to provide seasonal interest in the area surrounding the sign.Alternately, signage may incorporate stone,brick,or other decorative materials as approved by the Director. f. Entry signs shall be limited to the name of the larger development. I2. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'C' and `D': a. Alteration of trademarks notwithstanding,corporate signage should not be garish in color nor overly lit,although creative design, strong accent colors,and interesting surface materials and lighting techniques are encouraged. b. Front-lit,ground-mounted monument signs are the preferred type of freestanding sign. c. Blade type signs,proportional to the building facade on which they are mounted,are encouraged on pedestrian-oriented streets. 3. Illustrations. a. Acceptable and unacceptable signs(see subsection Jlc of this Section). Page 53 of 58 Typical "can signs" Internally lit letters are not acceptable or graphics are acceptable BANK BANK Plastic or Sheet — Only the individual translucent metal letters are lit sheet box (Ord.5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7-2005) K LIGHTING: Intent:To ensure safety and security;provide adequate lighting levels in pedestrian areas such as plazas, pedestrian walkways,parking areas,building entries, and other public places; and increase the visual attractiveness of the area at all times of the day and night. I1. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'and-,'C',and`D': a. Lighting shall conform to on-site exterior lighting regulations located in RMC 4-4-075,Lighting, Exterior On-Site. b. Lighting shall be provided on-site to increase security,but shall not be allowed to directly project off-site. c. Pedestrian-scale lighting shall be provided,for both safety and aesthetics, along all streets,at primary and secondary building entrances, at building facades,and at pedestrian-oriented spaces. I2. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'C' and `D': a. Accent lighting should be provided at focal points such as gateways,public art,and significant landscape features such as specimen trees. b. Additional lighting to provide interest in the pedestrian environment may include sconces on building facades,awnings with down-lighting,decorative street lighting, etc. (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124,2-7-2005) L. MODIFICATION OF MINIMUM STANDARDS: Page 54 of 58 I 1. The Reviewing Official lei-shall have the authority to modify the minimum standards of the design regulations,subject to the provisions of RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures,and the following requirements: a. The project as a whole meets the intent of the minimum standards and guidelines in subsections E,F, G,H,I,J,and K of the design regulations; b. The requested modification meets the intent of the applicable design standard; c. The modification will not have a detrimental effect on nearby properties and the City as a whole; d. The deviation manifests high quality design; and e. The modification will enhance the pedestrian environment on the abutting and/or adjacent streets and/or pathways. 2. Exceptions for Districts A and B:Modifications to the requirements in subsections E2a and E3a of this Section are limited to the following circumstances: a. When the building is oriented to an interior courtyard,and the courtyard has a prominent entry and walkway connecting directly to the public sidewalk; or b. When a building includes an architectural feature that connects the building entry to the public sidewalk; or c. In complexes with several buildings,when the building is oriented to an internal integrated walkway system with prominent connections to the public sidewalk(s).(Ord.5124,2-7-2005) M VARIANCE: (Reserved). (Ord.5124,2-7-2005) N APPEALS: For appeals of administrative decisions made pursuant to the design regulations,see RMC 4-8-110,Appeals. (Ord. 4821, 12-20-1999;Amd. Ord.4971,6-10-2002; Ord.5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124,2-7-2005) SECTION XVI. Section 4-4-080F.10e of Chapter 4, City-wide Property Development Standards of Title N (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended as shown in Attachment IF. Page 55 of 58 SECTION XVII. Section 4-7-170F of Chapter R, City-wide Property Development Standards of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby amended as follows: F. PIPESTEM LOTS ALLOWED: Pipestem lots may be permitted for new plats to achieve the minimum density densities permitted-within the Zoning Code when there is no other feasible alternative to achieving the pelted-minimum 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) 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. Walkways shall be paved for their entire width and length with a permanent surface and shall be adequately lighted at the developer's cost. (Amd.Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) SECTION XVIII. Section 4-8-120D.21 of Chapter 8, Permits- General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to revise the following definition: Urban Center-Design eeulations Review Packet: A set of submission materials required for projects ' subject to the Urban Design Regulations in RMC 4- 3-100: Page 56 of 58 a. Site plan,land use review; b.Elevations,architectural; c.Floor plans,general; d.Narrative outlining how the applicant's proposal addresses the City's Urban Center Design Overlay Regulations. SECTION XIX. Section 4-9-065D of Chapter 9, Permits- Specific, of Title N (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby amended as shown in Attachment `I'. SECTION XX. The definition of"AFFORDABLE HOUSING" in Section 4- 11-010 of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title N (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: AFFORDABLE HOUSING:Housing used as a primary residence for any household whose income is less than eighty percent(80%)of the median annual income adjusted for household size,as determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)for the Seattle Metropolitan Statistical Area,and who pay no more than thirty percent(30%)of household income for housing expenses. Affordable housing used to satisfy zoning requirements,whether for inclusionary or bonus provisions,must be secured to remain affordable in perpetuity,as determined by the City attorney. SECTION XXI. The definition of "DWELLING, MULTI-FAMILY" in Section 4-11-040 of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title N (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: DWELLING,MULTI-FAMILY: Dwelling,Attached:A one-family dwelling attached to one or more one-family dwellings by common roofs,walls,or floors. This definition may also include a dwelling unit or units attached to garages or other nonresidential uses. This definition does not include retirement residences,boarding and lodging houses, accessory dwelling units,adult family homes, group home I or group home II as defined herein. A. Flat: A residential building containing two(2)or more dwelling units which are attached at one or more common roofs,walls,or floors. Typically,the unit's habitable area is provided on a single level. Unit entrances may or may not be provided from a common corridor. Page 57 of 58 B. Townhouse: A one-family,ground-related dwelling attached to one or more such units in which each unit has its own exterior,ground-level access to the outside,no unit is located over another unit, and each unit is separated from any other unit by one or more vertical common walls. Typically Townhouse the units are multi-story. C. Carriage House: One or more accessory dwelling units attached to a garage. The garage attached to the carriage house typically contains vehicle and/or storage for people living in another building as well as occupants of the carriage house. D. Penthouse: A single dwelling unit located at or near the top of a building containing other,non- residential uses. E. Garden Style Apartment: A dwelling unit that is one of several stacked vertically,frequently-with exterior stairways and/or exterior corridors and surface parking. Parking is usually-at-grade-with-not structured eland may include-with detached carports or garages. Buildings and building entries are oriented toward internal drive aisles and/or parking lots and not street frontage. ally €rent-yard—There is typically no formal building entry area connected to a public sidewalk and a public street. Site planning may incorporate structures developed at low landscaped setbacks. SECTION XX I. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of ,2006. Bonnie Walton,City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of ,2006. Kathy Keolker,Mayor • Approved as to form: Lawrence J.Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. Page 58 of 58 ATTACHMENT A • D ZONES IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Designations are implemented by certain zones: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTING ZONES DESIGNATION Residential Low Density(RLD) Resource Conservation (RC)Residential—1 DU/AC(R- 1)Residential—4 DU/AC(R-4) Residential Single Family(RS) Residential—8 DU/AC(R- 8)Residential Manufactured Home Park(RMH) Residential Medium Density Residential—10 DU/AC(R- (RMD) 10)Residential Manufactured Home Park(RMH)Residential— 14 DU/AC(R-14) Residential Multi-Family(RM) Residential Multi-Family(RM-V, RM-I, RM-F) Urban Center Downtown (UC- Center Downtown D) (CD)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) Commercial/Office/Residential Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) (COR) Center Village(CV) 4O)Residential Multi-Family Zones (RM-F, RM-T, RM-U), Center Village(CV)Residential- 14 DU/AC (R-14) Commercial Corridor(CC) Commercial Arterial (CA)Commercial Office (CO)Light Industrial (IL) Employment Area Industrial Light Industrial(IL)Medium (EAI) Industrial (IM)Heavy Industrial (IH) Employment Area Valley(EAV) Commercial Arterial (CA)Commercial Office (CO)Light Industrial (IL)Medium Industrial (IM)Heavy Industrial (IH)Resource Conservation (RC) Commercial Neighborhood(CN)Commercial Neighborhood (CN) • csi z V Q O D Q U_Z D Z Q p V 0LU : I el 0 Q Q Z O Z U I Q I O 0 Q~ Q a ZUI QI,- Q 4 ILI . . 0 Z = v Q a 0Q Q = = a Q^ a o w Q Q `a 1-1 OZ IJ Z N0 .0_ Q Q Pctt Z 0Z W I a N. Q n. W O G F"' Z (9 � = aM ¢' cn a Z fn . p = if) i cco) U N. C.) CDN pW 0: a a a s ¢ < a Z Z � = coI i U o Q Q p NW C4 = a a a i a Qr' Q a (_ � � = a a a i a Q� Q co a CO Z CL p ck d0. 10 a a a a ¢~ ¢ Q^ `l = a Ia Z H a = a a a co Ic) co co= a <� Q^ Q Q~ a < W CO Z I u = C F , o CD . oC- L0 ECI -o = IS ''� H ? 08 Z -vcCo v € vw � i.. �, c U < = Oe c° � g7,- pay E 3 o f m o X g 2 1.-. O H _ O C L O 4 O (0 t ." /\ '_C co _L fixx( R L 0 u H O 0 = — y' F Z w Q .g � 4i co ca e 0 0u Eva) d. E E E 0 c.2 a) E c qi c"-- 0i & S 2 I Qc et N n a Q Z m Q 0 CO Y Y O. N C) 0 0 1 coNor NNW V a U U gzo, cm 0 Q Q a I F- n Q m Z a ICI loll 0 a 0 I__I . oll0. < .c.zi 0_ i d Zz 0U II o a = OQ co , ® cf) . Eir, 0, V a I I aaa =6 V W 2 V a s I I ■ aIILD a co O C) V a a I I flu__1 ' II lollIII ICI _1E111 II N Iz I I _Ell II a = Z a a a I I a ,,, a a = ° ■ ■ o _MIMI III Q O Wr a a II II Ca. - a • ll a = M. _ Ci � a a a lI 8 a_ Ill a i El .9 Z re = a d a W ■ aIII E. x El, N re a lil _ aIIIEll IIa. III a Ell Nth a ll ill Qp reit _ llMo aIlla aQu© c�3 C J p O 2 N Q w j gel J Nam* y N Z V V it Cl) y C O O W _ C Q rn / ai5X 0 E E °' p °cy a) a� o o cCi C C - N v = Q O OD E _ _ O c0 L L e- y N O N — :7 N C W any 0 c Z d 0 m "° 0 L Z 3 m ® n y J o v c c b 0 o a ix Z' >' - E o 0 c O w — cry , e- , .0 --- - co co L Q * N 6 - C L L . y O E = N N-� G � •E� `q v a a c O 0 = o o 0 E E coV N d N 2 fn Q u. u. 6 L g g ... a Q Q 0 0 0 (! 0 I cc w • Va. oxa x Co x xx x Q 0 = Z - a ■ x CO i a a a x x Q x x 0 0 Q: , a a ■■ a a Q I s x < x I l 0 , a a a a a a x x x a x s 10 Q0 , a a a a a Q x x x Q x a x 0 I a a a x a a Q x x s Q x x w 2 0 a ■ a n- a Q Z x = Q I x 0 V 0 ' a ■■■ a a a x s x Q x x 1 Q x x= a co a a Q xs = = 0 IX ti 2 , a cco o co 0. a a a. a. Q x x x Q i = x o M Z -II a a a a a a x x x Q x x op cd Pi CO OZ a: I a ■■■ a a a x x x Q x i 0 Ma V . a --- a a s x s a x x u a: o , a ■■■ a a Q x x x Q x x _ re _ , a ■■■ a a Qo co W x x s Q x x i N a: I a ■■■ a a ¢ c.) x s s Q I x IZIX a ■■■ a a ¢ 0 ; : : Q x x a ii , a ■■■ a a a m ¢ x x a re cea a x x x x s c -o m m C N m U r O .pQ ' ' U C U y E 0.61 J N .� Uea i=R 8 = 7 w 0 p .4 Is c zi. c m N E E E C 0 U i w !0 r 7 — 1 a > c > p O = mmwwwa L vu. ri i -� "^ c% E CP.c E Nam t ._ .Co f5IN a Y ti iaU. c 0 I 4iiUHVfl nt nY 0 Cl) f- u. a a 0, 0 0 tY a. 0 0 -y co 0 co ' co °' O (j a a a Q n a n. 0 Q CO a a a d d Q co d = a Qa. Q y 111 ' d a a s d d I d d Q I = ' CO a Z Cl.a Cl.a Cl.a COs a a z a CO 0aa N CI a a a s a Q03 a I a •a Q 0 Q _ a a s d N V a I c0 1.0 N d N 0 N N a a a_ Qa a a a a a a a a a 1 W NI ' 0 0 O a a s a v¢ a a a a a 04 0 11 Q Vo z I ii Q Q a 0-4:9 Q MMrM a a s CO 01 a v a Q a x s Oaaaa '1- m co 4.� a 0. ¢ ° = naa ° �co a a s a . a a a a a ,co co 00 00 NC? • a s d a d a Q Cl.. S d a a s a.. a a a l co j a Cl) g I I a a s a = ¢ _ O . .. o ' ■III co 03 O III a = _ O II F-• i II a■I, a II a = = W art y rel m m „Wj d E. Ci = m .L �L O e F-. 44 i Hm V 0 r a i0 C S 1tf N W. y mW Z 0 -o m = — d W C G o N 14. N G 4. C t- o - 0 -a .4) :,-.... c c Q O c6 > ��} la p� e0 �Gp� C1 Qi 2 y Z LL y at v vi c Q . C = — m.0 N 'S y 0 0 m di O EU 5 N T6 -0 z Cl) T. w ` • w n ds a is ' ' '" . ' O is z = t 3 0 0 O c 90 0 3 > 0 d — X rC •. R t W .3° c E-+ O v� o o r re a Ti 0 o m 05 o '6 m c is 3 co 0 d�L N D 1 0 2 O > .14 Q m 0 w 2 Y CG Q: F- > .. -, ILI Q 0 0 C!. C!. 1 N CO a o 0 a = a? i = a 0 p z a S S a a a.. Qao h W CIV Q.' a S a a a a v Z O a0 to co co Z U I N a a i a n. �'� N V a a a a a a 0. Qo reU ¢o U. N aa a= a a a a Q W g• V ? a s a.a s a O = I Q = = a a a co a co co co co a s Ct.co a <`� a c M 1-4 �.. Uf CO 00 CO CO N 00 CO CO CO CO to — S a a a a a aaaa QNa O in p 00 co co 00 N 00 00 c0 OD 0 a) ? =I S a a a co a a a a a a ¢N °' a N u, N N co re a a a CI- O = Pi z M � M M C7 r- a I a _ CD Lt = a S IIa a a Q ¢ F5 W re re a S Q Q 4, C C ir: o o ai el; •a W Q. .0 Ih4 m r Qt E.,4, y- x x _ OQ = � m co L. R V ? F- Nvi o N p m u co _ i CO !W i l'•HHH co e0 = dN O + c 9 Q to v m _v iwm Z-et z Am by y ,o — 8 m ° m0 o orom _ = r- 0i E-4 z Ili „ > .5gs L l 15 = cbe bg oM ts , a22. H to ? sz E+ O to0o 7 m o o m — m a) a) o a cLQ N n a U ceO0Sct r a v � = O _G N 14111110" *OF z V o 0 0 ell o U 0 0 O = a a a Q Q 2 a a Q C9 VZ a a a ¢ oea 2 a a a n. v� D a IliV . ° Q <p a a 2 n. CD Z N O) O CO Z 0 a a a Q a 0- °' a a Q = Q a = a aa a aU a Q ES aaQ = _ 0 d u w a = d Q d a a "2 2 V a a a Q a = a 04 d Y. CIA at O C) z a 0o_ a a < = < Jn Q = a a 2 a Q CO= a s a s a a o a a a = o n 1 ' N 0 0 3 U CO M n 0 v°)i c i n r00i d 0 M O EL 0- a 0- Q 2 0_ 2 Q. a_ d I I < a < Q ° oZ =I a c3 co a i a a a I cam ca Z Ce Q 2 = Q 2 2 O a O , Q — 0 V. Q = _, Q 2 2 dao G IX Q 2 111= Q 2 2 a CD 2 Z reS U U O Q 2 = Q 2 z — E. 'a N Q 2 = Q 2 a 2 Z _it Q 2 -< a 0 CV I V CI 0 2 = Q = 2 W CO IN H F- Ce ce Q 2 = Q 2 2 > > i C G1 0 'a �E V d Q I gel J p en 0 d N I-- 2 0 a' A v i p F- H mQ a. In _ a .c 4 m o5 v mL o d � m .c z f- Q 0 m g L t c c ai u u _ 'c w y 0 W W m q6s L.CO L. c u CO c y N 0 42 al zi '�. m m' .a so m le C two y O V >, m m H 4 m H `i ® t► l i +o! g u ;v_ toS.'b W -04. ist .?... . IT, 8 E v1 ; S H Z W m-,11 V 5 >, — C :aIi1„ ti. eD • = e ".2 .� L. 2 G Y Y t1 - �Lr G. c. W E-+ O th '� `- as RI c m Q: ct xut c aacauaa . g 5 J 4 N D > d < 0 LL 0 2 J CO 0 vair Aare CO O a Q = = a 5 Q N g Z II___I I I II R1111 f8rII■■■II_ I ' ll■ v¢ liii 0 V , co co a a III_ I ' ll _13„■, ce V I a a ■ n II_ III■ -ll � a ®a 11 W I III H 4 PEI . 8 III . II_ I Q© I a = II I O IX N E I a. a a a U El I II I a a 4-4 , 3• d I a Q a II I ' ll a Cd abo a O 2 Il II_ I_ II Eliii a Ck 'I II I I I II �Ennr= pIll___I II II II Ellin N lI___II_ I_ II 11111 II___II_ I_ II �11111 Ill IX • II IIIII 11111 re el el II III ! II flull 1 C C S C C i2o •C. ��+ O 1oaaa► R L O' m c c = c '' v yypp' L 4 mCcoO eel •511 ".. .". 4) 21^ 0) / 10t1 " 1CS63 ✓• 0w m a ,� m y� ° m m y .a i ° m O n L 4 E., O N L , m d L. L. L. a> 3 'O m O • N M f- > > > > 3 t <3R < _ _ z 0co > S +fir►'' *44110 N IZ o a p U a a H n ! IQ OZz 0 en in V I ■■■ a`� a ■■■ ■ a ■ x co ■ co x QN CI en V , a ■■ a a ■■■ ■ a ■ x co ■ 03 x ! W V I a a 0_ co co ! Q = , co co a a a co03 a a CO a COCO a x a COCO i 0 ce CD co n.a a Ma a 0) N. CO a I a M a. 0) O. x x 0)x CO 0 I I a i:: s 1 < , z & z_t • i 1 0 ico . 0i , 1,12, re ..._ x i . 1 0 2 ., 1 1 z re _ x 1 E iii al i N I. Z = C 2 P. . E a, .. N N Z y �. R get J Q1 G� ., R1 .0 .Q •13 -p r O ... 2 R C H L Qm C C 0 Cac d . d. co ca . ( 0 41 �Q wi+, _ -a 1.. C !3. j v C ..r i m Ci 1 ro co C ° W W Cf R C .- • y of .r5 C C C C j s O c. Ts to co z .. p C I H C 'g m :2 'o I 7 ,Q O` 'c w u N Iv y C >' gl - w v Ul 0.2 1 'Eli S w 0 Fd € r- cH SE 2 0 cco c c. = �a a 3r 0 = e al en - 5mI IN m ci ci 0 Z `; .J CO re O CD o _C rIJ • Z O a Q = = Q a a Q a s Io n 1 (9 DZ , a a © usa. a. ■� Q a a 0 v � , a I aaa < Q a a= a i a ! Z Oco, a� ® naasa Q� Q to¢ a a a asN , aaa Q`D 14 V i a a v o- Q = 4 a 4 v 4 g Q a a a l a a a a Q W a _ aas a a coa r., o 2 U = i a a a V f I 0 va °av °°i co 2o V = a a Q a aQ I w in 0 n CT CI Z d I 0. Ell 8 t... 4 0. 4 a) Pk ° a. v. co QcOi U a aoZ = aa a Q a I Inn Ell co v. La & V . a � © -av a s a = Q a a co a W & Ala ¢ © ■Q co a. 4 rn u4 ■ U co cn o I- a. a = Q a a s 0 Lo co■ a, a © ■ < ° a lCt = a a i Q a a Zco o jN I a. s a = ¢ a a n d F= , a Q © 0 ■<<o a. s a in .4. ¢ co a co o a a Z QW Q rn cn co co o 6 - , a Q © Z ■Qco a s a i ■ W Q a a s V Q © ■ rn in ■ co oU to, a 0co a 4 M Q aQ ¢ a a = >- Q Q: vi 3 2 2 CCU r ,4 R H s m W + C r o J O C C p y CmCO CC co La.Z < c E 0 0 c c 1,), ro z .2 a. 0. 9 mu) : viz 1-- >- C ii) 4.; ° Ca ala m y E L Ti v - o 3 m m 3 m a+ o a• c •E 0 > a._ CO et CA Ca m 0 O ram-• s.. V! a• 2 a• 7 fiyy9 v -0" Ca- > tl! O Z to O E = E. L O` O x o v . w d W m � t y W a Cd O x C EO. E-+ O co O r ++ r. R N 03 v C C d 0 , G N 6 M vet C S = �" C e0 13 = m O O • Q'IN > > > > a •� 2 53 2 2 aQ: ce2 (0) F- %11111.1t Ilia a co \ / / o& \ 2• — o (0Z cok % 0 i0 ° a. 1- c I1- . 7 � � « oa iA T. a i $ co — 7 O � � to $ 0ta 00 Z 0 CO to — E 2 0 a. 2 c S0 O co � t / $ � q S a « / . Ta7 gt — , Qo CL 0 0. c a � w 2 � f s 2 _ , k I . 0 O ■ ® § n 2 c � kk 0 � Q to kkk v.� / 2 % 2 co k co o n > c0 0 $ 2 2 co k tt - G c f © « _ / k k A$ k 0 � k 2 . a k 22a & E R \ f CO B ID CO" E E , � � S z , @ q ƒ # G jg 0 � O c4 — y� — � B & $ co �� k � $ C �2 kG \ 2 e 4 — Z � f 2k � � 8 • 2 � g §k 0G N p— -c � Rp_ Q I co Pa a 0 0 e a /2EE a4. &9 w r co &$ ko $ �tri q — ƒ O.2 / & , Tr 0 4ii 9 . a ■ co a kk � 20 cc,,(0 r- 0U 5,o � oL 0c 2o / XI - 0 l ee k ° m w H ■ 2 # § $7 0, 4 g VUJ Zf . k . - k} k La \ 0:1\q 5 f<g a E a 5 c — 0I � 5 •. 0 2 a f� k 0 c » ® o . . a -o N. .. � �' — V) ■ 2 0 . ES. # 0 c" �] E Ill E � :§ : k\ t2 -6 . . - .N » . . I-• D4 Q§ O ATTACHMENT C ..,, .,.. 4-2-070G RESIDENTIAL-14 DU/AC (R 14) Uses allowed in the R-14 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Natural resource extraction/recovery H ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Kennels,hobby AC#37 Pets, common household,up to 3 per dwelling unit or business AC establishment RESIDENTIAL Detached dwelling P#19 Semi-attached dwelling P#19 Attached dwelling P#50 Manufactured Homes Manufactured homes, designated P#19 OTHER RESIDENTIAL,LODGING AND HOME OCCUPATIONS Adult family home P Group homes II for 6 or less P Group homes II for 7 or more H Home occupations AC#6 SCHOOLS K-12 educational institution(public or private) H#9 K-12 educational institution(public or private), existing P#9 PARKS Parks, neighborhood P Parks, regional/community, existing P Parks,regional/community,new AD OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC FACILITIES Community Facilities Cemetery H Religious institutions H Service and social organizations H Public Facilities City government offices City government facilities H Other government offices and facilities H RETAIL Eating and drinking establishments H#33 Horticultural nurseries H Retail sales H#33 ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Entertainment Cultural facilities H ATTACHMENT C two NW ' Recreation Recreation facilities, indoor existing P#33 Recreation facilities, indoor new H#33 Recreation facilities, outdoor P#33 SERVICES Services, General Bed and breakfast house, accessory AD On-site services H#33 Day Care Services Adult day care I AC Adult day care II H#33 Day care centers H#33 Family day care AC Healthcare Services Convalescent centers H Medical institutions H VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Park and ride, shared-use P#108 UTILITIES Communications broadcast and relay towers H Utilities, small P Utilities, medium AD Utilities, large H WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD #46 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures H#45 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 development: one model home P#53 on an existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P#53 Temporary or manufactured buildings used for construction P#10 Temporary uses P#53 ' ATTACHMENT D .... 4-2-070J CENTER VILLAGE(CV) Uses allowed in the CV Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL Service and social organizations H RESOURCES Public Facilities Natural resource extraction/recovery H City government offices AD City government facilities H ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Other government offices and facilities H I Kennels, helms AC#37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per AC OFFICE AND CONFERENCE dwelling unit or business establishment I Medical and dental offices P#22 RESIDENTIAL Offices,general P#22 Attached dwelling P73 Veterinary offices/clinics P#22 Flats or townhouses(existing legal) P73 Conference Center li I RETAIL la Adult retail use P#43 I Drive-in/drive-through, retail AC#28 I OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND Eating and drinking establishments P#22 I HOME OCCUPATIONS Horticultural nurseries H I Adult family home P Retail sales P#22 Congregate residence P Retail sales, outdoor P#15 Group homes II for 6 or less P Taverns AD Group homes II for 7 or more P Home occupations AC#6 ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Retirement residences P Entertainment P-#43 SCHOOLS Cultural facilities AD I K-12 educational institution (public or H#9 Dance clubs AD#22 I private) Dance halls AD#22 K-12 educational institution (public or I P#9 Movie Theatres AD private), existing I Schools/studios, arts and crafts P#22 Recreation Recreation facilities, indoor existing P#22 I PARKS Recreation facilities, indoor new -P Parks, neighborhood P SERVICES Parks, regional/community, existing P Services, General Parks, regional/community, new AD Hotel P#22 I Motel P#22 OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC On-site services P#22 I FACILITIES Drive-in/drive-through service AC#28 Community Facilities Day Care Services ICemetery # Adult day care I P#22 I Religious institutions H Adult day care II P#22 I USES: TYPE: Day care centers P#22 Page 1 of 2 1 ATTACHMENT D USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: Macro facility antennas P#44 Family day care AC Micro facility antennas P Healthcare Services Mini facility antennas P#44 I Convalescent centers P#22 Minor modifications to existing wireless P#49 Medical institutions H communication facilities Monopole I support structures P#44 VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Monopole II support structures H#48 I Car washes P#22 I AD-#22 GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Parking garage, structured, commercial Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and as or public P#22 defined in chapter RMC 4-11,where AC not otherwise listed in the Use Table I Parking,surface,commercial or public P I Park and ride,shared use P#108 Park and rides, dedicated P#106 TEMPORARY USE Vehicle fueling stations P Model homes in an approved residential development:one model home on an P#53 I Vehicle service and repair, small PAD#2 existing lot I Taxi Stand P Sales/marketing trailers,on-site P#53 I -Transit Centers -P Temporary or manufactured buildings P#r0 STORAGE used for construction Indoor storage AC#1 1 Temporary uses P#53 I Outdoor-storage As-#64 I INDUSTRIAL Industrial,General I Laboratories:light manufacturing AD#22 I Laboratories: Research, Development H and Testing Solid Waste/Recycling Recycling collection station P UTILITIES Communications broadcast and relay H towers USES: TYPE: 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 Page 2 of 2 i 1 >, o5 m c a o c c C -O a a co C -o Lc a ca L co A o y o a aL co o co = = c 0 0i c w j eh N 3 •y y ro 0 ou •> > O O C p O O c > o C M N — r 0• E x x x O 13cC O • y = x N x X >, c. a) N E E m •L I >, a E p- p E N 8 H co N U cal) ` O > U a y U) `_• N r• N • �• > - - _ .� N .0 Ors C O L. > : m '2 N Q O m a) t- m u. 8 p O b O a) o I-. o u. LL 0 C C : N .e L .... 0 m LL •0 : N co : co Z a) co C N L .c C . y o I > C C co O C E L Q c my 0 3 3 Z.-5 m .0 L L ,. >, = • O O O C 'a b) C �. O z a= .• •. 3 co V — O ) o 9 co U) 0 Z N ► • y r 0 N E N L •O 00. Sm. CO O N .-. I- O N V T3 'C • U) 2 a. V N N Q C C u a a) p E 0 O L C X . i ... mc c0 s . oo > agg < o • _ y N m .y '-0 ( E a O O I; >w Ca)W tt N' C .. ,• � m O vO QL m ! C O . L- c C -0R L M a) .. .. iu 1- yE = . 0 O EO Zr oO N d' Q O E \ -o p L m �Z � ' a 0do ° aorN coN ' .0 = .. V• A Q. cC -- , a a) L. N\ ( Xir) p O s OQ c , •, m E o = a co O V :. 0 .. E O O . := to L m LL yrOy . Q. y c0 a) a eO .O F.. 3a)ZN . O c- V O .0 N +' m UJ co in • . O O) G m = ' co ` °) O a eOOc CO m � 0 CU Ca EV:Eo a C . � lUE ) EWa v 3 E > ` - oa • in X .c y ob � 22 ' •• tia = CL Qcvoccoo � G a � c`oa. ILL LL Z a 0 a)R� of O*a Cd l LO Q . 0) C '° C V) LDH `- Nm C C s O +r cc-�> c0 co m y O co O mV o .- c .6 .... N L. m E L a - coC a C O : yO N O 'Q z .0 O O O 3c0 = N .r _ cx .. L tu c3 > a) CD .c CO �' •Q _c0) L c CI m go) U E a)G. ' C ma) Hw = -- E .- _ a •E -0� C > -0Z Oa0 O - N •� Q O Or EH � O - ' O m W a0s .v) cCO L mv L d. C L. r di LL Q 2 mc > m m ` Co > o2 oOOy I CS a. v O v E E E a) . ai L om .N 'a CO co i '' _•-; N U O La I.. •Q a Z (I) in' v co,- > > mC .callo E m ` N OL iii 4-0 J C .m. > a .O. pNO -0 -0v — co io co c W L >, C ' CL» r L .0 R m a. m o 6 m > , + OOC m _ QO .. Cw 0 0Z a) V) 0 .CW LL O W v ... o W oom U. A 0 V a D _ . E • o • ) o CI a Ili d C = i— z H '=0 CA W ...i 0 M 0 re 2 e- 2 LL o E Qv Z E N F- m W c = eg m _ m a v 13 2— o 20 a 0 w '411.9 Q z O -0 CO a) A co w a) L a) o '� m c Zm to" a) E = >. N N '� E =t O V a) _o -O O p 0 L C N Q� co N a (c6 di La C w 0.'O O o Cl) 0• .5 O� c N E -a Oo _ > E fo N 'a a) - - a) �- E \ p L L • C co 2 0L N a N OO = aaas co 0 •a . 0 c n wc-- '9 mD = 3 c c • aa) Ce _ v ai m »- 3 as0 oEu) 0a) 3 L 0c caca0 .c O a O X N y V a) V p .0 a a'"ft • • 7 N Ce p 'a 0 — a) CN R) E E "as - N s 2 co :- W y) O .r a_ N C co a 0 N — > N N C N C c 04) CO = Ego Zoo. c=o o No. C a '0 '0 co a) .. a) w • 7.3 O Oar � N O V NL 7 r C 0)... a) a) pC. 000. >' .rO0 N OO • > p CO'> N CO a C coN NN �N8 " O o Oal C coo d� _Co) p O O 0 .? - C N C a) 0�Q ao N C E `_' > � � O O O 7 0 E °' `- o c •. = c 'd Eo coo L -atim as o o t° •0 •--00 c E 0 aa)i E 'a' E_ n o m 0 -o ••-• ' n. 0 'a C — a7 > L 0 N .N. V • .N d' ILL H •> N C L aa)) s� � m o10 o E 'c o 'c2 ,- o ° 0 0 v w as co U co N < = o 0Et E o . . . d ac H _u coo a) 0 Emy ao` Q = C o `° c EN •o .� . 3 CD R j N Z I a L- N Q X a) -a c s 0)v .c a) '- co a) O O c 10 C) O — c0 0 Q 0 a U a) p c•0 0 pVpo p).c-. N -a so O wp a 0c _c .' 0 0 .L a) v m E L -5 o) 3 a N p V L N E E a a) a) a°.-° a) O `O E .c ea z 0 Ll v 0 a) a N •N � 7 V Cl) • .. as .c co Lel)•- v.. y ca a., t .. a)� L >, -. •T a) � ai c _ p a � o � LL o0rn� 3vrn O O v C L = >. •a3 co c O .c 0 0 O o N as C a) 'a a) C O ° ° 3 i co ' •C -..c -08 a tY '0 a' m 3 ..q > a* cn " � s0 o a� 0 .0 � .N _ c v Ew C2 2 a) . C C 'a C co- a' d • m H m � 0 d = coo0 •a o ° ° � ai o _) - co co isE o — •- E 'aEi, O coa to y iil'a L . _ 0 4= 0 L • .' G.•- .0 L. z N co 0 , E c) V E .- N U c j U o C .- > ... C co a 0 C c O w- .0 -- �X N 0 'a 2 a a) L X C v- — a) a 00 0 . E _ -aa = a) a) a a) a) UocoE X wLu. Eo .� L t�. voa) EocoEClEca .. 2 F- . 11 I II 0 C Q 0 z z 0 0 O .0 N C >6c Z'm` W o CO > 0 (i) On• rn o Q = R o 0 C �� to _c cu L O m >, m a ,� ., O �o C� C� M CO 2 0.a o w 0 O o lQ 0 �_ •' C C 10N "EI`L m w N 0 0 • O O N= 0 _c Uez= 7 v a) 'a m , ,. .mC C > > O C � •7 CO • v C O O = O 0 +-. N 0 = 0 .0 .0 C 10 O 0 =' C 33 C �' C � �'•fdL R N E O N 5 1 C O '' . fA E O LO 0 ° I- 0 2 m C m m O •C . 1-- •c �« .L, LV O ., ; W N .0 0 m M .� m O N .. y :, = C .r as co L a , •. `0 ; m2 '—T. m m ..To ° L :° v ° v v .=+ v .0 • N yq N .,. C m H m m L 'Q m CO v CD c a o a. • vm a o o 2t o I- 7 0 C „ . 0 0 0 < < m < Ti n as as m� 0 o m Nd'75 • N• m v to O +' C � Lmw, a Rr 3~ v ci- a) O O NNNLO co 'C •a m0 D 2 co c y E > 0 , ca O- E C m oP LL moCCcom0 NO OOv ' oX0 € 12 . VO - oW 5 0 ' - 0 2n O '5 m m m • c N m m ° �v E m E = 0- o m oo ,o� oi y7v o' m y = c v Q • 0 C . 00 NNm O C f6 7 iO •y cc 4OOc CS CCoO a, t C = m m m .- m m t flil 92• •c o E t c m aCi v0 �o `� oLrn0L -v'.-'a? o m = 6- .5 u c 3 v .7. .0 m v, m U >. m m g CD a � v 'm ° m •s' c ca v c ° E m ,0 my 3 m w m C = Z C N ci d U '= rn•7 = a0'i D o m '0 7 •> 0 m d C 0 0 m 3 Q '0 CAN v = CO J Ov cO = L cow 2 .0 a) m..r — G. E £ .n O. o 0 . ELL co 0 .0 a J COILI Z L. ILI N +C u. y a u Z j M W rn _ m a CO m b E y � QZ 0 J E4° -5 *silmot Nei" in m x Y• L.a1 N _, F- O a to 0 m ii `- .c >% it; .0 >+fA ifi ( C V m C as • = 73 ° ; 15> i O >+ `vN v C N .0 0 C 0 C > N 24 0C c E > > E C c c 7 ++ C 7 O 0 a) w, m p o 7 N V 7 N V V w v 0 0 0 a) 7 a) 0 a) 7 S ; O ` `s N 7 + R 7 C Z . o 0 c = U.j C in O -E m L V 3 m 0 0 V 0 m a o o 44 0o = o 0 . .y p = 0 . V 0 0 C V v 0 C Q 0 C L O C L 0 0 v o m aci c 3 - d a? 3c a> y W ` 3j L Is M C bH C N �- 0 j/j �E 7 p 0 p y 2 7 ii L L N N .o m N M ... 0 0 0 .0 .� C) 4 -,-_- a) O C .r 10 C O a. 0 d S o` 3 a� c 0 u. a) `0 3 3'c R is. X e t m c c F0- s5 aa) m � `OD c a) I' .o v v 1 a N E V 0 N coC .'' V cV •0 .� V O L .� v L co = a E N :9 .. = = 0 m = 2 0 '1' U m as as a 0 c4 o = as 0a aU. ma O. a 0yt a � L moa� m — t a) a. N (U j cove V erg ,, >,0 un 0 0) a 1- o � � > c 6 N 0 E C . a3 E O co O L 7 E 0 v N 0 0 .'C.. Nun. E 3 >+`,- . M � 0 ^ 1.0 O 4 .y O N •• I:0o 0 IL) C ivsZ1�a " R 2a�i2' nu .. L _ ra .- m M Net 0 O ,S 7 O Q 0 O U u) m U. o '- NCIas 0 '0 . 01— u. N Z 0 w �+ !aS co z Z Y W J O 0 g J 42 O m v = earn O 0 ° arn Q E � .g? rn F- EEap' P .E -0 �- 0 .0 Q cra e- L. • i 1 i 'ftie vale ccco o cmm y y tm. & N 13 ,,F m X R 0 m L '�- L N. X �� .• y + v N L 3 •_ _ In In N N O C a O N m X X X r m O C �S X E O N a =la o H c Q.a•fyd S o j L l0z•' m 0 ._ L f00 . : : O G. O oa O ~ Q s N 0 _ O 0 °L'' 0 10 L. a) L and N y a) � 3 f mL.L. 0 y t. r-.y (0 L CU O -Co 1 a moN _co0 ., +� oa) w0 „ 0 Oi al Z OIv �. L ' aol-0 H m '° L. y c 3 '3 .. •• " c R o et 0� L y • �t'{j L to 0 • M O C P. t. ., m C c ca y R ., O � •a N •0. > Odim L V ` 0 m '; 0 V.... t0 � O O . m 0 m vm . Fs R m asco � � • ‘-COLL2 ot - U ' cs� o cIc � � o --0 E v 0.)i 2 N T a>E t_ C E ' c a v. H . c E N a)_ 0iLUE ma ma o0 a3 • cO i; 03y mN y (I) m N LNt. in Cg O0C > U C _ > a e0 10 O 2 = a: w L • 3 0 `O la a) e0 O L 0 nt m 7. m auk) c m a a a-n' g a a - L x �? c 3 m a a) m L m y .0 0 L c L. 0 cc L c m m e m ,- 0 m .0 ,C d C C �, .0 a) 'Q 0 y m V m co 08 , m i E E 10 i . E . D y . R y J 0 am+ m '5 a •L c0 m 0 �- 4 10 'i a) 4 02 - O O N m 0 N m m N 4' rt GR a. 0m = t. Qa a m. a. I t.) L CC .- a) CL O Q ea) O m 0 "O N. aj co N c a) ,•O- y0 ww cu cu y L. E m M v c mN !O p O L N i co t = O v-. N 0 a) • it. .1) C 3 roe yL yea c Osma� Of0 •a z' 0E cCm ) O N Vrn L a) co m B O` — .0 _c 2 m m Qp1 0 W c co N 3 . b 4- - 2 rn coon) a) .o a U) y ' N v a) L. = u 0 44 U) 0 W V m y Wit " O N t N r 0 v 0C t. C t. E coo E .at p d m m C v O �0 O y 2am E. .° o i 3 a c'. 0 (n = N C 0 0 w �, CO w0 ••00 co -a w (O 0 ) Cl) _= = a �' m a . • ab W C L Nov Noo., N P. J c LO , ' CO p a i u) CO m c m- N c COh 000 Q O O v L. O c CD O > CD = N O .c w O N �- L (O .. .3 •EC � N w y O O O = O `= Op Or + .0 to' Y `O n.ui DACal � D) O iO EN ici N OTCD � ti � 00 � CA •-• ,- r ,- r L 0 OUw > c4-.,', >+ C m � O 0 00° i{mw2 -a N COO V O V 0 EO EO 0 , N 0 .c „ P U N o 3 y .O} CO CO al CA CO e- CO j0E- N _ N fO . • � C m co f NwO U CO � to y e y >, .Lw , . _cr . — _c - L � of • >. O O O .-. O NON ° CO .0° ° O :0 aV 'O 'a O 8 •- v 0 0 8 E U R ' cN>? O3 33P 3 ' 3v3v3 ., x ? A c EN 0 ' P -0 '0 0 ` my g -0m E3 Q J � JJJJJJJN ON N ° O corn 0 } ›- >- ›- }- ›- QCOf/) C E (nr. u. W ccu a. C a) .0 >+ O (O N 0 = C N 0 N •-• `4. r' O •,-• VJ N• N C in 0— O IN O Z `O c V! 0 O N `- • p V d c '-- 7 Cn co to � 2 C to N O L. V O m N VVcN L O W.. 3 N ti- G) 0 N t^ O V IO 00 a CO 'p N O O V X (O co Cu ° co_ fl d •Cn m c e a ° O 0 v E O E c v O C O O N COO -c-• N Q o Z d V u. ID .c O >, co in c) O. re 'ON 7 0 0 N. O N NZ s- - . a- L = O CO 0) 0) g : E C s- O CO v � O A -co c 4 w CO c in Y •C 0 4 E N N -a C 15 N CD w < CO a) U V C C 0 C) w co I- ( z w Q. F CO Q N I Now' Nor' • to o a) 6 _a) Mtn w 3 C7 0 C�+ Cl' 0 CAN C .V) � .o ' O 0 N N N ... > V C p- 0 N w O a) ta0 , .0 O t\ t` -co C To" .0 O C Cu s in O O u) co C N to r N C -O D OIL_t1) co co X as O X i( N C N C -0 y x !< )C CD w .N ' 03N O y OC O H � � N N U � C w y 1N N 0 pF- L S ` O O : . L O o O c co O . - o N U Cu ... Cu U) N , 0 O C C c Cl)• N Cl) «. U) O E .. ,a- m U) m .a � 3 � `0 3 on ,O �- Cl) 'L° o -- o m • — a) •o C o R Q � E .� • � n > t � n C 0 y a) >, E g "_- co 8 � X a c U) o too m Cu - Uj O CU O U) l6 C ate. C(lpnp U a 0 C O O •C V CD m N C N t.C_- U) O Q m 0 co ' U 0 = N p y sa) mNg; E i- Z a�'i > O E m O co U •C O O 0 2 0 r �'+ CU O To N E co 0 2 N O 2 C • • Cu _O C U cc •_-. ate-+ V O 0 Cl) c U _U C U y : U) m c � E rn 2 ._ 3 ?r - o po3 N O O O U N ` N 9 I) _N U) m > CU Eo a) Q O O O 0 m `F- N toy- ... co cE 3 G NV 0. cAM � ` O > > BEN a �- o ti O V coOO Cu R ON wU= ia. 0 RN H! U) C M CO .,,, :a- 4-• U i .O- U= u• Oi N C C N c20 N N N o m U .0 O O O O E O to U) CU m U) 3 E m a' ,a a o ._ 0 .0 0 E C � � a) Co o ` m m 03 vOi C '= O Op Cu C w0 cC) O 0 H m O i Z N CL X W c0 .0 O co o 3 C) O E. O r' ce (-4 CC V e- V N CD trz cp (NI ..- -� >, 0 E U) U) O >. a) a) U 0 0Y 0- > Om a:' CA O N N O -� NN0V 7 15 6 - _m N — U O 0 ... n N .O co CM U can� c . L - • • •C'to' oa . co `N Uc) E 2 co Ca) MO O C C t ..,- "C) lr O �' dUZ7VI j 0 CU ,- NO3 N O ' N 0 OI VEOU >, D co Va 4 N0 ° L U m C oCNU C a > 0 cu two c � � v a° a0� 'c E • O co .0 Q- E Cu cL i-. ' Rfl o M Lt. ! � v a) m° mo oso $) 0a) ED rn � a)• ti 7 — U) CVV v0) cv '3 m co -0 0 0 m 0) o 0. 0 o ff c� •a o aa)) m •a) N To _ Y ' . O U - U O L0 L.. N C Cl) v0 0 C U O 0 to ,._ C U O O `O CO O 0. cU U O ` Cu0 C > O N 0 0 0 N DQI NN O = Qw -0 n.0 N co wE O co .E co = O .� -0 W... 4.• IZ, N Q C L. 0) O la as ; ld ~ 2 'R _0- F- 4k 0 4y E > N Z 0 C m 0 = C 2 n L S.c f` toce C � � Z Z aim N C Q :° J _E O E2 _U .,�' a 2 } C.) Eu_ CO 2 o2 = a—r V • C -0CNI„- c0 4 c o co co C7 8 y O O m �O co O 'C U) E "- 4►�- a) x O > O O _C _0 O V Op > 8EoN ,N y TC o y O - M co U ^ x 0 m m m 0 .0 - U a) o 2 = Cav) cm .0 c � L coo Et in O N= .0 E t m 0 j am) Q - p •Ca• coC_ coo - NocN CO aa))CD v S 6 o co 4= '' as o 03 .0 �N V H ijfl huh m cD r v m E E - a) vi ea day) O co0 .a• ° 0 of'-0v avi C 0 Q• cov 2 ;o cv .ca E cv •m0 m ' L cv ' n . coW vc > N cc00 o 03a) a) OCvOOL c, CO >. E - ..-- � . 0 O> O a Wc E C co aaNv a j 3 // tn- a co OYLpV = C Uy `)C Ds = O .0 O ' C N m ci) w v- m � ac) NG) N c) Cc co c � '►- ? O 0 m ,� •41-000i- N O E > > •C C N O a) "' — C O .Oi`►- C G y O Q V O O CCgOC) ._ w (`� . — � a) coL O _ cg = U) O Ea. •.—. E as o .Q c E'N U O co •V > O N C O` a) O O t) mow N O v C7 o > C Cct/ O a) Y'sL N O yN C U c0 j N L7 si v "2 E 3 N_ '1" ay) � COL'' gn. U) (D -`) cC miii .V) mNCO.n2CC V ci COO ca L `►- y — '0 = § 0 O 0 .0 ,, m yo y m > •p ._ OL O O C y co E °' O _= •.c 00 = -- _ a) c a �0.c V m , D V c 8 a) E o ° c »- m c c E a °° a c* -E a) 0 N v 8 m � c� E cei Ct O .c i° a >.N a) o c cn m f• v, o � c3 .— „' gym ' = o— v o 3 o o L c � 0 U �' O.fl a.m. O O. c c d C V 0 v +. y a; m p) c m E m •a Q. mc -c o — m mco m o "-. c U m •c � my co E v, �i $• a) m Et Ts • •�v a) c Et c ca c yv2 -° s coti Ev = o ._ E a) E m m c o 0 3 c N y o N O` co a) ym R m V ? co O N O aEi O O a>i U N co W 0 co � v o o tL y = J & . coy N E ,� 0) m 0 CO U 0 '0 c o o m NI' C T U V ct CO CO Z Ce Z Q 0 Z w r C o H e �Z- m 0 03 CP III . § o0 m a 2 20u: w m w 0 a) -a a) a) a� arc c N am '= o 0 g _ ti to M V = E E E E a.c r H w a cC E rn Q Q E_ o Z Z : . u. Q v w o) c p - a) _ Via) R N .� � � � aS 0 N o — J c p V L O N E 0 N L To- C 'N N IL a) U E G. y N a c c co R o N .. y M O m N 0 _ o_ G a) �. Ce m o •> a) c o a > : N 0 . ' 0 > 5 3 N a) = - o. Q � C � co �oo E -0 0 Ca nr 0 , 13)c co.c - -a t � >_ `N y ` N oo•C 0 0Ce C C � U 4% a) d c vo- L. c ago c � 0v 7 c`0 m 0a✓m O i c0 070O '- o 0o a 1- C . _ CON E � w00E .. EQ 0 ' .N '� co>. co o -0 0.00 f0 '0 0 >, o a) '0 = a) d 0 m ) 0 o oW ° E t m CO c o 0 a 0rw • a) � :o m c= o o m � � m 3 E0 a) .. a) � = rt0 � C 0. C) " '- Qa) to c m c a- .. 0 TILE a) .0 N s - ,� o = _ >•oo �O N 0 •03 'C L. 200 a CO Icao a= > � mcC) mCd � > c car�, a_ .a E - • a to o a- ,S - :.Ci3 >-. my c a) N m _ O 6 ." N N 07 N Nr N C C = yU 3'� C O 4)CL O Y m 10� Cf?O • E \° N "L-' 7 O = N O. O U 'i+ca y 1 �1SCL 0 U. T m O vi a E . 0 d d • E r0 !`► a)V a=• 0 N .o ch -c C O 0 c QC = o co a as 0 N C = U N O X 1U g d N O �' C7 M ,v V C c m d c o = a C .cr C M .0 2 o f avi 'v O flU N0 0 — C4lln E > � E �: 6 a`) o 0 H2 c.3 c�c0 > atom oC » CC = m a01- v- o io H •yC LI r C o V a) o c ti o U) .4 Vjr(/, ce Z Z 0 o � Q CI Z I I- z N y E m Q5p) i i 1 i I . stagy Iwo .. a) Ci c . ac) o O. (U '0 co E ita. co • a) a s 6 N ti N C 0 p c O U N O N w- O a) N N ._ C C N U O O .- �' O O to O O a) 0 x if; ENE co co a) - O O8ncN 0) a) o) O O C ,_ a) O (.) O as fo C O O O 0 N c N .0 0a)• cn N 0 M . C C 00 co r 0)Q .0 .0 0 Ni. — NI- 0 coo ▪ m0 6 .e a) Od- c) = try Qc tr tr tr XN = 0 000a5 0 , 3 .c CU ' 0r-tL w N a) a) W Ti a c/) co 0 -c v Q. UO. c tr to w- tr co v coo o a) c/) .0 c to . c as N tel C N C w WC R) c co 3 zscmg n. o co a) OCc�o30 > 3 3 O co N -0 •C a) Q.e- j `- '�„ O W .L E o. a) oLo v .c c -a 'c m e ._ v a) w • a v7 0)a) ma) 'EE8 Via' is c 0 a) Et o � y sa 2 � crn tic 0 V y O O 0.. N N x C ( E m .E a a o) C 0 C co '0 as = ms C O > 0C N ° e- =3� _ '-) & Ys. /) O t W N • V n ,. +' O, a) O a)O a)O O 0_ C O fl O G 4 V � " O cQ c c oL O t) 0 C 0 `�d' '1. c2 • `2 : E ca) IS 'wai U U U co -� aci 3 coo E cQo � E '- � � ct ce tL H a) E »(I) '_c w E V = 0 0 U a) 0 a) Z CZ I- 0 0 J E J a V coC 3 > > tY Cl) U) Q Cl) 111 Ce V . Q cc) o �, 0Z ^ O CO n 0 co M 0• 0 = E = t ? �' f • rn rn U 8 _C a) 0 N x 3 V c0 A O O LiJ O �, y CC Ca a) •C 0 N c I 1- J 1. C N co -0 o yr "r O v Q .OoeO 00u) L- 03 U U V U V a) In L Y a w. 'O .— tn coog) O co0Na'U '0 C9 CL 0 a) - 0 0 C L xv N a) a) Z a) Q0 nu_ co cow co co 2 Cl) Cl) -1 v) 0 >- w 11-- Z 0 a) 'a QC 0 C7 O c I as w d - )Z 5 , - a -Z Lk ° W F- m �, sa N E c— E O h a Eo. � �, a. 0eQtO a g 0E a04g,H2 Ero D - Gte6 OD -at) ` CZI ° Q Ca 2 N J t.9 ' OW ° tL 2.3 I v >, O � CD C cc m y e0 N c C . E a - .t N -41 N• COE c0 m O• 25 KRaOm Nm .cc m co + = V c c 1• .- -O •p 0 c0 (2)O8 m 3 m N0 7= O y 00 C O ▪ � U O r- C m N *' 0Cm m a) 0 o E >. O .aNa .a . O OC ._ c0 F•' (cu O O N 132mc2 m O. m 'd Nt 5 vN L aL co co C 0ctanc= 2 2 Hf co in c re No a� vY m o — E c 2E Ec� - L m m mo — co n o — O o L m •c o .., o •c „_, is. co a C m m o) °C m QO : U. R C >, LL 0 O � aw CA aO a aN O co coO n -0 8 3C c co c C -IC co C= 4... � mmN . m mC m N _ a C N t0 C CN0 c 'C d O . ON 0 pp mOm mN `O0 = C _s_ c 0� 7 O'O C • c - Of O 8 C C O m m VN 6 -C -0 O mcc mcc N = OC • m = :.0O coN L = � m 0 . o a- CoOL4L7 . co — _ N To 0 8 N E �m .cL0N 0 N N m D a asU O O N Uc V C O OO 1 d cm O tL > Id to E m C D -4 c0 D CO co � CO NU .0 - m - m a N N N .NX CL • ii CV e C O _c mN m co CO co L0 .c 5 .0 O O c c 2 0 C pp CO > C .O O c0 Nr C O C C O OV y Na L NN _CL O m z, e O 0r r N cn � ' CC _ _ 0 C?• CEm m CO m C 0 m cQMor22co o oo — L c Cl) c? n.cmOfNC en O 0 o - - O O NU mE » L w > > O E m• m m m m m 0o00 LO ) mmm m ►.. L m 0 m2 m m m m2 0Vv co LL m To' vvv a. > > CC 0 0 > > X pO LO m «O- C 0) y.0 4; > L0p. °�r: • l o.r O LN �NCO � oL v 3E0 € M c ' = a >am co3a p om . � c •` 73a v 5(u > ccoN � fEco-40O NtNNmY O a m 0 2 O O . . m m 0) mmNxco- D -0 O O N7 N Om CCCO co 1/42 O' N oc LL N v N S. L O a 7-1 O N "z O p ' 9 N C .0 a' c o 3 •a• v) o COL cv o o • L vc > y v v ce B � c 0 ' aaicca00, -- - 80.00.0wAD'v -om Q a � H t9r c� 016COo = � 2) Ewop0Noogao m •. c0 — 0. > >.Y L m EU N 7 I m E Z a O .c N O = W m c m O m � m 2 6. m 0 0 b m m Cr) d b 0 c0 Cs Cl) U. Co >,N N ca.-.E. ov Ev a.v aa..aw � N Cl) v) o F- co • w CO Q a o o ZB. .ac _ a a = mY I- ` L N 0 3 c - Z a) —E 17. `m `m 0 as L c _ a O. c� re w N c� v c� U) 0 N ca a) - N 1-6 Ca 0. N a3i cQm E .0 wT3o NmoL � occo � ` ca) 4 " y 'a U N .> a) C O N O > .o = L E 00 x N N cQ N 'O c'? +L-+ O L T C C g o c `) CA U N 0 - = N N - -0 U O N U N 0) aj C a) `7 O N C 6 a) to s ca •c C C — 3.0. O c0 _N c L O = C +L-' N tll 'O N ? a) N O 0 T C76 Y O Lp��. j co O V > 0.�- a) w fl C 0 `F- C ta!- 0 � Co> U 0 O i (..0 N CO 0)O 0 ` ' N' a) Co Oc -o 0) O N C O C co -- C C .O �.+ to' O N 0 N O 0 ,ct' -a '0 O r E a « C C N -Op O +L.+ E • .c c U N a) N Q. O c C co co fc) 0 (6 C ` W 0. N :E co -O 02 '� L L O N 0)-- O L 0 0• Y C C) O — O 0 O U _ 45 7 C N Q) C 0 O .V a7 t € N C - w ,' > C N o °)rn c a>) ° , 2itil 0 0 UciE � 0 2 0rD 0 3 o .LD, °)c E `N o i-e5 t. 0 N v co— O 0_Q. p •0 0 0 N Cl) .L+ C D Z G U a .L N Co 0 N 0. U O N O c 0 U a) Tco C o)N ,ta) 0 ; — L Q co N ' . a NL tUg O-0 '= -c ` o O C -o= vo O C N 0. O > _ w coO 0) O - c . C N o C aL N 4 N co -c, czNO tC.a) pLEt - -a•€ W O ,_ M>, " O v- co a) .— m N N N Q) -0 C>COO t3 wXUoco• > 0 O N cati � ovo. C- •° w aicaa,� CCsI ov � a) Z o • o a) � co o a) 0).0 a) .0 o O N 0 O C C °) as UN Uo � a c m_ y a) co Loa) wc� 2Rag � ti Z o .o o co Q 0 ti s C .+ .+ N ., •o 4 WO C0C O0) O *+ a� pfl N 0 V .cO � cm Oc = v-1c O pfa = c " a) — o cv co a "c_ a 2 -c •, •p vom U N'O NN t L .y a) Ya) y +>U• cot �O" E + Vc)' O O La)0 L O _ > o e- N a) a) — � N •• �GC a) c _ 'N O C ` LC • al L 't U co 8 N NU 'oc 8 N CD T=C ACX '' dco � �O N N C 2. 0 _ 0 c , rn _ � -0L O Ny50 `) O30 0.,° / a) 3 rn — , � o - don oUN c 0 = o o o . -0e . mC tnw ocCc > � wavO oCa .C ?' O Vi p) ¢ O O OUcoTt= O '- N oL _ cp -Ca) _E_ IT Yf C + cNNa coCwELNC'- � 8af_. .8L ° ti$ v im o / 0 0_ - o) OvOU Co `- C O— O 0. d P N •L tD -0 a > co •(7) C€ .a 8a) c` •caS Ng« v- n � O c -0 - 3 .- o § Z oN � o �0.>, >oc&- o0a N O0f° c .D .2L ° 2 .cau a) cTo 1a) .c .c § o Co N a 0. _0 o c Z Va 0 3 .0 N of 0 a t .L c9 .-. 0.U' c . i Te O N co t7) 4. T N d' To N T LU co m oo I— Z J co CV Z Q m CO CD L C ti to �+ '�.''- x W H � O < 4 O N . a) — co •0 r- L to p .2 W pC p O C C >+ O Fa �. 0 w 0 ++ 3 + ai 0 0 0 c a) 0 :. 3c N � ooN E• cpL ccca) 5 .c co"E °):° 08b c 803 -5N •n2 c p C V .. coC N IS C a' 0 'p > > >+'m 0 = a) • .,. Ce > N X � •- L 0 O 0 C.L 0 t)t r'C.+ 'E a 88E0a-. 0Eo ; >, c •E xcv �m0g to c0 V � , = hp N oc "' a ° c = comLcv. 0 ax) 0 0 .. to C E t4r 2 os 0 to o .. co p 0 0E20 * s 0 ° • m" 03 � smcc- a0 in 1- 0. c, cuO 00 E 0 Q u, c 3 0 co cot O o — o N C •`= U L cQ O t 0 0 O Q 0 •O 0 i Comm ai0 oOCC -t6 o co a 0cv = rnwa) y = 3c c§ 000oc c 0 0 •13 0 :. 3 c a > .. o o OLL �, E co ,� co c) -c c o) C rn 0 0 ° - -- 8 a) 3 •v -) , E E .._ (A r, • v c •c co 0 c w cm 0 c > >1 • co •c 0 0 Z 42 0 th o 0 O 0 ? rn m ' x 2 •c m .0 -, ° cc = m N 5 � 6 8 02' Q N O y •,� 0 p 0 7 N y C U N .. O C �/y a) 'D .0 vL�... d 0 L �' 3 co C O c O O •' t61 L c0 0 O O Z EOp o00a) E — a) cco p 0 � c a c a ac°i 0 E 2 � c • � oc `mc § = c L co c`d -o cp - a= C L '` w L v- V L i 0 O L C O .� to W e- 2cUco 1- E. rncamEO QcoOa 00v- ca -o 0 cov`- coo ‘- 0 0 Z om o .c c i j o 0 5 (D co a) •b N °- -- co •v y m N o 4- cm-0 c _ 0Oc22 op v • 00 CO �- 4 N E 3 115 a c C c 03 S O W yk.. N x c o N yN 0 0 2 .' c0 O cQ 2 N N 2 N c0 E O 0 O c6-Cp " �fa 22 a Ce CC�� w -C >•• O = 0 U `p E .= o O .J H th •X n O = a.0 0 co a. Y) O p fa 0 a) Z' C O — 0 co w W C 9 N O 0 a Ja 00 OL OO _V 7co m ,.. 0 N .. cap co _= `:., _co L re L N L. O N > p O u) C •O O ° 20 = N O Z E Z' O C u. "3 .0+ To:, 0 XX O v CO of VC 00 O3O 0CCO Z' 0 2 'O — L N 0 E a) p0 O v W to 0 L 0 N L O L 0 C) Z co Q N N .0 i- Cp I- CO zG CO G co Z m W 0 2 W o U. = 0 . w E 4 C) E d Z H E z 0 M Q gi = E c.44 0 d of _J 2 *kW NIII1100 L 0 _ a 0 L V- E t �•• '0 0 i 0 L O 'L' N 10 "- O 0 c0 N 0 0 N co 0 O `- O c0 N mtL '> t c`o o 92 c6 1:30m m 3r = c (" ° 4 L o a? c- a) aa)) 3 -t o 0 Q)a 0 >. c o r o o E .. c .- o 0 0 0 ' c8 0 w o o EZ co 0 .._ 0 3 w -9 O a. 0 E N c0 cB .0 i t L L O E N N Lt c c v g 0 0Z ai c8 co 0 a� N_ -E 0 °? n o � oL ai �° co m E a� 3 _N 0 ► CO Nen •c '0 _C D N O` C '0 E 00 in t O 'r= r- N w '0 C _ U O` C_ U E a N T7 O C CQ A N O Y >+C O .0 C 0) O i- N C C >.'E N O - - TZ° 0) a) N _ 0 C O 0 0 0) U 0 0 0 •0 0 0 C 0 c0 'C o 0 0) U ' N E 0 N 0y N 4. Oo z 0 N 0 >' co 0 .O � co O UN a 0 N 0 >.ca cc 0 X U as O 0 0 a• 0 ,.....,- O., 5 L `0 0.L ` 2 a aJ 0 O O 0''�1 .�'.. a) O 2 :0 co a7 N 2 ' 2 .t � c E4' t 0 O O c9 cU cL0 N 2 D E L . a. Z 2 .0 N M .0 .c a. N C7 a co a. N 0.N O U N . N CM.0 L 0. N 0 U. N 0. N E L vyO� �j .'r "- E O C a N C N O 0 a - 0 sm 0 .2822a) 3 E . y w >., c c80 - '5c co .523m o z z Ro OcC -oa O '0 oN C > wF- 3 t • c = -0 w o o 0 ocr-o pa $ aio0Cuco a c5 co LL W Z i) V) E a20 E O 2 0 0 Z N ... N *5 0 0 O C OO e- 0 O C OO Z co 33 7.N E N Y �� " N E w Y >,4- N r '0 CU N c0i .c 2 N E N V ,J N O N 2 7 .a R) t 0 R P. 7 L cC) t — N p_ " O CO c0 0 0 121 N O CU O O N ti-. Za0. a 0 . C0 >O >, O C.0 >+ 0 W NY c d ` co L. 1- 2 c .a. L cU N U c - N a 3 co 1- - N a 3 0 0 a E a) o E�« `' ov 0 � •- o `- o o •- o coo w 45 -0 a) c o .'. 0 cv 0 0 .'. n. >- C) - yO. E_ C rn ccoaE c. p a S 0 — N N c O co C 0 N s c o C V a) N t — E d O >O ) — 0 p u. U ..8 0 _o a .'8L _o a J Q C 0 a N w. N a) a N .+ 32 N m4N- "L' g 8 `O3OOc G) 8OLCOOOc C) 0 0) NBC aO .... O a N4C aO O '= O C N 0 0 U Q L N N U 0 0 0 O 0 0L co .• o ° mC� co .- -c o U. .+ 0 �0 0 V L 8 a) 0 0 -0 •a 0 'a) a) u) a (0 N = w 3 m _ E � w 3 N co E co Q v Oa, = c00No 0 a= cOov) o 0 Z >. co co (0 L •0 �. N co 0 R) .0 '0 s... N CI Z Q F- U) 1111 'a u.00 c 0 p ti In Ce E i as cv 0 2 03 E E E _ _ o0o 2 GI 9fk / / E ° _ ? .._ az - t % � gfc4 2 k5 . L-cam .c5 2 '7 2 $ . £ 0cq Ck7 / # c2ok $ 7q � ■ f2f kd § n3 - 2 0 tco 2k= C c250f9 a / 0 usc.q@S0 £ ■ 2 - 2 .CNVo_ Cl) # o � A ■ > cac f m 2 7 � f $ / co /�2 � �� k0 9 co £ ■ ■ _ 2 n 2 E ° c � 02 / � 4 / � � � • © ■ 2 $ f kd § > § § _§ v g @ o 0 \ 2af 22 - 4- d ■ . � — R2£ J k - 2f q 10 � # e 0 6 2 k c 7 N __to is P _ct,= 01 � m - 2 o o w m - 2 co -0 = co & COL. � § d Lb ƒ o _1 o . � � co ■ � § 4 # 2 $ 22 -a P 0 f § 0 2 < - N 0 9 2 2k moo 02 0 0c _ 0 0) 2 ce & 02 . 4 k £ kce k 0 2 < V- I- -Q � E 0 z ui a 2 0)co ® 2 ® W � II I < co 2 re R 2 -0 w ( Q . ± t § J > 002 § 0 « COXCOF 0 O w O N0) -o0o y _ � � yN0 = a- : v.s a) 6-N M o f-- C us N a3 C O E 3 N r - o� � Z o 3 o rn Cl) a mo u . 3 c N 0 C U co N Co N OOQ2 m d ca C w cco N � 43 'Cr)aC .� CE (o -c co , u. N - cov c2 t6 0A = N 0 '8 c O V cw ai o '5L co cs 8. N c . o N o a,) a� pZ c N ` 3 a a� cos c aw c o > E z aoxi N 5 E o y o XL � v ' g0Z , mv E Id c m r-. o, o) a) w N V _� x to m v c C7 aip .. 0 c C Z c � 3 o as .... -0.° -0 a) o� 0 e ` c .NX .cycv)� mmv w Za) 0 cnmS 0 pc oc) = D _c0co 0) G sd CD a.0 Z CO -- c'4 co (!) d N as c o Z `o c Z co coai a) O a) 0 3 op c cu N _oN � pC d U) Q > oc = cc v L. E re o m .c `• 5 v 5 .QN -Q — ai 2 o a) cuOI ill O 03 L. N v V_ N o Z (�D Q cC0 a co C ce C a. N O a) Cyv, 00 C 0 N ..p.. CO m... C c i LL O 2 .c c C w QU a= �ao «. 3 ` _ c ..... a3 I- m co O o a) °' a • 3 0 y o0 -0 C °D 4 C F- 0 c o in '> v 'rn 20 st. co o o cn L 2 .5 c as C I-- cri Z cooa.0oo> ' w o � o o $3o W m m fl 0 NZ Oto O 't7 d QJ C E w „ of E .0 I.z W V m .1.+ 0 E Z 0 Z To .ca nt 0 -' Z d 2 P. 20 Q Ill - E 0 t p 'A• E 0 V w 2 Nre I Z . Q 4 -J L`1 i. _ _ 2 � k � z $ d x _o 2E ° 222Ts02 a c » 0 0 __a k m § v*co E z � g . §� D.■ � ' � kacgE k 0 • ■ _ - 15.4 � a, 8 / -0 / � 2 22ZK� » x < c • 2 , 6a /c�22� ° � 9 § ° • 22 _ _ co 0 .cv � Ek - O2 ZCCu. Qk ,- @ 0 £ t CV z CO § � ■ � aco k !i: \ I ■ k : § 2 c �� . - c tx a k cx 0 0 z g e77 :2000 0 � e 007777 £ RR • , 0 � £ 2 O. 7 0N- o A § » U. E ■ a E = o.- 13 c ■ = D • 2 2 2 2 2 £ o E 2 - o ■ 2 > w . 2 . § E22E 2kk ƒ � vv � � " » - v to 1- ■ § 9° § © § (0 V � 22 > 0 § R = . V , $ @ - 2a� le- r- 2 ii al COO � � - emuI_ .. a) �� 1- v .= 0 •- O C m `yQJ� 0 4". (� O �+ C V NI 2 .r > V O to O (0 - N _ C .►. 0 /e�( N L L LL (p 0) -- o.'� 3L 'o >. 8 - - ' 8 dm c0 � 03 � w •.: ii) m U U Nw 2- — 0QN ' f0 pc � ""' � 00 f) - C1 C _ Zco -• O O .N C coC C) O 0 f_6 N O m O N • N C = 0.L y Q a°it a) 1 v n 8 oz x H R � o CO c cmi c � V1G) t O0 0 '0 0 C L O o cLi' O y O Ceir N G) G) 0 W N O > 5. to ..0 co o f oC 7 'y CC 0 3 u) .f C G) O co O• C O Ew a c ai o2 Z co 2 'f zit mfu: c o c_ c`Oo Z GJm' 0) 0 (.. .c . w _ 0 coo c) Z o 3 m c°)) c � w cto c � � rn N w L. flU G) t[) N � � ems- mr' ON d C � CO 0. - V N p c!0 GC) 2 C N 0 0 C 8 C ce o 0 O 4. 1� 1 o o 2 - Ce w V 0 G) C. CO N .0 V (0 ) > G) 7 y 7 r, m 3 m C �' ( C •0 2 co U = O o C cu co G) a) .0 N cc m .0 V • m s.0 O O r O O G) - v m > o y -0 o c G) co o � !g,y . C 2 D. 4= 6 c O ai ° Zv " 33ai vOin, z0Sce , Zc01LW� S. ccv -oo Z U c G) G) o _co c•C -• c°)i � � D O c � � F-• c 0_'5 0 C G) Y -O o u. G= N O CO LL r- Gi., t6 N O C �} = t .O F. a' m � � c`o c n maw 4 N W0 0.— co NULL .c o 'a) ym CT 0 ti N 0 C Q V m 0 0 (1)) ° 0 w N o c 8 o 'Pc ix o L O` w � IXw o a N N °o co) 0 E vr-- - x -o x ww V. N co c o E x > Z V Nt o CO 3v '0 (0 •V G) , w � , d 7 0 m 0 mu) = :se O � �Fa. G) > >y �c ocoo G) .o � w� C � V 'a �et ojLOCo XXaaiOG) L O 00p G) O G) O O co O O V O Z G 0 ,t7 Tr C .� Oa) MNOO N 14:(1) x Z0L .... 'O0..0 - 2 ,- cN0. Z — .2ire- 0 a. cc N .cN -0o O InE G)W Gam. c000 F- LQ °o c a) SO 0 t2 0 >. 5 asE 0 = od v 0) E E E � E CO .= C m m a0. b a Q 2c. 2 2 C.) a < 00 i 'emir NNW' N p. N 0 CD ..0. a-g Z'0? 0 i :.U-�. co a) N C N C NO a' t m VN 00 0 �� 8 � � oCI 5 ai .. w V o -p CO v) Co c c oU W .-: o• = 0 .«. o Rom. CO a' 0ry Zv �- a) o0 -Ck Z �- haim aoi _oaci o4 .sow '= m 12 0 .4N. O 42 v 46 C C o.-C j t C4 2cu) N U0 7 V CZ N N H Cl) 0 co ' Cl) .. 0 a= .r CO «+ .. �I- COCo 'O L p 0 Z G' CO N O .Q C 0- X C N (i. C,m p N p 2 d E 0 0 N 0 O N me 2 y o E a' "Ni V' Cl) g o CCaOO 2 0 2 `° Z' 5" X m Eve• 0) CO COp o vl Cu C •y Co $ a) a o (a CO Q V C N CO NOS G co ritnc`o cc = .o�'. Z cdm `D .alnM w c 0 FL- co 373E Zmm .1t CD 0 Z o 9 `r o z co Ni o v o a Q > C . c° o v' N L 0 V C O 0 0 O cp W a) = a' 2 Cl) a) CO5 (6I E N .`" O3 0 ,--Z 4 ce ci! U0 ac' O re H N a) 10 N = CO -cc3 o 0v C a) 0 0 Cu O N C o L CO F C v' = F- ccN a' 6 c c ' • O QX � aV = C30a QNp0 m N T ° - co A O 0) O � N v a UZt3 V ea' E N E N o • NoC -ocG Cto ts —At c € C � g : E o v oz � o o a u)) a' 5dNcoC polo a) iia`)ia'c'g- ciUEOU) U)2 I-- = t. o = v m1-- CO0X' = CO acan0. 10o W v '0 a `og c 0 O ti m o O W Z 11Jiil0 Hi5N I Q K E. ° _c g : O 24 = ms 4100 NNW N a) I a) a) N o N .C. " co la " y •C N N Ula O v0 ' »� p ` 01 fn N m a 0 0 N NW._ L C c' a).0 > m a co a U ma) CCU .0 '- C _a co m c a co o 3 c Ca> a) RN ° - � . N .c - C (I) . 00C ich - NN - NOC ZQ ) a) = c0 Z a a) _ > .C ?= OV - Cl)Naco � N c c � Na a °, • No = rns vpONZ x - E i_ aCm nc� v aL.° f0 � c -C E LTn ri, . ms 0. 0 8z c° • aN u .- oCDc d Ea Uof 'r • a)N N di CD C U N a) .) - i' V T.) 'N Ill ° N � 0mCYCNO' > NO p C caCG) o O p v v O - —0 I- E1 i. CO Q - a `* a. -aa 0 C l- N O Z CO 10 U � c° a) C a) WW) d C cn m N "' HflL cQvY � • �3 = Tiii co 0 m�- ° a>) Vo cO -° N 5wv o 0 a) .c 0)w W ilf c 0 6 a 1 ._ •vc cl c (1) m 0 2d c � 3 N € rno N 2 a) � L N > 3V aa05 aNiu> > O > c a co NL a m o ° > to c m 0 `- m o V Nc) a CN 'ONCL r , 'v) . .0C •oceZ •aa. .. a) I. ma) m a - , c ° U. y E 2 n_. -C cg a) a co .0 .0 a +'. N U N C V10-°->11 aVaai2a>) cmi v, c�°o wa o � �>o zz0 X v o 0 Da) 0) QO a C m 3 3 ,— y c '3v N E 3 a) ° a rn _ N a) ° (~ .D 4) •> N .O .N m cco co 4: OL Z w a) d' o c a CA Q. N C.o CD 0z . Nvc Gon, cX i - 02 .- mZ 0 0. if cL- s - V0Qw O Q c O mu- ° •ar° LIJ E °'m 'o v Q ' HE � 4yL.m ` E � � � 5 c 0 i+. C ctt 2 0 O- Y 0 L.*It2 _Alefn 2 -1 =C40 QNEIr O 1 m = o ccu6 c . m.cnca>'.c c C co y >L r O U p C • 0 5 O E N .0 0 co W 0 E O � ,-- C) a) +0. � N N W 0 P ` •O LL 0 L .0 a) t V 15Z »-' aJ 0 , Cd 'y a a CZ f0 O � W C co 0 , � � a3 '- 's � a) 3 �oc`u ° -oyc ' >,Z � 'a) > > -0 ma- 0 V) cb cog L .rU N E .c o ocv m c0 � cv 6 = x �u .0 y o ZaCONN -0O � Onrn� " .2E. co M MNCUONO _— A ,-- O v U CO c co f0 co c .0 Cl) o my rn0 0 H cu o 0. 3 U) E -0 0 E— N Tr Q C5209, 000 .0)a) - 0 C c C 0 y 9 a (If C , L c (!) 0 0 o Zr. f_`Q � m C. O V N a'II 0. � a� m CO C !n Cl) V •-• V � •• M i1'h EU m c3aoi0 - E U -a> g m as € mV� o03 0C ° aa).0C O a0i1-1 Ce .- .avQ N N •OF- a ndu. CO C' ix) cm c a) 3 a- -G oW U o 0 co Z a av C 3 'oe •L 2 C9 a) N y ZU .c Ca O Ti ,� o CO � > C cNcNy oo o VU _ 3 ca= 2 0 m � n � -�v v re aptc oar ch °� cN 0 2 3 — co = Q c rno 6 a) . o _c CC co c 0 a a) o ' E v N O co .0> UV - o cow -a 0. 0 !.- COI '0 , O 3 °co d rncuaa°i ccu 3 U U. > O wUNU3O > ccooOc Tr N O L a V N , -c =43 o .0 0 0v_ v 0 � p d a. L +r • p 0 , piugc < p 3 � y N � � O ai C 0NI- 2 V a3 ,_ 0 a 0 a= co U a) O > O O C W i N O > ZV o. > co -0 %.* 0 ywv 0. CV) .0 Cl) 2 CO ({p,� ® 0) Q- v- F- U C Jaa> _ 4) X W -1 '...- °P m ,= the = 1 gm `' ~ E u t i . Q � R ƒ o o - § � � U) d � zc . 6 2.< 9 9 6 f . a)9 - J . % kb %2I Z 2 2 222� 0 (73 7cak /J Z 15Dre co k cok t 2 — co w K a d b 42 ec 02ca � la13 § � = x. o £ © - 0w� -0c - R Q > 2 f 6 ? % - @a2k � a ° @0 50 d -a § § ■� o §C � k I Q Q QU c -0@p £ fv12o � E � . cc ct et Et 2 ' E � � £ 22 ■ o c ■ ■ ■ � ® � 2 & co � kf� 2 � ■ ■ @ c ■ & ■ c G o./ R -0 o ° I- ._ 0 n n m e ■ re _o = = m m _ e c £ m » r u. d a � d C) 9 9 - 9 <0 % . kJ z 0 2 2 2 ix co I k 2 $ k z m c IS 3 . 2 " 5 © � c - / ¥ CA c I0. o ■ c .m ■ ■ 2 _ � tr. e A2i : JJ \ f dfrte0 i @ § W L 1- 0 § §tV 00- 2 . . . .f» W ° � © .g � § © et g � / I X ° f 7 m ° § ■ k < J r m ■ WIII 1- � � . . 4ww, NNW >. 2 .c as C 0 a) t co O to U co cal - h 03 00 Nc ' cicOO . O ,0 r OU0OO ..:tiN ( C 4- ' L V O. aNY '— O O N m 't co I— C O .b �' m N C R g 2 z , V C O N c envy 3 CU co � co 0 ZV c62vvavco Pool) � c"n O fc0v .. O N .yb- o,-y V3 03 c 'v s C Tr Qc na E acib aC > � � as U Cl) 0 co re 00. 2o yYv E — g 'c 2 E w w c-aCCvcm '504'omvyL. a) o G < ma) OCU3 . •bmCQv) C ° (/) o Z CO v v «; co c co Z in O C 2 � '— � U w ami cY cco cm m O 0 — ...-. »� v v � IX � .a 0 .b a� E � •c o co ai � ca, 52t5H - mtN > eE2O m 00cw .,bO +. 0 c >+ cn U w m v co m •— coo . :�. cnbv t5 L 1 ° mE g 2 c E c o c .. c c v c = a0 5o -0 ai -o c .� y.a c a E ,_ , arms , )1 E5 O m . '> ,_ Oma''—` ns— v a)O OO U O .. = to OO N Q- O N �p _ O .. 0 VVn. o � 3 oar cCCM Q 0 nm C. v cn 3 ° c -0 L- g N c .Y c v) w -0Q..b9) O 0 • • O o N O 0 a c s Es D U c N O p m,% 0 0 0 0 t y 0 'v N 0 3 0 0 00. E0 > 0 0 0z0043v N F- ti cC � cca � � as .�cvE _vC = cn G. cO ONQ.rumm .— cog a) Z U) ¢ 8 a (7) .c v 8 3 0 :ti) m (/) CO w (jii 2 () 0. v 0 a W 0 > Z z c Q w Q: LLit 0 nQ L1 Q 4 N 0 111, 'wool` + 4 d) US rS co rn v L 0 •ci_ E Q O ._O N O O N N ti N _O) ti 0) • .- lf) • L c OEe. cc 'OV '0 7 IX 4 L O _ O 'a �° c 'a' covNU O iii N '(n9 0) aNi6W4 o '. m ('7 OL O aj7 O O ON NQ cc v w � ++ c rn O O U C V p O = N � O 4 NO Cl Z gQ CO U -C =a cao VU cU �to C7 O L .r 2 L 0.0 I G G in- r 65 cw o0N � � � -v c m m m m a QW •OCCN 000L7 m m QII -p ' 0) NQ0 cn . Z cvfcn CO (/) Zr CD � O — p m L — W • r a m t7 O mm 0IXts 0) g c� ‘- a VV - cocp � � et 4 c � p reU— '0ii O (5� 0 0 c0 O cjo W 221-4 w ,Wc Q M 2 'a cfj OL0 2 o)• -- -5 m LU m m m m o co • m m m 007 O VcoCO d w N N 0D Q fA fn m W M Z o m O O O O O � N LL Cl)v) �• r i # 0) `- N CI CI . -0 ._., o C . M (V O 9 O . re z • I Q 0 C O .0 ca N a' _.I V' �, 4 Z 2 l9 y p C :.a 0 V 0 ti 0 Q .c - - 2cWmV W W r` m �, Mtn m 32 �,d -t • (n m O E w O07 , 0 N QI � ' z co O. O O i) c' cc ' co co Z LQ 11.1 0 0)0 co 0 a CO > Cl) N °) N O Y a) V O CO d W N 0 w O v) o '° C M o) z 0 cud Q a Mis w (7 3 H 0 [Y. d ti is 0 Z c co v Cy Z a 0 QO cco a, a) 0 0 . 3 owIZ < W0 ! O Q N ATTACHMENT H e. Parking Spaces Required Based on Land Use: Modification of these minimum or maximum standards requires written approval from the Planning/Building/Public Works Department(see RMC 4-9-250). (Ord. 4517, 5-8-1995; Amd. Ord. 4790, 9-13- 1999; Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 4982, 9-23-2002; Ord. 5030, 11-24-2003; Ord. 5087, 6-28-2004; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) USE NUMBER OF REQUIRED SPACES Mixed occupancies: The total requirements for off-street (2 or 3 different uses in the same building parking facilities shall be the sum of the or sharing a lot. For 4 or more uses, see requirements for the several uses computed "shopping center"requirements) separately, unless the building is classified as a"shopping center" as defined in RMC 4-11-190. Uses not specifically identified in this Planning/Building/Public Works Section: Department staff shall determine which of the below uses is most similar based upon staff experience with various uses and information provided by the applicant. The amount of required parking for uses not listed above shall be the same as for the most similar use listed below. Detached and semi-attached dwellings: A minimum of 2 per dwelling unit. Tandem parking is allowed. A maximum of 4 vehicles may be parked on a lot, including those vehicles under repair and restoration, unless kept within an enclosed building. Bed and breakfast houses: 1 per guest room. The parking space must not be located in any required setback. Manufactured homes within a A minimum of 2 per manufactured home manufactured home park: site,plus a screened parking area shall be provided for boats, campers, travel trailers and related devices at a ratio of 1 screened space per 10 units. A maximum of 4 vehicles may be parked on a lot, including those vehicles under repair and restoration, unless kept within an enclosed building. Congregate residence: 1 per sleeping room and 1 for the proprietor,plus 1 additional space for each 4 persons employed on the premises. 1 ATTACHMENT H *4410, Attached dwellings in CD,RM-U,RM- 1.8 per 3 bedroom or larger dwelling IT,UC-N1,UC-N2 and Zones and CV unit;1.6 per 2 bedroom dwelling unit;1.2 Zones- per 1 bedroom or studio dwelling unit. RM-T Zone Exemption: An exemption to the standard parking ratio formula may be granted by the Development Services Director allowing 1 parking space per dwelling unit for developments of less than 5 dwelling units with 2 bedrooms or less per unit provided adequate on-street parking is available in the vicinity of the development. (Amd. Ord. 5018, 9-22-2003; Ord. 5087, 6-28-2004) Attached dwellings within the RM-F 2 per dwelling unit where tandem spaces Zone: are not provided; and/or2.5 per dwelling unit where tandem parking is provided, subject to the criteria found in subsection F8d of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) Attached dwellings within the CV Zone: 1 per dwelling unit is required. A maximum of 1.75 per dwelling unit is allowed. Attached dwellings within all other 1.75 per dwelling unit where tandem zones: spaces are not provided; and/or 2.25 per dwelling unit where tandem parking is provided, subject to the criteria found in subsection F8d of this Section. Attached dwelling for low income 1 for each 4 dwelling units. elderl : Attached dwellings: 1 per unit. Attached dwellings for low income 1 for every 3 dwelling units. elderl : t', iJ sF Drive-through retail or drive-through Stacking spaces: The drive-through service: facility shall be so located that sufficient on-site vehicle stacking space is provided for the handling of motor vehicles using such facility during peak business hours. Typically 5 stacking spaces per window are required unless otherwise determined by ATTACHMENT H ... .. the Development Services Director. Stacking spaces cannot obstruct required parking spaces or ingress/egress within the site or extend into the public right-of-way. Banks: A minimum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area and a maximum of 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area except when part of a shopping center. Convalescent centers: 1 for every 2 employees plus 1 for every 3 beds. Day care centers, adult day care(I and 1 for each employee and 2 loading spaces II): within 100 feet of the main entrance for every 25 clients of the program. Hotels and motels: 1 per guest room plus 2 for every 3 employees. Mortuaries or funeral homes: 1 per 100 square feet of floor area of assembly rooms. Vehicle sales (large and small vehicles) 1 per 5,000 square feet. The sales area is with outdoor retail sales areas: not a parking lot and does not have to comply with dimensional requirements, landscaping or the bulk storage section requirements for setbacks and screening. Any arrangement of motor vehicles is allowed as long as:• A minimum 5 feet perimeter landscaping area is provided;. They are not displayed in required landscape areas; and• Adequate fire access is provided per Fire Department approval. Vehicle service and repair(large and 0.25 per 100 square feet of net floor area. small vehicles): Offices, medical and dental: 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area. Offices, general: A minimum of 3 per 1,000 feet of net floor area and a maximum of 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area. Eating and drinking establishments and 1 per 100 square feet of net floor area. taverns: Eating and drinking establishment 1 per 75 square feet of net floor area. combination sit-down/drive-through restaurant: Retail sales and big-box retail sales: A maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area, except big-box retail sales, which is allowed a maximum of 0.5 per ATTACHMENT H NNW 140 100 square feet of net floor area if shared and/or structured parking is provided. Services, on-site(except as specified A maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of below): net floor area. Clothing or shoe repair shops,furniture, 0.2 per 100 square feet of net floor area. appliance,hardware stores,household equipment: Uncovered commercial area, outdoor 0.05 per 100 square feet of retail sales area nurseries: in addition to any parking requirements for buildings. Recreational and entertainment uses: Outdoor and indoor sports arenas, 1 for every 4 fixed seats or 1 per 100 auditoriums, stadiums, movie theaters, square feet of floor area of main auditorium and entertainment clubs: or of principal place of assembly not containing fixed seats,whichever is greater. Bowling alleys: 5 per alley. Dance halls, dance clubs, and skating 1 per 40 square feet of net floor area. rinks: Golf driving ranges: 1 per driving station Marinas: 2 per 3 slips. For private marina associated with a residential complex,then 1 per 3 slips.Also 1 loading area per 25 slips. Miniature golf courses: 1 per hole. Other recreational: 1 per occupant based upon 50%of the maximum occupant load as established by the adopted Building and Fire Codes of the City of Renton. Travel trailers: 1 •er trailer site. All uses allowed in the CD Zone except 1 space per 1,000 square feet of net floor for the following uses: area. Excepted uses follow the standards Excepted Uses: Convalescent center, applied outside the Downtown Core. drive-through retail, drive-through service,hotels, mortuaries, indoor sports arenas, auditoriums, movie theaters, entertainment clubs,bowling alleys, dance halls, dance clubs, and other recreational uses. Shopping centers (includes any type of I A minimum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of ATTACHMENT H - business occupying a shopping center): net floor area and a maximum of 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area. In the UC- Nl and UC-N2 Zones, a maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area is permitted unless structured parking is provided, in which case 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area is permitted. Drive- through retail or drive-through service uses must comply with the stacking space provisions listed above. Airplane hangars,tie-down areas: Parking is not required. Hangar space or tie-down areas are to be utilized for necessary parking. Parking for offices associated with hangars is 1 per 200 square feet. Manufacturing and fabrication, A minimum of 0.1 per 100 square feet of laboratories, and assembly and/or net floor area and a maximum of 0.15 packaging operations: spaces per 100 square feet of net floor area (including warehouse space). Self service storage: 1 per 3,500 square feet of net floor area. Maximum of three moving van/truck spaces in addition to required parking for self service storage uses in the RM-F Zone. Outdoor storage area: 0.05 per 100 square feet of area. Warehouses and indoor storage 1 per 1,500 square feet of net floor area. buildin s: Religious institutions: 1 for every 5 seats in the main auditorium, however, in no case shall there be less than 10 spaces. For all existing institutions enlarging the seating capacity of their auditoriums, 1 additional parking space shall be provided for every 5 additional seats provided by the new construction. For all institutions making structural alterations or additions that do not increase the seating capacity of the auditorium, see "outdoor and indoor sports arenas, auditoriums, stadiums, movie theaters, and entertainment clubs." Medical institutions: 1 for every 3 beds,plus 1 per staff doctor, plus 1 for every 3 employees. Cultural facilities: 4 per 100 square feet. ATTACHMENT H *110 Public post office: 0.3 for every 100 square feet. Secure community transition facilities: 1 per 3 beds,plus 1 per staff member,plus 1 per employee. Schools: Elementary and junior high: 1 per employee. In addition, if buses for the transportation of students are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. Senior high schools: public,parochial 1 per employee plus 1 space for every 10 and private: students enrolled. In addition, if buses for the private transportation of children are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. Colleges and universities, arts and crafts 1 per employee plus 1 for every 3 students schools/studios, and trade or vocational residing on campus,plus 1 space for every schools: 5 day students not residing on campus. In addition, if buses for transportation of students are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. (Amd. Ord. 5030, 11-24-2003; Ord. 5087, 6-28-2004) J cd fs «3 •.d 4' 0, 4 CU aF0N � ,iyvI-4 g NSA ZIQ) lig lC 'D �sV1o +, e' a) • 00 � oo .ti � a ' �IA a) E � o A. rt., D 0,, c) 1., v) ai b 0 o (13 =, ° •S o o 2 4.. •N `) • '42 rd a) o o 1.. .0 U z cd -0 Q..G g.•,4, 4 id a) = cG rn td > ,b 3 g d) a) g= b one td) y 00 O •0" N a) �. a) A v O N 0 O.` 0 'd . V 44-4 w (44 Q.-8 y b N h y o l .a 1/40 o nzi a) to 4a • gli 15%-o 0 8 o p r,, '.5 2 ,) i j 2 ! .. Cd ° 'DC) � 4) g $ ;8 '5 .4.--: -Segc+.. 0030 .. . ,.., 6 " o •41 vl o o 0 •Z o a) • '� •4 0 . a�i o a, wD � � Xa) 0 cob. voe � 5 •4. '0 'ya, Ua) c, a) 0 � � .- § 3g ,. . 00 `) 'doh . N o U Eton a) OD04.,i ° 'b c�dA �: al) V a .aabaa a.: Ts 3 3 ._. . a iiii 00 CII Q; 0 Z •':vs o •N G a' , " U " 0 +- C cti U °s� � d gh o0 ip 0 , ` g0c4 `4-, • bi) U IIIJ . il1 :.Y N r, vJ c9 g -c, 0 .' 0 ;,5 ;9 'a -.-.,,, g i 5 .k 0 s -2. 'de s- t 0-' .--,,49 4,,,0 .,8 41)" -t-,q 459 i ,7-2 +.0 ,40° .1 0° •v,"?-I.'I""'t) . •� a) o ;bay 0 0 a a) o y 0 i I r NOW, "wow 0 as �' w ° .4 0 ... .g o . r. 5 .5 dr) 4 a i fi4-1 ° ill �y U -000 p� 8844,3i s o 5 § c 40 ° � ci" A a � U )I o� -68 . '2 .5 .g2b � � Q' y 'O a, yv p+'-O, ' N Z Ai. � E .. 2. 4s ot° ao a >, o — p p «i bA cd p flfl1fl v� IiIH U cn 1 ko o .l b 0 a .d t a Q O O 6 0 • " +'�J a) 0 1 g.syN� N .g HHU cd 0 o a "d c� a cd O 2 P. Q O w •p O 4 . o O 0 �N 0 . a" '2 ° ` Aflh r8bc 4 - g . UU :h N a 4t1re � gE4Z38bo . bU w 1 �co 2 ti 5 + 2 a) _in . .--I 0 ^ •�-4 V) y i•'N .�i •.~i 754 .5 . � 40 a cv r Nue l ea •d ' a as g __gg al +' ta'" pp Sy 0 o b 4 � o I 'b v w, '� n O a O • O i .4- ea� D8 d . OO ° cna o ed a ° flj4i1fl Oa a v, ° di V ca b O i ti c1 .fl m •d" y [° 8 0 C� •d 0 o N N ;d O c* 0 ° a >, ' b or b ° 'o a� � o ;�, o i �„• 'v ° �0 Ucid c2 O › 4-. •a al 0 '.� ..o '5 €� U g ,4 '5 •[� t�i i N V W O .-. id .CAS" a� O I s c 'fir 4.4 0 0 tt tO 71)-1. 404 C Dr< 2cd ° 17g 'CI g •d tg v48 x n,ra ji w 4.., o • •(-3 s�. a el 0 ( HUH ) 1111 111100111 s ° 0 0i0 oc ° 1. b . a' � a ° °'° N ..84 o ' " UI '10 PI > o> 0 •0 4 ag o ,� 4 •d ►-, bibi d NO" NINO U 'b ,0 .ti O O > 4) cd ,� b ° ew •�o ¢, � w 0U a� E a 0 5b 46 oUU .° °E�' 4° 3 .b > o A1.15 boes, �v c a) o ' o � .b .bW 'S •80aFip, oNr El ° 0 44-1 . 0 C) 9 o a . cv5 4 WUa) 0 b b a bo bA o � b •L 8 b.() � F ; .5 0.) � I I 0 •_ C) . )0 i 0) 0 .o , C) v0boo p .- a 74 O q O d C7a November 20,2006 ter+ Renton City Council Minutes %we Page 401 In conclusion, Mr. Erickson stated that the annexation proposal is consistent with Boundary Review Board objectives and City annexation policies. He pointed out that the surface water costs are estimated at $3,258 annually, and unless the City delays the effectuation date, it will be responsible for the signalization project costs estimated at$789,000. Mr. Erickson indicated that the annexation furthers City business goals by encouraging responsible growth, and possibly serving as a catalyst for expanding its boundaries to the north or west to result in a more regular City boundary. Councilman Law expressed concern that King County will not award the contract prior to the proposed effectuation date of the annexation and the City will then be liable for the project costs. Councilman Clawson noted that it is possible to extend the effectuation date if necessary. Public comment was invited. Stephanie Lorenz,4725 NE 4th St., Suite B, Renton, 98059,representing Mr. Hudson, suggested that the City contact King County to verify that the annexation has to be delayed in order to secure the project funds. She referred to a project where King County funds were used for a passover in Magnolia, the area of which was already annexed. Ms. Lorenz noted that the proponents are frustrated with the annexation timeline and they want to move forward with their projects. Mayor Keolker indicated that the Administration will investigate the matter. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL: APPROVE AN ORDINANCE EFFECTUATING THE 14.63-ACRE HUDSON ANNEXATION ON 5/1/2007; APPROVE AN ORDINANCE REZONING 6.6 ACRES TO R-10 CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATION; AND APPROVE AN ORDINANCE REZONING 5.83 ACRES TO R-8 CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE DESIGNATION. CARRIED. (See page 406 for ordinances.) ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2006 and beyond. Items noted included: * The 13th Annual Clam Lights display at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park begins on December 1 and runs nightly through January 1. * The official tree lighting event at Piazza Park occurs on December 2. * A project to improve Rainier Ave. between S. 2nd St. and S.4th Pl. has been awarded $1,906,200 in funding for 2008 by the Transportation Improvement Board. The project is part of the overall improvements to the Hardie/Rainier corridor, and includes replacing the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad bridges, and pedestrian and transit improvements. AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, stated that although eliminating Citizen Comment: Petersen- the use of eminent domain and non-conforming properties in the Highlands area 2006 Comprehensive Plan came about prior to the formation of the Highlands Zoning Task Force, the task -04. Amendments, Highlands Area force succeeded in the ability to remodel existing duplexes and to have mother- in-law apartments. Ms. Petersen displayed a map of the Highlands area,and November 20,2006 �, Renton City Council Minutes ,,. Page 402 compared the zoning from the original subarea plan to the recommended zoning of the task force, noting the density similarities between the two plans. Ms. Petersen expressed concern regarding the high densities proposed for the area, including the allowance of three- to five-story buildings, saying that high densities should not be supported without a proper EIS (Environmental Impact Statement). She urged Council to consider requiring an EIS. Citizen Comment: O'Halloran - Mike O'Halloran,Airport Advisory Committee Chair, 4420 SE 4th St., Renton, Airport Open House, Master 98059, issued an invitation to the Renton Airport Open House on November 21, Plan Update at which citizens can ask questions and discuss future options for the airport. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. At Councilman Persson's request, item 6.b. was removed for separate consideration. Appeal: Linn Office City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Linn Conversion Landscape Office Conversion Landscape Variance; appeal filed by Alden Linn, 2907 Park Variance, V-06-108 Ave. N. Renton, 98056, accompanied by required fee. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Finance: Fiber Optic Finance and Information Services Department recommended approval of an Installation Projects Interlocal interlocal agreement regarding the sharing of fiber optic installation projects Agreement, Eastside Fiber with the Eastside Fiber Consortium(various eastside agencies) to add Bellevue Consortium Community College as a participating agency. Council concur. (See page 405 for resolution.) Budget: 2006 Year-End Finance and Information Services Department recommended approval of the Amendments 2006 year-end budget amendment ordinance. Refer to Finance Committee. Plat: Monterey Place II, NE Hearing Examiner recommended approval, with conditions, of the Monterey 16th St, PP-06-104 Place II Preliminary Plat; two single-family lots on a 0.26-acre site located at 2008 NE 16th St. Council concur. Utility: 2007 Rates Utility Systems Division submitted proposed changes to the water,wastewater, and surface water utility rates. Refer to Committee of the Whole. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO REMOVE ITEM 6.b. FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED. Separate Consideration Community Services Department recommended approval to transfer the lease Item 6.b. and concession agreement with All My Restaurants, Inc. for the restaurant and Community Services: banquet facilities at Maplewood Golf Course to Newcastle Restaurants, Inc. Maplewood Golf Course (Arias-Barajas, Inc.) for the remaining three years of the existing lease. Restaurant Facilities Lease, MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL APPROVE Transfer to Newcastle THE AGREEMENT ADDENDUM WITH A CORRECTION TO PAGE 1, Restaurants, LAG 03 003 ITEM 2., LINE 3 AS FOLLOWS: REPLACE THE WORD "shall" WITH THE WORD "may." CARRIED. Mayor Keolker noted that the agreement will be returned to the concerned parties to determine if they accept the change. Added Correspondence was read from James A. Fenner and Carolyn R. Fenner,402 CORRESPONDENCE Seneca Ct. NW, Renton, 98057, concerning stormwater runoff through their Citizen Comment: Fenner- yard and into their basement as a result of the development on an adjacent Stormwater Drainage property located at 84th Ave. S. and S. 128th St. MOVED BY CORMAN, Problems, Seneca Ct NW SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE ADMINISTRATION. CARRIED. November 13,2006 +.� Renton City Council Minutes Page 393 Nsie zoning regulations. He noted that when the ordinances take effect, R-10 will be removed as an implementing zone, effectively eliminating the moratorium. Councilman Clawson clarified that the moratorium only applies to subdivision of property for new single-family residential development or accessory uses, including plats, lot line adjustments, and site plan review entitlements in the R- 10 zone within the Highlands study area. Citizen Comment: Petersen- Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, recommended the implementation Council Rules, Character of Council rules pertaining to character attacks during Council meetings. Attacks Citizen Comment: DeMastus- Sandel DeMastus, Highlands Community Association Vice President and Highlands Zoning Task Force Highlands Zoning Task Force Member, PO Box 2041, Renton, 98056, stated that she is very proud of the task force's accomplishments. Additionally, Ms. DeMastus complimented the new Renton Magazine, which is published by Councilman Law. Citizen Comment: Hicks- Barbara Hicks, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, said most of the information 2006 Comprehensive Plan }14 pertaining to the Kennydale Blueberry Farm rezone request was based on the Amendments, Kennydale applicant's desire to sell the property, and financial need should not be a reason Blueberry Farm for granting a rezone. Ms. Hicks commented on the property's environmental features, noting that historically it has been unbuildable. Ms. Hicks indicated that the critical areas ordinance does not always protect properties when people are determined to fill in a wetland or remove a creek flow. Citizen Comment: Rider- Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056,displayed photographs of 2006 Comprehensive Plan properties containing filled-in wetlands, saying the action occurred under Amendments, Kennydale critical areas protection. She also showed photographs of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm Blueberry Farm, noting that it is suited for Resource Conservation zoning. Ms. Rider expressed her support for the blueberry farm as a park. On another topic, she suggested that written lyrics be provided for the caroling activity at the City's holiday lighting event. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 10:06 p.m. &1t41 ,r1. Lc1 ate,d0- Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann November 13, 2006 November 13,2006 'v.r Renton City Council Minutes Page 392 3. Renton Hill Neighborhood Association-Annual printing expenses for a newsletter printed twice a year and distributed door-to-door($427). 4. Summerwind Homeowners Association-Annual printing and postal expenses for quarterly newsletter($279). 5. Tiffany Park Homeowners Association -Annual printing for a newsletter printed twice a month and distributed door-to-door($89). 6. Tiffany Park Neighborhood Association - Annual printing expenses for a newsletter printed twice a year and distributed door-to-door($532). The second round of applications total $4,485 leaving a remaining budget of $32,746. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT AS AMENDED TO REFLECT THE CORRECTION TO ITEM 2. AS FOLLOWS: DELETE THE WORDS "door to door" AND INSERT THE WORDS "through mail." CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3840 A resolution was read declaring a moratorium on new development in the R-10 Planning: Highlands Subarea zone within the Highlands study area, establishing a public hearing date of Plan Study Area Moratorium 12/11/2006, and establishing a termination date of 5/13/2006 for the moratorium. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#5227 An ordinance was read amending Section 6-17-3 of Chapter 17, Pawnbrokers, Legal: Pawnbroker Daily of Title VI(Police Regulations)of City Code by clarifying the transmission Transaction Requirements requirements of the pawnbroker's daily record of transactions. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER THE Planning: Kennydale TOPIC OF THE KENNYDALE BLUEBERRY FARM TO COMMITTEE OF Blueberry Farm THE WHOLE.* Council President Corman stated that many people have suggested that the City should purchase the property as a park, and he pointed out that Council has not deliberated that issue. Councilwoman Nelson noted that Council has discussed the matter in executive session. Mr. Corman indicated that a significant policy decision such as this should not just be discussed in executive session. Discussion ensued regarding the appropriateness of discussing this topic on the Council floor. Mayor Keolker suggested that before going forward with the matter, a legal opinion be obtained. Assistant City Attorney Fontes concurred. *MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL TABLE THIS MATTER UNTIL A RULING IS OBTAINED FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT In response to Howard McOmber's inquiries,475 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, Citizen Comment: McOmber- 98056, Mayor Keolker explained that the current Highlands moratorium expires Highlands Subarea Plan Study tomorrow, the new Highlands moratorium was declared tonight, and the public Area Moratorium hearing on the new moratorium will be held on December 11. Citizen Comment: Moore- Kirk Moore, 1901 Harrington Circle NE, Renton, 98056, explained that the Highlands Subarea Plan Study Highlands Zoning Task Force requested the Highlands moratorium, which only Area Moratorium affects the R-10 zone, to allow time for the implementation of the land use and November 13,2006 NOW Renton City Council Minutes ..+ Page 390 AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton,98057, voiced her pleasure with the Citizen Comment: Petersen- efforts of the Highlands Zoning Task Force. She expressed concern regarding Various due process issues pertaining to the Comprehensive Plan public hearings,noting V1r P' that the ordinances adopted may be based on an invalid public hearing process. Ms. Petersen also questioned why non-Renton residents are allowed on the City's boards and commissions. Additionally, she indicated that while the Police Department has addressed some problems related to prostitution,there are more problems that need attention, especially one in an area near a church. Citizen Comment: DeMastus- Sandel DeMastus, Highlands Community Association Vice President,PO Box Prostitution Problems 2041, Renton, 98056, thanked the police for their work on addressing some prostitution problems, and expressed her hope that the work will continue. Citizen Comment: McOmber- Howard McOmber,475 Olympia Ave.NE, Renton, 98056, complimented all Highlands Area those who are working hard to improve the Highlands neighborhood. He noted Redevelopment that everyone has a right to express their opinions. Mr. McOmber stated that Renton is a wonderful place to live, and one of the reasons for that is the City's diverse population. Citizen Comment: Madson - Lori Madson, 1301 SW 16th St., Renton, 98056, chair of the Committee to Citizen Initiative, Fireworks Keep Renton Safe, expressed her pleasure that Renton will maintain its ban on Ordinance fireworks as a result of the vote on Renton Proposition 1. Additionally,she thanked those who campaigned against the proposition. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. At the request of Council President Corman, item 6.e. was removed for separate consideration Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 11/6/2006. Council concur. 11/6/2006 Community Services: Holiday Community Services Department recommended approval of a contract in the Lights Program, Sun Lighting amount of$62,778.43 with Sun Lighting for the 2006 Holiday Lights Program. Council concur. Comprehensive Plan: 2007 Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Amendments, Pre-Applications submitted two pre-applications for the 2007 Comprehensive Plan amendment pre-application review process. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Utility: Sewer Moratorium in Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department East Renton Plateau PAA recommended setting a public hearing on 11/27/2006 to consider extending the moratorium on sewer availabilities for new subdivisions in the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. Council concur. Plat: Cottages at Honey Creek, Hearing Examiner recommended approval,with conditions, of the Cottages at NE Sunset Blvd, PP-04-185 Honey Creek Preliminary Plat Major Amendment; 4.17 acres located at 4821 NE Sunset Blvd. Council concur. Police: Jail Inmate Health Police Department recommended approval of a contract with Occupational Services, Occupational Health Health Services(Public Hospital District No. 1 of King County) in the amount Services of$176,376 for health services for Renton jail inmates for 2007. Council concur. Transportation: May Creek Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of a contract in the Bridge Replacement Design, amount of$146,174 with Parametrix, Inc. for design of the May Creek Bridge Parametrix Replacement Project. Council concur. Niue RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting November 13, 2006 Council Chambers Monday, 7 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL OF RANDY CORMAN, Council President; TONI NELSON; DAN CLAWSON; COUNCILMEMI3ERS TERRI BRIERS; MARCIE PALMER. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS DENIS LAW AND DON PERSSON. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative ATTENDANCE Officer; ZANETTA FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; PREETI SHRIDHAR, Communications Director; ALEX PIETSCH, Economic Development Administrator; REBECCA LIND, Planning Manager; ERIKA CONKLING, Senior Planner; CHIEF I. DAVID DANIELS and DEPUTY CHIEF LARRY RUDE, Fire Department; COMMANDER KATIE MCCLINCY, Police Department. PUBLIC HEARING ! This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Comprehensive Plan: 2006 accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Keolker opened the public hearing Amendments - H to consider the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and the development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. Senior Planner Erika Conkling explained that the public hearing is divided into four groups of issues, and she began with Group 1 -Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments, as follows: • 2006-T-1 (City of Renton) - Update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent school district capital facilities plans. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-T-3 (City of Renton) - Update the Land Use and Community Design elements with housekeeping changes for clarity and to reflect new policy. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-T-4 (City of Renton) - Update the Transportation Element to reflect Renton's latest adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-T-5 (City of Renton) Allow existing mobile home parks in the Residential Low Density(RLD)designation to be zoned Residential Manufactured Home (RMH). Recommendation: approve amendment. Ms. Conkling pointed out that the Planning Commission held the required public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan text and map amendments on September 20. The matter was also referred to the Planning and Development Committee with the exception of the implementing ordinance for item 2006-T- 1,which was referred to Finance Committee. Public comment was invited. Scott Missall,999 3rd Ave., Suite 3000, Seattle, 98104, with the law firm Short, Cressman&Burgess, spoke on 2006-T-5. He noted that the State Supreme Court's ruling on Interlake Sporting Association, et al v. Washington State November 13,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 385 Boundary Review Board, City of Redmond, et al, may affect the City's ability to go forward with the Maplewood Addition Annexation. Raymond A. Breeden, Sr., 15279 Maple Dr., Renton, 98058, noted the importance of retaining mobile home parks especially in light of the recent flooding of the White River that destroyed one-half of a mobile home park in Pacific. Jerry Puckett, 15260 Oak Dr., Renton, 98058, spoke in support of 2006-T-5, which affects the Wonderland Estates Mobile Home Park where he resides. Continuing with Group 2 - Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Concurrent Rezones, Ms. Conkling reviewed the following amendments: • 2006-M-1 (Wan Chee) - Change the designation from a combination of Commercial Neighborhood (CN) and Residential Single Family(RS)with CN and R-8 split zoning to CN land use with CN zoning for the entire parcel at 1315 N. 30th St. Recommendation: deny amendment. • 2006-M-2 (Susan Larson-Kinzer; Kennydale Blueberry Farm) - Change the designation from RLD land use with Resource Conservation(RC)zoning to RS land use with R-8 zoning,or RLD land use with R-4 zoning for a 3.4 acre parcel currently used as a blueberry farm and residence at 1733 NE 20th St. Recommendation: deny amendment to RS with concurrent R-8 zoning and approve change to RLD with R-4 zoning. Ms. Conkling said the owner indicates that land use changes in the surrounding area,which is zoned R-8, have affected the viability of the farm. She note that critical areas exist on the site, including a mapped wetland, suspected peat wetland, Class 4 stream, and headwaters of Kennydale Creek. Ms. Conkling indicated that if a Type II wetland is assumed, 1.15 acres of the site are potentially developable, resulting in two building sites if zoned R-4. • 2006-M-8 (City of Renton; Upper Kennydale) - Change the designation for a 49-acre area located south of NE 28th St. and north of NE 16th St., from RS land use with R-8 zoning to RLD land use with R-4 zoning. Staff recommendation: downzone the area to R-4. R-4 zoning would help stem cumulative changes to hydrology and wetland areas, and result in a buildable lands capacity of approximately 110 units (96 units exist now). Planning Commission recommendation: keep the R-8 zoning. R-8 zoning has a buildable lands capacity of approximately 205 units, and property owners have invested in the properties with the expectation of R-8 development potential. • 2006-M-3 (Manuel Rivera)-Change the designation from RS land use with R-8 zoning to Commercial Corridor(CC) land use with Commercial Office (CO) zoning on a 2.09-acre parcel at 851 Carr Rd. Recommendation: deny request but approve redesignation of this parcel and adjoining parcels within the City limits to Residential Medium Density(RMD) with concurrent.R-14 zoning. R-14 zoning allows small commercial uses. • 2006-M-4 (Springbrook Associates) -Change the designation from RMD land use with R-10 zoning to CC land use with CO zoning for a 5.61-acre parcel located south of S. 37th St. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-M-5 (City of Renton; Puget Colony Homes and vicinity) -Change the area within the Puget Colony neighborhood from RS land use with R-8 zoning to RLD land use with R-4 zoning; and from RS to RLD land use in the unincorporated Kimberly Lane and Hideaway Home Sites subdivisions. Recommendation: approve amendment. November 13,2006 Nier Renton City Council Minutes •*..r Page 386 • 2006-M-7 (City of Renton; former Aqua Barn site and part of the proposed Maplewood Addition Annexation expanded area) - Change the designation of three acres located at the southeast corner of 152nd Ave. SE and Maple Valley Hwy. from RLD to CC land use with potential Commercial Arterial (CA)zoning. Change the 30 abutting southern acres from RLD to RMD land use with potential R-14 zoning. Recommendation: approve amendment. Correspondence was read from William E. O'Connor, 10402 151 st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, stating that the applicant for the blueberry farm amendment has not shown the following: proof that the current zoning is no longer appropriate, that the site does not contain preservable critical areas, that long-term agricultural use has been affected by environmental changes, and that the zoning revision will result in increased public benefit. Correspondence was read from Brad Nicholson, 2811 Dayton Ave. NE,Renton, 98056, expressing displeasure with the City's lack of interest in complying with laws, and listing a number of unaddressed concerns pertaining to the protection of critical areas on the blueberry farm. Correspondence was read from Wm Collins,420 Cedar Ave. S., Renton,98057, requesting the City apply the same considerations to the blueberry farm wetland as was done for the critical areas of the Defoor Short Plat, and requesting removal of this item from the Comprehensive Plan amendment process. Correspondence was read from Knoll D. Lowney, Smith& Lowney, PLLC (attorneys for Bill O'Connor and Kennydale Critical Areas Alliance), 2317 E. John St., Seattle, 98122, indicating that the notice for this public hearing failed to identify the subject properties, specifically the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, and requesting that the hearing be postponed for 30 days. Public comment was invited. Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, stated that issues relating to due process invalidate both this public hearing and the Planning Commission's public hearing of September 20. Pointing out that the notice for this hearing was inadequate, she asked that the public hearing be postponed to allow for proper notification. Ms. Petersen indicated that she wants the blueberry farm as a critical area. Lauralee Gordley, 2010 Jones Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, objected to the rezone of the upper Kennydale area to R-4. She stated that this complex area is located near the I-405 Corridor and is densely populated. Ms. Gordley said she purchased her property with the intent of developing it at R-8 zoning. She pointed out that the critical areas ordinance is based on science, and should be depended upon to protect property. Ms. Conkling stated that four to five lots are possible on Ms. Gordley's oddly- shaped property under both the R-4 and R-8 zones. She noted that some property owners will experience a reduction in development capacity if zoned R-4, and some owners will be affected by not being able to add one or two additional units in their backyards. Robert Cave, 1813 NE 24th St., Renton, 98056, opposed the upper Kennydale area rezone,pointing out that he owns a 3.5-acre property which is not hindered by wetlands or the Kennydale Creek. Additionally, Mr. Cave said he objects to the rezone of the blueberry farm, saying that it should remain a farm. • s November 13,2006 Now Renton City Council Minutes 'Now Page 387 Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, asked that the public hearing be rescheduled to allow for proper notice. In regards to the blueberry farm,she indicated that the creek is misclassified and that for permitting purposes, the wetlands have state and federal jurisdiction because the creek drains into Lake Washington. Ms. Rider stated that the sale of the farm is an opportunity for a unique and popular public open space. As neighborhoods change from semi- rural to infill-developed, she stressed that the importance and long-term consequences of this decision should not be underestimated. Mayor Keolker clarified that this public hearing is a courtesy hearing, and the required hearing was with the Planning Commission on September 20. Barbara Hicks, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056,pointed out that the public hearing notice did not clearly identify the blueberry farm as a topic for the meeting. Ms. Hicks emphasized that non-land owners also have opinions and rights,and decisions of the City affect all residents. She stated that when some part of the environment is destroyed, the future is being taken away from the children. William E. O'Connor, 10402 151st Ave. SE, 98059, spoke in opposition to the blueberry farm rezone,pointing out that the applicant has not provided the required burden of proof. He indicated that the applicant needs to prove the property is developable, and accurately delineate the wetlands before the site is considered for rezoning. Gary Young, 11624 SE 5th St., Suite 200, Bellevue, 98005, representing Valley Springs Apartments, LLC, spoke in support of the Aqua Barn site amendment. He thanked staff for bringing the zoning into compliance with the existing use. Bob Johns, 1601 114th Ave. SE, #102, Bellevue, 98004, spoke on behalf of the River Valley Condominium Association concerning the Aqua Barn site amendment. He noted that it is important to put zoning on the property that matches the existing development for property financing purposes. Mr. Johns relayed the condominium owners' support of the amendment. Karen Finnicum, 1302 Aberdeen Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, spoke regarding the blueberry farm and upper Kennydale area amendments. She indicated that the creek and wetlands area never go dry, and everything in Renton is full of water. Ms. Finnicum stated that property is an investment, and it is the owner's responsibility to watch over and care for it. She expressed concern regarding the increase in development, and stated that the peat bog on the blueberry farm property has to be protected. David Halinen, 2115 N. 30th St., Suite 203, Tacoma, 98403,representing Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc., submitted a letter regarding the Aqua Barn site's 3.02 acres of commercially zoned property. He requested approval of the amendment and corresponding development agreement. John Cowan, 1830 NE 24th St., Renton, 98056, objected to the rezoning of the blueberry farm, saying the farm is a unique geological area and should remain that way. He expressed concern that the amendment process is moving too quickly, and recommended that the City stop the process and conduct a comprehensive review of the wetlands and the needs of the upper Kennydale area. Debbie Natelson, 801 Renton Ave. S., Renton, 98057, said the blueberry farm should not be rezoned. She indicated that the property can be sold as a farm, and expressed disappointment with the City for helping the owners to November 13,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 388 potentially make a huge profit. Ms. Natelson explained that peat bogs absorb water and take thousands of years to create. She noted that flooding is caused by the removal of vegetation and forest cover, and urged protection of the headwaters. Ms. Natelson pointed out that the City could consider taking over this resource. Ms. Conkling continued with Group 3 - Development Agreement for the Former Aqua Barn Property(2006-M-7). Noting that the Planning Commission recommended the agreement following their public hearing, she explained that it only applies to the three-acre area fronting Maple Valley Hwy. proposed for CA zoning Ms. Conkling stated that the agreement prohibits a number of ordinarily allowed uses in the CA zone, including big box retail, some vehicle related activities, and all industrial uses. The agreement also restricts allowed uses such as drive-in/drive through retail, and car washes. Ms. Conkling indicated that the agreement provides that a transfer of a traffic mitigation fee credit be granted in an amount not to exceed$252,799.50 against traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the property. Additionally,the agreement requires that design standards, including common thematic elements and common landscape elements,be applied to all commercial development on the site. There being no public comment on Group 3, Ms. Conkling turned to Group 4- Highlands Land Use and Zoning Package,which includes 2006-M-6 and 2006- T-2, and supersedes prior staff recommendations. She introduced Highlands Zoning Task Force Chair Kirk Moore,who thanked task force members and City staff for their efforts on this proposal. He highlighted the proposed changes to the Center Village (CV) land use designation, which include removing R-10 as an implementing zone,allowing R-14, RM-U, and RM-T as implementing zones, and eliminating the requirement of residential-only development north of NE 12th St. Mr. Moore also reviewed the proposed land use map amendments and the proposed rezones. Ms. Conkling reviewed the proposed zoning text amendments, as follows: • Amend the implementing zones of the CV land use designation. • Remove the CV Residential Bonus District. • Adopt design regulations. • Amend uses in the R-14 zone. • Amend uses in the CV zone. • Add clarifying language to terms such as pipe stem lots and affordable housing. • Amend development standards for the R-14 zone. • Allow two types of affordable housing bonuses in the R-14 zone. • Amend development standards for the CV zone. In conclusion, Ms. Conkling stated that the Planning and Development Committee will discuss the matter on November 16, and first and second reading of the ordinances is scheduled for November 27. Mayor Keolker thanked the task force members for all their hard work. Public comment was invited. Brett Kappenman, 1004 SW 4th Pl., Renton, 98057,on behalf of the Highlands Community Association(HCA), thanked the task force and staff for this conclusive plan. He indicated that the plan reflects the concerns of the HCA, November 13,2006 ,ow,. Renton City Council Minutes Page 389 particularly the density increases and the affordable housing issues. Mr. Kappenman noted that the plan also addresses the conforming property issue. Linda Perrine, 1157 Glennwood Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, opposed the change from Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) to CV,particularly on the street facing Edmonds Ave. NE. She explained that the Renton Housing Authority has purchased three acres of property in the area near McKnight Middle School, which is surrounded by single-family homes and duplexes. Ms. Perrine expressed concern that when the 60 to 80 additional units per acre are built, traffic will increase significantly and parking will be problematic. She stressed that this area is not suited for high-density housing. Responding to Council inquiries,Planning Manager Rebecca Lind stated that current zoning allows up to 20 dwelling units per acre, and CV zoning allows up to 80 units per acre. She indicated that the access points to the proposed development have not yet been determined. Bill Grover, PO Box 2701, Renton, 98056, owner of property at 2807 NE 16th St., stated that due to the current Highlands development moratorium, he is unable to obtain building permits so he can develop his property. He explained that his property was subdivided under R-10 zoning prior to the moratorium taking effect, and he was under the impression that his property would be vested. Pointing out that another Highlands moratorium area property owner obtained building permits, he asked that Council allow him, or subsequent owners of his property, to obtain building permits in accordance with the R-10 zoning regulations. Howard McOmber,475 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, member of the task force and the Highlands Community Association, emphasized that the task force's plan was very well thought out. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. RECESS MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Time: 9 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:08 p.m.; roll was called; all Councilmembers present except Corman. (Corman arrived at 9:09 p.m.) ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2006 and beyond. Items noted included: * City of Renton employees and Rotary Club of Renton members are volunteering to serve Thanksgiving Dinner at the Senior Activity Center, which will be open from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. on November 27, for senior citizens to enjoy a day of social and recreational activities. Guests must pick up a free ticket prior to November 21. * The Hassle Free Holiday Bazaar will be held on November 17 and 18 at the Community Center, where a wide variety of handcrafted items will be sold by over 100 vendors. * Renton experienced some local flooding events due to heavy rain fall; however, overall the City fared well and did not suffer significant damage. � r City Council Public Hearing \ovcmber 11,2006 • Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Zicarr • Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and concurrent rezones " � • Development agreement for former Aqua Barn property • • Highlands Land Use and Zoning Package (Highlands Task Force) Next Steps • Planning and Development Committee to meet on November 16,2006 Comprehensive Plan Text • First and Second Readings scheduled for Amendments November 27,2006 2006 Comprehensive Plan 2006-T-1 School CFPs Amendments- Text and Map • Amendment would adopt the CFPs for the Kent • Planning Commission Public Hearing: and Issaquah School Dist'ict's by reference September 20 • Adopting a District's CFPs is a part of ensuring the City's ability to collect impact tees for new • Planning Commission Recommendation: housing units built within the district October 4 • staff and Planning Commission recommend adopting the necessary amendment • Referred to Planning and Development Committee,except 2006-T-1 • This item referred to the Finance Committee 1 2006-T-3 Community Design and Community Design and Land Use Land Use Elements Element Recommendations • Corrections and revisions of the Community • Planning Commission and Staff recommend Design Element are required for clarity and to approval of the corrections and revisions to the reflect new policy Community Design Element. • Corrections to the Land Use Element reflect three changes • Planning Commission and Staff recommend housekeeping changes approval of the corrections and revisions to the Land Use Element. Eliminate Goal 7 regarding agricultural and mining resources - Revise Goal 3 to reflect current annexation policy 2006-T-4 Transportation Element 2006-T-5 Allow RMH in the RLD • Updates the Transportation Element to • City initiated amendment would allow be consistent with the currently existing mobile home parks in the RLD adopted TIP designation to be zoned RMH • Staff and Planning Commission • This would protect existing mobile home recommend approval of these changes parks • Staff and Planning Commission recommend making this change Chee Rezone- 2006-M-1 Land Use Designation Map • Property has split Comprehensive Plan Map zoning R-8 and CN Amendments Use U and CN Land Use) • Owner requested CN toning for entire parcel • Staff and Planning Commission recommend denial nice Propert 2 , b `fir Chee Rezone- Analysis 2006-M-2 Blueberry Farm • Lack of redevelopment of land currently • Owner requested a rezone from RC to R-4 zoned CN indicates a lack of pressure to or R-8 zoning increase the amount of commercial land. • Change to R-8 zone requires change from • North portion of property(7,710 sf)can be RLD to RS Land Use developed for commercial use at the present • Land use changes in the surrounding area time,with current zoning. have affected the viability of the farm • Applicant concurs with recommendation. • Surrounding area is zoned R-8 • There are critical areas on the Farm Blueberry Farm- Critical Areas Blueberry Farm- Potential Develo 1 A • • Mapped wetland shown i. • If type II wetland • No formal delineation ` �� a II assumed,there would be 1.15 • Suspected"peat"wet- __ . 1 x 1 +. acres for I_ : i land \ ,! i , development L ,,I , • Class 4 strewn � 1� „if'. ' • Buildable Lands East and north INN, rt. -`.� Analysis results in • Headwaters of 1 a',. two building sites Kennydale Creek e . imil if zoned R-4 Blueberry Farm Recommendation 2006-M-8 Upper Kennydale Rezone • City initiated proposal • Staff and Planning Commission recommend to rezone this area of R-4 zone upper Kennydale from R-8 to R-4(RS to RLD • Meets mapping criteria in the Land Use) Comprehensive Plan .a • There are critical area • Meets the purpose of the R-4 zone constraints including: wetlands,steep slopes, • R-4 allows the lowest intensity urban use, waterways,and the while still protecting critical areas headwaters of Kennydale Creek 3 Upper Kennydale Rezone Upper Kennydale Rezone • Some neighbors asked for more •Stall recommends •Planning Commission environmental protection and less intensive down zoning this area recommends keeping development in the area around the to R-4 the zoning R-8 Blueberry Farm R-4 zoning would help Property owners have • Other neighbors wish to develop their steel cumulative invested in the property at R-8 levels of intensity changes to Hydrology properties ss;d,the and wetland areas. expectation of R-8 Buildable lands development potential • There are a number of vested development applications and pre-applications capacity would be - Buildable lands about 110 units capacity would be about 205 units 2006-M-3 Rivera Rivera Property and Vicinity • Property on Carr Rd is zoned R-8,but used This entire area t , as a mortgage business proposed 1'or % rezone to R-14 • Owner requests a rezone from R-8 to CO �`' � (RMD Land Use) (RS to CC Land Use) z; I t__ i �z 1 • Staff and Planning Commission recommend City-owned property.-- • 1.781c / rezone to R-14(RMD Land Use)to include S_ 17gth i this property and adjacent properties School __ _ _r ._ \ ..._... Z 3.12ac l Rivera Property ----- 3.7Mc '' is I Rivera Rezone 2006 M-4 Springbrook Associates • Critical Areas limit development on Rivera property Request to �+ rezone lion, t4. • This piece is not contiguous to other CO R-to to Co properties (change • Small commercial uses allowed in R-14 from RMD . to CC and zone Use) • R-14 zone must be designated in a minimum 20 acre area p Amoeba(2oae_Ma1.. _.��.. ".. „,....,„.4 s 4 ' ram• �s Springbrook Associates 2006-M-5 Puget Colony Homes • Staff and Planning Commission recommend • City initiated CO zoning rezone from R-8 to R-4(RS to 'I • Property access is through existing RLD Land Use) commercial area,not through adjacent • Planning residential area Commission and • Capacity for employment of 365 people Staff recommend R-4 Puget Colony Analysis Puget Colony Rezone • Upon annexation,property owners in Puget • Lot size and existing Colony asked for R-4 zoning because it was development $ more consistent with existing development consistent with R-4 zoning and RLD land • Planning Commission recommended use i' expansion of the area to include adjacent subdivisions • Capacity under R-4 is 112 units,capacity under R-8 is 173 units(102 units exist now) PP Cd.0.2 Ibm•e CPA 2006 M-05 2006-M-7 Former Aqua Barn Site Aqua Barn - Recommendation • Part of Ma plewood Addition Annexation 1 Planning 4 ��.. expanded area and Staff Recommend: • Zoned commercial and multi-family by King County in 1998 3 0 Acie piece on the a, Highway zone CA • Currently designated as RLD in Renton's (CC Land Use) �'�� ' Comprehensive Plan ; r 30 Ace multi-family � `h� ' • Without Comprehensive Plan Amendment the area and associated area would be zoned R-4 upon annexation open space tract zone R-I4(RMD l..and Use) 5 • Aqua Barn Rezone Analysis • The multi-family area is already fully developed and the open space tract permanently set aside-so Former Aqua Barn Property there is no additional capacity created there. Development Agreement • The commercial area has capacity for approximately 22,216 sq ft of commercial development • The proposed amendment is a close match to the existing County zoning 2006-M-7 - Development Agreement 2006-M-7- Development Agreement • Applies only to 3.0 acre commercial component fronting on Renton Maple Valley Highway • Planning Commission recommended a • Prohibits a number of ordinarily allowed uses in the development agreement on the commercial CA Zone,including: portion after the public hearing on Natural resource extraction/recovery,hobby kennels, September 30,2006 group homes,and higher education institutions, Adult retail uses,big box retail,horticultural nurseries, retail sales,and vehicle sales, • This is the required public hearing on the I Iotels,motels,off-site services,convalescent centers,and Development Agreement medical institutions, Vehicle related activities such as body shops.express transportation services,parking garages,dedicated park and ride lots and transit centers,and All industrial uses Development Agreement, continued Development Agreement, continued • Restricts other ordinarily allowed uses such as"drive- in/drive through retail" • Requires that design standards apply to all commercial • Restricts vehicle rentals to 10 parking stalls as part of development on the site,including: a commercial development with shared parking A-Site Master Plan" • Restricts"car washes"to 7 AM to 9 PM with no self- Common thematic elements service washes allowed - I5'-wide landscaping strip with 30"high berm and red • Requires that"vehicle repair and service,small"be maple,25'on center along street Homages unless existing conducted within a building,and provides for trees are retained • A traffic mitigation fee credit(not to exceed Common landscape elements throughout 3.0-acre site $252,799.50)reflecting property owners previous including 8'wide decoratis e concrete sideooalks along 2003 contribution to the Aqua Barn site's intersection building frontages facing parking areas,and improvements Screened and landscaped is ater detention ponds or provided) 6 Highlands- Background Comprehensive Plan Zoning Highlands Study Area • Comprehensive Plan • Highlands zoning Land Use and Zoning Package Amendments reviewed by the Taskforce Recommendations reviewed by the Planning Commission Planning Commission in April in September • Council asked for Includes Comprehensive Plan Amendments • Proposed amendments substantial revisions C2006-M-6 and 2006-T-2 reviewed by Taskforce in October ctober • Revised proposal reviewed by Citizen's and supersedes prior staff recommendations Taskforce in October Highlands- Proposed Changes to Highlands- Proposed Land Use Map Center Village Policies Amendments • Remove R-10 as an implementing zone in the • Add the area north of I 1 I Center Village Land Use designation NE 1G t ,th Street in the x `± " ., CV land use • Allow R-14 as an implementing zone in the Center designation Village Land Use designation I • t' I ; 'F t,3 1 • Place two areas with • s ,1 4x areasz • Allow RM-U and RM-T as implementing zones in existing multi-famil .., the Center Village Land Use designation y ".' ,L:;,� development in RMF . , • Eliminate Strategy 319.3-which requires land use designation "" 1 residential-only development north of NE 12'I'St. 1▪I:,3 #t j - t ii 1 '1)it .1 .I f Highlands Proposed Land Use Map Highlands Proposed Rezones • R-10 and RMF 3 t,„ residential areas to R 1.1 i 1 ' ; "« `; r- ' • Areas with large multi- _ t," family developments +- `„° , ` `! and Housing Authority �' �, 1 1 pax . a properties from RMF to $ ; ,, w 3l: M • Areas with smaller �`, : d ; 4 multi-family ' "''r , 6 , It."'= '" tlt t developments from R-10 4 3 A c ,y I s sis ? toRI\1F 1‘`,t• 1t » 1 t - = 3 [ ftvo 7 • Highlands Proposed Zoning Map Highlands Proposed Zoning Text Amendments s • Amend the implementing zones of the CV land use designation Remove R-10 as implementing zone ' Allow R-I4,RM-T,and RM-U as implementing Irma Irfite a, zones • Remove the Center Village Residential .r e � Bonus District • Adopt design regulations Highlands Proposed Zoning Text Highlands Proposed Zoning Text Amendments Amendments • Amend the uses in the R-14 zone: • Add clarifying language to the following Allow new indoor recreational facilities terms: Limit commercial development in the CV land Pipe stem lots use designation Design District Review Packet • Amend uses in the CV zone: Affordable Housing Require commercial use on ground floor along Sunset Blvd Townhouse Amendment of uses for consistency with CV Garden Style Apartment land use policies Highlands Proposed Zoning Text Highlands Proposed Zoning"Text Amendments Amendments •Amendments to the development standards •Allow two types of affordable housing for the R-14 zone: bonuses in the R-14 zone: Raise minimum density to 10 du/Lie Provision of affordable housing at 2 du/ac is Raise minimum lot size for detached units to one v+ay to become eligible for 18 du/ac bonus 5.000 s.t: density Alley access required for new units on parcels Allow a bonus of 30 du/ac if at least 50%of the with existing alleys units in a development 2 acres or larger in sue are allordable 8 Highlands Proposed Zoning Text Next Steps Amendments •Amendments to the development standards • Planning and Development Committee to of the CV zone: meet on November 16,2006 Allow a bonus of 10 ft.height if first floor is • First and Second Readings scheduled for commercial use November 27,2006 —Limit parking in the front setback Reduced parking standard for attached dwelling units { 9 • Uti�Y 0t '2006 Comprehensive Plan Ame1Mments '� © .I Public Hearing o� November 13, 2006 Group 1: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Text(Policy)Amendments Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 #2006-T-1: City of Renton Text Amendment to update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. Planning Commission Recommendation: Adopt two new policies specifically adopting the Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. #2006-T-3: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Land Use and Community Design Elements with housekeeping changes. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve corrections and revisions to the Community Design and Land Use Elements with housekeeping changes. #2006-T-4: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Transportation Element to reflect changes in the capital projects. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve the update to Table 8.3 to reflect the City of Renton's latest adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. #2006-T-5: City of Renton Text amendment to allow existing Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone in the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve a text amendment to the Residential Low Density designation to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park as an implementing zone. Group 2: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Concurrent Rezones Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 #2006-M-1: Wan Chee Map Amendment to change the designation from a combination of Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family with Neighborhood Commercial and R-8 split zoning to Neighborhood Commercial land use with Neighborhood Commercial zoning at 1315 N 30th St. Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny the rezone request for the property at 1315 N. 30th Street to change the designation from a combination of Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family with Neighborhood Commercial and R-8 split zoning to Neighborhood Commercial land use with Neighborhood Commercial zoning. Page 1 of 6 #2006-M-2: Susan Larson-Kinzer Map Amendment to change the designation from Residential Low Density land use with Resource Conservation zoning to Residential Single Family land use with R-8 zoning or Low Density Residential land use with R-4 zoning for a 3.4-acre parcel currently used as a blueberry farm and residence at 1733 NE 20th St. Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny the request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Residential Single Family with concurrent R-8 zoning and recommend that the Kennydale Blueberry Farm be rezoned from Resource Conservation to R-4 but remain Residential Low Density land use. #2006-M-8: City of Renton Map Amendment to consider changing the designation for a 49-acre area of Upper Kennydale, south of NE 28th St and north of NE 16th St from I-405 to approximately the boundary of the Heritage Glen Subdivision Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny the Staff's recommendation to change the designation from Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning. #2006-M-3: Manuel Rivera (Patrick Hanis, Hanis Greaney Attorneys) Map Amendment to change the designation from Residential Single Family land use with R-8 zoning to Commercial Corridor land use with Commercial Arterial zoning on a 2.09-acre single family property at 851 Carr Rd. Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny the request to redesignate and rezone the property to Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial zoning. Approve redesignation of this property and the adjoining parcels within the City limits to Residential Medium Density with concurrent R-14 zoning. The R-14 zoning designation allows small commercial uses using the development standard of Neighborhood Commercial zoning. #2006-M-4: Springbrook Associates (Cliff Williams,Vineyards Construction) Map Amendment to change the designation from Residential Medium Density land use with R-10 zoning to Commercial Corridor land use with Commercial Office zoning for a 5.61-acre undeveloped property located just south of S 37th St, and west of the dead-end at S 38th St west of Talbot Rd. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve the application changing the land use designation from Residential Medium Density to Commercial Corridor with a concurrent Commercial Office rezone. #2006-M-5: City of Renton Map amendment to change the area within the Puget Colony neighborhood from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning and in the unincorporated Kimberly Lane and Hideaway Homesites Subdivisions from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. a) 18.8-acre Puget Colony Homes subdivision consisting of 61 lots located at SE 133rd St, SE 134th St, and SE 135th St, and SE 132n1 St on the north and SE 136th St on the south. b) The nine lot Kimberly Lane subdivision to the immediate west on the north side of SE 136th St, 13508 138th Ave SE. Page 2 of 6 • • c) 1.1-acre parcel, west of Kimberly Lane subdivision. d) 31-lot Hideaway Home Sites subdivision on the south side of SE 136th St. Planning Commission Recommendation: Change the land use designation from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning. #2006-M-7: City of Renton Map Amendment to change the designation of two + 1.5-acre parcels at the southeast corner of 152nd Ave SE and the Renton—Maple Valley Hwy(SR 169), the former Aqua Barn site, from Residential Low Density to Commercial Corridor with potential Commercial Arterial zoning. Map Amendment to change 27 acres from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density with potential R-14 zoning (upon annexation). Planning Commission Recommendation: Change the land use of the commercial parcels from Residential Low Density to Commercial Corridor and residential parcels from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density. Group 3: Aqua Barn Commercial Development Agreement Required Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 #2006-M-7 Development Agreement A development agreement is recommended as a condition of the proposed rezone to Commercial Arterial. The development agreement accomplishes three things: a) It will restrict the range of uses allowed in Renton's Commercial Arterial zone, as the City's zoning is broader than County zoning. b) The agreement also requires design considerations to insure that the site development provides a transition to the residential area. c) The agreement provides for transfer of traffic mitigation fee credit be granted up to $252,799 against traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the property. Group 4: Highlands Land Use and Rezoning Package #2006-M-6 and#2006-T-2: City of Renton Highlands Study Area Comprehensive Plan Map, Concurrent Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 Zoning Code Text Amendments Required Hearing: City Council, November 13,2006 #2006-M-6: City of Renton Map amendment for changes in the Center Village land use designation in the Highlands Subarea Plan. This review will consider whether to amend the Center Village and Residential Medium Density Land Use Designations. Page 3 of 6 • Original Staff Recommendation a) Change from Center Village to Residential Multi-family Land Use • Area south of Sunset Blvd/SR 900, east of Dayton Ave, north of NE 9th St and NE 9th P1 currently zoned Residential Multi-Family. Zoning will remain Residential Multi-Family but the land use designation would be also become Residential Multi-Family. b) Change from Residential Multi-Family to Center Village • Area currently designated Residential Medium Density with R-10 zoning that is north of 16th St between Harrington Ave and Kirkland Ave. • The finger of parcels along Harrington Ave between 9th St and 7th St with frontage on Harrington Ave, these parcels would extend the Center Village south to 7th St. c) Change from Residential Medium Density to Residential Single Family • Area north of Sunset Blvd and west of Edmonds Ave. This area is currently zoned R-10 and developed with single family housing. • Area near Monroe Ave and Sunset Blvd. The properties on Monroe Ave are protected by covenant at their current level of intensity,which is approximately six units per net acre. The Planning Commission took a limited action on the original staff recommendation. The Commission concurred with the original staff recommendation for the map amendments but did not take action on either the concurrent rezoning or the concurrent zoning text amendments in the R-10, R-14 and CV zones because the Council appointed Highlands Task Force was assigned that review responsibility. This staff concurs with the Highlands Task Force recommendation. The original staff recommendation is superceded by the Highlands Task Force Recommendation. #2006 T-2: City of Renton 1) Text Amendments to update the Land Use Element to reflect changes in the Center Village Policies. a) Amended Policy LU-318 to delete R-10 as an implementing zone and add R-14 as an implementing zone in the Center Village and clarify that the RM zone with suffixes can implement the Center Village. b) Amend Strategy 319.2 to call for preparation of a subarea plan rather than a redevelopment plan to implement the Center Village land use concepts and provide that the phasing of the Plan is expected to occur within a two to five year period from the 2004 GMA update. c) Amend Strategy 319.3 to delete a statement that areas east of Edmonds Ave and north of Sunset Blvd currently zoned RMF are to remain in residential use and the area north of 12th St currently zoned R-10 is to remain in residential use. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve corrections and revisions to the Land Use Element. Task Force Recommendation: The Highlands Task Force concurred with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Page 4 of 6 • 2) Highlands Task Force Recommendation: Land Use Map Amendments The proposal is to include the residential area north of NE 16th St in the Center Village (CV) land use designation. The Task Force also recommends include the multi-family areas southeast of NE 12th St and Monroe Ave NE, and east of Harrington Ave NE between NE 7th St and NE 9th St in the Residential Multi-Family(RMF) land use designation. 3) Highlands Task Force Recommendation: Concurrent Rezoning An upzone to Residential-fourteen units per acre(R-14)was recommended for the current Residential- ten units per net acre (R-10) zoning in the study area. R-14 zoning was also recommended for the duplexes north of Sunset Blvd in the vicinity of Glenwood Ave NE and Harrington Ave NE. CV zoning was expanded along Sunset Blvd, in a few parcels adjacent to the existing commercial area and the Houser Terrace and Evergreen Terrace properties owned by the Renton Housing Authority. Rezoning to RMF was recommended for three strips of properties: a strip along Kirkland Ave NE, a strip south of NE 12th St, and a strip along Harrington Ave NE. 4) Highlands Task Force Recommendation: Concurrent Zoning Text Amendments Amendments are proposed to the development regulations in the R-10, R-14 and CV zones. Non-Conforming Uses Past zoning proposals for this area included the possibility of implementing zoning that did not allow existing residential uses, such as duplexes and single family homes. In such situations, the existing use is considered a legal non-conforming use. Legal non-conforming is the technical term for "grandfathered in". It means that the use is allowed to continue but may not expand or enlarge. Several members of the Task Force wished to ensure that the zoning proposal allow existing residential uses to remain legal and conforming. The recommended zoning proposal eliminates the issue of non- conforming uses. All existing use types (duplexes and single family uses) are allowed uses in the proposed zoning package. Property Redevelopment One of the most debated issues in the package of proposed zoning changes was a requirement that the existing unit had to be removed when properties came in for subdivision. This would only affect those applying for division of their properties and not to other changes like remodels or additions. However, the Task Force felt that property owners should not be required to remove existing units in order to subdivide their property. In lieu of requiring the removal of existing units, the Task Force indicated that property owners should be required to upgrade the existing units. Unfortunately,building and related codes make this impossible to implement without declaring the unit a hazard. The Task Force did not wish to create a situation in which existing units were declared hazardous. However, the Task Force did recommend deleting the provision that required the removal of existing units upon subdivision. The Task Force recommends that this provision be removed from both the R-14 or R-10 zones if either of those zones is used to implement the Center Village land use in the Comprehensive Plan. Affordable Housing Keeping the neighborhood an affordable place to live for people in all stages of their lives was important to the members of the Task Force. In the R-14 zone, there is an allowed density bonus of 18 units per net acre. The Task Force recommends keeping the proposed incentive of creating two units of affordable housing as one of the options to achieve the density bonus. The Task Force also recommends implementing an incentive geared toward public agencies and non-profit organizations whose mission is to provide affordable housing. An incentive is recommended that would allow a bonus of 30 units per Page 5 of 6 Akuimw net acre for any project of at least two acres, in which a minimum of 50 percent of the units developed would be affordable to those with incomes of 50 percent of the Area Median Income. Limits on Commercial Development While the Task Force liked the flexibility of the R-14 zone, there was general concern that it could allow some small commercial uses in a residential area. To prevent this, the Task Force recommendation specifically prohibits on-site services, retail, and eating/drinking establishments in this area unless they are accessory to a community, school, or recreational use. This would allow the possibility for a small business like an espresso stand or bicycle rental to locate in a park or the Community Center. A hearings examiner conditional use permit would be required. The Task Force also recommends that new, indoor recreational uses should be allowed in the R-14 zone to allow for redevelopment of the North Highlands Community Center property. Commercial Development Amendments in the Center Village Zone The CV zone is primarily oriented toward commercial development. Residential uses are allowed but some limits must be put in place to ensure that as the area begins to redevelop. Residential uses will not dominate this zone. As a result, the Task Force recommends increasing the minimum residential density in this area to 20 dwelling units per net acre. This will prevent lower density residential-only redevelopment from occurring in the commercial area. The Task Force also recommended a standard which requires commercial development in properties fronting on Sunset Blvd. This proposes that commercial development occupy a minimum of 75 percent of the frontage on Sunset Blvd. Another Task Force recommendation is to allow a ten foot height bonus in the CV zone for properties that have first floor commercial development. This allows building of four stories of residential over first floor commercial development, an important incentive for the development of mixed use commercial and residential buildings. R-14 Zone Density The Task Force recommends raising the minimum density in the R-14 zone to ten units per acre to comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the CV land use designation. The Task Force also recommends keeping the current bonus system in the R-14 zone that allows densities up to 18 units per net acre. In order to receive the bonus however, the proposed development would have to offer one of the following desired items: alley access, open space, or affordable housing. Design Regulations The Task Force recommends implementation of Design Regulations for all properties within the CV land use designation. The regulations consist of standards and guidelines that would be applied to new development. Minimum Lot Size for Detached Residential Development The Task Force recommended that the minimum lot size for single family detached residences in the R- 14 zone be set at 5,000 square feet. If the City Council determines to keep the current R-10 zoning, then the Task Force recommends that the proposed minimum lot size for single family residential of 5,000 square feet be required in the R-10 zone. Page 6 of 6 • • __) . . I. , ...., j3Pçj H 1 '1-\ I 3 go - . i t-, S , Area to Remain ' Single Family0 i \ 8 _ ,_ i-- 1 J _ , ,----- —\ Chee CPA 2006-M-01 0 200. 400 Planning Commission Recommendation `` G42 0{ Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning — Study Area Commercial Neighborhood ! ! Alex Pieuch,Administrator — Renton City NM Residential Low Density C.E.Feasel Limits I i Residential Medium Density l'4,N.roe. 13 November2006 I I Residential Single Family . 6......, • . miPr , 1441VIAw • a) , 4.1' • I 1 M CL Q) I cD = N, ' 1 ,_ \ E 24t - . _ ... , Ltn ..,,,< __. _ Li_i Q) _ 2Jri .„-- - > > c Q.) up . , \ -_ 2---\- -, s . Or- ill 1111' Ilml""...." , , , _ ••■ _NENE ..„-- _ Lip. ill El (i) .1 ft > A ft mo . ,‹ saiimom mops"4 i‘virE . _ , ,ama Alii =IL Ai ,t7,k 11111„ .—pi IP= 111111 (TD 4 vtr ang, ligiLvt• No.,-Ateks, III I IIII '4.:44 irti, ,40.;•> ,,,,I** .. Ilir. .1 ..,.--•00, \ — Irdilw Ill li 1111E 1.1 16t1- I 4 Blueberry Farm CPA 2006-M-02 0 400 800 Planning Commission Recommendation I I R-8 I (25 Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning t . 1 . 4800 • . rp..,Ad ...0, ma From Resource Conservation to R-4 v4 •- 13 November 2006 Remain Residential Low Density City Owned Parcels Unincorportated Area R-14 R-14 R-10 •nin Zoning Zoning g (Existing) 0 200 400 Rivera CPA 2006-M-03 Planning Commission Recommendation ® Commercial Corridor �Y Wit Residential Low Density Gti 94, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Study Area I I Residential Medium Density • • Alex Pietsch,Administrator — +�� C.E.Feaset — Renton City 1M Residential Multi-Family ��NT0 13 November 2006 Limits I I Residential Single Family ---ter.--.- O 44a hi O 11111111 ir gm awl an O O N N O o ti I 0 3 occE �11. oa� mmIE :jG)1 J U � I O :61:1)(j)(813 oa �/ 'Zo`� e s It7 RR °�� 'E v�<c9_ Cn n \ _ , ._ 1 .-L.-j n- • NMI III \ � 2nc St %IN, �„��� , 4: -- Mil C-17-23 0 i_ .___. , li / ] , _ Jai _ __ 1 MI= -<( i , _, '-- 1 1 A WM_ . __ _ , 1 , 1* 111_ ,,, -- _ „, 0 , , , * ().._. , ,. 1, , , , , . . 0, _ , _ Is% , , 1 ** * a, / , _ 1%., , ♦ 1 ,, A,4%, , 0 , 11._ s% ** , t,. 1 ; ; 1 * , 4 4111 I , � - i �- - - �J Puget Colony Homes CPA 2006-M-05 S. Planning Commission Recommendation 0 200 400 Gt;Y O„{, Economic Development,Neighborhoods& Strategic Planning Study Area + + Alex Pietsch,Administrator ,P o'� 3 Del Rosario os r 2oo6 — — Renton City Residential Low Density NT Limits I 1 Residential Single Family • K: •-u--.4"--roNsigims wi Prig-Aim .1214 , 1 A ' , 11 • * ..., wimourittoi .IIIN 1.21 INA Nu mial Vo ri V A , ... = ....• %RI Int_ ... . _ — i. rid weird ommonik in illiiiil■■Ir■■1_ / ■ :. r il•■■■ 111 �L':!am up n ��: :: ;i ■■■■■ ■■P■fie■;irn■■■■■�� ����1 ■ � '�1 p aHer :F�■ ra1�;T�■■ 11 21 111111111111B lid ►ri►mum ularigiammin , � . . ■a■lad :u ' i ■1111111►kRr177n riiii1E1'1■■ r ��i ■�� ■syt MIA ■��■ •� ��� Il��r�ta. �� n■■�� ■ r - ullh•■■■■■ imm dnuran 411 t Aim ono • I■i mist st fF� a ICLILMICJ1011111 Iii M .. , . AMA ■��� ■� ME = ■� 41111111111 ■ ■ _ `(U�i1 r ICE■jai MIEN i II ■Ili :+ CC NE 20th lla �iEil11I11 tom-- 11•J� � �■■■ ill : ' ■■■ mmm- ç:ju : ■ ■■ �a ■� ■__© "111111 �e Il■11 ini NMI 11111. NI iiimEr.■r \C ■=m ■■■■■limmi "■■■ ■ic ■ 1Pr • �J► 1-■Ii�`�iYfMN ��•■ ■=■ eI Old �rri�111:1 ■n■► -- ■R metal' n muma•the imp lo■ ■mlot am gg aim ak. :Ia►irn im! ' . ••,I' ia N1=■1 uA ■ A En :■ . mil n &�`��� :Illlli '■ ■ pm III■ ■■ ■■ •■■■ ■ ■ men ■e :■� 13■11.41 .■ sa - ■1' ■■�ILI EN ■■• a= rM I mi N im ■_ire ■■ ��� - ■ Minim it �� i�INN i R� ��/Ai ■ nr J upi r 1 III I a11■s lug ■mom s■ ■■r/n� _ vILI •w 1�:��itii��`+� on 1 L rig--11111ra riAidirc,-,A aro all m Noma maw an o .Nam .n■■■ intavil 1�r 17 1@1 CAI 1•1•® _ ■ ■ m-seil ■. ®1 f I w� �'''a ales►og — ■ 900mai IN o ■ *wom • en arm �., �i ■Wt F► IN ■ rrr�■ ■rn■L��a :W�duo.■,,■ ■W■■a1ui■ ■■i■l�� .iim ■I:Aaii ■, all. M ./MN W El I.t ■ WWI..ills W ♦1i mme s cal ■� ■Gnt1111 ?111!/A Ammo_ F�1■■1 c •i m� \\■r/gi /:wassm 1amsmaa g r■� N ■ - ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ 11■ ■C ■/1■uc■■c1�■iiii G1INJa m ue1n�onnurrs �i -r ~� �!111111111'■,!: :: =: �� I11k11I11 11111$IIIR�11111a '.■■ ■� Eta■ MINIM ■11111i11. 11111. • °`i ma L. -, : �m c■. 11II11III1 1I•• I111"w. 11�1116■ ■■■ . -l! -■ ■■ . e■ . � .•■ ut *� �Qn . ■,. 1111'///j r■ IN■ C� ��: rm lit 4 m' 9th is MI mila. ■li■ . ■1, • 1I11aurn:Haw *►*ioi: "-'C . ■ we,■tea _snp. _�list. sosto :I:0- ,,tp■ pi 1 ���� ": i 1 mi1►��inc■�,yy�!►ei y y�1,i•■■■: 1% III .1,, , 48 �IEa ►G��'a 44w air ` all CO. FJIH'I'■ N lil>I�.1! �■■!� �/ <a, �a 1,140� 11 ■■ ■P, ■i N■ IIIJ 11IS�11\�■e�a�Vs� t� ��►` \ 1n17u MVO �.♦i. .. �•/�%�� Irma Q T�/, 1�1.111f11-I► r ;�►�: �� LT.�. .. r11+.� ���,�r >> I��1I1 mit ♦1.�♦ �"' e, •me Si� F� IIiI:IL'1Llli i► �O�iAI: ■■ .... m IfU �i 1 a.♦ � '��I ail t■ h•�411 ■ ■e■ u� .. ♦ ` /�i # 11 , ♦i�;Ii�i ■■ ■� I■ 1111n11111€! ■1n��11111 ■1111!■ W� �� �1�`■ iWI ■, vA�`���� ■u i 111111l'9iC1 •uuiu Y1111 I11IL'ir III Elm 10 \III/ \IIIr' ail E! E ti ■` "iti 1■�l/• ■■ ■11 '■ ■■■ lee /111111I1 a9mmnD snll■■!'7 nJ �� aft 1,; • . ■I■ l�� �� yea \■■■J. _[rim a uu ■�;� 1 *1■ © 1 anm pan ''�s �� r�3 ■I ■■■ ■111 ■■ �1 u ■ i = = EMU m vtor .*! ■■■■el�®�I �I�t7NJ■ ■ ■■ 1[Y7 ENE UMW 2.."1.1.111111.1111 Q,c tA6.44 $ S... „,-.449. I nom �wv. :1,�♦ .�, ry\��V _ 1/ 4,I Highlands Subarea RLD 0 1000 2000 S Proposed Land Use - Task Force I I RMD ® RMF 1 : 12000 GtiT • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning ® CV • � Alex Pietsch,Administrator cCC® C.E.Feasel F •'r 03 November 2006 .....27 ....ciriniltoimmlimer mi. Liksiptiiiiimarirmi martlirlfIrmili ' \s'l''we'ill ' 111P4.9:14::0,11''ir. 10,1171.211111111:1filliroligirimurlir.°001111-4.4%5 Is1211:11111111-11-111' . . . " 11-wolTifill- GIBIIIIIiifil 1.6‘1° i ifi'&•- ' Wen 111 -* titiiiMIEMIIIIII . =wpm os 1..... .... - .4 •mi. smiummumil =I ion p_mhimi .... • 2 mu wm. ommirimel i... NI - • :11 El le NE ' 1•2 • LEN II. 111111 slam slibl El L di ipiganimunimu p AI w : mi. miimirmin immicr_ MI II MIN EriergiEffliniMIMI I= am Mimi zi161 Ei= Num NI UN miklani•1111.111Uue AR4 V line fs lrfi,MP q _kimii iiintlit.'ffirqj.mffi7 .11E4: 61,7,mmoi slim -----------,mid 115411 tl iti.`" i LI IMMO Powlm lown IMMI'dwaiMilIk ii11111116101111dEl nignigir NB .4, •eil . ..ill sai mu 1•1112311111 S, 'NJ E11111111111•511111111 At,,,,,,Vat IA 'no insmilltablillialili• millan 111111111111143 0161111111rre ME INEINIIIIMINIBI Mel , St k agir gh • ANNISMI. C61 _ la Aim mom nuomm.....10 ungi is . Abi A r•2°I lill M" NE uu u imatrUni OP !ELI • =No mum im•....ms Ti'' -,:ila WS' 0 4 marannulion Imo VP whiwii • ggir gam Es ...g.--7- EN 4-• 1, ik*-28 choi is -__ ars.fannirimailii MI imm imam 361.0, „,.-tir, 1.13...710 rNL__22th_F,7777 7,,,.,- /-,_,Nor i ---,,, ...._... .mr. 0,mi minima mill'*--- mil inn gun :mg el ge 2 RI ar..1._ •."-: ,,',..-;;--, ' --,..., [-, ki '. '''' ..,111101-4 20.101 RI LI 1111''''' No ... us Isimmi IMa me NZ nom! oillikvl ,N1 I, \ ' I IIII - /4-%' 411V m li•VITA.,..a.a wr.:,-1111 likilamm NE mil mum Immo Elm en..imiumi isimp,,.....\%I, " „ - 1' ‘, :;•1 4•51 .iiii Eimmi ANWZ. 1112.1M IIIII M. tal imIllu mwifJP "Inv%sopa IN=Iimmil 44'si,''‘.\4- ' ,, 1 , 2 de „ -mos mug ugg si I•lili Nom um Arf a==. ,,,,,....4 II .., _ Ewa limmodh,, , =NM 11Hite Bilionw =ma n111111EMISIIll mounigt , 11.11.1 Ir.""it III mil „.12,1 LINE it nue:sr!/11 .7111,1_7:14‘, :, MN M=410100017 4111FAI ling ifilirdelliTCT41 Wear - ' - n Anniii wri .1 r A ifisupai a a lama n ak Jinngi lc . I no INIOna omm IS Asia RI mmus meg LI .... mum , ..., .6..,„..i. .... -a. 011111X NI wpm moms,in is Zara No II IIN.L. , , •ma smomr MB IIIm NM a inmEl , r. 0_,Iii. .-: mos an= le ,.. gig...JP riellp-'11 loweirffil MI I A ENE mmi g3 liWitl LIZ mormit,a1 m• . - .:.,' ME lii MO KA a RPM 1,111L Ala - _. rij -"mrmil ra 13 Om" iii ta ra al 3 1 . maila MiSlanir..m '1 '6".0 g.diall-' osiigie In I ".II.ii.1.111E, ... E. worp,on IP mi 11 Anil= MEE -:-; op.: In morala ffilimilimic.4 rpm III LIR al r„ F31 gillilklall 6 wirrEMIII: 11111E1E1N :10 - ,. c i igi __,,, .........ziaii.„..___ , 4, Air m gin al pus IIIIIM --1-1 ' - -N !TPA Wil rifv4 111117-awkinli6 itis=1""Irol rjr0.-=-= , , lth rfrgi lard=41 I11110 Itile 111 minmEnen I - Asia lieA, AM Ns .°6.110 Willillw- 'Er '' Ai • WU 0, ma owls, wiping i a : MIEN ma: i-LIS mitkis truill = N _ 1. . „\ 900 1 , 1 1,:,111.11.1.12 itinallil 11• .7 or!: ,.iiiii oil 11 4r4:11110:1:11:1:1:• , , 1 . Mr ill ommummo mar191,14 sikivol° era .111. lel mill. Milk in in- nog sis Ed , 1 km WIN n"P4n111111:111111% ne"..on Ifid/11111 _ , \ 1 1 1 mil Eml nugunon 'WY iihrililliiii2111 Illir „„„ . .... . ,...... .. .- hiparlin 14. , \ li 1 1 , ill= #0 ei mn. ib awqmvanismia U .13.1111MI . 1.0 10.___ 6111111611110MMI an Eliania \ mmiraplACI1112111113111/#112 211711ftiNlik p.m son 'NM. 1111.1tH111111 0111111E1111111111111Is 0°,1111111011111 win ow ---,-.._Td it MO -L--C = Nom :'Z' minium Iminasuitunuma Ililimmin 2.11 mm. ...1 EL. klimmommommin Roo.. .Iii INT.11.91147 44,411•11 • _A-iuslimili Elm inn -----_, • \ 'Vol' &rno•••••tis NEI nu ----. ZI \ AL* 41P1nTni. pi ig •• inn--- 41 „am Pm 0. Nam igninE Es u'li: pillett_446.011 9th MM. \ as _40MM • gm IN• II/4 iiIrwal ri'' am mum ma_mop. .NI §.9. 041iIii Nab - \ 1..." ,.. r..,1. \ .4 rig Mil t--it ,or Ai.. IRM min rap= fel, 1i...dm ran WA. mom mow AT t,4111 r01 Mg It= elliMIN: lin lib: 11:1 EMI! . IN. .. 6.-.• ,.. is Ahoy ri- Myr illilimi Im ...... ,... ki.,damirAmmin. , ! #111:32m millIktopirs tr,iii • Jill III1 ifill .2 or 1111=11 STAIIIIIMIIINIIIMIIIII HE 1•1•1111" Sim limainivir-Al rtr, L'41: ,• loo a ii_ p, som mi.unno • 1 as. 114.= I= =I ... P10•1•00 ., • IIPIN wailiiiiii ill: .az aim- -rug Art, 1, ... to,* -44 .. uggill I ...p•-11 ins rPO4, a 1116.1 1 _imra of l°iii" M cum* * tii„,will% 611441.1** a W#W 1611.15.- Illfw*i -.:.:71.,f':,`'h:,.11 111-11‘484/#8, 144 ft 444 ,pig 0.116 StA Ge.:.:,'i.''.'...L 1, 011111111111111111 Irk OtIO :2 al 'I igOr 0,41 loam W. al, ' , 00 kt',.41'!;, MN „Pe. Aro raillEa A w.11 eft 41111: r-4M ..III Igkilli gatleal Pitt'r,Z-,,,N1 NM Mei er41 w`liktYCH 1=miiim 14 wil. MireseAre i ILI A a 0-1,%, ig riAlP No.412 -.0.1K%TA ri.. ...----- i".73j4:0,t1. LL'ilillighlitnAgi Salim 142`' 8 Illiarkgal II ir-s° lirar. 4. I. 1180.4 4$S1le. '31baw. al a Am g•VP$7:::k.Y N!IPIIIIP%vi$* A Ea Eli tal, kffsivaisi iin_...7, .1.-Not tfiri .01.61 sus 6 i a sj ri 1;g ,.‘42,..4 0.7„.0.,,il MillIkiL111.111 Lidlilial"" ...•am" kra tili"••n„_ mi Pli 0 mo '• al No; -* .* . ma • • ....n:r".‘"4 I 0 a k tVitai *i4i V#it . 111 N g. all .. ....,„..4.1 unewsuB1 impsram miaow rw. ark- r,..s. i tiinup 111111114.11161 IMMILIIMIIIII 11111110 = - PE '1110 i • A III' La SP 10111 'am 11111#‘11111•00 M %we 040. ii .. mile am ,..41,0,,,,-, in yam moimull MINIUM eullillagill 1.• A .,. ,..... I., m gi., st. =limn ,,.-,110.„.4.% morLATialigieum =Imp . am ^13 lit Ill'• all --.J 44:1111111111 OUP in iv u $4. le,f,i51 pi 4. E.21 =muffin= ko., zIP q% lk = millyinui• • •• ;,•1° NI Mativ:r.1 ad -t, 425 ern ir olowaion ••is mg to w • .v.,`;'14'.. . .. v.. g IMP um.= ' "' 'A''M immil0111111.11 IR ..11111r--Jo• ' g401 IiL.„4-4ii 40111, hi ,. .liiialiara4 11 I Mt!' IP VA V.'',t:' tomE Wair111.1. Highlands Subarea NM RC ° ' R-14 0 1000 2000 lis Proposed Zoning - Task Force 1-rfki R-1 111111 RM-F 6.* Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning + Alex Pletsch,Admuustrator CN 1 : 12000 I I R-10 C NT) C C.E.Feasel 03 November 2006 I I R-8 NM CV MI 41111111* ' ' . . ..., , _________ A/ t III s,,,E, Sk%, Rent Mapje Va j$ t4,1 11 y 4y \ r e H tirPir 0 ,. ..„,„:„.„,„„„::„...„:„....„,„„„,,,,,,,::::,:„,,::::,:,,,,,,,,,,,,. .,,,,„::::„,„,,,„„,,,,,.„,„!,:::,,.,:.:,„,,,,,,,,:.:,,,„,,...„.„,.:„.,,...:.::, „..„:„..,.„,„,,,, .:,,,,„,,.,,,,,,,,„.„„,,,.„.„..„..„..,„.„.::::,„,„:„.::,„,,,,,,::,,,,,, ,,.:,.,:,.-„...„,„:„:„.„..,„„.,::,,,,.„,„::,..,„:"„,..„...„..,,,,,.::.„,:: ,....„,,,,,.,....„.„:„:,,....,,,,,„:„.„,::::,...,:.„,,:„.„,„..„,,,,„:„.::....„...„..„:„, ..,,,,,•„:„..„,:,,..::,:„,„:„.:.,,,,,,,.„:„,,,,::-.,..„,,,„„,,,::„„,,,,,,„,,,„:„.„,:,:,„.„,,,,. h*b° ,1 .,...,:„.„,..„„...„..„:„.„...„,„„:„.,„„,„:„:„:„.„,„:„,,„,:::„:„.:„.::::.::...... (77.„.:„....„,,..,,...:,..„,.„.„..„..„...„,_, ,,,,,,,,,,,a,,,,,,,,u,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,„,,,„,...., ,,,,,,„„.„..,,,,..„),,,,,,,,„„,,„„.:5„,„,„:„,,,,,i,„.„„.„,„:„.., elm yi„:„....,„,,..,,„,„,,,,,,,,,,,„:„,„„,..,,,,,,,„......„:„,,,,,,:,,,, - `��' :„ (' '` `' " i i> ,,,„.„,,,,..„:„.„,,„:„...„...,,,,,,,,„,, ,,, 3.^icTy, /, �> Y ft 1 ...""......: . , ...... .,,d.„....,i,,,,,,,,,„,,,,„„„,„.:„,,,,„:„,„„„,,,,„,„..„,„,„ . ,..„.....„.... ..„:„.,,,:,,,„,,,,,,,...„,..„,,..„<„,„.„:„.....„:„.....„..... „,,.,„:,„,,,,,„„,...„..,,,.:„.„,..„„„„.„,,,,,,,,:,.„.„:„.,,,,,,,,, „„..,,,,,..,.„..,,,i,,,,,,,;„,„,,,,,.1 -.,:,,..,,, , ' F Fl FT '' > F �,!., .,,,,„,„,,„„,...„,„,,„,.,,,:„../..,„.„,,,,,,„„ W&II1 K ,,,.. .., I I { 'r ~ ,'s"",,,,,..„.,,,„,„,,,,,,„0.,,,„,,,,;„,„, ,,,,,,,,.:,...,,,„,„:,,,..,..„,:i,-,,,„:,,,,„,,,,„,,,,.„.:, 1. . y „,:,,,,,,,,„. „.„..,„,„„„,„:,„:„ it ,„ ` x ��, l a r..„ ,'.r , \ ,.r<a „.��J,ri 'X' .^\ / 1.\; '„ \ .� .�. . ,„ ,,,,,,,,,,,., , ,,,fir%,`' F/�i nt , '/1,: „: r ,,,„,: ,,,,,,:.,,,,,,,,,„,,,,,,„4„,„,,,,,,,„6 .„,„..,,..,:„„.„,„„,,,,,,„,,,,<„,,4„,:,..„,„„,,,_„,,„::,,,_:,„,„ „,„:„,,,,.,.,,,„.,,o,:,..„„.,,,,„.,,,,,,„,„,,„,,,,„,,,, ,,:.„,„.„,,,„,,,,::,„:,:„,,,,.,,,„,:,„,,,,,,::,„„,„,,,:„„,..,,,,,,,:„. „.„....,„.,,,,,, ' 1 t 1 �✓.,,,<,,„,,....,,,:.:,„:„,,„„,„:„:.: ,:,,„,.:.,:„,,..,.e...„,, „,„,,,„.„:,,,,,.,..„,,,,,,.:::.,,,„,,,,, ,.,,,,„.,,,,..:„.„,,,,,...„:„.„.„:„..,,,,,„...,,,........„......:,:„.„:„.„,,,,,,„,„:„.„.„,,,,,„•,,,,,,,..„,„„,:„.,/,,,.:„.„:„.„..„„,„:::,,,,.,. {„r„.......::„:„.s,::,...„,:.:,„:.,, ',,,..:,„„,„,,.„,,,,„.:.„,„„,„,„:„.„<„,.„,„,„,:,,,,,.,.,„„:„„:„.„.„„:„..„.,„:„„:„.„.,::„.:,,,,.:...:::,,, .„: y/f „„),,::,,...,:,„,„,:„,„:„:„,,,:„...,:„.„....„.„..,„,,„:„...„,:;:„,..E„,•,,,,::„,.,:r.,::,,,,..„.:., � y ifil ,,. ..„ ..... .. . ,.. „ .. ..... • , ...„„ ..... , , , ..„.... . . ma.—. Aqua Barn CPA 2006-M-07 0 300 600 .s, Planning Commission Recommendation Commercial Corridor .• • •��`•���;a:: . . ..; . . .; s w/CA Zoning 1 : 3600 i • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning : , Alex Pietach,Administrator i Residential Medium Density ,�, C.E.Feasel w/R-14 Zoning FNTO" 13November20W . moor,i\zz -iimmima 'NNNNIIIIIIIIIIII .,..., limmill MIMI! i �� Mill 2 sa elt4ir ' �1iiiili ■�� j -10-2,-ti,.., Emi1111111116 morn MIN 11111. filItilli, vr„P,34 0-fa.., kiitiv . 'Ilimir-.---, -t: =,,,46.4,,,,i,-,04, ,,,, ,,,,-, , lillr jillip '�j ■■■ .wohA itm re,, e--,-,,, At-mdm„--- Nip Itilin MI liall:11111 ma mr. ,^ -,.„. ,,, *, vo, i',, .. = /Algae ENE 741FSMTele& — ,,-4 Mil immil. 411.1 MEM • ! OM 124 UM g , ems . ®A MI C- 1 CI� Tults, '44."4,44 ,,,,,"'Or41. t 11I ,� ■ ■ ■ icIt3.11 ir.:.;„,,:. .;_:..,,,.,:, _ ,ff°,:-.. gi .„witbm k a . , -,,, .; • ; °.1,ti; ..,A, in er, , il 111111%1WaM Willi III ,, .., alii • 01111 • -,,,,,..7,,,_..1..:,,, ,t;:._Ail 11,41 .1,,,;,-:,,,,,,,,,,,ri ,..,,,1 ., � N� �0, L.,:< ii _Kum _, NE � � �,�.�,1 �`� III .0. lill x *1% ..?....,..a.- r.--.334-,,,Nezi gtO 'i';!: ?,: 41 AMIE •jj•MINI rim MOM •1 0"• III! Mt II!' ' Proposed Kennydale Rezone 0 400 800 Staff Recommendation [ I R-4& Residential Low Density m.�d � m u I I R-8& Residential Single Family 1 : 4800 tl!• ^ NM proposed under application CPA 2006-M-2 -66 Randy Corman, President November 13, 2006 Renton City Council 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Subject: Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2006-M-2—Blueberry Farm Dear Mr. Corman This letter is intended as a written comment in conjunction with the November 13th, 2006, City Council Public Hearing on the 2006 update to the Renton Comprehensive Plan. I would also like to incorporate by reference all the materials and testimony submitted on the issue to the City Planning Commission. I submit that the applicant has not provided the required burden of proof that the changes in zoning to the Blueberry farm property are of any benefit to the Public. The current zoning of RC — Resource Conservation is consistent with the historical and current use of the property as a blueberry farm; and also consistent with the underlying existence of a rare and environmentally valuable peat bog. The current zoning of RC may appear on the map to be incorrectly described as Spot Zoning but it is in fact correct zoning as it reflects the existence of both the headwaters of Kennydale Creek and the location of a rare and unique peat bog. The City argued in their July 2006 analysis of this issue that there was no mapping of the headwaters of Kennydale Creek, but the several of the City maps do show Kennydale Creek with obvious direct connection to the Blueberry Farm Property. The City also refers to the Creek as a Class 4 stream, however the overwhelming evidence collected shows that this stream does not ever run dry and should be classified as a City Class 3 waterway. We provided affidavits from a number of nearby residents commenting on that issue. The City also discussed the mapped wetlands which reportedly covered a portion of the Blueberry Farm property. The City wetland map of this area also is obviously flawed. More reliable indicators of the wetland location straddling NE 20th St. would be the 1952 USDA King County Soil Survey map showing the location of a rare spring fed peat bog at that location and the topographical map furnished by the City with the amendment package showing almost all of the Blueberry Farm property at a low elevation that would be consistent with the identified peat bog wetland. Another indicator of the unsuitability of the Blueberry Farm for residential development is the 1980's attempt to develop the property by Schneider Homes. In July 1982 Schneider bought the site for$ 90,000 and explored development with the City. The development was apparently not found feasible and in November 1988 the site was sold to the Kinzers for$78,000. The Kinzers have also argued that the property is no longer commercially viable for farming. There has been no evidence provided that the income from the property has reduced by development or other factors, or that the production of berries has been affected. In fact the farm has been open for business this summer and the berries appear to be thriving. The water table in the area was affected during and after the de-watering during the Heritage Glen construction, however the level in the last year has returned to the levels experienced in the past decade. Another issue not mentioned in the City's discussion of this issue is reduction of loss of aquifer recharge. A signification portion of the City's water supply is furnished by wells located near NE Now Now 24th St. and Jones Ave NE. Any development of the Blueberry Farm area may adversely affect the quantity and/or quality of the well water. I believe that the Kinzers have not met the requirement that they provide proof that the Resource Conservation zoning is no longer appropriate for this site. They have not shown that the site does not contain critical areas that must be preserved. They have not shown that the long standing agricultural use has been affected by environmental changes. They have not shown that the uses allowed by the requested revised zoning will result in increased public benefit. I request that the City Council reject this Comp Plan Amendment or return this issue to the applicants for re-submission with the issues noted above more thoroughly addressed. Sincerely William E. O'Connor 10402 151st Ave SE. Renton, WA 98059 • addil CITY OF RENTON � /3-66 PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT Kennydale Blueberry Farm Rezone CPA 2006-M-02 LUA05-159, R, ECF Highlands Area November 13, 2006 I did not think that I could be shocked any more by lack of City interest in complying with laws or its unreasonableness. However, the disrespect for SEPA, GMA and various State agencies evident in the file for the above action has actually shocked me. I didn't think that the City would display such a blatant disposal of environmental values and Laws. I am busy, but I just decided to take the time to comment because of the above. I was employed at the blueberry farm around forty years ago. I have also witnessed trout minnows at the headwaters of Kennydale Creek, (under 405 a short distance to the west) which was adjacent to the back of my Mom and Dads past residence. There are a number of unaddressed concerns regarding your possible legislative action on this property, that would be grounds for invalidation of the zone (regulation) I shall outline a few of them herewith for your consideration; 1) The wetlands on the property are undelineated, unstudied, improperly rated, and there has been no function assessment done. Staff unjustifiably and erroneously relies only on the Renton code to further the lack of information even though the actions take place under SEPA, a Washington environmental law. 2) There are important species and salmonid species that rely upon valuable systems relevant to this proposal. 3) The City Council would be unable to decide on how to proceed with this action until the scientific empirical bases upon which the project rests are considered; anything otherwise is contrary to Laws. 4) In the words of the City's planner, the project has "significant" implication for the neighborhood and the surrounding areas. That requires decision makers to be able to deliberate after disclosure according to laws. 5) The City paper also concludes that the information about the property, which is likely to be "rare peat", and "muck" is inadequate, and the most unlawful fact is that no measures are proposed to mitigate adverse effects. 6) The Planner that commented on the proposal was misplaced, stating that no comments were received about alternatives, because there were many comments not the least of which is the environmental element of the comprehensive plan that states that the City's goal is to protect such critical areas and achieve no loss of critical habitat wetland areas of this type. 7) The Staff has evidently decided to ignore the Department of Ecology, Department of Fish and Wildlife, not to mention the City's own plan for the protection of the environment and water resources. 8) It is true that the City still is ignoring it own policy, that calls for enacting regulations that are equivalent to the Ecology storm water manual intended to address these types of issues. 9) Staff has contended that "no environmental review is required" in a SEPA process which is actually a Law designed for full disclosure and review of actions by the City. No current studies or scientific information is available to the public. That is illegal and outside of SEPA and GMA. 10) The City is required to obtain HPA permits under RCW 77.55.020 for any action which could impact the flow of groundwater. As such, a word of caution to the City; there are appeals being also being planned at this time in an effort to compel the City to comply with GMA and SEPA instead of just an outdated map and no analysis. (inadequate environmental review) SEPA constitutes a full disclosure environmental law and the GMA requires the City to be guided by Environmental principles and include the best available science in decisions that affect areas like this, (something that has not yet been done) It would very likely be a waste of City money to proceed further without observation of the above principles, because the likelihood of successful appeals against this proposal are a definite reality. There is not much difference with this project than there is with proposing to discharge a huge volume of polluted storm water down Sunset Blvd. into John's creek and Coulon Park caused by inadequate mitigation of storm water flows. All need to have a plan for mitigation of adverse effects. I guess the City policy is to refuse to do that. It should now come to be realized that the above would be the prerequisites for proceeding with this rezone that will affect the City of Renton. In the alternate, appeals are likely to be forthcoming. On a closing note, it is wrong and illegal to say that no environmental review is required for"non-project" actions according to SEPA, and/or, planning to build homes on a blueberry farm wetland is a "project". I would think carefully about how to further public interests when deciding to rezone the Blueberry farm. Brad Nicholson 2811 Dayton ave N.E. Renton, Wa. 98056 425 445 0658 kehecco Litic/ • r.. //- /3-06 November 13, 2006 Public Hearing Portion of The City of Renton City Council Meeting From: Wm Collins &Family 420 Cedar Ave So Renton 98057 Subject: Statement in regards to the Kennydale Blueberry farm 1. In the minutes of The City of Renton's Office of the Hearing Examiner dated October 17, 2006, the City and its Planning Department successfully exhibited to a developer and their attorneys that 3.2 acres at 900 Renton Avenue South contained a Category 3 wetland, two Class 4 streams and one Class 3 stream all requiring buffered setback areas and other wetland protection as defined in the City's Critical Area Regulations. (Ref Defoor Short Plat LUA 05-089). We request that the City of Renton apply the same considerations to the established wetland known as the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. 2. In the interest of fairness, we request that this item be removed from the Comprehensive Plan Update currently under consideration so as not to delay the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. kb Pc /lea /rig C'orrespo'zkivce' �.,� //-13-66 SMITH & LOWNEY, P.L. L.C.Rr Tf-em 2317 E. dOHN ST. CITY OFRENTON SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 981 22 (206) 860-2976, FAX (206) 060-4187 NOV 1 32006 November 13, 2006 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Renton City Council Xr30/n+ 1055 S. Grady Way I{and hie rc-d i 4y Renton, WA 98057 � .tcs an Rider; Via Telefax 425-430-6523 also reed via AX Subject: 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments #2006-M-2 • Dear City Council Members: On behalf of our clients, we object to the Public Notice given for tonight's City Council meeting. The notice, appearing in the King County Journal on November 3,2006, failed to notify the public of the purpose of the City Council's meeting, as required by RCW 36.70.390. Additionally,the notice failed to properly identify the properties under discussion this evening, specifically the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, as required by RCW 36.70.315. Cumulatively, such notice fails to provide due process to our clients and other members of the community interested in the proposals. We believe that to continue with the planned consideration of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments would be a mistake, as these notice errors would ultimately be fatal to the Council's decision. In addition,we trust that the City Council wants to provide the best possible notice so that our clients and other members of the public can adequately prepare for the hearing, thereby helping to inform the Council and the legislative process. We therefore request that the City Council postpone for 30 days its consideration of any changes to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan and all proposals relating to the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. We thank you in advance for your consideration of these comments. Very Truly Yours, SMITH & LOWNEY, P.L.L.C. By Knoll D. Lowney Attorneys for Bill O'Connor and Kennydale Critical Areas Alliance 13-11-'-06 15:56 FROM- 206-860-4187 T-382 P001/002 F-903 2317 East John Street Seattle.WA 98112 Smith & Lowney, Phone: 206-860-1570 PLLC Fax 206-860-4187 www.s mithandlowney.com Fax To: Renton City Council From: Knoll Lowney Fax: 425-430-6523 Pages: 2 Phone: Date: 11/13/06 Objection to Public Notice of 11/13/06 City . Re: cc: Council Meeting ❑ Urgent ❑ For Review 0 Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑Please Recycle 13-11-'-06 15:56 FROM- 206-860-4187 T-382 P002/002 F-903 i SMITH & LOWNEY, P. L.L.C. 2317 E. JOHN ST. SEATTL , WASHINGTON 98122 (206) S/50-2976. FAX (2051 860-4187 November 13, 2006 Renton City Council 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Via Telefax 425-430-6523 Subject: 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments #2006-M-2 Dear City Council Members: On behalf of our clients, we object to the Public Notice given for tonight's City Council meeting. The notice, appearing in the King County Journal on November 3, 2006,failed to notify the public of the purpose of the City Council's meeting, as required by RCW 36.70.390. Additionally,the notice failed to properly identify the properties under discussion this evening, specifically the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, as required by RCW 36.70.315. Cumulatively, such notice fails to provide due process to our clients and other members of the community interested in the proposals. We believe that to continue with the planned consideration of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments would be a mistake, as these notice errors would ultimately be fatal to the Council's decision. In addition, we trust that the City Council wants to provide the best possible notice so that our clients and other members of the public can adequately prepare for the hearing,thereby helping to inform the Council and the legislative process. We therefore request that the City Council postpone for 30 days its consideration of any changes to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan and all proposals relating to the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. We thank you in advance for your consideration of these comments. Very Truly Yours, SMITH St LOWNEY, By oll D. Lowney Attorneys for Bill O'Connor and Kennydale Critical Areas Alliance • e - ... Pt C HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. PaVICI II vi A Professional Service Corporation David L. Halinen,P.E. McCarver Square Tacoma: (253) 627-6680 davidhalinen@ialinenlaw.com 2115 N. 30`h Street, Suite 203 Seattle: (206)443-4684 Tacoma, Washington 98403-3397 Fax: (253)272-9876 November 13, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING CORRESPONDENCE Renton City Council 1055 S. Grady Way, Seventh Floor Renton, Washington 98055 RE: My Client Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc.'s 3.02 Acres of Commercially Zoned Property at the Southeast Corner of the Intersection of SR 169 and 152nd Avenue SE (King County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 2323059210 and 2323059211) Request for Council Approval of (1) a "Corridor Commercial" Land Use Map Designation, (2) "Commercial Arterial" Zoning and (3) a Corresponding Development Agreement (Portion of City File #2006-M-7) Dear Council Members: I am writing on behalf of my client Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc. ("ABR"), the owner of the two parcels of commercially zoned property totaling about 3.02 acres fronting on SR 169 and located at the southeast corner of the intersection of SR 169 and 152nd Avenue SE in the portion of unincorporated King County that is the subject of Renton's proposed Maplewood Annexation. In regard to those two parcels, on ABR's behalf I hereby request and urge you to approve (1) a "Corridor Commercial" (CC) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation, (2) "Commercial Arterial" (CA) zoning and (3) a proposed Development Agreement that my client and I have negotiated with Don Erickson and Rebecca Lind of your Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning over the last two-and-a-half months, a Development Agreement that is now before the Council for approval. Please let me elaborate. The Planning Commission's Consideration of the Proposed Land Use Map Amendment and Zoning Concerning the Subject Aqua Barn Parcels On September 20, 2006, the Planning Commission held its public hearing concerning 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zoning Amendments, including the subject proposed CC Land Use Map amendment and CA zoning for the two Aqua Barn parcels. In support of the proposed Land Use Map amendment and zoning, at that hearing I submitted an eight-page letter with eight attached exhibits. A set of copies of that letter along with those eight exhibits is attached to this letter and I hereby request that you consider those materials as part of my testimony to the Council in support of ABR's request. That letter to the Planning Commission provides both: • Renton City Council November 13, 2006 Page 2 (1) A detailed description of the history of the two subject parcels (including the parcels' commercial zoning history in unincorporated King County), a history that is important to bear in mind concerning this request; and (2) A detailed analysis of applicable Renton Comprehensive Plan land use objectives and policies, an analysis that demonstrates that the requested "Corridor Commercial" Land Use Map designation and "Commercial Arterial" zoning for the subject property are appropriate and should be approved. There was no public testimony in opposition to the Aqua Barn proposal provided to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission deliberated concerning the Aqua Barn proposal at its October 4, 2006 meeting. At that meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the Council the proposed "Corridor Commercial" Land Use Map designation and CA zoning for the subject two parcels. Development Agreement Overview of Site-Specific Land Use Limitations The proposed form of Development Agreement that my client and I have negotiated with Mr. Erickson and Ms. Lind includes on pages 3 through 5 thereof an extensive set of site-specific land use limitations. Those limitations are of three types. The first type is a list of particular uses that, although generally permitted on property zoned CA, under the Development Agreement would be rendered inapplicable to ABR's two parcels. The second type sets forth special restrictions for other particular uses allowed in the CA. The third type is a set of design standards (set forth on Exhibit B attached to the proposed Development Agreement) that would be applicable to commercial development on the subject parcels. One Outstanding Issue We have reached agreement with Mr. Erickson and Ms. Lind on every aspect of the Development Agreement with the exception of an issue concerning the number of free-standing drive-in/drive-through fast-food restaurant buildings that would be allowed on the subject property (an issue relating to one of the above-referenced "second type" of site-specific land use limitations). Note that under the site's existing King County "Neighborhood Business" zoning, no limitation would exist on the number of such buildings allowed. Neither my client nor I believe that there should be a limitation. The site is located on the heavily traveled Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) at an important signalized intersection with 152nd Avenue SE located about 3.2 miles east of I-405 and 7.36 miles northwest of Maple Valley. (See the Attachment 1 map to this letter.) No fast food restaurants exist along that stretch of Maple Valley Highway. This site will inevitably serve both the nearby community as well as other travelers on the Highway and fast food vendors on the site will be appropriate. • Renton City Council November 13, 2006 Page 3 Note that Mr. Erickson advised the Planning Commission during at least one of his presentations to the Commission that he had discussed with members of the nearby community what they would like to see at the site and was told fast food restaurants are a use they would like to see. Bear in mind, however, that except in highly dense commercial settings (like downtown Seattle) or in captive markets (like the Sea-Tac Airport terminal), developers of such restaurants will generally only agree to construct a facility if they can have a free-standing building with a drive-up window. Because we were unable to reach agreement with department staff as to a particular maximum number of allowed free-standing drive-in/drive-through fast-food restaurant buildings at the site, we left a blank as a place-holder on page 4 of the Development Agreement so the Council can be advised of and readily consider the issue. My client hereby requests that there be no such special restriction at all. However, if the Council decides to place a maximum number of such buildings on the site, my client requests that at least three (3) such buildings be permitted. Three such buildings certainly would not be excessive on the subject three-acre site because, given the size and land value of the site, there inevitably will be various other buildings and uses constructed on the site as well. Please let me know if you have any questions concerning any aspect of my client's request. Thank you for your anticipated consideration. Sincerely, LINEN L OFFICES, P.S. noke;..,„ David L. H linen cc: Attachments (My September 20, 2006 letter to the Renton Planning Commission and the Attachment 1 map) Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc. Cedar Grove Properties, LLC Attn: Marlin Vortman(via email) Attn: Mark Hashem(via email) Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager, City of Renton Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Don Erickson, Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning • ATTACHMENT 1 I. in "mop -*me .1 • — CO I ad) o .-. ,„.... ., 2 , 2i,-- as eAv LiTozz 4 1 ,,,,,,..„.„ to W :2 E. _J .t•-rx I < a W >11 2 a) a. e,# , ...... [ 2 4 = > 2 0 LL 7-----. •' CZ= S --___,..„ \S,S-K-', Cr 0 ',' ‘ a) 2? — b O CO > 4 , , @ -- as I— \ -- E I. 70/ .-2 (-) , ' . (1:T-.----,-..„: ,...._ 8 WI \ x....A-7 N 1- LLI I .. ‘1 - 97 ... / co N-- E I— 0 ... / I. 0/ t?&/ a -•••4/ a) = Z 4 ..,- itb. f, Lu --_, __ g V) Liii — I V V- LIS 1-1 WI -1-i .... 4 C (f) mmoola ,' C5 lc; .,., / O Icri _ H .4.-+ <C I m Z ill ..2 CO ---- /-- Cr) (6 c i-- <C I- Cb ZDI IT'g < D .... F.4.. 3S eAV LITt79 li 0 cy CO --I 0 LLJ co < >-- ci 2 I.. (\' s'-' / 0.)8 Z , V"' 0 / LLI 11, 'f / l 3 eAV Llafr I: F- , , as( eAV Lior\ - ta 11.1 Z ' \ -.._ P.g .9. ....., aS eA pUZC I, ,-§! < s..... CO :.,.. co CO < 0.. I' < \ n g, i t B it) N. ,,:,. ' ) , • N'- 2 i LO , , '1-• g Pc, ---J .-------- I 2 — am ,, , 11":2 0 O. 0 '' '''' 0" I _ , ,, p..... , . 13 VI y... *a., +if:\„ , ,fv,,, - (0 '-- ' \ --' .'r"'—"-------itS .) \.. ,/ ...,c i, ,,. , / 1 /" Et \31' S aAV Llit19 ,. -7--- --- ................Lo-07_ 2:2 ( V.1 ( 1 r" 1,- __________,--- 1 / 1 s, i s,' 13 1.___H I I ,..;.:7.--- ________,.--- -....,,,=.1.._--- 1 --.-- _ S HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. A Professional Service Corporation David L.Halinen, P.E. McCarver Square Tacoma: (253) 627-6680 davidhalinen@halinenlaw.com 2115 N. 30th Street, Suite 203 Seattle: (206) 443-4684 Tacoma,Washington 98403-3397 Fax: (253) 272-9876 September 20, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING CORRESPONDENCE Renton Planning Commission Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 RE: My Client Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc.'s 3.02 Acres of Property at the Southeast Corner of the Intersection of SR 169 and 152nd Avenue SE (King County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 2323059210 and 2323059211) Comprehensive Plan Amendment#2006-M-7/Request for Approval Dear Commissioners: I am writing on behalf of my client Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc. ("ABR"), the owner of the two parcels of commercially zoned property totaling about 3.02 acres fronting on SR 169 and located at the southeast corner of the intersection of SR 169 and 152nd Avenue SE in the portion of unincorporated King County that is the subject of Renton's proposed Maplewood Annexation. ABR is currently under contract to sell those two parcels to Cedar Grove Properties, LLC ("Cedar Grove"), a company that is planning to construct a retail development on the parcels. For the reasons set forth below, I urge you to support the portion of City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment #2006-M-7 that would designate those two parcels Corridor Commercial (CC) on the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and zone them Arterial Commercial (CA)1. History of the Two Subject Parcels Overview of the Aqua Barn Ranch The two subject parcels comprise the remainder of ABR's land holdings of what was originally known as the Aqua Barn Ranch, a commercial recreational facility that, from about 1948 until 2003, featured a restaurant, an indoor commercial swimming pool, horseback riding (including a riding arena), various types of lodging (rooms, camping facilities and a recreational 1 The other part of Amendment 2006-M-7 contemplates an RMD Land Use Map designation and concurrent R-14 zoning on the site of a recently constructed multi-family residential development south of and abutting ABR's subject two commercially-zoned parcels. Renton Planning Commission September 20, 2006 Page 2 vehicle park), and a community hall operated on a site contain approximately 70 contiguous acres located at the southeast quadrant of SR 169 and 152nd Avenue SE. Other, small businesses leased space and operated on the property as well. Approximately 20 of those 70 original acres were sold off around 1990 and were developed into what is now the Emerald Crest Mobile Home Park that lies immediately to the east and southeast of ABR's two remaining parcels. King County Land Use Map and Zoning Amendments of 10 Acres of the Site to Neighborhood Business in 1996 During 1995, ABR hired me to seek a King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment to the County's "Neighborhood Business" designation and a corresponding zone reclassification of the County's Zoning Map to the County's "Neighborhood Business" (NB) zone for the north 10 acres of the then-remaining 38 acres of ABR's holdings. (See Exhibit 1, attached, which is a copy of a map depicting by hatching the location of the 10-acre site involved and see Exhibit 2, attached, which is a color aerial photo on which I have outlined that 10-acre portion of the Aqua Barn property.) ABR's now remaining 3.02 acres comprise the northernmost part of the 10 acres that were the subject of the 1995-96 Amendment effort. While the rezoning effort was not site plan specific, a conceptual site plan depicting an idea of a retail development that was within the scope of the BN zoning being sought was presented to King County--see Exhibit 3, attached. The Neighborhood Business Amendment process extended through most of 1996 and involved consideration by (1) the Metropolitan King County Council's Growth Management, Housing & Environment Committee, (2) the Renton City Council's Planning & Development Committee, (3) the full Renton City Council and, ultimately, (4) the full Metropolitan King County Council. Exhibit 4, attached, which describes the Land Use Map amendment that was prepared by the Growth Management, Housing & Environment Committee (and ultimately approved by the full Metropolitan King County Council in December of 1996), includes the following rationale statement for the amendment, which puts it into context: The amendment recognizes the significant commercial character of the site, which has a long history of commercial use; the Aquabarn swimming pool and restaurant has been operating for over twenty years under a conditional use permit that allows for many uses. The site is urban in character, with urban access and urban levels of service. The site is currently adjacent to Highway 169 (the Maple Valley Highway). In addition, King County is realigning and expanding the Jones Road right-of-way to the SE 154th St. corridor. This is a substantial investment in infrastructure, including replacement of the old Jones Road Bridge, and the new arterial will run adjacent to the site, increasing the site's urban access. The site is serviced by water, electricity, and sanitary sewer. • "%ape vase Renton Planning Commission September 20, 2006 Page 3 The amendment is consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies U-624 and U- 625, providing for Neighborhood Business Centers that exclude industrial and heavy commercial uses, that are no larger than 10 acres, and that provide convenient services for a nearby population of 8,000 to 15,000 people. The amendment is also consistent with U-626, U-627, and U-628 as it designates a Neighborhood Business Center on an existing arterial (Highway 169), and a planned arterial (Jones Road realignment).2 (Emphasis added.) During the course of the County's Land Use Map Amendment and rezone process, ABR agreed to a County condition requiring imposition of a permanent conservation easement on the 10.54-acre steep hillside at the south end of ABR's 38 acres. Although Renton did not have jurisdiction over the Aqua Barn property, Renton's opinion of the Amendment and rezone proposal was sought and obtained. On August 12, 1996, the Renton City Council's Planning & Development Committee issued a unanimous report concerning the proposal (see Exhibit 5, attached) indicating that "[t]he City of Renton would not preclude additional commercial uses on the ten acres . . . ." On September 16, 1996, the full Renton City Council concurred with the Planning & Development Committee's report—see Exhibit 6, attached, for an excerpt of the meeting minutes for the Council's September 16, 1996 meeting). Further King County Land Use Map and Zoning Amendments in 1998 Concerning All But the North 3.02 Acres of the Aqua Barn Site Pursuant to a contract of sale (to a party that ultimately did not close a purchase of any of the Aqua Barn property), in 1998 ABR's then contract purchaser sought and obtained a further modification of the zoning of portions of the site. Specifically, those changes involved rezoning of approximately (a) the south seven acres of the 10 Neighborhood Business-zoned acres to R-12 and (b) the balance of the property (other than the 10.54 acres of steep hillside at the site's extreme south end) to R-12 from R-6. This 1998 zoning action left the Neighborhood Business zoning of ABR's still remaining north 3.02 acres unchanged. Short Platting of the Aqua Barn Property Following the County's 1998 zoning action, ABR entered into a contract to sell the Aqua Barn Ranch property to Polygon Northwest. Pursuant to ABR's contract with Polygon, ABR's property was short platted(see copy of the recorded short plat attached as Exhibit 7), creating: 2 The Jones Road realignment was recently completedd with the construction of a new bridge across the Cedar River and the north leg of the SR 169-152' Avenue NE intersection. • Renton Planning Commission September 20, 2006 Page 4 (a) The two lots along the south edge of SR 169 that ABR still owns and that are the subject of Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment #2006-M-7's "Corridor Commercial" Land Use Map designation and CA zoning proposal (Lots 3 and 4); (b) The two lots that Polygon eventually purchased and developed a multi- family residential development on(Lots 1 and 2); and (c) A sensitive area tract(Tract A) in the extreme south part of the site. With light gray lines, sheets 3 and 4 of the short plat depict the buildings and facilities that were on the Aqua Barn site before Polygon's recent development of Lots 1 and 2. Construction of Substantial Intersection Improvements at the Intersection of SR 169 and 152°d Avenue NE During the period that Polygon had ABR's then-remaining entire property under a purchase contract, Polygon and the Renton Assembly of God Church (now called the New Life Church, a large church that lies along the west side of 152" Avenue SE and south of SR 169) jointly financed significant intersection improvements, including turn lanes and a traffic signal at the intersection of 152nd Avenue SE and south of SR 169. The improvements contemplated development of all four lots of the Aqua Barn short plat, including the two commercial lots that ABR still owns. Details of the improvements and traffic related information are summarized in Don Erickson's Aqua Barn Site Intersection Traffic Findings memorandum that was submitted to the Planning Commission and available to the audience at the Commission's September 6, 2006 meeting (copy attached as Exhibit 8). In a nutshell, the improvements made at the intersection have undeniably prepared ABR's two remaining parcels for CA-type development, the particulars of which will be reviewed under the City's development review process when an application is made to the City's Development Services Division. Analysis of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Objectives and Policies Several Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use objectives and policies bear upon the proposed Commercial Corridor land use designation and Arterial Commercial zoning of ABR's two remaining parcels. First, Objective LU-DDD states: Objective LU-DDD: The Commercial Corridor 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; 4)Uses dependent upon or benefiting from high-volume traffic; Renton Planning Commission September 20, 2006 Page 5 5) Uses that provide significant employment; and 6) Businesses that provide necessary or desirable goods and services to the larger community. (Emphasis added.) Prongs 3, 4 and 5 of Objective LU-DDD are all implicated at the subject site, which(a) will be highly visible from SR 169, which is a principal arterial, and(b)will ultimately have a development that will (i) depend upon or benefit from high volume traffic and(ii)provide significant employment. Second, Policy LU-333 states: Policy LU-333. The Commercial Corridor Land Use designation should be mapped in areas with the following characteristics: 1) Located on, and having access to, streets classified as principal arterials; 2) High traffic volumes; or 3) Land use pattern characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. (Emphasis added.) Prongs 1 and 2 of the three optional provisions of Policy LU-333 are both implicated at the subject site and although strip commercial development or a shopping center is not currently located at the site, the site's zoning and use history should qualify as compliance with the third prong. Third,Policy LU-334 states: Policy LU-334. The Commercial Corridor designation should be implemented through Commercial Arterial, Commercial Office, or Light Industrial zoning. (Emphasis added.) The Commercial Arterial zone, which is proposed for ABR's two remaining parcels, is the only commercial zoning choice listed Policy LU-334 and the only logical zoning choice of the three zones that Policy LU-334 indicates should be used to implement the Commercial Corridor designation. Fourth, Policy LU-335 states: Policy LU-335. Increased demand for commercial uses should be accommodated primarily through redevelopment and intensification of existing business area designations rather than expansion of those areas. (Emphasis added.) For nearly 10 years, ABR's two remaining parcels have had a business area designation, King County's Neighborhood Business designation, a designation that Renton's City Council was specifically consulted about during 1996 and did not object to. • Renton Planning Commission • September 20, 2006 Page 6 Fifth, Objective LU-EEE states: Objective LU-EEE: Create opportunities for development and re- development of land in portions of the Commercial Corridor 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, and residential uses. (Emphasis added.) Consistent with this objective, the proposed CA zoning will create opportunities for development and re-development of land in portions of the Commercial Corridor designation for general business and service uses consistent with the size of the subject property. (Certain uses, such as big box retail, auto dealers and light industrial uses will be excluded pursuant to a planned Development Agreement between ABR and the City.) Sixth, Policy LU-336 states: Policy LU-336. Portions of the Commercial Corridor 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. (Emphasis added.) The proposed CA zoning of the site will satisfy this policy. Seventh, Policy LU-337 states: 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 has 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. (Emphasis added.) As to prong 1 of this policy, the two existing Metro Transit stops at the intersection of SR 169 and 152nd Avenue SE (Metro Routes 143 and 149) already serve the site. As to prong 2, the Aqua Barn Ranch commercial operations historically operated for decades on the site until the closure and demolition of those facilities in 2003. As to prong 3, large parking areas existed as part of the historic Aqua Barn Ranch facilities. In addition, large parking lots Renton Planning Commission September 20, 2006 Page 7 continue to exist across 152nd Avenue SE on the New Life Church site. As to prong 4, as noted in Don Erickson's staff report to the Commission at the first briefing of the Commission as to this matter, "[f]uture development on the three-acre site is anticipated to have parking in front, oriented to SR 169 with retail/service uses located towards the back of the site." As to prong 5, as also noted in Don Erickson's staff report at the first briefing, "[u]ntil the original Aqua Barn site was subdivide into its current configuration in the late 1990s, it was defined as a larger parcel fronting an arterial with multiple buildings located throughout the site. As to prong 6, the SR 169 corridor does not have a grid street system and has long block lengths (many hundreds of feet apart). Eighth, Policy LU-351 states: 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. (Emphasis added.) The proposed CA zoning of the site will be part of the activity node already existing at the southeast and southwest quadrants of the intersection of SR 169 and 152nd Avenue SE and currently comprised of Polygon Northwest's multi-family residential development and the New Life Church. The CA zoning will enhance the function of this node. Ninth, Objective LU-HHH states: Objective LU-HHH: Support methods of increasing accessibility to Commercial Corridor areas for both automobile and transit to support the land use objectives of the district. (Emphasis added.) The two existing Metro Transit stops at the intersection of SR 169 and 152nd Avenue SE (Metro Routes 143 and 149) already serve the site, making designation of the site Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial zoning especially desirable to provide public access to services in the area. Tenth, Policy LU-360 states: 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 Commercial Corridor areas. (Emphasis added.) This has already fully happened at this site. Conclusion and Request Renton Planning Commission September 20, 2006 Page 8 The history of ABR's two remaining parcels strongly militates for the proposed Corridor Commercial Land Use Map designation and Arterial Commercial (CA) zoning. Further, the designation and zoning proposed are consistent with Renton's above-noted Comprehensive Plan objectives and policies. ABR thus urges the Commission to recommend approval thereof to the Renton City Council. Sincerely, LINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. - 4__,Ltv:LA„ David L. Hahne, cc: Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc. Cedar Grove Properties, LLC Attn: Marlin Vortman Attn: Mark Hashem Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager, City of Renton Department of Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning (via email) Don Erickson, Senior Planner, City of Renton Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning (via email) DEC 03 '96 2'3:33AM KING COUNTY COUNCIL 2@5 29E-2159 • P.5/5 w f . Nor, *rue • EXHIBIT 1 48 & 9: Aqua Barn . - - I-...i\T-7.\\ - - • Tilli -\\ , — `F c..,a,te 40.44 , 0) iliti rf , i ..z. ipp. . , al I m '` - tu \ cv r-. 01°11[ 10 ACRESSW / . • NB Oh I"ft& Ak i, • ZONING ' , . nitirer411 . .1111111111110 Leggin, 1 lin • 0 ffected pion of property K r i ." ' Property bour.dary - , r ^ _ / . - . , r„ w ,,� EXHIBIT 3 J C %i 2 0 U C - � r •lc 01 • < 4 � t i . L a< Ca U iA-� I< .1 0000000 o G �F W n [ Imo Fin - < _,._ = W a . o =_<c < L. " ' e Vlllls I I.-s .. a ._C u_ V C C C C i _ ( V v < < < wF / 0 4 '`=.L.-c = ci `L" c < ,c L.: E', 5 5 5 _x< U U U W i _I U G t_l :L G G O-. -Y � C C 5<i C h• C C C / Cy =G C I- I13l.l1J A11Nnivicoa 01 15Y311100S 3.1Y3AYOKZSI :JS301S3N(i1YAl11d 01 `', ... .11 ri( ) / „ INN I C _1____i_—__� . ,:-, :•:- 6 i / ,•' __I_ — • / o / / _ _—_ 1—'• ' / / / / t !t4 F VD W ; I Imo; _.1 C� / I ..... LL H • II JI i g I -- E CD W I . I . I _ D -__J ,5,1111 ,d , I , ._.,'' ._ 0 . i I Iii" s j +'o S• A'a.l� r ! z n g .Oai • �HJta_ _V V 7. • l .7 < v o ____ A0Z5' i % at G. c 7 re o- la _ c C W II-' G W SdONS II\'137 7lY�S < U ! L n I H k' C < u 1131A 3NYIlos OOI RI % — _ —_ 1 c I c — c O` 'J�101138 S.1011S'11Y13N 03SOd ONd n < / II ) < :I;� ,' 1cN39 ',IfJ. _! .:YlcN311 :,v.) 1 mil`-• I . . DEC is '' is Ds=S2Am KING COUNTY Y COUNCIL 2E16 295-0159 P. L/5 . 4' EXHIBIT 4 • 2 . AMENDMENT'TO THE 1944 MC COUNTY COMP!.a 11 ISIVE PL - 3 Cam. TWO - I,TRaAN LAND USE . 4• 5 Page 56, policy L'- 25 revise as fol rows: 5 1J-625 Current designated Neighborhood Busing Centers are: gh e) Beverly 7 Park Puget Sound Jr High site Unincorporated South Park•, (West.ill) . 8 lam Lamer King Jr. ayl68th Avenue-64th Avenue South,Rainier Avenue 9 Sotit nth 1.14 h Street-South 1176 Street; (Shoreline)Fircrest, 10 Gremwood/Westminister,Richmond Beach,Richmond Village,f unnamed ii mixed use); orthshore)68th Avenue NNE 170th Street,Juanita Drive/NE 12 ' 122nd Place,116th.Avenue NVINE 160th Street,NE 145th Street/148th Avenue 13 NE 'Hollywood Hill],Juanita Drives 153rd Pike,Juanita-Woodinville , 14 Way/NE 145th Street,Juanita Drive/NE 141st Street; (Bear Creek) Avondale is Corner; (East S mmariish)Monahan; (Federal Way) Star Lake,.Lake 16Geneva,Spider Lake,Mud Lake,Jovita,Redondo; (Soo Creek)Lake 17 Meridian,l eridi n Valley,Benson/SE 192nd Street,Cascade, 132nd Avenue s.B SE/E 240th Street'~E1.rrua Barn. Neighborhood'Ju in ss Centers should be TM 19 larger than ten acres,excluding land needed for s.grface water management or 2 0 protection of sensitive environments features., and should be designed to 21 provide convenience shopping for a nearby population of 8,000 to 15,000 • 2 people. Redevelopment of existing Neighborhood Busing Centers is • 23 eaconraged. 24 • 2 5 Ratiorat : Consistent with baud use amendment #8 and zoning amendment #9, ten 2 6 acres of the Aqua Barn property should be designated as a Neighborhood Business 2 7 Center to reflect current and historic use of this property. A Neighborhood Business . 2 B Center at this location is consistent with Comprehensive Plan policy direction. G:\GK `CCk4P- '1 14FOACy1U�525 11:25 AM' 7/18/Rs . y ,DEC 03 'E, 09:32RM KING COUNTY COUNCIL 206 295-0159 P P.2/5 • • r..r • 1994 King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map 2 AMEND? NT TO 1994 KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-LAND USE MAP 3 Amend the 1994 Mng County Land Use Map for Section 23,Township 23, Range 5 4 (l p_#14), by redesignat ig the northernmost 10 acres of the 33-acre subject property 5 (Aguabaru Ranch), consisting, of parcel number 23 591-35,indicated in the 6 attached map, from Urban Residential 4-12.DTJ per acre,to Neighborhood Businm 7 Center. 8 Rationale' The amendment recopizes the signiTicant commercial character of the site, 9 which has a long history of•commercial use; the A€puabarn swimming pool 10, and restaurant has been operating for over twenty years under a conditional 11 use permit that allows for many uses. • 1? The site is urban in character, with urban access and urban levels of service. 13 The site is currently adjacent to Highway 169 (the Maple Valley Highway)- hi - 14 addition, King County is realign; If,and expanding the Jones Road right-of- 15 way to the SE 154th St. corridor. This is a substantial investment in 16 infrastructure, including replacement of the old Jones Road Bridge, and the 17 new arterial will run adjacent to the site, increasing the site's urban access- 18 The site is serviced by water, electricity, and sanitary sewer. • 19 The amendment is consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies U-624 and U- 20 625, providing for Neighborhood Business Centers that exclude industrial and 21 heavy commercial uses, that are no larger than 10 acres, and that provide 22 convenient services for a nearby population of 8,000 to 15,000 people. The ?3 amendment is also consistent with U-626, U-627, and U-628, as it designates 24, a Neighborhood Business Centerron an misting arterial (Highway 169), and 25 a planned arterial (zones Road realignment). • - 1 - • • • 411., EXHIBIT 5 Aqua Barn Ranch Property (Referred August 12, 1990 The Committee reconnitionds Council forward to King County the following concern and comments on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and ten=request currently before the Mutropolia King County Council. 1. The Renton Camprelmsive Plan did not contemplate the iintemity of residential development which is occurring in this portion of the Cedar River Valley and consequently did not address the possibility of commerCial developrrient at this location. However,given the present County zoning,vesting of several large development projecis in the ama,and the conditional use peznit currently authorized for the site,the issue of corramerchd uses should be=skier,- 2. The City of Renton is not opposed to shifting more intensive uses from one'aortic=efthe 3g acre site to another,but does have contems about increasing the overall intensity cr use over the entire 33 acre pircel. 3. The City of Renton would not preclude additional commercial uses on the ten acres addressed in this application,but would suggest further review of the remaining 28 acres regarding the status of the existing developmmt on this portion of the property. 4. The City of Kenton requests that ciarificatinft of the status of the existing conditional use permit be provided and how it related to the existing uses on the property and uses permitted under the R-6 zoning on this pardon of the givperty. 5. The property owner be encouraged to apply for an amendment to the Renton Comprehensive Pia for the entire 33 acre pared. 6. The City of Renton and King County should continue to pursue a.joint process for review for review of future Comprehensive Plan amendments in Renton's Potential Annexation Areas. CY in/ Kathy Kediker-Wheeler,Chair • iRandyiE 1117 -Chair/ Thre II • . KirkA ear/ .e,N_ C4j7Sf"144 • ... EXHIBIT 6 RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting September 16, 1996 Council Chambers Monday, 7:30 p.m. Municipal Building MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pro tern Keolker-Wheeler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER, Mayor Pro tern; TIMOTHY SCHLITZER, COUNCILMEMBERS Council President Pro tern; KING PARKER; DAN CLAWSON; BOB EDWARDS; RANDY CORMAN. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCIL PRESIDENT TONI NELSON. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN JAY COVINGTON, Executive Assistant to the Mayor; LAWRENCE J. ATTENDANCE WARREN, City Attorney; BRENDA FRITSVOLD, Deputy City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; MICHAEL KATTERMANN, Planning & Technical Services Director; OWEN DENNISON, Assistant Planner; CHIEF ALAN L. WALLIS, Police Department; COMMANDER ROB SOFIE, Police Department; ACTING COMMANDER KEVIN MILOSEVICH, Police Department. PRESS Charmaine Adsero, Renton Reporter APPROVAL OF MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL COUNCIL MINUTES APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 9, 1996, AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. SPECIAL Chief of Police Alan L. Wallis explained that the City's Police Department is PRESENTATION currently being assessed by the Commission on Accreditation of Law Police: Introduction of Enforcement Agencies (CLEA) to determine if Renton should retain its Accreditation Assessors accreditation status. Commander Rob Sofie introduced the CLEA members performing the assessment, as follows: Chief Raymond Arthurs, Jr., Team Leader, from Willowbrook, Illinois; Sergeant Patrick Melvin, Assessor, from Phoenix, Arizona; and Sergeant Mike Worford, Assessor, from Redondo Beach, California. Commander Sofie then invited interested persons to attend tomorrow evening's public information session on the re-accreditation effort. Testimony will be solicited on the Police Department's ability to meet the 436 standards of police professional excellence. Saying that the Commission members have enjoyed friendly and hospitable treatment during their stay in Renton, Willowbrook Police Chief Arthurs added that the outcome of the assessment will be available in November. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published Annexation: Miller/May in accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Pro tern Keolker-Wheeler Valley Prezoning opened the public hearing to consider the Miller/May Valley Prezone - Phase One. The proposal is to establish prezone classification(s) prior to annexation of approximately 74 acres (phase one of two phases totaling 371 acres) outside the Renton city limits, bounded by 148th Ave. SE on the east, NE Sunset BIvd. on the south, and the Renton corporate boundary on the north; includes 2.1 acre site owned by David and Katrina Miller. Owen Dennison, Assistant Planner, explained that prezoning properties prior to annexation provides certainty to property owners and residents regarding • • September 16, 1996 Renton City Council Minutes Page 349 There being no further audience comment, it was MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL REFER THIS MATTER TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND A RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE FULL COUNCIL. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Martin Durkan, Jr., 330 SW 43rd St., Renton, 98055, commented on the desire Citizen Comment: Durkan of the owners of the Aqua Barn Ranch property, located on Maple Valley - Aqua Barn Comp Plan Highway, to secure a Comprehensive Plan and zoning change from King & Rezone Changes County to Neighborhood Business for a portion of their property. Mr. Durkan said this matter was presented to the Maple Valley Community Council, which concurred that such a change would be appropriate. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL SUSPEND ITS RULES AND ADVANCE TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT ON THIS SUBJECT. CARRIED. Planning & Development Planning and Development Committee Vice Chair Corman presented a report Committee regarding the Aqua Barn Ranch property. The Committee recommended that Planning: Aqua Barn Council forward to King County the following concerns and comments on the Property Comp Plan & Neighborhood Business Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezone request Zoning Changes for the Aqua Barn property currently before the Metropolitan King County Council: 1. The Renton Comprehensive Plan did not contemplate the intensity of residential development which is occurring in this portion of the Cedar River Valley, and consequently did not address the possibility of commercial development at this location. However, given the present County zoning, the vesting of several large development projects in the area, and the conditional use permit currently authorized for this site, the issue of commercial uses should be considered. 2. The City of Renton is not opposed to shifting more intensive uses from one portion of the 38-acre site to another, but it does have concerns about increasing the overall intensity of use over the entire 38-acre parcel. 3. The City of Renton would not preclude additional commercial uses on the ten acres addressed in this application, but would suggest further review of the remaining 28 acres regarding the status of the existing development on this portion of the property. 4. The City of Renton requests that clarification of the status of the existing conditional use permit be provided and how it relates to the existing uses on the property and to uses permitted under the R-6 zoning on this portion of the property. 5. The property owner be encouraged to apply for an amendment to the Renton Comprehensive Plan for the entire 38-acre parcel. 6. The City of Renton and King County should continue to pursue a joint process for review of future Comprehensive Plan amendments in Renton's potential annexation areas. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* Mr. Durkan requested that the wording in the third comment be changed from "The City of Renton would not preclude additional commercial uses ... " to "The City of Renton would not object to additional commercial uses ... " r i September 16, 1996 Renton City Council Minutes Page 350 Mayor Pro tern Keolker-Wheeler replied that not only has the wording of the committee report already been changed at the request of a representative of the applicant, staff has indicated it is more comfortable with the existing wording. Committee Vice Chair Corman concurred that the existing wording is satisfactory. *MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are accepted by one motion which follows the listing. Plat: Preliminary, City Clerk submitted appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision on the Orchards Orchards (Sectors E/F and Preliminary Plat (Sectors E and F - 63 lots on nine acres, and Sector G - 57 G), Appeal townhomes on nine acres); appeal filed on 9/05/96 by Dick Gilroy, representing Northward; File No. PP-96-010. Refer to Planning & Development Committee. CAG: 96-106, President's City Clerk reported bid opening on 9/03/96 for CAG-96-106, Steel Water Park Steel Water Main Main Replacement in President's Park; six bids; engineer's estimate Replacement, Kar-Vel $235,564.38; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the Construction low bidder, Kar-Vel Construction Co., in the amount of $228,297.41. Council concur. CAG: 96-111, Carco City Clerk reported bid opening on 9/09/96 for CAG-96-111, Carco Theatre Theatre HVAC HVAC Replacement; two bids; engineer's estimate $86,400. Refer to Replacement Community Services Committee. CRT: 96-006, Profit v Court Case filed by Todd Maybrown on behalf of Lowell Profit alleging that Renton Washington State's sex offender registration laws would violate Profit's Constitutional rights if applied to him, and further seeking to prevent public notification in the Renton community of his status as a sex offender. Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Services. CAG: 96-104, Highlands Community Services Department submitted CAG-96-104, Highlands Library Library Carpet carpet installation project; and requested approval of the project, authorization Installation, Decor Carpets for final pay estimate in the amount of $21,652.29, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of $1,049.05 to Decor Carpet, Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. Finance: Mini-Bond Finance and Information Services Department requested approval of proposed Issuance for Fire Pumper ordinance authorizing the indebtedness of $635,000 for the purchase of two Truck Purchase fire pumper trucks, and additionally authorizing the sale of mini-bonds to finance this purchase. Council concur. (See page 353 for ordinance.) Finance: Surplus Finance and Information Services Department requested approval of a Equipment Declaration & resolution authorizing the sale of surplus office equipment. Council concur. Sale (See page 352 for resolution.) Personnel: Firefighters Human Resources & Risk Management Department recommended approval of Local 864 Labor Contract the agreement reached with Firefighters Local 864 for their labor contract governing hours, wages, and terms and conditions of employment. Council concur. Personnel: Renton Police Human Resources & Risk Management Department recommended approval of Guild Commissioned the agreement reached with commissioned employees of the Renton Police Employees Labor Contract Guild for their labor contract governing hours, wages, and terms and conditions of employment. Council concur. • • September 16, ]996 Renton City Council Minutes Page 353 Finance: Mini-Bond An ordinance was read relating to contracting indebtedness; providing for the Issuance for Fire Pumper issuance of $635,000 par value of Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, Truck Purchase 1996, of the City for general City purposes to provide funds with which to acquire firefighting and lifesaving equipment; fixing the date, form, maturities, maturity amounts and accreted value at maturity, interest rates, terms and covenants of the bonds; establishing a bond redemption fund; and approving the sale and providing for the sale and delivery of the bonds. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 9/23/96. CARRIED. Planning: Street An ordinance was read deleting subsections 4-31-5.F.2, 4-31-6.D.17 and 4- Grid/Street Patterns 31-7.F.2 of Chapter 31, Zoning Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations), and amending sections 9-12-2 and 9-12-15 of Chapter 12, Subdivision Ordinance, of Title IX (Public Ways and Property) of City Code pertaining to street patterns. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 9/23/96. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading: Ordinance #4633 An ordinance was read amending Section 4-19-2 of Chapter 19, Shoreline Development Services: Master Program, of Title IV (Building Regulations) of City Code relating to Shoreline Master Program shoreline amendments. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY CORMAN, Amendment Process COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance #4634 An ordinance was read vacating a portion of Bronson Way North (RAMAC, Vacation: Bronson Way N Inc./Shane, VAC-94-006). MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY (RAMAC/Shane, VAC- CORMAN, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL 94-006) CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Richard Wolf, 14702 SE 105th St., Renton, 98059, provided a written copy of Citizen Comment: Wolf - the comments made earlier by his wife, Beverly Wolf, regarding the proposed Miller/May Valley May Valley prezone. Annexation Prezoning MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL REFER THESE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Larry Brosman, 3625 NE 9th St., Renton, 98056, thanked Council for Brosman - Affordable nominating him to the Housing Finance Implementation Committee (HFIC) as Housing Shared part of the Affordable Housing Shared Commitment Program. Mr. Brosman Commitment Program looked forward to serving on the committee in the interest of working for (HFIC) Appointment affordable housing. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:47 p.m. kU114°4) BRENDA FRITSVOLD, Deputy City Clerk 9/16/96 N E- Iii1 W N Q N d I fir. \ rn O p p Z Q W O w .z— pc\I _I m N. RI O D,. Z I• Q m�o� �o=�zm'�' 1S�" 6ZF.aZ 2�F]<¢7�-.:m a1- O w� Fa FYa.-X•�a zpO~zz P � aFQ OZ ~ " " • .'pfi YS NN z �NI m m z ° z,n.•. aw q Z • o V �n• Wprim VIO z : 2 O • L. w wN dWN Nmnz1-m Ow < �::... o 0W w z w Wo w W wU � WA Q a " 00oPwNohNw • oG Fw o :g UEm g ~ z • w ruU .o 5>x�q N-•pv = zpz =o wg � 4gp H! m oN J FmZ.' W Nff, Nz'0 N Mg N N minp N- N N NNm Rd, RwF¢ �w" � . 0 • v(Y O. rig aUwrcOza O4� - BzW�p •.'.¢ z - `zO Zm= 6,X OpW Zvi ZO ZNO Z z Vpm •:,,FF NO"W: a . no r¢zN Pi‹, ¢ z _tzz :.',••op F ',o F a F .F E Eoow Ell' FNmF6ao ~¢o ; > �Mso.: ❑ \ n = oaE3 N p Q 1u- 0 m 8 IONr zo..•.z 5 0 ow 921 o omoSz F3z . aoZo: . >- m ¢< Q ❑ mZ O OQ¢ 0•±0 G Ofi. go ,.•ppa0 00Uo U3m OUa„ Uw UOZ 4p �O Eq: am.:...pWNIal m O � ,a W Sw- cn 91-9 O .�z-•.. ozE ••ya O oOoo ow„ oOzwU Gm FU 0� .- Z :' • Od1� ❑ Z W Q 4 NSW a<N z5 UaZz m y0 U ..o ., 0 i'R ..•• ¢N 6`nW 40,0 O z<oQ- cm, ¢QF No', :• 06 .' LL ¢WO OG rem zf zZZm U - on ,., N3mpZ Nm NO Nn NY NZF N Nm�Nm 0-,w ¢y 0 U �' CD Q 1--,ON ¢N ywmaa ¢ SaG dN, ;': q2roa•pg Ea o r, m zz 9m'. oN °.• W Z Od' ai aozo doo a h m .,..r:m 3.' ' _'. 1 o .° ,awnPz H-CE kwa � wo ;• \ 6 f3M n�lo �zaV V y:‹Tm a1 WN :..,:ct,1:.,gQOw0s woU62¢ Go sN w :O z',,I.•iz. ." 6O Ili F zi oZNwo2 zz °p `- m r�QN �z w -W o�. zz LP- oT W w owmam4 •z, , Nza . 8 nM U=ma zmaWpN6F p °ElaY:. F - �= � N. Z n m N �N F- • i¢•� O' F4- W¢ .` ." qON c,...) (� 4 0 ZI wJn zzNw zox p 0GN¢ < a¢W< dyova cloo o• z_ Oz O O OmN mzOoO Z•omoQ, • -.QlN ,*W W �..� O �OV �F- ¢ W0 ~ UaJZ U 2WWG¢ - ippN zwN X6N° zK ¢- z9f,-; zW O� ¢O <E ¢ Q- zN - .N NW,TAi-::aNZ Q, k1NF.,. P�1d. ix (n C. 13 i¢ mF- ¢O -aoo �zz _wf 'oz'.:.'.F-G ~OFz 1-6 ,-wG ,- ,- F-N.1-N..tr NzNWF0' w 7 a a Op w0 m PIP 22 HOwZN6V, .Y. Upp OT,G gm •Z Wwm WW zOJ ZZN O•NSW :,•I �m Er-.- ENO (A. }OUZ`4 Y•az w?�N.:.•'JQww �oNadw I_KaF- : O wAT.3 '8. uN— c. dciw. q ;rwn1 Q' op • N °,v ow a°fUi ona a :,11J . o•:.'.'WwaO o :•ozXatl.F ¢ 0do Prn, H °zY Orz 1Om OOpP 2-8 Nt1Um ••Ni-:.�'..-=, ONq0nNatZ¢UNz OZ¢, Uli� 6.. '• S� w; pZFaZ..:Fzn� F^ rm Fz • F�° -o -.U-O FmwwK ' 16oa p'po" aswpgaa w°J �.rz '•r 'z;wo00 U`ZF L;U"3o zON a ' 8" � ZZ 28 UNujW WviZ 22 U oa*¢•wza Nw")8•.o 0 J LyINzo �wm 1Namz m¢ 7 a ,.;wF> °F•••�O 'p'o.Um7F•rp Op. � m}� mWna z ao z m 70 1-Elpw UW2 6 W�Uz 220 N(Lm •''• z°O :Z, a �'E �oEinn.zN-, NOWaFO ( opppz NO InF}}NN .,' ,t,S•aLLUzE, OF.O•• ,r N Z WUli �4 O aW2F-pU FQ tJOFZa1 S N O •:.Zr a,�Wn 2•m • OW- NOV NFWJOO_ N' 00 n Z m xz m 6oz.„2.N O:Wao60.6. O• N mWu7a�z a 0 0N oZ w mo nzN� Nkm t.aa0 z WFa Nu v, Fc. v,z Nz G 0m0 - a6 No -o- N:No - m<wpfa °° cPQ mdw IJKON QW^JLL SIN a � iciy-6W " aXZo c,W O o NWZF U•• U • o go • W Ogca N W ti oI I LLLLLL V)"NQo°zmI RawW• N. V4Wc IW 2 .W OGo W OG mwU '1 mmm fO 44~N ��J '4. F ..w . Wj w0,0o FQ WWW • 'z ? X Q .•.•• a ,•: - ". Wzco-', �O Oa 04a aWUO dLJ••a a.L (i& I, ce NNF§O Z CI I7 J MOp O\.: F ; °O WE `� V is OUp~:„U 0UV 2, K 252 2,ZJ 2a 'ta ¢ K •GmNa N oQaN ' '• I' (73'�� �x F0q4G KUKaUU8G Slil•2, WN." °- KaRgNwaN� iF E aN na aVlUQ aNar f6,z6.NR1z',�aF0 aN tw 4 �N _mD l TT zM oM N F4OVLE Wm • : JF � vN a4¢ F= -i� •saX � ..•,. .• U U¢ 2W F,-=U1 n to m ¢ Lo - QwY qU := F,o .... -6 U ¢••• . •waPN � ,T K ., . . �.: ' O .., U¢ 2Wiyi .w.g .<rnE= ce W < l mx ~Q N („,mow O [II UOQ. „i m Yo'C's �vi0.l d::,aW ,�ZZ mZ. oi2Zo ��NI_ .FAR NO 'O V:2 mW vi Do F.. ,pp YP..0 m0 '-0:.NY ._. Ny ,x<Qz N ( -t. s O -a� oz N W N ¢UN Z7 ,ZZan€yr 5zZ_�Qn 2�wppQa J2oll'�ZO��17ff•aSFfONa- .�ONawS••:.yy..'.��.•'•;�0.m•zZ ••,:••1W�-..WLL w4:�.WI�,FF0N.--.• F_0w�}V-I : �m •''✓ aG Yz , s�'"''m •6 ' xF~�.iO.=•.�uawn'�J C5 z KS NFo z:-.,G i" No rZ3 J . - g •' ti.¢w• .1 U Oo 'Ow G.•'NW,E Z w-W uZ,W Q^ • aN2 2w • ya- C � lWUa �W 7 •, TO O a EI • 0 o 1' -ZO , •' G z wz• N N ZK Frw •wZF . w ... w?a o3 U 'V�W o HmOG 7 : w 8'.6U'::,:N N WE 0. Wo¢<ra 1w : m; '-','It Kama QGF!F 0 6 ,,,'OW .N 'QO O 6.W p 1i ,,N.T.H,L. "=.m Q QQ -UN w - _ _w U N•.;a 2o ¢ O Gm oz. mNiPzww�2'eca6° J.J F zc�o ° aGt c.ro w N.. zw w og aW O '''_e WZZ m:6'-i-. z,'6 rU IWczaa W,1,mmo 4U �• '. O .z.m zr r a oZ tiom • : ,20.ce OM ,1OU SmZn<aJ9p(. Nw m20Gz CI, zO La,. a o4O ¢ G• 0 nbRraNl01_,,i - Cn . WLLW °OaJa U .• •.(� w mw IO O z,i m aNZ, m ' ,z00 0 .Wm . .W0 en o �zm wyzw . 4. , OzJN NMNw ~p �z Z � 4F aw z .G w w g o o 4. Q f:: '. - m o N m 'ga , nk_ Flo'o 4a >Z N N N 177.0n O0'-', .::•'r az,:•,.> ... ,- B z 10 O O.¢O .too- OoNO.mO ¢ �Q z400z " gm .as U(0 w - K 'c:,) U N-J ,•. c,• � Js J ¢,04 ZrwC0N 2 V F oZz SZ.= . 0 w wU mw az N© m S N ,,a-m , gz o z'o wN xo° M Q a ,-uo 0. ' Zm � a a c.' . zs_ NQ � oz NW 0o �aFa ozoz ; i , 5 Nz mG ° a,r ,,` oaWx VN¢UoQ ¢w r V IrdOr o Nqn . w,'•• PE oX w =z E c '30m6iNNza:t•c, pamxaP ,..vo ,_,PcnQ w • •' WF 2 l..) = , Uma mpa 1F' axm'"z Wo'_ FVi1 ,ca zW . FD rZ c, ten z p /U X-' F 'C.a. U-oq o a °a 3z ,o P 4 o '• . ;.r z Y o Pit' o a 'oaN.; vw6° aoFo ,n<a ,,m wO� �Uil � 1-- w } r GmLes o - W ..- ._._W m r NO o m co wPP.'.'.'�'�: r 0 =r- _ i, TN ovz � oraz Io " W dww?- O a Z ¢ a• '•. WJ 2 -2 WZ U F-- 4 � pp< U1 r(YZO Z OG • aMJ4d. m wjI.:w1l. J -""�f' o m p ONW wO Lin • 2 w ow VZZ4 w w � ?-❑dD ¢ZF- A N 'ONWpm :•W 4t .rns LL. LLNELwY G o am Z z z o n42 g� F�g: '-( EwNY'Wpp 7rN LL Oog¢ op) F411. �¢ Um 2O %n,O00i.fOn0 a QUU Jo Ua 6W O m9 zzi Ja a° U aZF 2Z05 � wOwonUaUON. • N N N Z J,,,,. a•O gmN-A,,:'Mid MIof* .- - NGz oa z ,- W . w o_ ZznpzOWQN :1 nFw G- '2. � w *z•- a UZQ _ O yF- QT'Q:•.q,.N Jy�Fm-r•:IF 1 r'x{NF wxm••FD-].-lr�Fo L'SFm:"y"Fm-W' IU� 2 H Om N {( O 0N wmWa U F" � N ._m •z ^ r-, ', fzF x UZ O WJ '. No OrozPSeFZi°11°. Ol w "-W ¢aZFQ > F¢-wF¢(, owm mJz T' ' O � Cm © , N � _ o ao 0 ,p,6L -0,,,, NNv1• NmN4,p10= O 0 Mm � Q ZN¢� 05WZZ mW0 ? =QF LA.1 W W O �Z.. Y4'':;• ': J "Y;'. 9ou_owza�PF- ,,_°sc zaz oO wa V) '-aZQ > Z az J OZN= rN } Z z2 e,•• m< : I— Cf,0 NP�O _pw�. zpU -p_z OW E5¢ Z1-z 0UZ Q w _ oWa aLLm•m''4Dr r'" EEL6r oF9 � 'kf 1IW /).....d •' V1 ZpN Fa.�5oozs- ffim aJ NEzU O UaW 2mKdQ J M c d,F a g7v o� __/, '/,,oa Uz0z0z000zz0zzzoa0oma zvl:•• mN (no dI;: mz.- Uwo _upoF- NF o -< orw wm,O,,? ° Z wwow z z -. mE .Z , � wm. W N :tno (7•'"P'',•, Wz_°ooS' � ° amrpazFP v❑Z4.k Z,A A 0Z6zZUUZU' ZVZZZZZZUNUF ;mfmwZU O 0.0 ��' '.:� viw °-3O--'Sa - NZ WO J la' I' N Q 0. g ii ` F DN o. ,_ UdQ ` paoaa aoasmo aZJF.<UQOU ❑ JFo,°° 3. FF FFF rTx : w . ' .a a .‹..‹.0.. ErFri. _,aoco U m �x m .,,no • :. .• .gym o I o •,j �y z •M-�mW F-zz '�• _U}:a":...�•p'o�.o I QOO Q� Nm.L ",.-. •.w• o w z O <C w 00 3 '' FiOW IN Qwm}}m ZNWZ Oa .. .. 1- 6 Sw FrozN,,'nyUm mmy�UWF-•O �-Z mOa„- 0 "1' Q O w0 O 22 WaU.w. o pwV z zNo p Uoo z ,9- F-' N _ N N m " zp'zE ¢a o Na-x 0o zq* Nw 0 z.. N; w Z O mJ< Z N e• z Q ¢OOr 4�F F-Z': 1.� N¢ N • I � Z Z 'c� 28 w8' <N wp�'E. mz°,i3�Z po4NWWmG�- wo :''•z W,ra z/1 Ov}•WpZmU OQ OU22 Zy-,=n-f Ez NSmp w¢ �•�'.•x � zr„zN- xoz `�'Nwo .�, '• o:o;m w z�p'tj.g8oW N wa •.NG (6 - ig- rza Otro�x}rtcmna FZ• ,=i, m'• Nr' ��g aN z z s4}o mN ° 1. �mmNlzsz ( ¢a 1- a""')-aGC'1 oy wrvx `Z zwwol'ro: zaJwYaQk'T� �iz7d'a°Nw�z2°Ya�a'�om�?Noz �,-• - U w <o ,1 r! _`` o o d w .� Z •':. OxwyZ �amm�F-U_b �U_'Z Z USNZm ICWO _U,map ....� i0 M1� w z p y, N o J >> zo N o r z w N o wi E F- w F- tr V` ''' 'WO WNKN �f!'.aa°-m- N pma N°a» Nzzz z M.... o •r m o aY a N Q ¢ EoPaw oa3N o a a_ Y- Fwil a : ¢ ¢ SQ �w. Nw'w.�P G r z¢ acFi°x (n�c¢i�'m uJw� z w.. o,d t✓ W a+� OZwNo11J0 . P pp<00.nNF- GU, m � aU-,'-' a �¢o J Q� U x "• r�s. SO_ a06-_-0 a U-4 JZWm z ZQa c'or NU ", m • Y.. G+2 ]- i 2 LL 'il T o_ C7 '':., rxa w (�7z �¢ azo�N-wa �� o_ ¢w m ° LL mao •�:aozoo_�`'„',o F.," c.` ,,,, p •w,,, z z o z , .o qq¢ ,,o s I- ° �a n o r •' Z rrztam.zo °-6..c JmNNv) zm mawim°ozo Nla.p .0 a oWo t 6i cri F vw" 6 a,C ti' d () a,?�i'z O >>c.aw m. mo mmwo a-� Ntou -`' m a rF- wF= 1„-.> > ��(( Q r ,,.� ,�� w 1- zFr�� °a �.,_,_ ,„, ,,,,_mWuuzl 0xmx -50E- c, LL N doz OmZm w Nz Le,,- omim U i . '•:. r tTfi� N .4.:51--VI ,0°=2M a x'61e"gSoFm'ZZZ,, W a ,n 2,z7, W Oao z N w o¢z JZ .Q zlnnwU4,.E§BmW a:2Ur 'Efl-E iW wEFSOo,w2omoU(U/�EzaW ° •�.Tj 0 F F. .¢R �YZa O ___',,,N 0= Q¢=¢ KZa I O \ O (r O iW WN NGp ,miW GZa� _ �' ^,ate u,,D o Y a < ¢� F G r i a ,- N w �O p" w�m Uo}waryofpo=mn^a‹.,.. . >,NNzo,4UociR",,cE00, 4lozoZ k FloT-o F ,r zoZoaz ¢6oao d >- X = r z dw=m= N N Vlm 6€O ��❑v,n, ppVSONOQm�Of=1l F-UO O{� ^ a4J' !¢- ¢- F g a W f-w GNZaZ F W F- '- Q U W maWZmU W z S w pZQ.-..cW�Nr( =,iz NZF N 2 low Z= GhK-Z.,,�4 2 O Z 0 F- O O w2cm&o�� ky_�N m� m�Fnoz NNsNo'rpYQ .� C m d� _ G �tF m <� 3� �cno^ w mW ,'.mamma-Pz x,K'oz„., ON U0m z . a i'-.V? i` ° zw >y-.�kl?••._,.--.h`Qr0b,rl zjW- >z O O o O v ❑OS a,'.UOJPON ,'._U'N IUWW�N - ,�Va WW- i , 3'•:. �Z pGpO aN¢�ZzpW �� NSWw WN=mW }N pWO G¢O 5�100 CJ�:�}'1PF "l' 7 OO �J R' =Z '" }� Qwpr� ¢�pNp�u =�=Fo€z t�a � t o G- W y c) ¢.NI Fp on O In z m oo_ z m w -FU w N Lc. F- m O �w m'-m Z 6 O� y J O r Z �U U � ,', Y L,a W I Q W Z w ( Y wzNz aowa ?p�~ z o Y > moc.m -� ozzoN4 0 _- . _ (W6L8 a� �'�j o W w mQ rLL O OQ F207mF-moN OUZ° •F 4U- N W G 4 I n O WF Z Z .: , pg.wF°Wowcw osN Ww,'. xm z o u,N,f w� - wp i i . F- go 'LT.-z �� O Z ozo WI"irwU vxlw°L NFwwEzomT[_WZ��11m NZJcDSNo =�- -t~, Q�OF f ¢ � ct O g 0 Q W }��g. �E La WaZ�N w-UN 1� UWGW 3 �. F �N F ,nG (A z W6 mY Oj XZmJN W 8q'.,il • p WN O Oa. 41 °"Wgm,nW.Jzzoo7d'WFpQG aoa,0-np3gQ z� oo 2 �¢a "'i --} o o L .j F-NZr 5 L �¢ �vwi V Ow •gi w a GYi� wJZQaH"wz,°n"Z�3 Nou,0,.21-'03.e zEi?wZFNiN • F f�c8o Wp F wP Wp W J`F- a a. Nao F ¢ aoU as _ o mW L'z� m Wa ° w zF m (X L� (^\�C/`� w �4 -m8 mBZUUN w2UO OPNU :y.,,, � z �ma F Z m ma Q -" ''•o••o im<wYWwop7-}{aGFESW�oa¢�Soaw,`'0o'J`�¢o¢�9w Fa- o " c, 4 o, 1-i o `_' !C.D, °a z]'O,W'4W0I FT2<z.a<UW 000UU� 0¢0N�3Ka�ol� 2� z N U - N¢ ra • .... a' m -.- .0 • .-.... .....v..... N 1 LI- ...,ct Cii , Z l'.i 2:9.7, .••::: IA _ .. /333 13 < 8 , c, _______ •II.9Z 91,.LON hi '''•••••',., '•:••••.., 0 1 •-. (f) -- -.L9"SOC 3 '4 I cr:-, ... z. ..• o , < "0cv ,-, .,._•-: P a. , ' £3 a-,2•••• • •• •... ,_ ..•.•- L9S0 m.:,-:,,,,,..`,'•••„ ON n r.: bi x'--,...t El.i,---51. POl• 5 N j r —I I ',:.1 6 0, c 0 ..-.J..8 z I-S 8 w . 6 m•. -i- 0> " I—12' .13 ••'' Z -F- '3',-;, 6.u-i, ...i?' •zs P',, ° -, ,,,,, a ,1 i N r.' Z ,','S: NI ------0-',,H -'''' W'.S..g'‹ .. • •''-'• 6 -0., Lo ZL'LL 'L'i t 1 21 a' .:. •17)'Z .7 C±f . ... RH° c •• 0 0..- 'g '1'11',S Z'N ill le, \ .rT F.--. M.ZS,3.3-1..LON I ‘() t >-''''415`re•Zsil' ''' x. rt! ,•.• ..'E,.z_J ,. -ot.1 '•'..t1...:.' (5)7 ••...,6o30 •-•.•,K) ....P, 1Y cii 8 E .. F-°28° 1-6 --, i ,`-)P ',',.:4S> .•• ,g, -,-- Q 3 F a'D&-,., ...• ... q 0`• ,.- ....74`c •-••,.. ,\\ d ;- H. v: '1:',--, •• ". . La' c)\ E 0— ,),2 . ..-k,`) ' --....- z 2 - '":'/) 0,it''...: ..t...-ot,g,,,.--..... .. ... ,,- . , ,-,,.1 , 1 .,..., .......„., ..... 5 r•- •. ......• inz <„0„! •.:... ••..,.. ... . - ›- 1,',1 , ... .E a,.• ,..; 10 • M ° 4 I .P....... [2 1 .•••... - . . ci x ci - .T PI ... 1 ,•-) ••. • 0 :..1 ":_.i .'.. -•. '63_ '••.41' , ' '•'.. 2,.,,- '2, Si :5 Z 0 ; >•4--9- V 11 •••:. • L.I. '0 1 saw" b o wl- - --- H Q•''..) z •-,, . 11 I ..g. ..: ,-y- F •:: ,„ - 8 N.. z ...- 2t .-.• 1.,.3'. -- --- ..• „ • • •• 0 I " 1 • • - b L'5° •••• : cO RI FLill ... i•J' . .;„„...• •"' ,ocyjj4. I -• -- ,L..... \ - 2 r34.60,L2.933N .. _----"," ' ;;;.,_ L' N(''''' .• • '5-.F.-e. ... . '-.'*•.• ..... ..'0 • <P,..,,....4.,*,,,,r?:4 : • 331' •Ii..?, ‘• •qta%. i Ldej 6 iii a. 1 LCD 8 o ; ,I ,..... • ,,, 6-,- ..,..: ...: 5.z- •••-•• „., ,s > cs t. ::";),- LL,-7 •'•:, OD D 2 w 6.,'. 1 L7, l''.L.,or, ...'',Z cili_ / -&' .' .... •".• •••'•••••••°:°-:".• g 461,irje,--, ,•,2 ''.•z'-. -bg •i -,•-e•S' : 04 1 .. 1, • , , "..-• •".,`"POP. '• / ..:: LA27 .•:•• .-•,--:--••4 :.... 12-11-*: F 0-)F ' ---- I.R 6..• , ,•-] ho. u-} •-•:••• t--,•.I-- ••.M '•••-, S.?..i. ''N t, S. .." --, ...Ea''.-¢,.I--* D LC,, CC '''•-., ''.‘4 SQ.'. ,,,..•.. •,1,i.,'' Z Z i'Ll?ti 03 4 113 ai 2 2 F;8 r••--: ,.. ,ct.lr_; . 2::,-,....g-Li o....3'6,7, i: IfJ ' ...' r,11-, M„66•,4,5•22N n .. -,-,5 F_c!.. c 2,'0-_ ,.1-• ............ ,....:,,,,.._Li_i 600_-.1•..w.m.,.......moZ .....ir,,q.... __,__...40., I 0 6 F'•:i ..4-r lo;•-)1-•:1-co,r ••• •:1,"! 0 w'o3oq = ElQ`±' -:r. - .• - , ....• 8 1.1.;,--•z i--I 4 - 4! :i L.,.IT -z 9:2---1 ,--,:i.(7 . .• ..--1 •±- z ••ik. , ui m `1'2 2 z 2 P,i'2 2 2 8 ›. co cci .....•'''.''' ?C•.3"15'.. ••••:•LC gt.frOLNI '1. '''' - (7) w •(..<"'‘-•'x L''''' c^i '•2 .• oc..z I- 0 '0. m z •v).4A_J 3-.1 o .: I ri:o_t•- z .3t•3 • Z) :.`I'N il5 b5 ' '"•• • . i••••. "i'...821,1-6.•.' e,sEn °_,_) 1.-4 OLL.W.- __W •<D0',4 0 La.! 1.41 r.) Id " <F•1.0 La W• 0 V)...J L..) < 3 I-- novinc4o.,g,r83 XI . ....Q g3„I4,eZ. NH'i ..2............t„,, K,'•°0 z•,,, ••••• .mNz x ••, z >- ,,,, ,• ›. N CLI 01 I gllIsC/0.1 .P1-.3,al...:, •••••••II ''' T.11021.1 N ii,`,°.mci3,-0-oo r ••••••••••......", .•:: •••••• 0 ° -Zfj.1D c < cn ct 8 00 w fr- r'..' r.‘°`0°F•2-al - Hx•[..4,.ce 0 ,.. ce r_c .._, r,-., , VA rz.,,,,0 tl.d... z 1-9 •-•''''- - cu '! -.. g.,311 5... <-- r„g c,°, ,,,-,••;.-:i3c,r1 ; F81, ..• •...-B,-2: -cmc• • w 2. , _ z cn m --`-'- •••••• z•--3 '''; I 7 7' 9 z'IE',,,T'fi) • `86-, :' 1,,es, E9oell,q. ,`,e ‹ < z Q (0 _, L'j•-•ic"•03,2 P'30•.. ce,---Et o--......:.- m = '15- _I c_i z CK . C\2 3 • • EL L-....-----4•:T•':.• .• I ••••• ,IN1„60,1£:621,1 NI T-4, •••• z z Lu •5- ulu-, rt •- 1 (..,0 •... .....w-.-4 L4:51 L° c i. ..-.... 1._ IA La W LJ LI LJ 14 L_LA LA w 0 7-•• 'FL .. ... .• GE La q i Z :5 Pc "- CD bi'•< Z / 01 L•r/ IV ',2 ... " , , .. 6 0- •`\-.I ....,GI Luz c:, z •.0 w L.) UD . , .. .: i•-• .... I 2„933,L0.26N j-------. 1-: .:.•... - I•• • w r).11 • • •. • ,.<.5z°8;••. ° ki ••••• 000_ . z.,---,;-.2 ,..,• 0 ,,p6_,...... . _, •c -8-1 lal LJ W Lil lal Ill W W lil W kJ kJ 1..J I.,J> CO .T..4 ......... , Eo, ....• •••••,.. , '• '`,''„3, 7. P 1?.` ii t-,- _JLA1,1,.,t`:`,-',o'i ?p,',U411 . .0,•:-a -,ci L'-'In z (:' w w "Ci C...,. c.,.) ..<Ezvv),71.1f)v)r•o.,;--,,-,,,,crior,, .4, 0 .'• .. .. . ' .. .7.1W.z,7-•••°c-I-- 5. z °Z (;)- "'Et-I ,,,13 Iwo .. 1-- .(2 f=2 2 F:1 2. cr;'LI;t.'.`Zt.'4 P-•i', . .. •. :-„L<c-'-;-•(..0:.,„. z - •ea-ec. N ''.1 •91 14 Pr cn ,_ - E.--,:LI ....... ...• ..... . .-- Q c''' '-,'`" -•-'-' ••6•9 9 M c <I < I •.rii 'T,,.'`, o _.,q, 9..c. -2,1i,r--,oa• - '''' C li -' ,--.LJL,7,4,3Ni"la.F,EAN:FA,Oli ... .. ...• ..... ..,..,,, . .....,......• .... •.....,, ••,...., ,,, _,F, .,•, , „it:.„., ,, giv --- .0 . .`2-..2 4 t.,,A 9. .... ,__H: ,_, , rza ... -...... -,..... -00 6 'A-. ...:.•:-.„:,9,, aN Psi,,z9 . .se• ' W N "_"...,E '•L,,•'''',-... ...'?, D E,- La W (r) 96? :5 e_'8,2 '.•.'',.. '...• .9 a' CP M Z .. •.,. -.-. .--e{ ".• -4'''''. i'-Z07 .,.?,-,' 3.4.it:o,,,,. __ , •...o• z.33,3.,;..>"<1.,..•.nzul •,. 5 -, L.:, rx a it.,3, Ci t z MI13•11`,F-'P,S' gSgLiZ-8,93No9 • -, ......7•.•.„ ".... - ._•.R, &iv 0o1•1.o. .'- p ,,,.. ,t,,,-,--, d i-9 .. CD .- ID:' CI' Lj (..)(-''1-.-1 m e•....1 CP;ai Lri ci r,r•••••u-5 ON:ui-•ed vf. 1-,,'" •,..,. 1— - 92•01[•-•:„..„ 3N0z- `•-".• o‘) '' .'L.'5 6 0°,°2 ",f,'',.z E I —zi-,7,-.0,.„,c-om,....4,,,,,,,E,,,,,,•-• - • •• -••• .,i'' (69r ------..--. i J.07 .2°? ..47. °,;,S-Lc's .'"'4 • 1 wi 10 z CO- G"vor as) •.z.9•6,----'...4:,.go. .;•.:E,* •••••:. LI o'-.-- I° eT, •.' V) L‘i -.:. "... Ler,',2 cr,8.'.• -------___ AaTzpA/ 9 991-•'3••' 1f,• ..7., 8 w ES '.. r ..:1..... 1 1 ..., < _J ... ••••••43; 3'%•_'' --- " a7.-1 -•••• •1•.§. „ ., .., <6t,_, •'. •-.'.d I --------,L. , - .1 10 '' " --''•.•• L5'•I;s al z I I c, uiflir,innAnr.,-LT:1 a El Z 1 a 6'LI' :::...."••••,,...... ., 0 ••,........ ...- .. L.,,. ....,.• „LAT • ( ''-• ---.._ au .8...:.x,s° -•,1.:-9- ,_1 . . L, . •.,.. ..,, •-.... z ,..„2 ...,.. --___ :. , s;iv ,!..,• ..•••,:giv F- Z .• < L7'., .• - ....". VI' ''N,6 h'iLl-'•13J -.. '. P,' .... °": —• I I IC-4- _0t2",..•C•••••o••a•7oi•i.6•n3 ciero3 F;•;••..F.u.r.tvvoo Lrir°.3 4o3Z,2, ci-,tn,3•,0o Z4-o••3E•3.•'••,•03•r2•1,-•i•Cno •,•- . .•'.,.:.....tI.;' E,a. . *- .. .... • .. , 4.*-...• E—,,,,, , L...••• •V, L • z i1zn'zv-•-P,z.,,,C"•enI▪Oz•Nz' .C!z.I'Nvz•..07oF;,'zF'zM z.7•,....,,z, r..13 : - / •. . . 4 Lav,owwwwwwwwtw 7 L " , . -)- i: d i - ° .- L E - ii: 10.- e ., O▪ 000?oco . n;2i - • 1a1--o,onc1Di1-pil,-:),c7 0.: a vo . ,r „ -v . vin. 00u8u0o , I0 ., - ,. 03- IltTJ Z • er0-.!- 0 - •., intr. 1 - 0003z0'-n,--_ r70 I„ & I 9Ld, 3N,- -03 ••1 um <, H. .¢v:''r.'''-r„.:7,..,,. . t,Z.:,`.'' ',8.,:,„...:•'..... ''.... w N .•....• 1.41 L 21 Lc: ?I t7,'`A i3, ''z-,,'i",8,7,''r,' f).','8''''2"0 P " ••••.. n .. • .. L ., .3. I P4 WO 0-1 II II 11 2' .... .... ... ... " • •7:-.2,-<_, FE; E, oL_ (./) „...,...-........., _J .• . . " I •• ...•c1.....-... .. .• .. .• ',. •31. I'l L'z < ) ... • , .0;1=1 i_ nFico•r•ovrascoi“;33-....4,03.• - CZ . ...... • . ' • ••• - b3-3I7). mq„,•,, P.131332,332,333,0? ,,,,„ 1\ / L3-I -r.3:8.2.E.W-,".`...°2(7)'..;2'4(.1'.•5.'4 F:i.' -.. •• -...- . • ' •, .. „ .. .. uj lc,'12 vr,T,2 2`,`,'6. i`ti sr r•••?•: - ... \ / • -... . •• . . '. ..3::••••••••,...•,. OC9LSZ .. •.. • • 1Z--• w >- S9I8ZI J _I F298S •••,„?,°,,, •-••.3,..•••••.,,••.• • - CK • • -„. •• :1'ir(±1 I'J'S''3'2;2_1 2.]-SI I-1,1 S' •:::.•,,f.-,•=z r;')51 2 il-2 8 r:-'2 8 F.,E.!A Fd.,=t,..r; "... - .. •••••••• .,. .. . L., .. ..... -....,, • .••:.. z . _ _ _...,__, w , •-... - .• •• .:_t -05 0- / \:.• . ... .. " •• ... ".... ....•...••....--• ••....--............... . • • ...... -0•ri xi •'•.. . .. ,....... n --i -• •.. .. , ... •• • ...„.............. •••... t.,-) II ii ( • ,. •• . *..'''.• CO -' \ • . . .:. .• • • .. .. Lu. ) . • .. • • .... .• ... .... .. . ' .. • < • •• .• .• .• - •• .; .. . ...• • •. . . ID . . WI • . • .. •Z , .... ....... •• • ., 0 I') : •... • •, • ...... ...r• •.• .• •• •••.„.. ., • . •-•.... .. 1 0 ,--- F- IP Co -,-,o in 1-'-vo c•I To ,-- 0 0 7-, •... or 1 -=-S 0 .4..;,:0 -0,0 -0 co'fo 14 z VO ... e H'0.- 1--.-0 b,-..1 r:, 0-o; ;,-)od"•Z • ..i..,]... r L.:-, _c•I -oo NI co 0 In .. M 0 -CSI• - .......Z.f.71 .' -c‘i 0 oo r; ii II ii 0 N 0 N FO ?.,•:, E`.4. -.. 1 O'C'1. r 8 r',' •..-• • ,,,,..:(3,,,,, ..,....,,,H -7.0.,„.„.:..-•....., 1:Nnu....... (:).....„ .... - 0 . .:- u-)c.,b Po,,,) • N'''... <-6 1.4 •••• 5,t. z,r-.:: <ir---, H ii n :.: w p•=4 g Tv < -- "...• a-IL,0 .,-,'-•,-1-4- -;4'... ..•: . - ._0 ;,,,, . 6 0 •....,r,f w i•• ..... ,.„. z. b 4 w;.-..-. z r•-.: '-t 0 -"`"., ,n )",•... X1'..'P , r-oi . co (NI 0.,- I,l'-• N • • • g:1 ../. ' ...',.. .0,CD 8 f, <1 ''"..... ...,...:-s P.4-4, / "1? :.,' , , F`-•CO ,,,,, .. Ln 0 r, . •,•Z"...,, •• 0 et; LI_ II 0 ci Y Z.L'") ,f,,,,, ,•C CO JO Lc) ••• . i ,. L.• JI II u '=34 --N. .•,c •..• ...--- ,;:::.,\::::,.....'„ :,. .,, L.,,T z t!,' , _.----' <,: -I E.,tj • <Z "'•'•• Ldt fi_T "•'••••,--- .-,,,,."•:',.'.... ,•••,:•. XI .. !a i".- - ------ -- ____. C ki fi r. I C...)Cs' •-•• .. C.1 ll..-, In ...• ..'"*.:••':•'**,‘,:•-..:-..: ; 'IN :7,r9 E.. •'•3 / -- - ' `1---. /3s. .1 •••:1 ,1- . --- •:: ...•Pr'0 _".., • 1-24.? •. - :..1•• ',..:-:::.*:•1::•:-..;I-1\C•1`-'':''''-.-'`:-. ' C-)ri) 1----% .k r '..- .. •• . ( , '.-- ,', ''.. ,"'••\:•.1,\-''''‘',2-'-‘:-Is':',' 'S.' I -er 2 t„.L. ,00-zz.I. r..ra -c'r- 1-4 - C•J- LO F.-, i-dlo aa •'7,- ,c`' .7'-- :•3`:, -',2g .,-''''"• -1 " 0 ..• ; , • .1`,., - E"" 11'EF, 2.•„2q,i0.28N ---. ,o 5 •6::: -,,--: • ,:•,-)cc ' •• • • ,:••, -- -0 . •• ••1 •••••.„... c n_ . 00 ,-.1 c•J 5 - ° . .. , : IN°3 -, . •--N rNI C'' *••••...,,,........• W -CO ''',1 c.' 3 1r z .• = a, tri _ on • ...• „ . ., •=....o 0 IP •,')'a; z --:1- ::--t- Sb . p-.-• :-. ,,, R: z (1) • . • . , •... lad 'Ad frk; ii.c.,,,ri?E'l IGO?.•-'1.•-1/5".i '::,,,f,',,la--a10 \..a.'s,4",SV.i..!4..e,%. Ii.1 ::?•:••.c-•,..-i'•:co-•••••••;'i,N-(.7,-5-4•Ny-, . .... •.' ..• 4,.. Fsi .. 1 ..., ,_N o ,1 ..k.,..... •*. C LL .0 •. b in 6 " •••:, ••• •••• z 1--- .• Z C .,.,'...'...,, •:. LLI CD L.I.1 • .; •CD Z I-- • z .....,, < b II 1.1..1 ., °- -2 I-rr) --"malffit- 11K---iMMIIE t- :-/- w • M. 0 C\I . •'.- N - -3 • •••• --I _.,, 2 • . -••-. o 0 -b> 0 0 2•••••••, 0 /.. 1".. v) 1 Im0-. - I cn • . - 0 R < 11 .. .0 vj ' .•......,... _• '<1. ..16...'''... p....0...,0.....• . a.ii ••... 0 > - .- .. .. 1.,..1 t-, 0 -•• ... . .• o •••.• -.....„ •.,.. .... ,..... •• - 0 0 ,._ ••.. -'• zL,,,,, ,.... .• . • x ri N 5..' ••••• •• a• •. Ll'-'.. . •••• ••• ii 3 . '6- •-•:,-,., ... . rs.... ... ,8 LLI e . . ..,. ".• CI) V) •••• ° ..... 1... K Ci L..- •7, •• •••••'... .• • •• . 6 ,-- kil , •o-g 1,-,,•: 7,, ..• •• .. .'. ". •• .•.• .• ... "... -6:i.-.... illy••••:;-,' ; 2 g• .',4 -• 0 0 Z 0 • 0 u.. ..•.......•. ......... ...... tr • ,. I. z ••••. ........ " .• 207,36'.•. 801'22'5.1'X 14 1'.• C\‘‘ ... fi01'22'517E // . ..---1 .. .r,...:., ....:::.. $;';.',...S•.,-4 N„, !, 0 0 P L.L.1 i&::/ II/ i • sow (...) < r Z .1 ••••• •!I .1 1 op.,, . .. • „,t..,.......-....„. n..% i(X U) fl. 11 11 ••• 7 :, g.- I 1...'•• - ---- 1,1 1 b r-i-lk,....... l' •'•... ''....., ---4, I: ut.1.4:&:••-` •,f2 r, „.• i .. !-- i .,,.. ! • Lq .„ t ..... •••••.... • ..3 ... Net. 1 ) ,:p 1 -,,,./1„..s t ci3E,,,. 1 1-.6 ••••••: _V•A °... ' il ' .... ''-'11..; :J. .7 1 i r;1-11[..; . .----1 liri i •• \ .r.... . 1" /i/ : t .. •,,--"N ,/1 ; ... 2 1 :,7:::Niv,,;:ct •i••. d---, ::: .' • '. I ‘ .'•• 2- I 1 II' 1 4 .,:?‘,:,, l'r•t:17,e,:iiiii fill:..i..i ....,........4:'7.1./.._i_.........'.....,:....•'::9-.1---...--.:-/. ..... ://:1:,.;,.."..:11.,\i‘ii,1,,;,,i:i_,,,,,..=,.._11.. 1-:--isz.11--/Laii,../rii't'/,?11) b.n.r2.,,,,,.._..<1.,,2.....,ny.,.. .........\.._.. i. 2'.1.:,.:":4:...,',41,!,.)...j41:11 ../.....-:."..:_!....,...,,..,_,.0.,•••._,._.......1/1„IsII\.I..-.1._l_Jo.. EY ,• ' , !•',-• •••• /1/ /'' ••*.- : ' / f'-`-• •-• (J) i••••••• e" .-.- '71' . • , .. N.. - /" '65' I I 0 L...i CNN/ r' ill l/.. •••• ......'.. . i•••1_-,2 i _.... ,-. • Cs4 Cn cr,. 4' ''-'• e.-. Z 0 0 cp / , /r/ " .. 0' / 4 ! // •,'.. •.. .. '''.'.....1-0* 1-.'j',;, ..../.-7- - i•-. 9 VI 1/s„,. .i.L.;'.4'.•1. .„.. i •,. I__ 05 ct cr) LL,Nce N.r., / ' / 1 ' i ti/ . lit / I/ i .. .• ... .. ., •.., ••• .•• .•. . . •.• .. ."1...i ....7.... / / ...• , , ;.(i (....:r a„i'•,. 4f4in..1 ,••• 1.1.4 0 U) J ,% c:)6L-. C,),Cr:Ak 1.).! I/ '. . I . • f k . ''..' I "i.:" I i Lg V f 1 ‘\:: .1 P''I '.'. --, -2—•:::e ..., _ / ,a,_ 1 1 f 1/ i i 314•18:257,, ..".... V /I; 1111 ...?6':1. '... 1 ...... !1 1 1;"1 .' ., II .• 1 1 : Ili II ..,• II/ 71 i i ; ... - /1... \ r.:::,, i...t. ........ ••••• ' A '.•'.. / •./ ! li'l i ....f '.Z• i I/...._ '''... ../,,,•••••I i 'T ;I I j / / , 4-) = ii'2,2' t qi '..t."••"------,,,,f .•,,.... i\'''..II re .''. .1 .•4• ;ii I .H- 'It.%.1 7 '•,•,1 -1,1,.../;,•• 3 b ... 1_, ...• --...... ...• •••.../ i i i•',..,- ,11-•'-'7,--•-• --- _.,, / '--1- ------••0 if •),....:_[1. !f"..f2 1: ''''),i:1^r-'-:::'.-.' - Z (0 L ..---.."' Z -6,--' t' N C'',C 0 - 0 •<1.T.1-L. LuZ a LLIZ V) 6-• Z -I,C kV J/t m 1 1 : .. 1 I.. --I___1,,, l'.6121.1_ 4,a9; !(4 I' . ,4 i-(••,.- .,..... -----1-1,4;.•fiN r '''...1.,* p 4 ././::- I i 1 '., . • •-....,,,iv,„A,.-",,,,d' 5,, ., ., IP.; 1 --.... --y.;'.• p d N-J Lt •'.77%.?. ,,,// I I `. . .. / 11;.•"tiv".11./ 1 1--52`fri- -- 4- I .-t":,1-L''' C:g C't '.7//Zzg... I 1 '1..`') ..••••••• ' t /'1.-‹ I I 4'A 1- ,:••cli --g.-6L: ,. -,,,, i -.4-- - •,•••• 511!' 0 C') •:;'//!:)Rify . 1 1 .:. / .4' '''''' ...1 //( '''''I' * I ' r- /1_,_ 1 i.;!;k17',1 ??!.... 1?-'--2 I - -•- .. .... 1 .: ,./ \N• - ,':, b IP ro .....,:_/. ( 1 l'.1-8-gu / i 0 i 15i..!- '-:-•2'..-.4 .•-•-/-•-] •• J) ',.;.., l'....• ili .. z,i. y i ....i 8 .. • -1.. .... ...... , ..,‘,.:.,.,.__ _ e_. , (.,,,,t__I\_4_,_ „r../ f__.. I .,„•.....,;-,,,,,,,I ;i•; ,:..,,,,.,;-..Lf•y---;::4-,....• 1,t; ) •::: 3".. yil ....... •.. ..-- ..- , 1 , , .....,,. ---,-- ---=----"•+. ---r---- -- /--\.-1--- .2-ce:.... .i...-1.L.-.-1_,!;.,„,,, ,,1%., i .. r-i g E 2 L.:'••..-yi4-71-111.j.W-;-.4:1'''':--/ ir. J- 0 V24 r,3 e., <... 6-4 • ; ..,,• — 501‘46:13”E ••••• ..,-- C-' -•\ t r- II it -• 1,. . I '''.. -,.........„....,-...-_-1.-7.77.,:..:.*L.::::=7:;:=7:-:-...:=„7-4-a;-•7:_io....,_.--.......:;-..,:---"- V — . A.. . •,-/-•,,,,,r .., 5.1,...7,i 1 1 __,..r -- 2528' .. r----I\ .1, 5.213.1(•I''.•'• .....}. I - --•'-'"•----, •'; ( •••• -------------' ...;-••••••,..,,,,,..J.211,:•• 1,'8 it C..1,3 , . .• ...../ 1 .. ggl i'''''''''--- 1 1T8 / ..' ‘-........) '.. ,•,-..:-.7:',1 • •.. ..... , ,....... 1.,.... •.. . •... . •. .,. . = •- 6• '..... ..,,Y,. .. • .• .n,,..,, .., •• <r. - • - . •• •.. , _ . ..., '.• . •'.' .' §>-,.,8' . ...,,... . •... • •• .. • .. .7 .. .•....... •1. •• .. Y/ -r2. .. ... ,t,e- ''''' • •1..•' .. . ., • .. ., . .. •.....,. ......., .. . .• .. .. •....... •• . • •......, ...... . •• ••,... .•• ••.. . . -.-.,. ....... •••••::,• •....... .• '•.•,•,. • .. ., •• .. ........,...„. •. 3.'0209 V/'09" •.......'%....11, .• .• : '•'. .• •• . . •.. . '.1., 2855.82' ----- ...... .. . . . .1. •. " . '.1.. ....•-• ". • .....- . . . .1.....,' ..... '',•••• : . .,..,.. .....• , ., ./.. ,.'. . • . ••....'''..1.. ., . . •• . c' U.'• .. .....".. iL('C'CA e'..••••••\ .:, . . , . • .. .. / . . • . ' ••‘44410. •, - ..,..... . • / .•• .. .•...,..,,L'u Z • ., • :;.., ., •• •• / -- ••••'.........•' CD 0 • / .• \/ .. .• .6.0 '••• ••• ...] \ v 0 ...•.••••••..... •.... .'.• WN'2 7,.. .' / ',.`-'-.) (.7.1 *.,;.,2 r-- id /•• 7.•,.. \ (f) ..C.... .• •. .. ... • . .•.... .....-. • •• . . 7'' c) = ' ' •.. .•...............''. I '8‘7;.k..W •,------ I,,.......i-- .6 P,A t -•• I -17,3 L,_L°,, ..Sci. :Z_''''''..1l' i• iii/1 7.‘, r.,-, I ........ . • . .• I 6- o 'i.- r: ••'... --'z :.'•'-r•/. p I 1 t .--• d . ••••• .• •• •• Er4 ° I-- ••• a •• E,L,'',• ›." 1 . . I -=',P (9 ' /11//•••< . z Z .., ... . .. .•. . . . . '1 .-,1..,, f -1' .• '',.. • / i•-• • .. .. .• ...' i , .. .. - 1 3 -= ',?.h, ssr..2_,_ ••.. Iiii _enL.,.4...-;) -“_..•ffi. .• ,. •'.,. .• .• '"• •.•.• \ ."--15 2' 1-- i.. .i Fr, .'rt, / .• •,,c- :'--FA`OS .• ,-. ... \ Pitt Z g •'1 8,SI / , " .... . -,-. ... \ I ... 1.tX .... 0,° ••••.... ".. •.. .• '5"5/' ill,/ .. .• le x.7-. ...... .. •••• ".•. ... .. ..... . •. .• ._.......,r,.., / .. •• .. •.. ..... .'•••••.,,, a_...i/ •'...'• ... Illt, .......'.....'... ....',..,........... • . \ 0.. 0. 0 0. 4-.-.4•!:_, ......"'"......° .,..., . -..... ............ ....-. .. ... • . NOilirit .. '..... . . ., .. '.•". .. .• ••• . ., . . . V ... ,. '''••••••••••••• ......,.. •..„ ••',... .:..' '• • '.•'.• ..0::• e..........,.......' • . .._ • • . - ... ,I,J,T,i i-4,-2 c..1 F1-.7.0 vioz,70-!,:ion ta:Ap.•31.--,-,-y-,7J,J6.,:,-,,X,...).4,...ti:s.. r,,06.g:,•,,,,,.i.•11, ,,ic,•,i-va,...1p ..3A,...lx -,i,,p.,,,, C_. • ..... , . ... .... LL1- 300.04' 23 .26 12 1.0 1 • 6 Oa 121 SOUTH 1,4 CORNER OF SECTION 23 •'.. .... Z C END 3"IRON PIPE 5/111,1E3 b.TACK 3 , ••• • (0 z c,.. • c.D . ••.... P4. ° 1 r" - I--to • . - *.•K-) 5 -.. 0 c`l . - I 0 _J rce,)1 1 --•••■111- 1K-----1111MMIK _11. •- •.•.. ....... !......,.'.....Cr.'..i(MI,f:-/:1:),..•.••••,..t•".5-......... .< 0 0 - - _ 1 s -. . s z b •: ' - . .. ! .._ 1 • •. -..t 0 Vi ti-J 1 L-1 .. .. .• I .• •... cc• til ... .• „. > - 1-0 --1 • •., •.. .• 0 •• .. .• , `t* 1 . . .. .....••........ .. „, . Lai N., ,...... co 1 •••,. '•• a• 8 °'-- (-) ... • ' ... Eti 0- ' w d II i LLI < ,,- _ fn -1- . ... • •• (I)\ b i• >-- MI (I) M § ... . . • .. ""• 6 i i h E -.... •.. - .'.•••... .. .• .. j., ,-... :.,6.. ..„. ... .... .. . 6 14 z'bILLIEll Z'-i .•„. , •. ..,.. . . .••. . . . . . ,.. .. C5 ,-, ..4 . , T Z 0 ..• • P 0 0 C Z Lt- 0 "4- VISicT! : .......;:•••••••••••••.., ••. .. .. .• . .... 5 \ ••••••.., • .. I _ • 1- t, .;: ..• .. .• .. ••',Y`' '' . '... .•. .• • .. •"kirio, .• .• .• .. .. - • •..„. .• ••••,...• . . . .. •. * ZNI • • • ',.8,1 y, 1 Lal . ° < W \ .• .•. .. . .. i Lj ft 8 Et L,, P:`3 Ir, \ . ,..•.. .. • . , .• .• .• .• .• ... • ' .,." 1'... ..1°.'r .\'' '°... - •...-, . „4„,, .ilk. z 5 4 a • • . •• , ' . .• , 7 1., . . .. . . 6 .',•;<' .." -.‘-', 4111krr,! . ,iiiiii6 riI L. -•'-'' .• . \\I ro 9 / .... ''„ . : ... .. . .... --,....,' I)",.4. ,:•-. "-. -.' q •'' , V •• ' • . '• ' :,.. N..,,.....,..e.1..." ...; .•• - ,,, .1 •• . , . , 4., s'N.:;,:. .....;•' , . .• .• [ .• . A4T; . ...,....: :: . • - • - . . .,... , ' .• .• .. ..., I .. ..•.. " •• ... .. .• •• (/) . . E \ .:•;"" •• •• . ... . •• . LI L., • *Le) (-) 1+.1 c\I Cs! l' 1 t \ . . .. .•• ..... .• .. " .• • ,... .. •. . . ...:• . .. .... ..• . FA c. n ...-. \\,„..---- ... ••.•.. . -... .• ... o. -5..,,r2c (c.'C32 • ..............f.• -..• .• L.d Luna,moo .. g3 . . , .. • a ........_....._........_.._... • N ,,,,....r---- ., . . •. 0 V) --J .., 03 to , .1;13 . . .. .. •.•. .< •4.4 N.S.-`'''''''' ''''-. . ., ... ' C6C61- 0/.1-1- 1`•.,, 13 rti . .„..- .. . , .• .• ... . . ..., .•-• z z i I i , 7 .-...1' 1 - ...... \ -,..-- --- '.. .. •• .. ...... --.... H,1 i , .- i , ... .• . ".. ••• (-4 C)"X 2 , LL- r.' 1 1 3viop I 1 1--- • I .. 1..• > -..• i I •••• ,L.(------:-.....i0 ..'"•',...7 n, •• .• .• .• •.. • "• z c.:, 4,z ,, o r I --4, !,, i i 0 . a?, .. •• •... . i I i -----1 •:: I• - / • .. `6',Z • .. •. •• •• •• ... . •• -.3 Q S •-.1 •• •• •• .. • ••• -a c.. •-- ....._ it-----14 ../ ......-.„. 1 1p, •• . '•-2 1 •• .: ,, .:, :• LI „„... • .• .• . ... .., .• -.• - •••• e34g•-•-..3 • ..... i .... i r-c ••r-v •••= .4? .....•.,...,.... .• .. • 4!I '1 i''''''-L'-,i,./L--4i,•'. •••1:•:'..... L.:. .... i -7, / •• .. '--•••i ur.,.1_ ,! ir, '•:-4-•,--ii--::---",,.....• -.7/ iI1 1 ;z1 b - • '... . . . . , •,.., - .•. .......... .• • • ,.., ,..,‘_, -JJ :-.-1 -PI ....',.'I.. '.I. I .....• J...!!)-ri• !el"— •,.,!•tV 'di !'!,.. .• .• r. 61, 1 •-•.'.. 1 .'....i.. 04-:''''-i• i.-l'i..!..T.'''%I'. n .. .• •,..........• ,. ,••-• !I '; .. .• . ,.;:••1 -, 7,V a :•••t, h.... _•‘..,, /"1••:c.- iii 1 .. • ir Pr' 11 ... ••••1 .......9E ( `0 .. .• .••• ci.,..„.:•:-. •••• i N11..1,,,, .-a.. • i•by \I 1 11/ e ...........„........ .. .. .. , 7,;-.../ ik '1'......,,i .• •••,. .., .. .• . • .=..- Lif : V • ••• .. .• .• " .... - „.....,....,,,'•:1-4--- '''',....n 11---'1 '7.7 -1-7.4...---—.: \ \ ... • . .•• .,,,,,,. .. . i'''' .1.'--.:.• . , .1 \I i 1 ...•••••••'../. / •••*1.... \ 1 - ,.. ..,1., ',..__ ''.1,_ \ / '71. • I /--I '1, gs'••••• , „ : ..' . •• .•••••••....• ,.. ...•...., . . .... ..... - ••••-•---1-r•-71-----'' ••'.• ----,"-N 1 :41 :-• ..• .c„:..I --/ 7 t • •• .., - ... - . .. •ii• •:-1 ; I I • -,,-.17---:--t -17-- ',•:•• i \ , . -, .ol••••;•§;13-E 141-134)?! ,...,_ ",. •. ' \ , '18,6.06' . '.>,, N_•' __-- - .„.... ...... .1 "..„. .. .. •• •• .. .•-•-, r34 -.... •-, \ . .• .. •. ...• ••.•. ".. .•... 0.,,......... .. .. .. -,-,., .. •... ••.. .•...... 1 t-F,2 .,..-... .....--....• ... .• W. •P-n'&1, . ' ... -....• •••.., ........,.,.....• .• .. . ...,. •..,,,... „„ ..61,3 ...' •..,, ,..'•. 0--,,,•,,_, •••... •••..........•••••••••.•'•.•..• Z9,„ ',.I.i.,'d.''Lp. .,,:• •. .•.• •.•••...••••..••••,...... - .-. - ; I u4-• •, .. , . . . -,......,... •, . .. •• • ••• . ....,.. ... . • .. -..,... .. .......... , ••• _ ........—""...... •.. • ... . • •• .. . . . "•••• . ... . •,. •.• •• • .-. . .. • , '•-.... • i ,.. •,.. ...... .• - . ... ...• Z ., . .. .. ...' ..... .............•. . ................... ...•• o) 0 .., .... .... .. — 1--- ‘,.. .,.„,d•-.. , ... " .. . •., 0 r n ..9f, -i --.0F .- .• .. .. ., .,. •.. " VPA LA:L'ACF c-ti c4 k9,•'-'.',' ,-0 — . • . •• .. u, z •....,,,..,2, 1N ..1 .• . .• _ " 7.. --, -›:,,ii- L'-'V':":A L'' to''R.ill2i25".4iti3iiCcTN:8 CD = '. I-- P-,,,PL•tF•••••0 •••••"•••" ... ... .. ...•I'l io,,` co o-,''.=4-,,o n o IN ZO k0•-•f--.to 4'r.z a:1-1 7!in;. ..ko cu 9 IpEo p:9 E.-:(;) 5)`I'Dr` FZ4"1 ic9"Z"Z"13 cr) ... E--•v 6,4),L)..Fw:,)ib,i„0,.1(.4.,8 s)2-1 ...... : 9., ,:.., oic, "•-•.;. . ',... ' cc''''j 3 thz x`-m-.• .. ••..,. <PL,71-• ,nt-,Fm,r. in . z 0. . W W.0 Tri.ES It N r•:-•A r tl r8 G.0 Pu"f,u,&1 R1 Li C; .• or:•'ca.rixwg.i.,3 Lu'' •••• • ' ' c''''C...tg 2 lEc'0 •-.• • .• W a' Z .., .. ,Lu v) c.I'z 14 " •.• • • . _J i—' .:.. .5.nuf-E---1<zwz "p• ' •.... L,-,,i_o•MoO,,,,-,, 4,, ..,' ' ... : ,.., mDocantliom-.-!K,ecu-,lia, P:1 < F- !--• co ni-sO..I.cr.OD h h r..•-•,03!:0_ . <'..Z. ... Cen.,•L'EP E M ZP•••• .. •-.. M0q01.,0(1M"tWok00'...<!-111 . ui,e;g ci oiuiinc6;Itti,,t e3geiin =(1 •‘I'in.1 Q:.,r-...0,!,r!'=!„6`t.L!! F_co,,051 d o5 en crs cu,:t ko 9,,, r.g2. —1 D..„ .• ,,,Pea..ELRIPI2 -t„., •.•.• --• ce 0 ql...Z L,.1. --.co '• LI ,!..0 •!1',D to cu cl to in CI.'0 "'• Ea F '-- T wd.1 • Z z I-4 id •,,i ....." .•• ''...¢cr,S-W„,icz'•... ,,,•4,- • .• -1 -J ,.., Z •n5L.L1L8 <1,8 , . EY •• • i-zu.,...., -,T •,-,'DI .,-Arr,.,•., v,•2?••,F,ENRr), 21 s,,,,...3'..,-_,.2,.,_°,,_--,s s'•_:-.;Li D •••••••6 tni-d• re.9_, ''''.. 1--- m.E.. • ?... l'-izit‘,,,e,,o.,. 'Ef.ao 2 L.„) L.,z .. 0 L*, - 8L•:•,s- `-.1,-- v) ... •• •r- -' ••,, .. „, • a'q,,,,a -r=ic) u' E5 .., . b..i.:, ,-..,...., L., . ,7,•',.'F'.1F ,22,T‘T, F•=0 1. .... ..• .•. • • • • •. ... . ... • .. •- .. •• -.., - ....... ''''•••••••••••.::: ..• .. ."•••-. • •...,... .. .. •.. . . . . . . .. . , • ...• ••. . . ..... '••••••........,........-.• . .. • • • • ` . EXHIBIT 8 Aqua Barn Site Intersection Traffic Findings According to the April 4, 2003 Supplementary Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by The Transpo Group, with or without Polygon Northwest Company's then-planned 247 dwelling units and new commercial development on the overall 33-acre former Aqua Barn site the analysis indicated that the LOS for the intersection would be"D" with the completion of both of two phases of the intersection improvements recently completed at the intersection of 152n1 Avenue SE and SR-169. The first phase of the intersection improvements were jointly funded by Polygon and the Renton Assembly of God church(now apparently called New Life Church). The first phase improvements included a new traffic signal and center left turn lanes along the west, east and south legs of the intersection, and cost approximately$488,000. Polygon paid $337,000 of this amount and the church apparently paid $151,000 of it. In addition, Polygon paid approximately$604,000 in additional King County Mitigation Payment System traffic fees toward other County road improvement projects. Prior to construction of that first phase of the intersection improvements, the northbound to westbound left-turning movement at the intersection operated at level of service"F". According to an earlier traffic study prepared by Transportation Planning &Engineering, Inc. during 2000, when the first phase improvements were completed, the traffic through that turning movement would have improved to a level of service "C" (both with and without Polygon's then-planned full build-out of the Aqua Barn site redevelopment). The second phase of the intersection tnprovements was the recently-completed County's Elliott Bridge Capital Improvement Project(No. 401288). It added the current north leg to the intersection,making it a four-way intersection and somewhat altering traffic patterns in the area. With the completion of the second phase, The Transpo Group's April 4, 2003 Supplementary Traffic Impact Analysis forecast that the intersection would operate at LOS "D" in 2006 both with and without Polygon Northwest Company's overall planned Aqua Barn site redevelopment project. While the residential portion of the Polygon development has been constructed, the three-acre commercial portion of the Aqua Barn site has yet to be redeveloped. In total, more than$941,000 in traffic improvement and mitigation funds were paid by Polygon for the mixed-use redevelopment of the former Aqua Barn site in spite of the fact that, documented in The Transpo Group's report, (a) only 9% of peak hour traffic could be attributed to the overall development (residential and commercial) planned to occur on the overall site and (b) only 8% of all daily traffic traveling through the SR- 169/SE 152nd Street intersection is attributable to such planned development on the overall site (residential and commercial). Prepared by Renton Senior Planner Don Erickson and submitted to the Renton Planning Commission at its September 6, 2006 meeting. ti c Ce1rUV►1.M t November 13, 2006 Rt�i 4irove From: Bill Grover PO Box 2701 Renton, WA 98056 To the City of Renton Council: Re: The Highlands moratorium I own property in the Highlands moratorium area located at 2807 NE 16th Street. The City of Renton approved and recorded my 3 lot subdivision on March 21, 2005, months before the moratorium took effect. The property was subdivided under the R-10 zoning rules in place at that time. The city also placed a restriction on the properties so that only single family, detached homes could be built. So, after spending tens of thousands of dollars on subdividing and to someday build, when I heard about the moratorium placed on my newly subdivided property, I asked Rebecca Lind if it would affect my property. I was told my property would not be affected by the moratorium because it would be "vested"under the rules in place at the time the city approved my subdivision and I would be free to build under those rules. She also told me there were other owners that would be "vested" as well so I did not worry too much about it. After watching the city council meeting on May 8, 2006 where Rebecca Lind defined "vested properties" I felt my properties certainly fit that description. On May 11th of this year, I decided to write a letter to Neil Watts (see attached letter) to confirm that my property was excluded from the moratorium. His response was that the city could not issue me building permits. I think this position is unfair. Let me tell you why. Another owner in the Highlands moratorium area, a Mr. Kumar, also subdivided his property and recorded his subdivision after mine and, in fact, during the moratorium in July of 2005 (see enclosed tax records). Building permits were then issued for Mr. Kumar's properties (see attached permits) in April of this year! With more research, I am sure I can find more examples of special exceptions being made. Without taking further action, I respectfully request that the City Council exclude, "vest" and/or"grandfather"my properties from any moratorium and allow me, or subsequent owners of my properties, to obtain building permits in accordance with the zoning rules and regulations that the City of Renton approved my short plat under. When a municipality approves a subdivision, a promise is made to allow the owner to build on that property. I just want the city to keep its promise. Respe, '4 Bill Gro - • I 1 G. o N ftW E R bi r, 2 4c 0yZ �j�GGL 15 J: n Y y o c a RW C_hN r/U C J+ W' O°q6 4 -Wij 2 h°1 `` !J' �. mWQCG a . �,Rj.HO�8iTiR ZoZ q. ,2_,'„ph 1 • CI N 20vf2 IL'W W� G�W �N=� O K ' :` �% oe '., . W \ q <��°! :7U o2 azz mw w �� pzoNa `-. nZ _jzp,3 C4 f o°WTO�W iL-N.. -. • 0 <214C 2 Z E-; 1e•m`a¢ c_ J W,.*-: y Z � ,t c 2� .: c e Co • w p E YCW zo z �4 o x i ?,� a z Q 0 ^' ,� z 2a`e Z¢ hxl cW, za& a°, J `�°I w2 C� c z E,. _ W� �g ��'-, ]'�� klc,i2mzg ° V] `�S w_'qq� ''x� �2 '..M o. 0 0 J G. VS2P-,: <F ---?ig 2c.. ,kz x oaiJ ag as ;;;2?.. Z QZ 'IO.� Z ' , z�z x i�o ,., r ?z� z E s U z x a -- 5 . k z1a W ' 1 ¢z °z zi v > - 1Wz Gm , 28 Om a x ? z oz �H m T ' cn t Tmy� .- i t z. „ 1 OaCO _2 w'�z iza3W0¢ o ° 3 O 0 G- .� � ` Saz � , - °2zC Wa � �. W 3 - - 1 1 ^ _.'.:>HU Z W 2Cngc4 aW,g4' o U u,.0 �i n U> Ali _ P� ��C 1- J .'�'i , ' - y w {-.' N`t' -4, # it �" Vco 5 gip_ �UaJ' 4 I� � V 2 m tY �v r _ Z < `' C y,20 2i2 r, i WF k� N • Z 2'•1 d ar v y o Q i 2 x x ¢ ,- P o'� o 'e rua � g n a M 1 5 t :E. yWa� x a Ati. .. d •"N' b2 �A 41t a C m O O 2°0 2 _<° zYa cs a Fr w _4 to ' n O " 1 .n u, (n - 01 F� Z z C- z <0 xxJ .. ..] -- ✓; ;.. N 1 Q 1r CO rJ EY z F3°.°ca > z er:K he e © Jez g C › " t O o iI L... .. z 2'O' V .23 z'�i asp --- a,rusey t . ' '� I o 7�z z - n z ,e ar rei 'i H Z a -o m �. ^J z ° 3 z z°3 o ' 5 5 � .'1n �N t ,= o ;:.1 co °¢c 3o m .`^ p u a�s �l ... ,� - Oi 1 < W .3a W' 1 a2i Yy 'U.i >- ^'_q ---'-- :,1y a+ am U .-; 4 Q z rt;c F Z Q CK �. x P(,. 4 ' C I0�,q ^ ! (L 3W o J EL- yF ; z E, av e-P, _ �.+-� �t Y a x a o a QI O,a,ng� 7 °k+`'e�Yan k O ?m 0 �` , eN. -- a Z C $� ,; 0. mtoze Poo oz ' - yen... Z : o U �/ r • J a o ti .. .:. ..... O 2 ° m� m 8 �C o 0 � mY z t.f r'2 . ,14 l w ly -� ..� °AoW b, ° Q3 �, Iz 1 O. 2R =a t��aim z RR a- O (J. 3 k�- 2Q ITT. C S J E ' •'�j�. 33,yp i I.c, QZXX ., m ?a �Gm �z O Yz� �n y, >2Z I ^I IV p 2S , C 52x xwU W xay T x2,y �2 1 t�t U 1 v' 2m2 2 � ,c' ,�4 ' - N o G mc2 ` CI pow \F N \vZ Z x oQA2` <N pCa i S P 9m y �Un o c .r z „ 0 &� z -- ¢ ,_ z't ab' ) we ',1 Wz `�Cj10 om w_ 2 tt o w A ,o 2 Lc a ❑ \ G 'S. W' '' % 2P2O �N oP0 R zk W 2 CSC. '. m x.m xa - Czs, x my0 J Ey cl , Zj 2 C �. Ca C^2 �O 7, ^' W.;!„ `yl- U:'6j�' U f"i tuw 22 °U nC q "0:. �" � �n : V1 3 a;h; y m �V Z d `Y o Via' �m W �Y.3W !et' >° ¢ t' WCe `8 '- 'k.N", 'J. �5 Zo ,,-,z _ L1 yWo�':.x 0 'Sgaz 2�Q2 ca 7 0 a i C] 1C- a , a �' O u ti� QW>. ¢ U 'o :f1 z o2 ^_i U: �S� 4 a e, _. z,,„1. 2 ja 6. U Q . 'WQ, x - ro�nc b Q o Q u z Q. mea '"', clg < a i:g_`z 0� a '' w' o W '- a ' ....N ¢ ha o Ph o.: df C: :' (`Pj mkN=� P� Q ma'n,h LLC- C W e ,<z y F,., :.�� 's7 h h _ ?<'2 2 Q '-� .. . iy WNo�n Z C�1u �i��<.' °U 9 LT�Y 'n 6GN '". 6�'' Ob � U. ',..:Mg yh C 'FA,,,Z WO Z w • Sao o di •• '. _1,,,„'„„,. »1 z ©A i . S�a•N : r 6 W CN - °� w 1 k �, 0 0 o -.s.-o o - gJg w `-a ; '� 'g 2 ��':. a2c?'n <i'pa N `dL..l wo oy C i F .. ..".-..( y:Fci o E� s•b7.zm C o� ¢ o �' a .[L z wms y4 z< ::•:l, a N 'Z< d c C:. ;i '� ., 1 m .' �... x age w � < ' w w �� m Z = � t a . W 'iy.i aoo 1,.^,�'jl zap o�in''Z F i� a oazai c i a w � ����yiii m a � pZr a S avao • _ ow rc JG FU 3loo �`� oS 1 22 zFSvIpO Y ry El: i� ,;j0c1. •.. ' 1r p 4 < -I Zom�<zd 1 �'o` fz'o �� s�' s j< o< RU'- W g s<� rcZz 5. �.. o `S_d Q$b %Wl:s 2 mi(� o r �_ CC c a ':� YONOOtJ• z 13 ,� o`w'. aai yy``'✓k'... .. '/ N yob �_ . • . , . 3a. 0Vd/16A 8 O; '0 .... 4. .< z 8 Ir z 4 --= 3-*/ r".....--,----r. ./ sH / // / ' - .-§ ' `S 5§ t !--,,,, m ..-- .2 ,.. - 0 i a-) — ' "I 1 r / I:,,' . 0 o . •.k 2.-.k> ,, / C..) 5 0 L 0 ? I ,..,"''-... ,--, --. Z ^ 11 E `-) < , ;-.. -,- n, 1 - • ^ -,,,__, ''' I s \ /I , 0 i 1V / Er, I(..9 • ,71N LI NOSU,TLIZT , ' ---1 ___ .;• „,,,,,s 1 1 „, `I ,. '-',,,1-• __ 1"o t '''' - ) ... „?.... '..A . , . 8' -.., ., "' t J I :,t,,,,,1 '" 1 7°---' `f.„r`,• .':4'e/ o 'r?!i ''S 'r'• - --!1 ,. 'r,', ''- Lf: .7 ,,' ,- ,:'3 '&-''.1, :,•';',, - :.-',-,f , I. 8'8 I -- ,,, r,.. /...,9 / , ..-.•.,.`..,' : .71 .--..,. ° t-4 I o're n .1 -L,--0- (821 8, -‹ , ,r8 / -I (p 1 li F ccsn I 4 I 1'-' "ENCEONE 43'2 (Z 73. 1,9, D _cc 0 1 , . i. - ' 1 CC a. 55 DO \.I9 99 87,05 24 N . z 0 -• -,t 1 0 0 h' • : 1 30 CO I ' csA C2 „ '-. W 0.._k 0 ,74%..._, r--, ..., I. -k R---- 0rçO SG__-----: -1',9:. z,T'' r < (-) ,-..1 Z '• SP. -- i .\, ' 1,1A- - '. . ' \I . I I k - ' Et.' ,- ..44,------ \ _., --\ ------.- c.0 'cIL Z ez -J 1-li EX 4 CC ISD ----f : r,. ,l'z .$' 0 • CZ . S , \ , > >8- '-- 4-- . . \ ' " ! c Z . -.. 0 i . \ . . . , 43 • ''' ...t\ . E- %1 i. 'i .1 E- `-'',1 .°'Nk' Ta',ii,' '. ' Eq - •,' ii7i ....:I c24 ii, 44 " •</ 1.0;1; = i t\s)s;,.. , gAr 372NJAY sani-ofrvaz c) z .. 0. ,. 6 961, - '..- , (0)1h--.)\i-_--(ra)* (ed)3.,60'1f.001S1 '-- (.5.9N1211,38 JOS,E5Y671\1----- - o (1d)3,9Z Lf.DON 0 L CO , . 0.0er 6I9L' . ..'..,... , 1, $ ' E--. • • , i C-.)I- - -- ) - I --- .,.• , . ". . May 11, 2006 Neil Watts City of Renton Dear Mr. Watts, I am the owner of properties located at 2807, 2811 and 2813 NE 16th St. in Renton. The last two house numbers are vacant lots subdivided under the short plat#LUA04-006 (Winston Short Plat) last year. My properties are located in the Highlands moratorium area. When the moratorium was originally put in place, I spoke with Rebecca Lind who assured me my properties would be "grandfathered in" for single-family, detached homes. The reason for my letter is to confirm with you, in writing, that the properties are excluded from the moratorium and that single-family, detached home building permits can be immediately issued under the zoning and rules in place when the short plat was approved. I plan to either sell the properties or build them myself. I know of another, similar property in the area, owned by a Mr. Kumar that just received building permits last month. Watching the city council meeting of May 8, 2006 where Rebecca Lind defined"vested properties" in detail, it seems my property also should be vested. Please call with any questions and your prompt response will be appreciated. Sin rq /") 1‘ Bill PO Box 2701 Renton, WA 98056 • Y �� CITY ')F RENTON • r.4 • �4'S + Kathy Keolker,Mayor Planning/Building/PublieWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator �N June 21, 2006 Bill Grover PO Box 2701 Renton, WA 98056 Dear Mr. Grover: Subject: Building Moratorium Impacts/Resolution#3805 I am writing in response to your letter of May 11, 2006, requesting a determination of the impact of the Highlands building moratorium on your ability to construct new single family homes. You specifically inquired on how the impacts affect recently platted properties at 2807, 2811, and 2813 NE l6th Street in Renton. In order to accurately respond to your inquiry, we requested that our City Attorney analyze the moratorium as it relates to your proposal. After review of the moratorium and the information you provided, the City Attorney determined that your short subdivsion would be subject to the restrictions of the moratorium and the Development Services Division would not legally be able to issue building permits for new homes until the moratorium is rescinded or expires. I apologize for the delay in responding to you, but I wanted to ensure that our response to you was legally correct and definite. If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager, at (425) 430-7286. Sincerely, .-AN\o-- -b-- -y NeAt ik.LA Neil Watts, Director Development Services Division cc: Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Rebecca Lind,Principal Planner Larry Warren,City Attorney Development Services Division File 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer . PEA.,L.IST-COM -i, . A SERVICE FROM REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS' 1;r1111°' • I k ` Property Details For Property Located At 1504 Index Ave NE Renton, WA 98056-3120 Renton - King County Owner Info: Owner Name: A&D Quality Construction Recording Date: 06/09/2006 Tax Billing Address: 220 SW Sunset Blvd Apt Annual Tax: $1,110 E202 Tax Billing City& State: Renton, WA County Use Code: Vacant(Multi-Family) Tax Billing Zip: 98057 Universal Land Use: Multi Family Lot Tax Billing Zip+4: 2320 Location Info: School District: 403 Street Type: 4 Subdivision: Renton Highlands 02 Map#: 626-F6 Corr Census Tract: 252.00 Neighborhood Code: 064004 Carrier Route: C063 Range/Township/Section/Quarter:05-23-04-SW Zoning: R10 Tax Info: Tax ID: 722780-1740 Land Assessment: $92,000 Parcel ID: 7227801740 Total Assessment: $92,000 Tax Year: 2006 Legal Description: 34 46 Renton Highlands# ..Correct Plat Lot 1 Of „'V� ' C '' 'r Renon"ShoPa ua-04 ;/ 6- _ 1 — i I-1 #200507199001_4 d Sp ' — r("t ?V;: r-U Being Lot 34 Blk 4 Sd - Plat 1/ 1 C /0 , Annual Tax: $1,110 Lot Number: 1 Assessment Year: 2005 Block ID: 46 Characteristics: Lot Acres: .1012 Sewer: Public Service Lot Sq Ft: 4410 Zoning: R10 Water: Public _ast Market Sale: Recording Date: 06/09/2006 Deed Type: Warranty Deed Settle Date: 06/07/2006 Owner Name: A&D Quality Construction Sale Price: $130,000 Seller: Kumar Subhashni D Auditor No: 200606092201 sales History: Recording Date: 06/09/2006 02/19/2003 07/31/2002 06/27/1997 Sale Price: $130,000 $170,000 $120,000 Nominal: Y Buyer Name: A ,Quality Kumar Subhashni D Kumar Bimal & Kossman Anthony „Gotlon Subhashni J &Theresa H Seller Name: Kumar S bhashni D Kumar Bimal Kossman Anthony J Jones Darrell A& &Theresa H Christina E Document No: 200606092201 200302193238 200207313513 199706271195 Auditor No: Warranty Deed Quit Claim Deed Warranty Deed Warranty Deed CITY OF R NTON inaL Combination Permit Permit Number: CP06047 Permission is hereby given to do the following described work, according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved plans and specifications pertaining thereto,subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton. Nature of Work: NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE COMBINATION PERMIT Job Address:/'� �� 1500 INDEX AVE NE Owner: KUMAR SUBHASHNI B 2102 NE 23RD ST RENTON WA 98056 Tenant. KUMAR SHPL, LOT#3 Contractor: A & D QUALITY CONST CO LLC Contractor License ADQUACC016CK 220 SW SUNSET BLVD STE E202 Contractor Phone 425-271-7751 RENTON,WA City License 3728 98055 Const Lender: l - Date of Issue 04/24/2006 ..i UBC Type of Construction VB Date of Expiration 04/01/2007 Building Height 0 Construction Value 240,643.14 Story Count 0 Parcel Number 7227801742 Building Sq. Ft. 3732 Dwelling Count 1 Occupancy Group R3 I hereby certify that no work is to be done except Subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the as described above and in approved plans, and that City of Renton and information filed herewith work is to conform to Renton codes and permit is granted. ordinances. Applicant X -daivr# Nt21449 Building Official BD3214a 12/00 bh a f� ® CITY OF RENTON Combination Permit Permit Number: CP06134 Permission is hereby given to do the following described work, according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved plans and specifications pertaining thereto, subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton. Nature of Work: NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIIDENCE COMBINATION PERMIT Job Address: ( 1502 INDEX AVE NE Owner: KUMAR SUBHASHNI B 2102 NE 23RD ST RENTON WA 98056 Tenant: KUMAR SHPL, LOT 142 Contractor: A & D QUALITY CONST CO LLC Contractor License ADQUACC016CK 220 SW SUNSET BLVD STE E202 Contractor Phone 425-271-7751 RENTON,WA City License 3728 98055 Const Lender: rogtektertirattn: Date of Issue 04/24/2006 ) UBC Type of Construction VB Date of Expiration 04/09/2007 Building Height 0 Construction Value 240,643.14 Story Count 0 Parcel Number 7227801741 Building Sq. Ft. 3732 Dwelling Count 1 Occupancy Group 7 I hereby certify that no work is to be done except Subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the as described above and in approved plans,and that City of Renton and information filed herewith work is to conform to Renton codes and permit is granted. ordinances. Applicant X 41441 N C ;6 Building Official BD3214a 12/00 bh 41 CITY OF RENTON .� "`L Combination Permit Permit Number: CP06135 Permission is hereby given to do the following described work, according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved plans and specifications pertaining thereto, subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton. Nature of Work: NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE COMBINATION PERMIT Job Address: 1( 1 1504 INDEX AVE NE Owner: KUMAR SUBHASHNI B 2102 NE 23RD ST RENTON WA 98056 Tenant: KUMAR SHPL,LOT #1 Contractor: A & D QUALITY CONST CO LLC Contractor License ADQUACC016CK 220 SW SUNSET BLVD STE E202 Contractor Phone 425-271-7751 RENTON,WA City License 3728 98055 Const Lender: Other Information: Date of Issue 04/24/2006 _) UBC Type of Construction VB Date of Expiration 04/1172007 Building Height 0 Construction Value 240,643.14 Story Count 0 Parcel Number 7227801740 Building Sq.Ft. 3732 Dwelling Count 1 Occupancy Group R3 I hereby certify that no work is to be done except Subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the as described above and in approved plans,and that City of Renton and information filed herewith work is to conform to Renton codes and permit is granted. ordinances. Applicant X Zaftv 7,ect&c 9 Building Official BD3214a 12/00 bh "r“ oet\ 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amettments Public Hearing �, November 13, 2006 Group 1: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Text(Policy)Amendments Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council,November 13, 2006 #2006-T-1: City of Renton Text Amendment to update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. Planning Commission Recommendation: Adopt two new policies specifically adopting the Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. #2006-T-3: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Land Use and Community Design Elements with housekeeping changes. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve corrections and revisions to the Community Design and Land Use Elements with housekeeping changes. #2006-T-4: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Transportation Element to reflect changes in the capital projects. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve the update to Table 8.3 to reflect the City of Renton's latest adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. #2006-T-5: City of Renton Text amendment to allow existing Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone in the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve a text amendment to the Residential Low Density designation to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park as an implementing zone. Group 2: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Concurrent Rezones Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 #2006-M-1: Wan Chee Map Amendment to change the designation from a combination of Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family with Neighborhood Commercial and R-8 split zoning to Neighborhood Commercial land use with Neighborhood Commercial zoning at 1315 N 30th St. Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny the rezone request for the property at 1315 N. 30th Street to change the designation from a combination of Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family with Neighborhood Commercial and R-8 split zoning to Neighborhood Commercial land use with Neighborhood Commercial zoning. Page 1 of 6 #2006-M-2: Susan Larson-Kinzer Map Amendment to change the designation from Residential Low Density land use with Resource Conservation zoning to Residential Single Family land use with R-8 zoning or Low Density Residential land use with R-4 zoning for a 3.4-acre parcel currently used as a blueberry farm and residence at 1733 NE 20th St. Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny the request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Residential Single Family with concurrent R-8 zoning and recommend that the Kennydale Blueberry Farm be rezoned from Resource Conservation to R-4 but remain Residential Low Density land use. #2006-M-8: City of Renton Map Amendment to consider changing the designation for a 49-acre area of Upper Kennydale, south of NE 28th St and north of NE 16th St from I-405 to approximately the boundary of the Heritage Glen Subdivision Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny the Staff's recommendation to change the designation from Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning. #2006-M-3: Manuel Rivera (Patrick Hanis, Hanis Greaney Attorneys) Map Amendment to change the designation from Residential Single Family land use with R-8 zoning to Commercial Corridor land use with Commercial Arterial zoning on a 2.09-acre single family property at 851 Carr Rd. Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny the request to redesignate and rezone the property to Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial zoning. Approve redesignation of this property and the adjoining parcels within the City limits to Residential Medium Density with concurrent R-14 zoning. The R-14 zoning designation allows small commercial uses using the development standard of Neighborhood Commercial zoning. #2006-M-4: Springbrook Associates (Cliff Williams,Vineyards Construction) Map Amendment to change the designation from Residential Medium Density land use with R-10 zoning to Commercial Corridor land use with Commercial Office zoning for a 5.61-acre undeveloped property located just south of S 37th St, and west of the dead-end at S 38th St west of Talbot Rd. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve the application changing the land use designation from Residential Medium Density to Commercial Corridor with a concurrent Commercial Office rezone. #2006-M-5: City of Renton Map amendment to change the area within the Puget Colony neighborhood from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning and in the unincorporated Kimberly Lane and Hideaway Homesites Subdivisions from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. a) 18.8-acre Puget Colony Homes subdivision consisting of 61 lots located at SE 133rd St, SE 134th St, and SE 135th St, and SE 132nd St on the north and SE 136th St on the south. b) The nine lot Kimberly Lane subdivision to the immediate west on the north side of SE 136th St, 13508 138th Ave SE. Page 2 of 6 c) 1.1-acre parcel, west of Kimberly Lane subdivision. d) 31-lot Hideaway Home Sites subdivision on the south side of SE 136th St. Planning Commission Recommendation: Change the land use designation from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning. #2006-M-7: City of Renton Map Amendment to change the designation of two + 1.5-acre parcels at the southeast corner of 152nd Ave SE and the Renton—Maple Valley Hwy(SR 169), the former Aqua Barn site, from Residential Low Density to Commercial Corridor with potential Commercial Arterial zoning. Map Amendment to change 27 acres from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density with potential R-14 zoning(upon annexation). Planning Commission Recommendation: Change the land use of the commercial parcels from Residential Low Density to Commercial Corridor and residential parcels from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density. Group 3: Aqua Barn Commercial Development Agreement Required Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 #2006-M-7 Development Agreement A development agreement is recommended as a condition of the proposed rezone to Commercial Arterial. The development agreement accomplishes three things: a) It will restrict the range of uses allowed in Renton's Commercial Arterial zone, as the City's zoning is broader than County zoning. b) The agreement also requires design considerations to insure that the site development provides a transition to the residential area. c) The agreement provides for transfer of traffic mitigation fee credit be granted up to $252,799 against traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the property. Group 4: Highlands Land Use and Rezoning Package #2006-M-6 and#2006-T-2: City of Renton Highlands Study Area Comprehensive Plan Map, Concurrent Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 Zoning Code Text Amendments Required Hearing: City Council,November 13, 2006 #2006-M-6: City of Renton Map amendment for changes in the Center Village land use designation in the Highlands Subarea Plan. This review will consider whether to amend the Center Village and Residential Medium Density Land Use Designations. Page 3 of 6 Original Staff Recommendation a) Change from Center Village to Residential Multi-family Land Use • Area south of Sunset Blvd/SR 900, east of Dayton Ave, north of NE 9th St and NE 9th PI currently zoned Residential Multi-Family. Zoning will remain Residential Multi-Family but the land use designation would be also become Residential Multi-Family. b) Change from Residential Multi-Family to Center Village • Area currently designated Residential Medium Density with R-10 zoning that is north of 16th St between Harrington Ave and Kirkland Ave. • The finger of parcels along Harrington Ave between 9th St and 7th St with frontage on Harrington Ave, these parcels would extend the Center Village south to 7th St. c) Change from Residential Medium Density to Residential Single Family • Area north of Sunset Blvd and west of Edmonds Ave. This area is currently zoned R-10 and developed with single family housing. • Area near Monroe Ave and Sunset Blvd. The properties on Monroe Ave are protected by covenant at their current level of intensity, which is approximately six units per net acre. The Planning Commission took a limited action on the original staff recommendation. The Commission concurred with the original staff recommendation for the map amendments but did not take action on either the concurrent rezoning or the concurrent zoning text amendments in the R-10, R-14 and CV zones because the Council appointed Highlands Task Force was assigned that review responsibility. This staff concurs with the Highlands Task Force recommendation. The original staff recommendation is superceded by the Highlands Task Force Recommendation. #2006 T-2: City of Renton 1) Text Amendments to update the Land Use Element to reflect changes in the Center Village Policies. a) Amended Policy LU-318 to delete R-10 as an implementing zone and add R-14 as an implementing zone in the Center Village and clarify that the RM zone with suffixes can implement the Center Village. b) Amend Strategy 319.2 to call for preparation of a subarea plan rather than a redevelopment plan to implement the Center Village land use concepts and provide that the phasing of the Plan is expected to occur within a two to five year period from the 2004 GMA update. c) Amend Strategy 319.3 to delete a statement that areas east of Edmonds Ave and north of Sunset Blvd currently zoned RMF are to remain in residential use and the area north of 12th St currently zoned R-10 is to remain in residential use. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve corrections and revisions to the Land Use Element. Task Force Recommendation: The Highlands Task Force concurred with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Page 4 of 6 2) Highlands Task Force Recommendation: Land Use Map Amendments The proposal is to include the residential area north of NE 16th St in the Center Village (CV) land use designation. The Task Force also recommends include the multi-family areas southeast of NE 12th St and Monroe Ave NE, and east of Harrington Ave NE between NE 7th St and NE 9th St in the Residential Multi-Family(RMF) land use designation. 3) Highlands Task Force Recommendation: Concurrent Rezoning An upzone to Residential-fourteen units per acre (R-14) was recommended for the current Residential- ten units per net acre (R-10) zoning in the study area. R-14 zoning was also recommended for the duplexes north of Sunset Blvd in the vicinity of Glenwood Ave NE and Harrington Ave NE. CV zoning was expanded along Sunset Blvd, in a few parcels adjacent to the existing commercial area and the Houser Terrace and Evergreen Terrace properties owned by the Renton Housing Authority. Rezoning to RMF was recommended for three strips of properties: a strip along Kirkland Ave NE, a strip south of NE 12th St, and a strip along Harrington Ave NE. 4) Highlands Task Force Recommendation: Concurrent Zoning Text Amendments Amendments are proposed to the development regulations in the R-10, R-14 and CV zones. Non-Conforming Uses Past zoning proposals for this area included the possibility of implementing zoning that did not allow existing residential uses, such as duplexes and single family homes. In such situations, the existing use is considered a legal non-conforming use. Legal non-conforming is the technical term for "grandfathered in". It means that the use is allowed to continue but may not expand or enlarge. Several members of the Task Force wished to ensure that the zoning proposal allow existing residential uses to remain legal and conforming. The recommended zoning proposal eliminates the issue of non- conforming uses. All existing use types (duplexes and single family uses) are allowed uses in the proposed zoning package. Property Redevelopment One of the most debated issues in the package of proposed zoning changes was a requirement that the existing unit had to be removed when properties came in for subdivision. This would only affect those applying for division of their properties and not to other changes like remodels or additions. However, the Task Force felt that property owners should not be required to remove existing units in order to subdivide their property. In lieu of requiring the removal of existing units, the Task Force indicated that property owners should be required to upgrade the existing units. Unfortunately, building and related codes make this impossible to implement without declaring the unit a hazard. The Task Force did not wish to create a situation in which existing units were declared hazardous. However, the Task Force did recommend deleting the provision that required the removal of existing units upon subdivision. The Task Force recommends that this provision be removed from both the R-14 or R-10 zones if either of those zones is used to implement the Center Village land use in the Comprehensive Plan. Affordable Housing Keeping the neighborhood an affordable place to live for people in all stages of their lives was important to the members of the Task Force. In the R-14 zone, there is an allowed density bonus of 18 units per net acre. The Task Force recommends keeping the proposed incentive of creating two units of affordable housing as one of the options to achieve the density bonus. The Task Force also recommends implementing an incentive geared toward public agencies and non-profit organizations whose mission is to provide affordable housing. An incentive is recommended that would allow a bonus of 30 units per Page 5 of 6 net acre for any project of at least two acres, in which a minimum of 50 percent of the units developed would be affordable to those with incomes of 50 percent of the Area Median Income. Limits on Commercial Development While the Task Force liked the flexibility of the R-14 zone, there was general concern that it could allow some small commercial uses in a residential area. To prevent this, the Task Force recommendation specifically prohibits on-site services, retail, and eating/drinking establishments in this area unless they are accessory to a community, school, or recreational use. This would allow the possibility for a small business like an espresso stand or bicycle rental to locate in a park or the Community Center. A hearings examiner conditional use permit would be required. The Task Force also recommends that new, indoor recreational uses should be allowed in the R-14 zone to allow for redevelopment of the North Highlands Community Center property. Commercial Development Amendments in the Center Village Zone The CV zone is primarily oriented toward commercial development. Residential uses are allowed but some limits must be put in place to ensure that as the area begins to redevelop. Residential uses will not dominate this zone. As a result, the Task Force recommends increasing the minimum residential density in this area to 20 dwelling units per net acre. This will prevent lower density residential-only redevelopment from occurring in the commercial area. The Task Force also recommended a standard which requires commercial development in properties fronting on Sunset Blvd. This proposes that commercial development occupy a minimum of 75 percent of the frontage on Sunset Blvd. Another Task Force recommendation is to allow a ten foot height bonus in the CV zone for properties that have first floor commercial development. This allows building of four stories of residential over first floor commercial development, an important incentive for the development of mixed use commercial and residential buildings. R-14 Zone Density The Task Force recommends raising the minimum density in the R-14 zone to ten units per acre to comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the CV land use designation. The Task Force also recommends keeping the current bonus system in the R-14 zone that allows densities up to 18 units per net acre. In order to receive the bonus however, the proposed development would have to offer one of the following desired items: alley access, open space, or affordable housing. Design Regulations The Task Force recommends implementation of Design Regulations for all properties within the CV land use designation. The regulations consist of standards and guidelines that would be applied to new development. Minimum Lot Size for Detached Residential Development The Task Force recommended that the minimum lot size for single family detached residences in the R- 14 zone be set at 5,000 square feet. If the City Council determines to keep the current R-10 zoning, then the Task Force recommends that the proposed minimum lot size for single family residential of 5,000 square feet be required in the R-10 zone. Page 6 of 6 S ,_ I __ S ,_ \ j 2 \,.„ , H 1 ,_ S ,_ S ,_ o Area to / Remain Single Family 0 \ 2 8 — n — S 1— \ I 1 Chee CPA 2006-M-01 ° °.... .................400 Planning Commission Recommendation GticY 0,4, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning — Studyent Area Commercial NeighborhoodwDensity . + Alex Pietsch,Administrator — Renton City Residential Low Density C.E.Feasel ,it-$ 3 November 2006 Limits I I Residential Medium Density I I Residential Single Family ' I� —IIIII � I Nur' — Y - WM am ' ' s,, i Ii r :/ > ! I I 1 1 _ f A ' /1_ I g cu (7) \ E 2 t- : Lth 1 i l / w I I > — ,2Jri 1111 Q -, El; - C CD C..) • \ 2G S 1 ■■■ ■ 1 1 1 mill ■ ,. -.A k M du ice■ ,) $_ wg ..... _<, _ ,:„ 1 mom 1 I -rJiPI i ligft lb ilmh All 1 \ - .1.......„, p _ a gal ml ,,,,, , iii 4,.. , 4 £ iIIII1Lm161tn S . i 1.1111 Flit ] Blueberry Farm CPA 2006-M-02 0 400 800 pi, Planning Commission Recommendation I I R-8 EconomNeighborhoods ic Development, &Strategic Planning 1 . 4800 ®* ME From Resource Conservation to R-4 C.E.Feed Remain Residential Low Density r• 13 November 2006 ACC / y C I C ) ilk _ City Owned Parcels Unincorportated Area 1 1 pi, Lning R-14 R-10 Zoning Zoning (Existing) 0 200 400 Rivera CPA 2006-M-03 Planning Commission Recommendation NE Commercial Corridor IIIIII1 Residential Low Density STY o Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning G � P g �` Study Area I I Residential Medium Density • IR •• Alex Pietsch,Administrator c E.Feasel — Renton City Residential Multi-Family 'P�'NTO 13 November 2006 Limits I I Residential Single Family -- .01..111111111/ 0 .IMIfin a-410D Innim O Inn' 1111.10, MI '® t liti4 iii O !; ii ao C) I � N N :li:.ili.:• • 0 4' E 03 it: , a� O 3 �' �' an! Hi dm_ arm' E N O O N -I g I' aka U Ce ce Iii c. 0 :.,._ iligs., .........,.8% ....a a:3 �I Ocl Oin 1 CD N cn o CIO sae jilgo w 0 I LCD d b ilLq \1 _ - 71i11111 _ I MI ill■. \ - 2nc St I . i.11 , Q.) Q vimIM1\ el I $ 1 b. 1pll 0 * v iii, 111 10 Ili , �� 111111.(:pik, ill *Ili $1E_It. % VW ** III II , , Aiiiii , , _ __ , _ , _, _ Puget Colony Homes CPA 2006-M-05 Ss Planning Commission Recommendation 0 200 400 Gt'Y 0{, Economic Development,Neighborhoods& Strategic Planning Study Area Alex Pietsch,Administrator G.Del Rosario — — Renton City NIS Residential Low Density �'-Nzo� 13 November 2006 Limits I I Residential Single Family . .,,,,,,.....„.., - ... ■\ ■ .fi �� .■■i ■■ ■ IIII■ - . , w ,. . . �. ■ Will w —� ■ J II 11 El." IIII ■ •ea ::u: ■ ■ Prd ■� ■■IfI■■n" ��I I ■ A : ■n 1■ 1s ■• nim. ■1.I SPITE ITE ■■11■ IYaiailf■1■■■umwea . II1 IIII/�/rim �= � . '1i■tsu�� ni -- •EI ■ .a."fellt ©��110� y • I,t! �!I �■ ■11■ IIIM ��J 11��� ■■�� ■ m■, /'' �i�%- 111111111111111.111111 1114• 1 st i1111�� :C, �Mr. MO ila IINNii mall t st st �f .�. 1�ILC�E��1�� 1 la -�A 1 i I!Jii MN it+ C= rze120th' s. �IIIII . illv. tl ii IE E[IEY1�1 El ri ■il I N■SEmim • Am ■I —In m= ; . .� i 1111 ■offiNs - . —il ■ ri.;11:1pinny - -■■.. n.� I•i w ■tea■ _a s ■ ■IIMI um •p \f ■■ miITii?iP J y m��■�7 ■-- i 1 �al IIC• u . .0�' r a ma 3 ■EM r.�' Mill .. Ea IEI ■ p ■ � Lua. sN. ■AE ■ ■rNium -- .7 .a � MIRm WI wa Ern E .1 / ■ o . MN ■■ Ra : ■ 111.• L� M■ c • ■�� i�■ ■,d11i. min ea .� ■ .A ym ■� YW—II�■ b. Vallaimlie ant All U. 4 ■ jr■■��a J1IuuuI!: S.■ ii —:g . Hit , .11- - in Mir: lial nolllail la 11111Alm 3 tow .16 Ell �/1/,= �, �E a �: �i�� a t 1 ■�� ■a I■i i...■ Eli ■■=a r�� v I1■■ s ■�1dr nr■ es wed I�Wfi• F� ■ 900 .Jj ■ ■a�■Y■ aims■Iimmi W■ ■■1i■i.4 is .lIfsrs s. IiIi o Lt miff II! u■n. :. ■ ■A�■■ M� IN■III �Y iYC15Yiii. �.■ ■■N F . .� .tIrtr■hlsR■■■■ Ot ■r. .11 ■11■ Yi■ccl■ ■■ II . 111,1 gm la .J/■■■1 = guCiiminns�:= rs/ ip era IIIIINIff .11111fI1111A111111 miss■■■ M� ;MN 1:1 t . IfINIIII ■111! Y1r�1111fI. T'a �,• :L1e+r i■i mis w cam MINIM NI III II9f11I►'•w �� rzs• Few tw c7 ul �► L. al� . fyYfllo �■ ■■ II/I'l I ■ �■•111 �� L� �■ EA litr ri . ■�■ I ♦ N ■mom rea r. 00 ♦ 9th ��_, • 111111.a :4g_ i �10 \�Y1�r.■ ■��a siIIa" �iti: i�i :��:C1i/, = R►It? ��t il � 04.0i■IN ii win i'�=■ ..■■11RarrAr lomp `■ :I`11yvin Ili� �. ■o- w El :lam ara V easiw us* Ai ■I1 ■ ■ ♦". � ■�fIf1LlIIIIY��17:n:::' tw aftc-r �r,l'ai t•110-- '►`♦.. IFli lia y ti;�tniz:: s. a 111 111111=owls .... MI IIA w ww c.•� rr. / ��`b �W�/44 i �'V`�♦` imil •111 •� rwaj:� IIIII�! 11111111111 1ffRllE f111L'�1fi! IIIIL�iY1111 IiIU a •IIIi1, iFr it? iitt " � IIV�.f1/9I1■ ©�s� 7 _Inm• II •I 1t■■ ■■ IN , ra L 1 Yp (� �m1t0‘ iiltv IV um lip IM •NI V.VII* 41 itti1V1i � /■ •■ i. 7, : -- -i . 1_1 aelOt.411kCP'1441r ; h. fed_allitilli&4!440 Highlands Subarea ME 0 1000 2000 S Proposed Land Use -Task Force I 1 RMD = RMF 1 : 12000 <CY Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning ® CV •0 . Alex Pietsch,Administrator _ G.G. C.E.Feasel INTO 03 November 2006 ■■■■■.►�T uiiiiI■ /t\ ■ n �_1 - :mi. mimr..ir ME M � ■■ f� / ■ /+Ea�NI� vIL '4iiais, ■ ■■■■NE= 1111.E ■� WM :I� ■ ria ■■■■ ■ ■��■IIIM .� .. ■■■■ ■�■� i I �/alM:�■. :■qNE ■ 0 LE ■Ni ii min=m■ b ■IIE� ■ 1 © ■■,■■■■■■r■ a I��■r�� rt.,NI :0likli�11r— --• ■■ ■Mill ■44"li 1101"11110% !: c,►�: • �' al 1151 Su WI ■EINE= Omm.11lll �, �■ 23rd■■ p' n � l F� Iqik� 1 . mute fillIIII �� my: Ina ■ri■ ■� Iguiluivril, I 11►�q� �M �■■�i■u■ 'Prim � •�� w, 11111hosin■■1 ■ 7 .�Vtn t■ir�� C� mom l!w IR 1st St aw .� �ICL'���OC11�A11i: ■t7c ■ ./Intw� . ■ f: w� w .. . .I d ■e 'L � ■ Fffl■ :n nn as F aw w e ■:ial_ i�j,n��. L. ■ ■r_� MO NE 20th �. 4-- u_ ��. \■ Ms • _ �1 a �111irusa 111 111.11.1— nn ill: �:.� :�•; .■ .■: snum 11„ 1 BET, tax �.� Nam oars=a= IN ■misomm i■_■_ dI !3TwkI ! : , ' vmI l.ii ■■■■I _ 4 Wm ` i■„ i ► .u■ ■N ■■ 4W. a,vi ■■■■ li4 ok I■© may/ .San�a Salina 1 3 ■MI Ilia I�\ .! it ■s et■■ ■■!g �t �� :� �,/� WI ■Ili'' I,I'■I IIJ■ ■ •01117 an N. • MI EN +illan:lirme:rtilli I■ millon nip ■■ ■■ •■'A ■ . ■ A ■■ w� sel .1"'I■1 111 irm ION ■■11=,i ■, mm . g �' ::11-.1119-11").1' `I. .igli � Ltim ■■ Ra 1.1"'. I..■ ■1 ■illr �■ a illi. I �`■1ii111■ it C� ■ ■ L� ■ �■ '� � � � U■� ■� ■ ■►C7 ■■■�I ■ lin Airmg IN.( 1�� ��N. �_ = ■ o ■r■■e► ha' misi mm `1■%w11111111Mill tIP aVisk G+1 i ■ irn ■ ..'■ •-•1101 to la 7 ERNE ER tIN i ■■■■■■■■ ■R■■I V&a �,�;�e+ -0 Wa ■ lib .. ..... - I�rtil IN goo ...■■ ■ "vraiY ■YV1lfliiEn t j ii in MINNAI a MISIMMI�,t2111 ►;�IILiISNYIIIL'/�� +�■j■1 I !! i� 1■■■1� ■■/ !! w1111111�i �\ :: i Gim 1■1■►N1■ ■I1lialiu mi■111i ���■l' .L'!EJl01::: al i■i : no I■MMEM ■I■ III IIi111_Iw al41rirlITN ;J iii ■ EEC III tee■ u' �U7►�3 wsii'Ylil■ e�i i�i II11/j1 I LAmEmil- In mi ra i/ �♦,, �gi ii -r. er. o ♦ ■.. CI F 11Ev _7Eihq r�l■ ti bi • t �� ^ .r." '`V`� ■LYE ie .. .:i. hi -l�� ■■■■nITIVIPM IIII I .:0. .\►11t . /l III 1 i4v*1'� ~I M •• va�•�I NV P- �. Ea■■ iii RC ■ r. a e uu • �� .n' u ��ilittj 'Ali eta 'pip �� ■II ■ ■ i1.� 7 141211L1.. ��+ ��S� jig. p, Ij� '��� ��C 4 i � I� �� �. i1Ba 1�t ■��i :/4*/. jjrit ` us�� \� `. w ■■ ■1■.. ��� `� .�. !illel/s Q wel4, � jam ■1■1�.J r, ` . 4s . ,,` enillsul►/.�-# am ra N rtiaho�w ...;,,hi .,,r.,L1 M.y ♦♦ ■. .. .._ w , , I11.11IlIl-i 24 u��.�ii . ,a ark, �j --, wq ♦"or gipgi_ - •• ■• Ell ,,n - IIiLIL�IYi�i► �OiII�. ■ha'■ wiz m ■ is VS ��\\�'I�*. 4 ■ 9j;�1• �4. , ■■ ■� .•■ wag i t-�",. ` mirtnigl 1■11/i•1111 limn 3 C..g �s ak■1R ■ •�A le�'�V`i �`� �4� rjA g r`a ,' ". ■1IYi11i. 111IY9i:1I1■ IIIIIM = ■ilia wa 11. E .� s� .. IiiI�.4 Mk 41.IIaY{I ■III► ,■ r\\ ■ Lsa• ifid _mut_lino plea I■ ME mug sAllgrogoom Highlands Subarea Proposed Zoning - Task Force ® RC R-14 0 1000 2000 .S5 r,. l R-1 ® RM-F :s:;:�:•:.x.x..x.x..x.:A.. ;; til • Economic Development Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning I-7 R-8 CV —+:` ztz:: +®. Alex i�;euet4 Administrator I I R-,o ® eN 1 : 12000 ' C.E.Feasel NT' 03 November 2006 F • Rent011 . Mapj V alle LI ipti...11;.f.,=.0.10.f.iiiitAK,,!:::,i.:.•:„:"Ritiut,,,i5a r � .. YV OrPlie Jr - ' . '''/: ':7---:' . '7-- Iimmi....4. A :i sr Illpir 1 111111,411111 om • . . , , . . , , „. , ,/ .. , '. ,. . / „ . . , . . . , / , . , , . ., .„/ ... .,. .. . , . . . . . .. ... , . , 1� . , . . . .1 all . , ....„... ..., . . . .... . .... .. . . . .. .,, " .. „............... . ,, .., .. . .. . ../„. ......,", . .,.. . . ,f .:- , / ,_:„... :,,,.,.., . ,.../„ . .._,..___,7____ :,..... ...... . ... . .. . . . ,,, ,,., ..... ..... .. . , ... .. , .. ... .. . . . . . . , . . . .... :..r. .. . . . , .. „. ..„....._. .. . : ... . ... . , : '', . . . .. . ,,;, ./.. ,/ . . . 1 . , : , . ,, , ,, . ,. . . 1 . ., , . ,..., . , , .•,•/ , /,., .. ./ . . , . . . , . . .. ...i ,.. . . . , . . . . ,. , ... „ , , , , , , , . , . .. , , , , , , / , . , , . , . , . , . ' , ifIli . , .. „ . , , , ftimili,.. Aqua Barn CPA 2006-M-07 0 300 600 S. Planning Commission Recommendation Commercial Corridor •• w/CA Zoning 1 3600 G� Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning ®� AlexPieteeb,ndo saeeor I Residential Medium Density NI 3Novembcr2006 w/R-14 Zoning • �1 1Vd II ii1itea 'itimas _ _ 1 rem ....,„ llefir > IIiin mil „c wi millIMIINLI11 I pm El r . i I 11111111 1111 PAIWimmillamirAl401 NI F1' i I it. -,.. MI k :,, m 711, . Is \ --7_ 2.14 , nio 1 s 111111 • _ ' 4t ..,, ,,,,,,,, . „.. o , ',',:,,„ :,„„,' a S■ II ,4' *:,, , •',‘„ , , ' ,4,, , .. ME Q.D. Illra NEI ae 4.. a. r,;.IA �, r $�' gam .'. III r,744,:a 4,'(44,001* ' .,:i W - ,,,r. ... 4,14-:; :',-„Iii an'. rali ' zF;iliticv-mi tg, ,git*;—• , 0- , 7,mHIr.mi qiL- is I ....... ,,,,i. i. ..„,,,,, _ .,....,„.....,.,, A,. ‘111 *el', r,-,,,",': 7s4rArZi I lill mil � ' % MI MI■■ .' ice■ A > ■� He's - ` 41111111111111 °' ;;,* , 4 rag .$.,,r‹.? Nip a allp1111111 ' '..4... s: P -,ERVi1I 4444;:„m,‘„.,, A� I ib.li I1111I1 MM la u1.T(--1) IMF■ 16 t S ,:*. 1' . -moo' '". • i1 ■ ♦ . IN Proposed Kennydale Rezone 0 400 800 Staff Recommendation ' 1 R-4& Residential Low Density ""' ,o,m�,Naghborhoods gS�,�,� I I R-8& Residential Single Family Cy)Alex ^� = R-4 proposed under application CPA 2006-M-2 1 : 4800 O< C�, 1006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments ' + Public Hearing ��NTo� November 13, 2006 Group 1: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Text(Policy)Amendments Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 #2006-T-1: Text Amendment to update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. #2006-T-3: Requested text amendment to update the Land Use and Community Design Elements with housekeeping changes. #2006-T-4: Requested text amendment to update the Transportation Element to reflect changes in the capital projects. #2006-T-5: Text amendment to allow existing Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone in the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation. Group 2: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Concurrent Rezones Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 #2006-M-1: Wan Chee, 1315 N 30th St Change from a combination of Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family with Neighborhood Commercial and R-8 split zoning to Neighborhood Commercial land use with Neighborhood Commercial zoning. #2006-M-2: Susan Larson-Kinzer, Kennydale Blueberry Farm, 1733 NE 20th St Change from Residential Low Density land use with Resource Conservation zoning to Residential Single Family land use with R-8 zoning or Low Density Residential land use with R-4 zoning for a 3.4-acre. #2006-M-8: City of Renton Change the designation for a 49-acre area of Upper Kennydale, south of NE 28th St and north of NE 16th St from 1-405 to approximately the boundary of the Heritage Glen Subdivision from Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning. #2006-M-3: Manuel Rivera, 851 Carr Rd Change from Residential Single Family land use with R-8 zoning to Commercial Corridor land use with Commercial Arterial zoning on a 2.09-acre single family property. #2006-M-4: Springbrook Associates, south of S 37th St, and west of the dead-end at S 38th St west of Talbot Rd Change from Residential Medium Density land use with R-10 zoning to Commercial Corridor land use with Commercial Office zoning for a 5.61-acre property. #2006-M-5: City of Renton Change Puget Colony, Kimberly Lane, and Hideaway Homes from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning at Puget Colony and in the unincorporated Kimberly Lane and Hideaway Homesites Subdivisions change from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. #2006-M-7: City of Renton,former Aqua Barn site, southeast corner of 152nd Ave SE and the Renton— Maple Valley Hwy(SR 169) Change the designation three acres from Residential Low Density with potential R-4 zoning upon annexation to Commercial Corridor with potential Commercial Arterial zoning and change 27 acres from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density with potential R-14 zoning. A development agreement is recommended as a condition of the proposed rezone to Commercial Arterial. Group 3: Aqua Barn Commercial Development Agreement Required Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 #2006-M-7: City of Renton,former Aqua Barn site, southeast corner of 152nd Ave SE and the Renton—Maple Valley Hwy(SR 169) A development agreement is recommended as a condition of the proposed rezone to Commercial Arterial. Page 1 of 2 Group 4: Highlands Land Use and Rezoning Package #2006-M-6 and#2006-T-2: City of Renton Highlands Study Area Comprehensive Plan Map, Concurrent Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Required Hearing: Planning Commission, September 20, 2006 Courtesy Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 Zoning Code Text Amendments Required Hearing: City Council, November 13, 2006 The staff concurs with the Highlands Task Force recommendation. The original staff recommendation is superceded by the Highlands Task Force Recommendation. 1) Text Amendments to update Center Village Policies in the Land Use Element. a) Policy LU-318, R-14, RM-T, RM-U zones b) Strategy 319.2, Subarea Plan c) Amend Strategy 319.3, Non Residential Use east of Edmonds Ave and north of Sunset Blvd 2) Map Amendments to the Residential Medium Density and Center Village Comprehensive Plan Designation a) Include the residential area north of NE 16th St in Center Village b) Include the area southeast of 12th St and Monroe Ave and east of Harrington Ave NE between 7th St and 9th St in Residential Multi-Family 3) Concurrent Rezoning a) R-14 to replace existing R-10 zoning b) R-14 to replace RM-F at Glenwood Ave and Harrington Ave c) CV to replace RM-F for Houser Terrace, Evergreen Terrace, and Sunset Terrace (Renton Housing Authority properties) d) RM-F to replace R-10 for three strips of properties • Kirkland Ave • south of NE 12th St • Harrington Ave SE 4) Zoning Text Amendments a) Non Conforming Uses—eliminated for duplexes and single family b) Property Redevelopment—existing buildings may remain upon redevelopment c) Affordable Housing—incentive and bonus d) Limits on Commercial Development in R-14—only in a park or community center e) CV Zone • Commercial Mixed Use required for a 75 percent of frontage on Sunset Blvd • Ten foot height bonus for first floor commercial • Minimum residential density 20 dwelling units per net acre • Maximum residential density 80 dwelling units per net acre f) R-14 zone • Bonus to 18 dwelling units for alley access, open space, or affordable housing g) Design Regulations h) R-14 and R-10 zone Minimum lot size for additional residential 5,000 square feet Page 2 of 2 P bk. 4-earl h) 11 wok �`°- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, U , NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC ' hat ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: November 8, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council CC: Kathy Keolker, Mayor Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Alex Pietsch rm./9 STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind SUBJECT: Development Agreement for Comprehensive Plan Application #2006-M-7, Former Aqua Barn Properties The attached draft development agreement is forwarded to you for consideration during the public hearing on November 13, 2006. The development agreement is proposed as a condition of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the former Aqua Barn property on the Maple Valley Highway. This property is in the extended Maplewood Addition Annexation and is expected to become part of the City in January 2007. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is a change in the Land Use Map from Residential Low Density to Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial zoning to allow development of a commercial shopping area on the Maple Valley Highway. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is needed to allow commercial development of the property to proceed as planned under King County zoning. Zoning for this commercial development was approved by King County in 1998 as part of a rezone approval that included the multifamily development currently constructed on the rear portion of the site and created a 3-acre commercial pad for future development along the highway. The development agreement is intended to bridge the gap between Renton and King County zoning as it applies to this project. The concept for this project evolved as part of King County's Neighborhood Business zoning, which includes design requirements. Renton's Commercial Arterial zoning allows residential uses as a mixed use within buildings and these types of projects would generally trigger site plan review. In this case, the commercial pads and anticipated commercial development are on different parts of the site and they are small enough that the City's site planning requirements might not otherwise be triggered. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-07 former aqua barn site\issue paper development agreement.doc Randy Corman,Council Pre ,nt Page 2 of 2 November 8, 2006 The development agreement accomplishes three things: 1) It will restrict the range of uses allowed in Renton's Commercial Arterial zone, as the City's zoning is broader than County zoning. 2) The agreement also requires design considerations to insure that the site development provides a transition to the residential area. 3) The agreement provides for transfer of traffic mitigation fee credit be granted up to $252,799 against traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the property. Developers of this property contributed $337,066 to King County for intersection improvements including a traffic signal and turn lanes at SR-169/152nd Avenue. The commercial portion of this site is estimated to account for 75 percent of traffic generation used a basis for establishing the need for the signal and intersection improvements during the King County review process. Uses that ordinarily are allowed in the Commercial Arterial zone but would not be allowed on this site include the activities listed on Page 3 of the draft agreement. These uses include: resource recovery, kennels, group homes, higher education institutions,big box retail, outdoor retail sales, vehicle sales, adult retail, adult entertainment, card rooms, dance halls, not for profit gambling, sports arenas, outdoor recreation facilities, hotel/motel, medical institutions, body shops, parking garages, dedicated park and ride facilities, outdoor storage, self-storage, and all industrial uses. Some uses would be allowed subject to specific conditions including: • Drive through windows for retail and fast food, which would be limited to a percentage of the site. The percentage to be specified is still under discussion with the applicant and will be reviewed by the Planning and Development Committee. • Vehicle rental establishments which would be limited to space within a shopping center building(not free standing) and have a maximum of 10 parking spaces. • Car washes would be limited to 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. operations and no self-service bays would be allowed. • Vehicle repair and service is limited to businesses conducted within a building, and buildings with a design comparable to Jiffy Lube or Oil Can Henrys. The proposed design standards include requirements for the equivalent to Renton's site plan review even though the proposed development will likely be below Renton's current site plan review criteria. These standards are imposed because they are consistent with the design criteria that would have been required under King County's Neighborhood Business zoning. In addition, specific design requirements are included to require the two separate legal parcels to be developed with a common architectural theme and to require quality materials, roofing, fenestration, signage, and architectural elements. Additional requirements are added for landscape buffers, street tree requirements, and paving standards for sidewalk areas abutting commercial buildings. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-07 former aqua barn site\issue paper development agreement.doc m- Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055 Please print or type information Document Title(s) (or transactions contained therein):(all areas applicable to your document must be filled in) 1. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Reference Number(s) of Related Documents: N/A Grantor(s) (Last name, first name, initials) 1.AQUA BARN RANCH,INC.,a Washington corporation 2. Additional names on page of document. Grantee(s) (Last name first, then first name and initials) 1.CITY OF RENTON,a municipal corporation of the State of Washington Additional names on page of document. Legal description (abbreviated: i.e. lot, block,plat or section, township, range) LOTS 3 AND 4 OF KING COUNTY SHORT PLAT NUMBER L99S3019(AFN 20010831900002) Additional legals are on Page 1 of document. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number ❑Assessor Tax#not yet assigned 2323059210 and 2323059211 The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the information provided on the form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES This Development Agreement (this "Agreement") is made and entered into effective this day of , 2006 by and between the CITY OF RENTON ("City"), a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, and AQUA BARN RANCH, INC., a Washington corporation, the owner of the parcel of property within the area covered by this Agreement("Owner"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the City has initiated processing a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment and Zoning Map amendment of the property that is now legally described as follows (the"Property"): LOTS 3 AND 4 OF KING COUNTY SHORT PLAT NUMBER L99S3019, ACCORDING TO THE SHORT PLAT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20010831900002, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. WHEREAS, the Property currently lies in unincorporated King County within the expanded portion of the boundaries of the proposed Maplewood Addition Annexation (Expanded), a proposed annexation to the City that was before the State of Washington Boundary Review Board for King County on May 4, 2006 and May 8, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Property's King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation is Neighborhood Business Center; and WHEREAS, the Property's King County Zoning Map classification is Neighborhood Business (NB); and DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 1 WHEREAS, the City has previously recognized the Property's King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and Zoning Map classification; and WHEREAS, not later than the point in time at which the Property is officially annexed into the City, the Owner and the City both wish to have the Property (a) designated Corridor Commercial (CC) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and (b) zoned Arterial Commercial (CA) on the City's Zoning Map, subject to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, on September 20, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing concerning the proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment; and WHEREAS, on November 13, 2006, the City Council held a public hearing concerning this then-proposed development agreement; WHEREAS, the City Council has taken into account the public comments presented at the Planning Commission public hearing and at the Council's public hearing; and WHEREAS, on , 2006, the City Council adopted a Planning and Development Committee report concerning the proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment and this then-planned development agreement; WHEREAS, this Agreement has been reviewed and approved by the City Council of the City of Renton, Washington; and WHEREAS, this Agreement appears to be in the best interests of the citizens of the City of Renton, Washington; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do agree as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORITY Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170(1), the City and persons with ownership or control of real property are authorized to enter into a development agreement setting forth development standards and any other provisions that shall apply to, govern, and vest the development, use, and mitigation of the development of the real property for the duration of such development agreement. SECTION 2. SUBJECT PROPERTY A. Illustrative Map: The Property is graphically represented in the drawing attached hereto as Exhibit A. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 2 B. King County Property Identification Numbers: 2323059210 and 2323059211 SECTION 3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION AND ZONING SUBJECT TO SITE SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS ON ALLOWABLE LAND USES: A. Site-Specific Land Use Limitations. The parties hereby agree that, in conjunction with both (1) the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Designation described in Subsection B, below, and (2) the Zoning Map classification described in Subsection C, below, the following site-specific land use limitations (the "Site-Specific Land Use Limitations") shall apply: 1. The following particular uses ordinarily allowed in the CA zone as set forth in Renton Municipal Code Title IV Section 4-2-070K shall be inapplicable to the Property: (a) The "Natural resource extraction/recovery" use listed under the "AGRICULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES" use category; (b) The "Kennels, hobby" use listed under the "ANIMALS AND RELATED USES"use category; (c) The "Group Homes I" and "Group Homes II for 7 or more" uses listed under the "OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND HOME OCCUPATIONS"use category; (d) The "Other higher education institution" use listed under the "SCHOOLS"use category; (e) The "Adult retail use", "Big-box retail", "Horticultural nurseries", "Retail sales, outdoor", "Vehicle sales, large" and "Vehicle sales, small"uses listed under the "RETAIL" uses category; (f) The "Adult entertainment business", "card rooms", "Dance clubs", "Dance halls", "Not for profit gambling", "Sports arena, indoor", "Sports arena, outdoor" and "Recreation facilities, outdoor" uses listed under the "ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION" use category; (g) The "Hotel", "Motel", "Off-site services", "Convalescent centers" and "Medical institutions" uses listed under the "SERVICES" use category; DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 3 � v.r (h) "Body shops", "Express transportation services", "Parking garage, structured, commercial or public", "Parking, surface, commercial or public", "Park and ride, dedicated" and "Transit centers" uses listed under the "VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES" uses category; (i) "Outdoor storage" and "Self-service storage" uses listed under the "STORAGE"uses category; and (j) All uses listed under the "INDUSTRIAL"uses category. 2. The following particular uses ordinarily allowed in the CA zone as set forth in Renton Municipal Code Title IV Section 4-2-070K shall be allowed on the Property but with the following corresponding special restrictions: (a) "Drive-in/drive-through, retail" uses provided that not more than (_) free-standing drive-in/drive through fast-food restaurant buildings shall be permitted on the Property and all such uses shall have customer seating; (b) "Vehicle rental, small" use listed under the "SERVICES" use category provided that: (i) The use is included as part of a commercial development; (ii) A maximum of 10 parking stalls assigned and marked for rental vehicles shall be allowed on the premises; and (iii) The assigned and marked parking stalls shall be considered to be part of the number of total parking stalls otherwise permitted under applicable parking provisions of the Renton Municipal Code (i.e., the parking stalls assigned and marked for rental vehicles shall not be allowed in addition to the total number of stalls otherwise permitted); (c) "Car washes" use listed under the "VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES" use category provided that (i) hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 am to 9:00 pm and (2) no self-service washes shall be allowed on the premises; and (d) "Vehicle repair and service, small"use listed under the"VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES" use category provided that (i) all repair and service be conducted within a building, (ii) the building has a design comparable in quality to that of a Jiffy Lube® or Oil Can DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 4 Henry's®service building. 3. The design standards set forth on Exhibit B, attached, shall apply to commercial development on the Property. B. Comprehensive Plan Map Designation: The parties agree that, subject to the Site- Specific Land Use Limitations listed in Subsection A above, the Property shall have a Corridor Commercial (CC) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation. C. Zoning: The parties further agree that, subject to the Site-Specific Land Use Limitations listed in Subsection A above, the Property shall have an Arterial Commercial (CA) Zoning classification. SECTION 4. TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE CREDIT The Owner has submitted to the Renton Development Services Division documentation for the Division's review and consideration of the following facts: (1) Around 2003 (while the Property and two abutting parcels to the south that were also part of the original "Aqua Barn" site were still located in unincorporated King County), a total of $337,066 in private funds (the "Overall Aqua Barn Site's Intersection Contribution") was contributed to the construction of intersection improvements (including a traffic signal and turn lanes among other improvements) at the SR 169/152nd Avenue SE intersection (an intersection that lies at the Property's northwest corner) on account of the entire then-proposed "Aqua Barn Mixed-Use Development", a development proposal that entailed both (a) retail development of the Property (which has not been developed yet) and (b) residential development of the two residential parcels to the south (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 232305-9185 and 232305-9209, both of which have subsequently been developed); and (2) According to that certain "Aqua Barn Mixed-Use Development, Supplementary Traffic Impact Analysis" prepared by The Transpo Group dated April 4, 2004, an estimated 75 percent share of total traffic trips expected to be generated from the entire site of the Aqua Barn Mixed-Use Development at the critical PM peak-hour left-turning movement at the northbound to westbound left turn lane of that intersection were expected to be attributable to future development of the Property (the "Property's 75 Percent of Peak Hour Trips Share") while the other 25 percent of such trips was expected to be attributable to the residential development of the two residential parcels to the south of the Property. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 5 The Owner has (a) contended that, in view of the Property's 75 Percent of Peak Hour Trips Share, it is appropriate to attribute 75 percent of the Overall Aqua Barn Site's Intersection Contribution (i.e., 75 percent of the total $337,066 = $252,799.50) to the Property and (b) requested that such amount be credited against City of Renton traffic mitigation fees that will become due upon development of the Property. The Development Services Division has reviewed that documentation and the Owner's contention and request. Based upon the documentation provided by the Owner regarding (i) the funds spent on the intersection improvements and (ii) the previous traffic impact analysis, the Development Services Division has agreed with the documentation, the Owner's contention and the Owner's request and has recommended to the City Council that credit for a 75% share of the$337,066 funds expended be granted up to but not to exceed $252,799.50 against City of Renton traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the Property until the credit has been fully expended. Based upon the Development Services Division's recommendation, the City hereby acknowledges and agrees that a sum equal to $252,799.50 shall be credited against City of Renton traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the Property until the credit has been fully expended. This Section 4 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. SECTION 5. EFFECT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Unless amended or terminated, this Agreement shall be enforceable during its term by the City and the Owner and the Owner's successor or assigns in interest with respect to the Property; provided, however, only the City may enforce the Site-Specific Land Use Limitations. Development of the Property shall not be subject to a new zoning ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance or to a development regulation or standard adopted by the City after the effective date of this Agreement unless (a) otherwise provided in this Agreement or (b) agreed to by the owner(s) of any of the portion(s) of the Property to which such new zoning ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance or development regulation or standard shall apply or(c) in the case of a new or amended development regulation the regulation is one that the City was required to adopt or amend because of requirements of state or federal law. Any development permit or approval issued by the City for the Property during this Development Agreement's term must be consistent with this Agreement. SECTION 6. AUTHORITY RESERVED Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170(4), the City reserves its authority to impose new or different regulations to the extent required by a serious threat to public health and safety. SECTION 7. RECORDING Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.190, this Agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of King County. During the term of the Agreement, the Agreement is binding on the parties and their successors. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 6 SECTION 8. TERM This Agreement shall run with the Property until amended or rescinded by the City Council in accordance with Section 9,below. With respect to any portion(s) of the Property that are not developed, the parties to this Agreement agree to evaluate the Agreement periodically, but not less than every ten (10) years. Where appropriate, periodic review of the Agreement shall generally coincide with the City's evaluation of its entire Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 9. AMENDMENT The provisions of this Agreement, before the expiration of ten (10) years from the date of execution of this Agreement by all of the parties hereto, may only be amended with the mutual written consent of the parties; provided, however, that the owner(s) of portion(s) of the Property shall be entitled to amend this Agreement from time-to-time (with the consent of the City) as it relates to their particular portion(s) of the Property. After ten (10) years, the City may change the zoning and development regulations pertinent to the Property as part of its normal process of alteration to its Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Development Regulations. CITY OF RENTON By: Kathy Keolker, Mayor Attest: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney AQUA BARN RANCH, INC., a Washington corporation By: Janette L. Carr, President STATE OF WASHINGTON ) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 7 ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that on the day of , 2006 KATHY KEOLKER appeared before me and acknowledged that she signed the instrument, on oath stated that she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Mayor of the City of Renton, the Washington municipal corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said City for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and stated that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said City. Dated: Name (print) Signature Notary Public Title My Appointment Expires STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that JANETTE L. CARR is the person who appeared before me and acknowledged that she signed the instrument, on oath stated that she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as president of AQUA BARN RANCH, INC., a Washington corporation, to be the free and voluntary act of such corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Name(print) Signature Notary Public Title My Appointment Expires C:\CF\2320\009\Dev Agrmt\Dev-Agmt D6(DLH 11-8-06 clean).doc DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 8 EXHIBIT A I t SITE til o ux.i 0 $ `. ���083 ,,,, 't ' ,r, , I. Z. ' :::4 "' It . '11''''' .":19::: 'If ''?*4441".-*4..*"."171: a �^ <.SA 1 \� @ ,III . t4_ W..( [[ �� a jrryr. oatiA mie.,-4 44/ n., 7 EXHIBIT B AQUA BARN SITE CA ZONE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Purpose: The intent of the following design standards is to set forth the desired character of future commercial development on the two visually prominent abutting parcels of land totaling approximate three (3) acres and fronting SR 169 on a portion of the former Aqua Barn site. The intent is that any commercial development on either of these two parcels be of a quality that will fit in with its residential and nearby rural surroundings rather than being garish or "Disney-like" in its setting near the urban/rural Urban Growth Boundary. The intent, also, is that both parcels, if developed independently of each other, share common thematic elements such as building forms, materials, signage, and landscaping to the extent reasonably practical in view of the ultimate uses on the parcels. Unless otherwise specified herein, all other relevant code requirements set forth in Title IV shall be met. Standards: 1. Site Master Plan: A site plan for either or both of the two parcels at the time of development shall include information on building type, location, phasing(if any), etc. a. Buildings: All proposed buildings shall be identified as to type, size, use, and location. b. Parking: All proposed parking areas shall be identified as to location, number of stalls, location of drive aisles, points of ingress and egress, lighting, proposed landscaping and pedestrian walkways related to them. c. Open Spaces: Common open spaces (if any) and their locations shall be identified, including open spaces such as larger landscape areas, storm retention ponds, etc. d. Pedestrian Features: Proposed pedestrian walkways shall comply with RMC 4- 3-040F.1.e and shall be identified as to location, materials, and what they are connecting or linked to. 2. Common Thematic Elements: Building elements such as those identified below are to be used throughout each of the two parcels to create a unifying architectural statement for the development of each parcel and both parcels when seen from the Renton—Maple Valley Highway(SR 169). a. Materials: Drawings submitted for review and approval' shall identify exterior materials such as masonry or concrete block that will be used on the façades of all buildings; b. Fenestration: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify location of openings and types of glazing proposed, including color of glass and frames; c. Roofing: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify roofing style (flat, gabled, pitched, mansard, etc.), material, pitch, and color, and ensure that these are consistent throughout the development of each parcel; d. Additional Architectural Elements: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall include type and location of awnings (if any), their proposed materials and color, and all exterior lighting should be shown on all relevant elevations and perspectives. Glass and metal awnings (or awnings of other permanent materials) or overhanging eves shall be provided on all facades visible from public streets. e. Other Architectural Embellishments (if any): Drawings submitted for review and approval shall include decorative roof treatments, decorative lighting, decorative paneling, etc., which are encouraged and, if proposed, shall be shown in all relevant building elevations and perspectives. f. Signage: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify all proposed exterior signage including façade signs. Any allowed freestanding signs shall be ground-oriented monument type signs. Pole and roof top-mounted signs shall be prohibited. 3. Landscaping Along Street Frontages: Landscaping along abutting street frontages shall comply with the following provisions [provisions that are derived from the portion of the table in RMC 4-3-040D (Development Standards for Uses Located within the Renton Automall Areas A and B) concerning "Landscaping — Street Frontage Landscaping Requirements" for"All Uses in Area A, Dealerships and Related Uses in Area B"]: a. 15-Foot Wide Landscape Strip Required: A 15-foot wide landscape strip shall be required along all street frontages. This is in lieu of requirements in Chapter 4-2 RMC. Unimproved portions of abutting street right-of-way can be used in a Once"[d]rawings submitted for review and approval"have been approved by the Renton Development Services Division, unless the approval is appealed and the approval decision is modified, any development(s) actually constructed shall be consistent with the approved drawings unless drawing revisions consistent with this Exhibit B have been reviewed and approved by the Development Services Division. Notwithstanding RMC 4-9-200D.2.a.ii, no building facade modifications (such as the location of entrances/exits, changes in materials, fenestration, roofmg, additional architectural elements or signage or aesthetic alterations) that relate to the subject matter of this Exhibit B shall be made without the approval of the Development Services Division. combination with abutting private property to meet the required 15-foot landscape strip width. b. Street Tree Requirements: Unless the existing trees within the 15-foot wide landscape strip are retained, the landscaping provided in the 15-foot wide landscape strip shall include a minimum 30-inch high berm and 2%2 inch caliper red maples (Acer robrum) planted 25 feet on center. 4. Landscape Materials: Common landscape elements shall be used throughout each of the two parcels to create unifying statement for the development of each parcel. a. Plant Materials: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify all proposed living plant materials of a permanent nature including species and size at time of planting. b. Paving Materials: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify all paving materials including driveways, parking areas, and pathways. In regard to buildings greater than 5,000 square feet in size, a minimum 8-foot wide concrete sidewalk with decorative banding shall be provided along the building side(s) abutting parking areas. Such sidewalks shall be raised from the grade of the abutting parking areas a minimum of four inches except for ramps for handicapped access and rolling of shopping carts. c. Exterior Lighting: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify all proposed exterior lighting, including parking lot lighting, and decorative lighting along pedestrian corridors. 5. Surface Water Detention Ponds: Surface water detention ponds (if any) shall be screened and landscaped with sight-obscuring evergreen plant materials. Where pond fencing is required, it shall be decorative in appearance and use permanent materials such as metal or decorative concrete block. Landscaping should buffer the exterior of all such fencing or walls. AMENDMENT 2006-M-7 - FORMER AQUA BARN SITE DESCRIPTION: The tenants of two ± 1.5-acre parcels at the southeast corner of 152nd Avenue SE and the Renton—Maple Valley Highway (SR 169), the former Aqua Barn site, have requested that the City amend its Comprehensive Plan land use designation for this area from Residential Low Density (RLD) to Commercial Corridor (CC), with concurrent Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. The City has agreed to sponsor this request because of a large eminent annexation that will change the area's zoning from the County's designations to City's designations. The subject site is currently zoned Neighborhood Business (NB) on the County's Zoning Atlas. This zone does not restrict the size of individual uses; rather parcels are restricted by a Floor Area Ratio (FAR), which in this case is 1.0/1.0. Thus, a 3.0-acre site could theoretically support 130,680 square feet of neighborhood business uses. City staff believes this review should be expanded to also evaluate the land use designation for the two multi-family developed lots to the south because they were part of the original parcel and project reviewed by the County in 1998. These two additional parcels and Tract A associated with them are currently designated Urban Residential, Medium, 4-12 dwelling units per acre (du/ac), by the County. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. What is the appropriate land use designation and zoning for the commercial portion of the former Aqua Barn site fronting on SR 169 (3.02 acres)? 2. What is the appropriate land use designation and zoning for the residential multi-family portions of the former Aqua Barn site (27.22 acres)? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Staff is recommending that commercial Parcels 9210 and 9211 of the former Aqua Barn site which front on the Renton — Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) be redesignated on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from RLD to CC and that residential Parcels 9209, 9185, and Tract A (open space), be redesignated Residential Medium Density (RMD), also from RLD. ANALYSIS: Background: The Aqua Barn site, located in Renton's PAA, has been a historical recreational site for picnicking, swimming, and horseback riding for generations of families both in the immediate Renton area as well as the region. In the late 1990's, the original owners approached King County and sought to change the land use designations and zoning on the 33-acre site. In 1996 the County had proposed rezoning the front ten acres of the site to NB. At that time the applicant had a conditional use permit that allowed a proposed 240-unit lodge. H:IEDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn siteUssue Paper(7-19).doc In 1998, the County proposed reducing the ten-acre portion fronting on SR 169 that was designated Neighborhood Business Center to three acres. The remaining seven acres were to receive their Urban Residential, Medium designation and R-6 zoning that could potentially be increased to R-12 (12 units per gross acre). Under this proposal, approximately 16 acres would eventually be available for residential development at a density of 12 units per gross acre, allowing up to 192 new multi-family units on the site. The proponents, in exchange for this density increase, agreed to set aside the southern steeply sloped 16.3 acres as permanent open space. The resulting average density over the non-commercial portion of the site was estimated to be 6.2 du per gross acre using the King County system and 17.58 du per net acre using Renton's system that would have excluded the steeply sloped open space tract. For the two residential parcels currently under consideration, the average density is now 17.58 du/acre. The City supported this revision. Fewer vehicular trips would be generated with less commercial business, and the steep slope set aside were both seen as positives. The current review is looking at the five properties that made up the original Aqua Barn site. These include four parcels and one tract: Parcels 9210, 9211, 9209, 9185, and Tract A. The first two, 9210 and 9211, are designated Neighborhood Business Center on the King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and zoned NB. Parcels 9209 and 9185 are designated Urban Residential, Medium, 4-12 du/ac on this same exhibit and zoned R-12, 12 du/ac by the County. The northern five acres of Tract A are zoned R-12 and the southern nine acres are zoned R-1. The County allowed the density on Tract A to be transferred to Parcels 9209 and 9185 to the north. The subject site as well as most of the 340-acre expanded Maplewood Addition Annexation site is currently designated RLD on the Renton's Comprehensive Plan. The City needs to modify its Land Use Map to better reflect the existing land uses in this area. Currently, there is a proposed retail development on the commercially designated parcels fronting on SR 169 that would be jeopardized if the land use designation and zoning are not changed this year. Commercial Neighborhood: For the purpose of mapping the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) land use designation, areas should have the following characteristics: 1) Within one-quarter mile of existing and planned residential areas; 2) To the extent possible, outside of the 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. The subject site would appear to meet the mapping criteria for the CN land use designation. Clearly, the subject two commercial parcels are within a quarter mile of existing residential areas that abut the site to the south and east. The subject site is outside the trade areas of other small-scale commercial uses since the nearest commercial area is more than 1.9 miles to the west on the Renton—Maple Valley Highway. Also, the site abuts a major arterial. However, given the high numbers of vehicular passersby and the likelihood that most patrons will arrive by automobile, CN seems inappropriate for this major location between the highway and the area's major north-south connector. H:IEDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn site\Lssue Paper(7-19).doc Commercial Neighborhood is implement through the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zone, which allows uses to have a maximum gross floor area of 5,000 square feet. This is clearly oriented more to neighborhood walk-in uses than those catering to passersby on a major highway and north-south arterial (152nd Ave SE/154th Ave SE/156th Ave SE). Commercial Corridor: For the purpose of mapping the Commercial Corridor (CC) land use designation, areas should have the following characteristics: 1) Located on, and having access to, streets classified as principal arterials; 2) High traffic volumes; or 3) Land use pattern characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. The 200-feet deep 3.0 acres comprised by Parcels 9210 and 9211 are located on the Renton - Maple Valley Highway (SR 169), a designated principal arterial, and have access from it. Also, SR 169 is characterized by high volumes of traffic. The land use pattern in this area, however, is not characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. Redesignating this area CC seems to be a better alternative than the CN designation since the proposed uses are larger, more community than neighborhood oriented, and most likely would serve a larger sub-regional market area. Also, they are located along a high volume traffic arterial. Commercial Arterial: For the purpose of mapping Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning, areas should meet the following criteria: 1) The corridor is served by transit or has 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. Metro transit currently provides bus service along SR 169 and historically, the Aqua Barn Ranch entertainment complex fronted on the highway. Whether this could be considered historical strip commercial is up to one's interpretation. Large surface parking lots historically existed both on the Aqua Barn site and the Renton Assembly of God church next door has a large surface parking lot that accommodates hundreds of cars. Future development on the three-acre site is anticipated to have parking in front, oriented to the H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn siteUssue Paper(7-19).doc SR 169 with retail/service uses located towards the back of the site. Until the original Aqua Barn site was subdivided into its current configuration in the late 1990's, it was defined as a larger parcel fronting an arterial with multiple buildings located throughout the site. And, finally, the SR 169 corridor does not exhibit a grid system. Where cross streets exist, they are often hundreds of feet and in some cases miles apart. Therefore, it would appear that the subject 3.0-acre site (Parcels 9210 and 9211) does meet the mapping criteria for Commercial Corridor zoning. Residential Medium Density: For the purpose of mapping Residential Medium Density (RMD), areas should have access, topography, and adjacent land uses that create conditions appropriate for a variety of unit types including both single-family and multi- family development types. Policy LU-159 states that RMD designated neighborhoods may be considered for R-14 zoning where a site meets the following criteria: 1) Adjacent to major arterial(s); 2) Adjacent to the Urban Center, Highlands Neighborhood Center, or Commercial Corridor 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 with the density range and of similar unit type is achievable given environmental constraints. The site is adjacent to SR 169 with access from it. If the front site is designated CC, it meets criterion 2 in that it would be adjacent to a CC land use designation. With the inclusion of the 16.3-acre open space tract (Tract A), owned by the homeowners association of Parcel 9209, the rezone area totals more than 20 acres, meeting the intent of criterion 3. Since the density on Tract A was transferred to Parcels 9209, it seems appropriate to include this area in any subsequent rezone. The net density for these three parcels is estimated to be 17.6-du/net acre, slightly less than the maximum density of 18- du/net acre, allowed under the R-14 zone. In regard to criterion 4, the site abuts a manufactured home park to the east with the nearest single-family area over 600-feet to the east. Neither of these nearby uses are considered incompatible with the existing multi-family developments on these two parcels. The density on these two parcels, as noted above, is ±17.6 units per acre. This density is below the maximum 18 du/net acre allowed in the R-14 zone. If the 14-acre steeply sloped permanent open space set-aside (Tract A) is averaged in, the net density of the resulting 27.22 acres would be slightly more than seven units per acre, somewhat less H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn site\Issue Paper(7-19).doc the minimum density for this zone. Rezoning Parcels 9209, 9185, and Tract A would appear to generally comply with the criteria for R-14 rezoning set out in Policy LU-159. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: The 10.92-acre residential portion of the site has an estimated 192 dwelling units on it at an average density of 17.6 units per acre. This is slightly less than the estimated total of 198 units estimated in 1998 with the transfer of 78 units of the 16.3 acres set aside as permanent open space. Because the site is fully developed, there is no additional capacity left on it. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed rezone of the existing two commercial parcels and the existing two residential parcels on the former Aqua Barn site must meet at least one of the criteria in RMC 4-9-020 G. These rezones would appear to meet the criterion that the change supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan. The adopted Comprehensive Plan vision calls for a diversity of housing types to cater to the variety of needs and wants in the community. It also calls for a commitment to protect environmental quality in the City, which the set-aside of the steeply sloped portions of the site to the so do. And by providing nearby retail and service uses that serve the immediate, as well as the surrounding community, transportation impacts within the City will be reduced. ZONING CONCURRENCY: This request complies with the decision criteria for rezones in RMC 4-9-180. It is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed zoning is consistent with the adopted mapping policies for RMD land use designation. Zoning of the subject parcels and the surrounding neighborhood has not been considered since 1998. CONCLUSION: Changing the land use designations for the two commercial zoned parcels fronting on the Renton — Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) from RID to CC, with concurrent CA zoning, appears to be consistent with relevant mapping criteria and policies. Also, this appears to be the only viable alternative, since the area does not comply with either the CN or Commercial/Office/Residential land use designation mapping criteria. Changing the land use designation for the two residential zoned parcels abutting and south of the commercial zoned parcels from RLD to RMD, with concurrent R-14 zoning, appears to be consistent relevant mapping criteria and policies. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn site"Issue Paper(7-19).doc ir)/ rea n n9 A--aierj<:,) Report and Recommendation Of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force November 8, 2006 `SY O ♦ • The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force was appointed by Mayor Kathy Keolker on October 9, 2006 Task Force Members: Kirk Moore, Chair Steve Beck Theresa Elmer Mark Gropper Jennifer Hawton Bimal Kumar Howard McOmber Colin Walker Scott Weiss Sandel DeMastus, alternate The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force was composed of a group of citizen volunteers, appointed by the Mayor, and approved by the City Council. Task Force members were recruited from the Party of Records list from the Renton Highlands Sub Area zoning action, from the Highlands Community Association, from the Renton Housing Authority, from neighborhood business owners, and through general public notice. Task Force membership was chosen to reflect commercial, community,property owner, and resident interests within the areas of the Highlands affected by proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning changes. Purpose The purpose of the Task Force was to provide additional citizen and property owner input into the zoning decisions within the Highlands study area. This Task Force convened for a limited time with the specific purpose to review the draft land use and zoning changes. This included review of proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments, proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendments, proposed Zoning Map Amendments, and proposed Zoning Text Amendments. After reviewing the proposed changes, the Task Force was charged with putting together a set of recommendations for City Council review. This report contains the recommendations of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force. It lists issues of concern that Task Force members identified, and proposed solutions. Task Force proposed Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments are attached to this report in the following appendices: • Appendix A- Task Force Proposed Land Use Map • Appendix B- Task Force Proposed Zoning Map • Appendix C- Task Force Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments • Appendix D- Task Force Proposed Zoning Text Amendments Process Since the Task Force was formed members have met twice a week with City staff. In the first phase of the process, staff briefed the Task Force on the current zoning regulations in effect in the Highlands study area, as well as the proposed changes. Initial briefings also included review of the Comprehensive Plan land use policies in effect for the neighborhood. During the second phase, each Task Force member developed his or her own zoning map for the study area. Individual zoning concepts were consolidated into three small-group concepts by consensus. From these three maps, the Task Force consolidated the information into a single mapping proposal. Throughout the process of the briefings and the mapping exercise, a number of issues surfaced regarding land use policy and zoning regulations. These issues were collected throughout the first two phases of the process and brought back to the Task Force for discussion and recommendation in the third phase of the process. Decisions during this phase were also made by consensus of the Task Force. Staff provided additional information as requested and provided further assistance in interpreting the details of zoning and land use regulation. 1 Although the recommendations of the Task Force were formed through consensus, there was always the option to create a minority report. Given that there has been a fair amount of contention in the Highlands study area over proposed land use and zoning changes, the City Council authorized the creation of a minority report if necessary. A minority report allowed the opportunity for a group of at least three Task Force members to present an alternative recommendation from the rest of the group. Thus, if there were areas in which the Task Force just could not agree, there would be a series of alternative recommendations. Task Force Recommendations Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations and Policies All zoning is required by law to be consistent with the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan. The Task Force completed a land use map for the study area. Implementation of the Task Force proposal requires some Comprehensive Plan Text and Land Use Map Amendments. Appendix A contains the Task Force Proposed Land Use Map. This map shows the proposal to include the residential area north of NE 16th Street in the Center Village (CV) land use designation. It also includes the recommendation to include the multi-family areas south east of NE 12th Street and Monroe Ave NE, and east of Harrington Avenue NE between NE 7th Street and NE 9th Street in the Residential Multi- Family(RMF) land use designation. Appendix C contains the Task Force Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments. The Task Force recommended that Residential- 14 (R-14), Center Village(CV), and the Residential Multi-family(RM-F, RM-U, and RM-T) zones implement the Center Village Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. Zoning Map Rezoning of property in the Highlands Study Area is a very important issue to the residents and property owners there. The Task Force completed a zoning map for the study area. A modest up-zone to Residential- fourteen units per acre (R-14) was recommended for much of the current Residential-ten units per net acre (R-10) zoning in the study area. R-14 zoning was also recommended for the duplexes north of Sunset Boulevard in the vicinity of Glenwood Avenue NE and Harrington Avenue NE. Center Village (CV) zoning was expanded along Sunset Boulevard, in a few parcels adjacent to the existing commercial area, and the Houser Terrace and Evergreen Terrace properties owned by the Renton Housing Authority. Rezoning to Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) was recommended for three strips of properties: a strip along Kirkland Avenue NE, a strip south of NE 12th Street, and a strip along Harrington Avenue NE. Appendix B contains the Task Force Proposed Zoning Map. Non-Conforming Uses Past zoning proposals for this area included the possibility of implementing zoning that did not allow existing residential uses, such as duplexes and single-family homes. In such situations, the existing use is considered a legal non-conforming use. Legal non- conforming is the technical term for"grandfathered in". It means that the use is allowed to continue but may not expand or enlarge. Several members of the Task Force wished to ensure that the zoning proposal allow existing residential uses to remain legal and conforming. The recommended zoning proposal eliminates the issue of non-conforming 2 uses. All existing use types (duplexes, single-family uses) are allowed uses in the proposed zoning package. Property Redevelopment One of the most debated issues in the package of proposed zoning changes was a requirement that when properties came in for subdivision, the existing unit had to be removed. This would only affect those applying for division of their properties, and not to other changes like remodels or additions. However, the Task Force felt that property owners should not be required to remove existing units in order to subdivide their property. In lieu of requiring the removal of existing units, the Task Force indicated that property owners should be required to upgrade the existing units. Unfortunately, building and related codes make this impossible to implement without declaring the unit a hazard. The Task Force did not wish to create a situation in which existing units were declared hazardous. However, the Task Force did recommend deleting the provision that required the removal of existing units upon subdivision. Affordable Housing Keeping the neighborhood an affordable place to live for people in all stages of their lives was important to the members of the Task Force. In the R-14 zone, there is an allowed density bonus of 18 units per net acre. The Task Force recommended keeping the proposed incentive of creating two units of affordable housing as one of the options to achieve the density bonus. The Task Force also recommended implementing an incentive geared toward public agencies and non-profit organizations whose mission is to provide affordable housing. An incentive was recommended that would allow a bonus of 30 units per net acre for any project, of at least two acres, in which a minimum of 50% of the units developed would be affordable to those with incomes of 50% of the Area Median Income. Limits on Commercial Development While the Task Force liked the flexibility of the R-14 zone, there was general concern that it could allow some small commercial uses in a residential area. To prevent this, the Task Force recommendation specifically prohibits on-site services, retail, and eating/drinking establishments in this area unless they are accessory to a community, school, or recreational use. This would allow the possibility for a small business like an espresso stand or bicycle rental to locate in a park or the Community Center. A hearings examiner conditional use permit would be required. The Task Force also recommended that new, indoor recreational uses should be allowed in the R-14 zone to allow for redevelopment of the North Highlands Community Center property. Commercial Development Amendments in the Center Village Zone The CV zone is primarily oriented toward commercial development. Residential uses are allowed, but some limits must be put in place to ensure that as the area begins to redevelop, residential uses will not dominate this zone. As a result, the Task Force recommended increasing the minimum residential density in this area to 20 dwelling units per net acre. This will prevent lower density residential-only redevelopment from occurring in the commercial area. The Task Force also recommended a standard which 3 requires commercial development in properties fronting on Sunset Boulevard. This proposes that commercial development occupy a minimum of 75% of the frontage on Sunset. Another Task Force recommendation was to allow a ten foot height bonus in the CV zone for properties that have first floor commercial development. This allows building of four stories of residential over first floor commercial development, an important incentive for the development of mixed use commercial and residential buildings. R-14 Zone Density The Task Force recommended raising the minimum density in the R-14 zone to ten units per acre to comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the Center Village Land Use Designation. The Task Force also recommended keeping the current bonus system in the R-14 zone that allows densities up to 18 units per net acre. In order to receive the bonus, however, the proposed development would have to offer one of the following desired items: alley access, open space, or affordable housing. Design Regulations The Task Force recommended implementation of Design Regulations for all properties within the Center Village land use designation. The regulations consist of standards and guidelines that would be applied to new development. Minimum Lot Size for Detached Residential Development The Task Force recommended that the minimum lot size for single-family detached residences in the R-14 zone be set at 5,000 square feet. Next Steps The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force has recommended a complete package of land use and zoning changes. These proposed changes are currently in environmental review and the City's Environmental Review Committee is expected to issue an environmental determination on November 13, 2006. November 13th is also the scheduled date for a City Council public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan changes included in this recommendation. Upon completion of the environmental review and the public hearing processes, the City Council should consider the Task Force recommendations for adoption. Beyond possible adoption, the Task Force identified a number of issues beyond their immediate scope of work. Issues that the Task Force feels merit further consideration by the City, include: - Implementation of a minimum property maintenance code that would address potential life safety issues in existing units - Affordable housing strategies for the Highlands, and the City as a whole, including zoning incentives, tax incentives, and possible fee reductions - Consideration of storm water regulation implementation in the Highlands - Development of properties for parks and recreation uses by the City - Completion of a full sub area plan for the study area 4 - Consideration of implementation of Cottage Housing standards in the Highlands and Citywide. In addition to addressing these issues, the Task Force highly recommends that the City continue to work with a Citizen's Task Force in the revitalization and redevelopment of the Highlands Study Area. 5 APPENDIX A it : v .:r 1■F I� 3 �►I ■■ mil 4- !■ —TC — �. ■mi.■■ ■ 1111Z ■■.■■■■1� 0, A : ii RINE ©'oak i11 ■Yiiii■■ .■LuWa]--A81 mma: /A,�■ ■ �■■■ 111 ■111■ ■■ e■ ■■ ■1111lE'L!■�f:n■W■■\l �e ■ ow-'we 1 ■�i,�111`© ice■ i� ■■ ■1►'L1�• ■■ , , %t;3 mg _ ,7' 1l . ,. .. :■ �irlil! mil/►/ 1V / " =11� �, ���0 ra1<�TI■■ 11 r1 �� '.��:�111 pilaf n►�I� �.■■�.1■� III /' �� kailszo WIIIIi■■■■■� in � 01st stIJ' .1 iIII ■o1111111 ■ +� �������Ilityni mar at 111111 III ILiiMa N E 2 0 t h ' nmEi ■ ■■� �■ ■■ :Ils 11111� p um 1 In Mil mil illill gm ami aim En M. ii`■:;l■ -� Ii�::ism _ ■■■■■�m NM so IL LI�1► ■mil 191111b .11‘ Min 7 im. all ai ■■ ■Idinil aPI/,4 1��/I L wi1I1I nJ& IL' Yl I _PrMr: illga NIMII uM • 16th ■ Ni •IM LA& UM ON no um c 1 2i-llii= .-7) NM MA :3 ow/Adam •,7_ - 11111111 . - al th ) In!gmbro Mb ILI tow 4 E -m1l um ri r in p� IV % 7 .— GLI■■ i 1 . I. macron w■ . ems■ rl�� Iw,_ ■ 900 = ■AiM■&�■ : �? ■W'� `/�/'i ■ia;■IaUY■ ■ums.ETINIIMMUI KM,A .a ■etyma ■n •� err 111�= ■■■■■■ ■tamsUI i la m�:► u %/ a mm �■ .■■� .�� w\■1 EVE 1P 1��■iln1111%a— �i ■obir- p ■ .m eiiRr■nrYT ■■■■auumaisuas ill '1a I/■ .1m ■11■MIXIe■il■■■■■ ""' ���u�YY�►1�■u1s� : +�■ii1 f IIII�GIAII 111111f11;1111111■ MIME k ' w111�Illli ii -- = IIIIL1.11 i1111Y1tV11111i 1 i.L11JS�llloj III�� " 11■1111■11 ■ � la � �� �a � j� 1►, w ! ��1II1 Fs �►♦ 9th .1,. II AIM .. �;1 � a IIIW■ ■■11�: Ia IM =fit: ■ii/, ■■iy■1�_,It r_ Al �� E■ lei ■■■11RII.�A!IISi,.11111 ._>. Mitirj 7. ��1111/l ■�oII,!♦� If/ .� 00111111 l',�y �!1♦w♦�\ UN 1 ti"I 0# mnifill111111z =dy § iii�111 l V PS ,,. SAM m,a, weeE i e s■\�w-- r, meaottl 42 I ■� ■o ■■II %ken ■,♦;i1w� 1i ■ I ■� ■ r.■RI Ea p.m ■IIIr.I. � :i Ate �uro � �AI■AA �yi • ■■ ■IS ■■ ■■■ pm ■111111/ mom■nllI la . �� ra gipi 1■ A A �� ■■■.. �w ►� Alm m �■, ■■■=man ■ II . ♦ E� glum:aim NA13T . so f gr itu1�,�13 ww ♦ .. ���:vd.. !��.���� mIIIy I. om "IR S ..40, Lghlands Subarea MI RED 0 1000 2000 I IRS Proposed Land Use - Task Force I I RMD ® RMF 1 : 12000 Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning ® CV •®• Alex easelh,Administrator - CC CF.Feasel 1'NTO 03 November 2006 APPENDIX B C= . p .: ■d ■■ ammo 1 •Pi I■ ■r . ■ t; I — . .' ■ IR�i7R!!11a�■ �� q !•■IL!19'� t • N E © 1.' . u aria iiii r■■1■■II ■ 1111 l „111- z ml.■ .. ■� �iallia ��7% . :_ 1111 �r�� FAR,it mil_ E ' I\� ►r0 y� ■1■■I NAI so um Mama hr ■i.11l���►I „►gam I Iti ra UIIIW ` : I IL ■n '1.mum,w 11 st St I s&-* -■'r — N nldl G I— UM ■ ■o � �. � � /�f J JIl Si ill. ,'�. _ • ■ ni MEd -1-,.1 Or. Os is - NI/ k l t1 St l t ri rnt.7Fi ` ■. ■ .ry 1 ■■ _ _ arum■■1 �/.■11■ ■.■ v�®„ �/O a p J No ���� I tat �■ �n 2��- am �E •• �� a),_ .1,, Nov 111 1 Ire NINE 4' III s mi a= :■ i I i■ Air EN 1 16thlip ®/ ■L'i■v� � fmi in Lin • m I .110111114,4615i4 .,....." :ION -•11111M1111 , la ..:10 8 . nom ir rix dzi..3 in _F), '''J IV...3- 41 ■ ��1■■ tom` ■�■�li/ ■,��� o �� ■1h4 � '�`�r•e■ �I■ N -' ' i 1 1 li 11I F■ 1111?:: = r� i 4el BIM -- 11: IVI + �� 1 ■ems :i�mi ' IF ■" kx ,ULi'Lc 1 ■• 11 , ra I �i \ e ■■■■ _ __. E MN �■■ � 4� ly 03 :I ��/ =`�� 1111111 um. 11 :I lb I re--. !l V��' IMINIA �E�� ll - ■900 M • �i!p NI mo NE 10th ■rn■� �� 1 ':eii • 41. 1 numobum ■■L Af I ra .,►� A p ma iill OW le, II �■ ■� \,I/� moll Vain • ■� sie lasou:: /Litr! . SJ1�► i1i ii : la mil : am Bill.IIII 8 II■ Niffi rg.cum E . i ,�PIIII//Iij� �41o. 0 �i �1.i LI� �! `■ �•j 9th i g a111/. .. �, 4�/: E■ Foul c_-_ r mr•. u_ ei ��I1 ��W .`:::t y�1„r1 L+ar ���y%1't�• \■� j��� `, NE t i St. _ r . rm �VideV I� II114 111� •11Ii IL7 11 st�� ���'�, _ omst.�/� �I fry ■i�>. rii111I !!� t'�. t 1 1'' ... _1 Alga pov• ■ i��VV�1 ,, 1L'!♦ . ■■�� "1HI i'li'mnal aff1fJ 11111 Il�.11lsul►�. 4�-1;F■ as N E 6 h �w•1�1gird y E. �f•�illi.E; a NEk, IIII E■ D ■■ pm- IIIIIE ■t.11■%k t$V�♦`i liam. M. I,L VI ■■ ■.tlfr g. rrt OF Fiighlands Subarea Proposed Zoning - Task Force ® RC R 1a 0 1000 2000 .S5 I 1 R-1 ® RM-F z::a�;i:: r;: : : xx<as : ::: : T • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning I I R-8 CV • • AC.E.I Pi etsch,Administrator I I R-10 CN 1 . 12000 Feasel '� 03 November 2006 APPENDIX C 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 and 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 and 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-195. 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. ' r Policy LU-196. Designate Centers in locations with the following characteristics: 1) A nucleus of existing multi-use development; 2) Potential for redevelopment, or vacant land to encourage significant concentration of development; 3) Center locations should be located on major transit and transportation routes; 4) 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 of land 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-201. 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. Policy LU-205. Identify major natural features and support development of new focal points that define the Center and 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. Policy LU-208. 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 of the project. Policy LU-210. Connect residential uses to other uses in the Center through design features such as pedestrian access, shared parking areas, and common open spaces. 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 providing for 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. I Policy LU-317. Apply the Center Village dDesignation 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. Policy LU-318. Implement the Center Village Designation using multiple zoning designations including Residential 10 14 (R-1014)), Center Village (CV), and the Residential Multi-family zones (RMF, RM-U, RM-T). 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-Subarea Plan is expected to occur over within a 2—5- year period from the 2004 GMA update. Strategy 319.3. Areas east of Edmonds and north of Sunset currently zoned RMF are to remain in residential use. The area north of 1.2th S* tly zoned v ,0 is t„ remain in residential use. *so INS Policy LU-320. Allow residential density ranging from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 80 dwelling units per acre in the Center Village Designatiendesignation. 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 Village. Policy LU-323. Accommodate parking within a parking structure. Where structured parking is infeasible due to site configuration, parking should be located in the back or the side of the primary structure. Discourage Pparking lots between structures and street rights-of-way shall not be permitted. Policy LU-324. Use alley access where alleys currently exist. Encourage designation of new alleys in redevelopment projects. Policy LU-325. Encourage shared parking to use urban land efficiency. Policy LU-326. Develop design guidelines to provide direction on site design,building I design, landscape treatments,and-parkin&and circulation components of new development projects. Implementation of this policy should be phased within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 Centers. 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 and/or 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. APPENDIX D CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 4-2,ZONING DISTRICTS—USES AND STANDARDS, CHAPTER 4-3,ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND OVERLAY DISTRICTS, CHAPTER 4-4,CITY-WIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, CHAPTER 4-8,PERMITS- GENERAL AND APPEALS,AND CHAPTER 4-11, DEFINITIONS, OF TITLE IV(DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO.4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON"BY CHANGING THE ZONING REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE CENTER VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION,INCLUDING THE RESIDENTIAL-14 (R-14)ZONE AND CENTER VILLAGE (CV)ZONE,AND ENACTING DESIGN REGULATIONS. WHEREAS, the Vision for the Center Village calls for the modification of the existing, low-density suburban land use pattern; and WHEREAS, Comprehensive Plan Strategy 319.1 requires the evaluation of commercial and residential development standards in the Center Village Land Use Designation to ensure better implementation of the Center Village policies; and WHEREAS, Strategy 319.1 calls for the replacement of existing zoning that does not implement the Center Village Vision; and WHEREAS, the R-10 zone does not implement the Center Village vision for medium to high density residential development; and WHEREAS, the Center Village zone includes uses that are incompatible with high density housing; and WHEREAS, the Center Village Land Use policies promote high standards of design, pedestrian orientation, development of alleys, and the clustering of commercial and civic uses; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Housing Element promotes the provision of affordable housing for all income groups; and; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Page 1 of 58 SECTION I. Section 4-2-010.D of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts —Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment 'A'. SECTION II. Section 4-2-020.G of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: G.RESIDENTIAL- 10 DU/ACRE (R-10): The Residential-10 Dwelling units Per net Acre Zone (R-10) is established for the 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 flats. It is intended to implement the Medium Density and Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. 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, aw 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(4) to ten (10) dwelling units per net acre. The zone serves as a transition to higher density multi-family zones. Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose statement, objectives and policy direction established in the Residential Medium Density land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU-157 through LU-181 or the Center village land use designation, Objective LU CCC, Policies LU 317 through LU 332 and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Page 2 of 58 SECTION III. Section 4-2-020.H of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: H. RESDIENTIAL-14 DU/ACRE (R-14): The purpose of the Residential-14 Dwelling Units Per Net Acre Zone (R-14) is to encourage development, and redevelopment. of new residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of detached, semi-attached, and attached dwelling structures organized and designed to combine characteristics of both typical detached single family and small-scale multi-family developments. It is intended to implement the Residential Medium Density or the Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designations. Densities range from eight (8)ten (10) to fourteen (14) units per net acre with opportunities for bonuses up to eighteen (18) dwelling units per net 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 allowed when they support the purpose of the designation. Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose established in the Residential Medium Density land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU- 157 through LU-181, or the Center Village land use designation. Objective LU-CCC, Policies LU- 317 through LU-332, and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION IV. Section 4-2-020.I of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: Page 3 of 58 `err rrr�' 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.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 three(3) suffixes: a. "F" (Multi-Family): The RM-F suffix allows for the development of both infill parcels in existing multi-family districts with compatible projects and other multi-family development. It is intended to implement the Multi-Family or Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. Density ranges from ten(10)to twenty(20)du/acre. Interpretation of uses and project review in this suffix shall be based on the purpose statement objectives and policy direction established in the Residential Multi-Family land use designation, Objectives LU-JJ through LU-LL, Policies LU-182 through LU-192, or the Center Village Land Use designation, Objectives LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332. b. "T" (Traditional): The RM-T suffix 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. It is intended to implement the Urban Center— Downtown designation or Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Density ranges from fourteen (14) to thirty five (35) du/acre. c. "U" (Urban Center): The RM-U suffix 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 Page 4 of 58 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 — Downtown Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation or Center Village Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. Interpretation of uses and project review in suffix RM-U and RM-T shall be based on the purpose statement objectives and policies of the Urban Center—Downtown land use designation, Objectives LU-OO through LU-XX, Policies LU-216 through LU-264, , or the Center Village Land Use designation, Objectives LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through L11-332 and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. (Amd. Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002) SECTION V. Section 4-2-020.K of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts- Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: K CENTER VILLAGE ZONE (CV): 1. Purpose: The purpose of the Center Village Zone (CV) is to provide an opportunity for concentrated mixed-use residential and commercial redevelopment designed to urban rather than suburban development standards that supports transit-oriented development and pedestrian activity. Use allowances promote commercial and retail development opportunities for residents to shop locally. Uses and standards allow complementary, high-density residential development, and discourage garden-style, multi-family development. The Center Village Residential Bonus District supports superior residential projects that complement commercial uses, provide ground floor 2. Scale and Character: The Center Village Zone (CV) is intended to provide suitable environments for district-scaled retail and commercial development serving more than one neighborhood,but not providing City-wide services. Page 5 of 58 Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose statement, objectives and policy direction established in the Center Village land use designation, Objective LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332, Residential Medium-Density land use designation, Objectives LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU-157 through LU-181, or the Residential Multi-Family land use designation, Objectives LU-JJ through LU-LL, Policies LU-182 through LU- 192, and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION VI. Section 4-2-060 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment `B'. SECTION VII. Section 4-2-070G of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment 'C'. SECTION VIII. Section 4-2-070J of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment 'D'. SECTION IX. Section 4-2-080A.33 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: 33. Indoor or outdoor recreational facilities and/or eating and drinking establishments, mini marts, 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 and not a conditional use. Page 6of58 Additional Restrictions within the CV Land Use Designation: Retail uses, eating/drinking establishments, and on-site service uses are prohibited in R-14 areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation unless they are accessory to a School, Park, or Entertainment and Recreational Use as allowed in RMC 4-2-060E, F, and J. SECTION X. Section 4-2-080A.73 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: 73. Within the Center Village Zone, Residential Bonus District, "residential only uses"are limited to . Garden style apartments are prohibited. Flats or townhouses, when in a mixed use structure that combine residential with first floor commercial uses, have a maximum density of eighty(80)dwelling units per net acre. Projects within the Center Village are also subject to the provisions and development standards in RMC 4 3 095C Ground floor commercial development at a minimum depth of 30 feet and a minimum width of 75% of the length of the building is required for all residential projects on parcels abutting NE Sunset Boulevard. Parcels west of Harrington Avenue NE and east of Edmonds Ave NE may cluster the required commercial development as long as there is commercial development greater or equal to 75% of the sum of the ground floor areas of all the buildings proposed for the site. SECTION XI. Section 4-2-110F of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment `E'. SECTION XII. Section 4-2-110G of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment `F'. SECTION XIII. Section 4-2-120A of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment `G'. Page 7 of 58 ‘4110 lase SECTION XIV. Section 4-3-095 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby deleted in its entirety. SECTION XV. Section 4-3-100 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: A PURPOSE: The purpose of this Section is to: 1. Establish design review regulations in accordance with policies established in the Land Use and Community Design Elements of the Renton Comprehensive Plan in order to: a. Maintain and protect property values; b. Enhance the general appearance of the City; c. Encourage creativity in building and site design; d. Achieve predictability,balanced with flexibility; and e. Consider the individual merits of proposals. 2. Create design standards and guidelines specific to District 'A'(the Downtown Core)that ensure design quality of structures and site development implementing the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for its Urban Center—Downtown. This Vision is of a downtown that will continue to develop into an efficient and attractive urban city. The Vision of the Downtown Core is of mixed uses with high-density residential living supported by multi-modal transit opportunities. Redevelopment will be based on the pattern and scale of established streets and buildings. 3. Create design standards and guidelines specific to District 'B'(the South Renton Neighborhood)that ensure design quality of structures and site development implementing the City's South Renton Neighborhood Plan. The South Renton Neighborhood Plan, for a residential area located within the Urban Center—Downtown, maintains the existing,traditional grid street plan and respects the scale of the neighborhood, while providing new housing at urban densities.The South Renton Neighborhood Plan supports a residential area that is positioned to capitalize on the employment and retail opportunities increasingly available in the Downtown Core. 4. Create design standards and guidelines specific to the Urban Center—North(District 'C')that ensure design quality of structures and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for its Urban Center—North. This Vision is of an urban environment that concentrates uses in a"grid Page 8 of 58 • pattern" of streets and blocks. The Vision is of a vibrant, economically vital neighborhood that encourages use throughout by pedestrians. 5. Create design standards and guidelines applicable to the use of"big-box retail" as defined in RMC 4- 11-180, Definitions. 6. Create design standards and guidelines specific to the Center Village commercial core(District `D') that ensure design quality of structure and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan Vision for the Center Village designation. Uses within this district include business and professional offices, services,retail,restaurants,recreational businesses,mixed-use commercial and residential buildings, and multi-family residential. This portion of the Center Village is intended to provide a vital business district serving the local neighborhood and beyond. 7. Create design standards and guidelines specific to the residential portion of the Center Village (District `E')that ensure design quality of structure and site development that implements the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan.Vision for the Center Village designation. A variety of housing options allows economic and lifestyle diversity in the Center Village, with design regulation to tie the range of styles and types together. 8. Establish two categories of regulations: (a) "minimum standards" that must be met, and(b) "guidelines" that, while not mandatory, are considered by the Development Services Director in determining if the proposed action meets the intent of the design guidelines. In the Urban Center Design Overlay area,Set specific minimum standards and guidelines that may apply to all three districts, or certain districts only (Districts 'A', 'B',ef-'C', `D', or`E'), as indicated herein. (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124,2-7-2005) B APPLICABILITY: 1. This Section shall apply to all development in the Urban Center—Downtown and Urban Center— North. For the purposes of the design regulations, the Center Downtown is District'A', South Renton is District 'B', and the Urban Center—North is District 'C.'Districts A through C are depicted on the Urban Center Design Overlay District Map, shown in subsection B4 of this Section. 2. This Section shall also apply to big-box retail use where allowed in the Commercial Arterial(CA), Light Industrial(IL), Medium Industrial(IM), and Heavy Industrial(IH)zones,except when those zones are located in the Employment Area—Valley south of Interstate 405.Big-box retail uses within these zones, except in the Employment Area—Valley,must comply with design standards and guidelines specific to the Urban Center—North(District 'C'). 3. Where conflicts may be construed between the design regulations of this Section and other sections of the Renton Municipal Code, the regulations of this Section shall prevail. 4. Urban Center Design Overlay District Map: Page 9 of 58 *4110 446.0 4 C - .'z X`''-1. :: rr�, :HINGTON t i 'r r# t ` .i 14.4, g �€ '-EX • • F t? t 4 4 a ( , � r :' . 1 'E F[ , 111 e.t . o t {a t fE. i n. l +t�7 }' r a ,1tk r }tFTh g 1 s w*�•« s�•y �„ k � � t gr 1 -t's ',, ,,, ,,,,i,, r,,,,,,,,zik,,,..rip:„E,E:::4i_,Ei;,...,,,,,:171 _::i,, 1.;,j,..,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,;;,,,,"T.,,,,f/,:??f.:::,-;•,:i.i.:,,,E,E.,,,,,,;,-;:,;-:„I-.,,,:,,.:E..-„,,::1:7,4i"-7.E.7.7„--'1.f!E-E:r-E:i1;,,,,f,;/.1:.,,,,,,.:-.7.-,-,"if.,,E-ii ii.'1'..,;--,-E,f-t:: rri.-_,-.-..,,,., ..,E.,,,,,,Iti; t � \N t. v grd F .. __ , „..,„..,,,,,....,.,,- .:,,. _,„ ,71.i,,,,,-;f74_,„ .,,,,,,E,,,,-,:i;, -_-_-,,,,,_.,:.,,,, -..- .,..„ >, ,,,,...,. ....)5.4317Lie, ,v.„,,,.:-,v.ztvo,,.5 :1 . , ,,......, :‘,;„ ...,C-1',-.;,,i•.. t..i' 1•r.i,'''....5:',..,,E,-...,-;,i:-..,,,--' „•-•„;•,„. -: ':..:,:,.,,,-, _. .,_ ,-, ,,.;4,- •'''',,,N.4-'3 Fl.".,,, S,',-!::,,,f-,,''' - i ; : .. . € i r, 8 �.., y - k 4 k- �, EIS ... ..„ tA.l o c ... rs y � Urban Center Design Overlay District Map — City Iknits !> Ecano�mlc pnva[a nt,Kd�ww4 Saul' G' Plar"" rum*.A C.@3 *. ' 00 Nra�lR MOO Page 10 of 58 5. This section shall apply to all development in the Center Village Land Use Designation as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. For thepurposes of the Design Regulations, areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation zoned Center Village(CV) shall comprise District"D". Areas within the Center Village Land Use Designation zoned Residential Multi-family(RMF)and Residential-14 (R-14), area shall be in District"E". (Amd. Ord. 4991, 12-9-2002; Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) C EXEMPTIONS: The design regulations shall not apply to: 1. Interior Remodels: Interior remodels of existing buildings or structures provided the alterations do not modify the building facade. 2. Aircraft Manufacturing: Structures related to the existing use of aircraft manufacturing in District 'C'. (Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) D ADMINISTRATION: 1. Review Process: Applications subject to design regulations shall be processed as a component of the governing land use process. 2. Authority: The Director of the Development-Services D visio.,Reviewing Official shall have the authority to approve, approve with conditions, or deny proposals based upon the provisions of the design regulations. In rendering a decision, the Director Official will consider proposals on the basis of individual merit, will consider the overall intent of the minimum standards and guidelines, and encourage creative design alternatives in order to achieve the purposes of the design regulations. (Amd. Ord. 4991, 12-9-2002; Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) E SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity throughout the district. 1. Site Design and Street Pattern: Intent: To ensure that the City of Renton Vision can be realized within the Urban Center Districts;plan districts that are organized for efficiency while maintaining flexibility for future development at high urban densities and intensities of use; create and maintain a safe,convenient network of streets of varying dimensions for vehicle circulation; and provide service to businesses. a. Minimum Standard for Districts'A' and'B': Maintain existing grid street pattern b. Minimum Standards for Districts'C' and 'D': i. Provide a network of public and/or private local streets in addition to public arterials. Page 11 of 58 ii. Maintain a hierarchy of streets to provide organized circulation that promotes use by multiple transportation modes and to avoid overburdening the roadway system. The hierarchy shall consist of(from greatest in size to smallest): (a)High Visibility Street.A highly visible arterial street that warrants special design treatment to improve its appearance and maintain its transportation function. (b)Arterial Street. A street classified as a principal arterial on the City's Arterial Street Plan. (c)Pedestrian-Oriented Streets. Streets that are intended to feature a concentration of pedestrian activity. Such streets feature slow moving traffic,narrow travel lanes, on-street parking, and wide sidewalks. (d)Internal or local roads(public or private). (e)Drive aisles. 2. Building Location and Orientation: Intent: To ensure visibility of businesses; establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways; organize buildings in such a way that pedestrian use of the district is facilitated; encourage siting of structures so that natural light and solar access are available to other structures and open space; enhance the visual character and definition of streets within the district;provide an appropriate transition between buildings,parking areas, and other land uses and the street; and increase privacy for residential uses located near the street. a. Minimum Standard for Districts'A'a-ndf'B', and `D': i. Orient buildings to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. ii. The front entry of a building shall not be oriented to a drive aisle, but instead a public or private street or landscaped pedestrian only courtyard. b. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. Buildings on designated pedestrian-oriented streets shall feature "pedestrian-oriented facades" and clear connections to the sidewalk(see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7a). Such buildings shall be located adjacent to the sidewalk, except where pedestrian-oriented space is located between the building and the sidewalk.Parking between the building and pedestrian-oriented streets is prohibited. ii. Buildings fronting on pedestrian-oriented streets shall contain pedestrian-oriented uses. iii. Nonresidential buildings may be located directly adjacent to any street as long as they feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. iv. Buildings containing street-level residential uses and single-purpose residential buildings shall be set back from the sidewalk a minimum of ten feet(10')and feature substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and the building(see illustration,RMC 4-3-100E7b). Page 12 of 58 v. If buildings do not feature pedestrian-oriented facades they shall have substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and building. Such landscaping shall be at least ten feet(10')in width as measured from the sidewalk(see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7c). c. Guidelines Applicable to District'C': i. Siting of a structure should take into consideration the continued availability of natural light(both direct and reflected)and direct sun exposure to nearby buildings and open space(except parking areas). d. Guideline Applicable to Districts `C' and 'D": ii. Ground floor residential uses located near the street should be raised above street level for residents'privacy. 3. Building Entries: Intent: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A' -,'B', `D',and 'E': Entrance Location: i_A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street.-Sueh entrances shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human scale elements. ii. Multiple buildings on the same site shall provide a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. ii. Ground floor units shall be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. iv. Secondary access(not fronting on a street) shall have weather protection at least four and one-half feet(4-1/2')wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. v. Pedestrian access shall be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots, abutting street intersections, crosswalks, and transit stops. b. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. On pedestrian-oriented streets,the primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing the street. ii. On non-pedestrian-oriented streets,entrances shall be prominent, visible from surrounding streets, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human-scale elements. iii. All building entries adjacent to a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, and/or landscaping. Entries from parking lots should be subordinate to those related to the street for buildings with frontage on designated pedestrian-oriented streets (see illustration,RMC 4-3- 100E7d). Page 13 of 58 iv. Weather protection at least four and one-half feet(4-1/2')wide and proportional to the distance above ground level shall be provided over the primary entry of all buildings and over any entry adjacent to a street. v. Pedestrian pathways from public sidewalks to primary entrances or from parking lots to primary entrances shall be clearly delineated. c. Guidelines Applicable toll Districts `A', `B', and `C': i. Multiple buildings on the same site should provide a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. ii. Ground floor units should be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. iii. Secondary access(not fronting on a street) should have weather protection at least four and one-half feet(4-1/2')wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. iv. Pedestrian access should be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots,abutting street intersections, crosswalks,and transit stops. v. Features such as entries,lobbies,and display windows should be oriented to a street or pedestrian- oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features such as trellises, artwork,murals,landscaping, or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street-oriented facade. de. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A' and `D': i. For projects that include residential uses,entries should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area, terrace,common area, lobby,or similar feature. ii. Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows should be oriented to a street;otherwise, screening or art features such as trellises,artwork,murals, landscaping,or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street-oriented facade. iii. Entries from the street should be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping. Entries from parking lots should be subordinate to those related to the street for buildings within District 'A'. ef. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and 'E': Front yards should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area,terrace,or similar feature. fg. Guideline Applicable to District'C': For projects that include residential uses,entries should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area, terrace, common area, lobby, or similar feature. Page 14 of 58 4. Transition to Surrounding Development: Intent: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long-established,existing neighborhoods are preserved. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A' and `D': Careful siting and design treatment is necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height,bulk and scale. At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: i. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased by the Reviewing Official in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; ii. Building proportions, including step-backs on upper levels; iii. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or iv. Roof lines,roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. b. Minimum Standards for Districts'B' and 'E': i. Careful siting and design treatment is necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk, and scale. At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: (a)ii. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; or (b)iii. Building articulation provided to divide a larger architectural element into smaller pieces; or (c)iv. Roof lines, roof pitches,and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. achieve more harmonious relationships between new and old buildings. c. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. For properties along North 6th Street and Logan Avenue North(between North 4th Street and North 6th Street), applicants shall demonstrate how their project provides an appropriate transition to the long established, existing neighborhood south of North 6th Street known as the North Renton Neighborhood. Page 15 of 58 err' NisiO ii. For properties located south of North 8th Street,east of Garden Avenue North, applicants must demonstrate how their project appropriately provides transitions to existing industrial uses. 5. Service Element Location and Design: Intent: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements(i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use(see illustration,RMC 4-3-100E7e). ii. Garbage,recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed, consistent with RMC 4-4-090, Refuse and Recyclables Standards, and RMC 4-4-095, Screening and Storage Height/Location Limitations. iii. In addition to standard enclosure requirements,garbage,recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors(see illustration,RMC 4-3-100E7f). iv. The use of chain link,plastic,or wire fencing is prohibited. v. If the service area is adjacent to a street,pathway, or pedestrian-oriented space,a landscaped planting strip,minimum three feet(3')wide, shall be located on three (3) sides of such facility. b. Guidelines Applicable to All Districts: Service enclosure fences should be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood,or some combination of the three. 6. Gateways: Intent: To distinguish gateways as primary entrances to districts or to the City;provide special design features and architectural elements at gateways; and ensure that gateways, while they are distinctive within the context of the district, are compatible with the district in form and scale. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'C' and `D': i. Developments located at district gateways shall be marked with visually prominent features(see illustration, subsection E7g of this Section). ii. Gateway elements shall be oriented toward and scaled for both pedestrians and vehicles(see illustration, subsection E7h of this Section). iii. Visual prominence shall be distinguished by two(2)or more of the following: (a)Public art; (b)Monuments; Page 16 of 58 (c) Special landscape treatment; (d)Open space/plaza; (e)Identifying building form; (f)Special paving,unique pedestrian scale lighting, or bollards; (g)Prominent architectural features(trellis, arbor,pergola, or gazebo); (h) Signage, displaying neighborhood or district entry identification(commercial signs are not allowed). 7. Illustrations. a. Pedestrian-oriented facades (see subsection E2b(i)of this Section). Pedestrian-oriented facade Property line • T { Pedestrian-oriented facades: �. Primary building entry �•� must be facing the street transparent window area or window • display along 75%of the ground floor � /"\, �j/ between the height of 2 to 8 feet above the ground /'' weather protection at least 4'A feet wide along at least 75%of the facade b. Street-level residential (see subsection E2b(iv)of this Section). Page 17 of 58 • Raised planters provide privacy for residents while maintaining *ire 461110` views of the street from units .1 � N ONO Trees -hi---':.•,:.-'1=:11---144`4-4'-- , .11_ 1111r.' 'J."- woe gil ii-Liz:IAltilfril iit:'./ ------,1_ .1‘;1\811:liw;.\mi it. ,: ,r . , .,., ill ��—I .1.1\ kii_ ..-T----1 .'. .,r N',7,-14'1.i.9-fri-..1/ ---eti-kz . ,,,,,, ,..,.,,, / .:. .. ''' ‘,..415m—- -,_%.--)01.----17,,,kusviiiiijip----- illErtilLimp_ 2,!'''' ----. Z c. Buildings without pedestrian-oriented uses(see subsection E2b(v)of this Section). -;'1- Combination of evergreen and Building deciduous shrubs and trees A_, l Raised planter d. Building entries(see subsection E3b(iii)of this Section). Page 18 of 58 `.r �... ..,..-^:s=rol' 141' ;.,... ,l'il i 'i 1 1\ ll'1\ 40 , . , ..4 -1�.`_`willItr�. .111 ili%Nam- rill) •_iioa I ' ' nth r--4\N. /'..,,,,,,,, IRO a _L.,' di kik "1--" , ‘,..-;- 'Old _..eir_,.--iiilivweitairrammi illis " #it ►nA 1L _ 14U rli 1 . lei, ,,„--‘-fri mivirorif _ � li, o .n1'� 1 + Azel1 w: A. �.. ..,A -- yout dye � 1 e. Service elements located to minimize the impact on the pedestrian environment(see subsection E5a(i)of this Section). SCREENED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT '� DUMPSTER LOCATED AT . REAR OF • ��� SITE 7 4k� ,� i I .110 6 4 'ASH r §S A10 0)F f. Service enclosure(see subsection E5a(iii)of this Section). Page 19 of 58 Roof enclosure Landscaping to keep birds out ' ''.."‘....„.. ..L11:111 --.1t.-" , AI*. loir . tillii1.0 jittl° :.,,.:..;,,E,..i.,.,.:..;„:„:;,::,:,. ,i$00,174pli i, ,tiiir - .k, ': .•_ Self-closing ...- doors Trellis '.— Concrete pad g. Distinguishable building form appropriate for gateway locations(see subsection E6a(i)of this Section). iiiiiulpmnnunpu m CO mmm m m CO CO CO m Elevation ■ ■■ II Balconies Turret Corner accentuating roof line TlLf�1111ii'�1�-_ Plan IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII=;lilt i i Note:Ensure that building does not block viewing triangle at intersections 0❑ 000 IIIIIIIIILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL❑= II 4- 00000 ❑ Elevation — Il T mown' T r mul Distinctive use of materials Canopy Bay window ' ''I 11 f; I I 1 / Plan �����; IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIic .' l J i Page 20 of 58 h. Gateway landscaping,open space,pedestrian amenities and signage that identifies the commercial area(see subsection E6a(ii) of this Section). ,--pitm,N-,,-, ,,,-: _,, '-' ' .;:,:r-=.:..1''4';'-1:7I"r" :t..4'•- ''';'Z.- , , , ' .!e • eve: ._ . l t qt i,A s m .. (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124,2-7-2005) F PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS: Intent: To provide safe, convenient access to the Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate various modes of transportation, including public mass transit, in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided,while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. 1. Location of Parking: Intent: To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A' a 'B',and `D'\: No surface parking shall be located between a.building and the front property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. b. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. On dDesignated Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: Page 21 of 58 (a)Parking shall be at the side and/or rear of a building,with the exception of on-street parallel parking.No more than sixty feet(60')of the street frontage measured parallel to the curb shall be occupied by off-street parking and vehicular access. (b) On-street parallel parking spaces located adjacent to the site can be included in calculation of required parking.For parking ratios based on use and zone, see RMC 4-4-080, Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations. (c)On-street,parallel parking shall be required on both sides of the street. ii. All parking lots located between a building and street or visible from a street shall feature landscaping between the sidewalk and building; see RMC 4-4-080F,Parking Lot Design Standards. iii. Surface Parking Lots: The applicant must successfully demonstrate that the surface parking lot is designed to facilitate future structured parking and/or other infill development. For example,an appropriate surface parking area would feature a one thousand five hundred foot(1,500')maximum perimeter area and a minimum dimension on one side of two hundred feet(200'),unless project proponent can demonstrate future alternative use of the area would be physically possible. Exception: If there are size constraints inherent in the original parcel(see illustration, subsection F5a of this Section). c. Minimum Standards for District `E': i. No surface parking shall be located between a building and the front property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. ii. Parking shall be located off an alley if an alley is present. ed._ Guideline Applicable to All-Districts 'A', `B', `C',and `D': In areas of mixed use development, shared parking is recommended. De. Guidelines Applicable to District'C': i. If a limited number of parking spaces are made available in front of a building for passenger drop-off and pick-up,they shall be parallel to the building facade. ii. When fronting on streets not designated as pedestrian-oriented,parking lots should be located on the interior portions of blocks and screened from the surrounding roadways by buildings, landscaping and/or gateway features as dictated by location. 2. Design of Surface Parking: Intent: To ensure safety of users of parking areas, convenience to businesses, and reduce the impact of parking lots wherever possible. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A'-ai'C', and 'D': Page 22 of 58 Aar Neel i. Parking lot lighting shall not spill onto adjacent or abutting properties(see illustration, subsection F5b of this Section). ii. All surface parking lots shall be landscaped to reduce their visual impact(see RMC 4-4-080F7, Landscape Requirements). b. Guidelines Applicable to All-Districts 'A', 'C', and `D': i. Wherever possible,parking should be configured into small units, connected by landscaped areas to provide on-site buffering from visual impacts. ii. Access to parking modules should be provided by public or private local streets with sidewalks on both sides where possible,rather than internal drive aisles. iii. Where multiple driveways cannot be avoided,provide landscaping to separate and minimize their impact on the streetscape. 3. Structured Parking Garages: Intent: To more efficiently use land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of structured parking throughout the Urban Center and the Center Village;physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages when they are located in proximity to the designated pedestrian environment. a. Minimum Standards for District'C' and `D': i. Parking Structures Fronting Designated Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: (a)Parking structures shall provide space for ground-floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy-five percent(75%)of the frontage width(see illustration, subsection F5c of this Section). (b)The entire facade must feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. ii. Parking Structures Fronting Non-Pedestrian-Oriented Streets: (a)Parking structures fronting non-pedestrian-oriented streets and not featuring a pedestrian-oriented facade shall be set back at least six feet(6') from the sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping. This includes a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs,and ground cover. This setback shall be increased to ten feet(10') adjacent to high visibility streets. (b)The Director may allow a reduced setback where the applicant can successfully demonstrate that the landscaped area and/or other design treatment meets the intent of these standards and guidelines. Possible treatments to reduce the setback include landscaping components plus one or more of the following integrated with the architectural design of the building: (1) Ornamental grillwork(other than vertical bars); (2)Decorative artwork; Page 23 of 58 'two NNW (3)Display windows; (4)Brick,tile, or stone; (5)Pre-cast decorative panels; (6)Vine-covered trellis; (7)Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials; or (8) Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard. (c)Facades shall be articulated architecturally, so as to maintain a human scale and to avoid a solid wall. Vehicular entrances to nonresidential or mixed use parking structures shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials(see illustration, subsection F5d of this Section). b. Minimum Standards for District `D': i. Parking structures shall provide space for ground-floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy-five percent(75%) of the frontage width(see illustration, subsection F5c of this Section). ii. The entire facade must feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. Iii Facades shall be articulated architecturally, so as to maintain a human scale and to avoid a solid wall. Vehicular entrances to nonresidential or mixed use parking structures shall be articulated by arches, lintels.masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials(see illustration, subsection.F5d of this Section). , either the side „ „f'the building c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A' and-,C',and `D': i. ' Parking garage entries should be designed and sited to complement,not subordinate. the pedestrian entry. If possible, locate the parking entry away from the primary street, to either the side or rear of the building. ii. Parking garage entries should not dominate the streetscape. iii. The design of structured parking at finished grade under a building should minimize the apparent width of garage entries. Parking within the building should be enclosed or screened through any combination of walls, decorative grilles,or trellis work with landscaping. Page 24 of 58 ivy. Parking garages should be designed to be complementary with adjacent buildings. Use similar forms, materials, and/or details to enhance garages. v. Residential garage parking should be secured with electronic entries. vi. Parking service and storage functions should be located away from the street edge and generally not be visible from the street or sidewalks. d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and `E': i. Attached personal parking garages at-grade should be individualized and not enclose more than two (2) cars per enclosed space. Such garages should be architecturally integrated into the whole development. ii. Multiple-user parking garages at-grade should be enclosed or screened from view through any combination of walls, decorative grilles, or trellis work with landscaping. iii. All garage parking in this district should be secured with decorative doors. Personal parking garages should be individualized whenever possible with separate entries and architectural detailing in character with the lower density district. iv. Large multi-user parking garages are discouraged in this lower density district and, if provided, should be located below grade whenever possible. vi. Service and storage functions should-he-located away from the street edge and generally not be visible-froni-the-street-or-s-idekvalks, 4. Vehicular Access: Intent: To maintain a contiguous,uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating and/or eliminating vehicular access off streets within pedestrian environments and/or designated pedestrian-oriented streets. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'B' and `E': Parking lots and garages shall be accessed from alleys when available.- b. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. Parking garages shall be accessed at the rear of buildings or from non-pedestrian-oriented streets when available. ii. Surface parking driveways are prohibited on pedestrian-oriented streets. iii. Parking lot entrances,driveways, and other vehicular access points on high visibility streets shall be restricted to one entrance and exit lane per five hundred(500)linear feet as measured horizontally along the street. c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A' and `D': i. Parking lots and garages should be accessed from alleys or side streets. Page 25 of 58 ii. Driveways should be located to be visible from the right-of-way,but not impede pedestrian circulation on-site or to adjoining properties. Where possible,minimize the number of driveways and curb cuts. d. Guidelines Applicable to Area'B' and `E': i. Garage entryways and/or driveways accessible only from a street should not impede pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk. ii. Curb cuts should be minimized whenever possible through the use of shared driveways. 5. Illustrations. a. Parking and vehicular access in District'C' (see subsection F1b(iii) of this Section). Page 26 of 58 Parking lots are accessed by �; �a `��y a system of local access"streets" '- �. teeti , „c, _ "� '{ Parallel parking ''..J 1,(� W� on local access .., -• "streets" 0. 45/ Parking lots are sited ;; Minimize access towards the interior of the block points from P to the extent possible ,, } tit` High Visibility kL "` " a r r,`• Streets t •1„ t-N • S i .,,P , Parking lots are tee y . h / configured to allow } � i / ' s future infill / r c� er fur development a M - i Pb * ' 141 I • i ,,,','4. ' + Vt F t 1 ' ' Street 41' r �°sf ar,sS' �. r t :r r • �� ��� �1 i `a�"� eti � Mid-block connections enhance t>, . n $+ -' y�� access and provide a good °'s,�' '`p� -'‘,,,I. framework for future infill development No parking lots or driveways adjacent to a k '-- F ` pedestrian-oriented street Parking garage entrance designed to minimize impact on pedestrian environment b. Parking lot lighting(see subsection F2a(i)of this Section). Page 27 of 58 Niie vm 4-1_ eo¢�ss t I L44010 DO THIS e InnEO+I - kaij •--,..-_-_-_44„;...kv9A ,,,,-------1:s- DON'T DO THIS c. Parking structure fronting on pedestrian-oriented street with pedestrian-oriented uses and facades along the ground floor(see subsection F3a(i)(a) of this Section). ---,,,,,:----------,,.„.._, ------ji-- ; _ \ ., -`IN, Parking garage on second floor . 7 '••r .1, _ , ° 17 ,,�\;°*0ini., lo i , ,N, 4,.,,,:,_4_",_JN71 ._,_,,,,,,,,,,A;_i,_. .,,,,,,,, ;\(,'/,:- .L-:-,!1,11 ,,,,, 1- ' 1 isiikAii*,469:. t '- Y-- - 1-_____Nil,.., ,; ; titi.-.1140,..,....._...._:„.„.„...,_-- '- %r7/,° Ground floor commercial space with pedestrian oriented facade d. Parking structure designed to enhance streetscape(see subsection F3a(ii)(c)of this Section). Page 28 of 58 Articulation of facade components - ,1 I 1 1 Ir / ifZ' to reduce scale4. ' ; ' �, `�' ►� �, N.... and add visual l I �`' ' Ili interest 'ti I: ��I !! I I- i� i. ! . /, .k 1 .� Decorative trellis �. - , - i If l t ; 1 R.Al, �� i i / .�• , structure for vines ? I ��dlt � �'1 '� ' ' "'Or •' vile: ' z:774-75Titd7,.;;;*--1 re .:: Ailx.i., V ,t if _ . e.?„..,1 / ,,, 0,_ , . . 7 di ►.,� 7 as 1r�'\� �'61"ip at , rir ' Raised lantin +� �•,. ` -' r.;p 9 1 y I �z il � bed adjacent to ____ � ag •,�'�." _ sidewalk ��'."" ► .'`'4+ (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124, 2-7-2005) G PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT: Intent: To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village-by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable,and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks,to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi- modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. 1. Pathways through Parking Lots: Intent: To provide safe and attractive pedestrian connections to buildings,parking garages, and parking lots. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'C' and `D': i. Clearly delineated pedestrian pathways and/or private streets shall be provided throughout parking areas. ii. Within parking areas,pedestrian pathways shall be provided perpendicular to the applicable building facade, at a maximum distance of one hundred and fifty feet(150') apart(see illustration, subsection G4a of this Section). 2. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent: To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A' wndl'C' and `D': Page 29 of 58 i. Developments shall include an integrated pedestrian circulation system that connects buildings,open space, and parking areas with the adjacent street sidewalk system and adjacent properties(see illustration, subsection G4b of this Section). ii. Sidewalks located between buildings and streets shall be raised above the level of vehicular travel. iii. Pedestrian pathways within parking lots or parking modules shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent paving materials(see illustration, subsection G4c of this Section). iv. Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: (a) Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings one hundred(100) or more feet in width(measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least twelve feet(12') in width. The walkway shall include an eight foot(8')minimum unobstructed walking surface and street trees(see illustration, subsection G4d of this Section). (b)To increase business visibility and accessibility,breaks in the tree coverage adjacent to major building entries shall be allowed. (c)For all other interior pathways, the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users. A ten to twelve foot(10'— 12')pathway, for example, can accommodate groups of persons walking four(4)abreast, or two(2) couples passing one another.An eight foot(8')pathway will accommodate three (3)individuals walking abreast, whereas a smaller five to six foot(5'—6')pathway will accommodate two(2) individuals. v. Locate pathways with clear sight lines to increase safety.Landscaping shall not obstruct visibility of walkway or sight lines to building entries. vi. All pedestrian walkways shall provide an all-weather walking surface unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. b. Guidelines Applicable to All Districts: i. Delineation of pathways may be through the use of architectural features, such as trellises,railings, low seat walls, or similar treatment. ii. Mid-block connections are desirable where a strong linkage between uses can be established. iii. Decorative ttences, with the exception of chain link fences,may be allowed when appropriate to the situation. c. Guidelines Applicable to District'C' Only: i. Through-block connections should be made between buildings,between streets, and to connect sidewalks with public spaces. Preferred location for through-block connections is mid-block(see illustration, subsection G4e of this Section). Page 30 of 58 ii. Between buildings of up to and including two (2)stories in height,through-block connections should be at least six feet(6')in width. iii. Between buildings three(3) stories in height or greater,through-block connections should be at least twelve feet(12') in width. iv. Transit stops should be located along designated transit routes a maximum of one-quarter(0.25)mile apart. v. As an alternative to some of the required street trees, developments may provide pedestrian-scaled light fixtures at appropriate spacing and no taller than fourteen feet(14')in height.No less than one tree or light fixture per sixty(60)thirty(30)lineal feet of the required walkway should be provided. 3. Pedestrian Amenities: Intent: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are inviting and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of activities,at all times of the year, and under typical seasonal weather conditions. a. Minimum Standards for District-'C': i. On designated pedestrian-oriented streets,provide pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings,marquees,canopies, or building overhangs. These elements shall be a minimum of four and one-half feet(4-1/2')wide along at least seventy five percent(75%)of the length of the building facade facing the designated pedestrian-oriented street, a maximum height of fifteen feet(15')above the ground elevation, and no lower than eight feet(8') above ground level. ii. Site furniture provided in public spaces shall be made of durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. iii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. b. Minimum Standards for District `D': i. Provide pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings,marquees,canopies, or building overhangs. These elements shall be a minimum of four and one-half feet(4 '/2')wide along at least seventy five percent(75%)of the length of the building façade, a maximum height of fifteen feet(15')above the ground elevation, and no lower than eight feet(8')above ground level. ii. Site furniture provided in public spaces shall he made of durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. iii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. c. Minimum Standards for District `F,' only: Page 31 of 58 Nor *NO i. Site furnitureprovided in public spaces shall be made of durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can he reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. ii. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'C', `D'and `E': i. Transit shelters,bicycle racks,benches,trash receptacles,and other street furniture should be provided. ii. Street amenities such as outdoor group seating,kiosks, fountains, and public art should be provided. iii. Architectural elements that incorporate plants, such as facade-mounted planting boxes or trellises or ground-related or hanging containers are encouraged,particularly at building entrances, in publicly accessible spaces,and at facades along pedestrian-oriented streets(see illustration, subsection G4f of this Section). 4. Illustrations. a. Pedestrian walkways within parking lots(see subsection Gla(ii)of this Section). Page 32 of 58 w V V V w 150' MAX 11,44 41,4 Pedestrian '� . tf walkways el it b. Integrated pedestrian access system(pathways are shown in solid black lines) (see subsection G2a(i)of this Section). Page 33 of 58 'tee • J. 4\• Sidewalk along Pathways along building eft rr > high visibility street facades are at least 12'wide ` .r' and indudes street trees Parking lot pathway • a h ' tea1E x Mid-block pathway ° - t � connects uses and w �y 'r activity centers ' % .' ,, ` 1 , Sy ; . �: ;. te • VV _e t • 'S ti •A 't ; `P 4} rr s t`?' a `" ' : .,: '' i' t o '' ' :iGr t. Y q1Ykg 1 t" Major local access �o '.. �` t "streets"are designed ~w. " with sidewalks Pedestrian-oriented ,ti,= on at least one side street with wide �, t sidewalks,and street trees e� ` ' le ce , Interior pathways that link ' storefronts,parking areas, and residential uses c. Parking lot pedestrian interior walkway(see subsection G2a(iii) of this Section). Page 34 of 58 G k 1 1- 4 ( A T--t-1=1.4 + -OUS µ '=_ A¶... ' . ►� ill,\, : '� .► .--- :/ti. �il'' _- - 9,...AVI:ii/P/' liS-= \ 7k t \ ibmitirr d. Sidewalks along retail building facade(see subsection G2a(iv)(a) of this Section). Street trees and/or pedestrian street lamps every 30' Weather protection ,t; ",t r 4' • . y�A 'tev a 1 .;; oi Y J r.yh ,. a • / 8' min unobstructed width 12'min Total sidewalk width e. Through-block pedestrian connections(see subsection G2c of this Section). Page 35 of 58 o � 1� (tPeiaiomdor oP NedestrianCorridor ..... . . .. . . . . ..I,. Y 40isso immune.. ► r i f. Pedestrian amenities incorporated into development(see subsection G3b(iii)of this Section). Recessed entry Seasonal landscaping Transparent windows Weather protection _ r I IIIIt/ r� . k l I Pedestrian `�. 0 ■P`7 ��; 0-' 44.1..._*ftlj,.. ..... l§ • , space ‘k =_�+�`J�►������y�i ' Seating areas otireitilial '- Vfi '� 1- I -1 II�I,�4 il, :ry Trees and I Ji +mi l �Iot -`j;j� lie street ��N : I Fi ,,�} i (t.i, y, _ features �I � I___` - s ■ lgol lif� I �� used to ((( � �,�I�, . IG r14.`� definei t I I _^ d,r' _ �3�I pedestrian ---�-� ! 'I '_. II j 7--4774, �• -� - area FUDGE /� al—.,_� wl/I/Ii':..U✓ tt \\,\' .. - / It { � Varied �"' - _ - 2 pavement . ,�`� - _ Pedestrian - ice— `z oriented i" --` signage (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) H LANDSCAPING/RECREATION AREAS/COMMON OPEN SPACE: Intent:To provide visual relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community.To have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents,workers,and visitors;provide these areas in Page 36 of 58 sufficient amounts and in safe and convenient locations; and provide the opportunity for community gathering in places centrally located and designed to encourage such activity. 1. Landscaping: Intent: Landscaping is intended to reinforce the architecture or concept of the area; provide visual and climatic relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; channelize and define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. All pervious areas shall be landscaped(see RMC 4-4-070, Landscaping). ii. Street trees are required and shall be located between the curb edge and building, as determined by the City of Renton. iii. On designated pedestrian-oriented streets, street trees shall be installed with tree grates. For all other streets, street tree treatment shall be as determined by the City of Renton(see illustration, subsection H3a of this Section). iv. The proposed landscaping shall be consistent with the design intent and program of the building, the site, and use. v. The landscape plan shall demonstrate how the proposed landscaping,through the use of plant material and non-vegetative elements,reinforces the architecture or concept of the development. vi. Surface parking areas shall be screened by landscaping in order to reduce views of parked cars from streets(see RMC 4-4-080F7,Landscaping Requirements). Such landscaping shall be at least ten feet(10')in width as measured from the sidewalk(see illustration, subsection H3b of this Section). Standards for planting shall be as follows: (a)Trees at an average minimum rate of one tree per thirty(30)lineal feet of street frontage. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least thirty five feet(35'). Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet(8')or two inch(2") caliper(as measured four feet(4') from the top of the root ball)respectively. (b) Shrubs at the minimum rate of one per twenty(20)square feet of landscaped area. Shrubs shall be at least twelve inches (12")tall at planting and have a mature height between three feet(3') and four feet(4'). (c)Groundcover shall be planted in sufficient quantities to provide at least ninety percent(90%)coverage of the landscaped area within three(3)years of installation. (d)The applicant shall provide a maintenance assurance device,prior to occupancy, for a period of not less than three (3)years and in sufficient amount to ensure required landscape standards have been met by the third year following installation. (e) Surface parking with more than fourteen(14)stalls shall be landscaped as follows: (1)Required Amount: Page 37 of 58 Total Number of SpacesMinimum Required Landscape Area* 15 to 50 15 square feet/parking space 51 to 99 25 square feet/parking space 100 or more 35 square feet/parking space * Landscape area calculations above and planting requirements below exclude perimeter parking lot landscaping areas. (2)Provide trees, shrubs,and groundcover in the required interior parking lot landscape areas. (3)Plant at least one tree for every six(6)parking spaces. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least thirty five feet(35').Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet(8')or two inch(2")caliper(as measured four feet(4') from the top of the root ball)respectively. (4)Plant shrubs at a rate of five(5)per one hundred(100) square feet of landscape area. Shrubs shall be at least sixteen inches(16")tall at planting and have a mature height between three feet(3') and four feet(4'). (5)Up to fifty percent(50%) of shrubs may be deciduous. (6) Select and plant groundcover so as to provide ninety percent(90%)coverage within three (3)years of planting; provided,that mulch is applied until plant coverage is complete. (7)Do not locate a parking stall more than fifty feet(50') from a landscape area. vii. Regular maintenance shall be provided to ensure that plant materials are kept healthy and that dead or dying plant materials are replaced. viii. Underground, automatic irrigation systems are required in all landscape areas. b. Guidelines Applicable to all Districts: i. Landscaping should be used to soften and integrate the bulk of buildings. ii. Landscaping should be provided that appropriately provides either screening of unwanted views or focuses attention to preferred views. iii. Use of low maintenance, drought-resistant landscape material is encouraged. iv. Choice of materials should reflect the level of maintenance that will be available. v. Seasonal landscaping and container plantings are encouraged,particularly at building entries and in publicly accessible spaces. Page 38 of 58 vi. Window boxes, containers for plantings,hanging baskets,or other planting feature elements should be made of weather-resistant materials that can be reasonably maintained. vii. Landscaping should be used to screen parking lots from adjacent or neighboring properties. c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and `E': i. Front yards should be visible from the street and visually contribute to the streetscape. ii. Decorative walls and fencing are encouraged when architecturally integrated into the project. 2. Recreation Areas and Common Open Space: Intent: To ensure that districts have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers, and visitors and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in convenient locations; create usable, accessible, and inviting open space that is accessible to the public; and promote pedestrian activity on pedestrian-oriented streets particularly at street corners. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A's a-nd-'C' and and `D': i. Mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten(10)or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to fifty(50) square feet per unit.The common space area shall be aggregated to provide usable area(s) for residents. The location, layout,and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Director.The required common open space shall be satisfied with one or more of the elements listed below. The Director may require more than one of the following elements for developments having more than one hundred(100)units. (a)Courtyards,plazas, or multipurpose open spaces; (b)Upper level common decks,patios,terraces, or roof gardens. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to the site and are provided as an asset to the development; (c)Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system; (d)Recreation facilities including,but not limited to, tennis/sports courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities; or (e)Children's play spaces. iii. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects,required landscaping, driveways,parking, or other vehicular use areas shall not be counted toward the common space requirement or be located in dedicated outdoor recreation or common use areas. iv. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects required yard setback areas shall not count toward outdoor recreation and common space unless such areas are developed as private or semi-private (from abutting or adjacent properties)courtyards,plazas or passive use areas containing landscaping and fencing sufficient to create a fully usable area accessible to all residents of the development(see illustration, subsection H3c of this Section). Page 39 of 58 v. Private decks,balconies, and private ground floor open space shall not count toward the common space/recreation area requirement. vi. In mixed use residential and attached residential projects, other required landscaping and sensitive area buffers without common access links, such as pedestrian trails, shall not be included toward the required recreation and common space requirement. vii. All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand(30,000)square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas)shall provide pedestrian-oriented space(see illustration, subsection H3d of this Section)according to the following formula: 1%of the lot area+ 1% of the building area=Minimum amount of pedestrian-oriented space viii. To qualify as pedestrian-oriented space,the following must be included: (a)Visual and pedestrian access(including barrier-free access)to the abutting structures from the public right-of-way or a nonvehicular courtyard; (b)Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; (c)On-site or building-mounted lighting providing at least four(4)foot-candles(average) on the ground; and (d)At least three feet(3')of seating area(bench, ledge, etc.)or one individual seat per sixty(60)square feet of plaza area or open space. ix. The following features are encouraged in pedestrian-oriented space(see illustration,subsection H3e of this Section)and may be required by the Director: (a)Provide pedestrian-oriented uses on the building facade facing the pedestrian-oriented space. (b) Spaces should be positioned in areas with significant pedestrian traffic to provide interest and security— such as adjacent to a building entry. (c)Provide pedestrian-oriented facades on some or all buildings facing the space. (d)Provide movable public seating. x. The following are prohibited within pedestrian-oriented space: (a)Adjacent unscreened parking lots; (b)Adjacent chain link fences; (c)Adjacent blank walls; (d)Adjacent dumpsters or service areas; and (e)Outdoor storage(shopping carts,potting soil bags, firewood,etc.)that do not contribute to the pedestrian environment. Page 40 of 58 xi. The minimum required walkway areas shall not count as pedestrian-oriented space. However,where walkways are widened or enhanced beyond minimum requirements,the area may count as pedestrian- oriented space if the Director determines such space meets the definition of pedestrian-oriented space. I b. Minimum Standards for Districts'B' and 'F.': Attached housing developments shall provide a minimum area of private usable open space equal to one hundred fifty(150) square feet per unit of which one hundred(100)square feet are contiguous. Such space may include porches,balconies,yards,and decks. c. Minimum Standards for District'C': The location of public open space shall be considered in relation to building orientation, sun and light exposure, and local micro-climatic conditions. d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A'sand-'C' and 'D': i. Common space areas in mixed-use residential and attached residential projects should be centrally located so they are near a majority of dwelling units, accessible and usable to residents, and visible from surrounding units. ii. Common space areas should be located to take advantage of surrounding features such as building entrances, significant landscaping,unique topography or architecture, and solar exposure. iii. In mixed-use residential and attached residential projects children's play space should be centrally located, visible from the dwellings, and away from hazardous areas like garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, streets, and parking areas. e. Guidelines Applicable to District'C': Developments located at street intersection corners on designated pedestrian-oriented streets are encouraged to provide pedestrian-oriented space adjacent to the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity(see illustration, subsection H3f of this Section). 3. Illustrations. a. Street tree installed with tree grate(see subsection Hla(lii) of this Section). NIJ. '^Y' '-: a ,5.'i. • mil!•: • 1 ..::. tag %- _.; 14.4;E7 ri.i.,S .r�i,4 +- t,1 y?.• °L^v1' +l~ Gt r• F.0. }' d! S yy� 1i1 L` 1. A « r }ti Wirg �t�"I SI Page 41 of 58 b. Parking lot landscaped buffer(see subsection H1a(vi)of this Section). One tree per 30 lineal feet Parking, service, or storage areas 1U' t Landscaping � Buffer c. Visible and accessible common area featuring landscaping and other amenities (see subsection H2a(iv) of this Section). i r k. i„...,AL-1- � ,, -; ,-____,a...1 --J -i)f \ .L._- "iu f (. 4, ,„,,,, „44, iif's-k ( , ,,,... _ ,. 4,, _ r, — ---- d. Pedestrian-oriented space associated with a large-scale retail building(see subsection H2a(vii) of this Section). Page 42 of 58 . / ,..„ .7 \,,,...., , ., .,.,,, ✓ „....... .... Recessed entry areas /.�y i'` ;'z can qualify as pedestrian- •'' i ,.t..'p 'y.\ 't `l j oriented space if they % \\ V 01 f �� meet requirements 4 \. Centralized and visible ` ''' pedestrian-oriented space '4 located at major building r� ai-. � " h _ entry and crossroads f Q % ' 774- , 4,).._ 7 -'''ks 1„..!---"fN jirligili''''''",,';':,,,;4' %."1 --'—', 641 ' \"/:k:,,,,,,-: (. `' ' JL ifs l 1 , I Ai ,,, / ,, C. ft, ,,,,-,-...fcr,-,1-', rt,j, 41 + ' - ' 'ram (. -:ti � e. Pedestrian-oriented spaces,visible from the street,including ample seating areas,movable furniture,special paving,landscaping components and pedestrian-oriented uses(see subsection H2a(ix)of this Section). 411_111111 1 ,_ 74' t i7.:„ II ir- lIi, J it. ;' ` ► � i Olk,t7P I II I\ _ fv; ; ,b q , LYE.• •----•• - R�..i ea)1111 01 1 - qr.�- ' te r----,`� istiwAlirailift;, Milft ►;, .- f. Building setbacks increased at street corners along pedestrian-oriented streets to encourage provisions for pedestrian-oriented spaces(see subsection H2e of this Section).(Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7-2005) Page 43 of 58 . ...., S11 Corner building 41 a0000: . 1.' sil .„..., �s , , : ' Co rner entry I,. . . , : . : _; with increased �� setback Pedestrian-oriented space I BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Intent: To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate.To discourage franchise retail architecture. 1. Building Character and Massing: Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale; and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public,are visually interesting. a. Minimum Standard for Districts'A' and `D': All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet(40'). b. Minimum Standard for Districts'B' and `E': All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than twenty feet(20'). c. Minimum Standards for District'C': i. All building facades shall include measures to reduce the apparent scale of the building and add visual interest. Examples include modulation, articulation, defined entrances, and display windows(see illustration,subsection I5a of this Section). ii. All buildings shall be articulated with one or more of the following: (a)Defined entry features; (b)Window treatment; (c)Bay windows and/or balconies; Page 44 of 58 (d)Roofline features; or (e)Other features as approved by the Director. iii. Single purpose residential buildings shall feature building modulation as follows(see illustration, subsection I5b of this Section): (a)The maximum width(as measured horizontally along the building's exterior)without building modulation shall be forty feet(40'). (b)The minimum width of modulation shall be fifteen feet(15'). (c)The minimum depth of modulation shall be the greater of six feet(6') or not less than two tenths(0.2) multiplied by the height of the structure(finished grade to the top of the wall). d. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A'aud-,.B', `D', and `E': i. Building facades should be modulated and/or articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings,break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. ii. Articulation, modulation,and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. iii. A variety of modulations and articulations should be employed to add visual interest and to reduce the bulk and scale of large projects. e. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A B' and `F.' : Building modulations should be a minimum of two feet(2')in depth and four feet(4') in width. f. Guidelines Applicable to Districts A' and `D''W: i. Building modulations should be a minimum of two feet(2')deep, sixteen feet(16')in height, and eight feet(8') in width. ii. Alternative methods to shape a building such as angled or curved facade elements, off-set planes, wing walls, and terracing will be considered; provided,that the intent of this Section is met. g. Guidelines Applicable to District'C': i. Although streetfront buildings along designated pedestrian streets should strive to create a uniform street edge,building facades should generally be modulated and/or articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings,break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. ii. Style: Buildings should be urban in character. iii. Buildings greater than one hundred and sixty feet(160') in length should provide a variety of techniques to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade or provide an additional special design feature Page 45 of 58 such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering place to add visual interest(see illustration, subsection I5c of this Section). 2. Ground-Level Details: Intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human-scale character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. a. Minimum Standards for All Districts: i. Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited.A wall(including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: (a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over six feet(6')in height,has a horizontal length greater than fifteen feet(15'), and does not include a window,door,building modulation or other architectural detailing; or (b)Any portion of a ground floor wall having a surface area of four hundred(400)square feet or greater and does not include a window, door,building modulation or other architectural detailing. ii. Where blank walls are required or unavoidable,blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following(see illustration, subsection I5d of this Section): (a)A planting bed at least five feet(5')in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b)Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c)Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d)Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture,mural,or similar; or (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. iii. Treatment of blank walls shall be proportional to the wall. iv. Provide human-scaled elements such as a lighting fixture,trellis, or other landscape feature along the facade's ground floor. v. Facades on designated pedestrian-oriented streets shall have at least seventy-five percent(75%)of the linear frontage of the ground floor facade(as measured on a true elevation facing the designated pedestrian-oriented street)comprised of transparent windows and/or doors. vi. Other facade window requirements include the following: Page 46 of 58 VOW (a) Building facades must have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building.However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be fifty percent(50%). (b)Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise,rather than permanent displays. (c)Where windows or storefronts occur,they must principally contain clear glazing. (d)Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective(mirror-type)glass and film are prohibited. b. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'A'a-nd-i C' and ID': i. The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by incorporating a minimum of one of the following architectural features from each category listed(see illustration, subsection I5e of this Section): (a)Facade Features: (1)Recess; (2) Overhang; (3)Canopy; (4)Trellis; (5)Portico; (6)Porch; (7)Clerestory. (b)Doorway Features: (1)Transom windows; (2) Glass windows flanking door; (3) Large entry doors; (4)Ornamental lighting; (5)Lighted displays. (c)Detail Features: (1)Decorative entry paving; Page 47 of 58 vose (2) Ornamental building name and address; (3)Planted containers; (4) Street furniture (benches, etc.). ii. Artwork or building ornamentation(such as mosaics,murals, grillwork, sculptures,relief,etc.) should be used to provide ground-level detail. iii. Elevated or terraced planting beds between the walkway and long building walls are encouraged. c. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and `E': Use of material variations such as colors,brick, shingles, stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. 3. Building Roof Lines: Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. a. Minimum Standards for Districts'A' and-i C',and `D': Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles(see illustration, subsection I5f of this Section): i. Extended parapets; ii. Feature elements projecting above parapets; iii. Projected cornices; iv. Pitched or sloped roofs. (a) Locate and screen roof-mounted mechanical equipment so that the equipment is not visible within one hundred fifty feet(150')of the structure when viewed from ground level. (b) Screening features shall blend with the architectural character of the building, consistent with RMC 4-4- 095E,Roof-Top Equipment. (c)Match color of roof-mounted mechanical equipment to color of exposed portions of the roof to minimize visual impacts when equipment is visible from higher elevations. b. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'B' and `E': i. Buildings containing predominantly residential uses should have pitched roofs with a minimum slope of one to four(1:4). Such roofs should have dormers or intersecting roof forms that break up the massiveness of a continuous,uninterrupted sloping roof. ii. Roof colors should be dark. Page 48 of 58 c. Guidelines Applicable to District'C': Building roof lines should be varied to add visual interest to the building. 4. Building Materials: Intent:To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings; and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. a. Minimum Standards for all Districts: i. All sides of buildings visible from a street,pathway,parking area, or open space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials,detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. ii. Materials, individually or in combination, shall have an attractive texture, pattern, and quality of detailing for all visible facades. iii. Materials shall be durable,high quality, and reasonably maintained. I b. Minimum Standards for Districts'A' and-i C',and `D': Buildings shall employ material variations such as colors,brick or metal banding,patterns, or textural changes. c. Guidelines Applicable to all Districts: i. Building materials should be attractive, durable, and consistent with more traditional urban development. Appropriate examples would include brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass, and cast-in-place concrete. ii. Concrete walls should be enhanced by texturing,reveals, snap-tie patterns, coloring with a concrete coating or admixture,or by incorporating embossed or sculpted surfaces,mosaics,or artwork. iii. Concrete block walls should be enhanced with integral color,textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or incorporate other masonry materials. iv. Stucco and similar troweled finishes should be used in combination with other more highly textured finishes or accents. They should not be used at the base of buildings between the finished floor elevation and four feet(4')above. d. Guideline Applicable to Districts'B' and 'E': Use of material variations such as colors,brick or metal banding or patterns,or textural changes is encouraged. 5. Illustrations. a. Building modulation and articulation (see subsection Ilc(i)of this Section). Page 49 of 58 lire km. I I I I I Q I l► r • 1 1 1 ❑ ; E c11 _ I [71-1 j 1 N CID 1 tI1FuI 1 1 1 Ii< INTERVAL i INTERVAL)1. b. Single purpose residential building featuring building modulation to reduce the scale of the building and add visual interest(see subsection I1c(iii)of this Section). Articulated roofline-in this case a , traditional cornice .„,„ 0 Windows / , add visual interestand andbuilding givesurfaces the building a human scale Building is'modulated" ....;.:i ifi i *g ' a,� (goes in and out to relieve the monotony of the wide wall 4 11„14 0 0,.. ,;.,..., ., ill ...,,,,,,„„r<, -,- - 3. ,,,-, 11 ►1 , ® It III p tit f o 0 it _,ii-- 0 II If ,I 0 [I] ,an. p *A' -1:1 ' :gi ° :: 51 likli ' I . -4 .11iti • ,11,„,, rmii , ,,, . :k lArTi � sue"` c. Reducing scale of long buildings(see subsection I1g(iii) of this Section). Page 50 of 58 W n 1IIIIIIIIllhIIIIuIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIII,,lpr 160' Maximum facade length allowed I-- Wm Lu M W all lir OZ ii Z 00 13 La . ...L A ...-k .I, .7,6 A & „I 0 More than 160' Facade is too long 1 p"IIIIIIIIIIlIIIIIlP"' IIIIIIIIIIIII '''�"UIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII" ' W11.1 Ill 2 fil _ . . . nrirlIN onnex m 160'or less 160'or less Meets guideline Meets guideline d. Acceptable blank wall treatments(see subsection I2a(ii)of this Section). iltph• ,, • Trellis with vines or other plants ' Artwork., ,-X ito,_....., witiotort "onto , itivtgif otvot. at 40 t:.-r..*- N 11.q:-AVI it Al. ' ' po Min. 5'wide planting '441_,� bed and materials to cover 50%of wall within 3 years e. Building facade features (see subsection I2b(i)of this Section). Page 51 of 58 IOW %NO 4'-6"min. s i i io RECESS OVERHANG CANOPY i EL i TRELLIS PORTICO PORCH f. Preferred roof forms (see subsection I3a of this Section).(Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord.5124,2-7- 2005) Feature elements projecting Extended parapets above •ara•ets i..4ti i .„, \ , r, "t*N- lif d h-• 1 41 I h. ' 1 , \\.,' Projected cornices Pitched or slo•ed roofs / / / — 1 / iiii .r.....s\ ,,,,, i "Ii;.,. 7-7/,y\\,\‘,\\\\ /',,,it \ t kill .1,,s,..., ,,,, ,,.... (// ///iN A Iiiik 7/\' /7 \s• ` Iv' ��,44 (dill \ Ilk r J SIGNAGE: Page 52 of 58 Intent: To provide a means of identifying and advertising businesses;provide directional assistance; encourage signs that are both clear and of appropriate scale for the project; encourage quality signage that contributes to the character of the Urban Center and the Center Village; and create color and interest. 1. Minimum Standards for Districts'C' and `D': a. Signage shall be an integral part of the design approach to the building. b. Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. c. Prohibited signs include(see illustration, subsection J3a of this Section): i. Pole signs. ii. Roof signs. iii. Back-lit signs with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet(can signs or illuminated cabinet signs). Exceptions: Back-lit logo signs less than ten(10) square feet are permitted as are signs with only the individual letters back-lit. d. In mixed use and multi-use buildings, signage shall be coordinated with the overall building design. e. Freestanding ground-related monument signs,with the exception of primary entry signs, shall be limited to five feet(5')above finished grade, including support structure. All such signs shall include decorative landscaping(groundcover and/or shrubs)to provide seasonal interest in the area surrounding the sign. Alternately, signage may incorporate stone,brick, or other decorative materials as approved by the Director. f. Entry signs shall be limited to the name of the larger development. 2. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'C' and `D': a. Alteration of trademarks notwithstanding,corporate signage should not be garish in color nor overly lit, although creative design, strong accent colors,and interesting surface materials and lighting techniques are encouraged. b. Front-lit, ground-mounted monument signs are the preferred type of freestanding sign. c. Blade type signs,proportional to the building facade on which they are mounted,are encouraged on pedestrian-oriented streets. 3. Illustrations. a. Acceptable and unacceptable signs(see subsection J1c of this Section). Page 53 of 58 itro *ay Typical "can signs" Internally lit letters are not acceptable or graphics are acceptable it BANK ',..:.; k , ., . , Plastic or Sheet — Only the individual translucent metal letters are lit sheet box (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124,2-7-2005) K LIGHTING: Intent: To ensure safety and security; provide adequate lighting levels in pedestrian areas such as plazas, pedestrian walkways,parking areas,building entries, and other public places; and increase the visual attractiveness of the area at all times of the day and night. 1. Minimum Standards for Districts'A' and-,'C',and `D': a. Lighting shall conform to on-site exterior lighting regulations located in RMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior On-Site. b. Lighting shall be provided on-site to increase security,but shall not be allowed to directly project off-site. c. Pedestrian-scale lighting shall be provided, for both safety and aesthetics, along all streets, at primary and secondary building entrances, at building facades,and at pedestrian-oriented spaces. 2. Guidelines Applicable to Districts'C' and `D': a. Accent lighting should be provided at focal points such as gateways,public art, and significant landscape features such as specimen trees. b. Additional lighting to provide interest in the pedestrian environment may include sconces on building facades, awnings with down-lighting,decorative street lighting, etc. (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) L. MODIFICATION OF MINIMUM STANDARDS: Page 54 of 58 'vary' Now 1. The Director of the Development ServicesReviewing Official ion shall have the authority to modify the minimum standards of the design regulations, subject to the provisions of RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures,and the following requirements: a. The project as a whole meets the intent of the minimum standards and guidelines in subsections E, F, G, H, I,J, and K of the design regulations; b. The requested modification meets the intent of the applicable design standard; c. The modification will not have a detrimental effect on nearby properties and the City as a whole; d. The deviation manifests high quality design; and e. The modification will enhance the pedestrian environment on the abutting and/or adjacent streets and/or pathways. 2. Exceptions for Districts A and B: Modifications to the requirements in subsections E2a and E3a of this Section are limited to the following circumstances: a. When the building is oriented to an interior courtyard,and the courtyard has a prominent entry and walkway connecting directly to the public sidewalk; or b. When a building includes an architectural feature that connects the building entry to the public sidewalk; or c. In complexes with several buildings, when the building is oriented to an internal integrated walkway system with prominent connections to the public sidewalk(s). (Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) M VARIANCE: (Reserved). (Ord.5124,2-7-2005) N APPEALS: For appeals of administrative decisions made pursuant to the design regulations, see RMC 4-8-110,Appeals. (Ord. 4821, 12-20-1999; Amd. Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 5029, 11-24-03; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005) SECTION XVI. Section 4-4-080F.10e of Chapter 4, City-wide Property Development Standards of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended as shown in Attachment `H'. Page 55 of 58 low to. SECTION XVII. Section 4-7-170F of Chapter R, City-wide Property Development Standards of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended as follows: F. PIPESTEM LOTS ALLOWED: Pipestem lots may be permitted for new plats to achieve the minimum density densities permitted-within the Zoning Code when there is no other feasible alternative to achieving the permitted-minimum 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) 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. Walkways shall be paved for their entire width and length with a permanent surface and shall be adequately lighted at the developer's cost. (Amd.Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) SECTION XVIII. Section 4-8-120D.21 of Chapter 8, Permits- General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to revise the following definition: Urban Center Design O -Dicer-ictRegulations Review Packet: A set of submission materials required for projects i„ the Urban Center Design Overlay Dis,-..; +subject to the Urban Design Regulations in R[VIC 4- 3-100: Page 56 of 58 a. Site plan, land use review; b. Elevations,architectural; c. Floor plans,general; d. Narrative outlining how the applicant's proposal addresses the City's Urban Center Design Overlay Regulations. SECTION XIX. Section 4-9-065D of Chapter 9, Permits- Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended as shown in Attachment `I'. SECTION XX. The definition of"AFFORDABLE HOUSING" in Section 4- 11-010 of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Housing used as a primary residence for any household whose income is less than eighty percent(80%)of the median annual income adjusted for household size,as determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) for the Seattle Metropolitan Statistical Area, and who pay no more than thirty percent(30%)of household income for housing expenses. Affordable housing used to satisfy zoning requirements,whether for inclusionary or bonus provisions,must be secured to remain affordable in perpetuity, as determined by the City attorney. SECTION XXI. The definition of "DWELLING, MULTI-FAMILY" in Section 4-11-040 of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: DWELLING,MULTI-FAMILY: Dwelling,Attached: A one-family dwelling attached to one or more one-family dwellings by common roofs, walls,or floors. This definition may also include a dwelling unit or units attached to garages or other nonresidential uses. This definition does not include retirement residences,boarding and lodging houses, accessory dwelling units, adult family homes, group home I or group home II as defined herein. A. Flat: A residential building containing two(2)or more dwelling units which are attached at one or more common roofs, walls, or floors. Typically, the unit's habitable area is provided on a single level. Unit entrances may or may not be provided from a common corridor. Page 57 of 58 4 B. Townhouse: A one-family, ground-related dwelling attached to one or more such units in which each unit has its own exterior,ground-level access to the outside,no unit is located over another unit, and each unit is separated from any other unit by one or more vertical common walls. Typically Townhouse the units are multi-story. C. Carriage House: One or more accessory dwelling units attached to a garage. The garage attached to the carriage house typically contains vehicle and/or storage for people living in another building as well as occupants of the carriage house. D. Penthouse: A single dwelling unit located at or near the top of a building containing other,non- residential uses. E. Garden Style Apartment: A dwelling unit that is one of several stacked vertically, frequently with exterior stairways and/or exterior corridors and surface parking. Parking is not structured erand may include-with detached carports or garages. Buildings and building entries are oriented toward internal drive aisles and/or parking lots and not street frontage. Buildings typically have access from internal drive aisles and/or parking lots. The building usually turns its back to the front yard. There is typically no formal building entry area connected to a public sidewalk and a public street. Site planning may incorporate structures developed at low landscaped setbacks. SECTION XXII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of ,2006. Bonnie Walton,City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2006. Kathy Keolker,Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J.Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. Page 58 of 58 ATTACHMENT A D ZONES IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Designations are implemented by certain zones: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTING ZONES DESIGNATION Residential Low Density(RLD) Resource Conservation (RC)Residential—1 DU/AC (R- 1)Residential—4 DU/AC (R-4) Residential Single Family(RS) Residential—8 DU/AC (R- 8)Residential Manufactured Home Park(RMH) Residential Medium Density Residential— 10 DU/AC (R- (RMD) 10)Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH)Residential— 14 DU/AC (R-14) Residential Multi-Family(RM) Residential Multi-Family(RM-V, RM-I, RM-F) Urban Center Downtown (UC- Center Downtown D) (CD)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) Commercial/Office/Residential Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) (COR) Center Village (CV) Residential 10 DU/AC (R 10)Residential Multi-Family Zones (RM-F, RM-T, RM-U)1 Center Village (CV) Residential- 14 DU/AC (R-14) Commercial Corridor(CC) Commercial Arterial (CA)Commercial Office (CO)Light Industrial (IL) Employment Area Industrial Light Industrial (IL)Medium (EAI) Industrial (IM)Heavy Industrial (IH) Employment Area Valley(EAV) Commercial Arterial (CA)Commercial Office (CO)Light Industrial (IL)Medium Industrial (IM)Heavy Industrial (IH)Resource Conservation (RC) Commercial Neighborhood (CN)Commercial Neighborhood (CN) . q 0 < Q 0• nZ < Cl, al 00IX I / < o < Z 0 I 0 ZQ < q 0 z < < a Q Z.5 I <~ < 2 ( I \ a 0 0 _ o < < et-1I a < a iE 2 6 co § 2 < < o 2 — 2 — — a < <cn c « < a k <~ < CO w E D « 2 § MT < < § z (7) o CO q o - a a a ) <~ a § w z w I co I 00 < a~ ao N 0 t a a a i s / -J - « / J a a a- CO CO < < / m 2 re ' , w "I a I m G G G CO m CO r 0 CO ° m _ _ _ I a < < a a el cn ' ILI o _ in in G R § 3 § G §w ° Ce ■ w p a_ I a I a < < < < a 2 Z I— - / Q « k a �' R 2 _J & = a) § o D k m - « / Ce C$ � f �� \ 2 % � 2 \ � � m a) kz �/ of •D, iii k $ < E co k z 2o « cw c = Eomb = >, _ £ ® @ - m - m £ @ £ c m a E \ To . 2 m o ± m @ . _ £ E a » -0 G Q, E E 2 R a ¢ o = @ � o � mE ° � 0ao. o7 / Eon = o w = _ N o 2 2 r ° 2 / _ 2 [ o 2 . Q ■ 6 o ,- G ° e c - n - - _ 130 _ • 2 2 - f k ° @ - © ® - § E k c ° 0 2 ' ® @ £ _ m o 2 a « ■ ■ ■ o w o o 9 z w « » 2 § « E6 % ° ° a ± ECa £ a) C C / b � 3 3 a • � 0 n < < co m < < < o CO f f a q 0 a) 0 'kw, New N Z F- CD 0 U Cl. ¢ < a = F- Z „ aIn co ■_ Q a a = LA Vce „ a ■- a a Q Q ° _ V III ¢ a = „U ■_ a v a iQ W 1 V IIa a a a a co a ¢ a = ZII2 ■ a 2 III ¢0 in g III 0 i 0 ? J ,,, . ¢ = cd 0 E IIa a- a y a a = Q a = Q -... O • a W & o , a a a- a V co a a I Q ¢ 2 G 0 (9 rn 0) rn 0 rn „■- a s a a Q a = Q = Z J a III a a 0 = a a = co 0 = a ci Q a a i co Q = CD o I-A- Ill a a) ,,,■_ a M O a a a a Q = f C O0 J C 7.C) 0 ° C inN Q �= �- 7 C4 W C C w C CO CO N Z N C) - Co 0 J N N ""' ° E o o U cot h U N CO N V) o N C N .� th W 0) C C 8 L C C Q 0, Co h ° 'x J o E E G c a) a) °� o o N F- 0 C p all p N Q) Q = 0 fA E _ w 0 v CO tWn 3 c a) C rn Z a�i a�i aNi L CI) m m a a.0i co o ,= D c) v 3 rn 3 } W m E 1n t' E E E 0 c 0 cc°) VQ (� :° -v g w ° a) = G u c vs cu c ° t " W o E m a) 0 0 0 0 a) O ° Z cn ° c° s ° 'X ° a0) c° W > > •,as � a) O v) '. COci, I C. n CO a a) a) 0E) ate) [• 4 O to °) °: CO m C1 RI CO° CO 0 O 0 v co 0 0 0 o f o CD 0 Q N D CO Q L E 6 2 2 2 2 . - O Q Q O O 0 C0 0 I ui ilie *Of 0 C) = a a a x 2 a 2 2 1- D Q = Z 0 ■ = a a a 2 =co a 2 2 (75 a re , a a ■■ a a a 2 2 x a 2 2 Z I a a a a a a 2 i = a i 2 a 0 _-J V , a a a ■ a a a 2 i i a 2 a 2 Q V , a a a 2 a a a 2 2 2 a 2 2 E I a ■ csi a ■ a a 0 7G 2 i a 2 2 0 V 0Z , a ■■■ a a a I I I a 2 2 tea/ _ , n-a) COa el a I a a a ICO 0 I I a 2 I 2 O a a- co a-CI n a a a I I I a I = I 0 ZJ , a a a a a a a 2 2 x a I 2 coctt 0-1 2 111 °' a a 0I I I 2 2 a --- a a a 2 2 2 a 2 2 ILI Q "(2 , a ■■■ a a a i i i a = 2 Z = a a a0 U) 2 2 2 0 2 2 Z F N , a ■■■ a a a V 2 x 2 a I 2 Z , a ■■■ a a a V i 2 2 a 2 2 CI , a ■■■ a a a m 2 I 2 a I 2 1Y Q! O. ,-■■■ 4 n a Z I I I 2 2 c C Q m m .= c w p '�. R 0 W .. H 1a w w a a u = o on 4- O G C .p O Em m a •ca In t c o = > > w L. Ti70 ow 'cZw c Z i1-- > m > o ° o E E '� u H w c c �' W W o .0 o o Otiin oihhi0) - R U VC C C WC Z = O w O O O pWYe . Y 'wd ~ EON RI L. a. RI W i C o • .p d p O 'R d * w R N n Y 5 co 1- U. a s a d v v w co a v v -) co 0 N ZZ N C7 co st (C) C) a) O U a a a Q a a a. Q Q Z V co a a a N U co ao I Co aCo a < a. a a Q V a Q = _p aasa a a I N0_ 0 Z U a a a CO aco co _ a a a a a J U a a a s a Qao a. I a Q co a Q I I Q _1 , U Q a a s v N v a I CO ") 0 v N a ill Q a a re U a a. s < a a. a a a a a ' U N CWa M °I N 0 =I a s Qa a I .- 0_ a < < a Q 0 U Z r` ~ C.) a a < a = a a a — co co co co a a. a a CO a Q a I 0-3 CO a s a a Q a a o 2 - Co Co co CO aa co a. 0 0 CO N O CO CO 4-4 a I a a 0_U co co a ¢ co a a < a a C) co Co (•) Co (l) sr O C) N W 2 0 Z J c) co co a U a. I ch o) a s sr U c) C) of) a. a. a s a Qa s a a < n. a ai PI-4 N N N N a Cl) Q a a a a Q 0 Q y k c = I O li � a Z ct = d I I z O es N ii a I I J Z et d I I _O I W I-- F- 0 Ei LT I W I in W et IX U Z a E I LU I M ce W 0 O W vi ui N Z LL C L a) a) L 0 Q J O 0 G> OO — N Z C Zir�r•' d v• d R a) w C d C 3 y R W Z - N C O 0Zr C N N ° C .76. :. Wn V O Q R 'O dC O R > i d ;it d C = N N YJ V Q N x W V O r+ , L a) O G (C 10 •O wN E coi OC R U) J .,., N 7 Co N Ce C dO „a vR C.) 9 — a) am coQ ID x C R = R R yNO C C .0 u' va) C L. O .. — _ V L • W • iZ I. V RCO R V NH t5T.') F" t 4_, 7) i Z W 0 It O d W O rdN cis- *0- r � a ts N O > d aa) c : > t t £ W 0 - c = W Q = O2 O > .aQ Ea W 2 i aaH > a -, Q oc ,00 N o Cl) ZI ct a)) a) o)00) 00)) 0) 00) 0) co = a I I I a a a Q Q z C) ,,,co a`ro CO N- a. co N- 0 co C9 nZ a I I a VCC <°p a 2a a a. (1 n Q O Z O M N au co v co O 0 2 a a 2 a a Q N V a. a a a a a a Qo J Q < O O O N O 0 0 Cu O) O it C) = a a ao ° = a a a a < a LU m• c) aL a a a a Q O o Z a0 a `CO 0 0 a < < —I xQ — I a a a co a a co co OD CO . 0..a a a OD 0 ° o < F. 0) ao a7 co 0o N Co Co Co Co (0 t. — I a a a a a a a. a s aN a. Z ' tn CI J i a a Cl_ cn a co co co co co c\I co M CC0 O N a.CO bi) a. a a a a < cd a ao a sZaC a O a a a a �Z ' ,* M M M 0 CJ V a I a Q co I MI MI & C 0 Q Z• rz = a 2 Z N ix a 2 op a J Z Q W e- ai a a a 0 a N W aC ce a 2 a < �. c c di 6 w 0 0 co H '0 O w+ .43 O O 7 CO W _75 � = d d a�i O O 0 cn — J L. L y t+ w+In C O 1 4 Q cw as O O d C •U c 'V 5WI a m 0 s E W�SS ~ .O 0 i f0 N O en N O W. t�A w 3 w G Y Y �0 _V V 4; (/? C r+ 0 3 C 3 +�-� d d to K R 0 a W m a t, a) C •� •� CO > w GI C (7 a. i • C : M W 0 0 gap_C I 'L 0 O i L. O a: O �: O O V L 0 L 'N O 0 t3 'p m 0 V 0 m w O 2 vj e0 w y a O O co '«. p :, p :r O > d 'O ea -am C C1 • Z _ •V r i0 I. 7 io 0 v v C i •ea 0:1 p 2 .0 ` W v N C� eo O W •� is E"t Z l21 w O o. O L O a. R L " 16-v — w L 0 C V = u 0 u) c -a V L d V! tR N L • N D C9 2 co N ( C9 C9 E aC CC aC O Y o m 03 = 2 O O Y 0 >, _ 2 / 0 0 0 o s- G 0 0 o ° E E E < ) = E a Q § § a co < 0© I a 0 o a m < E E q p aaa < < I I o o a m Z Co csi E < 2 J < 2 < I 0 N CI n n § 2 0= a a. q I 0- ...IQ < EE« ID « (X Q a § a < = _ i / < 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 C) [ § / < a ) / [ CD 00 ® E E Q & 0 E § a a < i o I g 2 17 0 cc) a c7, a. m G a a = m « — a. E < _ a. _ a E = 2 I- — § § < § < co i § i a a } I co CI } § < a < I a a a § } I / co < I cl <0 I = } O R < 2 < 00l- $ m iiiI $ < I I 0 p E 2 & _ $ / I E CI z - g N0 2 < = < } k a < co C k' < VJ . I < I I �CI ii < 2 la L L re ix < I $ < = I > > k DJ -0 k ° E , U w Q -45 � = k 6 / 11.1 — 0 2 49 o t 4) E 1 CD « — — co . o o o ■ C) 2 -J E ■ a % $ ° k0. & ° 6 a 2 0 ° [ 2 / c _� 2 0 2 u c wc _j -- § f # ta § $ 2 2 O \ � 2 ■ © c = w al ■ 2 ■ 2 ■ v \ � E � = � ® ° 2 o c U U U 2 e e © 2 ■ e e — ■ ' ■ mvc m E c c ■ ® o L —Z U U _ — V i © h' ■ t '0 in c § Z 0. c ■ ■ ■ o 0. 2 X E z ■ 3 5 >, E 2 > la > - - $ 3 CO 2 0 12 0 V) = ' » I § > O m ■ e e ■ ■ o ■ o x — e ■ e e ■ ■ o N D > O « « o u- I Qs J ■ Q w u £ a a. a s cG R R R 5 N O C.) 0_ Q = I d H m Z II liii. 03 O Z 0 I IL Ico co L III_ I ' ll_ Q r re V , a o_ 0_ a , I I _ „ Q� a i Qoo VNi 10. 0- � , ,■,■„ ¢ < 2 0 00IIacD ■ a11� a Q 2 a 0_ a a a © I a = uI Nr = a. a s o. IL o I o a a a _ < IaIto- cNi = a in in a a a a0 Z 2 II 11111 a a 0 thMN II I II CI Z „■■■lull. L1J CI N rk II I I_I_II CL x II I I I II CO Ui. ii � (I)C C o CD C C N .Q C 0 pa W 0 0 In 'i 'i C 0 To L ZJ :a :� C C 7 C '' ''' O o ` R) C ca Ts Q In y y R) R) R) O IOO Io0 C _ N /V 'y�.' d r-.' d L (� co V d V 'a ISO 7 3 ,� tl) V) d E o I�0 N C d c 2 ow J C .a Lull C C C o & . To L t c c : oci) N E W C 'a 0 L In R) cn a O) N d d ILO t E R o R) iv <O 0 o C 'a Vr C _3 .� ILO o o L c m C7 03 •E e) cm, N N 0 o) O.N E E y N Ri t, V < 3 d V y O a v r .N >a U C7 41 i C C d G) va G) vi R) N Q. o a) C E y L. E V) o Vn !O .0 -e4 z w 0 u 0 •0 0 0 03 0 03 0 E a u i_ o +°_�) m o 0 y v 0 H m E� O to L C) d df d L d L L _L a Q. R: 1. •D Q. •3 m N NIO U) N •+ -o 5 d d IO Z a NN Q' N n I- > > > > 4 Q Q Q I 12 2 2 S 0 t/> > Z = Q Oi Nr Z ' 0 0 O ? a a Q O ? Z a a a. U LLI CI V Ct I a a a I _ C7 Z C.) a`� Q a = i O J CO CO U a a o a I _ a rt U a a a".co a- I CO W gQI =' a- _ _ 0 - U z co U a _ _ J i a) a) co n F- co co c0 Q — co co a a ° co a CO CO a a ° a CL I ° I CO o 2 r. H coa CO CO CO ID ``"oU co = i I i = M _ 00 Z '"I co co to Co a a, M (co bU — a a a a a a I = at a zI _ 0 Q C9 CC I W & o— _ Z• rt _ I ZL L N ix I o0 a z I Ce W p & I Cl) 11 IX w I m N I Z v o c • W O d d v Z i 73 E C tO L 'C O E'4 CO y C C C V t H 10 C R C y.2 C s :'OC C r OC O +_N+ l0 _d " v Z Q > > V J m C d +' 10 d 10 RI m d v d ( — C 'C L 3 w o CA CC a •c c CA . CIE m— w — — oCI cZ3 ° R 3 d c m w fW CI lC _R o _d V d E •L o •6 0 •L o w V C o a c >,w W `° H °o,o = M •5) •V C •, v d F- L. .$ L C. p, a+ p, r z t . N m N CI =p d 0 V a w C i O �«- O O C� ea i0 la R N C C v N jp A U Y d w d L Q D C d w g w o ki w L C d c O d E L N J O 'C &- v Z o f 'x E ai .� zo `o ai _v >, 2 >,3 m °' E R d .` m E Z W N O �0 N C 7 3 O d N 4+ �_ 0 3 +. N � — 0 d 0 C 0 N — C E C 'Cw ( avd R � •O d a d N d +, cp +.44 1- O � d m 0 0 0 Z J J 2 2 2 w CL CC v) 3 O 0 W N Z ' a Q 2 i Q a a 0 a s - D Q ' 0 0 V Z a Q 2 2 Q a a Q a a % 0 p V � a 0 I 2 CL a a 0 = 0 co CO 0 a n a C7 Z 0 p v v rn v v 0 co 0 Z U a Q 2 Q� a a a a a Q� ¢ a a J C• am) a ¢ _ I a ° a a <cD I 0 a CL a g a o co co o Ce V a s (2, a a a a a a Q a a s w St as a a Q co cp a a a O Z o co v rn -t co 0 co co 0 (,) a ¢ I I a a s a Q I ¢ a_ a a Q 2 a Q 2 Qn a ° a a a < < el 0 a a a CD N a a w <2 < aa < a s a a a D O\ Ovvv 0 Z -I a Q2 N- a "Zr 0I U CI a a a a < < a a co 2 a a 2 a 4 ,t 0� a 0 co co 0 Z r Q 2 a a a < I ¢ a a a 0 Q Et � co d a 2 Qv a co co o a s a 2 0 CL d a w• � � a Q 2 0 ca a v v 0 LD n n 0 C Q a a I Q a a a • re a co = o a CL 0 in_ °- a 2 a ,- Z Z Q O o0 a I y 0� a v v in 0 co n o J aa a a 2 ¢ a a a Z cc a Q 2 J Q0 a s d = 0 d d a Q a & a 0 2 LL Qoca a s a = y Q d d a cn zO w re ce a Q 2 Qcn a s d 2 0 d a Q >- V Ce V .o m t R R N 0 co re C V H 0) 10 0 a1 C. c C C c N t w ` °' _ °' LLI :aN c °' R Q Gs p N C 0 V a�° C 'NO C Z Ia- c _ E 0 U N Ia. ca _ °�' m a0i ° a a, U N �I y H �- COaw as [_] O y N �i C v L N p 7 Q d !F O 0 G1 C 0 C L cu i�Cij £ 0 W 3 r 'C 3 p N y in 0 N in d J p O : O = O 'C E O N O C L.' C C £ d O..0 c x C N F J O 0 _ O C , 0 �0. 0 = W O MO • d V C7 g VJ VJ Vl w 0 CO w w V E C E .- „ 0 v N O .0 t O C N a' cp. Ey Z W O = = = 47; .'L. 0 — O ..i O R C w c w w d N a = �Vl W N fl. d p K N el C C E. 0 0) V y. '►1 ::. p N co 2 c c co u 4►. O N p N 0 v C 3 F- 0 10 '0 G G> O N > > > > a -1 _ 2 2 g g 2 2 0i Q d M co H a _ . aw \ \ o \ hi -crf — 0 Z ' co o q rz ¢ 0 0 Il •- # 7 D § ez k o (7) to ) % / o � � co o 27 E \ P o 0 ■ E E 0 0 z 0 co 0 ' v - 0 2 n c , a o N p n / ° / \ Q C.) / '- CL � cc) c % \ w r 7 2 # 2 > a , [ c 0 , , 00 o 2 n M a Q 2 c0 / / § o = 0 9 « 2 ) kk � \ a 2 152 'g Q / o ari % q — ! .c / _� 3 2 k CO \ 03 \ § � \ bO m 0.) ......a- a p\ & a a § IX a_ < . « = e E f 0 \ ) Ff � D " 20 ) ./ § m o g co — ra 2)2 6., G \ O2 _ 2 _ f@ $ � k � a. c id. 0 E / $ 0 9 G . c J A 2 o r ° £/ 2 % # Q § @ g a 2-9 O k a.o �� ¢ / % a a- ll.' r co #� ao 2 a CI ii y �� // & - � @ \ 4 � C1 co cp ■Ill 0 § §k 32a CL 3 w O § /0 � 6 ® 7\ 0 $ 0 ■ /f & / H ■ K §§ co Q E / « ■ ■ @ k � � a � Z II cZ � � � ¢ n C ) ƒ C a. 2� C5" U o i3 m ic - n o k § g § a E\ / 2 F E E u E 2/ $ 2 \ QN M I— j4 060 ATTACHMENT C 4-2-070G RESIDENTIAL-14 DU/AC (R-14) Uses allowed in the R-14 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Natural resource extraction/recovery H ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Kennels, hobby AC #37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per dwelling unit or business AC establishment RESIDENTIAL Detached dwelling P #19 Semi-attached dwelling P#19 Attached dwelling P#50 Manufactured Homes Manufactured homes, designated P #19 OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND HOME OCCUPATIONS Adult family home P Group homes II for 6 or less P Group homes II for 7 or more H Home occupations AC #6 SCHOOLS K-12 educational institution(public or private) H#9 K-12 educational institution (public or private), existing P #9 PARKS Parks, neighborhood P Parks, regional/community, existing P Parks, regional/community, new AD OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC FACILITIES Community Facilities Cemetery H Religious institutions H Service and social organizations H Public Facilities City government offices City government facilities H Other government offices and facilities H RETAIL Eating and drinking establishments H#33 Horticultural nurseries H Retail sales H#33 ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Entertainment Cultural facilities H ATTACHMENT C . Recreation I Recreation facilities, indoor existing P #33 I Recreation facilities, indoor new H#33 Recreation facilities, outdoor P #33 SERVICES Services, General Bed and breakfast house, accessory AD On-site services H#33 Day Care Services Adult day care I AC Adult day care II H#33 Day care centers H#33 Family day care AC Healthcare Services Convalescent centers H Medical institutions H VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Park and ride, shared-use P #108 UTILITIES Communications broadcast and relay towers H Utilities, small P Utilities, medium AD Utilities, large H WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD #46 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P #44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P #49 Monopole I support structures H#45 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 development: one model home P #53 on an existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P #53 Temporary or manufactured buildings used for construction P #10 Temporary uses P #53 ATTACHMENT DNow 4-2-070J CENTER VILLAGE (CV) Uses allowed in the CV Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL Service and social organizations H RESOURCES Public Facilities Natural resource extraction/recovery H City government offices AD City government facilities H ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Other government offices and facilities H Kennels, hobby AC#37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per AC OFFICE AND CONFERENCE dwelling unit or business establishment Medical and dental offices P#22 RESIDENTIAL Offices, general P#22 Attached dwelling P73 Veterinary offices/clinics P#22 Flats or townhouses (existing legal) P73 Conference Center H Flats or townhoucoc, no grcatcr than-2 RETAIL Adult retail use P#43 Drive-in/drive-through, retail AC#28 OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND Eating and drinking establishments P#22 HOME OCCUPATIONS Horticultural nurseries 14 Adult family home P Retail sales P#22 Congregate residence P Retail sales, outdoor P#15 Group homes II for 6 or less P Taverns AD Group homes II for 7 or more P Home occupations AC#6 ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Retirement residences P Entertainment P#43 SCHOOLS Cultural facilities AD K-12 educational institution (public or H Dance clubs AD#22 private) Dance halls AD#22 K-12 educational institution (public or private), existing P#9 Movie Theatres AD Schools/studios, arts and crafts P#22 Recreation Recreation facilities, indoor existing P#22 PARKS Recreation facilities, indoor new -P Parks, neighborhood P SERVICES Parks, regional/community, existing P Services, General Parks, regional/community, new AD Hotel P#22 Motel P#22 OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC On-site services P#22 FACILITIES Drive-in/drive-through service AC#28 Community Facilities Day Care Services Cemetery H Adult day care I P#22 Religious institutions H Adult day care II P#22 USES: TYPE: Day care centers P#22 Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT D Noe USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: USES: TYPE: Macro facility antennas P#44 Family day care AC Micro facility antennas P Healthcare Services Mini facility antennas P#44 Convalescent centers P#22 Minor modifications to existing wireless P#49 Medical institutions H communication facilities Monopole I support structures P#44 VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Monopole II support structures H#aa Gar-washes P#22 Express transportation sorvicos AD#22 GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Parking garage, structured, commercial Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and as or public P#22 defined in chapter RMC 4-11, where AC not otherwise listed in the Use Table Parking, surface, commercial or public P Park and ride, shared use P#108 Park and rides, dedicated P#106 TEMPORARY USE Vehicle fueling stations P Model homes in an approved residential development: one model home on an P#53 Vehicle service and repair, small PAD#2 existing lot Taxi Stand P Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P#53 -Transit Centers -P Temporary or manufactured buildings P#10 STORAGE used for construction Indoor storage AC#11 Temporary uses P#53 Outdoor storage AD#61 Self-servise-storage H#26 INDUSTRIAL Industrial, General Laboratories: light manufacturing AD#22 Laboratories: Research, Development H and Testing Solid Waste/Recycling Recycling collection station P UTILITIES Communications broadcast and relay towers USES: TYPE: 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 Page 2 of 2 *awe *400 >, a) C a o -al a) o c c c w a) c aL) a) Zr) a o co co o- a_ a_ C c c cre � cn c >, co N0Oc � > >Nr • c 0 oc � Lt.) cn oo co> O ~ NC - a C — O a) X X X a) O C p O X N _X X fn C O y >, Q E E a) ' a 3 E w C O O U O U 7 ' 2 L N .O. O O c O o O cII D N (o M cp N • E a > V (o N N fn fn O > N - •J - C_ Uw C 7 L > - a - 2 - a Q LL •a C H C = (o 2 O U in LL co : CO :L a) Z L > O c E L o Q)= ° c . � 4 0 3 � 2i ., ca� � TO g) .0 c • = 3 C L .. to >U .� O C c O p ., 3 o co a COz C. ' •, -C ar.. O °' N � � p N F- p rn � � E . U2 aV a Q C C ., . Q a) o •E Q I� O C N �Z = 'co . , C = n 0 co p • a a. co C V t •X , , O O > O N a L L C Ti C V) N a y w p a) • a +' Q t O p CO oc �, a � = UOOY a > �_ E C a) ' C N 0 N a t7 d a) .� ' .0 a E C m • 2°21 •- 0 p .O E O L E „ .. 7 C 0 C C O 3 o O a I) ? � ., a � am a0Eoo � rnL a ZO 0 a o � a :5' , m o ° � o a cL° N + CO w a�, c c .Eo a o a) t i- 0 N Q �' c , , c x E a 'v, � o � � ) m� 3 0 f,U X cn co o E- O L C •o E a a) ►n O • -2 �- a) o L a •- Z H a O „ _O NL. V p _d N O _0 .-. 3 , a) LIJ6U >,-0 0) LI v E O ', ry N W 0) -Q C a) to U) N a) y a co Nu �, 'c •, > a � fa 15 0cLa fwE � f p a aw. �p < o •Eo -13 I - Q Oa) a) NE Maaa a- rl C , ., !=' ti".. L L =� O to a) O L t f� � � • ., ti a � < W a) . -4. a a LLL u.0 09---Z co Q a a> L s CO •) co 0 � a O. N o O. •:y a"i c 'a __ C cn a O c CD c 0 fy - .c � 12 22 �' rnoafn p) c�ia aoo Zr _ °) m CLo :4ID 'F, aa)i LTScao a ' - rn < R ' r — c .X 0 O L O V C O tn ': - to L ` L0 � t 'a ac a a) rn C U .Lri : a > a.) .0 I- a c > a CN a a > cco " E 0" r m e E � CI) _c "� c -0 Z - O a. p . d w c ,�- 2 O co r' E H IA O V. a LO O a) 2 m 111 CD IA c .> a -° fv � c p > fn co , coop z.� t/) - a aai -I R � p O � .-. a) .� LN2 a _> L _ a u) 7 u) O _! C Q. N a) - 3 co > U -. v- 'a i C) C -! N co co C w L d >, > C c p v �_ O L .0 to fv L d a) O (n CO co > >> O 0 c a) a 0 0 .� C co O = 4' % u) L ill _.n uLeaco - 2Lz., Ufnco0co uLacav a D °) E . _ c 0 0 C) u) ,I-, C I Z Z •'m 3 N w Ce >- x° .- x° O = u. F- E 'r" 3 c.) to 3 to To Q Z E y .y Q d I- I-- N W C d CO d J a) Q 4 CI 2- o 20 C- 0 -.are 44800 z o -o co a) >• E O L 0 0 U c0 c 7 E 7 O O N = O ,- >. y � w E : C 0 U rn - 0 O 4- ,_ C a) C In 0 -0 t0 ( ._ co Q O C N' OL a) O. c � � cam O o .0 a U) 3 0) ns Cl) a � — °) -aE o � oomc � `r O � m m o a, am cc) 0 -0V o c) .0 a 5 .- coD :� C • aoi � m o o 0 or o f cn 7 3 X c c -0 O ` E a) 0 L > -p w O ID 0 C 'X 7 CO 7 CU0 CD U 7 p N c cn ) ` c0a) oL coa.� Rccalm 0 N � > L N C O C co -co 3 >, C O co a) cU OL C .V - 70 •0 •0 'O > m a co o 0 a o a) co 3 nr:- •> CD C ov CU >' c � cv cocoon 4- 4.- _cU0 ,� cn caa) .- C.) '- ca) � w o o � N � o co =0a) s N r- ac 0 0 — c � •( C aao 0 N �_ aXi � o (U z c N � 4- O >' y e w c 7 N CU c a) O 0 0_ (moo w L E U > Oi O w_ U 0 4' w 0 m a L '- 7 TO >' O L 'O U m cU O ouo. -o °-- c N •E a00 E , E ) o 0 3 mow =_' 0- > m co • fU > v c E w c .._ U 0 c v LL l- >O c') c L V) iaN CU'0 cU < o E . . . D. ao (o c C fU co� a) co E L a) 1 (Q E a 0 0• ._. c CO o E E O ... a) cn m L a 3 a> Cl) c Z i L y X a) 0 'C t v)v L a) y N a) O O C N CO t)co d O Q co 0 Q O 7 U y ) O C N `) O O > 0 N C .CO. C L N = c 73 i dL. •.... E O 6 V 0 .. 0 y L U U E o a) y 0-.- a) y r o E s ,� l�0 z m C. cva O. Q a) 7 a) a) �O 7 ^ 0 o V o T C .c - �` N = O c C C 0. .c 0 0 " p In 0 N �' o _0 C N a) 0)N O p C co` O co (o -0 -0 c0 C a) d d ,- 0 co - C V - - ` L 3 O • .-. .c C -0 co 0- .0 ' "O a) 3 N �,, a) _co t' t Ln O m o '0 ` O v E - 00 0 0 E .as 0 C 'c Q o CO p L 5 7) 41 E a) , :0 E t 44 a O o -0 O U D. y N . c0 U •> O a n3 0 C c0 CO 7 0)'p i 7 y -6 .0 Q. L a E \ '0 a) 'O 7 .iii a• CD L 55. C as • a) L _ V E w " a) r= 2 N i=. .' C. d L - N d •'' 0 E O U .E c4 V C U O � > c cn 0_ co) c c O co -a x crO c0u- 2 Q = ao) i c� •c � m c E c co cn• . E .S .0 a '.- co ca co o cu c O o co E X w ,' u. E o � e_ u. v a) 0 E o m E a) E m E 1- z w D 1- CD w z 2 J J W L 1 c a ° 0 err'' 406 . a) Q c Z 0 Z ii OL . t >. 1/! •r fo O Zr) N pl c O y N - CD u 0 a. O O a) CD u v C O •"' X . o _� NCNV y aa) >. • . co OO c O a� ch 0UUO Cr) iv; oo a� � ,- .. O - - ,6 " C C inCV CLL. 7 O '• LCco W rno N.- a . co0U -a U ca) a c '; -a a) =a a) c a) to 0as U _ y U � L C O O - •� w . �� is y 52 E 3 O .92 V N C O i U) •E O p - O ~ p N L .d O , • M d t a) c ce,c' N "C 0 N .• a. C Cn X c R x M dN Ncoc▪ o O W ' F- 4'' •O co � It d -pC0_ O •' d L M V U a1 .0 U d V r .� U Q) . " () 2 w •-- f�0 �^f2 co T— .0 CD 17 �1 " IX 0 M V Q "- a) O C L 'O O .. O d a= O a) cn O cB io O N .•. w a) L c a t E y F' rn o ow -a cc o .c wv w — 3 -2 aii c� & 0 "5 E c to to O - C � V 0 c O o' co U coco 0 'v V a y N O fl .) o • N o 'X -0 Cl)N L_ N o � ° •° co ,_ a) y w a) m axe = o CO E c d — �' a, cco fl o m y co '> o,L L aci . ' 0_ mM � Nr v o..aU C N j L Q L C L O L C N 0 j fJ .c Yi 'C 3 = O 0 i_ 8O L 'g — 0 a, co (.4 3a) Oco ` oro3 C = = oCmo0 Oc � � 3 . � v� �aoo'- � � - •- viiv �o = rn 3 a) N O 3 — L X O E s c •z O U O N 7 C •a � oE Z � � ° '^.• � oha) y � � :, w, v� � co � c 2 C cl) E � .N � �_ -ow co L = ,- _c O C N O O O co C N co a) O O co C t 0 V - r C C N C Z C N - (o U 5 (7).5 a N O` O 0 '� "" > c a) '- O C) d 3 45 Q '3G a N 3 � = co D. O � co a= E.D. cu . ma a) Q_ -c aE .c .2, n. U 0 aELL. ai o •v n J W U) Z ` W CI 0 N H LL (n in co W r 13 O coW W Z J co O) g 0 = W E ,- C.) CO 2 d Q Z o J 2 o . 2 .CI- X E § 0 k 0 ■ _ p k \ o \ $ 0� c DC @ a a > .2 » a ± 2 c a0 0Ca0 Q a 7Ta o >.. oC • � $ $ - $ E ƒ / C cc k 7 ® ® = k . k § \ . k 000 = a t ■ m = u o t ■ 0 o c 0 C 9 / ' \ 0 2 / ' / \ 2 v 0 f 2 2 2 / c 7 c 2 » § 2 - k § / / d / / C k d ƒ k k / E ' f $ f E ■ o $ f $ f » f 2 b B § k § §8 $ 2 \ \ n to $ = / & % - o » g g § LI a s 7 8 k \ § II k 7 / . C 2 k / 2 k / 2 ® " 2 V 0- o ■ _ ® o o 8 = o •• ■ = M @ / = o M 0 : U o 3 0 -4 0 0 : U 2 E ® ° f , \ / o 7a a \ < 1- a k " a) a) 0. 3 1- 6 as Q X o M D Q re ca m \ o Q k it ■ - -0 � - N — 2 I... a 2 ■ � @ •» = u a rm - / a cm 1 « � u) _¥ % £ ± 2 CT 0) e ■ E c 2 0 2 o 0 .0 C, - to $ 0 004 0 0 NC n # to L 2 � $ £ ? � o ..—• 2 § ® § - § ■ in to �as � zE k �/ / k 2 Eo / 21- d / �$ � k �2 � � = ° cc t C 7n � � « Uok /\ a / kk / dk co 0 / CO 2 0 iii W 03 w / 2 \ Cl) . k ƒ _2 -Jk ƒ U o § 4- / / k4- 2 \ CCI \ kk � O / �k � W 4 E � 22 —I B0t2 CO w U U O O C C C C O R) N d t O M -C w N d X R) 0 d 0 p a) w in in N - 0 ; C Q O y a= a) 3 3 . X x ~ .O _O C L w 12 K E N O U 10 3 7 C Q''O .0 L O E U " a) U U U R) — d U n+ O V) •E .-• O L la r., d O L- to . .. U U Rs _— d - E � LCO H LL. ? C C. L. Q O ~ Q = in N O O 4 w .0 0 L. ) (NI to 3 m N v it) dC) C 0U . I- rC a -Co C — U r a) N L_, _ {a L O RS . a L _ i (0 L o U 'C L L (-. L L g O 3 I. O R) a) r.+ R) O a) R) O — a) w, O r -4- ... a) 0 C 0.� -O . U O U —. „ Y a) L co r «- O r y iL+ DI O i d . a) L U U E U) L a) O 0 •� OI •� H U U U 40 : aas 3 eu w � U ) Ia p N U t' R)• *• a 1 N a0 a) M C C > U r.+ (0 co > r L p L 3 C t6 L. d C U R a o O 11) -0 U O. > N .i' O d .. `T V O `p V d a a-. — a O •a 0 �F•• L .- wL... i IL .0 ccrO . w r: dr0 - 4— r . Inw +L.' O O co 'F' ifs E N a E •.. w E N . E . ' �- D L C 4- 2 y) EE' .O w ' _ w C ''C wOL- .� C a) .... y E O (0 a) C I a U! U U N co o N N v v o 0 RI 13 r a ' : V 3 U N RS N U C 0 2> U N C 22 r `a O - O > > E O 'C C > . c > UN E > . ..r a a) c 0 c 3 cn a ea O ` Ri O 7 OL L a-% 7 OL ' a, R a) ea d R1 .2 a) �. -a an 8 va r aQ.y c -0a - i x c_v ++ co 3 �+ -a IS aci .a'c w a a) m = a a) r. - a) a) c ac) o o) c c m a. C a O -Co U . C C N a) C C _ a' E ' a) 'C "• p) 'C 0 u Y! 2, V E N r V ri •R.. i E 2 r 6. 3 E O a c R3 U r O Ri 0 0 R : N C V ': •.. R) .� cu •.. co 0 o N 0 O co d d N• r Cl R) Q Q. • Q a ..= t (..) L re O m D a Q vUi O U) O . L p L a) V N, a) N a) 0 O • � O .L•• a= U 2 Nco � V UR= C O -0 4O N U ' 3 O 17 a 11, Q its, 6 r ,= 4-, -0L .L• 0L f/) C L l0 O d c--" C 3 U L �' O C U .)7 N L U L U E C d V a) co co O = t 2 U Cr; U Uf) 7 O) > E N 4-" .0 d L. U 4 O) r-. Cr) U fL C •C .1.2. U) O a) O a) O) 3 = o a) d r d r L Rf d r- 'C U � L L L .... O7 R) 11 o ,- N � U � a) L U CD d � � O �' O L O CO '- , t Q = U = f� R3 U '' w- N L U -0 V .: if; U O ((0oc`a .Eco E a= o � v 0 `raE = a) Q 2Q2 a(0 N 3 C 0 (AD N C 0 0 wI- .... co C d W LL 2 ;C R) Y v g y CDC.) y 2 E Eo Q E .a E � d CO •C la 1- 2„) W •C L - ka q ' -V ■ % /o . • c / I mu ■ 2 & 0 / \ \ a I. / / \ o I � k \ 0ma) � CN2ma) co o 0 0 0 . - - c CO > ■ - CO £ £ 22E c = o . ¥ c ca � a u ■ 0co02 � 1, @ � _ _ . co� Io oaoaoa � o � ® CO o0 § - ^ £ � � ° � � .0 ® - & �� �� , � E 5 c ® ¥ _ o ■ c o 4- = = a C ■ Ce o cam . 222 , T . T . 2 � � , m2aa 01- om E & 2 / a / > Lo— alas / 2 / \ \ / / � ,_ \ $ / 2 ` � ° 4- � � � J / .- 2 ■ .. >, / . £ a a a a a a G = G 2 a .E 2 c 1- .. 0 ® E 0 ° ■ CL - ■ 0w0) o « 0e ■ tet@LBa) e � o = ■ oc ® = � � ■ >,- qo & .0 CO x = . 0 . m . 0 0 . 0 - 0 . ¥ ■ _ ° 0 E 0 2 - t . o / $ F � 62 / 2f2 / 2 / 2 / 2 / 2 / a � mo \ f § \ G ■ § '— E 2 m22 / \ 2 \ ƒ \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / / SJU) G � \ .§ E $ 61 � U. Oddk & / >, o » 5 ® / o k / # O 2 E cr E / ® ° § k z \ a) / C. C / k 4) : ' °to 4 = C " 2 0 co @ ■ � • > = E 2 Z• � o b f Q. � ,D 2 a 5 0 o t o > ■ ° / -0 co el e . 0 2 0 / / 0 0 § f 2 / 2CO / / . m o o ( CO £ 8 Q Q 2 & = k 0 / � / o 3 / / ƒ f - ® q 0 co / Ce ) [ 0 k W C O o a / r _ as 21-0 � 'EE o § 5 L0 .0 2 % @ @ -0 — a) o » m £ « CO0o = c C 0 C.) w co I- 2 Y w C.) < I I- V W « *le '441019 th ai a 41 LU > > c ,- 0 — a`)) 0 0 >1 •L N Cin � -0r O 0 _ - a) -tr.. > V N O h N N th .0 co _c L 2 V) Oa LU .- N O O ry -0 L (� M () a) 4 — a) O a) a v .« ct OC ' LU (p - U C a C O LU U) C NLo `- • C = 'O CO f M CO K CU0 w N CN ,C 'p 0 X Ka) M 7 7 7 co N O O 7 N u) .a O U) U) �h L O — N u) o a) E :CD •- - 'C o H LL C > O i_ C) O O m I- IL O O C co O ,- .« - - : U) co . N U a) _ a) O — as C C C _ a � °aiU! u) .4. 0) - w a) E 4 m N a) N �} L a. 7 a) d � � �' coo o v)U a Q E N V U CD O L a N ? E COL U X a S .S a) a y • C U -O a) O C a) L(� U Q (6 a) N C N C Nco Q o d co E U O a • C O a) t 0) a) O E L Z �t t03 .0 � a) CI, cco .C • •. LO O N O 0 4- +'' co O cv co .a E 0 0 — 2) co '� 2 to Q r • . 0 7 N y C ,..452 •C .c C > V) _cti .0w, "O o O U U C N _a a) 3 3 'v a) O a) N (0 a) > 7 U) U V) 1/J cNi d d O C c a) E 0 a) V a3 N (Q UJ . H y L U C E L a — a) a) a) o y 4 V- > to E t- cv c (U -ea' a = M O O a O U E v) CU O NC) .0 v= U TO G R N a) +' ''•' M C E O .L.. U O O "O ++ N V C d a v dadUo N � a) Lr) COa) CO CD mo Da�'i d • m L a E �' c a N ._ V U U N L 7 C c o U) O > E V p re QC9 (o .a o CLn 3 C) (moo co . reNCC U — UN O O a)i N, aa) p >, a) a) C a) U >, E O (o a w O O a) -C "Ca) O co (/) ` � a) C Q N 4a v U O L (0 E -co 7 C co 9 . 2 L p N 1t — p y N O j O U 0 y 0 crs N • O .�- C 5 C .0 o ce co 3 -c M E 'a E V .N cv >,Y a) .- io O CU 9).N 4 D - U (A a) c- (Ln 10 C) O C o .E a) c _N fU0 C L N — a) > U a) a) 0 co r C w U a) R c)).- .0 EL- co O N - a w O) L C CO 2 (U O -O O U CU (0 E E OL v- O ._. (n a) w `- O V co a C t CD L U - (0 t O) a (D .- ,a ,a C C U C "O N 3 ) a) -0 a) ( 3 H w co -0 o U 0 N c d 0 N V N v co—C aNi «= (1) 30 — _ � � Y '> YcoUm 7o -c a) o � Nc_ (`o (/) _o C U O C (0 C V O U O U t CU L _C U E L U C a) O ( a) " O Lc) w L co L co 7 a co ' U (U 0 U C > L a) O L = Q2 NN O � Q .. -0 a.0 U) U) rnE 0 U) 4_ (U — O �. -o - re N Q CI Z Q L 0) N W a) (pY C L C0) Q d . N E _v ° •5ar w a) c 0dC9 = comtxti CC O LL � Z ZtomU (n E m xa� n o i E > 3 °'rnG Ea) a . = � 'iv L O J( E O E t U V C QE >- C) E. Li m 2 o2 = a � v C 4- C CD0 C 0 coN mr= • oc0d o �o ,NE0oK a) o a) wo.U. a) Cooc) p Ca > ccooEvaa) — ai ' c Ir ooOZNo - c? 0) •• c `� � . o - � yc 2 m coc0cm c � � o cC 0 O ,L c0 E 0 a) - "0 •� ° To - 0 0 0) ) v) Z : 2s 2 cr= E aa))co : 0t/ UQ N Cl) Vi N C a) -0 N O To I- a) .o >> _ .V C �_ 1:5 _ C •� al 0 co N w to C ° Tri a) a) -° c t .0 oY a a 0 O -0 N O V wv c 0 C .- a) N O 'C a) > c 15 > C.> 5co ;a a) f0 a) U 'N C Ecaa) w c N • c7) -, ° ornofl" QN) E R N E0 N v) c 0 •- N c ° N L .. c .-.-0 v c 0 acoa 2 5 c-2 .cp E c_° -0 ) a) ° c U o 0 a) 4) 0 c0 -0 O CO - ' ›. Ec co ? N > w U C t O O co E _co a) ° 0 c C O O 0).-:0_ Ncoccna 7 = L O .§ ] N U co CI - Ccu y C V 0CD 0) •O C O C 2 t y o D w % L m a) N a) N - N O C ;) c .0 v- co d0E >, > CC 22O a0 to - 4:i0.H !0 N c0d � Oa) co co C meO w "0w a C5. > ° w 0 U Ua) � E d' d a) N m 0 2 0. 4:9 c d co co., c N () Cl) a) D CO L Y) - -0 !_ 0 O 0 N -0 O a) ' U) a) > c c0 C i 0 N C O `? � L °o � � taNi aNi � oaoi Va' � � ° _ co) a) E � � 0 ° cco � . Eo co r uNi -E O o •0 0 0 > U > M a-, 0 00 •_� o c L °p 0 e ate) .- 0 ac) V L rn U c m - E a) 0 U L N L. N -4' c o �, 0 0 t_0 L C C O E 0 +- 0 2 a) C L E Q U 4F0 a C C C 5 U d ° 0 L a) N UN) - ] Q D C d ce a •a .W� a°i c c C' as w N � � ° lc! > j .c° E m E i —a°) a) m3caiaoac) ° � c° c° v0icco ' me � °L =1.... aE) 0 - osa) � °) c) rL o co CC c U U u- N ' ' D .J .S Et < co co co E w o N 0) a0 U U '0 C o • C9 d C 1' ++ C U 0 2 V CC N v) z IX z Q CI Z C Q w ao oI- ) w = a 0 UZ 2 E ) 14 V 0 ) d in C EE J v Q la m CO m 45 a) D co a) 0, (`p c c to (n (n U O = ti ti co a) ?< xC xC z >, E. E as 3 3 7 X E C) N N N (p \ O Z Z I u. Q t O 2 � a) N -0 U w N w e C a) = Q. N n 0 4O - J C 2 R U C RI O (p O U) E . C N O W U a) •o n. a� w a ° c m c N c yt 3 .-, 2 o "c d CC N (p °)O O a) a) n. .° d O •O 0 O > d C 5_ co C N U O O E -0 0 O� N t O L O Q > fp y L W N o Q ow a) c C ] C (/� 3 d C ` a) O Cl.) (0D O� O (p a, c C m O m El CO 0 E .Q ° � o E o E om o : .N I- I-l- .. o (A a) `' 'O a M co 'O O >, 0 N 'C a0 ._ -O U a) Va) 0 O X a) E N 'C = 0 " _ l a) ` ti c N tea) W3 a) U UC oa) a) t ., a) O fA :6 0 a) c N .� O O a) CO wno X r 0 .c 3 E _ m C ,� E 0 Q o Q ° iri a c -- m ca��i > o m c _ a0i _o u)• s -_ r° o a) >+oo >,O (n a)> CO 'i L. r a) 0 _ >, (,) F- (p 0 > a) d C O d C N ) > .d: C a3 rLO. O N N C $ d w+ (p �t • N C a) O 'O C C3 N O o L Tu O N (6 N a) O O c O v N V o ld s o O 0 O Y d � e' E o N -- j j 0- O C.) -4 6, y tz Er 0 N 0) O Q U y m fl! = O N Q U R 0 ° a, C O C L C y C .�� a) 0) >, O `� N d E r- 'y a) j $ ` .V .0 M � . V a) a) O O N N (p (p N a, C m O D N O X U d N co C d ch (y O)-O V O C N d - 0 >, oc � QEa (o'E o EEa) a) in o •c L • m o (p .0 o N — w+ 3 3li » .E - r E = a`) o O o aa)) E (n a) � a'5 ca > o ,- ctoo °oo UI— _ Do (p 0_ u, O o o - » CL Dm 0O !- - o to v a) 0 0 1.0 s y C1 __ a) E = a) t = , C 0 • 3 U -0 0 y CD 0 3N QCi z z o 7LE 0 Z us F— c c H v Z = W Z N N CO m I d N O E E Q Ti Vs E Z as H = '5'• K ) K > O E c Q CO o. J 2J 2U I --� >, a) U c cu a O aCD � wt E 0 • 3 a �� _ .0 v, 0' co o J -O a) U -0 cC •a w o cn - a) a) (n o c CD u) N N- co Co C L. a CU O V NCt ") O 0 0 X t/i C N E cao c_co N C - -a o a c ti a) C) a)) O a) V) C a Q y O 3 U „ Co O 0 O CO c) O O CD 7 w D (n 3 -- — � D •O 0- coaa)) 0 .. C co c`o v- Ce c � o _ �r — v N ` L O Q O w E N �, O O N Co co �_ 0- 0 0 0 c c r v v N � o vi a�Ei0v O co cnc_ Oa) a) Ce . 0U N 0 a) ti coc _ o -0 -0a) p > c.) ` 5 � _a i �� � 0 .- a) a) a) L� a _ •Q (0 o o -ca a Li.. E .SCe co IX ea .0 o v) u) v) v c N CO �' c J C a) Co c ' C W L'' L Co C a) 3 .O 0 a) :v a: o Co > p N N > O 3 • O (D N -O c C a) a) Q.� y a) a= •L 0 eC •c E a a) O U c c CD h aE - (n C a _ 0) a) •- - O. • E () 'O co �0 c 0- a) E :C. o N _cO a 2 .0 *E •0) U c U (A OS a- .- ,5 CON CDC & +(A y 03 E (0 • _0 N (0) 0) D y 03 .0 CI D La C -cN• J V N a):173c.- ' (0 > N N V Op (nd' �,U a)L. . .- d N ai Cl)L U '0 3 L. O (0 J C C 0 o) o) O o ca C >, o a - 0 C a) U y O O O 0 O (0 p) p N (0 O "T ' I O .F h1 C D C Q'. O -O ai C O a) - a) Y u :. _o0 .c v d C .▪ `- (0 d 7 E 7 00 c 0- •`.. N M 0 0 0 0) :o w > E ° E coiX p co � 00 X Ce tt E E y to U w a) E N •- ) -O = a) m a) a) a) Q a) L C 0 0 - 0 I 0 C (0 0 0 a) a) a) Z D I- a) U JE .3 cL v2 3 » d' U) u) Q v) W Ce 0 0 1 Q .c o >, E Z co � rn (v (00) 0 d .� a) N 'i Ti 0 ~ m E 7 •C - t J • Q7 U c N 0 ai x 3O Q coy o o J o +r c m C N N 'T 1- J 1- c 3 a) coaop 0 O pro c`oaa)) (n ,.- 0 0 U U U a) oL �c ( Co a)io Ur- O co 0 3 Q L a) cc a CD Q' (0 0 L � a) a) 0 D CI a) C D a) C -- X J (a) U) .-I u) ) )LT_o O u) 0 'O a) co Q U C) >- Z U Q w 1- Z 'c d c m c a - 0 " (a W N W Z Z 3Q U z •o�� m H v) =0 a 3 - a cn W a) "- E0uo „ o nido-130 2 = o n x 0_t Z c o co 5 .. 0a E 03 0 Q . 0 •c 0 Q CO Ey J O N v) I_ 0- (XI � 2J 1 � >. dC - = a) C'0 E a) `? a-- Ea) OL — R > D .C . a) �«- .. ro ro O E O . -c C 2 d o a p s •�, C _V °°)" c d N a) E U 'co -0 as as� N a '.' LA_a C N .5 o ` Q) ro a) a) ro ro t _O O O 0)To 0 CD Nco . �' (l) N O Q 3 j •. j (n E >, O O� C c C - ° X � — �— a) Fco rnL roE c °- 6aw� Q0 : c rovOa) cn U) N �10 U U CD cr -ff Lw • o c c C a)c ` o r ro = •yCO ro OC CO n "'• ro ro � d a) rnO _ `u) c..; 1- a w W I- a) O E C E E CV - ` a a) a) O O a) — oo D O — tp O L a) 'C O . O •C w_ .LL id .0 C a) a) 0) L .-•Q 0 _ LL (0 .S >, LL io O . a 4 w . O . w O U) V) O a c fl o c C C C co a) O c R J R c 0 C C .,... -C a) a)a) .0 y • .0 U = y _ C a C C CL c° •c °tn `ro oonoroE � o o- °• ia) •i — cn ; ° a) i a) on ° a a a cn v) x O > °)D > -c) a) •c p o .@ ro = U -c C C_ C C a) .0 a) 7 O • rot 'c 2 L O 'O N a) CL a) C as w > to C . O c = 0 s C t roL "Q • C to O 7 i • d • c L O 4ih.- co Too . ioov) ) 0 EO Ea) CO` a�i to O ` a)o • v c 0a O 00 c • 0 c o O 7 U c rn U c rnro c ro a) o • 2 w co dO o ml i- U c`oa)@8E3 � aci _� � v R0 atn • = � a Ea 0 - Cl)— — a) a) -c al > row X > •ro '5 > a) c O • t� .a • N c ro .0 a) `) C 2 a_ co tp L (/) 1- O ' CC .0 O N • c C 0 40.. g O O Qi `�- 00 C Q • ?r C .� c ro ro w ro C C 4 O to C c O O U to ro o co co N o • • N O O 4 O a) 'cY .-. U w a) N •c C C ...E a) d C 0 co O M y Cc) a) d V a) C C co N roc a) a) > ,C • .c • c- O) a`) p ro o L c E E ro 'aJ M 0 0 C '0 c`) co crEOL ro ro to �-• an d d EC Et Lt N ro ° —0 oo oa N a) a) m Acu- ° (v) U 'co co o - - Q a. > > a COU coco > > � O I1, L -c^, c ro to a) .0 a) >l.° to 1 t! NV .0 N ° N d CO C C M C o y 3 E CO -O >, 3 > U -- -c �O E a) > E cEL C as y a, 'C)C a) •5 ro -- ocro roo >, v) .c2aa)) a) oX ` 2o- oa) co L? o O '7 '— , O a) a) a) v) O C to C CO O) .O 0 0 15 O. O' a) O LL H O c o o D w O Oc -c To "� �_ p c O, Oi N to Cw 1" - 5 -c 0 O �"0.L-• c"C L C c C c O .c '- M Q E L "° '� E 0 0 to C co = -0 0 y O 0 LO -° > to C 0 co >, a) a) U p) t- o 'C ro o. o Q to 3 -p 0 0 Q LC m 2 Ow ccosoro •mc° c � En. E4= —ao80(c) o ° > > = CC Z mE � Z 0 LO co 00 0 Y a) "O O O > O > 0 0 (� o O i a) O p Q N C .c as as C a) a) L a) L L Cl) ... a) a) Q) .-• O tp Q 0 LL to >,.� to d w O v E "O d v O. a.0 .,.. m to U U O N (n Z O_ _O _U) Z Win III 6 C Z O W a ) <UJ z ocZ o Q J N 'a a= L N1 C)LY 1_ CUZ L '.- To1.'Q •5 Y// C 5 ' � = W I- T< a) T c et c 4tur, Nary rn C 0 rnN>co Z' IC " o a)S >, Ea o— cnCtcM a2c13a) v° a � a -0o • � ° I, 00 ) v � a � coiaNi � � � cncca � � a�i °� � � cLioocoiaXi -' __ °i J_O C c o c O m co ° c_ - cco c)� wd o a�oi N c s ` c co 2 -o 0 ` > "' U -o � co c co N o Win. o c) > o c o -_ n caw c'S '= ° � > U aEi � � � � oco C co O .n N $ C 8 ' o O > w V co j o w •`- u) Le vi L' � O •o o 0 o c as _c C O N c _ '" c O c c O U y a) o as p V v a) acra) Nate) ca) 0a`�) _ a) a) 0o -c oOpomC� v, 2v, � � o .o � E a) c a o E s c 6 v, a) CO 9— � c cQ c �o _ O y Q ui cv o O -co, O vi v,•- Cr) 0 i- v,w Y C co 0 0 a d co rn0 ayi o c o a , co Z. 0 m c Ew c 3 = c o U ' 0) CD o .E .5 O o O) W U U > U D•�;c E 112 p > U L CD c o c ? 0 N _o L co > U > C O U)�� COw 'O CD aa_ V "0U _0 y N .t.. � Q Z V U '0w V) . y • dN QU aG O N 0 C 0 co O u) U N 0 U p• O .0 as O N •C - '_E -O a) ui La 1 w- N5E ' C OaO . w 0) 0 aO L � N = Q E � c'' -a . oU c 3 ° o 22L cr) >, oai o� o c,-;a) .- a) W " us o)N N O) L C) C C d 'O w C O C o •O o a) N o ` .(1) •� 'a o•X U c0 > > O cy c C'C O O. 2 2 'O L O — "O O fl w C E o a co 0 o co coo CD " E < E c c � (1) o a) of o a) ooa)i o C o COo � L aj 25 N UC C) a. Z c .c)3 o 0) n -o 2 .0QU co I,- 8 O a> CO '- C Tr- 'a .. o C .0 .U" 0 o E O O o ' co O c >, O.= C 0 0 o- o Ci- U O L " O(11 U y d 0 N O ". O O ` c E 0 0 a) L p ;a - ,- o N 'O "' •• > N _ to C O ••X to co U N `�= M L 0 0 O O N o O N i .. O N N a) N > +. O fo .L to N _ _o Oa) O O C > W Y E :r O C O o v, adoiccact) coincc ow0Xccnoa > N ,_ y0 -acem o..-' o c o v, N U s 3 O E N L co N O a) U N C N U N cco .� coi o a�'i a) co � � � s c oo ;Na, -o _ � � .. c a) o « � c%) o C C C > O 2 r... O"a N O O O .. • o ., O O L c �«- N r O 0 C 0 • U N o .c 0 L 75 L 'O >, O `- O C C ` 3 O � co CO O O O (� �rj o D .- co 3 0 V 3 d.'. "O d (X3 L c o O N co 'v L •E Sc N C Q C (o ti • (o o H .. N N �.- N O a) O > fo N O•- O O)w- a) ` o).0 - `- C O .0) coa) .c pO N L O caw N 0 CD CDN 2 30 O O 0 d U ._. c N c fo U> co-O ,0 0 -- 0 0 O c To 21: .c 3 ° V, ) CO a3 . ° c Z o co) -a _' 'uc-i to o aa) cos cao . aU a� o co 0 0) N t N To (..1 W Cl) CCD DCo 00 Z o co LIJ LO Z V W x 2O Q O w y O i�i X (I) Q LV a J N _c a) — a) w v co_c To co -o C w o cv Ct 0 m rn Lo. a`) : = a) 'O ai o 0 c N c -O L. a) a) w. > �' o 0 v, ocL COC CO cco oc0)iio8a , co •> >, � a) 35o0 _ � c ,L_ > >, — W > � O L X O C cn O co d c O N O 0 0 w ° a om a. a) E •o ° cE xco �� oc`oycca ca)) _ m X o '? vi C N U) o a = C O o o cm "0 CO a) co _ _ a) a _ o a) :0 a) E ` 0 ° y U co O r co E 7 cn 0> a CO (0- -c I- anoccnnEo Qccnno3 c 0ccnn ° ccoo2 �o � _ o N C (o cn w E 0"= w L Nc , c a) 0 3 0 c c cam E 3 cn fl- ° � .3rn.r � = 3 c o(13 ca) 0oc >, n) c u) v - o C co o m� a) � o ° 0 '() c°) a) 3 � CO 0 a�) � o E E T `) c c c a) L > c m Z ac) o ° °' o - O . xoC N ° oai c `o > v� � o °' s >O m �, 4) C �,L 'C cn co L o — O co o O co a) O Qai y ,w ° ° o CO y c c°) a-i c a) c co cn a) � Lw � o Z i .E_ _coo oc c) cEv) cnoc (ui o � coas — oos� > �u°i ° ° c 0 a) x o o a) E C xw ° o N E Eo c `- moo (n a ° c L •C " 0 .0 co 4 V L 0 'C O L O p 0 CO L O C O y 4- (A ,— ill T c (o H a to N to E O Q () a (9 cn co 10 N N (o cn 0 p (. L a) c Z 0 0 L O U 0) V O o 8 O V) a) L X w c N w- T cn "O N a) cn 0 Q c) a) co Z E N — O C 30 N w 7 O o E � " � t o m _ T p ° N. x o cn N N a) C a) CO L 4— (o O (o V) y .0 a) (0 W p E co co co a) -O C 6 ', t`r E o 0 O E ._ ° O L- - u) f N 0 co c aL N L as E d Q) Na) a) Z' ` 0E U. 0 (O ti ai c "- cn O> a) 0. I- Q O a) co ° a) w 7 N � � n.-• fo w cm0 O 0 .0 Lo 7 N a.. CO CO — 7 . T oa) a) — E N3 COCL L O (p (0 7 0 v Eo 4= E o .CE L'.o c tL Xi .O.� 3 O 0 x o (j co CI, ° c oa) o3c° v) c Z' m c Q N Naa= IL- C = IL- coOL°. Q C z z ~) Z w v I- Q .0 0 w co W a CO 0 O ? a`) u- W E Z E z o M Z 0 z = O = 1— E c� _� 2 To Q m = E rnl 0Q a=i W RI > a) m- °' a) o w c � c`a OE w $ c .oaLo a) L O cn w L O -p (0 a) O OO O O 4 L c) -p co a) s > sLO0) � ma) ac) 3r o > > L � Lo 1) " aa) aOS a)) 3 ' a)L >, c � L• ooE CE (0 .cooE co 0 .0'� 2 3 _o U a) Q oho 0 0 o a) .r U 0 a) Q L L C C -p C (0 O a) ---• O O O O E a) (n .0 Y Q o O) O 4) w a) O O O E a) 3 co a) � N cn _c -0 .c .N U 2 o c Lo c cu () E � 'c r- (n _c � C U) O (0 o c E Q ,-- .0 -,E) N c — � co '- = .-• co ID 0 ' ov .- a c = -2 uj co '~ .. p a) O U O 'p L a) C p >. L Y >, C ,� Q) N C O >+ L -Y >+ �. cn O O y C O -C (0 O Q U •C a) N O O C N > O C a) -t (o O 0) U -t (n .E- a) • a) c0 L >5 0),w. O a) a) a) A co C (0 O •U a L :. U O U O a) a) O >, on.0 CO a) a O O a) O O Q:p 2 ' a) O 2 .0 O N 2 7 2 w'' O O Q O a) O 2 O O (0 N 2 D E - � o, z 2 cn r) M . .c Qcn0 Qcn Q (n QN a) c.) cn - cn MLL Q20 Qcn Q L N a) • j a) 0 a) _. a-- y L 0 rL+ C U to 'O O L O "O O .0 5 � (0 c a) Q•- N w >. C C o N f6 L f0 E Y Q) _c _ U (0 C 0 Z -0 (0 Z O a) .L-. a) O C -Op XI O a) v) O -C -O C ,(n O > , L 0 O z o � a) � N a) >,0 O .� 'rt p Op -co O N O O (0 (0 = " o W Z (n (n MLL ai- C.) E O L- CI O .- _ .r Z a) a) O " O — a) 7 O e- Z w Q .0 E AL) Y u h E a) Y O L O cn .v U O O ' m U >' O N J O a) ,.0 a 7 .0 (0 CO L 0 co 3 (o O cn Q ...... L >, 0 U4.. .O j L >. N h0 "0 = Cr) F'• V)) . a) co O a) Q) '- (0 O •O a) cn w Z •' >, O • _C a) 4- O• > >•• O a) C a) >+ O O L (n ,[ c L co L •- ,[ C L O N CI () • N 3 — (Ni O (n i 4 L O 'C p O L Q 'C p • O (0 � � y � CQECL -00CQECL >- 7 C "5 (n Q co o O C C (On d = C Q J y o a) a)=o N .E O O O O N C p 0 Q 0) L 3 S a ' E '- > 3 •o a) - Q0 •E > v o 0 a •t o o o ici u- � t _ a 0 HQ wa m ao (nwo yE V a) w 'o Ea) Qm n •y D c- U O) o o C a) O t- 0) O O C a) O Q (O 1- L O L_ Q (LO ,L- L O L_ d 'O co Y Q y O f0 Y Q O a) C U O (n U Q Y L N U O 45 L O O O L co N ,_ O al O O ,, O f/) a) N To - _c a) - C p U 7 _c a) C a) U f° o 3NcoE O 3y0EO 0 O L O O y 0 t -p O ) 0 t QZ >, M N (0 . 'a OL y cn N 10 . 'O OL (() 13 Z Q H y I- Z O) W C as '6 . 'a 0 5 COCOR J >- >- LL W m CO C L CO O 'G w CO o E Y �i 6ix (..) E t CO E E E •� I— 'E c_ c Q co 2 CO E £ > ; mco . _ ° 0 5 [ o -o 7 ( £ 0 . m 7 > � • / o \ ƒ 9o9 ƒ 4 ƒ / / / / 9 JE \ \ / / 'a a) \ f [ c 4 o = 223 = q COofo . 0 ƒ f % ° : e > § S § Q22 wk / \ \ \ f \ f oo • c a \ 2 & N $ S2t2 ƒ - - f % 0q Or o y / ao � f I / \ - o ° ' CO $ > � % � � £ C � CO 2 oo % ,r . 00 9 # 2 E\ a $ � f $ / / • E ix @ 0 2 , 0 17- 7 $ 26 $ m / / f ka & > o n o 0 0 \ f �f c / akd % o % S � $ 2 k � 7f \ f \ / \ c O G O z \ K c -4 N �� / ff O co z6 / / o � • a) a n k § / w ( § 2 6 G a / / \ 2 — = 2 \ $ Q k � � C u_ u % a co 0 i= « 6 coo 0 6 � T m 9 ƒ $ \ in E s2 / � _ # o . # a OS 0 ) \ I 2 $ @ p 0 • 0 CC 6 < � / \ � / z / I # cn / 0 2 0 � � © W \ L.L. w 0T ° W CO Ce « Z ill illLU CI � § � I � 2 § � 'Cl: T / x m _ _ < To_ E2 k O t- U)2in0 ■ « U 0 _ _ C CD / k 3ƒ kfa / k o= o a)� a § f ƒ 7 � Ee / co o c % E $ k5 = t/3 : # 2 •- ƒ % / � $ � § § co�0 \ 0 § � tf E@0if0 @E 0) @ '0 � c a) � moo Q .c� 8 . �2 � 2 � c/ • 3 �_cco- $ £ 5E / - Cn •� � @ � 3 § ooa \ 0ZCLa2 « m 7QQ u $ g IS • 38 / ' o o & o §e aoEQ ( �� / aL 0i 47, wk7� = 7 � o _ S ?Z ° cocoE ow § 0 % § -mo g $ % o0 c : 2 ® ■( c3 1 _ = �/moo / 27 c aCC = � coer2 §Cz / Q_ m • \ a) / � $ $ a)$ \/ Z \ % _Z o / z J % 3 4 / N CU § O. o � � \ $ 1 : _1 f '. \ off L. co \ k k \ 2 / ƒ ) t c | w ® CL$ % 2 2 © d f \ / 0 ± _ a) o 2 7 a) / / ® � / / a00 d ° \ 0 $ / \/ § % \ � / k E ƒ Q— . ■ a) k � u. J « @ § k n / _Q o c E � 2 , ' E c c 0) « o 4 5E7 � / _ = z / 72 % \ $ k k 0 ® o � 7kk / # w o c \ \ ° 5 c § w Z co o a= o 0 Z— # ■ 4 — � ■ 0. w z k 2 k g 15 5 th c ' z in q p $ � § � 2 k = a P 0 § § w ■ E .c i- W o ■ O cp E O / 2 2 � 2 � 04- O o $ Z - \ � Z CI W EIV 2Qm U w 2 _ w � � 22 E 2 s Eg I d (3 Csl - a 2 ( Cn I—. § $ 4 4 ° ° ± § / _ ƒ 2 6 � 7 / 22 ° / � 333 / c « » & asz 2ec Pi)) roc n - _ c0 m « � § \ a/ / f / / V /o § Fes § / § k / tg /a. � � � z � � fKfk \ / � � / § /\ / g .zciL mcocuI- e .072 � ■ � a2 / / f I— F/5 LLI / a > o � 9a = c � n � c / � / , E / kn/ \ ZJu. Ok / / _DZ • f � 2 • ' • , • _ ° - a) 0 2 > � a E E co N • ;:":: £ a §\ 2 f £ \LIJ $ 0 c £ 0 0 $ $ • ID U I.:. _o CU U) IC f2 = � $ � � q � /■ ® S S f o g E ■ _/ . 2 , / kk .c s- , \ . . a » » �. — 0 c » u_ E t E $ 0 a.� = cf � M p 7aa ) Q)W o E < 0 / �� � 2oc0 ƒ G a Q a) E 2 £ E &/ 7 2 f z = - _ _ a. 6 = f = oom C a k \ R \ / c o m a / w off $ ± ° � - k7 � 2 m � � -0n£ _ w a co oo -a 0 113 12 CD -J 4. ea I... o 0 ■ o w ® 3 CO = = 2 W E § E W c « CO E. 2 2 Cl) ' a) c -O Y .= r+ as 7 rX a � O U fII . C Oce 8 `- O `, tO `lal L • 'O 0 � 1. I-4 O 7 C (q � 00 vr 0 C y a) a) c �: cU O w yct � N .0 5U u- L to O.- a) •0 >, w- w u ai r4 cv .0) co W U Z < F a) a) 3w a) � `n U - , `- •^ c — a) p Z . (� a) _ i Y a a) `— p C • •5 O O cII L U C b 7 C co U O a fII N O d N ' fn •S a_c N Q a°i � EI3 Q X •y o . X L !a � N CN c X CD • -- Z a) L O a) O •.) RI w a) LO O O C O0 cII N a) ate) a) U �+ �� 33 a) c _ a) 0 W 'P C � � C p � w "O • a) C 0 CU L N O` C) a) 0 E O jo N Z ,Op /y C j C t- M O 7 O ., -a a N A— 4— Z (o 2 � 0 Ectu: O . mo Z (0m w C9 L Y ,� vs Z 0) C C , U N f0 , O (II -0 Q) O.�' w3 L a) a) Q LO a) •a 2 '0 v:- N C co LL O C p N co N > O a) a) In N ' , d cII N »� C 't d .� tea= � � o c Qw ,- m -c N C � - � ,C pV Q > TO 5 a �� a - {C N to V U o aci ac ) o .c r `O ac) ir O 0 O � � � � ai > 2 > � WY "O _ a N N w Y me a) 4 N � � d 7 C C l' re N C a) . 2 as c '�) > c0i u) s � a= � 0. as- w� m � � c R R c � O c c rn= co c O a)) � £ � Q3 .3 co o co a ° o 0ty0 Z ov d w 'a' c .t 5Q a) co O U as )- r- - en .0 CN 0 o Z Ce 'E. w ,� (5 .0 a) co , s O m ,• c.) cth 05 fto c cas- I- - c a > 10 C O Y -O a) In •� N d e' p N —• O C ' L ,p O N a) m w U a) _C as � g c � • - � ,C pV a) a CI L .N i :0 N C as N w N Et C.N R O oc LL L ` a) u) y Q) c 0 U p a) a N w N p O C U O O O �O, jp a) O �- to w U U Z Y 'O L a u) c0 3 is C Y >, N .- y d y C C 1 I cII C _O C OL co = a) L Q (UII a) 0 O co Y 10 U t. tU9 N a) 2 t a) .0 V a1 O U 7 0 a)•10 0 .E a) a O .,tt O U C .Q a) co N "O ea N O o () O N LO O p U p O ... . to ' 1- c ` w p (/) O N .' U H N N -0 a� O 2 r co a Z O .O Q' .-- Z C R i tX - L N -0 O Z E c N z0 w aar° co Q o (o O v -0 1- o c C9 :o ` yaJ c ° � L o �z o d mL. d d C 0 '^ W w u. U) Cl) O V Z C •— U Emsa E E L -I E 0 E Qa o •co �_ �_ 'XdEa) Q 2u`. 2- 2 v m 2QUc0 'fir'' ,4410 00 .: UC) 0 _ U) i -o U >'i N o L oo C .V To 2 c 0) AWE' O N 4-, 0 r-% �' cow a. a)a) Z'c? = o co c a co 0 U C N c D O vi — ) co -oco NI- Ocn +r _; I0 a) y 0 0 fn �� � v a)O o O 0 LL rn 0 cr 3 O y N O uj O a o vi co N a O u) c c a)2 W U = u) o O o o c 0 c M a) U c Z V d a) o o -0 � za. a u) h � 0 O4:7) a) .o -a- w w N Q a) c rr C C 0 U O c a U) a) O O) U :0 .n (U 0 Z v_) y Q c O Q o 0 cn a U c c = Cr �p Ti oo a) .E � acm O Z o' — m u) . E co o x — u) O. — m (n �p a) ,.2 a o L - c a) a) (n C� �' oo L v, ' E � u' a) o o a) x a a) �° x a) - v cn u) Cp (n ., 0 ( N C0) a) a) = o 1U 'c a 0 c 7) op W 2 0 to a) o E h o O 2 0 In .c o o Q s Q a) 0 Q > > C? o) ❑ co dcnco c[ = _ � z cum CD .ncnch i- o c (n H m 3v E Zcl a i- o Z c 04. U> 0 r 0 a) p _ o d J c c o O u) (0 N 0 CU D .o U OrJ W 0 _c a) N (0 0 4-. g c cn � o E 0 - O Z ZQci 0D aa)) 0 _a)a) To O _c o (0 N •u) • N a) c• L O N C y C C a) ••-. a) 0 0 c co H c C^` 0 0 N U H C C 0 p ,_ 0 .- -0 • ❑ rn o a)-0 12 2 — v�i E x c o o °) o -5 c 3 ,- a) QU �' 4- 15• aoi c°) Ns � w 3 Z E o o 7 • o x � � g o � 0 c E > a) N-0 o < 0 y n o c a oa` >, 3 N iU O L " a•- >, of oo �o o a) ; acuH. m E o a=i Z7 1_ CUU 7 -oa r) IH- U) ax) 7 m ( co vim) • Q (=n a. ((nn `o U) W U v a `o R) O OJ a m o 0w N °)Q) o I- > o 5 d C W ❑ EQ U) •O _ 0 ,� c 0 0 E o = ° Q 2 Q D CO __I Now Nor, C U) O a) rn vi a) N O a) 'a L �a N C 2 N V O O O . .CD N N a 0 O 7 �' N N LLJ V C c o).c > co a C Z c co N a -p m co 3 io c`o 7. -a - c 0 •5 c 'aoEt 0 15 `o O C -0 V C 0 (o .0 (' a) r ca aai a) o C 2 a , a> •o c C co N y ° c -o _ N O _c w > O C O V 3 0 N O a) ,_ C O C) .N C 7 >' =- - Q a) a) a) (o c U C N N Oi a) .-. N -o O 0 C co a) 1- C Z xL d � a(11m �M C , �0 c , C w dc1a CO CD _ cm O 0 w .,. L 3 0 N a c o f (o o o ai w 4- o > a`) '� -p c)7 a) U - cn Q) c U d N U a) a) v 0 0 ` a) L C a) = o a) to C '` _a a) a) a) t C co - w 'a 1- ca a d (_ cA CL .- m 4 a o _a V O V H 45 o Z .c o N a) c a) U a) a) •c a) N a Z (a N ° '' N O N M a) C 3 co 3 0 a-a) (o N cw- > Ba) tII Lrnovi V a, N .0a) aa)) d J > c0 > O p 3 O a) N c ? '2 _o Q V > L � •- .. (aC0 a � 0 = O" Co O c a .` o• � o ` aI) Nco coi vo m � � � c)� E W ._ O O 4) L a •vi 2 oQ c .0 o 2v � � cu 3 3 '05 co E 3 rno N O Y N N > V O .o =• a) a) > o > U p 7 (o a) .0Da) o � oa, . a (n = Ca) a) Loo 0 U) (o C N 'O 2. r- N L L O "a W _o a a) C) c O O a) a) . L a a, a (a N t � Q • 0 U co0 -a a) w .•- �- 0 3 rn O vi t -0 co c .(7) v 'a •N >.._ _ re a ° a>) co) vo-i' ccoca . n cocooaVO �) m Cji coin o o m aoi m � co c c)w x Z 4) -O C a c L w 0 - c o o . L F a3i 3 � `� o rn m � � y c - cr > o 0 o a) LO L .-. a) -0 L _c C a) L s- L. N .- O N ,= -0 CO 0 N 7 -o .,.. z W C) 4' a o treCe 0 m O W Z a) -c..., a) .c 0 as N c� o > viand = vwco L ;., o c � Z 0 < C � 0 R C � s- -c 0 C cii I y c9 d LL E , o d d Q ZZ .- . 'o d E1:3C d � 2 .0 C L *C c a- C mce-ce Q J 2J � N 2 _I 0 ' so o` Saw 'WO a) C vi N h u) >,w c w 'r ca o m v> £ -� en L cca co r (n (n .N a) O a) L C O c 7 E .� v O > L. 2 O o -p D O N a) a? C cn w 'C N -O .c r c co_o ', a N C W 'Y co �- O W t a) t U 013 •�' c �•3 - ts a) 3 m c`o '° -0 � cc o �Z � '� � � vci ccu � y CU v�i E � '> o C o � '-' Cv 2 t v) 0. ZQc y O QLO NC cnw cnOcUOXC — +_ r O V O a) c C O c ti 0 *c j) P N o a) c C O .- y N N p E as - .c To _ O 'Cr F- O CO .riia) N . L (n O C N O) U W c0 V O. 7 O -p N — N Z 2 !n m 0 O.M O C '� 0 - E � d N > > O. M U N -c o a, N -c M 0 L- c6 I ` O N -0 O- W aswf/) m (3 ? 0 CV) N DOr O .o I 2 y C -c E Cr 3 0 O = = w a) O O y 7) L E 0 _ O o U 0 0 . U O L 0 an=. LLU) CY co a �v 'ovH �° adcicon Ce o . m E aa)) 3 a aa)) � u) co 0 0 z -a r o o cfl Z Q r co C -g ,Dw •� a) v } v o �0 3 0 � L o) O ` o 0 UU � —IcT) 3 Ca= .0 a) N � o � `� v O fII c C O v) >, M O N 2 = Q = Ern0 aui o ° cCe 0 cn .O o o N .0 d O` a) OL o to a) a Cl) a) O 3 cn o 0. :E, O -v c — cY v) Q. a) 0) 3 O 0 0 (I) > u) U O n > y C W C 0 a) O QO aci `� 15 3 c � � � o � � C)) aoi `co p E a) � C ' Qv, s M 0 Ot� U < 0 (i)) 3 � N •oo •= co ,c oa v) c CD V) 4 W � ' vEv)— — s u) a) v � cnc � Un. 3O v �.- V ai ° it) .0 o i - .o ° aa) 2 cn 'a) E a) Z - O_ r > U 0 r o V) ... •O O_ c .c= U) w 4 2 L. n, o (1) _ O C7 > RI 0-. = toi � a z O C °a k . H W C i J O. y x p or 2 .J C.L ti a CO d O = E C 0 0 E Q E_ .0 E 1° re2 C� E r C? . C E •C O �Q O — ix W .. .� > > .0 X Q 2 0 QNti o = 2 xa.: -0 2 0 2 � . / nf / co co c cu IL Ce a d - Zc o 2 « ¢ E Gm - a) # 0 � 7 / \ / Ik ® .- o ? g # 0 0 o � a. = Q o 2 I 2 / Ik2 m tgfct 0 / / / \ / / kz / 0 c g ¥ 0 a 6 \ 6 Cl)� / 7 / ek E \ kk = / N c o \ _ ■ _ ° o « @ e 9 9 o vs 0f7 : $ >f � C / } � V \ v- \ \ ro + f \ � & 2k � ± ° S ) -a _ ° ° ° § c a) 7 w k 0 kk k7f2 £ ma)=g - § m 2 ± CC CC cc -0 - o a g o 2 = 2 _ 0 5 _ _ 2 m a) a) -0 ■ 2f3b § § qf / � $ a O Q o 0 ■ W m c = o " t " = o / m m m ■ wrz2D = 7CO7CDc � � R et � a 6 / 6 § / / O / rt2 7 1 \ 7 # # # k 0 0 CCk I— V) I- $ Cl) ƒ k 2 w c a / w =_ a$ § 116 O @ 2 � 5 I- _ co > c G co a) 0 2 z LLI CI o = 0kk0 ,5 � wq _ WO w Q 2 ■ � 222cEc Z_ ■ ■ W -� g ■ ■ ■ o _Q $ J k . ° k ° E § ■ Y @ cT2 CL U 2a1- 22 :: 0 I < c e ■ = ■ ° = c Cr cr tr ea. a) ca« k � 0ce5 � ■ wwww � O a >, a) �o CO L V _C C � �_ C � CO 0 -0 .cL- c o coO w _c ` O 0 o O O C O '`� O (0 C f0 L W m V O ~ (n C y 'O 3 0 H Z O C O Z Q o f o a) o 0) CO O OV � oa) � a� a) rnOc0d � H c '~ w > N U) .` co— f�0 C O U �i Q - o 0 0 E aci '5 0.� > cu) cco U 0 ui CO -0 o c aa)) cn c� a_oa - .. co CL f0E to 'C 13 Q .a a) O co 3 Jo 0 2 CU Q co0 .O co p z V U V . p a0 Z N � � O 'CG`� 0 O c - C 0) a) p Nnw � � v a) o � i2 � � L- a) a)co c o cco d co ` a) a" N O dQ > co c CD ow 5" o cn E o � � � E a)U N nt (0p NL a) O M v) Cy0n. L. a) Na) OoU c0 t) a) C N .� t0 N c �-' c .0 Cw 'OO Na E rn"- ''' aCt dE .a c0 c cn = • c W .o O 0 O a) NOc >, to OU • cEcate) cc c V c •� CCO `50 10 CDv C -Oo U t_ N .- c c ° EtE Y c0 'pa) .Y dx 0OO o C '> f0 L U c0 Y O O — O0 co o co 0 'S °' At Xc`o or o .- ac o o m n� � a) . co a) UUa m 3 c) �t� c c� Q co) o_ o .5 � co 3 2 .E _a m V) CD C O ) = CD CNN o U. Ce Z C 5 E .L.. O` f0 N C E (0 - �I QU asc ° oa00_ °) Ooo v 0 Q A — aP ° a) o =, ao m vm . C -co ,-u) c - Ce f) n• c >O .L `O aa)) co Y fl a) .— .as a) N Qc8ia_ aa)) .S '5u)) 3 ° c _a2 V) Z CO W W 2 V a 0 O Q W I- w Q w G ii- 2 F- x CDU W y Q- W = I a O. 61) y ow M Co M co Q) P L 0 E ao N O N O N N o _O) o '2 O • _c to c j L _ L o a) O fo ,� � oItj cri yy• 9 (n w 8ce ' oo 0) coop4 co O c O O oN Q) to i pCa) c � 0 i0a90O o O NN H •o a) -a V• a) N .2cc 4 4 a, O Z < TO 0 = �c0 0 U �� L 2 E _o a) 0 V) = _.c_ S Q' ap � �' �' - _o 0 1.3 co N y a) Q L O co � O t!) _o co W co Cl) (/) 'II OQ O CD O Q', f") O _ aj 0 Z a) o .� (-4. rn N rn N i c co N a) a) ow o rn tor) a J I - t. - -a - O O N in . Q O c o a) �I ch o . c O ce U - -o � oCj� U 0 coo 0 g � � o �� W � o � -0 2 a) O E a) c W Q a) a) a) O U u) o aw cca ro� ao Q v) v) U) Q1C � O iri Z o a) o 0 ai o o + V o O N LL 0 .-• cce- p O O Q) 4 0 a) a) N aith 0 o o e; N 0 I ID 0 c co al 9 rn ,_ re QU � c01:3 c � J v d• Q 2 L N O .2 1- o 0 0 0 O L Lo a) � • co � o co y � C� aoi a°)i QI • o I- u) o d o O � w r Z U) U) Z L Q w J O () ai o a N >- Cl) v) rn ' W 0 6 W c c LV Z NN CD Q O C1 w M O) F- W o = a cl' Q o M 00 2w z 3 F- ' w a 5 r- �' Q Q o c 0 IL c° 0 R H d LI d 0 . d c 7) c "N H _j o N m i d W W 00 Q J NreQ (� C9 N ATTACHMENT H • e. Parking Spaces Required Based on Land Use: Modification of these minimum or maximum standards requires written approval from the Planning/Building/Public Works Department(see RMC 4-9-250). (Ord. 4517, 5-8-1995; Amd. Ord. 4790, 9-13- 1999; Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 4982, 9-23-2002; Ord. 5030, 11-24-2003; Ord. 5087, 6-28-2004; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) USE NUMBER OF REQUIRED SPACES GENE}, Mixed occupancies: The total requirements for off-street (2 or 3 different uses in the same building parking facilities shall be the sum of the or sharing a lot. For 4 or more uses, see requirements for the several uses computed "shopping center" requirements) separately, unless the building is classified as a "shopping center" as defined in RMC 4-11-190. Uses not specifically identified in this Planning/Building/Public Works Section: Department staff shall determine which of the below uses is most similar based upon staff experience with various uses and information provided by the applicant. The amount of required parking for uses not listed above shall be the same as for the most similar use listed below. sE s Detached and semi-attached dwellings: A minimum of 2 per dwelling unit. Tandem parking is allowed. A maximum of 4 vehicles may be parked on a lot, including those vehicles under repair and restoration, unless kept within an enclosed building. Bed and breakfast houses: 1 per guest room. The parking space must not be located in any required setback. Manufactured homes within a A minimum of 2 per manufactured home manufactured home park: site, plus a screened parking area shall be provided for boats, campers, travel trailers and related devices at a ratio of 1 screened space per 10 units. A maximum of 4 vehicles may be parked on a lot, including those vehicles under repair and restoration, unless kept within an enclosed building. Congregate residence: 1 per sleeping room and 1 for the proprietor,plus 1 additional space for each 4 persons employed on the premises. ATTACHMENT H Attached dwellings in CD, RM-U, RM- 1.8 per 3 bedroom or larger dwelling T, UC-Nl, UC-N2 and Zones and CV unit;1.6 per 2 bedroom dwelling unit;1.2 Zones- per 1 bedroom or studio dwelling unit. RM-T Zone Exemption: An exemption to the standard parking ratio formula may be granted by the Development Services Director allowing 1 parking space per dwelling unit for developments of less than 5 dwelling units with 2 bedrooms or less per unit provided adequate on-street parking is available in the vicinity of the development. (Amd. Ord. 5018, 9-22-2003; Ord. 5087, 6-28-2004) Attached dwellings within the RM-F 2 per dwelling unit where tandem spaces Zone: are not provided; and/or2.5 per dwelling unit where tandem parking is provided, subject to the criteria found in subsection F8d of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) Attached dwellings within the CV Zone: 1 per dwelling unit is required. A maximum of 1.75 per dwelling unit is allowed. Attached dwellings within all other 1.75 per dwelling unit where tandem zones: spaces are not provided; and/or 2.25 per dwelling unit where tandem parking is provided, subject to the criteria found in subsection F8d of this Section. Attached dwelling for low income 1 for each 4 dwelling units. elderl : Attached dwellings: 1 per unit. Attached dwellings for low income 1 for every 3 dwelling units. elderl : VON Cs t411-0AskVI ki,j'efatt CPA Drive-through retail or drive-through Stacking spaces: The drive-through service: facility shall be so located that sufficient on-site vehicle stacking space is provided for the handling of motor vehicles using such facility during peak business hours. Typically 5 stacking spaces per window are required unless otherwise determined by ATTACHMENT H the Development Services Director. Stacking spaces cannot obstruct required parking spaces or ingress/egress within the site or extend into the public right-of-way. Banks: A minimum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area and a maximum of 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area except when part of a shopping center. Convalescent centers: 1 for every 2 employees plus 1 for every 3 beds. Day care centers, adult day care (I and 1 for each employee and 2 loading spaces II): within 100 feet of the main entrance for every 25 clients of the program. Hotels and motels: 1 per guest room plus 2 for every 3 employees. Mortuaries or funeral homes: 1 per 100 square feet of floor area of assembly rooms. Vehicle sales (large and small vehicles) 1 per 5,000 square feet. The sales area is with outdoor retail sales areas: not a parking lot and does not have to comply with dimensional requirements, landscaping or the bulk storage section requirements for setbacks and screening. Any arrangement of motor vehicles is allowed as long as:• A minimum 5 feet perimeter landscaping area is provided;. They are not displayed in required landscape areas; and• Adequate fire access is provided per Fire Department approval. Vehicle service and repair(large and 0.25 per 100 square feet of net floor area. small vehicles): Offices, medical and dental: 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area. Offices, general: A minimum of 3 per 1,000 feet of net floor area and a maximum of 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area. Eating and drinking establishments and 1 per 100 square feet of net floor area. taverns: Eating and drinking establishment 1 per 75 square feet of net floor area. combination sit-down/drive-through restaurant: Retail sales and big-box retail sales: A maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area, except big-box retail sales, which is allowed a maximum of 0.5 per ATTACHMENT H 100 square feet of net floor area if shared and/or structured parking is provided. Services, on-site (except as specified A maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of below): net floor area. Clothing or shoe repair shops, furniture, 0.2 per 100 square feet of net floor area. appliance, hardware stores, household equipment: Uncovered commercial area, outdoor 0.05 per 100 square feet of retail sales area nurseries: in addition to any parking requirements for buildings. Recreational and entertainment uses: Outdoor and indoor sports arenas, 1 for every 4 fixed seats or 1 per 100 auditoriums, stadiums, movie theaters, square feet of floor area of main auditorium and entertainment clubs: or of principal place of assembly not containing fixed seats, whichever is greater. Bowling alleys: 5 per alley. Dance halls, dance clubs, and skating 1 per 40 square feet of net floor area. rinks: Golf driving ranges: 1 per driving station Marinas: 2 per 3 slips. For private marina associated with a residential complex, then 1 per 3 slips. Also 1 loading area per 25 slips. Miniature golf courses: 1 per hole. Other recreational: 1 per occupant based upon 50% of the maximum occupant load as established by the adopted Building and Fire Codes of the City of Renton. Travel trailers: 1 •er trailer site. To _Ow All uses allowed in the CD Zone except 1 space per 1,000 square feet of net floor for the following uses: area. Excepted uses follow the standards Excepted Uses: Convalescent center, applied outside the Downtown Core. drive-through retail, drive-through service, hotels, mortuaries, indoor sports arenas, auditoriums, movie theaters, entertainment clubs, bowling alleys, dance halls, dance clubs, and other recreational uses. Shopping centers (includes any type of A minimum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of ATTACHMENT H vow **004 business occupying a shopping center): net floor area and a maximum of 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area. In the UC- N1 and UC-N2 Zones, a maximum of 0.4 per 100 square feet of net floor area is permitted unless structured parking is provided, in which case 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area is permitted. Drive- through retail or drive-through service uses must comply with the stacking space provisions listed above. 1$m Airplane hangars, tie-down areas: Parking is not required. Hangar space or tie-down areas are to be utilized for necessary parking. Parking for offices associated with hangars is 1 per 200 square feet. Manufacturing and fabrication, A minimum of 0.1 per 100 square feet of laboratories, and assembly and/or net floor area and a maximum of 0.15 packaging operations: spaces per 100 square feet of net floor area (including warehouse space). Self service storage: 1 per 3,500 square feet of net floor area. Maximum of three moving van/truck spaces in addition to required parking for self service storage uses in the RM-F Zone. Outdoor storage area: 0.05 per 100 square feet of area. Warehouses and indoor storage 1 per 1,500 square feet of net floor area. buildin s Religious institutions: 1 for every 5 seats in the main auditorium, however, in no case shall there be less than 10 spaces. For all existing institutions enlarging the seating capacity of their auditoriums, 1 additional parking space shall be provided for every 5 additional seats provided by the new construction. For all institutions making structural alterations or additions that do not increase the seating capacity of the auditorium, see "outdoor and indoor sports arenas, auditoriums, stadiums, movie theaters, and entertainment clubs." Medical institutions: 1 for every 3 beds,plus 1 per staff doctor, plus 1 for every 3 employees. Cultural facilities: 4 per 100 square feet. ATTACHMENT H Public post office: 0.3 for every 100 square feet. Secure community transition facilities: 1 per 3 beds,plus 1 per staff member, plus 1 per employee. Schools: Elementary and junior high: 1 per employee. In addition, if buses for the transportation of students are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. Senior high schools: public, parochial 1 per employee plus 1 space for every 10 and private: students enrolled. In addition, if buses for the private transportation of children are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. Colleges and universities, arts and crafts 1 per employee plus 1 for every 3 students schools/studios, and trade or vocational residing on campus, plus 1 space for every schools: 5 day students not residing on campus. In addition, if buses for transportation of students are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. (Amd. Ord. 5030, 11-24-2003; Ord. 5087, 6-28-2004) a) � .� v 8 .� 0 'b to .° cu a ) ,5 v 0 •,. . i "o •"b o K -d o o o _ o 0 -o ° 0 ¢ o 6 3 a) .0 N N �. ,O 'O N >, O ,° rn a) 0 ~ et 0 0 71. o - 0 o :d id a) ^; an El E a > �b 0 0 - ct O d �,,b �. p cis .-. -0 �, ° E - Z � a no 0„.0,.� -0 cd a cn ct 'a' 3 0 a) a) c 'd tu0 to ��- as s. .� O N y , �" O + 4Q) a) �+ 0 oN o � b � . 3 a) O �' .� N -b � � 0 4. c.o -d a) �, c. ° o a. ' �o -os to ct a d o 0 0 ° ; .o ) -~ •o 4_, up •i o,do o8 , 9 4, o O • O � U . 0 o En ooa ..o -0 0 c o u ° 'b : o ° o i o a °W •- - a Q -o o ua) ' b oEgt,' °A� � cd te y'' .ct , oU o n " a) 6 ° �, ; - C 3 ° A .0 0 .- a • O -O .0b - a) U ,6 p d] b4. ;n� V ,$) ° a) o • •. E En c U ) -0� ti " O ° �N o topi.. 'ABrio N o ) � Q�' 2 O - a) a) 0 bA ct a) a) •-. cd �, o L" +� �. ) H a ° 4 H t) al al a:E OD"0 a V S W cA x 0 ela, a Z 0 H A a a d d d A E 0CD 0 o Q) p, a o 0 N C) dA cC a w U H z z z z b .0 -0 U •0 O • •0 O 0 . 0 a3 a) 0 0 bD cn 3 U N a) ... O 0 ., •- — ^� U U U �, co 1.. N � E E o •P o � � v) AadUa � o 8 � � •g .� cat 'b a) U • • • O cn Z A el., cdE '�' c"d � ow oA a3 a M 0 .y .50 p ..O .ai '0 5 0 a) a) ti d p a3 ,4 at ,.•, E .0 � p O .y p .3 p , �, g G? y0 O .- 0 0 �, c/� ..� O 0 V O Lam., 4-. .ri 0 U) .b fi O a) 0 of s••,y,y U • ilUil ' c1-. O �. .-, s-. = O O p fa U .P. �>, c O .O 2U., N ,- ., ,. y '3 0 O U cn h M h > cd y �, V) U '." N U 0 0 y .'—', U U) y 4�) " 5 c2 to a) N 0 r O a) O r".' U O w i „so N`'" c. dQ•O— 'E , 4) a) cO ,.O ta. E y • .. t], E 0 E N a3 H c c—+d 4, 7 •cad c O E O th U 4-I • U rn •., N •., 4� �,•., ..., v) • . C � .,-.+ N ._, N •., N 'sr. a3 tn 3 •.-1 m 3 -...> •'.' a3 0 v, a. -°' ,s-, '.' .4d .�. x a! O 61) U 5 s", `> aS A A Q M -+ c�' of axi cad U E b • bJ a •0 al ., H Wa C� U O .. C7 GA 03 ... H• •� ° o 0 p d � c1A d pqV • no 0 al bA v 2 as t � U cd C.) N _ •-, ,0 a) •_ tj t oAQ �v) � � � , a F O a. a) d . U O ° r, s:, E o cci a a) a) ;- 4-, in � a'C7 E 0 `` cc!c O o bA b c) .4 o E E a) ' o •- 00. .b a) 0 a)hfl 1-1 4- (°, 0""" o ›, a) - `" a) o . R. 0 b En 0 O C ^ ai : o 0 a) .o > as al k o >, aE.I. B o o .r ai . o >, Q. ci .x E '> E o o , b w .E x , x c� ° GU o AQ Al ,4 61) o Q" c w F to o .4 E w 0. Q" O aoi 8 • • • • • • H z w x U H H VD 4-( 0 Lel a) to ct a v rna; ,- _ a) = 'd 0 X +� .ct -. - ..• •0 ^" 0 O O N cl) X 'O 0 O '0 ctj 'Cy O cn 2 a" o 3 ti O 0 .� n „, ' a) cd .� ,� •0 2 0 'yam. 0 0 .4 a) a) L o cbd 0 to cz ;b a U O 4.., 0 •6 ',- cR pp cn P „ 0 O -�-' 0 bA O ta, O _V) O c/ v '"'1 ° 4. N a0•+ '. O bA _ N _, V r.-� ES MI o '.�"', O 0 ^' i cd U id Q" o O O O d ,0 0 y o y E cn QO •2 v O a) ad 'd CI 0 bA 0 sue, �••^ 4- .� ( 'b cd cd �+ 4-, }, a) •• 0 ti ^� `+c•d 0 0 O 0 >, o o° U O O +'�-+ .�. 'O 0 `++ U O �' ': N .—.. 6, ti 0 'p 0 O ; c w a O O * 0 0 0 Li, a) -0 i�!0 Os. Q cl 7O. Q"W o Q. o .�"5' �� f0. ^ - > * O 0 0 O 0 t -c o z -0i En c. 0 .—. i H z w U Q H F-+ vamp' N..r w cn ,b "d o W Q"'C O0 g 0 U a�i • 2 E 0. 0 0 w • 0 +>' i, •� 'd 0 •� •�n N .O 0 O U 0 N O t- O O c) O U •ice U 4 a, Ei Sp', �j E EO y ? a) 0 E R' a) 5 ci U c: 0 0 y s' , O 0 0 on 4-4 C, ebb � :- o c4-40 0O a) ci) oR, at E up' +-+ 1-1-1U 0 VD 0 VD 0 .� -d a on :x 1 5 � 03 ) a) .� _ • cn 0.) • • 0(4.4 0M OU 0 'd - ) • O cd g cd o O -0 a) J, c 0 a) .2 bO X 0 2O rid al U c c� cn V/ pp' 3 'CA CU O • H z z U c4 •2 41) ray 0 L .6 et WU 1t i t/� 1g14 Taskforce Recommendations Highlands Study Area Land Use and Zoning Package Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force Report to the Committee of the Whole November 13,2006 Task Force Purpose Task Force Purpose • Provide additional citizen input The Task Force reviewed the following items: • Review draft Highlands Land Use and -Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Zoning Package —Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map • Issue a report with Task Force --Zoning Map recommendations on Land Use and Zoning -Zoning Text Amendments Task Force Process Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments • Phase 1-Staff briefs Task Force on current • Remove R-10 as an implementing zone in the zoning and land use and proposed changes Center Village Land Use designation • Phase 2-Task Force creates zoning and land • Allow R-14 as an implementing zone in the Center use map of study area Village Land Use designation • Phase 3-Task Force discusses zoning and • Allow RM-U and RM-T as implementing zones in Comprehensive Plan text amendments the Center Village Land Use designation • Phase 4-Task Force issues report of • Eliminate Strategy 319.2-that only residential recommendations uses be allowed north of NE 12°i Street 1 / ._,r *4100 *4110101 Proposed Land Use Map Highlands Proposed Land Use Map Amendments �h • Add the area north of f �� NE 1 G°i Street in the }Y f a t t . fi CV land use ""1 t r1 :� designation "" r • Place two areas with ` J " hE'1 i i g� existingmulti-family �l t'k , 1g� development in RM F� �; lti � � ;J ! ' land use designation ' p 1 it , t 'k T `..,� r ,_ 1 -`4 Highlands Proposed Rezones Highlands Proposed Rezones try - rr '»I i. r R-l0 and ; et t t Areas with ;. Y .,: ..� '� ' ' RMF ��, . , e b i smaller multi- � „�� f �>F' 1 ' �� family `r = '«» i,�_. , residential i .i t,. ,.""' t =. developments areas to j from R-l0 to iI t: 3 tl R-l4 -- 1 . 3 RN1F -4144i T, s T ! Y r � ! 'r;":2-:', . f X t F.1 ' '' t { i-+R 3`f NA Y EE 4'1c Highlands Proposed Rezones Highlands Proposed Zoning Map Areas with large 171 ' r . ,,, }diT.t j multi-family t t {s f µ ,F ,, developments r M t = hi k,a and Housing 1 . ,. r l Authority r C f' ° �.� ti t 1 >- t properties from 1 l i , a f'.p RMFto 011 ai �F i ki,' �T 1 _,,,..„..,-.:-..,,,,,,,,,,,.. , ,. 1..s-,1;','''....o.. ; , , i-.0;":1/ -,1; "kr.-',--' ` 14-'7TyA4. i . ,.. s wilifigale. ,,, ' --4,..iz--.'• :, '''' r.- iLe4, -, ,.,,,,,,,,„,, axT', ra ,, r .`49 2 Zoning Text Amendments Zoning Text Amendments Non-conforming Uses Property Redevelopment • Past proposals did not allow single-family • Draft proposal required the removal of residences or duplexes existing units if a property is subdivided • As a result,past proposals created legal non- • This proposal eliminates that provision- confoiming uses existing units may remain even if the rest • This proposal allows single-family of the property is developed residences and duplexes • There is no issue with non-conforming uses-existing units may remodel and expand Zoning Text Amendments Zoning Text Amendments Affordable Housing Limits on Commercial Development Two proposed incentives to help keep the • The proposal limits commercial uses in the neighborhood affordable: R-14 zone north of NE 12th Street • Allows the creation of 2 units/acre • The proposal only allows on-site services, affordable housing as one option to receive eating and drinking establishments,and 18 units/acre bonus density in R-14 zone retail uses if in conjunction with a • Allows bonus density of 30 units/acre for community,school,or recreation use developments at least 2 acres in size where • The proposal allows new indoor recreation at least 50%of the units are affordable uses Zoning Text Amendments Zoning Text Amendments Commercial Development in CV Zone Increases in Minimum Density • The proposal ensures that residential uses • The proposal raises the minimum density in don't dominate this commercial zone the R-14 zone to 10 units/acre to be • The proposal requires commercial uses to consistent with the Comprehensive Plan occupy 75%of the frontage along NE • The proposal raises the minimum density in Sunset Blvd. the CV zone to 20 units/acre to prevent • The proposal allows a 10 ft.height bonus to lower density residential uses in a primarily a maximum of 60 ft.for buildings with ground floor commercial use commercial zone 3 40 Zoning Text Amendments Zoning Text Amendments R-1 4 Zone Regulations Design Regulations • The proposal keeps the existing density • The proposal adopts design regulations for bonus in the R-14 zone that allows up to 18 the Highlands units/acre • The regulations are a mix of standards and • The proposal raises the minimum lot size guidelines for single-family houses to 5,000 square • There are different regulations for the feet residential and commercial areas Issues for Further Consideration • Implementation of minimum property maintenance code • Affordable housing strategies • Storm water control in the Highlands , " • • Parks and Recreation del,elopment in the Highlands • Completion of sub area plan • Cottage Housing ordinance • Continued involvement of a Citizen's Task Force 4 Vite `u h/ &b Report and Recommendation Of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force November 8, 2006 G E, � 440.0 NNW The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force was appointed by Mayor Kathy Keolker on October 9, 2006 Task Force Members: Kirk Moore, Chair Steve Beck Theresa Elmer Mark Gropper Jennifer Hawton Bimal Kumar Howard McOmber Colin Walker Scott Weiss Sandel DeMastus, alternate The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force was composed of a group of citizen volunteers, appointed by the Mayor, and approved by the City Council. Task Force members were recruited from the Party of Records list from the Renton Highlands Sub Area zoning action, from the Highlands Community Association, from the Renton Housing Authority, from neighborhood business owners, and through general public notice. Task Force membership was chosen to reflect commercial, community,property owner, and resident interests within the areas of the Highlands affected by proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning changes. Purpose The purpose of the Task Force was to provide additional citizen and property owner input into the zoning decisions within the Highlands study area. This Task Force convened for a limited time with the specific purpose to review the draft land use and zoning changes. This included review of proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments,proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendments, proposed Zoning Map Amendments, and proposed Zoning Text Amendments. After reviewing the proposed changes, the Task Force was charged with putting together a set of recommendations for City Council review. This report contains the recommendations of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force. It lists issues of concern that Task Force members identified, and proposed solutions. Task Force proposed Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments are attached to this report in the following appendices: • Appendix A- Task Force Proposed Land Use Map • Appendix B-Task Force Proposed Zoning Map • Appendix C- Task Force Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments • Appendix D- Task Force Proposed Zoning Text Amendments Process Since the Task Force was formed members have met twice a week with City staff. In the first phase of the process, staff briefed the Task Force on the current zoning regulations in effect in the Highlands study area, as well as the proposed changes. Initial briefings also included review of the Comprehensive Plan land use policies in effect for the neighborhood. During the second phase, each Task Force member developed his or her own zoning map for the study area. Individual zoning concepts were consolidated into three small-group concepts by consensus. From these three maps, the Task Force consolidated the information into a single mapping proposal. Throughout the process of the briefings and the mapping exercise, a number of issues surfaced regarding land use policy and zoning regulations. These issues were collected throughout the first two phases of the process and brought back to the Task Force for discussion and recommendation in the third phase of the process. Decisions during this phase were also made by consensus of the Task Force. Staff provided additional information as requested and provided further assistance in interpreting the details of zoning and land use regulation. 1 Now *NO Although the recommendations of the Task Force were formed through consensus, there was always the option to create a minority report. Given that there has been a fair amount of contention in the Highlands study area over proposed land use and zoning changes, the City Council authorized the creation of a minority report if necessary. A minority report allowed the opportunity for a group of at least three Task Force members to present an alternative recommendation from the rest of the group. Thus, if there were areas in which the Task Force just could not agree,there would be a series of alternative recommendations. Task Force Recommendations Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations and Policies All zoning is required by law to be consistent with the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan. The Task Force completed a land use map for the study area. Implementation of the Task Force proposal requires some Comprehensive Plan Text and Land Use Map Amendments. Appendix A contains the Task Force Proposed Land Use Map. This map shows the proposal to include the residential area north of NE 16th Street in the Center Village (CV) land use designation. It also includes the recommendation to include the multi-family areas south east of NE 12th Street and Monroe Ave NE, and east of Harrington Avenue NE between NE 7th Street and NE 9th Street in the Residential Multi- Family(RMF) land use designation. Appendix C contains the Task Force Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments. The Task Force recommended that Residential- 14(R-14), Center Village(CV), and the Residential Multi-family(RM-F, RM-U, and RM-T) zones implement the Center Village Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. Zoning Map Rezoning of property in the Highlands Study Area is a very important issue to the residents and property owners there. The Task Force completed a zoning map for the study area. A modest up-zone to Residential- fourteen units per acre (R-14)was recommended for much of the current Residential- ten units per net acre (R-10) zoning in the study area. R-14 zoning was also recommended for the duplexes north of Sunset Boulevard in the vicinity of Glenwood Avenue NE and Harrington Avenue NE. Center Village (CV) zoning was expanded along Sunset Boulevard, in a few parcels adjacent to the existing commercial area, and the Houser Terrace and Evergreen Terrace properties owned by the Renton Housing Authority. Rezoning to Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) was recommended for three strips of properties: a strip along Kirkland Avenue NE, a strip south of NE 12th Street, and a strip along Harrington Avenue NE. Appendix B contains the Task Force Proposed Zoning Map. Non-Conforming Uses Past zoning proposals for this area included the possibility of implementing zoning that did not allow existing residential uses, such as duplexes and single-family homes. In such situations, the existing use is considered a legal non-conforming use. Legal non- conforming is the technical term for"grandfathered in". It means that the use is allowed to continue but may not expand or enlarge. Several members of the Task Force wished to ensure that the zoning proposal allow existing residential uses to remain legal and conforming. The recommended zoning proposal eliminates the issue of non-conforming 2 NNW uses. All existing use types (duplexes, single-family uses) are allowed uses in the proposed zoning package. Property Redevelopment One of the most debated issues in the package of proposed zoning changes was a requirement that when properties came in for subdivision, the existing unit had to be removed. This would only affect those applying for division of their properties, and not to other changes like remodels or additions. However, the Task Force felt that property owners should not be required to remove existing units in order to subdivide their property. In lieu of requiring the removal of existing units,the Task Force indicated that property owners should be required to upgrade the existing units. Unfortunately,building and related codes make this impossible to implement without declaring the unit a hazard. The Task Force did not wish to create a situation in which existing units were declared hazardous. However, the Task Force did recommend deleting the provision that required the removal of existing units upon subdivision. Affordable Housing Keeping the neighborhood an affordable place to live for people in all stages of their lives was important to the members of the Task Force. In the R-14 zone, there is an allowed density bonus of 18 units per net acre. The Task Force recommended keeping the proposed incentive of creating two units of affordable housing as one of the options to achieve the density bonus. The Task Force also recommended implementing an incentive geared toward public agencies and non-profit organizations whose mission is to provide affordable housing. An incentive was recommended that would allow a bonus of 30 units per net acre for any project, of at least two acres, in which a minimum of 50% of the units developed would be affordable to those with incomes of 50% of the Area Median Income. Limits on Commercial Development While the Task Force liked the flexibility of the R-14 zone, there was general concern that it could allow some small commercial uses in a residential area. To prevent this,the Task Force recommendation specifically prohibits on-site services, retail, and eating/drinking establishments in this area unless they are accessory to a community, school, or recreational use. This would allow the possibility for a small business like an espresso stand or bicycle rental to locate in a park or the Community Center. A hearings examiner conditional use permit would be required. The Task Force also recommended that new, indoor recreational uses should be allowed in the R-14 zone to allow for redevelopment of the North Highlands Community Center property. Commercial Development Amendments in the Center Village Zone The CV zone is primarily oriented toward commercial development. Residential uses are allowed, but some limits must be put in place to ensure that as the area begins to redevelop, residential uses will not dominate this zone. As a result, the Task Force recommended increasing the minimum residential density in this area to 20 dwelling units per net acre. This will prevent lower density residential-only redevelopment from occurring in the commercial area. The Task Force also recommended a standard which 3 t requires commercial development in properties fronting on Sunset Boulevard. This proposes that commercial development occupy a minimum of 75%of the frontage on Sunset. Another Task Force recommendation was to allow a ten foot height bonus in the CV zone for properties that have first floor commercial development. This allows building of four stories of residential over first floor commercial development, an important incentive for the development of mixed use commercial and residential buildings. R-14 Zone Density The Task Force recommended raising the minimum density in the R-14 zone to ten units per acre to comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the Center Village Land Use Designation. The Task Force also recommended keeping the current bonus system in the R-14 zone that allows densities up to 18 units per net acre. In order to receive the bonus, however, the proposed development would have to offer one of the following desired items: alley access, open space, or affordable housing. Design Regulations The Task Force recommended implementation of Design Regulations for all properties within the Center Village land use designation. The regulations consist of standards and guidelines that would be applied to new development. Minimum Lot Size for Detached Residential Development The Task Force recommended that the minimum lot size for single-family detached residences in the R-14 zone be set at 5,000 square feet. Next Steps The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force has recommended a complete package of land use and zoning changes. These proposed changes are currently in environmental review and the City's Environmental Review Committee is expected to issue an environmental determination on November 13, 2006. November 13th is also the scheduled date for a City Council public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan changes included in this recommendation. Upon completion of the environmental review and the public hearing processes, the City Council should consider the Task Force recommendations for adoption. Beyond possible adoption, the Task Force identified a number of issues beyond their immediate scope of work. Issues that the Task Force feels merit further consideration by the City, include: - Implementation of a minimum property maintenance code that would address potential life safety issues in existing units - Affordable housing strategies for the Highlands, and the City as a whole, including zoning incentives,tax incentives, and possible fee reductions - Consideration of storm water regulation implementation in the Highlands - Development of properties for parks and recreation uses by the City - Completion of a full sub area plan for the study area 4 } - Consideration of implementation of Cottage Housing standards in the Highlands and Citywide. In addition to addressing these issues,the Task Force highly recommends that the City continue to work with a Citizen's Task Force in the revitalization and redevelopment of the Highlands Study Area. 5 Nos" %se :7 ._ •-,-: V i• 0 Cif . A in ......, 0 0 —2 I -,_•,-. .^1 t • f `-' 11 14 -4: N. -.' (T) 2 N gl 0 ....'-'7:: 1 - hi Er e 0 ."4:: I LIZ().,., il - ... 2 --- •..: 0 -- ia ga 0 -2. 01 Wzz ei --2 ft 0 2 iti) 0 ---• 0 ---; W 0 - ...... X -3-t 2 0 . co tr) .. o :al Cl) co in e4 a) 0 o < 11 e4 ci •:-. 1.1) N. Nt•Lu I-1 to = 0 i tn F—I tt' tcs ca 00 a) co — cr •i 01 — . e. • NI1 44 = •_ ,,N, , •_, 0 ,-. \K . _____e_. ci-• al u j o o.) D c., = 0 •-st \-. 7 o 0 r (\\N ili C=4 i 0 >-, — )...i 0 U u_ --,t) 0 1r) 4:( ,...)-. ,-1 v II 9 CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 13th day of November, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, to consider the following: 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. For information, call 425-430-6510. 6-7t4'tW Cda.lten Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Published King County Journal November 3, 2006 Account No. 50640 11/2/2006 - Notice sent to 108 Parties of Record per attached labels. L.Johnson 1 cc: Rebecca Lind Nasuo• 'Nose Leslie Clark &Scott Missal Sherryann Allen Heather Allen-Lilly Short Cressman & Burgess 1217 N. 30th St 1212 N 30th St 999 3rd Ave, Ste 3000 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104 Judy Anderson Dennis Banes Steve Blackman 15258 Maple Drive 1909 Jones Ave NE 2100 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Julie Bray Raymond Breeden Fritz Brendemihl 1901 NE 20th Street 15279 Maple Dr 2116 High Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Karen Browne Robert & Roberta Butcher Robert Cave 2000 NE 20th St 2422 Jones Ave NE 1813 NE 24th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Timothy Charnley Don Charnley Peter Chee 14140 SE 171 st Way#E204 15291 Maple Dr 1311 205th Ave NE Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Sammamish, WA 98074 Wan Chee Mare & Durward Clare Karen &Jay Cook 1605 E Lk Sammamish PI SE 1818 Jones Ave NE 14012 SE 133rd St Sammamish, WA 98075 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 John Cowan Jean Daniels Michael &Joan Davis 1830 NE 24th St 1707 Jones Ave NE 2020 NE 20th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Scott Day Sandel DeMastus Robert Dier 1932 NE 20th St 1137 Harrington Ave NE 1732 NE 24th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Robert & Deanna Dobak D Downing Terry Dutro 1700 NE 20th St 13807 139th Ave SE 10711 SE 30th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 Bellevue, WA 98004 Robert Eichler Carol Espy Reeves Annie & Learon Farnsworth 3455 Hunts Pt Rd 1624 Jones Ave NE 15263 Maple Dr Bellevue, WA 98004 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Karen Firinicum Randy Fung Karol & Eric Gabrielson 1302 Aberdeen Ave NE 2024 NW 57th St#302 2001 NE 20th St Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98107 Renton, WA 98056 Karol Gabrielson Shirley Gaut-Smith Richard Gersib 2001 NE 20th St 4102 NE 6th PI 8525 37th Ct E Renton. WA 98056 Renton. WA 98059 Lacey, WA 98503 Deborah, Charles, & Lenora Gibson Rick, Eli, & Lauralee Gordley Randy & Sheri Grittman 2008 NE 20th St 2010 Jones Ave NE 1909 Monterey Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Bill Grover David Halinen Patrick Hanis P.O. Box 2701 Halinen Law Offices, P.S. Hanis Greaney Attorneys Renton, WA 98056 2115 N 30th, Ste 203 6703 S 234th St, Ste 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Kent, WA Brett Hawton Barb Hics Don Hoffman 1308 Harrington Ave NE 1805 NE 20th St 375 Union Ave SE #143 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 Connie Jahes Bob Johns Barbara Joy Johnson 1835 NE 20th St 1601 114th SE #110 1824 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98004 Renton, WA 98056 Carolyn & Carmen Jones Kathryn Jones-Giel LaVonne Kahnell 408 Midway Ave 4935 Topaz Ave 15275 Maple Dr San Mateo, CA 94402 Rocklin, CA 95677 Renton, WA 98058 Brett Kappenman Darrell & Sue Kinzer Harry Kodis 1004 SW 4th PI 1733 NE 20th St 2619 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Rochelle Krispin Marie Larsen Tina Leiler 1109 30th St 2006 NE 20th St 3101 Meadow PI N Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Rick Lennon Alden Linn Stan Loreen 35815 SE David Powell Rd 2907 Park Ave N 13605 139th Ave SE Fall City, WA 98024 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 Marcie Maxwell David McBride Charles McCord P. O. Box 2048 1706 Kennewick Ave NE 2802 Park Ave N Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Howard McOmber Albert Miller John &Joan Morelli 475 Olympia Ave NE 3108 Park Ave N 1726 NE 24th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Jessica Morgan John & Kelly Morgan Jane Nation 4200 Smithers Ave S #B201 2414 Jones Ave NE 25113 265th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056 Ravensdale, WA 98051 James Nelson Brad Nicholson Dan OBrien 1905 NE 20th St 2811 Dayton Ave NE 400 S 38th Ct Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 William O'Connor Michele Odren Pete Olds 10402 151st Ave SE 2030 NE 20th St 1314 N 26th St Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Marcie Palmer Inez Petersen Bill Pohl 2507 Park PI N 3306 Lake Washington Blvd #3 2310 Monterey Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Frank Poon Anthony &Annie Porcello Iola Puckett 5360 Col de Vars PI NW 1817 Jones Ave NE 15270 Pine Drive Issaquah, WA 98027 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Carol Pyka Rick & Karen Redfern Betty Remore 15291 Oak Drive 2000 NE 20th St 15277 Birch Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Sue Rider Ken & Edith Saunders Virginia Serwold 1835 NE 20th St 4200 Smithers Ave S #D201 15275 Oak Dr Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98058 Erma Sidebotham Jean Spencer Brian &Jean Stearns 1633 Jones Ave NE 1809 Jones Ave NE 2216 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Tim&Judy Stevens Joye Stranrent Thelma Sutherland 1408 N 28th St 15268 Maple Dr 1205 N 29th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Jim Sween Ken Torkelson Hanna Victory 2514 Jones Ave NE 1820 NE 17th PI 4200 Smithers Ave S #D103 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 Danny Weng Bob Wenzi Judith White 13508 1338th Ave SE Vineyards Construction LLC 201 Union Ave SE #59 Renton, WA 98059 P. O. Box 2401 Renton, WA 98059 Kirkland, WA 98083 Rod Williams Cliff Williams Larry Wood 2402 Jones Ave NE Vineyards Construction LLC 1155 Shelton Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 P. O. Box 2401 Renton, WA 98056 Kirkland, WA 98083 Pamela Wood Alice Zehnder Armando Zorbin REMAX 15245 Pine Drive 2400 NE 10th PI 3660 116th Ave NE Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98004 Lancaster-Barnes LLC Springbrook Associates Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc P. O. Box 25844 P. O. Box 978 115 Garfield St, #4139 Federal Way, WA 98093 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Sumas, WA 98295 CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 13th day of November, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, to consider the following: 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. For information, call 425-430-6510. Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Published King County Journal November 3, 2006 Account No. 50640 October 23,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 364 Comprehensive Plan: 2006 Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Amendments recommended a public hearing be set on 11/13/2006 to consider the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments, concurrent rezonings,zoning text amendments, and the development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. Council concur. Utility: 2006 Emergency Utility Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement in the amount Power Generation, RH2 of$151,240 with RH2 Engineering, Inc. to provide engineering consulting Engineering services during construction of the 2006 Emergency Power Generation Project. Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval of Finance Committee Claim Vouchers 253355 -253808 and two wire transfers totaling Finance: Vouchers $5,269,221.21; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 66244 - 66409, one wire transfer, and 636 direct deposits totaling$2,001,990.63. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services: City Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending Hall Deli Lease, 5 Kwang concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the five-year lease with Corporation Kap S. Yang and Min J. Chang(doing business as 5 Kwang Corporation) for operation of the deli on the 3rd floor of City Hall and the espresso stand in the Renton Transit Center. The Committee further recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the lease. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation (Aviation) Transportation(Aviation) Committee Chair Palmer presented a report regarding Committee the severing of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Track at Transportation: BNSF Wilburton. The Committee recommended that the City of Renton formally Railroad Track, Severing at protest the rail abandonment petition filed by BNSF on 10/19/2006 before the Wilburton US Surface Transportation Board(STB Docket No. AB-6 [Sub. No. 453X]). The reasons cited by the Committee for this protest action include the considerable damage to the City's economy posed by the impact of the rail abandonment on potential future location decisions by The Boeing Company, damage created by the discontinuation of the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train, and potential damage from not having this line available to pending users along the east shore of Lake Washington. The Committee remains fully supportive of the expeditious upgrade of the BNSF Cedar River Bridge to accommodate longer fuselage transport to the Renton Boeing Plant. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3838 A resolution was read opposing I-933, entitled "An Act Relating to Providing AJLS: Initiative 933 Fairness in Government Regulation of Property." MOVED BY BRIERE, (Government Regulation of SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. Private Property) CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Council President Corman encouraged citizens to attend the local talent events School District: IKEA at the Renton IKEA Performing Arts Center. Performing Arts Center Events OF RENTON COUNCIL AGEND:...dILL AI#: � I. Submitting Data: For Agenda of: October 23, 2006 Dept/Div/Board.. Economic Development Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Staff Contact Rebecca Lind Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. 2006 Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments, Correspondence.. Concurrent Rezoning, Zoning Text Amendments, and Ordinance Development Agreement for the former Aqua Barn site Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Council Concur Legal Dept X Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... None Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted NA Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Set a public hearing on the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set a public hearing for November 13, 2006. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 CPA Agenda Bill.doc �Y ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ` NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 18,2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Kathy Keolker,Mayor ]],,�� FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator 1b4' �r STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind,Planning Manager(ext. 6588) SUBJECT: 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments ISSUE: Should the City Council set a public hearing for the 2006 annual Comprehensive Plan amendment recommendations including the Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments, concurrent property rezones, zoning text amendments, and a development agreement accompanying the revised Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning request for the former Aqua Barn property? RECOMMENDATION: Set the public hearing for November 13, 2006. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The Growth Management Act limits processing of Comprehensive Plan amendments to an annual review cycle. The Planning Commission has completed their review and recommendation on these applications and forwarded their recommendation to the Planning and Development Committee. Requested amendments are summarized in the attached materials. Summary of Amendments as modified through the Planning Commission review process #2006-M-1: Wan Chee Requested map amendment to change from Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial with R-8 zoning. 1315 N 30th St. #2006-M-2: Susan Larson-Kinzer Requested map amendment to change from Resource Conservation to Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning. 1733 N.E. 20th St,Kennydale Blueberry Farm. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\Public Hearing Issue Paper 2006.doc Randy Corman,Council Prt%,cnt *MO Page 2 of 3 October 18,2006 #2006-M-3: Manuel Rivera(Patrick Hanis, Hanis Greaney Attorneys) Requested map amendment to change Residential Multi-Family to Commercial Corridor with Commercial Office zoning. 851 Can Road. #2006-M-4: Springbrook Associates (Cliff Williams,Vineyards Construction) Requested map amendment to change Residential Medium Density to Commercial Corridor with Commercial Office zoning. 244,807 sq. ft parcel located between S. 37th Street and S. 38th Court, east of Talbot Road. #2006-M-5: City of Renton Requested map amendment to change the area within the Puget Colony neighborhood from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning and in the unincorporated Kimberly Lane and Hideaway Homesites Subdivisions from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. #2006-M-6: City of Renton Requested map amendment for changes in the Center Village land use designation in the Highlands. This review will consider whether to expand the Center Village land use designation to include an area to the north of 16`h St that is now within the Residential Medium Density land use designation. This area currently has R-10 zoning. A concurrent zoning change to R-14 would be considered if the City Council adopts the proposed implementing zoning text amendments package now being reviewed by the Highlands Task Force. If the proposed zoning text amendments are not approved,the zoning for this area would remain R-10. The review will also consider amending the existing Center Village mapped area to remove several areas south of Sunset Blvd to redesignate them as Residential Multi-Family Infill with RMF zoning and Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning. #2006-M-7 City of Renton: Requested map amendment for Commercial Designation and Residential Medium Density at the former Aqua Barn site. A development agreement limited the range of commercial uses to a specific list of activities and specifying design considerations is proposed concurrently with the recommendations supporting commercial zoning on a portion of this site. #2006-M-8 City of Renton(expansion of Application 2006-M-2): Requested map amendment to change Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning to Residential Low Density with concurrent rezoning to R-4 for a 3-acre area in Upper Kennydale. #2006-T-1: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. #2006 T-2 City of Renton h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\public hearing issue paper 2006.doc Randy Corman,Council 1; .dent Page 3 of 3 October 18,2006 Requested text amendments to the Center Village Comprehensive Plan Policies. #2006-T-3: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Land Use and Community Design Elements with housekeeping changes. #2006-T-4: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Transportation Element to reflect changes in the capital projects. 2006-T-5: City of Renton Text amendment to allow existing Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone in the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation. Concurrent Rezoning Within the Center Village land use designation, concurrent rezoning would occur, amending the zoning map to change all currently zoned R-10 properties to R-14, and Residential Multi-Family zoned properties to Center Village. Properties changed from Residential Medium Density to Center Village along Harrington to 7th St would receive CV zoning. Properties changed from Residential Medium Density to Residential Single Family would receive R-8 zoning. Concurrent Zoning Text Amendments Amendments are proposed to the development regulations in the R-10, R-14 and Center Village (CV)zones. cc: Jay Covington Gregg Zimmerman Neil Watts h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\public hearing issue paper 2006.doc -, y C t erk. Lop/ CITY OF RENTON 1 JAN 29 2007 RECEIVED 2 C'ITY CLERKS OFFICE 3 ,land lDe/el/ by Robe/t('.ode 4 • 6 7 8 BEFORE THE CENTRAL PUGET SOUND GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BOARD 9 STATE OF WASHINGTON 10 ROBERT CAVE and JOHN COWAN, ) 11 citizens of the city of Renton, ) Case No. 12 Petitioners, ) ) PETITION FOR REVIEW 13 v. ) 14 CITY OF RENTON, ) 15 ) Respondent. ) 16 17 Petitioners Robert Cave and John Cowan bring this appeal because the City of Renton 18 has failed to preserve petitioners' property rights, has violated mandates for early and 19 continuous public participation, and has violated Growth Management Act policies and 20 provisions calling for compact urban growth in downzoning petitioners' residential urban 21 property. Petitioners ask the Board to invalidate the City's downzone ordinance,and for their 22 23 petition allege as follows: 24 I. IDENTITY OF PETITIONERS 25 Petitioners are: 26 Robert Cave 27 813 N.E. 24'h Street Renton,WA 98056 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 98101 PETITION FOR REVIEW - 1 CC' lay Ca%ln9)O n Phone: (206)621-8868 Fax: (206)621-0512 Larry barren Alex P'e4sc' Zanett" Fo riles Rc b ccca Lind 1 (425)235-1041 2 John Cowan 3 1830 N.E. 24'h Street Renton,WA 98056 4 (425) 226-1174 5 II. PETITIONERS' ATTORNEYS: 6 Petitioners are represented in these proceedings by: 7 8 Michael W. Gendler Gendler&Mann,LLP 9 1424 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1015 Phone: (206) 621-8868 10 Fax: (206) 621-0512 11 E-mail: gendler@gendlermann.com 12 III. DATE OF CHALLENGED ACTION: 13 This petition challenges Renton City Ordinance No. 5234,which was adopted by the 14 Renton City Council on November 27,2006. Notice of adoption of Ordinance No. 5234 was 15 published on December 1, 2006. A copy of Ordinance No. 5234 is attached as Exhibit 1. 16 17 IV. ISSUES PRESENTED FOR RESOLUTION: 18 4.1 Did the City of Renton violate the mandates of the Growth Management Act 19 for early and continuous public participation (RCW 36.70A.140, RCW 36.70A.020(11))? 20 4.2 Did the City violate the Growth Management Act provisions for notice 21 reasonably calculated to alert the affected public(RCW 35.70A.03 5),where the notice of City 22 23 Council public hearing provided no identification of or information about the proposed 24 downzone? 25 4.3 Did the City of Renton's downzone violate Growth Management Act policies 26 and provisions, and the policies and provisions of the City of Renton Code and 27 Comprehensive Plan for urban growth within urban growth areas that are already characterized 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 98101 Phone: (206)621.8868 PETITION FOR REVIEW - 2 Fax: (206)621-0512 1 by urban development and have adequate existing public facility and service capacities to 2 facilitate and accommodate such growth? 3 4.4 Did the City of Renton's downzone violate the policies and provisions of the 4 5 Growth Management Act,City of Renton Code, and Renton Comprehensive Plan by failing 6 to preserve petitioners' property rights in downzoning their urban residential property? 7 4.5 Did the City of Renton violate the policies and provisions of the Growth 8 Management Act,the Renton City Code,and the Renton Comprehensive Plan which require 9 consistency between development regulations and the Plan? 10 11 4.6 Did the City of Renton violate its Comprehensive Plan by morphing a proposed 12 Comprehensive PIan amendment and rezone specific to one three-acre parcel of agriculturally 13 designated and zoned property into a rezone to downzone 49 acres of property designated and 14 zone urban residential R-8,rather than initiating the downzone as a new proposal in the first 15 quarter of the year in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan? 16 17 4.7 Did the morphing of a proposal to redesignate and rezone a single three-acre 18 agricultural parcel for residential use into a downzone of 49 acres already designated and 19 zoned residential violate requirements for early and continuous public participation and for 20 public notice calculated to provide notice to property owners that their rights and interests 21 would be affected? 22 23 4.8 Did the City fail to show its work to justify the downzone,where it entered no 24 findings of fact, provided no rationale for its decision in its ordinance, and where the 25 downzone has irregular and illogical boundaries? 26 4.9 Was the decision to downzone 49 acres of urban property already designated 27 for residential development clearly erroneous,where the downzone is contrary to provisions 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 98101 Phone: (206)621.8868 PETITION FOR REVIEW - 3 Fax: (206)621-0512 1 and policies governing residential urban growth in urban areas which have sufficient 2 infrastructure capacity,where the downzone boundaries are irregular and illogical,and where 3 the presence of wetlands suggested as a rationale for the downzone applies only to some 4 5 portions of the area downzoned? 6 4.10 Did the downzone violate the State Environmental Policy Act? 7 V. PETITIONERS' STANDING: 8 Petitioners have standing pursuant to RCW 36.70A.280(2)(d) because they are 9 aggrieved and adversely affected by the City's action. Petitioners own property within the area 10 11 that has been downzoned. The City's action prejudices petitioners by depriving them of the 12 rights they previously had enjoyed to use and develop their urban residential property. The 13 City of Renton was required to consider petitioners' interests before downzoning their 14 property. An order by the Board finding noncompliance or invalidity of the downzone would 15 substantially eliminate or redress the prejudice to petitioners caused by the downzone. 16 17 Petitioners additionally have standing pursuant to RCW 36.70A.280(2)(b)because petitioners 18 participated in writing before the City regarding this matter. 19 VI. LENGTH OF HEARING: 20 Petitioners estimate that the hearing will take one-half day or less. 21 VII. RELIEF REQUESTED: 22 23 Petitioners request that the Board find the challenged Ordinance No. 5234 to be not in 24 compliance with the Growth Management Act,and determine that the ordinance substantially 25 interferes with the goals of the Act and therefore is invalid. 26 27 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 98101 Phone:PETITION FOR REVIEW - 4 Fax (20)621-se iz • • 1 VIII. CERTIFICATION: 2 The undersigned attorney representative of petitioners has read the foregoing petition 3 and believes the contents to be true. 4 5 Dated this OR day of January, 2007. 6 Respectfully submitted, 7 GENDLER &MANN, LLP 8 9 By: 10 Michael W. Gendler 11 WSBA No. 8429 Attorneys for Petitioners 12 \Cave Cowan(Den)\Cave Cowan v Cily\Petition for Review 126 07.wpd 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 08101 Phone: (206) PETITION FOR REVIEW - 5 68 Fax: (206)621-0511-0512 Copy at: Joy coop P1 CITY OF RENTON Larry Ufa rren /�lex I9;e ci' JAN 2 9 2007 �.. 2 FON S ZQn e-H-q RECEIVED L,h d CITY CLERKS OFFICE t 3 Re C CCa sjl: ,3 6�iYI > A Hand- delIV.i't/ 4 BEFORE THE CENTRAL PUGET SOUND GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BOARDS Z ���{Y�n 5 STATE OF WASHINGTON 6 7 Inez Somerville Petersen,a citizen of the City of ) Renton, ) 8 ) Case No. 07- Pro Se Petitioner, ) 9 ) v. ) PETITION FOR REVIEW 10 City of Renton, a State of Washington Municipal ) Corporation, ) 11 ) Respondent. ) 12 ) 13 44.w 14 I. PETITIONER AND AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 1.1 The following resident of the City of Renton,a Pro Se Petitioner,hereby petitions the Central Puget Sound 15 Growth Management Hearings Board as follows: Inez Somerville Petersen 16 3306 Lake Wash Blvd North#3,Renton WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543, Fax 888-253-1074 17 1.2 Inez Somerville Petersen will act as the Pro Se Authorized Representative. 18 II. ACTION CHALLENGED 19 2.1 The subject of this petition is: 20 a. The set of City of Renton(City) Ordinances adopted on November 27, 2006; specifically. Ordinances 5228, 5229, 5230,5231,5232, 5233, 5234 hereafter referred to as Ordinances. Exhibit A. b. The 2006 Comprehensive Plans(CP) Amendments to which these Ordinances apply. A listing of the 21 resulting changes to the CPA are shown on the"Looseleaf Insert"dated November 27,2006. Exhibit B. 22 2.2 The Affidavit of Publication for these Ordinances is dated December 1, 2006. Exhibit C. 23 III. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES 24 3.1 Public Participation and Notice 25 a. With regard to said Ordinances and the related 2006 CP Amendments_the City of Renton failed to provide effective notice to adequately alert the Public regarding public hearings and ways they could participate. In addition,the City did not facilitate early and continuous public participation.. Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW- 1 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543, Fax 888-253-1074 v 1 b. The City's actions and inactions with regard to the Growth Management Act(GMA)are so blatant as to prompt me to uncharted waters to petition the CPSGMHB. Petitioner seeks to prove the allegations by presenting: 2 (1) The FACTS regarding opportunities for the City to follow GMA. (2) The LEGAL QUESTIONS posed by the facts,and 3 (3) The City's DUTY TO ACT under the Law 4 3.2 Opportunities to follow GMA 5 a. FACTS - Planning Commission public hearing, 2006 CP Amendments September 20, 2006 6 Narrative: Petitioner was in attendance at this public hearing and provides this narrative from first hand observations 7 and knowledge. • The Planning Commission public hearing was extremely well attended. Participants overflowed the Council Chambers and crowded into the hallway outside the meeting room and beyond the elevators. 8 • The City had made no provision for overflow seating. On April 17, 2006, approximately 300 participants had attended a public hearing relating to the same high density zoning being discussed on 9 September 20th.and approximately 400 participants had attended a follow-on public hearing on May 8, 2006. This was a clue to the City that interest was extremely high regarding the proposed 2006 CP 10 Amendments. • At the time, the City had over 1300 "parties of record"interested in the proposed CP Amendments. 11 • On the night of September 20th. some participants.with no place to sit and who did not wish to stand for several hours, left the meeting as it began. 12 • The previous Planning Commission agendas set a precedent which allowed members of the Public three (3)minutes per proposal to comment. This precedent was not followed on September 20. 2006. 13 • According to the Agenda for that night's public hearing,the Public's opportunity to speak was reduced by the taking the thirteen(13)proposed CP Amendments and grouping them into eight(8)categories. with public comment to be taken after the staff presentation on each category. With regard to the 14 category with three CP Amendments in it,this limited the Public's opportunity to speak to as little as sixty(60)seconds per proposed CP Amendment. 15 • In the case of the Highlands Amendments,where two CP Amendments were placed in one category. the participant was allotted 120 seconds per proposal. Highlands Redevelopment was the subject I 16 mentioned above which resulted in the largest public response to a public hearing in the history of the City--and not just once,but three times! First 100 citizens,then 300 and then 400 citizens came to City 17 Hall to protest proposed high density zoning and use of a Declaration of Blight. • In the first ten(10)minutes of the hearing,the Commissioners changed the Agenda by deciding to run 18 through all the staff presentations first and then proceeding to one audience comment which would cover all the proposed CP Amendments. 19 • Some people left after this change in the Agenda as they would have to wait too long to speak. • Audience comment began at 8 p.m. (the meeting started shortly after 6 p.m.). • About twenty(20)minutes into the Audience Comment period,the Commissioners changed the Agenda 20 again because members of the Public were attempting to speak three(3)minutes per CP Amendment. • The Commissioners ruled that participants could only have three(3)minutes total for all thirteen(13) 21 CP Amendments. The early participants had been given three(3)minutes per CP Amendment. Now the later participants were denied this same opportunity. 22 • Some participants left as a result of this ruling. • Not long after the"three-minute total"ruling,another change to the Agenda was made. Participants 23 were told they could submit written comments after the meeting because the Commissioners weren't going to make final deliberations until October 4,2006. 24 • No Notice to this effect was published giving other members of the Public an opportunity to submit comments after September 20, 2006,and people who already left due to poor meeting management e did 25 not get to hear the announcement. • Also,no parties of record were notified that the period for written testimony had been extended. Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-2 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543. Fax 888-253-1074 1 • Sue Rider spoke on the GMA requirements relating to the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. She can be seen on the video providing her back-up data to the Commission;however,the CP Amendment file which I r..- 2 later viewed contained none of her materials. • I have a video of a portion of the meeting where it is evident that the Chairman Pro Tem did not 3 understand his obligations under GMA in overseeing a public hearing. It is a time consuming job to copy DVDs, so I will provide the discs later. 4 • Letters were entered into the record at the beginning of the hearing by merely listing the writer's name and a short title, rather than reading the letters"into the record." The content of these letters then 5 became "for Commissioners'eyes only." The citizens who participated by mail were not given the same opportunity to have their comments entered "into the record"for other participants to hear as those who offered their comments orally. 6 • Citizens have sixty(60)days from the publication date of this hearing,which was December 1,2006.in this case to petition the CPSGMHB. That 60-day window expires on January 30, 2006. As of January 7 26,2007,the minutes of the September 20, 2006,Planning Commission hearing had not yet been published. 8 • So many amendments were crammed into one hearing that there was not sufficient time to enable meaningful public review and comment. Changing the meeting format several times in ways that made 9 the opportunity for participation unequal occurred,as well as failure to provide notice about the comment extension time. 10 • The 2006 CP Amendments,excluding the City-sponsored ones,were all for single property owners who wanted to develop their property. The Comp Plan wasn't providing a 20-year plan, it was being revised on a developer-by-developer basis. Isn't that similar to "spot zoning"? 11 Exhibits: 12 (1) Affidavit of Publication for September 14, 2006, Exhibit Dl (2) Parties of Record=over 1300 parties,Exhibit D2 13 (3) Planning Commission meeting agenda, Exhibit El (4) Economic Development Director's schedule for Declaration of Blight, Exhibit E2 '`"" 14 (5) Video(DVD)of meeting,Exhibit F(to be provided later) (6) Example of letter from Brad Nicholson which was not read"into the record" Exhibit G 15 (7) Copy of email between myself and Economic Development Director's administrator regarding minutes being unavailable for the September 20, 2006,public hearing, Exhibit H 16 b. FACTS - City Council public hearing, 2006 CP Amendments 17 November 13, 2006 Narrative: Petitioner was in attendance at this public hearing and provides this narrative from first hand observations 18 and knowledge. • Affidavit of Publication for the City Council public hearing is dated November 3,2006. The wording on 19 the Notice immediately became a point of controversy: "2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments, concurrent rezonings,text amendments,and development agreement for former Aqua Barn site." 2 0 • A one line sentence hardly did justice to the lengthy agenda covering the proposed 2006 CP Amendments. A reader of the Notice would assume it was all about the Aqua Barn. Without effective 21 notice,the public did not have a reasonable opportunity to participate. • Parties of Record= 108,and one has to wonder how 1300+interested parties dwindled down to a little 22 over a 100 in less than two months. This notice should have been reasonably calculated to reach the affected and interested individuals,but that was not the case. And even if it did,who could have 2 3 determined what the real agenda was from a one-sentence description? • I received the Agenda for the City Council public hearing on November 9,2006,and was puzzled by the description too, so I called the City Clerk to get a clarification. 2 4 • The City Clerk confirmed that there had been considerable discussion regarding the wording,but the Economic Development Director wanted the Notice worded as it was. 25 • The Minutes of the City Council for November 13, 2006,covering the public hearing confirm the long agenda covered by one sentence. Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-3 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 Nape 1 • The public hearing was very poorly attended;and during this hearing and subsequent Council meetings, citizens indicated they were not properly informed. One gentleman even abandoned his car in the snow �.. 2 to get to the Council meeting in time to voice his protest that he had missed the hearing because he didn't know about it. 3 • In Exhibit M there is a comment by Mayor Koelker that the City Council public hearing was just a "courtesy"hearing. I have been a City Hall watcher for many years,and I've never heard any city leade 4 refer to the Council's public hearing on CP Amendments as a"courtesy" hearing. The Council held a public hearing for the proposed 2005 CP Amendments on November 21.2005,and no mention was made then that it was a"courtesy hearing." The Planning Commission's public hearing for the proposed 5 2005 CP Amendments was held on November 2,2005. 6 Exhibits: (1) Affidavit of Publication is dated November 3, 2006, Exhibit I 7 (2) Parties of Record= 108 parties, ." Exhibit J (3) Agenda for Council meeting of November 13,2006, Exhibit K 8 (4) Minutes of the City Council meeting of November 13, 2006. Exhibit L (5) Comments of interest from Council meetings November 13,2006 and on, Exhibit M 9 c. FACTS - Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Task Force 1 o October 7 through Nov 13, 2006 11 Narrative: Formation of a Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Task Force was requested by the City Council during the summer,and the year was drawing to a close. Mayor Koelker and her staff had taken no action to form the task force, so the rush was on in order that recommendations could be made and the Highlands C' 12 Amendments adopted by year's end. • On October 4,2006,the City's Economic Development Director wrote a memorandum regarding formation 13 of the Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Task Force. • On that same day communications went back and forth between City's Economic Development Director 14 and the President of the Highlands Community Association, which indicated there was not a clear understanding among parties as to the scope and who could participate;and it was obvious no provision 15 was being made for Notice. "Insiders"knew,but no one else. • The instructions changed several times over several days regarding how the public was to participate. It 16 was "send an email" one day and use"this form"the next. No organized way of alerting the public was undertaken to inform them that a task force was being formed. 17 • On October 6,2006, Brad Nicholson wrote to Terri Briere, Chairman of the Planning and Development Committee, to ask about the task force's role compared to the Planning Commission. He wanted to know which body was to be given substantial weight. 18 • Later that thy Terri Briere replied that the Planning Commission had already made recommendations to the Council,but,as a result of citizen concerns,the Council had agreed that the Task Force would take on the 19 role of the Planning Commission,but no new testimony would be taken. Briere said in her reply that the time schedule was compressed to allow time to make the changes to the CP. 20 • There is no Council record to support Briere's contention that the Task Force was to take on the role of the Planning Commission,and RMC does not provide for this. 21 • There is no statute that required the Highlands-related CP Amendments sponsored by the City to be adopted with the other CP Amendments proposed for 2006. The rush was in the City's mind. 22 • On October 9,2006,the Council voted to approve the members recommended by Terri Briere. There were unsubstantiated and nasty comments made about the HCA President,who had worked tirelessly to keep the 23 community informed during the year where the City had made no effort. He was not allowed to participate and was probably the most logical and well qualified citizen to participate. I have video of this meeting, which I will provide later. 24 • The first meeting of the task force was on October 10, 2006. They met a 7:30 a.m., in the morning which precluded some willing citizens(and stakeholders) from participating because they could not take time off 25 of work for the duration of the task force. Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-4 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 1 • No signs were posted directing the public to the meeting;and even one of the task force members(Kumar) missed the first two meetings because he did not know where to go, and it was so early no one else was in 2 the building to ask. • On October 10,2006, I coordinated with Rob McKenna's Ombudsman, Greg Overstreet,regarding the 3 Task Force's decision to keep the meetings private and to not allow one of their members to video tape the meetings. And on October 20, 2006,I contacted him again because no minutes were being taken of Task 4 Force meetings so others could be kept informed. None were ever taken. • On October 13,2006,the Task Force Chairman,Kirk Moore, invited the task force members and City staff 5 to meet on Saturdays at Starbucks to engage in"frank discussion"about zoning issues. I alerted the City Attorney, and he stopped the illegal meetings. I also alerted him that the Task Force meetings were not listed under"Public Meetings"on the City's website. No action was taken. 6 • On October 14,2006,I contacted the Staff to see why Task Force meeting packets were not available on the City's website as Planning Commission packets are. No response received, and the information was 7 never posted to the site. • On October 15, 2006,Brad Nicholson contacted Terri Briere(Planning and Development Chairman) 8 about wanting to participate on the Task Force and never being given an opportunity. He had seen Kirk Moore's invitation to meet at Starbucks and actually went there so he could join. Briere was on vacation so 9 the Council Liaison responded,indicating that the City was not giving Notification and not taking testimony at the meetings.but the Task Force would be presenting their recommendations to the Council 10 on November 13, 2006. Doesn't that equate to no public participation? • On October 30.2006. Notice was finally published in the newspaper with two meetings remaining. • November 7, 2006,was the final meeting of the Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning 11 Task Force. • On November 13,2006,without any testimony from the Public,with no viable Notice, and with no proper 12 public hearing to inform the Public,Kirk Moore presented the task force recommendations in the Committee of the Whole,a meeting which usually consists of"dry" presentations of the staff to the 13 Council with few members of the public in attendance. • On November 13,2006,a SEPA Appeal was submitted relating to the Staffs original high density zoning 14 for which there had been no EIS. As a result,the Council extended the Moratorium. • I have video of the Task Force presentation during the Committee of the Whole, but even the Committee of 15 the Whole was not publicized so that all interested citizens could have a reasonable chance of finding out about it and attending. 16 • There never was a proper public hearing to address the Task Force Recommendations. Hearing the proposal one hour before a public hearing in the next hour doesn't facilitate effective public participation. 1 • As shown in Exhibit N, had not the SEPA Appeal been submitted,the Council planned to adopt the task force recommendations the same evening as Kirk Moore presented them,thus robbing the public of a reasonable opportunity to review and comment on the proposed changes before the Council adopted them. 18 Exhibits: 19 (1) October 4, 2006,MEMORANDUM from City's Economic Development Director to form the task force, Exhibit N 20 (2) October 4. 2006,email exchange between HCA President and Economic Development Director indicating confusion reigned regarding scope,participation and notice Exhibit 0 21 (3) October 6,2006,Brad Nicholson and Terri Briere discuss the roll of Task Force v Planning Commission,no public participation would be allowed,compressed schedule, Exhibit P 22 (4) October 10,2006,requested help from AG(Overstreet,the Ombudsman)because meetings were being kept private no video taping allowed,and no minutes were being recorded, Exhibit Q (5) October 13.2006, invitation to Task Force and City staff to meet at Starbucks to discuss zoning, 23 and note to City Attorney about Starbucks and task force meetings not being listed on the City's website under Public Meetings, Exhibit R 24 (6) October 14,2006,agenda packets not available on line as they are for the Planning Commission, Exhibit S 25 (7) October 15, 2006,Brad Nicholson regarding lack of information or opportunity to participate, City's position that Notice is not required Exhibit T (8) October 30,2006,Affidavit of Publication for last two meetings of task force. Exhibit U Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-5 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton,WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 "war Now z 1 `"` 2 3.3 Legal Questions 3 There are many GMA questions raised by the way the City of Renton handled its 2006 CP Amendments,and I've included only a portion of the documentation I have. Questionable public hearings go back to April 27,2006. I 4 wonder now as I type this Petition if I am overly concerned about the"rule of law," or whether my sense of justice is rightly offended by the blatant manner in which the City of Renton managed its duties under the GMA during last 5 year. I do not believe that what I have described under FACTS shows that the City was sincerely trying to follow GMA. I believe no one has called the City to task before.and employees have fallen into the habit of doing things 6 "their way." 7 Immediately after the September 20, 2006,public hearing and continuing to the end of the year, Citizens gave the City feedback which went by the wayside. I think it mattered more that the City met a schedule than 8 whether they were guided by the goals of GMA. 9 a. Legal Issue #1 Public Participation 10 (1) Considering that written comments carry just as much weight as oral comments,did the City 11 satisfy the requirements of RCW 36.70A.140 when it did not read letters"into the record"during a public hearing? (2) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.020 concerning property rights when it proceeded to plan for a Declaration of Blight "on a fast track"without the public participation of those who would be loosing their homes by 12 virtue of that Declaration of Blight? (3) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(2)when it did not provide the public with another 13 opportunity for review and comment after the Highlands Comprehensive Amendment and Zoning Task Force made its recommendations on November 13,2006? The old proposal was being appealed,not the new Kirk Moore 14 proposal. (4) Did the City fail to involve the citizens in the planning process as required by RCW 36.70.020 15 (11)when it did not provide for overflow seating for the Planning Commission meeting of September 20.2006? (5) Did the City exclude the Public by the way in which the Highlands Comprehensive and Zoning 16 Task Force was conducted; i.e.,willing members turned away, closing the meeting,no minutes kept,purposeful inconvenient time? (6) Did the City provide early and continuous public participation in the case of the proposed CP 17 Amendment for Highlands with only one open house held on November 15, 2005,where maps were handed out indicating early and continuous coordination with the developers? 18 (7) Based on events related to September 20, 2006,November 13,2006,and October 10-Nov 7, did the City show a pattern of not providing early and continuous public participation as required by RCW 36.70A.070 19 and RCW 36.70A.140? 20 b. Legal Issue#2 Notice 21 (1) Regarding the City Council public hearing of November 13,2006,did the City violate RCW 22 36.70A.035 by failing to provide notice which is reasonably calculated to alert the public to the major issues at hand and the ways in which to further participate in the planning process? 23 (2) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(b)by not publishing a Notice in a timely manner for the meetings of the Highlands Comprehensive Amendment and Zoning Task Force? 24 (3) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(b)by not publishing a Notice alerting the Public that written comments would be accepted after the September 20,2006,Planning Commission public hearing? (4) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(c)by distributing notices to only 108 parties of record for 25 the November 13, 2006, City Council hearing on proposed CP Amendments, when there were over 1300 persons with known interest for the Planning Commission public hearing just a few weeks previous? Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-6 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 V.w 1 (5) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(c)by not notifying interested parties of the presentation which was to be given by the Highlands Comprehensive Amendment and Zoning Task Force on November 13, 2 2006? 3 3.4 City's Duty to Act 4 a. RCW 36.70A,the Washington State Growth Management Act(GMA),requires the City of Renton to development and implement a CP which provides for early and continuous public participation and effective notice, 5 among other requirements,when CP amendments are adopted. Exhibit V b. Requirements of the GMA are codified in Renton Municipal Code(RMC): Exhibit W 6 RMC 2-10-1 thru 2-10-3 Operation of the Planning Commission RMC 4-1-020 Adopts GMA 7 RMC 4-1-060 Codifies the purpose and description of the City's CP RMC 4-8-090 Public Notice Requirements 8 RMC 4-9-020 CP adoption and amendment process 9 c. Citizen participation is defined in the first section of Renton's CP in a short section which reads as follows: "Because public input is vital to effective planning,the City encourages community groups,businesses. 10 and individuals to work together with City staff to identify and achieve community goals. The following principles should guide all future planning efforts: 11 • Encourage and facilitate public participation in all planning processes and make those processes user- friendly. 12 • Consider the interests of the entire community and the goals and policies of this Plan before making land use decisions. Proponents of change in land use should demonstrate that the proposed change responds to 13 the interests of the neighborhoods most directly impacted by the project. • Ensure that the process which identifies new commercial areas or expands existing areas considered the 44"' 14 impacts of potential development on affected residential neighborhoods and results in decisions that are consistent with other policies in the Comprehensive Plan. 15 • Balance the interests of the commercial and residential communities when considering modifications to zoning or development regulations. 16 • Encourage and emphasize open communications between developers and neighbors about compatibility issues." 17 • V. STATEMENT OF STANDING 18 5.1 The Petitioner is a citizen and resident of Renton who participated orally and in writing before the City of Renton many times regarding the matter on which review is being requested and,therefore, has standing to file a 19 petition under RCW 36.70A.280(2)(b). 20 VI. HEARING LENGTH 21 6.1 The estimated time for presentation of the Petitioners'arguments and evidence is one-half day. 22 VII. RELIEF SOUGHT 23 7.1 Petitioner seeks the following relief pursuant to pursuant to RCW 36.70A.300 and.302, relating to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and related Ordinances: 24 25 Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-7 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton,WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 • 1 (a) A final order finding Renton in non-compliance with the goals and requirements of RCW 36.70A 2 (b) A final order withdrawing said Ordinances and the related 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments which were adopted without valid public participation and notice. This may be too extreme,but when a city holds 3 two invalid public hearings and knowingly proceeds to put expediency over GMA requirements,then such brazen disregard for the GMA should not go unnoticed by the CPSGMHB. 4 (c) A final order requiring the City to hold valid public hearings,with effective notice, for the purpose of providing proper public participation in the re-adoption of the proposed 2006 CP Amendments. If not this.then a 5 final order requiring the City to follow the GMA in its adoption of 2007 CP Amendments. 6 VIII. AFFIRMATION 7 8.1 The undersigned has read the foregoing Petition for Review and believe the contents to be true. 8 DATED this 30th day of January, 2007. 9 P•11\/ 10 • Inez Pe en, Pro Se Petitioner 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-8 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N 113 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 1 ATTACHMENTS 2 3 Ordinances, .ExhibitA List of CP Amendments relating to Ordinances,Exhibit B 4 Affidavit of Publication for these Ordinances is dated December 1,2006,Exhibit C 5 Relating to Planning Commission public hearing of September 20, 2006 (1) Affidavit of Publication for September 14, 2006, Exhibit DI 6 (2) Parties of Record=over 1300 parties,Exhibit D2 (3) Planning Commission meeting agenda, Exhibit El 7 (4) Economic Development Director's schedule for Declaration of Blight, Exhibit E2 (5) Video(DVD)of meeting,Exhibit F(to be provided later) (6) Example of letter from Brad Nicholson which was not read"into the record" Exhibit G 8 (7) Copy of email between myself and Economic Development Director's administrator regarding minutes being unavailable for the September 20,2006,public hearing,Exhibit H 9 Relating to Planning Commission public hearing of September 20, 2006 10 (1) Affidavit of Publication is dated November 3, 2006, Exhibit I (2) Parties of Record= 108 parties, ." Exhibit J 11 (3) Agenda for Council meeting of November 13,2006, Exhibit K (4) Minutes of the City Council meeting of November 13, 2006, Exhibit L 12 (5) Comments of interest from Council meetings November 13, 2006 and on, ExhibitM 13 Relating to Highlands Comprehensive Amendment and Zoning Task Force 14 October 10, 2006 thru November 7, 2006 (1) October 4,2006,MEMORANDUM from the City's Economic Development Director to form 15 the task force, Exhibit N (2) October 4, 2006,email exchange between HCA President and Economic Development Director indicating confusion reigned regarding scope,participation and notice Exhibit 0 16 (3) October 6,2006,Brad Nicholson and Tern Briere discuss the roll of Task Force v Planning Commission,no public participation would be allowed,compressed schedule, Exhibit P 17 (4) October 10,2006,requested help from AG(Overstreet,the Ombudsman)because meetings were being kept private no video taping allowed,and no minutes were being recorded, Exhibit Q 18 (5) October 13,2006, invitation to Task Force and City staff to meet at Starbucks to discuss zoning, and note to City Attorney about Starbucks and task force meetings not being listed on the City's 19 website under Public Meetings, Exhibit R (6) October 14,2006,agenda packets not available on line as they are for the 20 Planning Commission, Exhibit S (7) October 15, 2006,Brad Nicholson regarding lack of information or opportunity to participate, City's position that Notice is not required Exhibit T 21 (8) October 30,2006,Affidavit of Publication for last two meetings of task force, Exhibit U 22 City's Duty to Act 23 Pro Se Recap of GMA,RCW 36.70A, with case law, Exhibit V Pro Se Recap of RMC, Exhibit W 24 25 Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-9 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543, Fax 888-253-1074 1 2 3 PROOF OF SERVICE 4 On the 30th day of January 2007, I certify that I hand delivered this document with exhibits to: 5 1. Four(4)copies to the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board at 800 Fifth Avenue 6 #2356. Seattle, WA,on the date shown above. 7 2. One(1)copy to the City Clerk of the City of Renton at 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA,on the date shown above. 8 3. One(1)copy to the mayor of the City of Renton at 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA,on the date shown 9 above. 10 4. One(1)copy to the City Attorney for the City of Renton at the offices of Warren Barber&Fontes PS, located at 100 S Second St,Renton, WA, on the date shown above. 11 12 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and 13 correct. 14 Dated this 30th day of January, Year 2007.in Renton. WA. 15 16c9/4". 17 Inez Petersen Declarant and Pro Se Authorized Representative 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW- 10 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton.WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543, Fax 888-253-1074 CITY OF RENTON, WASIIINGTOI\ ORDINANCE.NO 2 2r; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHIN( TON, ADOPTING THE 2006 AMENDMENTS TO THE CIT 'S 2004 CO\IPRF.HENSI%T PLAN, MAPS AND DATA IN CONJUNCTION THEREWITH. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Renton has heretofore adopted and filed a ''Catnprehensis e Plan' and the City;Council of Renton has implemented and amended said "Comprehensive Plan" from time to time. together with the adoption of various codes, reports and records,and WHI EREAS, the Planning Commission has heretotore recommended to the City Council, from time to time, certain amendments to the City's"Comprehensive Plan".and 'WHEREAS, the City of Renton, pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act, has been required to review its"Comprehensive Plan", and Nair WHEREAS,the City has held a public hearing on this matter; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission has made certain findings and recommendations to the City Council, including implementing policies; and WIIF:RE:AS., the City Council has duly determined aller due consideration of the testimony and evidence before it That it is advisable and appropriate to amend and modify the ('.itv's"Conrprchensivc Plan. and WHEREAS. such modification and elements forthe-Comprehensive Plan" are in the best interest for the public benefit. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COl NCII OF THE. CITY OF RENTON, ON, 14ASIIFti(TTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS Exhibit A Page 1 ti.r v `rr. ORDTN I CF NO 7,22:; SECTION I The"'Comprehensive Plan,- maps, data ant reports in support of the"Comprehensive Plan" arc hereby muddied,amended and adopted as said"Comprehensive Plane consisting nfthe following elements Capital lacililics,Community Design, Land Case and Land f_!se Map, and Transportation as shown on Attachments A, B, C, D and E and incorporated herein as if fully set forth SECTION II. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to make the necessary changes on said City's"Comprehensive Plan"and the maps in conjunction therewith to evidence the aforementioned live amendments. SECTION III The City Clerk is authorizer.]and directed to file this ordinance as provided by law, and a complete copy of said document likewise being on file with the office of the City Clerk of the City of Renton SECTION IV. 'I his ordinance shall he effective upon its passage. approval and '`ow live days after publication. PASSED BY THE CTTY COU\NIL,this 2 7 t tt day of `o ?00(7 1r Bonnie I Walton,City Clerk APPROVED BY TIIF MAYOR this <7 i ii day of' Nov oml, . Kathy Keolker, Mayor Exhibit A Page 2 Nor.. ORDINANCE NO 2 Appr ed as to tbrrtl: Lawrence J Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication 0 ( inr r ORE) 1304 Ii/20/06:ma Nio-fre d ckfe_ Co G.vv,. rof peyoue4 c, / 04-1,9 c, Exhibit A Page 3 Nor., CI FY OF RENTON. WASI IINGION ORDINANCE NO. 5229 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REN1ON, 11 ASIIING'1 ON. (-HANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERI IN PROPERTIES WITHIN 11IE CITY OF RENTON (CARR ROAD PROPERTIES) FROM RESIDENTIAL, S DU/AC (R-5) .1ND RESIDE:\ VIAL 10 DE/A(` (14-10) ZONING TO RESIDE:NI I I 14 DE/At (R-14), FILE NO. LEA-05-163(CPA 2006-M-3). 11 I I EREAS.. under Section 4 2 020 of Chapter 2 Zoning Districts L.ses and Standards, of Title l\ (De.elopntent Regulations), of Ordinance No. .1200 entitled -Code of General Ordinanccs of titc C itv of Renton_ Washington'' as amended, and the naps and reporis adopted iu conjunction therewith_ the propene' hereinbeloss' described has previou.sh, been zoned as Residential 8 du-ac (R-8)and Residential 10 du/ac(R-10), and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding liar change el zone classification of said property This flatter was reterred to the Planning Commission for imicstigation. study. 'ter' and public hearing_ and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20. 2006, and I he !titter vi as considered by the Planning Commission, and Lhe zoning request rs in contermity with the Cit' s Comprehensive Plan. as amended, and the City Council has considered all ohittteN relevant !hereto and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereor of in opposition thereto, NOW, THEREFORE_ TIIF CITY COI'NClL OF THE CITY OF REvION. WASIIINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS SF(1 ION I The follorAing described properbi ut the City it 1CctrOiri is beech. rezoned to Residential I t duiac as beiernhelors specified I he Fconontie Decelopntent. Nci.iiilrkrrhn;rds and Srr:uertii Planning Department Adrriiitistralcrr is licrubs authorized and Exhibit A 1 Page 4 sreb, Avire ',Nur ORDINANCE NO E229 ,Hycicd :naps(ti the toturtg Ottlmance, a allICIlded, 10 C1 Id,...MCC od !,:i4,111 10- See 1ttachments "13- and -C attached hereto and made a an hereof as ii idk sot lOrth herein (Carr Road Properties) SECTION II IThs ordinance shall be enective upon as passap,e apptot,al and \ dtp,s after its puhtheation PASSED BY THE( II Y.COUNCIL,this 0.711 day of November too Bonnie I. \Valton. th Clerk APPROVED DY TI IF MAYOR this 27 tt n day of November 2no6 New, Kathy Keolker. Mayor pp' as to f \Yrence 1 Wan en ( it V Adiot hey Date of Publication 2/1/12206 ,_,-Amm.-1r:7 1 ()RD 1-20') ! I/16.1.1() ina Exhibit A Page 5 New' "Nover. OPI) "_;229 11 I 44.4.11:111 1 A 12174)\-1. 20116-11-03 121,14rs.J. 120`11 l'O It-14 11 DEStritl I he 1),C1 he qudlh ol the \ cittalh_ Of sect i$ [ r 1< tri,_—• 5Lu-it, V\ .\1 : it),KI .1!1 Rd tfl thC&Nh iI\CItit111, Kine17{1111'6, \\,bhir).211)11 Exhibit A Page 6 Nose .VI1ACUENIE1N1 B 101 1111:k REZONE 21106-N1-03 1EZONE H (Y:sel RAO 10 11-14 1,1(;.11. DES( RIP 1 ION I he Lr,t- haff,,Ithe 7‘.ortIto.ed cr,Lii ler of the \ortitv.c,t qtri.ricr ot eli ii 'c IiE \\ \I . c<IcrI ici Ott 111;11I!Ul`, \ljl 10;': ,\NC S. we I IAA 2 H RCIIICII1 I 11e -1"1 1-() ,S recorded iindcr Kine Comm RA No I'lNo!)3J)70001: I el tr 11-1A \II ‘dursitk: in Cl OUtli Watill!POOr. Exhibit A Page 7 Now L ra r i r: ry ,. „2 c, Attachment C rr as' vim:,� Exhibit A Page 8 Carr Rd Properties Rezone to R-14 LUA 05-163 CPA 2006-M-03 0 500 1000 . Economic Devcto me nt,Nci ShbnhnodckSttacgic PlannnE A a Alc r F-Mss}t,Admin-ordio7 c J. c O (J,.wbcr ber 30Gti Renton City Lirrmrts Rezone to R 14 I F�1 O 26 'Am.+ Name ',tow CITY 01 WIN l'ON, WASH:N(110.N OKI)1:\.A,Nf t 5;,-3•S'i AN ORDINANCE OF 'THE CITY OF RENT()N, WASHING IO'\, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAI\ PROPER1 Y WITHIN THE CITY OF RF-.NTON (SPRINGRROOK ASSOCIATES PROPERTY) FROM RESIDENTIAL 10 01.7AC ( 1-10) ZONING .11)COMMERCIAL OFFICE ZONINC (CO), FILE NO. LI A-05, 158 (( PA 2006-M-4) W HEREAS. undeT Secucin 4 tCC)of( ha.pter 2 lonim2 Districts- .lsesaid HidaI ds. of Idle t isslopmem Res.tulationsi. off Ordinance `so 42:50 emitted-Code at LfltLi Ordinances of the( it A of Kenton Washington-as amendcid and the maw,and idpinis iilopted ii einnunctIon therewith. the properi,, nereinbeloy, desciibed has pme iously been 'once Residential I dulac(I& I 01,and NVIIERE.tS the f. Ire of Renton Initiated iiproceedinti for chancy /one cla.s--.sifiL:at ion of said property This matter was referred to the l'hinninCommiss'ion for invesTry,ation. urN and public I-learn-1,4 and a public hearinma was held thereon on or about September 10 and the matter was e-onsideied b time Planning Commission., atid the zonM4 viquesi is in contlti nut\, ith the it s ompicheusi\C amended, and the City Courted has consideied ad matters relevant theieto and ail parties haw been heard appeatiiw in support thereof ri nit irpp(II,I114)n NOW, THEREFORE T111. CITY COIHNCII OF THE CIT) 01- RI N [ON. SHIM.; I ON DOE-S ORD:IC-s Vis hOt.i OWS SFCTIO! 1 he fi.)Ilowitit,, described propert tri the(*its: at Renton is hetell re/oned Inc Commercial Office specit)ed. the Leonomic ki,elopment Nciyhhorhouds and Stratei4te Phinninna Depat fluent Administrator is hereby mithoriied and Exhibit A Page 9 Nom., ORM AN( l: NOrit,22,0 directed to ehant4c the marts of the Zonictit OichnEtnce. as amended, to evidence said ne to- v,it See Attachments A- and -fir anitclicd hetet° and made a nail he col'as if set inith herein tiSpruntbrook Associates Property) SECTION This ordinance shad he effective upon its passage. approval and days ancr its nut-Teat ion PASSiliT) BY 11th ( It N CottN( II. this nt:n day of tt oyes:tic:7 ?))(46 Bonnie L Walton, City Clerk APPRONT,D BY Till MAYOR this 27 en day of Nr--)yeabcr Kathy Keolker, Mayor Apprvittied as to fortlitr liaisi.rence.1 Warren, City Attorney Date of Puhileation. 1 2/ / Cut Et r ORE) .-(1'; I I i0,0(Olth Exhibit A Page 10 'Name ,wirow OR D NANC E NO !,2.3 L .11.1ACIINIEN1 k SPRIVAIROOK RF7,0NE 2006-N1-04 REZONE FROM R-10 1 0 CO 1,11GAI. DES( RI III( ol o! Runtoli \ iIIc Vicdical :.;}14)EiIl I ; tInd;:t Ni 7X08 1 I 009. record:::of Kin,,2 nunN. \II .,lIALItc in Ilk 11RtFtei i cIRn.zi). I 0\\ kalhzc (.]( RL1lion. Kin Cotint . Exhibit A Page 11 ' • C . ):NANCF tr0.52 r 3 > -nO o - CD 4 > O CO A 5 O � 1 - -- CD A`D v o © . $1, 0 , . n in O C Y.` t.m 0 ei • Exhibit A . Page12 C1 CY OE Rl-N-FON- WASHIN'GTO ORDIN%1NC'E1 NO 231 AN ORDINANCE: OF THE CITY OE RENTON. WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONIN(. CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN fill[. CI1', OF REN"TON (PLGfr'T COLONY HOMES) FROM RESIDENTIAL NTIAL R DEIA(' (R-F) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL 4 DI ACC (R-4) ZONING. FILE NO. I,II,A-06--I20 (('I'A 2006-A1-51. Al HEREAS. under Section 4 2 02I) of hapter-2 Lonin'Districts Lacs and Standards. (CT'Ile 11 (Development Regulation:),of (_)rdivauce No 420e ;stilled "(Code of(ierrerxh Ordinances or the City or Renton, Washington- as amended. and the maps and reports rirlupted to conjunction !her ectiillr_ the property irereinhelou esr,a ileril ha, previously been zoned its Residential 8 du/air(R-R),and WHEREAS, the City of Rentuir initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification olrsaid properts_ Ibis matter was;denied tc>the Planning Commission for investigation, study, and public hearingg, and a public hearing sea, held thereon on or about September 'U. 2000, and the matter has been considered by the Planning Commission; and the zoning request is in conformity with We('itv's Comprehensive flan as amended, and the(ity Council ha; cow...RkTed all 'ratters relevant theren' and all parties hale been heard appearing in support 1heren('itr in opposition thereto. NOW, J I i EEORF_ I l-11-: ( I"I Y (-OLNCHI_ Oh mE= CITY OF REN'I'ON_ WASHING I'O\ DOES ORDAIN AS 1 01.i.O11 S SECTION I The following described propert in the City of Renton is hereby le .s red to Residential 4 City'ttc 3s Irenelmbeleco, specified. I he Economic !)evelopntenl., Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning. I)c))arlrncnt ;ldminulraria is hereby author mind Exhibit A Page 13 Vow' 411/ 4esier ORDINANCF NO L,7231 directed to chantt,c the maps of the toning Orditonce as amended. to evidence said re7chintt i,i, See Attachments and "R attached hereto and made a part hero:0'as it-for set forth herein tPuget Colony !tomes) SECTION II, 1i ordinance shall he effective upon its passage, approval and Ike days after its publication PASSIA 13Y Ilik Y COUNCIL,this 2 irt_ti day ofNOVE;TAI:iC C 2U)(' 13011.111e Walton, City Clerk APPROVED H HE NIAVOR this 27!:h day of Vvcmbe-..-:- Kathy Keolket, Mayor ApprsKee as to fir ;,,,/ Lawrence i Wanton, ( tv Attorney Date of Publication. 1221/ 1.Jim I ;nit t itioo ma Exhibit A Page 14 *sr "aro- liver L,A . 231 VI T,1(..11".‘11,17\ 1 Pt4;II (4)1,()N1. /NIFS, P. 20(16-N1-05 REZ()NE IRO VI R-8 "1() R-4 LEGAL 1)ESCRIPTION 111c \,\ HIO quultend thc W thc rkv 1:cnin, K ,r'II!!: . 1' Nuir•- Exhibit A Page 15 W.r Ili.. , r i" A 'TAC'11‘11?NT 13 t , j .- 44 ,,,'' F r j C - i i -- EXhtbit A 6; Pale Puget Colony Homes CPA 2006-M-05 O (00 I ?OO Rezone from R-8 to R-4 ' m '; r::>>.% sew. 1 {13toR 1 (_ �,, I runn;n,r llc•. k;1,r,,ccr,tic ihl-,nrl o,d-,'t onr:2ic!0 i'lanarmp From Re „fertisl Single Tm i ly to f • 1 I r t, n i;i,L nos R s,,ri0„(,t t�w r?en,ity '.. vTci., „;•,. a,, r,u>ntor t i v flints CITY Y OF Rt.NA ON. AV \:SHI\GTUty ORDI\A'VLF NO 5 32 AN ORDINANCE OF TIIE CITY OF RE:NTON, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE 7,ONING ( 1:ASSLF'L("ATIC)N OF C'ER'I\IN PROPERTY WITHIN THE (: ITY OF REN1'ON'S POTENTIAL NTIAL ANNEXATION AREA (FORMER AQUA BARN PROI'ERT'1) AS COMMLERCIAL.ARTERIAI,(CA)ZONING. (CPA 200E-NI-?) WHEREAS, tinder Section 4_2 020 of Chapter 2 toning Districts- t ses and Standards. of Mille IV(Development Regulations),of Ordinance No 42n0 entitled "Code ui'(wire'al Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"as amended, and the snaps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has not been zoned in the C its°of Renton.and WHEREAS. the City of Renton initiated a proceeding,for change of zone classification of said property. This matter was iefcrred to the Planning Commission lot investigation, study_ and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 20110. and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City s Cunrprehensise Plan, as amended_ and the C`ity Council has considered all matters relevant thereto. and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; NOW. THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL. OF Tilt CITY OF RE,N ION W,-VStII,Nti I ON. I_]Ol:S ORDAIN \S FOLLOWS SF:('T'ION I The fi)llcnrm;described prctpelrty in the City-of Renton ,shall treat the following morning designation once annexed to the City of Renton. Commercial Arterial (CA) as hereinbelow specified. I he Leonorrric Development, Nci hboi hoods and Strategic Planning Exhibit A Page 17 stow (-)RI)INANC;`.NO 5232 ')e artment Adam sirator is hereby auihornaed 2nid directed to ci1aIlir lac the Loasile Ordinance. as amended,toe''iden.e said rezoning,to-Jvit. See 'Attachments "A' and Af., attached hereto and made a part herco as if fu31c set loath herein. (Fortner Aquabarn Property) SECTION I.I. f his ordinance shah be effective upon its passaec, approval and dtrrs halt its publication 1 .1S"i1.1)t31' 111E (11 Y COI.NCfts tln 2 '�- h day of Nuc., Bonnie I Walton, E ity Clerk ;Ul'RO\ID13Y NIL MAYOR this 27th day of N.'veii p 200o Kathv Keolker. Mar or Apr€ "d as to I 1 tsre e.t. Warren. City Attorney Date of Publication 1.2/1/2006_ ( ) t)Ri) l '‘Iil; I I;Iai1)(i ma Exhibit A Page 18 NNW ,eire *law ORDINANCE NC 2 NT TkCIINIEN I A AQI.A BARN REZONE REZONE FRO\1 KING COI N`I'Y NB TO CITV OF III NTON CA LEGAL DESCRIPTION ; .1 olKino,Count, short Pint 1.99S1011). as leccinicci in Vol -17 1-%ijc!, cC. ]01ji n,I 0,I( rminhcr L5rn rocori,k K in 11 siltiati.. in Sc( tiouilnk:ct quader or Section 2 . 1 ownshir 2= North. P.an.2e \A NI.. KIIT. 011ffiy. iishirton Exhibit A Page 19 Noire *vow t J N 1,' r, °'a 0 2. ✓ > n .>cj. 0 M. I ,.- O � - ef 0. -- __- - xyT Y3 C f c` " #J 4vt n O , n w \Y r^-F� -• 5 G,.. rif '4'' C) _ AJ (j. r) _ I H r—F- a N E. a > =i! 'F. l \ , - N Exhibit A V! ) Pa a 1 f _._ - CITY OF WA ION. kVASIIING ION ORDINANCE NO 52 `s AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON. ESTABLISHING THE ZONING CI.ASSIFICA-I`R )N OF (;ERTAI\ PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF REN!'ON'S POTENTIAL. ANNEXATION AREA (F'ORv1I:R AQUA BARN PROPERTY) A5 RESIDENTIAL-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE; (R-14) ZONING. (CPA 2(106-]1-7). WHEREAS, under Section 4 2 t72UofChapter 2 lonin_.; Districts Use_and Standards. olTitle IV (Development Regulations),ofOrdinance No 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City ot'Renton. Washington" as amended. and the maps and reports adopted in Conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has not been zoned in the City of Renton:and WHEREAS. the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification of said property 1 his matter was referred to the Planning Commission t >r investigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered ht the Planning Commission. and the zoning request is in confirrrniry with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended. and the(:ity Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto: NOW, THEREFORE, TI II'.CITY CO1_NCII. OF IIII=.Cll Y OF RTNI ON, WASI IlNG l ON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 The following,described property in the Cir cif Renton shall bear the following zoning designation once annexed to the City of Renton Residential-14 dwelling units per acre(R-14) as hereinbelow specified The Economic Development. Neighborhoods Exhibit A Page 21 Nor ORDNANCE" NO 5232 and Strategic Planning Department Administrator is herehv aotnonlled and directed to i hiarlv;e Ille maps of the i.aninu,Ordinance_ as amended, to evidence said reioninr„ to wit See Attachments A and "B" attached hereto and made a parr hereof as il'fiiily set forth herein (Former Aquaharn l'roperiy) SECTION I-I. fins ordinance shall be effective upon its passage approval,and i e( )day title! its publication PASSED E34' UHF.Cl1A' COL.:N(:I1_thl, /?L ' day of , 20i6 Bonnie 1 1baltort, ( itv Clerk -1PPRO\I E) FA\ I IF:M.1YOR this 2 7 ti'1 day of r ie r , 2000, Kathy Keulker. 11;ttior moo-Air Appr d as to tOrr .-; Lawrence.; Warren,City -1tto;ncv Date of Publication 1 2/ i 1 )-6 r r>ri m;a r y (MD 1307 I 'mhjt)t, ma Exhibit A Page 22 N N 17: N . 5 2 3 1:1 TA( IIMENT A •kOLA BARN RE/ONE REZONE 120Y1 KING COUNTY R-I2 TO CITY OF RENTON 12-14 LEGAL DESCRIPTION of Kin!, ( onnt Shori Phi 1 ) iPI9, 1.;recorded in \ l 7. 1}4!cs ;04. 10-1-\. 10413 and it)4( . nnicr r,-cordir !, nurnbcr 2001031900002. re,:orck All wale inLIR' gliariCr iii Sellit I Ov,nshir North. Ritn::!(- W.11,. King( ounti. .Wi Exhibit A Page 23 Nome rpi,T'3At '_,.. NO2 ` ;-3: al ri ' g n - - _ ,-^ D ¢� t T D 7 �J _ _, j> f S h " , c ' T PP ..7V `el ', ..N it-' - , 1�tct, 0 -t r i a n� a� - ,� , c .. ,i / i pay.d'r.'t -__.. m III,f r 2 ' a ....36. m 3i4 it AAA ----- -/ __._.. F ,#h tk, ti _ , �t ry ,` Xttib 'A - ,Page 24 r- i — - r �_., ``r CITY OF RENTON,WASIdING ION ORDINANCE NO '3234 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON. (HANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN AIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (UPPER KF N\YDALE AREA) FROM RESIDE;NTIA! 8 DU/AC (R-8) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL 4 DU/AC (R-4) ZONING; PILE NO. LUA-06-122 (CPA 2006-M-8). WHEREAS, under Section 1 2 020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts Uses and Standards. of rifle 1V (Development Regulations), ofOrdinancc No 120u entitled-Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" as amended,and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith. the property hereinbelow described has previously been zoned as Residential 8 duiac(R-S); and WHEREAS, the City of Rental initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification ...... of said property This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, stud`, and public hearing,and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered by the l'laniniig Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City';Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties have been heard appearing in support the.reofor in opposnion theierii. NOW, THEREFORE, 1'HE CITY COI NCI .OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WAS!IlNGTON. DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS SECFION I. "Hie following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential 4 dulac(R-4)as hereinbelow specified 'I-he Neighborhoods and Strategic: Planning Division is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning„ to wit_ Exhibit A Page 25 ORDINANCE NO 5234 See Attachments"A"and"14-attached hereto and made a part het-colas if fitly set forth herein (Upper Kennydale Areal SECTION IL 1his ordinance shall be effective upon its passage. appi oval and live days after its publication PASSED BY TILE CITY COUNCII.this 27 t _day of tte vembe r 2000 Bonnie I Walton,City Clerk APPROVED BY 'It IE MAYOR this h day of _Novfamboi , 7006 Kathy Keolker, VItodit Ap, 7et1 as to fgrtrt,, --;," / Ltro.Terleitt j Warren. City Attorney Date of Publication. 12/1/2006 Hsurnmary) ORD )8:l 1/7 7/06 ma Exhibit A Page 26 sAftse. %us ORIA N AN CE NO. !1,234 A1TA(1INTENT A I'PPER KENNVDALE REZONE 20062\HIS REZONE FRO 1.1 R-8 TO R-4 LEGAL DES("..RIPTION ihotttc contained within die iollowiTI!..1dcscribcd houndar. I nn!nc II the tiontheasl. cornk-.T of I act 2c)I o; the Nat of C.D. I Llnian c Lake Washington (iarden iii Liden Acklitionlo SeAttle. Division No. -4, i-Lcorklc,1 in Volume ii Plat . '.!'iTc SI records of V,.asfungton: I hence :oirth..2r1:,. aloft:the ,;outhcrl,.. tocn-:ion (lithe east line of Liid lac!, :o lii in!crccticnwith the centerline ii I St: [hence westerly alonr said centerline to en intersect)on with the centerline limes AN,c N 'hence f-;outh,,:rh,, ajong said ecellerinte ii ,lone Ave NI., to an intersection ca,4e*, e tension of•filc south line of reel 320 cithe Plat°ILI:), f iilltnwi' I eke kVaNhiiirton (iarien l'den vddition to Seattle I)ivision No, I lie.u,:eoudin,; to inc Nair thercof, reeolded in Volume 11 oi records orNili.1 C(111V '. I henCe k1/4-c:;terk extension and the -4outh line of said Iract to its irec;-scHon Liii the eu-,terl riOt 01.1%.1\ oi Interstate. northerly alon!1 the various ec,11'':',C.-;01 saki easterly margin to the south line of Lot 1 of the I'lat or lido!" . :.:(xorc.,lin ! hi the plat thereof. recorded in Volume I I ol Plets, Ht.fi.cs .\Aft fccmik, ii Silo,2ount:, I hence easterly alov the south incI ci said ot 4 to the corner 01 I oi 5o[the I. reh Subdivision accordin,,,-. 10 the plat there.OL recorded in Volume SN Si) rocord.,of sdid count\ hence northcrh, dlon . the WcSt said I H._S inch the northerk exten,:ionftwrvol the centerline ci \I Ct: I hence cat alort, centerline to ii,ith.Cr,e(th)1.1 with the centerline oi .Iiiics V.c Ni : I hence mirth along said centerline to an nm2r::.ection ,,,,atn the easterly•,....!xty.nv-:ion (ri thL,-! north line it I met 278 of said Plat of CD. I[dioxin's lake Garden o l'iCicu NiddJi ion to Scuttle Di\ iiuti No 4' Exhibit A Page 27 (ADINANCE NO. 5234 ATTACIBIENT A :wucc- surd 1:7,0.01n,ion and sAILI 11111 ol 1ot 4 oiTity4 Rcrook Short PHI ,--00-0(17 c ccordcd trider K ii (' '1111:, 70)1 04760000f N: ICIICC `,00(ht.'11\ 1.101c the o3s1 line otiiidI Ill 4 to the lllimnrr 4.:otncr neicot. roil corner 1-1Q...111;13 point on the south hoe frail Tract 77 the :-;odth line of I ract 27S to fito Northe3,4 corner ol Lot i or Renton i line,1.1jtpo.rnent LIII or icuoi.k:d tinder 1,,[nv toni Rec. N . 98(10Q7,71')0 1; icniio !- 111C.11'!, iiintt too eiol line 4 rail 1 I he SOUthoa;_a cotter et honor southerly crossinp NI, 26`-' hI. to th,.-2, Northcast corner oil it 2 if raid ion hoe adiustment: "f hcmcc sotillcrk ulonri the oui line el raid It+i to the nitheiust come':thereol. s,nd Srttlhcasi corner home a point I'm the north line ct I Friel 295 ni raid Plot o',•( \k,ushineirn(iard,..711 Ot [den Soothe <.i(.11 Nu, 4., I hem::: c3:,,tork aloiT ihe north line ot ,,aid I riot 71)c,to the ilorthc3.,',. comer Ihereof: I hence souther1,, alowe the cra:.t lilK said I Fact to an iffler.ce.ii,,n %%id) the nor.h Inc or iho 'oriti) ;50 Sect or)stet 22 oi rand plat. I hence ca:.terr. along raid north line,to in intersection v..dh the\\...,ster17,, riteht of Ionic thar:!,tu of ketinev,ich e NI : I hcnce sontherl' ilone.said hi imer-,ection v,nit the ii 'stePc extension oi the northerlyitoitherli Inne )t I,ot 1 nl dle Pint el Sunset I Ilk. recorded in Volume 160 of PAL, leer I-TV re((Ink orsmd I hence eaq.115;alon4 raid extension :old the roil hire nut raid Lost I lc, the northeast corrter tlietcoi rOil Northeast coiner heittot111 the 4nest line it Lot I I of ruid pint: lIIeueeninrillerlr tInt: said nenl line to the Nortlineut counter of .tid 1 tnt 1f I hence ea:-,teri:: aionLi the north lInen 1 tn I I. II dir I tLnd Hat. to the `.'-:‘,.01-thed:,t en oiler -nil I ot I hence southerIN .done the e. ,,t lin.:on said I ot I nod its ethel ext,...1H]ott ninritne NI 24' St to the titlilterli rn.!ht nt wit Iniroc thcreoi.: I hence ,..vc,,terH, niIon.e tail southerly in3121n, no the ra,•0 of I he oi 7.hi' idol the ant li.drol the North 4411 Icct of I ract 47h ol raid Pint ot CD. 11)111113n). luke rmtlen on Lien Addition to Seattle No 4: Exhibit A Page 28 "Amor Aare' "' i'Ki)IP\AinCI O, _34 ATTACHMENT TACHME'NT A cnee Sutttli rl� aitrnt�. �.si11 cast lioc,to the ,troth iittc ci the Ninth 'tif) red cl said I nisi I liencr wt.-act-1 alone said north tine. to the Lest litre of l i,tet _"5 i c cii nini- i ietice ,,11thCrll tilmin the east lines of Tr tets 2,i'iTI ''. 28-of said oLe to in inierseenon wadi the north line of the South 8t1 teci of I r;n:i 272 or stiiil plat: ills .e itisierlss .11;mg stud north hoe to the east hoe oldie \\e=t 126 !eel ail paid l rant 1 hence stiittlirrIN alone said east lime and Hs moulterl extension ,is;itlii AI 201 �r. to the souttaerlt, right of margin thereof: hence westerly tilting satid 'ciittherk margin, to the northeast roarof tiic idet �iiietl zis ( i 11.1 [IFS ANI) ()PEN SN \('I-. f'ASI N1[N, ''on sheet 2 oh) tri the rr rnriu'd in 'v'ohnne ! I> r,f Plats. Pages records i4 said count 't hence souther{\ along the\ riots courses of the easterly houndari. of saot tract of!and to the `Southeast corner thereof. said`,<itilhedst corner lretnkt on the tioriheris right of t iav margin Ui NI. 1 avr,NU. I he:ICC<�IuiiC the airious courses of the southerly hound at oh said tact. to it:, intersection with the west line of said tract, said west line also heini2 the west line c( I raft ,-Sri of said flat ofC.1). 11iliniar s t tiNe \V'ashinton (inrdeo of t-hen Addi:iort to Nettle isiun \u. •�1: 11denCC northerly along said west !Incctl 11"aCi 770 and 2?l tothe 'lu1'1hi1C,1 VOIThT 41f1 said I met 271. said Northwest corner also heist a point tirt the sotitherli right 14 was margin of`;1 'St: i hence t,,extern air 7cs'?and margin to the Northeast cornet of 1,CEii t 'Q' Ul'sEorl thence outherlti along the east hoer of'said I rtcts 2{)2 c' 2`71 to the beginning 1.1INN roads. 111 .itnate in section if% orsnsiup 2 North hams+_• List. Vv l t I att. tit Penton. king CoL7nit. �1 ashineton. _ Exhibit A Page 29 Attachment B , i , . N F T:4` ' . +�'; , fib (-- I `r d ' tea +'+-- {¢� pp pg,� 1 �diYC.'i3in�.' 1 4Y1'is%,K� - ___ . '" tr� om";W l, 1 1 1 r,' , _ �— i 1 Exhib-i A Page 3u-' Upper Kennydale Rezone from R-8 to R-4 LUA 06-122 CPA-2006-M-8 0 600 120() i L�}) Economic lltvtloptncni,Ncighbatitrwds&S:rntagic PLuunng 1 4L.z P ac.,6,._aid:rc;oc � ► c..r_ F��; * Rezone R-8 to R-4 1 7200 ,..-„,-..--.0 06 Navm'xr'[A6 tt•ture ',ire t i;:t.. ,,A. 14., •r.1,-..i )t 4 t •..:,-, --t.- t cov1RI -IF\ rkt.: i)i, A tAtf)sciett Stipplerticrit lc:T.:„.rii i, A k,ptHli 0. ihA,- t iL„ oi P.,'(.,i01.! ( trmiliAl,A-n-,r,,,,' ,i,, ,im.„ r;',„.:H h Litt. h.,,,,cd L„:-. •,,.=.,:.'H. r,..-W-:,.1 Ih:. 2.r..tf; ( 0.W.pi-,,:t!.i , ',C. i'ID '.. WCW.", ' hL"--,..,'R 'Li' ',tliVH::':' ;:l'i...!C`.- %I ,. 1;. i.',.:',•:',, .0, r-,h i,) iiT .11 , iFH.HtkliOn .41,',1i "%Now HI Lirli;:11 I ,wililA-t Fic,1:cr! Hi ki :_q-,wii l'Acil,,Ht-tt r,,01, 1\ ( orowwi,„ i i,,,H,,rr,: 1 l': , IV-1 ih,:fti:h V, Li I\ I ,il,' t „:„:' i i,-,. HkI HI‘,., 1\ i '0..h!':, , 1\ H PA..12{,. \ i i i:in`Ps,;1:0k-0! 1"1CrO:r0" \1 i it,tift. „[-tqq"1-di 0,,rt I tit,:ntit,t-cti ititt,..1,-, \st i z..Atitttt.t..-.Th >-„t tt-ttt, ittttIttc, \1.-1 ii-ttptt;tt:L Nitt-tt tt, ,nt,ttrtLt.titt..:trtttit,,tt II-tH t t.tittl. t t tt.' \lilt Ct-tmpit:Tht„11-titt.t.t I'LL': t ,ottt, t tt, \I:iiti tt:titttH i th..tttt,.-11h,:tt i tt ttitt'ttrtt, ,t::f ct:.! t\tt,tt tt-tItt t IC r .'_, I,,`,- ........._ ____ 0:, Hi iiicr,,,,,r, .H).-.~,--! •,,,-, rth Cir.w.:, \',,i.-.. iKt, LI:.qt:„ \ts, 't, ttt-t •-•-, • 401.1., Exhibit B Page 1 of 1 Adopted 11/01/04LAND USE ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A LAND USE ELEMENT VIII. RESIDENTIAL POLICIES Goal: Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: a) Contribute to a strong sense of community and neighborhood identity; b) Are walkable places where people can shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; c) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; d) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; e) Are varied or unique in character; f) Support"grid" and "flexible grid" street and pathway patterns where appropriate; g) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; h) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and i) 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 urban 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; H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-05 RMH Policies\RMH Exception In RLD Att A.doc Exception I.,Residential i o.,Density Poliey Dr ft doe Adopted-14404/84LAND USE ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A 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 Land Use designations. Policy LU-124. Promote the timely and logical progression of residential development. Priority for higher density development should be given to development of land with infrastructure capacity and land located closer to the City's Urban Center. Policy LU-125. 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 land capacity should occur in multi-family housing in parts of the City and PAA located outside of the Urban Center. Policy LU-127. Infrastructure impacts of the goal of 50/50 ratio of single-family to 411000 multi-family outside the Urban Center should be evaluated as part of the City's Capital Improvements program. Policy LU-128. Multi-family unit types are encouraged as part of mixed-use developments in the Urban Center, Center Village, Commercial/Office/Residential, and the Commercial Corridor Land Use designations. Policy LU-129. Small-lot, single-family infill developments and plats 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 LU-130. Adopt urban density of at least four(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. IAdepted-4-1 }/O4LAND USE ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A RESIDENTIAL LOW 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 larger-lot housing stock, at urban densities of 4-du/net acre, 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 significant sensitive areas, or can be adequately protected by the critical areas ordinance, are zoned Residential 4. Lands developed with existing manufactured home parks that provide a transition to adjacent Rural Areas and/or are adjacent to critical areas but were established uses in King County prior to annexation may be considered for Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning. Objective LU-DD: Provide for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas of the 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 of the 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 (Resource Conservation) to 1 home per acre(Residential 1) on Residential Low Density (RLD) designated land with significant environmental constraints, including but not limited to: steep slopes, erosion hazard, floodplains, and wetlands or where the area is in a designated Urban Separator. Density should be a maximum of 4-du/net acre (Residential 4) on portions of the Residential Low Density land where these constraints are not extensive and urban densities are appropriate except as provided in Policy LU- 134a. Policy LU-134a :A density exception to the 4 dwelling unit per acre maximum is allowed for pre-existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation. Upon cessation of the manufactured home park use, these properties should be considered fbr Residential 4 zoning. Policy LU-135. For the purpose of mapping four dwelling units per net acre(4-du/ac) zoned areas as contrasted with lower density Residential 1 (R-1) and Resource Conservation(RC) areas, the prevalence of significant environmental constraints should be interpreted to mean: • Adepted4-148-1404LAND USE ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A 1) Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area; 2) Developable areas are separated from 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 setbacks/buffers 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. Implementation of this policy should be phased in within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-136. Rural activities, such as agricultural and animal husbandry, should be allowed. Policy LU-137. Warehousing, outdoor storage, equipment yards, and industrial uses should not be allowed. Where such uses exist as non-conforming uses, 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. ,441009 Implementation of this policy should be phased in within two years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 maybe considered for designation of trail easements or other public benefits through agreements with private parties. Objective LU-EE: Designate Residential 4 du/acre zoning 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 du/acre zoned 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. Adopted 11/01/0ILAND USE ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A Policy LU-144. Ensure quality development by supporting site plans and plats that incorporate quality building and landscaping standards. Policy LU-145. 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 as well as innovative site planning. Criteria should include: 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. i.► _. ...".. ...• ;7 117 ..... -,, ... ...:. - • :.; , ,"7",.7.,N1 "..1.,':',.I r-'.. ..... ..,-. -7' '''''' ',•:'7N -. ..„ 7. 7 A. .,,' ..-..'•,C.', !,:' :„,' -7' . „..; '' •,-.• :" ' "..---.' '.._. , a ' C'''. 7, , ,,,. X .;., ,...„ - r',.`..:`J'.-. „;.,„ -'1„ ;,,,, ....". 7; P. ,-' ,-' t '''-' :' t ,--' :-..' ; ,,,-•,., __,-,-.. , ,:7-, '---;'-;---3 "... '7 ..:''" 7-, .."2'-"". -'' ..Z.-. E 7" " •-.7-'4,7-, 7'z Li.-- F.' a. L, ,-_.- 7! ,,,,- .-----;7, ''-7 - -7 4. ..=:,,.,,...... 74 ;NN ,"" . .. a ''..... .-..'7.: ."•;••'.'''," „..;',..„,;',"''., „ ..., z„.“ „ '.-.S 7- ',,,"''''_' C'N' ..": ,'7,2 ..."„ ..,... „, :.... r.,-,1 a.,- '.' ",:,'"-...;"-a '7",- a .-.."' ''' a .`" - •...., ''' a!„z----• 7_1....,...,' , •-• (.;',Z. -,-,:i.„ ,: ,,,'..'.„'7 ..'.'..'' .,•__.....t.,"';'',S:":,,7;...',. 7 -:,, .,'.„..-"...'.,.,...,,,'_-N,..''"........'-.'..•r,'.--.,.-.:,. -a ,. ,..'..,.Z':."..::,•--".."'4:....„ ','.;...''"';,' ''' - -::.-.,,,..- -,-.,' •;41-,".,,,...:,7.::..._a'.'. /.-.,,.,',`%t...-.,,:.-,1- ,.,-;'-..1',,-.3Z-,,., '-t,-.-'-,,!-•. 1t- . .- . - :: 7 . . , f.. - - ,,:- V7" •= - . -_ , -,,..---•.-,•,,ta,..-.,...47,: •,.' --, ,"-7-1 a ,, -= .`,.:'-••; a .".-:::'7, ";:••N.. "...."7. - -._-•,„..... .:', ,..7. . ....,--.1.-,-- .-L-.,,7 F.,,: ..,;.. ,:::3 .7: ;,0 7.: L.L.,..-, --- ..,' , ,, ,_ I,,-, .....„.,.. -7, 7: -:, , .7- L, ._,7-7,r._,7- 7, ,.,--_...L f.';..,s 'F-_, --•.'-' s s- `-' ',7'.7 .7•,, ,, 'S :7. -_-...',1 Ss- "--- L":.•- 7- '• -7-_1 -;-_-_.:-..-,_, .s. s .1; a 7 .„',''„•'' N-• ;,. ".7, a 7.', .... '-;-..,',-(,s.r''N 1,..", ,, ,,-::: N'. . a ,..,..; . ',',.... ;': :'--.I --; ''' ''''.".-: ''''- :, ''.,' '-' Z2 ,- .---, ' ^•": ''''. ""''''' - "-^''- -6 ,_ Z 7' ':,,- :-' y z-'_ : %,'„:',4''''___,"t , ,e "^.' 7 l , '---, r,..1 - , '- t-'.. C.,,, , ;',,“ :.„ '' !,,,'7," „- :,--...,.::. ,..::,,,,..-,-,z, ....2, .7:,,E--- ---•,_, ...,---,c.: :.; 1; ,.,„„,....,; -, :.--.._-..^. :..., .,..-.,.•„,.:::, :,-.-- 7 7:7'." ,. "-: , -..' 27, -, C 77 • 7-1'77 77 ' .---, 1.,''4 ,- 7:- ''''. - --, ',-,-- -'--• '.., - - '.7 '•,.. '`'''' ., ."''' ':... '" - 7-" 'i.'- •-'''C7'. ,•," . L-.-..-. ' _"..„•:, -.NI 7--, ."..::„ ..: 7,... ,,,,;4 -,...?„,;_,-. .:,,, .;.-_, .,„.-,. ,-,,,,..4:,--- ,.,,,,. ,-:,.; ...--.: 0:,•_", ,....,t.,,tf_ ,7,,., ",,-,,. :.„1:',, ,:.; , .„.. .. -,-,- 7-7 ,, -, ,F. , 7 7.= , -'-=-5 ,,,- '- _5.- ---' - r1 "-,- ' ',:r- ''"•- '..:'"-.P a-'..""•-;!;-7 -' 7...".--. c 7-, rf, F'-''', =7---; - "E. = --, ..ci .71'.. , ?.. = .., a,,.... --._! --- _, :.,,,,„ ,,- ,t, ;-_, '... ,,..... = 7:,•-'.' a ",,,,,' .,,...., ., ','• F. •---'2. "•'", 1,'7. ...• "_',„"..' ..1., C.--..-7 .._".. '.'.11 '•-,'7.... .•-.- a ""4''Ne. '.'' ".,.--," --N;'.: '.'''. N'''' ''" 0-",-•'''''''. ,'''' -7 ''';'-' a'-,-:•-• ..-C ": .`"'-''''' '''''T. -"' ..,'._,'"z : -=1 ",,,-_,..c.4 E-Ha' 5, ,... = F-- ":_.' 5 -..---:4, -„,-, = i'._, 4:-. t-_-...",_:-..- . -= 4-; F.' -:--: z- ri,.,• E-; ,'-' 7:-L..L, ,;-- 7"- '''''' 7' :-'-' '.•:. IT,-'P.7 `7--;'-,,7„,' ".7---17,,',"4--- '..-L;7, ''L-^ t 7, t.-L-7, :::--„'.,'„.:L. P..7-7 L.'--',4 7.. ,,- ,..- , 4,- '*' ""'" E ;.• ;-.: "..".1,7- ,...., .-, ,,, -," ..-.;,:•,,, - .,,-„. ,-. --, ....... _ - = ,,,,.= a' ,-- 7:. ..t -,,' , ', •-, :" ,r,:4 .- -...':i r. ;7"-',',' 'f.,-7,-..'.7..."; , = ..,, ,„,,...r., „,,,..,..] -, ..,,, -- ,,-. -,- '.,_ , -- ,-. c, - .; 7: 7 71.7 -7 -7 2,,,7'21 27 7' :7 ....2 :e7 :7_ .4 '7 5 7;.,..-,' - `-_, --L. ,-' L.,-L -: c, •• -. - -',' ,' t 7L:' --.7 . 7,; 7 77" .-, '7 ..,", L, .;.',.L':'' ..." •• 7 .. "' , . '.7.;'',..,„I a .,-.. ...„ .'...... ',, ; ,..,'„,". i..••, - ..... -•-'''' -',fp- - .. a,-.",r-• .;•.'''.'",.1:"1'„ 7- ''''. . -,7- '''' '".. - ',''''''''-' *7•-' ,... a ".••-• ',.''" ".-,-. s- `.0 '''' .;--•7'.'',... '7.N].•...,..' ',: ,__.''.- I.''7 r" *,. T.-',-;7.... ,In."-"-, .'• j:' '.:'''''',--!,',.•^ ''''' ' -.... • l' ;-• '"'"',....-N7' •-•'•,..... ...., i.... ,.' ''-'--'-'.:--, - •7„..,7-' •-", ;1,- -7....f. ,..' -,3' c..... '-...N. '..::::','-''..... '''-'„..a 7", '-' -.I.: - "'It - - ''.5•Li:,:-'-,:7--- 7, :- 7-';,--:,-'7',-- '-7:L.-; ."•:' ,- ..---, - -;'7, .- , '- ''',i ":7„.'4=, ,-..,',''' ,.., ,1„, ..„ :,":'...::.7.„' :1„. - ,,,„ r,,:',--.:, _.:, ,L, ,-,-. ;::-1- ;,-' .."7::: i7--'',L',E---_,' .';', r,5,", •=.:::!."''44,7 .i.7, ''',-*.,:,,..,,, 1—.,..-7„ ';.-:',. 75 '.=1 c ' -.,i., ,2,--•.L7'..'7 E' ',.LE.'L,,L.,..-L±„-_, 7 f ,:3„:,,-- 7.' t'LL-, 7„,' L',-5 ,..i , ' ,t,-,.-: -,.. ,-- - - ..--' ,,, - - 77 - - 7,„ , - -----.' ., "...'-".' 7::: ',---"- '-'7! '-.'; ,.: ,--- '7,' , -, ,,:7''' 7-% .. - -, ---- ,-7 •,; - 7--' .7-'' _.• :,'''L 7', '--: -0:-, 7 -- - '-.1 c 7 7,.: :.;..,:. ,=7; c ,-7, ---,.,.. ;`.". 7, E•',,-_,7':-..:: ..,,:.--., '",* •- ',-.-LI ,..'-',': "'t''' ''2, T.'" -7,- ./.' 7.- 7 77.- ''-'1.. "--. ...'-:•-:::: c•-:' '44"... (-' - "; .--.. '''•--.7, '-•-- ''''. '-.2. -- "--- C ',.• _---.7_ ..5. -c.. -• -.-- ::.- t,=• . .-.7•-•.. _L--... --, '..!:, •-- .7'• .. -;_i .r. - 7... '...- '...: . 7.,.• -7-...- .- •.._....___-: L-. -z• ,-; - f * -...** ..t.:....-.; C. :.. Z-*" :,, ,-' *''''I• ....*'-2 '....' ri$--5 -' 7 ..-, --: .-- :-..,•-• -'-,-- -- -r=i /. _ ,, ..- ' ,z- :-..,..c. k., ,," -7",-'"77-; '',., '',..''' . ,' ....' 5 -.. ,:,..,' ;-; :..-' -..-...../" ,,- .r.. ,, ,, 5'-- -= 7 ,'''- '; - -.T. : --- .."'- .7- --.-- 1.-- _." 5 "' ' '-__-' r-c.4.-`:" 5-_-_" 4 4,,- -, --''''77--'--_.-1.'7"77.-. S, 7 ' r - ." :„.,._ „. 1:2-.."-, .7:: -...-,4L. ',1 .:'''4'7" .•±-; , 7 -H -_-:, ---- - -'; ",- .. _ - r,. . ...-.; - ..... a. _;:;,,,"". '':,-,-,"„ = , * "" ":2 a. s .. ......,... -. „.„ V:', , '.',L,::. !Z' '.7 '2„:",',-...,_...? ,_ __. --. '..". .-,-„- ._': 7.-_, ,- ,...., „,„ ...,,-J4..'- ,..; '4":''',' ... . • -r..-,_, , ;:--. ' ' '''' ::. 77; ..-.' ''''...• .t.. ....' :,..:: 7. E.:,•:,"...- ,' ...7.1"; ,,.7.-„-".'- ',..-'7"2, ,7, .-".•"::: .:. '-''-'^'-..':a ''''.-.L,.... E-:-,..-, .. ,,..." S! - ,Z, :;-•... .--7,.:-=,, tr"" -9-,.;,- :.- :5 t/..„,7.-...' :.,-.. _;,.. ',..,i-.'-. ,--'„.=. <-..,-, -- =2_,-L L-7_ C..7.'z L.,.., 7'. ::',- ..,,L'7 - _1-, - 11,'.--=',„? c ..---- 0 ...S' „3, a F 5 ''', ''?"--1-`''• ,. ',.. 73.'.,.... 7...'' - "... --.. .., ,.-..-,'of,7. s"-_,, .•- -7..:„.,-__..- .- s LI,,...e.. - Is t_ -..... c*-- z..... , ::-..-rr,i, . -. •-- , :.'.' .-, ,..; .7.-, , 7:--.Z 77:: ;'-'-i-- 4 ," , ",7 -7,' ' 7 ,' 5 ';''' O :" .-- "' ,-,-.- -- - ;-' i.',-', 5 ,, .. -<", :.--:'. ' --,''. •?..',.' - 7.1..--- c-_, ".--,i.••-• 7s. --7- ..,-• • c.,-, '',"",..„...-, s ,_;,- .,....-- . s• ,,,,,.-.•--- ,".."(--- :.; = ,-.7, ,,, ,...', _ .,-;-- -s,„ ,•-- c• 4:-, -,•-• "L...--,-_-..,-,- .:,- -_-_, ..CS, .::: .--- :_-_.' - -. L-'17'7' 7''''. •:-- '''' 7' .•'-'' "4: :'7'. '-'• ''' ''-- ---`''''-' •c•'. S -:.1.4 ..---c. - '7 LT- ,.:7 , --'7-7"--7-:'' 17' P. - , .:-7.:7' - -- •,'-;0-7i !-Lf.- t:. T-,-. .,,, ;7" , 7.:r7..--.: .7-:'---.7. ;-'-: t--.::•''= 7 ",i,-.1: 7, P '',.:,;----,L,,:", ±'..L., =7--.7L-.- .'::' ,.• 't---', ,.,,, _ 7,7,;:,_: ., -4:" -9- .-.--: Z,, "v. ---e ',-:,.-: 4., ,.., _...'-' ..:., = .2........ ;-. ',`:. .7. ,"a"' -, 3 , ,:-,"7-.: ,„) a 7..•..--• '"- -' ".., ...C. -• ,.., - -i. , N.,..' ''-''''••.... - - '„, ''.7 47,-''' •.'7-i::•-•L--` -;-", 7 'le .:: ..1::: '...". ',-;',7 •='' ;.,' '7, .... •,, ,-;_-: -,. f.... NI • T '''"-'ii."-i ..,",'''• ,T, .„ ',-- -' ".7. -7 "." , .,::,.... 72. :,..,,-,'..", a_,z).-7.7 - -,... ,.... ...., ,...._,..1 ,- - -- ---- - - -72 '--- --.- - z - ,-,L-7-`,t---',",C.- .;",,..„=„ ,L,..; 1,7-- C 7.-'----•-.- .... .- :- ,... ;7',-- 7': - t ,L7-,-.;.. ,-;--"7„,"----.-P-,' :: -,..77 -.7-- ;.--• ---, - .•,-7, -7:72 t ,.., s,-- ,-*= ,7-2, _„-,..-- „._ ',1..z."''LS -7. -,,-- ,.-...,:•,--- .•-•, _ r;._; .-•-•_, s:, 7 j, 27-" r"-"' --, 72 7 7. 7"i <- 7. -,72----,::2-*-- J..-r-',-;:, ''''' :•,'--'-'_, ;-. .'7.' ,r;:-;;'' ,,,,.- 9•-: .';', ,t; ;,„-, -:c :,'-: ''''' ›."7.7- • .,,; _---.--,, 7 ,,-; i 7,7_,-,-"-. .7,,, - .-: '--Lr ,,, - t ';'- t -7_, .,._.„..r,-_-_, _ -7. ..•,- 7! -.: i"-,' !,- ,, '., . ' ''4-7'Z'= 7'."E.- ••'•'''..- ..' .,-, " '77'' '• - '.. "-- .7'.,- - "1.,.--' - , 21 - 77. :., '' .,"7=.. -. 1- '_. ,,-,,--_,.._: , ,*..--.-:, -.,, .-_-: „, ,;.;,„::: ,,:-..,•,-. - n ,.= ;.„--,7- .. 7. ..,...',.77 5. ,_. ,.., -, •;,-, -.,.-'4 .7-_,'„L',L. ;,- ,-- ,,.. 7: ,_1•_,,-;,...',-..--: :--. _Y. -,-..±' -k:.-::.:',...-": --- -.2 - '' ;.,-..7.,L?:z -, , " ..,1-,1-. , :: c----,-.....,-, .-,,,,'2, 1- - 74:--- -,,c.,..7-,P„ ' L-7 -.1.7-- ,,,,,t -;.- '- 7 '-7. -.s. -,-. 72:P. .4. '-.*.'" . _, 7-'-' ''F; ' 7,172 ---c7,',-----* - .r:' '' ...... '" 7 -:-- ''I" '." , '''. '-,...,'"F. '... .: ..,,,.1-""'„„; ....; .... .""7_, .4,•1 2.'7, r-,iN:...;,,N 0--i ....",,, ... ":... ."....: ;l -. ,- , - - "7'-1-, ":.f,1„'-'.-''''''"--•:-.. ''. '-:.' '.:' 7 7 '...---', '1., --.; =''''''' .....:E-'. 7 .7,-...., 7.-:"...-''' •,..., -7.-".--77' _2", , 1,‘", 7 7. 3 ci :,.. ...,:. --. i-, "-. '-' ;'.,:,,: ,... ''' - - '-7.7 '-'7"7 '.: r' :- ":-__1_ ....', '-_-' ,''-L:,--• a '7' ''' - ; ''„,"7: -• ''' '"' 7;-'':-'.:: :. -4 - "- .:_- '-.7- -7 ---'-••.='-'''. '.7..••.-'':-.-.; 4' ',--- '"L" -7, ''''.. c. _.• ,-- 4,- '..;., S.. :-'--- T. ,I' "i '.-;-- ' .,' `.7..: c ,, -,,,7 '7 C 7'7....)7 -_. -,. ,-,,.-= ,' --- :. ,,,.-..- , ,„, ,r, ...-_, z_. :,,,..;., r- ''.'"., -, -- .."-. -- ,_-, ..-,.: .-, -i-;.: ,,,,r;- ' =.57 ,-= --c--,', ;-- ---.-1"_ 7.....- -.- c.2.,7.-. ' - 5: 5:s_.--'7..- '.....::•-•-7:7-- -- -:•) - ---'- 44.0., -7. 7-3 7,.._ _,- ...., -7, 7., „.,„.., < 7_, '2 _,-., ' 7_..J ''.-. r,-;•_• ....?.•'... .7: .F•_ --_- ...- .s..• '..-'...- •.---- „„. ...-.,. 17_, .:-.-. ,-,., .s.'-i,-L7 ---••-: ,... -,---: 4 , .. ,..., --"'- E ....- -7,- •-r.. - -- --_. •-s- s•_-__ .7., .- F:. , ...- '''''• i?.". .:". -s ."-sr-, ,. ,:,.., .';':. ',-,- ., ..... _ •,.... - . „ -- - _, .,_„ ":!:' -Q,'7. _, .....:::-•-4 ,,-= ,...= 3 -'5, t .= --= _., .-- _ 7,.. ;::: 7,--; -:: 7:: -4 i-- 5 5 .... . .c. ...... ,„.„,, :•." .--, = '---'•-- 7 '. '".: :7'. ...., ".: ''''' ":. •7.. , 4'. 4 .., _ ,..., - 77,, 7-- -. ...-7,---',... .•,- ..'7 . ..4 - -- -,,,- t.o 1 - -,-, _ , ,I,7-2 7 "--- •-, -7' , - ,_ ,....., ...-.• .'.-- = .7 '- - - .."-.• .-,..i, --... , •_:_..- •._Z, - - ...... C.. F. -, - - -7.- . --• - ,-..".. Ls :: '-• '--.7:- , _ ;..., , -.. 7- 7 ,,, .,-.7, ? 7'. - 7 = .--.`" 3 ,..T.. :--- ,''.,^' Lf: .',.`, 7. .7 ..! .7 :7 77 ,-7-i ''. .... ••••• ---" ' ,, ,_,.. :- 7 .,' - , ,...., ''...., 7L ' - --7,. -.7, . _ - = ,L---: ---; 7- :'. 7; 2:2 .:--: ....7- — ',..4 _-, 7: ___, ,..,' 4" ,_,, _ ,_,,, -, :_. ,' '...1) '., -_-_ ' 7, - , - _ '-' ' - __ ,...., .r.,. . - .z. c._ .= 2 "--. ...!.. ,...., 7, . -'' 77' .; ''''' :_. = ,- ,..... . - --, Z", .F.,- 't:-. --, = •-•:.; :,..., .....- - - :.----- ,..r.: „..` •--, - . 7. ' ..E. „.., ......, -,. ---..., ,-- 5 ,.. "-•-:- r:4 '----' ---- --, - -H 5 't '- --.1 '"2 -7.; 5- - - ..-.- .r., eses ,,,,,, ':-..f; ,', c- 7. = :c, .., = -7,,, -.. .... -... ...",,- I 77 1 :=- 0.0 -' '..„, --.',. '7:7', '73' .'.-: '....:' ';'). 7-.--. '.2 1-76' '''.1 :;•,', !--. V 3. —, — .,r, ss Exhibit C Affidavit of Publication December 1, 2006 SY ° 3 ' j° ' 0 -7 . z, c_ . z Y f X,i�x :" F cy Ec , 3 c r -r, - x. - x ,c _ a ' 8 "s .c _ x i 3. f, o Y _a Txa Xmo : x y .t - J t a L a J p J -Y . c+e ST. KcfPv.c 1 c _ 1 K- 1 i L I- C X - � , 7 .c c So ram x,�� o"ro ::: c1.� aS_c aim? r.�r. �s _ _.c^' a 2' .c o r :X _.,�i , ' I- .,'.a -_ �'x h yj c -�.�i-. 3'- do- i4 � o� o:: � it � ;t aS mF � � YT rt -a- a NOW gg -2:-C .. _ $ o s - x - .,3_. Y Q`�ox,.. � , - -� " x " � , o-- 4 r 7,. . N . q� � L , r r , - x ' J ,J -LGSTC.�, . 0 . s-. �G_ - � _z -7 xx ixx - • r a_a • • _£ - a c _ __ t _ ` - 0' _ ppN� _ - ..1. _1b[, 1 - /1 = 17fr: - -t... .t -.3, - r c t �' m r = a 'r N1. G . z� q � � t t r z .� . - -: _ Ex N s u x= r € m • Y.=I...._.} mot- - _.?_ :-T-#'t'' _ _1 s.- _ �c1'= - .., .... ..,�T.....�._ m, _.- :1, 7. Z' r' i 4 / - 5. .- L r - .�4. 'v' �' •- �. _ - _ v � s v .M.. = I. G. f c J d tWm Cr - ' - r a - - _;, - 2 ' i ^ �7 7, _J _ _ - _. .. Y i - ..i+ - _ . n t I - F Exhibit DI Affidavit of Publication September 14, 2006 �.. N.JG G- - G" W w W W :vNN 1 7'-i r CY > Z sy 1 -i'c 1C�' ;4. t a' wYtsn ,: b'w ww scNOM t '3ti -3i f'-1 nye xN, s X'r V .DC SAP sO O. 00EO COb � s �' z2 - GE�n+o 0 .mdc..r oc . , c .4 y _ T - *j T� ?R. m N ° .,o > - t W .,. w T >t rn t c Jc 3 _ "i gi, ,Syww E2,38W g � . ooe, c�tOcc L ` ' ._ .. o `-� .. ys-ate _ . ,;;c _ .fe- aF.. . .�cT,co acx noi wp acwc. uJ o �* a� -01 'Ei p p C Al RI'qtG �1-B g' � �n yy C'+N u.p �U... I t seemed like a waste of paper to print pages with over 1300 names and addresses (over 50 pages) But I have the data if you need it. Exhibit D2 Parties of Record-September 20, 2006, public hearing �.. "NNW PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING September 20,2006- 6:00 p.m. ',for % 'r COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7`'Floor -�"t'v\ AGENDA t CALL TO ORDER: 2 ROI L CAI I 3. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED: 1. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: I) r'O1ICY CODE StUL)Y SESSION: a 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments #2006-M-1 Map Amendment to change tie designation from a combination of Neighborhood Commercia°Singie Family with Neighborhood Commercial and R 8 s rlit 1,011111f-110 Neighbor1001:3 Cornrrlerciat land use with Neighborhood Commercial zoning STAFF PRESENTATION AUDIENCE COMMENT " a2.) #2006-M-2 Map Amendment to change the Kennydale Blueberry Faun from Residential Low Density land use with Resource Conservation zoning to Residential Single Family land use with R 8 zoning or i-ow Density Residential land use with R-4 zoning #2006-M-8 Map Amendment to consider changing the designation for a 49 acre area of Upper Ken:riydale. south of NE 28''`and NE itO !rum l-405 to approximately the boundary of the fl ntage arm Subdzvrsion from Residential Single Family with A 8 zoning to I.ow Density Resident_al witn R-a zoning. STAFF PRESENTATION AUDIENCE COMMENT" a4,1 #2006-M-3 Map Amendment to change the designation from Residential Single Family land ii,e with H-8 vr.. zoning to Commercial Corridor land use with Commercial Arterial zoning or a 2-09-3 c'e single fare ly property STAFF PRESENTATION AUDIENCE COMMENT #2006-M-4 Map Amendment to change,the designation from Residential MediurrI Density tand ears with R-1 Li zoning to Commercial Con idol land use with Commercial Office zoning for a 5-61-tire Undeveloped property located act south of S 37' St and west of the dead end at S 38'St. west of taibol Rd STAFF PRESENTATION AUDIENCE COMMENT" a6.t #2006-M-5 Map Amendment to charge the following plats and parcels from Reside.ntal Singe Family with R- ft zoning to Residential I.Low Density land use with R-4 zoning a i 18 8-acre Puget Colony Homes subdivision consisting of 61 lots located at SE 1 33"`Sr. SE 1 ,4- St.and SE 135-S1,and SE 132 St on the north and SE 136 St on the south. This are s located ir. Renton and would receive R 4 zoning b Tim nine lot Kimher'iy Lane subdivision to the immediate Wes!on the north slide of SE 136 ' St These o operties are,n unincorporated King County ty and will riot have zoning spp"sad. Potential.zoning upon annexation would be R-4. Ci 31-lot Hideaway Homes Sites subdivision on the south side of SE 13f3i"Si STAFF PRESENTATION AUDIENCE COMMENT " a7.i #2006-M-6 Map Amendment to amend the boundary of the Center Village and Residential Medium Density land use designations in the Highlands Subarea at Change from Center Village to Residential Multi-Family land use • Area south of Sunset E lvc"SR 900., east of Dayton Ave, nurt-r of NE 9`r St and NE 9' Pi, r urrentiy zoned Residential Multi Faintly, Zoning will remain Residential Multi-tam iy but the land rise'would also occome Residential Multi-Family b ( waricie from Residential Medium Density to Center V'lag€: n Iwr,areas Exhibit El Agenda for September 20. 2006, Planning Comm Public Hearing Page 1 of 2 • Planning Commission.Agenda Piigr' Ctt 23.06 (cont.) `wrw • Area currently designated Residential Medium Density with R-10 zoning mat is north of 169'St between Harrington Ave and Kirkland Ave, the land use proposed is Center Village and the zoning wound remain R-10 • The parcels along Harrington Ave between 9 St and "St with frontage on Harrington Ave.currently designated Residential Medium Density with H 10 zoning,would esr'•id the Center Village land use designation south to 7'`. St tie nand use proposed is Center Village arid the zoning would remain R-1 u ci Change tram Residential Medium Density with R-10 zoning to Residential Singe Family with R 8 zoning. • Area north o' Sunset Blvd and west of Edmonds Ave This area is currently zoned R- 0 and developed with single !airily housing and would change to R-3 • Area rear Monroe Ave and Sunset Blvd. The properties on Monroe Ave are protected by covenant at their current level of intensity,which is approximately,, units tier acre. lupine; is currently Ft 10 and would change to R-Ft a8 i #2006-T-2 Text Amendments to update the Land Use Element to reliec,f chan1ges in tne Center Village policies a; Amend Policy LU-318 to delete R-10 as an implementing zone and add R 14 as an implementing zone in the Center Vit age and clarity that the RM zone with suftixrrs case implement Center Village et Amend Strategy 319.2 to call for preparation of a subarea plan rather than a redevelopment plan to implement the Center Village land ase concepts and provide that the phasing or the Plan is expected to occur within a two to five year period from the 2004 GMA Update c'r Amend Strategy 319,3 to delete a statement that areas east of Edmonds Ave and nortl,of Sunset Blvd currently zoned Residential Multi Family arc to remain in residential use and €he area north of 1 '''St currently zoned P 10 is to remain,n residential C18e STAFF PRESENTATION AUDIENCE COMMENT" a9., #2006-M-7 Map Amendment to change the designation of two_ 1.5 acre pa€ce'c at the southwest corner of 152'u Ave SE and the Renton-Maple Valley Highway {SR 169i,the-former Aqua Barn site. from Residential Low Density with potential R-4 zoning upon annexation In Commercial Corridor with fir: potential Commercial Arterial zoning and a Map Amendment to ctla rge the designation of thron parcels ranging in size from 3.7-mires to 14-acres to the south of two grove referenced parcels of the former Aqua Barn site.from Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning upon annexation to Residential Medium Density with potential R-14 zoning ai0 ) #2006-T-5 Text Amendment to update the Land Use Element to allow Residential Manufactured I lmrie coning to be an implementing zone with the Residential Low Density land use designation. Policy text amendments are proposed to provide a density exception and mapping policy for existing manritactured home parks in the City's lowest density residential designation Residential Low Density. This is a citywide amendment but the change in policy would apply primarily I the Petentiat Annexation Area, specliicaily in the Maplewood Addition Annexation STAFF PRESENTATION AUDIENCE COMMENT it I #2.006-T-1 Text Amendment to update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption at Kent and Issaquah School District Capital Facilities Plans a12a #2006-T-3 Text Amendment to update the Land Use and Community Design Elements wa"r housekeeping; changes a 13 ) #2006-T-4 Text Amendment to update the Tirirrspurtation Element to reflect changes in the capital projects list STAFF PRESENTATION AUDIENCE COMMENT" 6. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: 7 ADJOURNMI-NT' " Those wishing to address the Planning Commission roust complete a"Bequest to Speak"forth located next to the agendas at the Lack of the room and return it to the Recording Secretary. Speakers will be called open by the Chair. Each speaker is allowed three (3) minates. Additional information can be found online at www.ci.renton.wa.uafednspiocinfo.htm Exhibit El Agenda for September 20. 2006, Planning Comm Public Hearing Page 2 of 2 EXCERPT from Alex Piets'l is website concerning Highlands Redetelopment as of 4/13/06 ' i,'Pi*P -Fio, j Liri 1# pti } ,...ravorit, eig orrood-1:..,- retegicAtittning _. HIGHLANDS REDEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE Outline of Implementation Timing and Steps: 1st Quarter(Jan-Mar) 2006 • $150,000 set aside in 2006 Budget for planning and public outreach (completed). • Analyze the real estate market to guide new zoning and density incentives(completed). • Develop conceptual land use plan identifying land uses, densities and growth assumptions. (nearly complete as of 4/13/06) • Collect and analyze data needed to support a declaration of blight under the Community Renewal Act(nearly complete as of 4/13/06) • Continue public outreach (four property owner, one developer, and one institutional owner (school and church) focus groups, and one open house completed). • Mayor outlines the City's Initiative in the State of the City Address. • At Council Retreat, Mayor and Council determine direction of initiative and request additional$1 million of unallocated fund balance to Highlands Redevelopment Fund ($2.5 million total) • Based on Mayor and City Council's direction, develop expanded public outreach program. 2nd Quarter (April -June) 2006 • City Council committee and Planning Commission hold meetings on proposed implementation legislation including interim zoning, Comprehensive Plan amendments, Sub-area Plan. • City meets again with expanded focus groups of property owners to discuss plan. • City meets with residents of the Highlands and adjacent neighborhoods in community open house and other meetings as part of larger communications and outreach strategy. • Engage Renton Housing Authority(RHA)and other non-profit housing organizations to develop affordable housing replacement plan. • By May 14th, expiration of the Highlands Building Moratorium, City Council adopts a package of new, interim zoning to attract new investment to the Highlands residential and commercial areas. • Complete DRAFT Sub-area Plan, which includes a package of Comprehensive Plan amendments, rezones, development standards, and capital facilities plan. • By June 30, complete DRAFT Declaration of Blight and North Harrington Community Renewal Plan (NHCRP), which includes plans for redevelopment, infrastructure and facility — improvements, and housing relocation and replacement. Exhibit E2 Alex Pietsch's Statement of Work-Page 1 of 3 EXCERPT from Alex Pit.rsch's website concerning Highlands Recteieelopment as of 4/13/06 "%to,, 3rd Quarter(July-Sept.) 2006 • City encourages redevelopment of area outside of targeted Community Renewal Area by connected willing sellers with developers of smaller scale. • City continues to work with existing commercial property owner to identify new commercial development with emphasis on leveraging adjacent new mixed income residential development. • By July 31st, submit Sub-area Plan, Declaration of Blight and NHCRP to City Council for consideration and subsequent adoption. • City launches media outreach to explain the NHCRP(North Harrington Renewal Plan). • City issues RFP and selects development partner(s) for master planning and redevelopment envisioned in NHCRP. 4th Quarter(Oct.-Dec.) 2006 • RHA identifies new housing locations for existing Section 8 voucher holders displaced by redevelopment. • RHA partners with non-profit housing developers to identify and build new affordable housing in smaller, scattered developments around the City. • City and development partner complete Development Agreement. • Development partner begins to purchase property from willing sellers. • City offers Community Renewal purchases for willing sellers seeking tax advantages of"friendly condemnation." • City explores with Development Partner and commercial property owner possible joint redevelopment of both the residential and commercial areas. • RHA partners with non-profit housing developers and Development Partner to develop mixed-income housing on existing, new, and/or swapped property within the NHCRP area. 2007 • Development Partner initiates first redevelopment project(s). This schedule is not about"public participation." It is about a Declaration of Blight which the City wanted to have completely arranged with its development partners before the Public learned about it. The City held its first and only open house for the Public on November 15, 2005. The handout showed the kinds of housing the City wanted, and none of it matched existing housing. In addition, one of the main thoroughfares would be converted into a walkway/drainage facility which would run the entire length of the Subarea. I stood at the door at the November 15th Open House and people left scared and with questions about how this"urban village"was going to come about without their losing their homes. The answer was provided on April 13, 2006, when I inadvertently stumbled upon this webpage, which was immediately removed from the City's website. Once Mayor Koelker's plans for a Declaration of Blight were exposed, then the Public wanted to be included in the planning. But the way in which the Public was engaged from that point on is an astounding series of events which I do not believe meet even the minimum requirements of GMA regarding public participation and notice. The handout from the November 15, 2005, open house follows: Exhibit E2 Alex Pietsch's Statement of Work-Page 2 of 3 EXCERPT from Alex Piet3en's website concerning Highlands Redevelopment as of 4/13/06 Land Use Concept A -).. -- - . .-,-•--7.7.77., NNW, AreimicIL.i.Shop rg with I lo,.Jsrig Ate ARM Nv,ii lbor lot:LI Hi.L 9 'meth n.K.P.:Firnall ot —men::lal Si-ogie Fa--oh: (...:Littage 1 loc Sr l&i ...... ..-... 4 5 S....try 10,111 Fa^-iii Pi.n or 8 r ritrgkitimos i;Ve.1 1iiii.o. Flt---"C4•.,T.--- ''•7:7— ,,,..c ic ClwrErship i ' .'" . ‘4, '*$-•A 'N . ' itklig-.4"i' .i 4 „,, t....,-- — kk i .A ile416'...*4/S ii - I tidokrr — " A klikkAAA Akik -- kilikidesi i 1 '1. 1.0.4.0Pr r ,• .i • ii140,41.40 , V........"."7".' -.... ---- ''''''.i:i' Fr ay. kiitkireikAl TkAkA 1.'"*"kk. . _ ‘41111111k, li I . • . I 111:'• ig lillfai j At 01.41041,, ' • , t • •,• if',.. ,, i -_ . . .. ' 1 ...& . A.. iiurnaiero rioimi'1111Pir V i ' 1.14,.- . ' L._ I' .•, .r. or 4.43-1111111e,,>iiiii4/, ' 1 . 1:40ilik 1,... _ , , - I-- Alex Ptetscn's statement of Work-Page 3 of 3 DVD to be provided later. It is time consuming to copy DVD's on my home computer.. Exhibit F DVD of Planning Commission meeting, September 20, 2006 DVD to be provided later. It is time consuming to copy DVD's on my home computer.. Exhibit F DVD of Planning Commission meeting, September 20, 2006 771 Davton.1venue N.E. BRAD NICHOLSON Renton, Washington 98056 (425) 445-0658 111. City of Renton Planning Commission Mr. Ray Giometti, Chairman 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 RE: 2006 Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan RE: Public Hearing comment Dear Mr. Chairman, Thank you for the opportunity to make these comments. For the record, I am the person stated above and at the above noted address. I will not again reiterate for the record the substantive errors I noted at the last Planning Commission public hearing on these same subjects that are contained in the 2006-T-4 proposition of performing a "housekeeping" purportedly for the purpose of making the Transportation Improvement Program and/or Comprehensive plan "more consistent". That should already be in the record. It should be clear that I dispute the material relevant to the handout analysis stating that the plan already contains all of the information necessary to fulfill GMA mandates. I appeared at the last public hearing of the commisssion leading up to this letter and raised the issues of internal consistency and continuous review requirements. I can say with certainty that I was disappointed with the result of my efforts. It should not be that way when a citizen takes the time to try to make a positive difference. Evidently nobody gave the issues that I raised a rational thought. That is substantially wrong. I should concede for the record that amending the comprehensive plan and development regulations in the face of our present environment and situation does present some rather difficult questions for the Planning Commission to consider and respond to, but that doesn' t mean that citizens may be ignored. I do not agree that the substantial issues that are so clearly within the ability of the Planning Commission to analyze and respond to should be met with blank stares and no communications, while doing or saying absolutely nothing that is substantive. Our plans are subject to continuing review and evaluation according to substantial requirements of Washington Laws. A direct violation of the code/while ignoring those consistency and implementation issues could definitely be the subject of yet another appeal and is one of the main reasons why I write this letter. brad nicholson Exhibit G-Letter not read "into the record" Page 1 1,292007 New 'we Another appeal would probably be a benefit to Renton. The alternate course which we should be in general concurrence is a process where the Ntew interests of people is given appropriate consideration in the first place. And of course we should have to observe that the last hearing where I commented "such comments didn' t apparently result in any kind of substantial response in the process". Perhaps another appeal to the State Growth Board would help in convincing the Planning Commission to interact with Citizens, encourage their participation, and recommend actions to the City Council that benefit Renton Citizenry, The issues that need to be discussed and deliberated, as a basis for compliance with our various laws with avoidance of legal actions and wasted time and money, is of course the foregoing, but also some procedural errors which appear to now be ripe for discussion in this forum as well. Of course our various statutes require deliberation, coordination, and participation, after full disclosure, but also require participation and cooperation by the parties of record and Planning Commission for these hearings that you purport to have organized for the benefit of citizens. At the heart of such issues are full disclosure of material fact before the recommendation that you should make regarding amendments that you may or very likely may not be fully aware; and you well should be in order to appear to perform the duties of your office as Chairman or Members of the Renton Planning Commission. I know that the contents of your review and recommendation is very important to subsequent review by the City Council or Superior jurisdictions and of course the future of our City. It is very important that you appear to be performing the job that you volunteered for, in a way that eliminates any appearance of any unfairness, impropriety, conflict of interest, misinterpretation, capable to cast of pall of improper influence or misconduct over these very important proceedings for citizens. (Please do not misconstrue this statement as I am sincerely prone to believe that it may be innocent in actuality, however it remains to be seen the result or response for my efforts) I think this means actual consideration is required, deliberation, posture, and a public response at least indicating your position or findings, taking into consideration all factors after a full disclosure of all of the information that might be material. A dignified Hearing and proper response and conduct is necessary to achieve that result. I think you agree. I wish to state here in the record that my concerns are genuine, and I live in an area of the City that is just a short distance from either the Urban Center North or the so-called Hilands subarea. brad nicho%son . Exhibit G-Letter not read "into the record" Page 2 1 29,2007 'goer ,ftre I use these subject areas and others for living, for working, and playing. I was raised here and will raise my family here. You can rest assured that this letter comes from me as a person, from my heart, a Renton citizen, standing alone, just like I have done on past occasions for Citizenry and Renton' s benefit. There are a number of undisclosed facts and process unknowns presented to the Commission for review and comment with these various proposed subject Comprehensive Plan Amendments at your Hearing. That is another major concern but it is the one concern that if properly addressed would result in a benefit to people. Amendments should not be performed in the backroom or with some kind of an ultimatum. Our Laws require especially accurate identification of strategies for which the approving jurisdiction cannot demonstrate availability at the time of completion, as well as consistency and disclosure to the public. The reason why I am commenting and requesting an inclusion of some of these unknowns is because of my right to participate. These amendments would not allow me to do that. All they want to do now is get more tax revenue from a large scale shopping center and are ignoring the Urban character that the zone requires. They want mass quantities of Apartments in the Hilands in the theory that those people will shop at the Landing and pay more propety taxes. They are now unable to create the employment required by the CPP, (Countywide Planning Policy) or our Comprehensive Plan. (CP) Those plans are unsustainable. My opinion is that I don' t think they are fooling anybody. How can anyone aid them, to enact amendments which would forget or omit needed transportation improvement amendments that are probably too burdensome for the people to repay, compromising our ability to sustain, or maintain, our quality of life? Such is only one of the many questions that should be posed at the Hearing on our issues. It looks to me like there is some kind of a concerted refusal to disclose some of the material facts that are relevent to the deliberative and substantive participatory processes required by GMA and SEPA. That shall be grounds for reversal. That is very unethical conduct by public officials. I think irregardless of the facts surrounding the Chairman leaving the previous Public Hearing at the very instant that I presented myself to give comments; it appears to violate the rules of procedure in a way that looks very improper. I was sincerely making efforts to do what I can to ensure a good, sustainable, and prosperous future for all of us and our families. Working on the "inside" is not an answer or a way to further legitimate process that is legal or benefits people. brad nicholson . Exhibit G-Letter not read "into the record" Page 3 1292007 Nor- Nome This makes it necessary to call into question our City' s ability to comply with the GMA and more issues I have and that is of procedure, effectuating and fulfilling GMA goals and procedural requirements. Nobody seems to be listening. According to Laws, they should have to. Another point is that there has not been an analysis disclosed as to how the City will pay the bonded indebteness from the recent sale of bonds to finance what would have been the 20-40 million dollars of improvements that should have been the responsibility of the big developer (for in the Mayor' s words one of the largest Big Box destination retail shopping centers in the Puget Sound Region) in the first instance. Can you speculate how that will turn out? I have not been able to comment because the information is being withheld as "proprietary" Those requests need to be addressed by the City. The Director of Development Services in Renton Approved the Landing as a planned action Ultra Vires and outside of his authority according to Washington Laws and Administrative code. That was attempted without an analysis that could demonstrate the City' s ability to repay that bonded indebtedness incurred as a result of the sale of municipal bonds to finance the transportation projects, many of the important ones that will probably never materialize without taxpayer intervention and they are not on the TIP. (notwithstanding of course the fact that the "Landing" as currently proposed would fail to implement the comprehensive plan and Renton Municipal code on numerous and multiple fronts) The Vehicle called the comprehensive plan and our codes should not travel down the same road we have been down before by proposing, recommending, and then adopting such amendments as these in this hearing without addressing this letter. This Transportation TIP plan issue has some serious problems. I have not seen an articulation of those facts in the proposal that was submitted or for that matter anywhere in City processes to amend the transportation element. I would like to be able to participate in these processes, and my opinion is that I would be very beneficial and helpful to the future of Renton with that participation. I am getting tired of trying to make a difference, only to be dismissed or ignored with unreasonable grounds, or processes. I read the Hearing notice I received as soliciting my opinion. The above is my opinion. City leaders must be presently in favor of expending money on Legal actions for proponents while refusing to subject the actions to public scrutiny and participation with the public hearing that is required for the "Landing" or the "Hilands redevelopment" by Hearing Examiner/City Council/SEPA. (43.21C RCW) that is relevent here. brad nicholson Exhibit G-Letter not read "into the record" Page 4 1;29 2007 Now- However the appeals are so powerful they will waste taxpayer dollars and wind up amending the TIP many more times before six years is up and it is because voices of reason are not being heard. It is my understanding that the "Landing" has already broken ground and is proceeding full ahead, however, it is clear that because it is illegal to do so without the necessary public hearing on a "planned action" according to the Renton code its transportation issues are in serious doubt. My opinion is that this letter is just a short list of the problems and just a few of the factors you should consider; Another issue is that of the Hilands area and is also very, very, important to Citizens. Combined, the two create serious concerns. The City' s Evironmental Review Committee (ERC) issued an erroneous Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated on a proposal to add somewhere around 3600 family dwelling units to that area. I shop and travel through that area as well. My family and I walk and play in the Parks in those areas. The accumulation of impacts and adverse effects that will become apparent, from multiple projects including the proposed Hilands redevelopment which has been wildly unstable in its form will result in specific and direct need for transportation mitigation measures that are not identified in the TIS proposed. Without something in the plans the developers will be scot-free. Or they could admit that they need an EIS. For your information I am a developer, wish to protect my interests, and the number of trips I have been charged is 10 trips per dwelling unit, which indicates to me that the Hilands area rezones would result in a net increase in transportation trips of around 36, 000 trips plus. The unknowns from that kind of increase should and must be disclosed in an honest Programmatic type Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and then discussed in this forum as a basis for fullfilling the requirements of our Codes and Laws. I have not noticed any information or justification as to the TIP "strategy" on how 36, 000 additional trips in addition to the flawed presumptions of the foregoing are not discussed, disclosed, considered, or deliberated to justify the adoption of the proposals under our Laws, nor have I been able to comment on it with full information. It is clear that the Sunset/405 area, as well as other areas will experience dramatic and dangerous increases in traffic that should be mitigated. The justification for approval or recommendation of approval of these amendments is seriously in doubt and I don't want to pay for them. I urge the Planning Commission to require disclosure and honest analysis by recommending that there be performed a programmatic EIS for the Hilands area, brad nicholson . Exhibit G-Letter not read "into the record" Page 5 U'92007 Noy and completion of the powerful appeals presently before the City Council prior to making any new implementation measure or modifications to our Now, existing comprehensive planning, and then recommending that those improvements that are needed be placed into the Transportation Improvement Program. (TIP) Those appeals probably express the same interests as our code, laws, and present comprehensive plan. I strongly urge you to consider recommending that the process of amending the Comprehensive Plan in the ways identifed at this stage be delayed until such time as the above issues are addressed and resolved, because more damage and more time loss to Renton and the various projects may result without reversal of any approval of these processes. The City has knowledge that whenever incorrect threshold determinations are made, or factual material is not considered or disclosed, or improper procedure is used in such actions it "thwarts" legitimate processes and results in problematic amendments and implementation measures. That is the proposition upon which this Hearing should rest. I can not be one to agree at all that what appears to be a one sided process, trying to fast track all private development interest at public cost, should not be reversed because it is unreasonable, arbitrary, erroneous and fails to rest upon distinctions that have any fair and substantial relation to our codes or processes required by Law. To do so would ignore the people and that I would not do. I would urge you to observe the same. It seems so obvious that to exclude the public in any way from the proceedings while trying to comply with some kind of Staff or City Council ultimatum is exactly what is wrong with this process and with these amendment proposals. They should not be recommended for approval. Quite a few other things need to be done first. Most Sincerely, Brad Nicholson, a citizen of Renton brad nicholson Exhibit G-Letter not read "into the record" Page 6 1 29 2007 NNW Nee Original Message Subject:Minutes of 9/20/06 commission meeting Date:Sat, 27 Jan 2007 17:05:30 -0800 From:Inez Somerville Petersen <webgirl(a�seanet.com> To:Judith Subia <JSubia(a�ci.renton.wa.us> Dear Judith: When we talked on the phone the other day after I sent this email, you said that the minutes for the 9/20/06 Planning Commission meeting hadn't been finalized yet and that you were working on them. Do you have an ECD? I don't mean to pressure you, I'm just looking for information. And if you can, when they are ready, could you send me a copy please? I hope I don't have to make a BIG deal out of getting a copy by having to go through the City Clerk. It's so easy for you to send me a copy via email. But it looks like Rebecca Lind is making you go "formal." Do have that right? Again, I do appreciate the great job that you do keeping tabs on everything going on in your area, Thanks, Inez Original Message Subject:Minutes of 9/20/06 commission meeting Date:Fri, 19 Jan 2007 12:56:53 -0800 From:lnez Somerville Petersen <webgirl@seanet.com> To:Judith Subia <JSubia(c�ci.renton.wa.us> Judith, How long does it take to get a copy of the minutes of the 9/20/06 Ping Comm meeting? What form are the minutes in; i.e., video, audio only, typed? How long would it take to get a list of the parties of record for that evening, in other words, who got the letter advising them of the public hearing on the 2006 Comp Plan Amendments/ Thanks, Inex 425-255-5543 Exhibit H No minutes from September 20, 2006, public hearing as yet Now"' -4.ire* an'....)H -- • ' ,.,-,- '-' t".- ,::" .,„, ',-, .2 . -,,,, --, Z p,-,i"z.••=4. ,,tr, _•... :- ",-.' , - r.,-! .7, _1., :: .--1, -,- ,,-..., , _ ,r, ,.. ---, -.., --• ,--, - ;..., - . 0 ,, _ , - - , - - ,- .• --,:f...., r ,-- rii.--,-- f-< > -;,- +.4 1- ..,,,, ,,,.. . ,-, c Cr = -,_- __ c,-',•, 4.7,,..;..,,_ '..--: -...: '-' •- -.'-.---":.'"' 7 71 i:::-4-r-' - 1-2,': r- co_ ';" ';:.,- ,- 3- -4)'c' r ,-,"-- Lt _„''-• ,,--; ,,,, --.., '3. - `,1, 3- )- ..77, ..-- ::-., -... -.... ..-., , - -;- ..i L., -..,,,) ..:-. ›,.--, - Lr` .--,.• - ,_..3-'''," *r:,' '' r:.:: ''- ' — .L.- . ;-=' a; * ,...„,;„r4...., ,,,:_, .-.:. .., ci 7- ',.-•:I-. .1", ..,-• -'8 4„, p----. ,- ,,.-,T'r2 ,,,p :.., 1,„ ct =.(_,,,,_ -72, . ,-.-i t,,, p :(2', ---' ---c--• 2 I) ;,,, 1.-.. --'H-i ,..,"-- ,-ei-: .:4 ,..... ,.-- - „. .,,_,--,....?, '-'" --' -- .- ---. ---• 7-;" 1,, -=', c 0 7 7 .1.-,--, 6 : 4-",-' •'-', - ,-- -.`-' c"7.5 .....,.-1.7. - 7.': - ,, ,-:-_-_,. * ' L.- c- -.-- ,Ci I) C,./ .- -:..., -I ---, OW .- -1" -; „., - - -,.._ ...., .... u.. , c, ,..- -..-- -... 7.7 li - -r - - , ''' . - -1, ,.., c ' ,---• _ ...,.,-. ,„,,,,, C.:. -,,',e. ,:_--' '• .-1 - •-•'-1 c,,,,, ,.', ",, ..- 1-, r... . ...- ....... - .---. _ - — 71 __ - -- ..,-, „,,,,,, -, _ .._ ,...., ,....., P., ..t ... .,, 1„) L., .: - r• 1... ,..„,/,, . --. ..„,„„ 7 .11; .,-+ .- o - ..._. ..., ,, ,-- '-'-' -- - C -- -_, 7 --, • Z. ".= _..) 1-0 ,. 7.1 7,..., .--, ,.... ,- -,' •-• C V - ... *".., -, .-- --,.. - -..., „C, 9 0 G. ;7- -. ,-. I.. - - i_. .. - C 7/1,--, .- ., C , - .."=" .( .womd SO - ,....'.4 ...".."- • , , .7- 1, ..“'"-- .r _i '.7.. '2! ...., ‘...ard ..- -' 7..... "" ..... 71 r- .-- '.,J • C 1 r..... .L... •7. r. no.' ..".. 0.4 --; L ---, 0., -..1.-- -- - ,---, -- • — , ., ...,. - ..z. - - ,.. _ - .- ••••••'' .4 ,...., 12 ,-....: .7- --I .• --) ...: -l 7, '.4.-- ,... , ,---.-.- •...., _:- c.,........ ,..,• .-. ▪ - -. _. ..;- = - - - -,-J `‘i i\a-'. i-, •=7- -- -J‘....., . 1- --- -, - — ._ --• - ..L-: F. , 1 t 7-- - ....., . , - -/ ..C.,,...1 '.,-1 " 1 s'y 1,-. '•' ,- - C '4-1 :4 *--' .... ,„.*: .) , :14 1--- ..'-' --'' -14111/ Exhibit I Affidavit of Publication dated November 3, 2006 I t seemed like a waste of paper to print pages with just those names on it. I have a file with 108 names and addresses which I can print for you, if you need it. Exhibit J Parties of Record- City Council public hearing, November 13, 2006 AGENDA ..r RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING November 13, 2006 Monday, 7 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC HEARING: 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and development agreement for former Aqua Barn site 4. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 5. AUDIENCE COMMENT (Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting. Each speaker is allowed five minutes. The comment period will be limited to one-half hour. The second audience comment period later on in the agenda is unlimited in duration.) When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to the podium and state your name and address for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME. 6. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further discussion if requested by a Councilmember. a. Approval of Council meeting minutes of 11/6/2006. Council concur. b. Community Services Department recommends approval of a contract in the amount of $62,778.43 with Sun Lighting for the 2006 Holiday Lights Program. Council concur. c. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department submits two pre- applications for the 2007 Comprehensive Plan amendment pre-application review process. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. d. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends a public hearing be set on 11/27/2006 to consider extending the moratorium on sewer availabilities for new subdivisions in the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. Council concur. (See 9.a. for resolution.) e. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends a public hearing be set on 12/11/2006 to consider extending the moratorium on new development in the R-10 and RM-F zones within the Highlands Subarea Plan study area. Council concur. (See 9.b. for resolution.) f Hearing Examiner recommends approval, with conditions, of the Cottages at Honey Creek Preliminary Plat Major Amendment; 4.17 acres located at 4821 NE Sunset Blvd. (PP-04-185). Council concur. g. Police Department recommends approval of a contract with Occupational Health Services (Public Hospital District No. 1 of King County) in the amount of$176,376 for health services for Renton jail inmates for 2007. Council concur. h. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a contract in the amount of$146,174 with Parametrix, Inc. for design of the May Creek Bridge Replacement Project. Council concur. i. Utility Systems Division requests approval of an agreement with Aero-Metric, Inc. in the amount of$104,487 for the final phase of the 2006 Photogrammetric Aerial Mapping Project. Council concur. Exhibit K- Page 1 of 2 Agenda for November 13, 2006, public hearing j. Utility Systems Divi lrn recommends approval of a utility eastltient granted by SI VI, LLC, owner of the Belle Vista Apartment complex, for the N. 26th St. and Park Pl. N. Storm System Improvement Project in the amount of$46,500 and $1,000 per damaged or removed tree. Council concur. k. Utility Systems Division submits CAG-03-112, Maplewood Water Treatment Facility and Golf Course Improvements; and requests approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of$1,600.55, and release of retainage bond in the amount of$496,353.39 to Mid- Mountain Contractors, Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. 7. CORRESPONDENCE 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if further review is necessary. a. Community Services Committee: 2nd Round of Neighborhood Grants; Appointment of Heather Nugent to Library Board 9. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Resolutions: Moratorium extension in East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area (see 6.d.) b. Moratorium extension in Highlands Subarea Plan study area (see 6.e.) Ordinance for second and final reading: Requirements for pawnbroker's daily record of transactions (1st reading 11/6/2006) 10. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.) '6w 11. AUDIENCE COMMENT 12. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA (Preceding Council Meeting) Council Chambers 6 p.m. Highlands Task Force Update Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CI CANNEL 21 AND ARE RE-CABLECAST Tuts.&TxuRs.AT 11 AM&9Pm, WED.&Ftu.AT 9 AM&7PNi AND SAT. & SurLxlaibi $wIPage 2 of 2 Aj'enda for November 13, 2006, public hearinji RENTON CITY COUNCIL - Exhibit L Regular Meeting Nome- November 13, 2006 Council Chambers Monday, 7 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL OF RANDY CORMAN, Council President; TONI NELSON; DAN CLAWSON: COUNCILMEMBERS TERRI BRIERS; MARCIE PALMER. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS DENIS LAW AND DON PERSSON. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER, Mayor: JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative ATTENDANCE Officer; ZANETTA FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON. City Clerk: GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator: PREETI SHRIDHAR, Communications Director; ALEX PIETSCH, Economic Development Administrator: REBECCA LIND, Planning Manager: ERIKA CONKLING, Senior Planner; CHIEF I. DAVID DANIELS and DEPUTY CHIEF LARRY RUDE, Fire Department; COMMANDER KATIE MCCLINCY, Police Department. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Comprehensive Plan: 2006 accordance with local and State laws. Mayor Keolker opened the public hearing Amendments to consider the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and the development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. Senior Planner Erika Conkling explained that the public hearing is divided into four groups of issues, and she began with Group 1 -Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments, as follows: • 2006-T-1 (City of Renton) - Update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent school district capital facilities plans. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-T-3 (City of Renton) - Update the Land Use and Community Design elements with housekeeping changes for clarity and to reflect new policy. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-T-4 (City of Renton) - Update the Transportation Element to reflect Renton's latest adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-T-5 (City of Renton) -Allow existing mobile home parks in the Residential Low Density(RLD) designation to be zoned Residential Manufactured Home (RMH). Recommendation: approve amendment. Ms. Conkling pointed out that the Planning Commission held the required public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan text and map amendments on September 20. The matter was also referred to the Planning and Development Committee with the exception of the implementing ordinance for item 2006-T- 1, which was referred to Finance Committee. Public comment was invited. Scott Missall, 999 3rd Ave.. Suite 3000, Seattle. 98104_with the law firm Short, Cressman & Burgess, spoke on 2006-T-5. He noted that the State Supreme Court's ruling on Interlake Sporting Association, et al v. Washington November 13, 2006 Renton City Council Minutes rr.r Page 385 State Boundary Review Board, City of Redmond, et al, may affect the City's ability to go forward with the Maplewood Addition Annexation. Raymond A. Breeden, Sr., 15279 Maple Dr., Renton, 98058, noted the importance of retaining mobile home parks especially in light of the recent flooding of the White River that destroyed one-half of a mobile home park in Pacific. Jerry Puckett, 15260 Oak Dr., Renton, 98058, spoke in support of 2006-T-5, which affects the Wonderland Estates Mobile Home Park where he resides. Continuing with Group 2 -Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Concurrent Rezones, Ms. Conkling reviewed the following amendments: • 2006-M-1 (Wan Chee) -Change the designation from a combination of Commercial Neighborhood(CN)and Residential Single Family (RS) with CN and R-8 split zoning to CN land use with CN zoning for the entire parcel at 1315 N. 30th St. Recommendation: deny amendment. • 2006-M-2 (Susan Larson-Kinzer; Kennydale Blueberry Farm) - Change the designation from RLD land use with Resource Conservation(RC) zoning to RS land use with R-8 zoning, or RLD land use with R-4 zoning for a 3.4 acre parcel currently used as a blueberry farm and residence at 1733 NE 20th St. Recommendation: deny amendment to RS with concurrent R-8 zoning and approve change to RLD with R-4 zoning. Ms. Conkling said the owner indicates that land use changes in the surrounding area,which is zoned R-8, have affected the viability of the farm. She note that critical areas exist on the site, including a mapped wetland, suspected peat wetland, Class 4 stream, and headwaters of Kennydale Creek. Ms. Conkling indicated that if a Type II wetland is assumed, 1.15 acres of the site are potentially developable, resulting in two building sites if zoned R-4. • 2006-M-8 (City of Renton: Upper Kennydale) - Change the designation for a 49-acre area located south of NE 28th St. and north of NE 16th St., from RS land use with R-8 zoning to RLD land use with R-4 zoning. Staff recommendation: downzone the area to R-4. R-4 zoning would help stem cumulative changes to hydrology and wetland areas, and result in a buildable lands capacity of approximately 110 units (96 units exist now). Planning Commission recommendation: keep the R-8 zoning. R-8 zoning has a buildable lands capacity of approximately 205 units.and property owners have invested in the properties with the expectation of R-8 development potential. • 2006-M-3 (Manuel Rivera) - Change the designation from RS land use with R-8 zoning to Commercial Corridor(CC) land use with Commercial Office (CO) zoning on a 2.09-acre parcel at 851 Carr Rd. Recommendation: deny request but approve redesignation of this parcel and adjoining parcels within the City limits to Residential Medium Density(RMD)with concurrent R-14 zoning. R-14 zoning allows small commercial uses. • 2006-M-4 (Springbrook Associates) - Change the designation from RMD land use with R-10 zoning to CC land use with CO zoning for a 5.61-acre parcel located south of S. 37th St. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-M-5 (City of Renton; Puget Colony Homes and vicinity) - Change the area within the Puget Colony neighborhood from RS land use with R-8 zoning to RLD land use with R-4 zoning; and from RS to RLD land use in November 13. 2006 �r Renton City Council Minutes viwe Page 386 the unincorporated Kimberly Lane and Hideaway Home Sites subdivisions. Recommendation: approve amendment. • 2006-M-7 (City of Renton; former Aqua Barn site and part of the proposed Maplewood Addition Annexation expanded area) - Change the designation of three acres located at the southeast corner of 152nd Ave. SE and Maple Valley Hwy. from RLD to CC land use with potential Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Change the 30 abutting southern acres from RLD to RMD land use with potential R-14 zoning. Recommendation: approve amendment. Correspondence was read from William E. O'Connor, 10402 151st Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, stating that the applicant for the blueberry farm amendment has not shown the following: proof that the current zoning is no longer appropriate, that the site does not contain preservable critical areas,that long-term agricultural use has been affected by environmental changes, and that the zoning revision will result in increased public benefit. Correspondence was read from Brad Nicholson, 2811 Dayton Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, expressing displeasure with the City's lack of interest in complying with laws, and listing a number of unaddressed concerns pertaining to the protection of critical areas on the blueberry farm. Correspondence was read from Wm Collins. 420 Cedar Ave. S., Renton. 98057, requesting the City apply the same considerations to the blueberry farm wetland as was done for the critical areas of the Defoor Short Plat,and requesting removal of this item from the Comprehensive Plan amendment process. Correspondence was read from Knoll D. Lowney. Smith & Lowney, PLLC (attorneys for Bill O'Connor and Kennydale Critical Areas Alliance), 2317 E. John St., Seattle, 98122, indicating that the notice for this public hearing failed to identify the subject properties, specifically the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, and requesting that the hearing be postponed for 30 days. Public comment was invited. Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, stated that issues relating to due process invalidate both this public hearing and the Planning Commission's public hearing of September 20. Pointing out that the notice for this hearing was inadequate, she asked that the public hearing be postponed to allow for proper notification. Ms. Petersen indicated that she wants the blueberry farm as a critical area. Lauralee Gordley, 2010 Jones Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, objected to the rezone of the upper Kennydale area to R-4. She stated that this complex area is located near the I-405 Corridor and is densely populated. Ms. Gordley said she purchased her property with the intent of developing it at R-8 zoning. She pointed out that the critical areas ordinance is based on science, and should be depended upon to protect property. Ms. Conkling stated that four to five lots are possible on Ms. Gordley's oddly- shaped property under both the R-4 and R-8 zones. She noted that some property owners will experience a reduction in development capacity if zoned R-4, and some owners will be affected by not being able to add one or two additional units in their backyards. Robert Cave, 1813 NE 24th St., Renton, 98056, opposed the upper Kennydale area rezone, pointing out that he owns a 3.5-acre property which is not hindered November 13, 2006 me Renton City Council Minutes Page 387 by wetlands or the Kennydale Creek. Additionally, Mr. Cave said he objects to the rezone of the blueberry farm, saying that it should remain a farm. Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, asked that the public hearing be rescheduled to allow for proper notice. In regards to the blueberry farm, she indicated that the creek is misclassified and that for permitting purposes, the wetlands have state and federal jurisdiction because the creek drains into Lake Washington. Ms. Rider stated that the sale of the farm is an opportunity for a unique and popular public open space. As neighborhoods change from semi- rural to infill-developed, she stressed that the importance and long-term consequences of this decision should not be underestimated. Mayor Keolker clarified that this public hearing is a courtesy hearing, and the required hearing was with the Planning Commission on September 20. Barbara Hicks, 1835 NE 20th St.,Renton, 98056, pointed out that the public hearing notice did not clearly identify the blueberry farm as a topic for the meeting. Ms. Hicks emphasized that non-land owners also have opinions and rights, and decisions of the City affect all residents. She stated that when some part of the environment is destroyed,the future is being taken away from the children. William E. O'Connor, 10402 151 st Ave. SE, 98059, spoke in opposition to the blueberry farm rezone, pointing out that the applicant has not provided the required burden of proof He indicated that the applicant needs to prove the property is developable, and accurately delineate the wetlands before the site is considered for rezoning. w.r Gary Young, 11624 SE 5th St., Suite 200, Bellevue, 98005,representing Valley Springs Apartments, LLC, spoke in support of the Aqua Barn site amendment. He thanked staff for bringing the zoning into compliance with the existing use. Bob Johns, 1601 114th Ave. SE, #102, Bellevue. 98004, spoke on behalf of the River Valley Condominium Association concerning the Aqua Barn site amendment. He noted that it is important to put zoning on the property that matches the existing development for property financing purposes. Mr. Johns relayed the condominium owners' support of the amendment. Karen Finnicum, 1302 Aberdeen Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, spoke regarding the blueberry farm and upper Kennydale area amendments. She indicated that the creek and wetlands area never go dry, and everything in Renton is full of water. Ms. Finnicum stated that property is an investment, and it is the owner's responsibility to watch over and care for it. She expressed concern regarding the increase in development, and stated that the peat bog on the blueberry farm property has to be protected. David Halinen, 2115 N. 30th St., Suite 203, Tacoma, 98403.representing Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc., submitted a letter regarding the Aqua Barn site's 3.02 acres of commercially zoned property. He requested approval of the amendment and corresponding development agreement. John Cowan, 1830 NE 24th St., Renton, 980.56, objected to the rezoning of the blueberry farm, saying the farm is a unique geological area and should remain that way. He expressed concern that the amendment process is moving too quickly, and recommended that the City stop the process and conduct a comprehensive review of the wetlands and the needs of the upper Kennydale November 13. 2006 Renton City Council Minutes .. Page 388 area. Debbie Natelson, 801 Renton Ave. S., Renton, 98057, said the blueberry farm should not be rezoned. She indicated that the property can be sold as a farm, and expressed disappointment with the City for helping the owners to potentially make a huge profit. Ms. Natelson explained that peat bogs absorb water and take thousands of years to create. She noted that flooding is caused by the removal of vegetation and forest cover, and urged protection of the headwaters. Ms. Natelson pointed out that the City could consider taking over this resource. Ms. Conkling continued with Group 3 - Development Agreement for the Former Aqua Barn Property (2006-M-7). Noting that the Planning Commission recommended the agreement following their public hearing, she explained that it only applies to the three-acre area fronting Maple Valley Hwy. proposed for CA zoning Ms. Conkling stated that the agreement prohibits a number of ordinarily allowed uses in the CA zone, including big box retail, some vehicle related activities, and all industrial uses. The agreement also restricts allowed uses such as drive-in/drive through retail. and car washes. Ms. Conkling indicated that the agreement provides that a transfer of a traffic mitigation fee credit be granted in an amount not to exceed $252.799.50 against traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the property. Additionally. the agreement requires that design standards, including common thematic elements and common landscape elements. be applied to all commercial development on the site. There being no public comment on Group 3, Ms. Conkling turned to Group 4 - Highlands Land Use and Zoning Package, which includes 2006-M-6 and 2006- T-2,and supersedes prior staff recommendations. She introduced Highlands Zoning Task Force Chair Kirk Moore, who thanked task force members and City staff for their efforts on this proposal. He highlighted the proposed changes to the Center Village (CV) land use designation, which include removing R-10 as an implementing zone. allowing R-14, RM-U, and RM-T as implementing zones, and eliminating the requirement of residential-only development north of NE 12th St. Mr. Moore also reviewed the proposed land use map amendments and the proposed rezones. Ms. Conkling reviewed the proposed zoning text amendments. as follows: • Amend the implementing zones of the CV land use designation. • Remove the CV Residential Bonus District. • Adopt design regulations. • Amend uses in the R-14 zone. • Amend uses in the CV zone. • Add clarifying language to terms such as pipe stern lots and affordable housing. • Amend development standards for the R-14 zone. • Allow two types of affordable housing bonuses in the R-14 zone. • Amend development standards for the CV zone. In conclusion. Ms. Conkling stated that the Planning and Development Committee will discuss the matter on November 16, and first and second reading of the ordinances is scheduled for November 27. Mayor Keolker thanked the task force members for all their hard work. November 13, 2006 °rrr Renton City Council Minutes _ Page 389 Public comment was invited. Brett Kappenman, 1004 SW 4th P1., Renton, 98057,. on behalf of the Highlands Community Association (HCA), thanked the task force and staff for this conclusive plan. He indicated that the plan reflects the concerns of the HCA, particularly the density increases and the affordable housing issues. Mr. Kappenman noted that the plan also addresses the conforming property issue. Linda Perrine, 1157 Glennwood Ave. NE, Renton. 98056, opposed the change from Residential Multi-Family (RM-F)to CV, particularly on the street facing Edmonds Ave. NE. She explained that the Renton Housing Authority has purchased three acres of property in the area near McKnight Middle School. which is surrounded by single-family homes and duplexes. Ms. Perrine expressed concern that when the 60 to 80 additional units per acre are built, traffic will increase significantly and parking will be problematic. She stressed that this area is not suited for high-density housing. Responding to Council inquiries, Planning Manager Rebecca Lind stated that current zoning allows up to 20 dwelling units per acre, and CV zoning allows up to 80 units per acre. She indicated that the access points to the proposed development have not yet been determined. Bill Grover, PO Box 2701, Renton, 98056,owner of property at 2807 NE 16th St., stated that due to the current Highlands development moratorium, he is unable to obtain building permits so he can develop his property. He explained that his property was subdivided under R-10 zoning prior to the moratorium taking effect, and he was under the impression that his property would be vested. Pointing out that another Highlands moratorium area property owner obtained building permits, he asked that Council allow him,or subsequent owners of his property, to obtain building permits in accordance with the R-10 zoning regulations. Howard McOmber, 475 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, member of the task force and the Highlands Community Association, emphasized that the task force's plan was very well thought out. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. RECESS MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Time: 9 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:08 p.m.: roll was called; all Councilmembers present except Corman. (Corman arrived at 9:09 p.m.) ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2006 and beyond. Items noted included: City of Renton employees and Rotary Club of Renton members are volunteering to serve Thanksgiving Dinner at the Senior Activity Center, which will be open from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. on November 27,for senior citizens to enjoy a day of social and recreational activities. Guests must November 13. 2006 Renton City Council Minutes ',we Page 390 pick up a free ticket prior to November 21. _ The Hassle Free Holiday Bazaar will be held on November 17 and 18 at the Community Center, where a wide variety of handcrafted items will be sold by over 100 vendors. _ Renton experienced some local flooding events due to heavy rain fall: however, overall the City fared well and did not suffer significant damage. AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, voiced her pleasure with the Citizen Comment: Petersen - efforts of the Highlands Zoning Task Force. She expressed concern regarding Various due process issues pertaining to the Comprehensive Plan public hearings, noting that the ordinances adopted may be based on an invalid public hearing process. Ms. Petersen also questioned why non-Renton residents are allowed on the City's boards and commissions. Additionally, she indicated that while the Police Department has addressed some problems related to prostitution, there are more problems that need attention, especially one in an area near a church. Citizen Comment: DeMastus - Sandel DeMastus, Highlands Community Association Vice President, PO Box Prostitution Problems 2041, Renton, 98056, thanked the police fortheir work on addressing some prostitution problems, and expressed her hope that the work will continue. Citizen Comment: McOmber- Howard McOmber, 475 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, complimented all Highlands Area those who are working hard to improve the Highlands neighborhood. He noted Redevelopment that everyone has a right to express their opinions. Mr. McOmber stated that Renton is a wonderful place to live, and one of the reasons for that is the City's diverse population. Citizen Comment: Madson - Lori Madson, 1301 SW 16th St., Renton, 98056, chair of the Committee to Citizen Initiative, Fireworks Keep Renton Safe, expressed her pleasure that Renton will maintain its ban on Ordinance fireworks as a result of the vote on Renton Proposition 1. Additionally, she thanked those who campaigned against the proposition. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. At the request of Council President Corman, item 6.e. was removed for separate consideration Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 11/6/2006. Council concur. 11/6/2006 Community Services: Holiday Community Services Department recommended approval of a contract in the Lights Program. Sun Lighting amount of$62,778.43 with Sun Lighting for the 2006 Holiday Lights Program. Council concur. Comprehensive Plan: 2007 Economic Development. Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Amendments. Pre- submitted two pre-applications for the 2007 Comprehensive Plan amendment Applications pre-application review process. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Utility: Sewer Moratorium in Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department East Renton Plateau PAA recommended setting a public hearing on 11/27/2006 to consider extending the moratorium on sewer availabilities for new subdivisions in the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. Council concur. Plat: Cottages at Honey Creek, Hearing Examiner recommended approval, with conditions, of the Cottages at NE Sunset Blvd, PP-04-185 Honey Creek Preliminary Plat Major Amendment; 4.17 acres located at 4821 November 13, 2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 391 NE Sunset Blvd. Council concur. Police: Jail Inmate Health Police Department recommended approval of a contract with Occupational r.. Services, Occupational Health Health Services (Public Hospital District No. 1 of King County) in the amount Services of$176,376 for health services for Renton jail inmates for 2007. Council concur. Transportation: May Creek Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of a contract in the Bridge Replacement Design, amount of$146,174 with Parametrix, Inc. for design of the May Creek Bridge Parametrix Replacement Project. Council concur. Utility: Photogrammetric Utility Systems Division requested approval of an agreement with Aero-Metric, Aerial Mapping, Aero-Metric Inc. in the amount of$104,487 for Phase III of the 2006 Photogrammetric Aerial Mapping Project (digital terrain model update and orthophotography production). Council concur. Utility:N 26th St/Park PIN Utility Systems Division recommended approval of a utility easement granted Storm System Project. SI VI by SI VI, LLC, owner of the Belle Vista Apartment complex, for the N. 26th St LLC Utilities Easement and Park Pl. N. Storm System Improvement Project in the amount of$46,500 and$1,000 per damaged or removed tree. Council concur. CAG: 03-112. Maplewood Utility Systems Division submitted CAG-03-112, Maplewood Water Treatment Water Treatment Facility and Facility and Golf Course Improvements; and requested approval of the project, Golf Course Improvements, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of$1,600.55, and release of Mid-Mountain Contractors retainage bond in the amount of$496,353.39 to Mid-Mountain Contractors, Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO REMOVE ITEM 6.e. FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED. Separate Consideration Economic Development..Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Item 6.e. recommended adoption of a resolution that declares a six-month moratorium on Planning: Highlands Subarea new development in the R-10 zone within the Highlands study area, and sets a Plan Study Area Moratorium public hearing date on 12/11/2006. Council President Corman expressed concern regarding the length of the moratorium. Assistant City Attorney Zanetta Fontes explained that the existing moratorium expires tomorrow(1 1/14/2006), and a new moratorium is being requested. She noted that the moratorium can be rescinded prior to the six- month term upon implementation of the new land use and zoning regulations. Mayor Keolker pointed out that the Highlands Zoning Task Force requested the moratorium to allow time for the implementation of the regulations. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE ITEM 6.e. AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. (See page 392 for resolution.) UNFINISHED BUSINESS Community Services Committee Chair Nelson presented a report Community Services recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the Committee appointment of Heather Nugent to the Library Board for a term expiring on Appointment: Library Board 6/1/2011. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PALMER. COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. EDNSP: 2006 Neighborhood Community' Services Committee Chair Nelson presented a report regarding the Program Grants second round of the 2006 neighborhood grant projects. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the following grant award: Tiffany Park Neighborhood Association - Continue November 13, 2006 Noy, Renton City Council Minutes r,r Page 392 development of a pocket park on Seattle Public Utilities-owned right-of-way in Renton. The area is approximately a quarter of an acre and is bordered by Puget Dr. SE, Beacon Way SE, and SE 16th St. ($858). v.. The Committee further recommended approval of funding for the following administrative newsletter applications: 1. Earlington Neighborhood Association-Annual printing for six newsletters a year distributed by newsletter box at mailbox kiosk($300). 2. Kennydale Neighborhood Association -Annual printing of quarterly newsletter distributed deere-deerthrough mail($2,000). 3. Renton Hill Neighborhood Association -Annual printing expenses for a newsletter printed twice a year and distributed door-to-door ($427). 4. Summerwind Homeowners Association -Annual printing and postal expenses for quarterly newsletter($279). 5. Tiffany Park Homeowners Association -Annual printing for a newsletter printed twice a month and distributed door-to-door($89). 6. Tiffany Park Neighborhood Association -Annual printing expenses for a newsletter printed twice a year and distributed door-to-door ($532). The second round of applications total $4,485 leaving a remaining budget of $32,746. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT AS AMENDED TO REFLECT THE CORRECTION TO ITEM 2. AS FOLLOWS: DELETE THE WORDS "door to door" AND INSERT THE WORDS "through mail." CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3840 A resolution was read declaring a moratorium on new development in the R-10 Planning: Highlands Subarea zone within the Highlands study area, establishing a public hearing date of Plan Study Area Moratorium 12/11/2006, and establishing a termination date of 5/13/2006 for the moratorium. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#5227 An ordinance was read amending Section 6-17-3 of Chapter 17, Pawnbrokers, Legal: Pawnbroker Daily of Title VI (Police Regulations) of City Code by clarifying the transmission Transaction Requirements requirements of the pawnbroker's daily record of transactions. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY CORMAN_ SECONDED BY PALMER,COUNCIL REFER THE Planning: Kennydale TOPIC OF THE KENNYDALE BLUEBERRY FARM TO COMMITTEE OF Blueberry Farm THE WHOLE.* Council President Corman stated that many people have suggested that the City should purchase the property as a park, and he pointed out that Council has not deliberated that issue. Councilwoman Nelson noted that Council has discussed the matter in executive session. Mr. Corman indicated that a significant policy decision such as this should not just be discussed in executive session. Discussion ensued regarding the appropriateness of discussing this topic on the Council floor. Mayor Keolker suggested that before going forward with the matter, a legal opinion be obtained. Assistant City Attorney Fontes concurred. November 13, 2006 *✓ Renton City Council Minutes ...r Page 393 *MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL TABLE THIS MATTER UNTIL A RULING IS OBTAINED FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT In response to Howard McOmber's inquiries. 475 Olympia Ave. NE. Renton, Citizen Comment: McOmber- 98056, Mayor Keolker explained that the current Highlands moratorium expires Highlands Subarea Plan Study tomorrow,the new Highlands moratorium was declared tonight, and the public Area Moratorium hearing on the new moratorium will be held on December 11. Citizen Comment: Moore - Kirk Moore, 1901 Harrington Circle NE, Renton, 98056, explained that the Highlands Subarea Plan Study Highlands Zoning Task Force requested the Highlands moratorium, which only Area Moratorium affects the R-10 zone, to allow time for the implementation of the land use and zoning regulations. He noted that when the ordinances take effect, R-10 will be removed as an implementing zone, effectively eliminating the moratorium. Councilman Clawson clarified that the moratorium only applies to subdivision of property for new single-family residential development or accessory uses. including plats, lot line adjustments, and site plan review entitlements in the R- 10 zone within the Highlands study area. Citizen Comment: Petersen - Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, recommended the implementation Council Rules, Character of Council rules pertaining to character attacks during Council meetings. Attacks Citizen Comment: DeMastus - Sandel DeMastus, Highlands Community Association Vice President and Highlands Zoning Task Force Highlands Zoning Task Force Member, PO Box 2041, Renton, 98056, stated that she is very proud of the task force's accomplishments. Additionally, Ms. DeMastus complimented the new Renton Magazine, which is published by Councilman Law. Citizen Comment: Hicks - Barbara Hicks, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, said most of the information 2006 Comprehensive Plan pertaining to the Kennvdale Blueberry Farm rezone request was based on the Amendments, Kennydale applicant's desire to sell the property, and financial need should not be a reason Blueberry Farm for granting a rezone. Ms. Hicks commented on the property's environmental features, noting that historically it has been unbuildable. Ms. Hicks indicated that the critical areas ordinance does not always protect properties when people are determined to fill in a wetland or remove a creek flow. Citizen Comment: Rider- Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, displayed photographs of 2006 Comprehensive Plan properties containing filled-in wetlands, saving the action occurred under Amendments, Kennydale critical areas protection. She also showed photographs of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm Blueberry Farm, noting that it is suited for Resource Conservation zoning. Ms. Rider expressed her support for the blueberry farm as a park. On another topic. she suggested that written lyrics be provided for the caroling activity at the City's holiday lighting event. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 10:06 p.m. Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann November 13, 2006 Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, stated that issues relating to due process invalidate both this public hearing and the Planning Commission's public hearing of September 20. Pointing out that the notice for this hearing was inadequate, she asked that the public hearing be postponed to allow for proper notification. Ms. Petersen indicated that she wants the blueberry farm as a critical area. Source: Page 3 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 13, 2006, Comments made during public hearing on proposed 2006 CP Amendments Susan Rider, 1835 NE 20th St., Renton, 98056, asked that the public hearing be rescheduled to allow for proper notice. In regards to the blueberry farm, she indicated that the creek is misclassified and that for permitting purposes, the wetlands have state and federal jurisdiction because the creek drains into Lake Washington. Ms. Rider stated that the sale of the farm is an opportunity for a unique and popular public open space. As neighborhoods change from semirural to infill-developed, she stressed that the importance and long-term consequences of this decision should not be underestimated. Source: Page 4 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 13, 2006, Comments made during public hearing on proposed 2006 CP Amendments Mayor Keolker clarified that this public hearing is a courtesy hearing, and the required hearing was with the Planning Commission on September 20. Source: Page 4 of the Minutes of the City Council.November 13, 2006, Comments made during public hearing on proposed 2006 CP Amendments NOTE: Please note use of the word "courtesy" hearing and surmise why this term was used. Barbara Hicks, 1835 NE 20th St.. Renton. 98056, pointed out that the public hearing notice did not clearly identify the blueberry farm as a topic for the meeting. Ms. Hicks emphasized that non-land owners also have opinions and rights, and decisions of the City affect all residents. She stated that when some part of the environment is destroyed, the future is being taken away from the children. Source: Page 4 of the Minutes of the City Council. November 13, 2006, Comments made during public hearing on proposed 2006 CP Amendments John Cowan, 1830 NE 24th St.. Renton, 98056, objected to the rezoning of the blueberry farm. saying the farm is a unique geological area and should remain that way. He expressed concern that the amendment process is moving too quickly, and recommended that the City stop the process and conduct a comprehensive review of the wetlands and the needs of the upper Kennydale Source: Page 4 of the Minutes of the City Council,November 13, 2006, Comments made during public hearing on proposed 2006 CP Amendments Exhibit M Comments of interest Page 1 of 5 There being no public comment on Group 3. Ms. Conkling turned to Group 4 - Highlands Land Use and Zoning Package. which includes 2006-M-6 and 2006- T-2,and supersedes prior staff recommendations. She introduced Highlands Zoning Task Force Chair Kirk Moore, who thanked task force members and City staff for their efforts on this proposal. He highlighted the proposed changes to the Center Village(CV) land use designation,which include removing R-10 as an implementing zone, allowing R-14, RM-U, and RM-T as implementing zones, and eliminating the requirement of residential-only development north of NE 12th St. Mr. Moore also reviewed the proposed land use map amendments and the proposed rezones. Ms. Conkling reviewed the proposed zoning text amendments, as follows: Amend the implementing zones of the CV land use designation. H;Remove the CV Residential Bonus District. -Adopt design regulations. ,_,Amend uses in the R-14 zone. Amend uses in the CV zone. Add clarifying language to terms such as pipe stem lots and affordable housing. Amend development standards for the R-14 zone. :Allow two types of affordable housing bonuses in the R-14 zone. Amend development standards for the CV zone. In conclusion, Ms. Conkling stated that the Planning and Development Committee will discuss the matter on November 16, and first and second reading of the ordinances is scheduled for November 27. Mayor Keolker N"" thanked the task force members for all their hard work. Source: Page 5 of the Minutes of the City Council. November 13, 2006, Comments made during public hearing on proposed 2006 CP Amendments NOTE: The formation and operation of the Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zoning Task Force. chaired by Kirk Moore, did not follow GMA regarding public participation and notice. I will cover this separately. Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton. 98057, voiced her pleasure with the efforts of the Highlands Zoning Task Force. She expressed concern regarding due process issues pertaining to the Comprehensive Plan public hearings, noting that the ordinances adopted may be based on an invalid public hearing process. Ms. Petersen also questioned why non-Renton residents are allowed on the City's boards and commissions. Additionally, she indicated that while the Police Department has addressed some problems related to prostitution. there are more problems that need attention. especially one in an area near a church. Source: Page 7 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 13, 2006, Comments made during audience comment on proposed 2006 CP Amendments Kirk Moore, 1901 Harrington Circle NE, Renton, 98056, explained that the Highlands Zoning Task Force requested the Highlands moratorium, which only ti.. Exhibit M Comments of interest Page 2 of 5 affects the R-10 zone,to allow time for the implementation of the land use and zoning regulations. He noted that when the ordinances take effect, R-10 will be removed as an implementing zone, effectively eliminating the moratorium. Source Page 10 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 13. 2006. Comments made during audience comment NOTE: Although excerpts relating to Kirk Moore's comments are brief, they hint that this group was exclusive and not open to the public and made decisions without public participation and notice, the details of which will be covered in its own section.. Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295. Renton, 98057, stated that although eliminating the use of eminent domain and non-conforming properties in the Highlands area came about prior to the formation of the Highlands Zoning Task Force, the task force succeeded in the ability to remodel existing duplexes and to have motherin- law apartments. Ms. Petersen displayed a map of the Highlands area,and compared the zoning from the original subarea plan to the recommended zoning of the task force, noting the density similarities between the two plans. Ms. Petersen expressed concern regarding the high densities proposed for the area, including the allowance of three- to five-story buildings, saying that high densities should not be supported without a proper EIS (Environmental Impact Statement). She urged Council to consider requiring an EIS. Source: Page 5 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 20, 2006 Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295. Renton, 98057, inquired as to which fund the$1.5 million set aside for Highlands study area infrastructure improvements is in. Regarding the Comprehensive Plan amendment concerning the upper Kennydale area, Ms. Petersen expressed concern that citizens were not given the opportunity to speak publicly on the matter and the decision to adopt R-4 zoning was a result of a staff recommendation. Source: Page 10 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 20, 2006 Kirk Moore, 1901 Harrington Circle NE, Renton, 98056, identifying himself as the chair of the Highlands Zoning Task Force, expressed concern that some citizens are questioning the independency of the task force in the matter of the task force's report and recommendations regarding the Highlands area zoning. Mr. Moore stressed that the task force worked hard on behalf of the residents of the Highlands, City staff, and City Council to produce reasonable and expedient policies for growth and protection in the Highlands. Source: Page 1 of the Minutes of the City Council. November 27, 2006 NOTE: Where was the public participation and notice regarding the recommendations made in such an expedient manner? I will cover that in a separate section. Inez Petersen. PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, spoke about the multiple appeals that were filed related to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments. She pointed out that what is proposed for one neighborhood affects all Nifty Exhibit M Comments of interest Page3of5 neighborhoods, specifically in regards to high density. Ms. Petersen stated that she supports the work of the Highlands Zoning Task Force, but does not support what the City did with the work of the task force. She indicated that the public hearing process pertaining to the Comprehensive Plan amendments was invalid, and voiced her support for the appeals that were filed concerning environmental issues and the public hearing process. Ms. Petersen emphasized that citizens should not be forced to spend their money on legal services in order to do what the City should already be doing in regards to these matters. Source: Page 1-2 of the Minutes of the City Council.November 27, 2006 NOTE: Why isn't Mayor Koelker listening to me? An ordinance was read adopting the 2006 amendments to the City's 2004 Comprehensive Plan, maps and data in conjunction therewith. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Source: Page 4 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 27, 2006 NOTE: And with those votes, we are right back at Exhibit A. Mr. Cowan expressed concern about the process, pointing out that a Council sub-committee rejected the Commission's recommendation, and that tonight, first and second reading of the ordinance was held. Source: Page 7 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 27. 2006 Inez Somerville Petersen, PO Box 1295. Renton, 98057, claimed that since the public hearings held on November 13 and September 20 regarding the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments are invalid due to lack of due process, the ordinances adopted this evening are also invalid. Noting that a number of appeals were filed related to the amendments, Ms. Petersen stated that she wants the community to grow but in a legal way. Source: Page 7 of the Minutes of the City Council, November 27, 2006 Kirk Moore, 1901 Harrington Circle NE, Renton, 98056, said public hearing notices can be short, and he pointed out that it is up to citizens to be active in government. Mr. Moore expressed disappointment with the appeals that were filed related to the Comprehensive Plan amendments. He indicated that the Highlands Zoning Task Force's recommended plan for the Highlands area contained significant differences from the original plan. Mr. Moore suggested that the City review the appeal structure and raise the appeal fee from$75 to $500. Exhibit M Comments of interest Page 4 of 5 Source: Page 7-8 of the Minutes of the City Council. November 27, 2006 Susan Rider. 1835 NE 20th St.. Renton. 98056. speaking on behalf of the Kennydale Creek Areas Alliance, thanked Council for making the decision to protect the peat wetland system. She disagreed with a suggestion made by a citizen at last week's Council meeting to raise the appeal fee to $500,saying that the high fee would prevent her and others from having a voice in City affairs. Requesting that Council deny the rezone of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. Ms. Rider stated the current Resource Conservation zoning is the most appropriate for this unique and fragile property, which is the heart of the wetland system. Source: Page 4 of the Minutes of the City Council. December 4. 2006 Council discussion ensued regarding the funding for and an assessment of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm property for potential purchase. [It's about time!I Source: Page 7 of the Minutes of the City Council, December 4, 2006 Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, expressed concern about the denial of Jeff Colee's request for an over-height fence variance. Additionally, she claimed that the public hearings conducted for the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments are invalid due to lack of due process; therefore,the resulting adopted ordinances relating to the amendments are also invalid. Council President Corman voiced his intention to have public hearing notification be a topic of discussion at a future Committee of the Whole meeting. He noted that staff is working on an e-mail notification feature for the City's website, which can supplement the outdated notification process of publishing in the newspaper and posting on telephone poles. Mayor Keolker stated that although the public hearing notification system may seem somewhat outdated, it must be done in order to comply with State law. She indicated that staff proposes to do some things in addition to the State requirements. Source: Page 8of the Minutes of the City Council. December 4, 2006 NOTE: Councilman Corman was well aware that the mayor and her staff cut corners, but they were so far down the road, his recommendation was just to review her procedures for 2007. If she stepped over the requirements of GMA for the sake of expediency this year. she will no doubt do it again next year. The problem isn't a public hearing notification system that is out of date. the problem is an Administration which does not adhere to the tenants of GMA. As a result, I now find myself trying to figure out how to petition the CPSGMHB. Exhibit M Comments of interest Page 5 of 5 ��, (J ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ,� NEIG.I ORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC 4 *• �: PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: October 4, '2M6 TO: Terri Briere, Committee Chair Members of the Planning and Development Committee CC: Kathy Keolker, Mayor Members of the Renton City Council Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Alex Pietsch STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind SUBJECT: Formation of Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Task Force ISSUE: Should the City convene Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Task Force to provide community based planning recommendations to the City of Renton? RECOMMENDATION: Form Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Citizen Task Force that will begin meeting in October 2006. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: Purpose This"Task Force is formed to provide citizen and property owner input into the zoning decisions within the Center Village(CV)and Residential Medium Density (RMD) land use designations. Membership(9 Positions-) The Task Force membership should reflect commercial, community,property owner, and resident interests within the area impacted by Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning proposals. It is recommended that the Task Force consist of nine members, as this is a small enough number to provide staffing, but large enough to provide a range of representation. The attached list of potential Task Force members includes individuals responding to Committee of the Whole's action at their October 2. 2006 meeting, calling for volunteers. Regular meetings of the Task. Force will he scheduled with staffing and support provided by the Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning. Exhibit Al Alex Pietsch Issue Paper on forming the task force Page 1 of 5 Terri Mere Page 2 of 5 October 4,2006 Member 1. Highlands Community Association member who lives in or owns property in the proposed study area Member 2. Commercial representative - business landowner or tenant with a lease with a business interest that could stay the same or be a candidate for redevelopment Members Property owner(1 developed lot) that could either stay as is or have 3 & 4. redevelopment potential- maybe one of each Members Multiple property owner of multiple lots with existing improvements and 5 & 6. redevelopment potential Member 7. Renter in the proposed rezoning area Member 8. Owner of potential CV zoned property with underutilized residential or commercial use, that could either stay as is or develop with mixed use, commercial or residential Member 9. Housing Authority in its role as major property owner and to provide input on affordability provisions in the draft code Appointment The Council will appoint the Task Force after review and recommendation of the Planning and Development Committee. Members will be recruited from the Party of Records list from the Renton Highlands Subarea zoning action, the Highlands Community Association, the Renton Housing Authority, business owners in the commercial area, and the general public notified through the City Council Committee of the Whole October 2,2006 meeting. Scope of Work The Task Force work requires review of zoning and policy amendments, rather than the broader issue of the vision for the Center Village. The Task Force review will provide a citizen perspective on the following five issues: 1) Amendments to Comprehensive Plan policies in the Center Village: a. Adding the Residential 14 (R-14) zone as an implementing zone to the Center Village concept, and b. Deleting a restriction on commercial uses north of 12th St and west of Edmonds Ave. c. Wording changes that do not change policy content (housekeeping amendments) Exhibit N Alex Pietsch Issue Paper on forming the task force Page 2 of 5 Nimme Terri Briere Page 3 of 5 October 4i., 2006 2) Changes amending the boundary of the Center Village(CV), Residential Medium Density (WDI, and Residential Multi-Family (RMF) land use designations within the study area. 3) Zoning text changes to the R-14 and Residential 10(R-10)zones that might be applied to properties in the study area. 4) Zoning text changes to the CV zoning designation affecting properties already zoned CV and other properties that might he rezoned into the CV zoning category. 5) Potential area wide rezoning of property from R-10 to R-14, R-10 to R-8 (Residential 8), RMF to R-14 or CV, and R-10 to CV. The Task Force will he convened Tuesday, October 10, 2006 and will meet twice a week for one month. Participation in the Task Force will require a commitment to attend an • estimated eight meetings and review maps and written materials outside of scheduled meetings. Product The Task Force will produce a written report with specific recommendations on proposed zoning and Comprehensive Plan text and map amendments. The Task Force will also reviewproposed area-wide rezoning and include recommendations on this issue in its report. The report will be drafted for Task Force members review by city staff after presentation of discussion items and review and identification of issues. The report will be presented to the Planning and Development Committee for review and recommendation to the City Council. Recommendations The Task Force members will be asked to approve the report by a majority vote. At the request of three of the nine members, a minority report may he prepared on any issue and included in the Task Force report. Schedule and Meeting Topics Week 1: October 9 to 13, 2006 Meeting I Background overview of Center Village policies, with focus of Comprehensive Plan text and map amendments Identification of issues and concerns List generated by Task Force Identify items for further work/refinement Hold until Meeting 5 Meeting 2 Summary of R-14 zoning proposal Exhibit N Alex Pietsch Issue Paper on forming the task force Page 3 of 5 Terri Briere Page 4 of 5 October 4.2006 °+rr' Focus on why current R-l0 zoning does not implement the Center Village Review of R-14 zone What is it now? How could it be amended and why? What is needed to address the Center Village concept? Alternative amendments to R-10 zone Identification of issues and concerns List generated by Task Force Identify items for further work/refinement Hold until Meeting 5 Week 2: October 16 to 2A,2006 Meeting 3 Summary of Center Village zoning What is it now? How would it be changed? Identification of issues and concerns List generated by Task Force Identify items for further work/refinement Hold until Meeting 5 Meeting 4 Map Amendments a. Center Village boundary b. Property rezones Identification of issues and concerns • List generated by Task Force Identify items for further work/refinement Hold until Meeting 5 Week 3: October 23 to 27,2006 Meeting 5 Review all four issues lists Discuss staff responses Begin to identify Task Force positions on each work program task Meeting 6 Draft I positions prepared for Task Force review Week 4: October 30 to November 3,2006 Meeting 7 Review Task Force report, Draft 1 Meeting 8 Review final report Determine reporting out speakers and presentation Non-Task Force Meetings ReQuiring Coordination October 21 and November 2: Planning and Development Committee Exhibit Al Alex Pietsch Issue Paper on forming the task force Page 4 of 5 vi.r v..r Terri Briere yr. Page 5 of 5 October 4, 20(K) Review of Planning Commission recommendations on all Comprehensive Plan amendments (October 21'` other citywide amendments Nov. 2nd highlands) November 8: Transmit Task Force report to City Council for November 13th Public Hearing November 13: City Council Committee of the Whole Briefing Regular Council meeting Public Hearing on zoning package (text and areawide rezoning) November .14: End of Moratorium November 16: Planning and Development Committee Review and Recommendation November 20: First reading, of Ordinances November 27: Second reading of Ordinances CONCLUSION: Formation of a Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning, Task Force would give the residents a voice in the planning for their community. Exhibit N Alex Pietsch Issue Paper on forming the task force Page 5of5 Original Message Subject:Unauthorized membership criteria element (WORK) added to Highlands Zoning/Text Amendments Task Force Application Date:Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:28:54 -0700 From:"Terry G Persson" <terrypersson@msn.com> msn.com> To:"Jennifer Davis Hayes" <JDavishayes@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Corman, Randy" <randy.corman@boeing.com>, "Catherine Corman" <racorman@comcast.net> Unauthorized membership criteria added to Highlands Zoning/Text Amendments Task Force Application Also Text Amendments should have been included as one of the main topics to be reviewed and for some strange reason this critical piece of the mix was left out. Randy, for some strange reason the criteria put forth on the attached application for membership in the Citizens Task force application does not marry with what was presented at your council meeting. Someone made the decision to insert the word (Work) after Live and own property in the Highlands. It was agreed near the end your meeting that only the stakeholders would be on this team. Bringing in others who live outside of the Highlands community will only foster confusion and distrust from those who are the real stakeholders (property owners and renters). We have talked about this before Randy and you agreed that only those who own property and live and raise their families in the Highlands will make the determination as to how they see the Highlands redeveloped. I don't want to turn this wonderful opportunity for the formation of the task force into a negative thing, but I see this simple one word addition to the criteria as another opportunity by the Terri, Alex and the Mayor to try another back door approach in their continued saga to push the Center Village concept in our Highlands Community. Why is it that the council agrees to specific requirements for membership (and I reviewed the DVD of your meeting) and then for some strange reason (without the councils approval) someone adds another unauthorized element is to the equation. I feel it would be reasonable for you (as council president) to make a simple phone call to who ever is responsible for writing the criteria and ask that the added word "WORK" be removed from the Highlands zonings Task Force application. Then in the future if the council feels that others outside of the community (besides the stakeholders) should be allowed to participate, then and only then should they be included on Highlands Zoning/Text Amendments Task Force. If you disagree with my analysis, please give me a call and review you thoughts with me. Thanks for your help Terry Persson President Exhibit 0 Confusion reigns - Page 1 of 2 ;,,ro,,.. Original Message Subject:Re: Unauthorized membership criteria element (WORK) added to Highlands Zoning/Text Amendments Task Force Date:Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:45:54 -0700 From:"Alexander Pietsch" <Apietsch@ci.renton.wa.us> To:<terrypersson@msn.com> CC:<david@lnewman.org>, <angelsandel@aol.corn>, "April Alexander" <analexander@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Bonnie Walton" <Bwalton@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Daniel Clawson" <Dclawso@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Denis Law" <DLaw@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Don Persson" <Dpersson@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Jay Covington" <Jovington@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Jennifer Davis Hayes" <JDavishayes@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Julia Medzegian" <Jmedzegian@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Kathy Keolker-Wheeler" <mayorkathy@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Marcie Palmer" <MPalmer@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Marty Wine" <MWine@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Randy Corman" <Rcorman@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Rebecca Lind" <RHlind@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Terri Briere" <Tbriere@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Antonette Nelson" <Tnelson@ci.renton.wa.us>, <gauntsmith@comcast.net>, <Donovanboyd@earthlink.net>, <steve-morris@earthlink.net>, <mouserkm@gmail.com>, <bkappenman@hotmail.com>, <howardmcomber@hotmail.com>, <Running4Renton@msn.com>, <webgi rl @ seanet.com> Terry(and others)... Please let me explain what happened here. The word "work" was our attempt to try to create a role for a commercial property or business owner. Looking back at it, it is probably the wrong word. We do believe that owners of commercial properties and business owners in the study area are stakeholders in this process and would like to create a spot for one or two of them on the task force. We agree that people who do not live, own property or own a business in the study area, do not have a role in this task force. There is certainly no attempt on our part to "stack the deck" one way or another. I apologize for any confusion and concern this may have caused. If you have additional concerns or questions, feel free to give me a call. Alex Pietsch Administrator Dept. of Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning City of Renton 425.430.6592 voice Exhibit 0 Confusion reigns -Page 2 of 2 From: "Terri Briere" <tbriere,Oci, enton.Wa,us> To: <bredt27ra)hotmail.corn> CC: 'Alexander Pietsch" <Apietsch(o c/renton.we.us> Subject: Re: Council Date: Fi/, 06 Oct 2006 10:28:.14 0700 >Mr. Nicholson, >Thank you for correspondence regarding the role of the Planning Commission and the Highlands Task Force. You are correct that the Planning Commission is the body that takes public input and makes recommendations to the council on planning and zoning issues. The Planning Commission has previously heard public testimony and made a reccommendation to the Council on the Highlands Zoning and Comp Plan Changes. It be came apparent to council that the community continued to have concerns with the Planning Commission and Administration recommendation. A result of citizen concerns is the Highlands 1-ask Force. Because of the compressed time schedule to make changes to the Comp Plan Council agreed to allow the Task Force to take the role of review rather than the Planning Commission. The Task Force will not take any new testimony, they will be working with the existing record. >Again, thank you for contacting me. >Terri Briere >> "'Brad Nicholson- <brad827(ahotmail.com> 10/06/06 8:42 AM >>> >I was wondering the reason why the Planning Commission is not the primary or exclusive way of taking public input and making recommendations to the Council for the "Hilands Vision" but rather it appears that a "task force" will be used for that above purpose? Could you answer that? Or am I wrong is it the Planning Commission that will be given substantial weight? Could you answer that too? the question is which citizen body will be accorded substantial weight? I am going to want to participate. Your response is appreciated. Exhibit P October 6, 2006, exchange between Brad Nicolson and Terri Briere Original Message Subject:RE: Our public meeting situation Date:Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:31:48 -0700 From:"Overstreet, Greg\(ATG\)" <GregO@ATG.WA.GOV> To:"Inez Somerville Petersen" <webgirl@seanet.corn> Inez: The question is whether the task force is an "agency" or a "subcommittee" of the City. If so, the Open Public Meetings Act applies and non-disruptive video taping must be allowed. Here is a link to the Attorney General's web site on the "agency"/"subcommittee" issue: http://www.atg.wa.gov/records/chapterl.shtml#1.2b Greg Greg Overstreet Original Message From: Inez Somerville Petersen [mailto:webgirl@seanet.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 8:46 AM To: Overstreet, Greg (ATG) Cc: tpersson@comcast.net Subject: Our public meeting situation This morning, under the auspices of the City of Renton Economic Development Dept, the task force voted to keep the meeting private and to allow no video taping. Just because these uninformed people were led to do this doesn't it legal. What can we do? Sincerely, Inez Somerville Petersen Exhibit Q Problems resolved by State AG Ombudsman, Greg Overstreet Page 1 of 3 Original Message Subject:RE: Minutes of Highlands Task Force Meetings Date:Fri, 20 Oct 2006 06:55:43 -0700 From:"Overstreet, Greg\(ATG\)" <GregO@ATG.WA.GOV> To:"Inez Somerville Petersen" <webgirl@seanet.corn> Inez: Yes, the law requires a governing body to keep minutes (except of executive sessions). RCW 42.32.030 provides: "The minutes of all regular and special meetings except executive sessions of such boards, commissions, agencies or authorities shall be promptly recorded and such records shall be open to public inspection." http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=42.32.030 From the email below from Judith Subia, It looks like the City is claiming that the Task Force is not a "governing body." If this is the City's claim, let me know the facts of the Task Force (whether it is composed of city officials, what its purpose is, etc.) and I could give you my thoughts on whether it is nonetheless a "governing body" as defined by the Open Public Meetings Act. Greg Overstreet Original Message From: Inez Somerville Petersen [mailto:webgirl@seanet.com] Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 4:42 PM To: Overstreet, Greg (ATG) Subject: Re: Minutes of Highlands Task Force Meetings Dear Greg: Is there no lawful requirement to keep Minutes of public meetings? Especially an important meeting like the Highlands Task Force? Sincerely, Inez Somerville Petersen Exhibit Q Problems resolved by State AG Ombudsman, Greg Overstreet Page 2 of 3 Original Message Subject:Re: Minutes of Highlands Task Force Meetings Date:Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:47:47 -0700 From:"Judith Subia" <JSubi@ci.renton.wa.us> To:<webgirl a,seanet.com> CC:"Julia Medzegian" <Jedzegian uci.renton.wa.us>, "Randy Corman" <Rcorman@ci.renton.wa.us> Hello Inez, There are no minutes being prepared for this Task Force. -Judith >>> Inez Somerville Petersen <webgirl@seanet.com> 10/18/06 8:56 PM >>> Dear Judith: Where are the Minutes of the Task Force meetings posted? Or are they only available on paper? Thanks, Inez Exhibit Q Problems resolved by State AG Ombudsman, Greg Overstreet Page 3 of 3 Original Message ---- From: Kirk Moore <mouserkmnu gmail.com> To: BNFKNLDN@aol.com; colin@colinwalker.org,jdhawton@yahoo.corn; mrg@rentonhousing.org; steve@starfiresports.com; tenacious_tic@msn.corn; Erika Conkling <EConklina tz ci.renton.wa.us>; howardmcomber13 <HOWARDMCOMBER@hotmail.com>; Kirk Moore <mouserkm@gmail.com>; Rebecca Lind <RHlind@ci.renton.wa.us>; Sande] DeMastus Highlands Community Association Director<angelsandel@aol.com>; Scott Weiss <sweiss@remedystaffcorn> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:11:01 AM Subject: Saturday Hello task force members and city staff.... I generally am at the Starbucks located at Sunset and Duvall every Saturday studying. I would like to invite you to join me there if possible to discuss what we are doing. I think that the more time we spend discussing our ideas and ALSO our understandings of the Comp Plan, Zoning Issues, and Text Amendments, the better we will be able to address the daunting task (Though we only eat the elephant one bite at a time) in front of us. I would like to suggest that any time between 9a and I 1 a you can join me for a cup of coffee and a frank discussion about zoining issues. I have had great discussions with Kumar and Howard. I think that each of us should be discussing with the rest of the task force the goals and desires that we have. Personally I believe that it will help guide us better in our decisions, hopefully reduce any friction that might exist, and make everything more relevant as we get to know one another. Kirk Moore 1901 Harrington Circle NE Renton, WA 98056 425-443-1408 (Call any time) Exhibit R -Page 1 of 2 Starbucks Invitation and note to City Attorney From: Inez Somerville Petersen [mailto:webgirl©seanet.com] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 3:19 PM To: Larry Warren; City Council President Randy Corman Cc: Jay Covington; City Clerk Subject: Scheduling "public meetings" under questionable circumstances Dear Mr. Warren: It would appear that you need to give some IMMEDIATE direction to the City Staff and the Highlands Task Force, specifically the chairman, Kirk Moore, about the calling of public meetings of the Task Force outside the legal boundaries of this committee. Mr. Moore must be totally ignorant of the State Public Meetings Law, since it was he who instigated the vote to close the Task Force meetings, which, as you know, the Attorney General's Office reversed after my complaint. But now Mr. Moore is setting up his own meetings of the Task Force outside the published meeting times at the local Starbucks. You need to address this situation as only you can do. Sincerely, Inez Somerville Petersen P.S. The City's website does not reflect the Highlands Task Force meeting information under "Public Meetings." You need to address this situation as only you can do too. Exhibit R - Page 2 of 2 Starbucks Invitation and note to City Attorney Original Message Subject:Highlands Task Force Meeting Information Date:Sat, 14 Oct 2006 21:46:39 -0700 From:Inez Somerville Petersen <webgirl@seanet.com> To:Judith Subia <JSubia@ci.renton.wa.us>, Erika Conkling <EConkling@ci.renton.wa.us>, rlind@ci.renton.wa.us CC:mouserkm@gmail.corn, tpersson@comcast.net, howardmcomber@hotmail.com, City Council President Randy Corman <rcorman@ci.renton.wa.us>, Jay Covington <Jcovington@ci.renton.wa.us> Dear Rebecca, Erika, and Judith: I want to remind you that these are PUBLIC MEETINGS. The agenda, packets (if any) , meeting times and places, etc. , need to be posted to the City's public meetings webpage in the same manner as Planning Commission meetings and other public meetings are publicized. Sincerely, Inez Exhibit S No Task Force agenda packets on City's website like Planning Commission Neftsr *err >>> "brad nicholson" <brad827(hotmail.com> 10/15/06 8:15:09 AM >>> Ms. Briere, 1 am sorry you have not responded to my last mail because I was sincere about the task force thing. Some people in renton webcast a video and I just this weekend saw you say that the meetings of the task force were not going to be at city hall. I recieved another message saying that the task force was holding a meeting at starbucks in the hilands so I went. 1 really havent had notice for this stuff. It wasnt hard to figure out which one was part of it because he had a law book about eminent domain and Kelo out in front of his computer. One Kirk Moore at the starbucks task force meeting. He informed me that he was the chairman of the task force and if 1 wanted to participate I would have to give all of my comments to him and he would present the comments to council for me. I could only observe according the rules he said. He informed me that I would not be able to participate in public and so providing him with my comments was really important to the processes. I am not one of those that is easily convinced of the viability of some kind of ill concieved processes. I was offended by the above, and for what I believe is good reason. As you probably know, that reason is RCW 36.70A and other relevant statutes. I think you should agree with me. Now Again, I would request information as to how I can participate in the task force. 1 would like you to know that I think that I would be very beneficial to the processes. Thank you in advance. Brad Nicholson Exhibit T Brad Nicholson's intent to participate, City doesn't have to give Notice Page 1 of 2 NNW From: '.Julia Medzegian" Jmedzegian'kci.renton.wa.us- To: brad827(cl)hotmail.com CC: "Daniel Clawson" Dclawson(cl!ci.renton.Wa.uS ,"Denis Law" DLaw'c ci.renton.wa.us>,"Don Persson" Dpersson(a ci.renton.wa.us- "Julia Medzegian" Jmedzegian(aci.renton.wa.us= "Marcie Palmer" MPalnler(a;ci.renton.wa.us "Randy Gorman" 'Rcornlan'aci.renton.wa.us>,"Terri Briere" "Thriere4ci.renton.wa.us=,"Antonette Nelson" ; Tnelson!aci.renton.wa.us Subject: Re: Council Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 07:53:12-0700 Mr. Nicholson, 1 am responding to your concerns on behalf of Councilmember Briere, who is away on vacation. Unfortunately, your e-mail requesting consideration to be placed on the Advisory Committee arrived after the deadline and the meeting to make the decision had taken place. To my knowledge, the Task Force is holding all of their meetings at City Hall. Therefore, the meeting you attended in the Highlands, was not a Task Force meeting. You can contact Rebecca Lind (430-6588)or Judith Subia (430-6575) in the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning department for a schedule of those meetings if you would like to attend. They are public meetings. It is my understanding that, while they are considered public meetings, they are not taking testimony at those meetings. They are considered working meetings. And, because they are not public meetings held by Council, we are not making notification of those meetings. Thank you, again, for your interest in this matter. The full Council is expected to receive a recommendation from the Task Force at the November 13 Committee of the Whole meeting. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Julia Medzegian City Council Liaison 425-430-6501 �... Exhibit T Brad Nicholson's intent to participate, City doesn't have to give Notice Page 2 of 2 Nor Nor, "_ i �;rw'C�'' o Sr r J, __� L `I -y Sv:. w �.�. , -•s' , ac, - r cf -- c' 1i _ - - I. u r- v _ _ C ...-. L v; U ^ C 151.1 — Q _ r 0 J C ',.. 0 \ '.d J J 1- of% - .''` r ^ l r Of)" .� -G "- .� -- n J V v J C J ^..1) r 1 ., ^J re r., :c - li vli.-4 ..-^ G : CJ Q ..� v 're., L U cf) Z r O � ▪ .- �A ,� � v ;) `V V > c3 '^ ram; p� _ pa c a i . , _ f — ro* �. ���111 - .. v J .L v 1� i '.I) J J L J i r = U 'J i v71 J .. to 71Y Exhibit U Affidavit of Publication - Finally on October 30, 2006 with two meetings left RCW 36.70.020 establishes 13 planning goals which the City of Renton(City) is to use exclusively for the purpose of guiding development of its comprehensive plans and development regulations. RCW 36.70.020(11)further establishes "Citizen participation and coordination"as one of the essential goals. This section requires the City to encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process and ensure coordination between communities and the City to reconcile conflicts. RCW 35.70A.035 requires the City,whenever changes to the comprehensive plan or developmental regulations are proposed. to provide notice which is reasonably calculated to alert the public to the major issues at hand and the ways in which to further participate in the planningprocess. This section clarifies and emphasizes that effective notice is an essential and necessary part of public participation_and it applies to the entire GMA planning process. The City shall implement reasonable and effective notice by implementing provisions such as. • RCW 36.70A.035(1)(b)requires the City to publish notices in the local newspaper. • RCW 36.70A.035(I)(c) requires the City to distribute notices to public and private groups with known interest in the comprehensive plan amendments or development regulations being considered. • RCW 36.70A.035(2)(a)requires the City, when it is considering a change to a comprehensive plan or development regulation and the change is proposed after the opportunity for review and comment has passed under the city's procedures, to provide to the public another opportunity for review and comment before the City Council votes on the proposed change. • RCW 36.70A.035(2)(b)(ii)provides an exemption if the public had the opportunity to review and comment on the changes to the proposed amendments.then the City is not required to provide an additional opportunity for public participation. [The previous "opportunity" for public participation must have been valid.] RCW 36.70.070 makes it mandatory for the City to adopt a comprehensive plan which provides for public participation as provided in RCW 36.70A.140. RCW 36.70A.130(2)requires the City to establish and broadly disseminate to the public a public participation program consistent with RCW 36.70A.035 and RCW 36.70A.140. RCW 36.70A.140 requires the City to establish and broadly disseminate to the public a public participation program identifying procedures providing for early and continuous public participation in the development and amendment of comprehensive land use plans and development regulations. The public participation program shall provide for: • Broad dissemination of proposals and alternatives • Opportunity for written comments • Public meetings after effective notice • Provision for open discussion • Communication programs • Information services • Consideration of and response to public comments RCW 36.70A.140 also provides that, should the City make an error in exact compliance with its established program and procedures.the City's comprehensive plan or development regulation shall not be rendered invalid if the spirit of the program and procedures is observed. Case Law(many more than this) WRECO. 8335.FDO. at 9 WSDF I. 4316 FDO.at 71 Bremerton,5339c,FDO,at 25 Tracy, 2301,DFO,at 19 Andrus,8330,FDO,at 6-7 McVittie VIII, 1317. FDO,at 19 Lewis. 1320. FDO.at 10 Exhibit V Pro Se Petitioner's Recap of GMA Page 1 of I r.r TITLE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION 2-10-1 CREATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION: There is hereby created a Planning Commission in the City of Renton. (Ord. 5155, 9-26-05) 2-10-2 AUTHORITY: The Planning Commission is established pursuant to RCW 35A.63.020, providing for its membership, method of appointment, organization and duties. (Ord. 5155, 9-26-05) 2-10-3 FUNCTION: A. Power: The Planning Commission shall serve in an advisory capacity to the Mayor and the City Council and shall have such powers and duties as shall be provided for herein. B. Authority: The City Council and Mayor have designated the Planning Commission to function as the public hearing body for many planning related activities of the City. The Council may, at its discretion, retain this function for any specific project, proposal, or plan. [Cross references to Final Plan Action, 4-9-02.0, Para l] C. Representation: Planning Commissioners are entrusted to make recommendations reflecting the broad interests of the community. D. Conduct: All Commissioners shall conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the Code of Ethics for Municipal Officers, Chapter 42.23 RCW. In formulating its recommendations to the City Council, the Planning Commission and its advisory committees may conduct public hearings; however, in any event all meetings of the Commission or its advisory committees shall be open to the public pursuant to the Open Public Meetings Act. E. General Duties: The primary responsibility of the Planning Commission is to review the Comprehensive Plan, carry out work activities in the work program adopted by the City Council, and to elicit public input for and to advise the City Council and the Mayor on land use planning matters. F. Scope Of Review: At the direction or referral by the City Council, the Planning Commission shall review staff proposals, hold public hearings, and submit recommendations to the City Council and the Mayor on the adoption of and amendments to the following: 1. The Comprehensive Plan and new goals and policies. 2. Neighborhood or subarea plans and studies which will amplify and augment the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission may conduct periodic planning studies of homogenous community units, distinctive geographic areas, or other types of districts having unified interest within the total area of the City which will amplify and augment the Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit W Pro Se Petitioner's Recap of RMC implementing GM.A Page 1 4 6 3. Shoreline Master Program amendments after holding a public hearing. 4. Land Use Regulations and processes upon Council request. 5. Duties related to Development Regulations and processes as described in RMC 4-8-070. 6. Other land use plans and programs contained in the Commission's work program, or referred by the City Council. 7. Short-range programs as necessary for implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 5155, 9-26-05) TITLE IV - DEVELOPMENTAL REGULATIONS CHAPTER GUIDE: Chapter 4_1 RMC provides the framework for Title 4 in terms of identifying the City's authority to adopt development regulations, stating the relationship and consistency of the development regulations with the Comprehensive Plan, providing for interpretation and enforcement of the development regulations, listing fee information, and referencing violation and penalty consequences. 4-1-020 PURPOSE: It is the intent of the Renton City Council that these regulations implement the City's policies adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan in compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) and implement the requirements of the State's Regulatory Reform Act, which has a primary goal of integrating environmental review with project review. 4-1-050 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The regulation of land development is a cooperative activity including many different elected and appointed boards and City staff. . . [Public participation omitted.= 4-1-060 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: A. PURPOSES OF PLAN: 1. The primary purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to define and establish the policy relating to the development of the community as a whole; to indicate the principles and objectives which shall guide the establishment, development and implementation of definite and precise plans, public and private; to provide for the coordination of the many separate plans which govern the development of this community, to officially adopt a program and guide which will enable the City to attain the principles and objectives set forth in chapter 35.63 RCW and the Growth Management Act (chapter 36.70A RCW) in the manner provided. (Ord. 4437, 2-21-1994) 2. The overriding consideration is to promote public safety, welfare, and interest. Additional factors to be considered (not in order of priority) are preservation of property rights, Exhibit W Pro Se Petitioner's Recap of RMC implementing GMA Page 2 of 6 protection of life and property, equal opportunities, public interests prevailing over private interests, and economic and social benefits. (Ord. 3976, 3-3-1986) [goals of GMA''j 3. The Comprehensive Plan is intended to guide the enactment of development regulations that are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and capital budget decisions that are in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. [not just a guide, a mandatory guidel 4. The Comprehensive Plan is intended to help resolve some of the dilemmas confronting municipal officials and the people they represent, and to provide a coordinated approach to local and regional problem solving. 5. Additional purposes of the Comprehensive Plan are: a. To improve the physical and social environment of the City as a setting for human activities; to make it more functional, beautiful, decent, healthful, interesting and efficient; b. To insure acceptable levels of access, utilities and other public services to future growth and development, c. To promote the public interest, and the interest of the City at large; d. To facilitate the democratic determination and implementation of City policies and development; e. To effect coordination in development; f To inject long range considerations into the determination of short-range actions; g. To provide professional and technical knowledge in the decisions affecting development of the City; and h. To guide future development and growth in the City that is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Growth Management Act as defined in RCW 36.70A.020, Planning Goals. B. DESCRIPTION OF PLAN: The planning horizon for the Comprehensive Plan is twenty (20) years. The Plan is, of necessity, general in its proposals. It must be flexible, since it is impossible to predict all future events which may affect the community. The Plan is not a development regulation, although it makes significant recommendations for future land use. The Plan is not precise. It does not present engineering accuracy, nor does it claim to predict exactly the future use of every parcel of property. It is not intended to retroactively impose compliance with goals, objectives and policies upon existing developed property, but voluntary compliance is encouraged. Exhibit W Pro Se Petitioner's Recap of RMC implementing GMA Page 3 of 6 4-8-090 PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: D. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice of a public hearing for all development applications subject to notification requirements and all open record appeals shall be given as follows: I. Time of Notices: Except as otherwise required, public notification of meetings, hearings, and pending actions shall be made by: a. Publication at least ten (10) days before the date of a public meeting, hearing, or pending action in the official newspaper if one has been designated or a newspaper of general circulation in the City, b. Mailing at least ten (10) days before the date of a public meeting, hearing, or pending action to all parties of record, the project proponent and affected government agencies, and c. Posting of three (3) notices at least ten (10) days before the meeting, hearing, or pending action at or near the project site. 2. Content of Notice: The public notice shall include a general description of the proposed project, the action to be taken, a nonlegal description of the property or a vicinity map or sketch, the time, date and place of the public hearing, where further information may be obtained, and the following, or equivalent, statement: "If the hearing on a pending action cannot be completed on the date set in the public notice, the meeting or hearing may be continued to a date certain and no further notice under this Section is required". [Appears to be a loosey-goosey implementation of effective notice as required by (.1 IA__ 4-9-020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT PROCESS: A. PURPOSE: (Reserved) B. APPLICABILITY: Proposed amendments may be submitted by the Mayor, Planning Commission, City Council or private parties. (Ord. 4437, 2-21-1994) 1. Exemptions: (Reserved) C. AUTHORITY: (Reserved) Exhibit W Pro Se Petitioner's Recap of RMC implementing GMA Page 4 of 6 D. TIMING FOR AMENDMENTS: �.— The City Council will consider amendments to the Comprehensive Plan not more than annually except for emergencies. Formal application for Comprehensive Plan amendments shall be submitted by December 15th for consideration the following year. Application for preapplication review is recommended to occur by October 1st_ Comprehensive Plan amendments shall be given the highest priority in the Planning Commission's work program, and review shall be initiated within the first quarter of the work year. (Ord. 4437, 2-21-1994; Amd. Ord. 4794, 9-20-1999) E. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS AND FEES: Shall be as listed in RMC 4-1-170, Land Use Review Fees, and RMC 4-8-120C, Land Use Applications. A fee shall only be charged for private amendments. (Ord. 4722, 5-11-1998; Amd. Ord. 4794, 9-20-1999) [Follow-up later: How are private amendments differentiated from spot zoning, reference the single-owner properties in the 13 amendments in the 2000 Cr] F. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT PERIOD: (Reserved) G. REVIEW CRITERIA: The 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 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. Proposals that include a concurrent rezone request shall also comply with the decision criteria for change of zone classification in RMC 4-9-180F for the rezone portions of the application. (Amd. Ord. 4794, 9-20-1999) H. REVIEW PROCESS: 1. Preapplication Review: The City Council shall review preapplications for Comprehensive Plan amendments submitted by October 1st prior to determining the Planning Commission annual work program and before referring Comprehensive Plan amendment applications to the Planning Commission. Preapplication review is recommended to advise applicants of City Council policy directives prior to submission of a formal application. The City Council shall consider whether proposed amendments are timely and satisfy the review criteria established in RMC 4-9-020G. When an application is found to meet these criteria, the City Council shall authorize the inclusion of the application in the Exhibit W Pro Se Petitioner's Recap of RMC implementing GMA Page 5 of 6 Planning Commission's work program. Authorization does not imply affirmative support of an application, but merely agreement to consider the application on its merits. 2. Review of Formal Applications for Comprehensive Plan Amendments: The Planning Commission shall review technical studies and other pertinent information as needed prior to making a recommendation to the City Council on the merits of the application. If a Comprehensive Plan amendment application is submitted without a preapplication authorization, the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G shall be considered by the Planning Commission in making its recommendation to the City Council. (Ord. 4437, 2-21-1994; Amd. Ord. 4794, 9-20-1999) 1. FINAL PLAN ACTION: The Comprehensive Plan and any amendments shall be adopted by ordinance of the City Council after public hearing by the Council. (Ord. 3976, 3-3-1986) [Relevant to Nov 13, 2006 City Council public hearing which Mayor Koelker began to call a "courtesy hearing" after Citizens complained about the one-sentence. Notice.] J. CONCURRENT REVIEW OF REZONE PROPOSALS: To maintain consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, any rezoning that would be required by approval of the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan shall be considered concurrently with the proposed Comprehensive Plan changes. (Ord. 4437, 2-21-1994) Exhibit W Pro Se Petitioner's Recap of RMC implementing GMA Page 6 of 6 1444-6 03/z Report and Recommendation Of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force November 8, 2006 S` Y O U s � �u 44610 r 7 The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force was appointed by Mayor Kathy Keolker on October 9, 2006 Task Force Members: Kirk Moore, Chair Steve Beck Theresa Elmer Mark Gropper Jennifer Hawton Bimal Kumar Howard McOmber Colin Walker Scott Weiss Sandel DeMastus, alternate The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force was composed of a group of citizen volunteers, appointed by the Mayor, and approved by the City Council. Task Force members were recruited from the Party of Records list from the Renton Highlands Sub Area zoning action, from the Highlands Community Association, from the Renton Housing Authority, from neighborhood business owners, and through general public notice. Task Force membership was chosen to reflect commercial, community, property owner, and resident interests within the areas of the Highlands affected by proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning changes. Purpose The purpose of the Task Force was to provide additional citizen and property owner input into the zoning decisions within the Highlands study area. This Task Force convened for a limited time with the specific purpose to review the draft land use and zoning changes. This included review of proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments,proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendments, proposed Zoning Map Amendments, and proposed Zoning Text Amendments. After reviewing the proposed changes, the Task Force was charged with putting together a set of recommendations for City Council review. This report contains the recommendations of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force. It lists issues of concern that Task Force members identified, and proposed solutions. Task Force proposed Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments are attached to this report in the following appendices: • Appendix A- Task Force Proposed Land Use Map • Appendix B- Task Force Proposed Zoning Map • Appendix C- Task Force Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments • Appendix D- Task Force Proposed Zoning Text Amendments Process Since the Task Force was formed members have met twice a week with City staff In the first phase of the process, staff briefed the Task Force on the current zoning regulations in effect in the Highlands study area, as well as the proposed changes. Initial briefings also included review of the Comprehensive Plan land use policies in effect for the neighborhood. During the second phase, each Task Force member developed his or her own zoning map for the study area. Individual zoning concepts were consolidated into three small-group concepts by consensus. From these three maps, the Task Force consolidated the information into a single mapping proposal. Throughout the process of the briefings and the mapping exercise, a number of issues surfaced regarding land use policy and zoning regulations. These issues were collected throughout the first two phases of the process and brought back to the Task Force for discussion and recommendation in the third phase of the process. Decisions during this phase were also made by consensus of the Task Force. Staff provided additional information as requested and provided further assistance in interpreting the details of zoning and land use regulation. 1 Nomo Although the recommendations of the Task Force were formed through consensus, there was always the option to create a minority report. Given that there has been a fair amount of contention in the Highlands study area over proposed land use and zoning changes, the City Council authorized the creation of a minority report if necessary. A minority report allowed the opportunity for a group of at least three Task Force members to present an alternative recommendation from the rest of the group. Thus, if there were areas in which the Task Force just could not agree,there would be a series of alternative recommendations. Task Force Recommendations Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations and Policies All zoning is required by law to be consistent with the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan. The Task Force completed a land use map for the study area. Implementation of the Task Force proposal requires some Comprehensive Plan Text and Land Use Map Amendments. Appendix A contains the Task Force Proposed Land Use Map. This map shows the proposal to include the residential area north of NE 16th Street in the Center Village (CV) land use designation. It also includes the recommendation to include the multi-family areas south east of NE 12th Street and Monroe Ave NE, and east of Harrington Avenue NE between NE 7th Street and NE 9th Street in the Residential Multi- Family(RMF) land use designation. Appendix C contains the Task Force Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments. The Task Force recommended that Residential- 14 (R-14), Center Village (CV), and the Residential Multi-family(RM-F, RM-U, and RM-T) zones implement the Center Village Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. Zoning Map Rezoning of property in the Highlands Study Area is a very important issue to the residents and property owners there. The Task Force completed a zoning map for the study area. A modest up-zone to Residential- fourteen units per acre(R-14)was recommended for much of the current Residential- ten units per net acre(R-10)zoning in the study area. R-14 zoning was also recommended for the duplexes north of Sunset Boulevard in the vicinity of Glenwood Avenue NE and Harrington Avenue NE. Center Village (CV) zoning was expanded along Sunset Boulevard, in a few parcels adjacent to the existing commercial area, and the Houser Terrace and Evergreen Terrace properties owned by the Renton Housing Authority. Rezoning to Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) was recommended for three strips of properties: a strip along Kirkland Avenue NE, a strip south of NE 12th Street, and a strip along Harrington Avenue NE. Appendix B contains the Task Force Proposed Zoning Map. Non-Conforming Uses Past zoning proposals for this area included the possibility of implementing zoning that did not allow existing residential uses, such as duplexes and single-family homes. In such situations, the existing use is considered a legal non-conforming use. Legal non- conforming is the technical term for"grandfathered in". It means that the use is allowed to continue but may not expand or enlarge. Several members of the Task Force wished to ensure that the zoning proposal allow existing residential uses to remain legal and conforming. The recommended zoning proposal eliminates the issue of non-conforming 2 uses. All existing use types (duplexes, single-family uses) are allowed uses in the proposed zoning package. Property Redevelopment One of the most debated issues in the package of proposed zoning changes was a requirement that when properties came in for subdivision,the existing unit had to be removed. This would only affect those applying for division of their properties, and not to other changes like remodels or additions. However,the Task Force felt that property owners should not be required to remove existing units in order to subdivide their property. In lieu of requiring the removal of existing units, the Task Force indicated that property owners should be required to upgrade the existing units. Unfortunately,building and related codes make this impossible to implement without declaring the unit a hazard. The Task Force did not wish to create a situation in which existing units were declared hazardous. However, the Task Force did recommend deleting the provision that required the removal of existing units upon subdivision. Affordable Housing Keeping the neighborhood an affordable place to live for people in all stages of their lives was important to the members of the Task Force. In the R-14 zone,there is an allowed density bonus of 18 units per net acre. The Task Force recommended keeping the proposed incentive of creating two units of affordable housing as one of the options to achieve the density bonus. The Task Force also recommended implementing an incentive geared toward public agencies and non-profit organizations whose mission is to provide affordable housing. An incentive was recommended that would allow a bonus of 30 units per net acre for any project, of at least two acres, in which a minimum of 50%of the units developed would be affordable to those with incomes of 50% of the Area Median Income. Limits on Commercial Development While the Task Force liked the flexibility of the R-14 zone, there was general concern that it could allow some small commercial uses in a residential area. To prevent this,the Task Force recommendation specifically prohibits on-site services, retail, and eating/drinking establishments in this area unless they are accessory to a community, school, or recreational use. This would allow the possibility for a small business like an espresso stand or bicycle rental to locate in a park or the Community Center. A hearings examiner conditional use permit would be required. The Task Force also recommended that new, indoor recreational uses should be allowed in the R-14 zone to allow for redevelopment of the North Highlands Community Center property. Commercial Development Amendments in the Center Village Zone The CV zone is primarily oriented toward commercial development. Residential uses are allowed, but some limits must be put in place to ensure that as the area begins to redevelop, residential uses will not dominate this zone. As a result, the Task Force recommended increasing the minimum residential density in this area to 20 dwelling units per net acre. This will prevent lower density residential-only redevelopment from occurring in the commercial area. The Task Force also recommended a standard which 3 l Now `4410 requires commercial development in properties fronting on Sunset Boulevard. This proposes that commercial development occupy a minimum of 75% of the frontage on Sunset. Another Task Force recommendation was to allow a ten foot height bonus in the CV zone for properties that have first floor commercial development. This allows building of four stories of residential over first floor commercial development, an important incentive for the development of mixed use commercial and residential buildings. R-14 Zone Density The Task Force recommended raising the minimum density in the R-14 zone to ten units per acre to comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the Center Village Land Use Designation. The Task Force also recommended keeping the current bonus system in the R-14 zone that allows densities up to 18 units per net acre. In order to receive the bonus, however, the proposed development would have to offer one of the following desired items: alley access, open space, or affordable housing. Design Regulations The Task Force recommended implementation of Design Regulations for all properties within the Center Village land use designation. The regulations consist of standards and guidelines that would be applied to new development. Minimum Lot Size for Detached Residential Development The Task Force recommended that the minimum lot size for single-family detached residences in the R-14 zone be set at 5,000 square feet. Next Steps The Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force has recommended a complete package of land use and zoning changes. These proposed changes are currently in environmental review and the City's Environmental Review Committee is expected to issue an environmental determination on November 13, 2006. November 13th is also the scheduled date for a City Council public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan changes included in this recommendation. Upon completion of the environmental review and the public hearing processes,the City Council should consider the Task Force recommendations for adoption. Beyond possible adoption, the Task Force identified a number of issues beyond their immediate scope of work. Issues that the Task Force feels merit further consideration by the City, include: - Implementation of a minimum property maintenance code that would address potential life safety issues in existing units - Affordable housing strategies for the Highlands, and the City as a whole, including zoning incentives, tax incentives, and possible fee reductions - Consideration of storm water regulation implementation in the Highlands - Development of properties for parks and recreation uses by the City - Completion of a full sub area plan for the study area 4 - Consideration of implementation of Cottage Housing standards in the Highlands and Citywide. In addition to addressing these issues, the Task Force highly recommends that the City continue to work with a Citizen's Task Force in the revitalization and redevelopment of the Highlands Study Area. 5 0 n N. 01 i\ lama 0W3 or W LLIZO 034, .* t aza F-iI. U h -T zamaz -c r IA a = ui 0 ii W Z U al co Lo � co =r (4 rn N Q t LI el � w — at 2 Z =n N. o O W T CC 0i °cid3wki Lu K z co „5:-> ,i cl r n r� WV to t o c© > mac, v a v \ `7 CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 13th day of November, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, to consider the following: 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. For information, call 425-430-6510. Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Published King County Journal November 3, 2006 Account No. 50640 11/2/2006 - Notice sent to 108 Parties of Record per attached labels. L.Johnson 1 cc: Rebecca Lind Leslie Clark & Scott Missal Sherryann Allen Heather Allen-Lilly Short Cressman & Burgess 1217 N. 30th St 1212 N 30th St 999 3rd Ave, Ste 3000 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104 Judy Anderson Dennis Banes Steve Blackman 15258 Maple Drive 1909 Jones Ave NE 2100 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Julie Bray Raymond Breeden Fritz Brendemihl 1901 NE 20th Street 15279 Maple Dr 2116 High Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Karen Browne Robert & Roberta Butcher Robert Cave 2000 NE 20th St 2422 Jones Ave NE 1813 NE 24th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Timothy Charnley Don Charnley Peter Chee 14140 SE 171st Way#E204 15291 Maple Dr 1311 205th Ave NE Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Sammamish, WA 98074 Wan Chee Mare & Durward Clare Karen &Jay Cook 1605 E Lk Sammamish PI SE 1818 Jones Ave NE 14012 SE 133rd St Sammamish,WA 98075 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 John Cowan Jean Daniels Michael &Joan Davis 1830 NE 24th St 1707 Jones Ave NE 2020 NE 20th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Scott Day Sandel DeMastus Robert Dier 1932 NE 20th St 1137 Harrington Ave NE 1732 NE 24th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Robert & Deanna Dobak D Downing Terry Dutro 1700 NE 20th St 13807 139th Ave SE 10711 SE 30th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 Bellevue, WA 98004 Robert Eichler Carol Espy Reeves Annie & Learon Farnsworth 3455 Hunts Pt Rd 1624 Jones Ave NE 15263 Maple Dr Bellevue, WA 98004 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Karen Firinicum Randy Fung Karol & Eric Gabrielson 1302 Aberdeen Ave NE 2024 NW 57th St#302 2001 NE 20th St Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98107 Renton, WA 98056 Karol Gabrielson Shirley Gaut-Smith Richard Gersib 2001 NE 20th St 4102 NE 6th PI 8525 37th Ct E Renton. WA 98056 Renton. WA 98059 Lacey, WA 98503 Deborah, Charles, & Lenora Gibson Rick, Eli, & Lauralee Gordley Randy & Sheri Grittman 2008 NE 20th St 2010 Jones Ave NE 1909 Monterey Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Bill Grover David Halinen Patrick Hanis P.O. Box 2701 Halinen Law Offices, P.S. Hanis Greaney Attorneys Renton, WA 98056 2115 N 30th, Ste 203 6703 S 234th St, Ste 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Kent, WA Brett Hawton Barb Hics Don Hoffman 1308 Harrington Ave NE 1805 NE 20th St 375 Union Ave SE #143 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 Connie Jahes Bob Johns Barbara Joy Johnson 1835 NE 20th St 1601 114th SE #110 1824 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98004 Renton, WA 98056 Carolyn & Carmen Jones Kathryn Jones-Giel LaVonne Kahnell 408 Midway Ave 4935 Topaz Ave 15275 Maple Dr San Mateo, CA 94402 Rocklin, CA 95677 Renton, WA 98058 Brett Kappenman Darrell & Sue Kinzer Harry Kodis 1004 SW 4th PI 1733 NE 20th St 2619 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Rochelle Krispin Marie Larsen Tina Leiler 1109 30th St 2006 NE 20th St 3101 Meadow PI N Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Rick Lennon Alden Linn Stan Loreen 35815 SE David Powell Rd 2907 Park Ave N 13605 139th Ave SE Fall City, WA 98024 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 I Marcie Maxwell David McBride Charles McCord P. O. Box 2048 1706 Kennewick Ave NE 2802 Park Ave N Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Howard McOmber Albert Miller John & Joan Morelli 475 Olympia Ave NE 3108 Park Ave N 1726 NE 24th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Jessica Morgan John & Kelly Morgan Jane Nation 4200 Smithers Ave S #B201 2414 Jones Ave NE 25113 265th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056 Ravensdale, WA 98051 James Nelson Brad Nicholson Dan OBrien 1905 NE 20th St 2811 Dayton Ave NE 400 S 38th Ct Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 William O'Connor Michele Odren Pete Olds 10402 151st Ave SE 2030 NE 20th St 1314 N 26th St Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Marcie Palmer Inez Petersen Bill Pohl 2507 Park PI N 3306 Lake Washington Blvd #3 2310 Monterey Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Frank Poon Anthony&Annie Porcello Iola Puckett 5360 Col de Vars PI NW 1817 Jones Ave NE 15270 Pine Drive Issaquah, WA 98027 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Carol Pyka Rick & Karen Redfern Betty Remore 15291 Oak Drive 2000 NE 20th St 15277 Birch Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Sue Rider Ken & Edith Saunders Virginia Serwold 1835 NE 20th St 4200 Smithers Ave S#D201 15275 Oak Dr Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98058 Erma Sidebotham Jean Spencer Brian &Jean Stearns 1633 Jones Ave NE 1809 Jones Ave NE 2216 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Tim&Judy Stevens Joye Stranrent Thelma Sutherland 1408 N 28th St 15268 Maple Dr 1205 N 29th St Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Jim Sween Ken Torkelson Hanna Victory 2514 Jones Ave NE 1820 NE 17th PI 4200 Smithers Ave S #D103 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 Danny Weng Bob Wenzi Judith White 13508 1338th Ave SE Vineyards Construction LLC 201 Union Ave SE #59 Renton, WA 98059 P. O. Box 2401 Renton, WA 98059 Kirkland, WA 98083 Rod Williams Cliff Williams Larry Wood 2402 Jones Ave NE Vineyards Construction LLC 1155 Shelton Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 P. O. Box 2401 Renton, WA 98056 Kirkland, WA 98083 Pamela Wood Alice Zehnder Armando Zorbin REMAX 15245 Pine Drive 2400 NE 10th PI 3660 116th Ave NE Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98004 Lancaster-Barnes LLC Springbrook Associates Aqua Barn Ranch, Inc P. O. Box 25844 P. O. Box 978 115 Garfield St, #4139 Federal Way, WA 98093 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Sumas, WA 98295 CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 13th day of November, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, to consider the following: 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. For information, call 425-430-6510. 611vuw C/ Clot Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Published King County Journal November 3, 2006 Account No. 50640 October 23,2006 Nor, Renton City Council Minutes Page 364 Comprehensive Plan: 2006 Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Amendments I recommended a public hearing be set on 11/13/2006 to consider the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and the development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. Council concur. Utility: 2006 Emergency Utility Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement in the amount Power Generation, RH2 of$151,240 with RH2 Engineering, Inc. to provide engineering consulting Engineering services during construction of the 2006 Emergency Power Generation Project. Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval of Finance Committee Claim Vouchers 253355 -253808 and two wire transfers totaling Finance: Vouchers $5,269,221.21; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 66244 - 66409, one wire transfer,and 636 direct deposits totaling$2,001,990.63. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services: City Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending Hall Deli Lease, 5 Kwang concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the five-year lease with Corporation Kap S. Yang and Min J. Chang (doing business as 5 Kwang Corporation) for operation of the deli on the 3rd floor of City Hall and the espresso stand in the Renton Transit Center. The Committee further recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the lease. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation (Aviation) Transportation(Aviation) Committee Chair Palmer presented a report regarding Committee the severing of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Track at Transportation: BNSF Wilburton. The Committee recommended that the City of Renton formally Railroad Track, Severing at protest the rail abandonment petition filed by BNSF on 10/19/2006 before the Wilburton US Surface Transportation Board(STB Docket No. AB-6 [Sub. No.453X]). The reasons cited by the Committee for this protest action include the considerable damage to the City's economy posed by the impact of the rail abandonment on potential future location decisions by The Boeing Company, damage created by the discontinuation of the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train, and potential damage from not having this line available to pending users along the east shore of Lake Washington. The Committee remains fully supportive of the expeditious upgrade of the BNSF Cedar River Bridge to accommodate longer fuselage transport to the Renton Boeing Plant. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution#3838 A resolution was read opposing I-933, entitled "An Act Relating to Providing AJLS: Initiative 933 Fairness in Government Regulation of Property." MOVED BY BRIERE, (Government Regulation of SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. Private Property) CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Council President Corman encouraged citizens to attend the local talent events School District: IKEA at the Renton IKEA Performing Arts Center. Performing Arts Center Events OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDh.c1ILL • AI#: 9# re Submitting Data: For Agenda of: October 23, 2006 Dept/Div/Board.. Economic Development Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Staff Contact Rebecca Lind Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. 2006 Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments, Correspondence.. Concurrent Rezoning, Zoning Text Amendments, and Ordinance Development Agreement for the former Aqua Barn site Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Council Concur Legal Dept X Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... None Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted NA Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Set a public hearing on the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, concurrent rezonings, zoning text amendments, and development agreement for the former Aqua Barn site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set a public hearing for November 13, 2006. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 CPA Agenda Bill.doc (CY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, C-) NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC fam • ♦ PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: October 18, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: Alex Pietsch,Administrator IU f-6 r STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager(ext. 6588) SUBJECT: 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments ISSUE: Should the City Council set a public hearing for the 2006 annual Comprehensive Plan amendment recommendations including the Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments, concurrent property rezones, zoning text amendments, and a development agreement accompanying the revised Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning request for the former Aqua Barn property? RECOMMENDATION: Set the public hearing for November 13, 2006. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The Growth Management Act limits processing of Comprehensive Plan amendments to an annual review cycle. The Planning Commission has completed their review and recommendation on these applications and forwarded their recommendation to the Planning and Development Committee. Requested amendments are summarized in the attached materials. Summary of Amendments as modified through the Planning Commission review process #2006-M-1: Wan Chee Requested map amendment to change from Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial with R-8 zoning. 1315 N 30th St. #2006-M-2: Susan Larson-Kinzer Requested map amendment to change from Resource Conservation to Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning. 1733 N.E. 20th St,Kennydale Blueberry Farm. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\Public Hearing Issue Paper 2006.doc Randy Corman,Council Prb >=nt NiOf Page 2 of 3 October 18,2006 #2006-M-3: Manuel Rivera(Patrick Hanis,Hanis Greaney Attorneys) Requested map amendment to change Residential Multi-Family to Commercial Corridor with Commercial Office zoning. 851 Carr Road. #2006-M-4: Springbrook Associates (Cliff Williams,Vineyards Construction) Requested map amendment to change Residential Medium Density to Commercial Corridor with Commercial Office zoning. 244,807 sq. ft parcel located between S. 37th Street and S. 38th Court, east of Talbot Road. #2006-M-5: City of Renton Requested map amendment to change the area within the Puget Colony neighborhood from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning and in the unincorporated Kimberly Lane and Hideaway Homesites Subdivisions from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. #2006-M-6: City of Renton Requested map amendment for changes in the Center Village land use designation in the Highlands. This review will consider whether to expand the Center Village land use designation to include an area to the north of 16th St that is now within the Residential Medium Density land use designation. This area currently has R-10 zoning. A concurrent zoning change to R-14 would be considered if the City Council adopts the proposed implementing zoning text amendments package now being reviewed by the Highlands Task Force. If the proposed zoning text amendments are not approved, the zoning for this area would remain R-10. The review will also consider amending the existing Center Village mapped area to remove several areas south of Sunset Blvd to redesignate them as Residential Multi-Family Infill with RMF zoning and Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning. #2006-M-7 City of Renton: Requested map amendment for Commercial Designation and Residential Medium Density at the former Aqua Barn site. A development agreement limited the range of commercial uses to a specific list of activities and specifying design considerations is proposed concurrently with the recommendations supporting commercial zoning on a portion of this site. #2006-M-8 City of Renton(expansion of Application 2006-M-2): Requested map amendment to change Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning to Residential Low Density with concurrent rezoning to R-4 for a 3-acre area in Upper Kennydale. #2006-T-1: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. #2006 T-2 City of Renton h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\public hearing issue paper 2006.doc Randy Corman,Council 1 .dent Page 3 of 3 • October 18,2006 Requested text amendments to the Center Village Comprehensive Plan Policies. #2006-T-3: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Land Use and Community Design Elements with housekeeping changes. #2006-T-4: City of Renton Requested text amendment to update the Transportation Element to reflect changes in the capital projects. 2006-T-5: City of Renton Text amendment to allow existing Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone in the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation. Concurrent Rezoning Within the Center Village land use designation, concurrent rezoning would occur, amending the zoning map to change all currently zoned R-10 properties to R-14, and Residential Multi-Family zoned properties to Center Village. Properties changed from Residential Medium Density to Center Village along Harrington to 7th St would receive CV zoning. Properties changed from Residential Medium Density to Residential Single Family would receive R-8 zoning. Concurrent Zoning Text Amendments Amendments are proposed to the development regulations in the R-10,R-14 and Center Village (CV)zones. cc: Jay Covington Gregg Zimmerman Neil Watts h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\public hearing issue paper 2006.doc • ' . icy Ctev'k. CO py CITY OF RENTON 1 JAN 2 9 2007 2 RECEIVED CITY CLERKS OFFICE 3 hand' Delleqq 4 by ,Pobeif&We //: 1s . 5 6 7 8 BEFORE THE CENTRAL PUGET SOUND GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BOARD 9 STATE OF WASHINGTON 10 ROBERT CAVE and JOHN COWAN, ) 11 citizens of the city of Renton, ) Case No. 12 Petitioners, ) ) PETITION FOR REVIEW 13 v. ) 14 CITY OF RENTON, ) 15 ) Respondent. ) 16 17 Petitioners Robert Cave and John Cowan bring this appeal because the City of Renton 18 has failed to preserve petitioners' property rights, has violated mandates for early and 19 continuous public participation, and has violated Growth Management Act policies and 20 provisions calling for compact urban growth in downzoning petitioners' residential urban 21 property. Petitioners ask the Board to invalidate the City's downzone ordinance,and for their 22 23 petition allege as follows: 24 I. IDENTITY OF PETITIONERS 25 Petitioners are: 26 Robert Cave 27 813 N.E. 24'h Street 28 Renton,WA 98056 GENDLER&MANN,LIP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 n; �Q Seattle,WA 98101 C PETITION FOR REVIEW - 1 1. y eoVrn9-/on Phone: (20 )621-8 28 Larry e Pidsc'' Zane-tta F'onfes Rebecca Lind 1 (425)235-1041 2 John Cowan 3 1830 N.E. 24'h Street Renton,WA 98056 4 (425) 226-1174 5 II. PETITIONERS' ATTORNEYS: 6 Petitioners are represented in these proceedings by: 7 8 Michael W. Gendler Gendler& Mann, LLP 9 1424 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1015 Phone: (206) 621-8868 10 Fax: (206) 621-0512 11 E-mail: gendler@gendlermann.com 12 III. DATE OF CHALLENGED ACTION: 13 This petition challenges Renton City Ordinance No. 5234,which was adopted by the 14 Renton City Council on November 27,2006. Notice of adoption of Ordinance No. 5234 was 15 published on December 1, 2006. A copy of Ordinance No. 5234 is attached as Exhibit 1. 16 17 IV. ISSUES PRESENTED FOR RESOLUTION: 18 4.1 Did the City of Renton violate the mandates of the Growth Management Act 19 for early and continuous public participation (RCW 36.70A.140, RCW 36.70A.020(11))? 20 4.2 Did the City violate the Growth Management Act provisions for notice 21 reasonably calculated to alert the affected public(RCW 35.70A.035),where the notice of City 22 23 Council public hearing provided no identification of or information about the proposed 24 downzone? 25 4.3 Did the City of Renton's downzone violate Growth Management Act policies 26 and provisions, and the policies and provisions of the City of Renton Code and 27 Comprehensive Plan for urban growth within urban growth areas that are already characterized 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 98101 Phone: (206)621-8868 PETITION FOR REVIEW - 2 Fax: (206)621.0512 1 by urban development and have adequate existing public facility and service capacities to 2 facilitate and accommodate such growth? 3 4.4 Did the City of Renton's downzone violate the policies and provisions of the 4 5 Growth Management Act,City of Renton Code, and Renton Comprehensive Plan by failing 6 to preserve petitioners' property rights in downzoning their urban residential property? 7 4.5 Did the City of Renton violate the policies and provisions of the Growth 8 Management Act,the Renton City Code,and the Renton Comprehensive Plan which require 9 consistency between development regulations and the Plan? 10 11 4.6 Did the City of Renton violate its Comprehensive Plan by morphing a proposed 12 Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone specific to one three-acre parcel of agriculturally 13 designated and zoned property into a rezone to downzone 49 acres of property designated and 14 zone urban residential R-8,rather than initiating the downzone as a new proposal in the first 15 quarter of the year in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan? 16 17 4.7 Did the morphing of a proposal to redesignate and rezone a single three-acre 18 agricultural parcel for residential use into a downzone of 49 acres already designated and 19 zoned residential violate requirements for early and continuous public participation and for 20 public notice calculated to provide notice to property owners that their rights and interests 21 would be affected? 22 23 4.8 Did the City fail to show its work to justify the downzone,where it entered no 24 findings of fact, provided no rationale for its decision in its ordinance, and where the 25 downzone has irregular and illogical boundaries? 26 4.9 Was the decision to downzone 49 acres of urban property already designated 27 for residential development clearly erroneous,where the downzone is contrary to provisions 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 98101 Phone: (206)621.6868 PETITION FOR REVIEW - 3 Fax: (206)621-0512 1 and policies governing residential urban growth in urban areas which have sufficient 2 infrastructure capacity,where the downzone boundaries are irregular and illogical,and where 3 the presence of wetlands suggested as a rationale for the downzone applies only to some 4 5 portions of the area downzoned? 6 4.10 Did the downzone violate the State Environmental Policy Act? 7 V. PETITIONERS' STANDING: 8 Petitioners have standing pursuant to RCW 36.70A.280(2)(d) because they are 9 aggrieved and adversely affected by the City's action. Petitioners own property within the area 10 11 that has been downzoned. The City's action prejudices petitioners by depriving them of the 12 rights they previously had enjoyed to use and develop their urban residential property. The 13 City of Renton was required to consider petitioners' interests before downzoning their 14 property. An order by the Board finding noncompliance or invalidity of the downzone would 15 substantially eliminate or redress the prejudice to petitioners caused by the downzone. 16 17 Petitioners additionally have standing pursuant to RCW 36.70A.280(2)(b)because petitioners 18 participated in writing before the City regarding this matter. 19 VI. LENGTH OF HEARING: 20 Petitioners estimate that the hearing will take one-half day or less. 21 VII. RELIEF REQUESTED: 22 23 Petitioners request that the Board find the challenged Ordinance No. 5234 to be not in 24 compliance with the Growth Management Act,and determine that the ordinance substantially 25 interferes with the goals of the Act and therefore is invalid. 26 27 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 96101 Phone:PETITION FOR REVIEW - 4 Fax: 62 1-0 516 2 1 VIII. CERTIFICATION: 2 The undersigned attorney representative of petitioners has read the foregoing petition 3 and believes the contents to be true. 4 5 Dated this day of January, 2007. 6 Respectfully submitted, 7 GENDLER &MANN, LLP 8 9 By: 10 Michael W. Gendler 11 WSBA No. 8429 Attorneys for Petitioners 12 \Cave Cowan(Den)\Cave Cowan v City\Petition for Review 1 26 07.wpd 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 GENDLER&MANN,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 98101 PETITION FOR REVIEW - 5 Phone: (206)621.8868 Fax: (206)621-0512 (11 v .f copy CITY OF RENTON Larry War ten Alex P1ef5c/. JAN 29 2007 2 Zan e Fonts RECEIVED I h4 CITY CLERKS OFFICE t 3 Rebecca �C ;� NA/ 4 Have'-ode li ver ed BEFORE THE CENTRAL PUGET SOUND1)-6/ -P?ie i Peler en. GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BOARD 5 STATE OF WASHINGTON 6 7 Inez Somerville Petersen,a citizen of the City of ) Renton, ) 8 ) Case No. 07- Pro Se Petitioner, ) 9 ) v. ) PETITION FOR REVIEW 10 City of Renton, a State of Washington Municipal ) Corporation, ) 11 ) Respondent, ) 12 ) 13 14 I. PETITIONER AND AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 1.1 The following resident of the City of Renton,a Pro Se Petitioner, hereby petitions the Central Puget Sound 15 Growth Management Hearings Board as follows: Inez Somerville Petersen 16 3306 Lake Wash Blvd North#3,Renton WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 17 1.2 Inez Somerville Petersen will act as the Pro Se Authorized Representative. 18 II. ACTION CHALLENGED 19 2.1 The subject of this petition is: 20 a. The set of City of Renton(City) Ordinances adopted on November 27, 2006; specifically. Ordinances 5228, 5229, 5230, 5231, 5232,5233. 5234 hereafter referred to as Ordinances. Exhibit A. b. The 2006 Comprehensive Plans(CP)Amendments to which these Ordinances apply. A listing of the 21 resulting changes to the CPA are shown on the"Looseleaf Insert"dated November 27,2006. Exhibit B. 22 2.2 The Affidavit of Publication for these Ordinances is dated December 1, 2006. Exhibit C. 23 III. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES 24 3.1 Public Participation and Notice 25 a. With regard to said Ordinances and the related 2006 CP Amendments,the City of Renton failed to provide effective notice to adequately alert the Public regarding public hearings and ways they could participate. In ... addition,the City did not facilitate early and continuous public participation.. Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW- 1 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543, Fax 888-253-1074 1 b. The City's actions and inactions with regard to the Growth Management Act(GMA)are so blatant as to prompt me to uncharted waters to petition the CPSGMHB. Petitioner seeks to prove the allegations by presenting: 2 (1) The FACTS regarding opportunities for the City to follow GMA. (2) The LEGAL QUESTIONS posed by the facts,and 3 (3) The City's DUTY TO ACT under the Law 4 3.2 Opportunities to follow GMA 5 a. FACTS - Planning Commission public hearing, 2006 CP Amendments September 20, 2006 6 Narrative: Petitioner was in attendance at this public hearing and provides this narrative from first hand observations and knowledge. • The Planning Commission public hearing was extremely well attended. Participants overflowed the Council Chambers and crowded into the hallway outside the meeting room and beyond the elevators. 8 • The City had made no provision for overflow seating. On April 17, 2006,approximately 300 participants had attended a public hearing relating to the same high density zoning being discussed on 9 September 20th,and approximately 400 participants had attended a follow-on public hearing on May 8, 2006. This was a clue to the City that interest was extremely high regarding the proposed 2006 CP 10 Amendments. • At the time,the City had over 1300 "parties of record"interested in the proposed CP Amendments. 11 • On the night of September 20th,some participants,with no place to sit and who did not wish to stand for several hours, left the meeting as it began. 12 • The previous Planning Commission agendas set a precedent which allowed members of the Public three (3)minutes per proposal to comment. This precedent was not followed on September 20, 2006. 13 • According to the Agenda for that night's public hearing,the Public's opportunity to speak was reduced by the taking the thirteen(13)proposed CP Amendments and grouping them into eight(8)categories, with public comment to be taken after the staff presentation on each category. With regard to the 14 category with three CP Amendments in it,this limited the Public's opportunity to speak to as little as sixty(60)seconds per proposed CP Amendment. 15 • In the case of the Highlands Amendments,where two CP Amendments were placed in one category, the participant was allotted 120 seconds per proposal. Highlands Redevelopment was the subject I 16 mentioned above which resulted in the largest public response to a public hearing in the history of the City--and not just once,but three times! First 100 citizens,then 300 and then 400 citizens came to City 17 Hall to protest proposed high density zoning and use of a Declaration of Blight. • In the first ten(10)minutes of the hearing,the Commissioners changed the Agenda by deciding to run 18 through all the staff presentations first and then proceeding to one audience comment which would cover all the proposed CP Amendments. • Some people left after this change in the Agenda as they would have to wait too long to speak. 19 • Audience comment began at 8 p.m. (the meeting started shortly after 6 p.m.). • About twenty(20)minutes into the Audience Comment period,the Commissioners changed the Agenda 20 again because members of the Public were attempting to speak three(3)minutes per CP Amendment. • The Commissioners ruled that participants could only have three(3)minutes total for all thirteen(13) 21 CP Amendments. The early participants had been given three(3)minutes per CP Amendment. Now the later participants were denied this same opportunity. 2 2 • Some participants left as a result of this ruling. • Not long after the"three-minute total"ruling,another change to the Agenda was made. Participants 2 3 were told they could submit written comments after the meeting because the Commissioners weren't going to make final deliberations until October 4,2006. 24 • No Notice to this effect was published giving other members of the Public an opportunity to submit comments after September 20, 2006,and people who already left due to poor meeting management e did 25 not get to hear the announcement. • Also,no parties of record were notified that the period for written testimony had been extended. Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-2 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton,WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543, Fax 888-253-1074 1 • Sue Rider spoke on the GMA requirements relating to the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. She can be seen on the video providing her back-up data to the Commission;however,the CP Amendment file which I 2 later viewed contained none of her materials. • I have a video of a portion of the meeting where it is evident that the Chairman Pro Tern did not 3 understand his obligations under GMA in overseeing a public hearing. It is a time consuming job to copy DVDs, so I will provide the discs later. 4 • Letters were entered into the record at the beginning of the hearing by merely listing the writer's name and a short title, rather than reading the letters"into the record." The content of these letters then 5 became "for Commissioners'eyes only." The citizens who participated by mail were not given the same opportunity to have their comments entered "into the record"for other participants to hear as those who offered their comments orally. 6 • Citizens have sixty(60)days from the publication date of this hearing,which was December 1,2006,in this case to petition the CPSGMHB. That 60-day window expires on January 30, 2006. As of January 7 26,2007,the minutes of the September 20, 2006,Planning Commission hearing had not yet been published. 8 • So many amendments were crammed into one hearing that there was not sufficient time to enable meaningful public review and comment. Changing the meeting format several times in ways that made 9 the opportunity for participation unequal occurred.as well as failure to provide notice about the comment extension time. 10 • The 2006 CP Amendments,excluding the City-sponsored ones, were all for single property owners who wanted to develop their property. The Comp Plan wasn't providing a 20-year plan, it was being revised 11 on a developer-by-developer basis. Isn't that similar to "spot zoning"? Exhibits: 12 (1) Affidavit of Publication for September 14, 2006, Exhibit DI (2) Parties of Record=over 1300 parties, Exhibit D2 13 (3) Planning Commission meeting agenda, Exhibit El (4) Economic Development Director's schedule for Declaration of Blight, Exhibit E2 "" "14 (5) Video(DVD)of meeting.Exhibit F(to be provided later) (6) Example of letter from Brad Nicholson which was not read"into the record" Exhibit G 15 (7) Copy of email between myself and Economic Development Director's administrator regarding minutes being unavailable for the September 20,2006.public hearing,Exhibit H 16 b. FACTS - City Council public hearing, 2006 CP Amendments 17 November 13, 2006 Narrative: Petitioner was in attendance at this public hearing and provides this narrative from first hand observations 18 and knowledge. • Affidavit of Publication for the City Council public hearing is dated November 3,2006. The wording on 19 the Notice immediately became a point of controversy: "2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments, concurrent rezonings,text amendments,and development agreement for former Aqua Barn site." 20 • A one line sentence hardly did justice to the lengthy agenda covering the proposed 2006 CP Amendments. A reader of the Notice would assume it was all about the Aqua Barn. Without effective 21 notice,the public did not have a reasonable opportunity to participate. • Parties of Record= 108,and one has to wonder how 1300+interested parties dwindled down to a little 22 over a 100 in less than two months. This notice should have been reasonably calculated to reach the affected and interested individuals,but that was not the case. And even if it did, who could have 2 3 determined what the real agenda was from a one-sentence description? • I received the Agenda for the City Council public hearing on November 9,2006,and was puzzled by the description too, so I called the City Clerk to get a clarification. 2 4 • The City Clerk confirmed that there had been considerable discussion regarding the wording,but the Economic Development Director wanted the Notice worded as it was. 2 5 • The Minutes of the City Council for November 13, 2006,covering the public hearing confirm the long agenda covered by one sentence. Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-3 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 1 • The public hearing was very poorly attended;and during this hearing and subsequent Council meetings. citizens indicated they were not properly informed. One gentleman even abandoned his car in the snow 2 to get to the Council meeting in time to voice his protest that he had missed the hearing because he didn't know about it. 3 • In Exhibit M there is a comment by Mayor Koelker that the City Council public hearing was just a "courtesy" hearing. I have been a City Hall watcher for many years,and I've never heard any city leade 4 refer to the Council's public hearing on CP Amendments as a "courtesy" hearing. The Council held a public hearing for the proposed 2005 CP Amendments on November 21.2005,and no mention was made then that it was a "courtesy hearing." The Planning Commission's public hearing for the proposed 5 2005 CP Amendments was held on November 2. 2005. 6 Exhibits: (1) Affidavit of Publication is dated November 3,2006, Exhibit I 7 (2) Parties of Record= 108 parties, ." Exhibit J (3) Agenda for Council meeting of November 13,2006, Exhibit K 8 (4) Minutes of the City Council meeting of November 13, 2006, Exhibit L (5) Comments of interest from Council meetings November 13,2006 and on. Exhibit M 9 c. FACTS - Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Task Force 1 o October 7 through Nov 13, 2006 11 Narrative: Formation of a Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Task Force was requested by the City Council during the summer,and the year was drawing to a close. Mayor Koelker and her staff had taken no action to form the task force, so the rush was on in order that recommendations could be made and the Highlands C' 12 Amendments adopted by year's end. • On October 4, 2006,the City's Economic Development Director wrote a memorandum regarding formation 13 of the Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Task Force. • On that same day communications went back and forth between City's Economic Development Director 14 and the President of the Highlands Community Association, which indicated there was not a clear understanding among parties as to the scope and who could participate;and it was obvious no provision 15 was being made for Notice. "Insiders"knew,but no one else. • The instructions changed several times over several days regarding how the public was to participate. It 16 was"send an email"one day and use "this form"the next. No organized way of alerting the public was undertaken to inform them that a task force was being formed. 17 • On October 6, 2006,Brad Nicholson wrote to Tern Briere, Chairman of the Planning and Development Committee,to ask about the task force's role compared to the Planning Commission. He wanted to know which body was to be given substantial weight. 18 • Later that day Terri Briere replied that the Planning Commission had already made recommendations to the Council,but,as a result of citizen concerns,the Council had agreed that the Task Force would take on the 19 role of the Planning Commission,but no new testimony would be taken. Briere said in her reply that the time schedule was compressed to allow time to make the changes to the CP. 20 • There is no Council record to support Briere's contention that the Task Force was to take on the role of the Planning Commission,and RMC does not provide for this. 21 • There is no statute that required the Highlands-related CP Amendments sponsored by the City to be adopted with the other CP Amendments proposed for 2006. The rush was in the City's mind. 22 • On October 9,2006,the Council voted to approve the members recommended by Terri Briere. There were unsubstantiated and nasty comments made about the HCA President,who had worked tirelessly to keep the 2 3 community informed during the year where the City had made no effort. He was not allowed to participate and was probably the most logical and well qualified citizen to participate. I have video of this meeting, which I will provide later. 24 • The first meeting of the task force was on October 10,2006. They met a 7:30 a.m.,in the morning which precluded some willing citizens(and stakeholders) from participating because they could not take time off 25 of work for the duration of the task force. Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-4 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 1 • No signs were posted directing the public to the meeting;and even one of the task force members(Kumar) missed the first two meetings because he did not know where to go,and it was so early no one else was in 2 the building to ask. • On October 10, 2006, I coordinated with Rob McKenna's Ombudsman, Greg Overstreet,regarding the 3 Task Force's decision to keep the meetings private and to not allow one of their members to video tape the meetings. And on October 20,2006,I contacted him again because no minutes were being taken of Task 4 Force meetings so others could be kept informed. None were ever taken. • On October 13, 2006.the Task Force Chairman, Kirk Moore,invited the task force members and City staff 5 to meet on Saturdays at Starbucks to engage in"frank discussion"about zoning issues. I alerted the City Attorney,and he stopped the illegal meetings. I also alerted him that the Task Force meetings were not listed under"Public Meetings"on the City's website. No action was taken. 6 • On October 14, 2006,I contacted the Staff to see why Task Force meeting packets were not available on the City's website as Planning Commission packets are. No response received, and the information was 7 never posted to the site. • On October 15, 2006, Brad Nicholson contacted Terri Briere(Planning and Development Chairman) 8 about wanting to participate on the Task Force and never being given an opportunity. He had seen Kirk Moore's invitation to meet at Starbucks and actually went there so he could join. Briere was on vacation so 9 the Council Liaison responded.indicating that the City was not giving Notification and not taking testimony at the meetings,but the Task Force would be presenting their recommendations to the Council 10 on November 13, 2006. Doesn't that equate to no public participation? • On October 30,2006,Notice was finally published in the newspaper with two meetings remaining. • November 7. 2006,was the final meeting of the Highlands Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning 11 Task Force. • On November 13,2006, without any testimony from the Public,with no viable Notice,and with no proper 12 public hearing to inform the Public,Kirk Moore presented the task force recommendations in the Committee of the Whole,a meeting which usually consists of"dry" presentations of the staff to the 13 Council with few members of the public in attendance. • On November 13,2006, a SEPA Appeal was submitted relating to the Staffs original high density zoning 14 for which there had been no EIS. As a result, the Council extended the Moratorium. • I have video of the Task Force presentation during the Committee of the Whole,but even the Committee of 15 the Whole was not publicized so that all interested citizens could have a reasonable chance of finding out about it and attending. 16 • There never was a proper public hearing to address the Task Force Recommendations. Hearing the proposal one hour before a public hearing in the next hour doesn't facilitate effective public participation. 17 • As shown in Exhibit N, had not the SEPA Appeal been submitted,the Council planned to adopt the task force recommendations the same evening as Kirk Moore presented them,thus robbing the public of a reasonable opportunity to review and comment on the proposed changes before the Council adopted them. 18 Exhibits: 19 (1) October 4,2006,MEMORANDUM from City's Economic Development Director to form the task force, Exhibit N 20 (2) October 4,2006,email exchange between HCA President and Economic Development Director indicating confusion reigned regarding scope,participation and notice Exhibit 0 21 (3) October 6,2006,Brad Nicholson and Terri Briere discuss the roll of Task Force v Planning Commission,no public participation would be allowed, compressed schedule, Exhibit P 22 (4) October 10, 2006,requested help from AG(Overstreet,the Ombudsman)because meetings were being kept private no video taping allowed, and no minutes were being recorded, Exhibit Q (5) October 13,2006. invitation to Task Force and City staff to meet at Starbucks to discuss zoning. 23 and note to City Attorney about Starbucks and task force meetings not being listed on the City's website under Public Meetings, Exhibit R 24 (6) October 14,2006,agenda packets not available on line as they are for the Planning Commission, Exhibit S 25 (7) October 15.2006,Brad Nicholson regarding lack of information or opportunity to participate, City's position that Notice is not required Exhibit T �• (8) October 30,2006,Affidavit of Publication for last two meetings of task force. Exhibit U Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-5 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543, Fax 888-253-1074 1 r.. 2 3.3 Legal Questions 3 There are many GMA questions raised by the way the City of Renton handled its 2006 CP Amendments,and I've included only a portion of the documentation I have. Questionable public hearings go back to April 27,2006. I 4 wonder now as I type this Petition if I am overly concerned about the "rule of law," or whether my sense of justice is rightly offended by the blatant manner in which the City of Renton managed its duties under the GMA during last 5 year. I do not believe that what I have described under FACTS shows that the City was sincerely trying to follow GMA. I believe no one has called the City to task before,and employees have fallen into the habit of doing things 6 "their way." 7 Immediately after the September 20, 2006,public hearing and continuing to the end of the year, Citizens gave the City feedback which went by the wayside. I think it mattered more that the City met a schedule than 8 whether they were guided by the goals of GMA. 9 a. Legal Issue #1 Public Participation 10 (1) Considering that written comments carry just as much weight as oral comments,did the City 11 satisfy the requirements of RCW 36.70A.140 when it did not read letters"into the record"during a public hearing? (2) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.020 concerning property rights when it proceeded to plan for a Declaration of Blight"on a fast track"without the public participation of those who would be loosing their homes by 12 virtue of that Declaration of Blight? (3) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(2)when it did not provide the public with another 13 opportunity for review and comment after the Highlands Comprehensive Amendment and Zoning Task Force made its recommendations on November 13.2006? The old proposal was being appealed,not the new Kirk Moore `". 14 proposal. (4) Did the City fail to involve the citizens in the planning process as required by RCW 36.70.020 15 (11)when it did not provide for overflow seating for the Planning Commission meeting of September 20, 2006? (5) Did the City exclude the Public by the way in which the Highlands Comprehensive and Zoning 16 Task Force was conducted: i.e.,willing members turned away,closing the meeting.no minutes kept,purposeful inconvenient time? (6) Did the City provide early and continuous public participation in the case of the proposed CP 17 Amendment for Highlands with only one open house held on November 15,2005,where maps were handed out indicating early and continuous coordination with the developers? 18 (7) Based on events related to September 20, 2006,November 13,2006,and October 10-Nov 7, did the City show a pattern of not providing early and continuous public participation as required by RCW 36.70A.070 19 and RCW 36.70A.140? 2 o b. Legal Issue#2 Notice 21 (1) Regarding the City Council public hearing of November 13,2006,did the City violate RCW 22 36.70A.035 by failing to provide notice which is reasonably calculated to alert the public to the major issues at hand and the ways in which to further participate in the planning process? 2 3 (2) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(b)by not publishing a Notice in a timely manner for the meetings of the Highlands Comprehensive Amendment and Zoning Task Force? 2 4 (3) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(b)by not publishing a Notice alerting the Public that written comments would be accepted after the September 20. 2006, Planning Commission public hearing? (4) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(c)by distributing notices to only 108 parties of record for 25 the November 13,2006,City Council hearing on proposed CP Amendments, when there were over 1300 persons with known interest for the Planning Commission public hearing just a few weeks previous? wr Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-6 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543, Fax 888-253-1074 1 (5) Did the City violate RCW 36.70A.035(c) by not notifying interested parties of the presentation which was to be given by the Highlands Comprehensive Amendment and Zoning Task Force on November 13, 2 2006? 3 3.4 City's Duty to Act 4 a. RCW 36.70A,the Washington State Growth Management Act(GMA),requires the City of Renton to development and implement a CP which provides for early and continuous public participation and effective notice, 5 among other requirements,when CP amendments are adopted. Exhibit V b. Requirements of the GMA are codified in Renton Municipal Code(RMC): Exhibit W 6 RMC 2-10-1 thru 2-10-3 Operation of the Planning Commission RMC 4-1-020 Adopts GMA 7 RMC 4-1-060 Codifies the purpose and description of the City's CP RMC 4-8-090 Public Notice Requirements 8 RMC 4-9-020 CP adoption and amendment process 9 c. Citizen participation is defined in the first section of Renton's CP in a short section which reads as follows: "Because public input is vital to effective planning,the City encourages community groups,businesses, 10 and individuals to work together with City staff to identify and achieve community goals. The following principles should guide all future planning efforts: 11 • Encourage and facilitate public participation in all planning processes and make those processes user- friendly. 12 • Consider the interests of the entire community and the goals and policies of this Plan before making land use decisions. Proponents of change in land use should demonstrate that the proposed change responds to 13 the interests of the neighborhoods most directly impacted by the project. • Ensure that the process which identifies new commercial areas or expands existing areas considered the 14 impacts of potential development on affected residential neighborhoods and results in decisions that are consistent with other policies in the Comprehensive Plan. 15 • Balance the interests of the commercial and residential communities when considering modifications to zoning or development regulations. 16 • Encourage and emphasize open communications between developers and neighbors about compatibility issues." 17 V. STATEMENT OF STANDING 18 5.1 The Petitioner is a citizen and resident of Renton who participated orally and in writing before the City of Renton many times regarding the matter on which review is being requested and,therefore. has standing to file a 19 petition under RCW 36.70A.280(2)(b). 20 VI. HEARING LENGTH 21 6.1 The estimated time for presentation of the Petitioners'arguments and evidence is one-half day. 22 VII. RELIEF SOUGHT 23 7.1 Petitioner seeks the following relief pursuant to pursuant to RCW 36.70A.300 and.302,relating to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and related Ordinances: 24 25 Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-7 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N 43 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 • 1 (a) A final order finding Renton in non-compliance with the goals and requirements of RCW 36.70A 2 (b) A final order withdrawing said Ordinances and the related 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments which were adopted without valid public participation and notice. This may be too extreme,but when a city holds 3 two invalid public hearings and knowingly proceeds to put expediency over GMA requirements,then such brazen disregard for the GMA should not go unnoticed by the CPSGMHB. 4 (c) A final order requiring the City to hold valid public hearings, with effective notice, for the purpose of providing proper public participation in the re-adoption of the proposed 2006 CP Amendments. If not this,then a 5 final order requiring the City to follow the GMA in its adoption of 2007 CP Amendments. 6 VIII. AFFIRMATION 7 8.1 The undersigned has read the foregoing Petition for Review and believe the contents to be true. 8 DATED this 30th day of January. 2007. 9 10 • Inez Pe en, Pro Se Petitioner 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ter.- Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-8 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton,WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 1 ATTACHMENT S 2 3 Ordinances, .ExhibitA List of CP Amendments relating to Ordinances, Exhibit B 4 Affidavit of Publication for these Ordinances is dated December 1, 2006,Exhibit C 5 Relating to Planning Commission public hearing of September 20, 2006 (1) Affidavit of Publication for September 14, 2006, Exhibit Dl 6 (2) Parties of Record=over 1300 parties,Exhibit D2 (3) Planning Commission meeting agenda. Exhibit El 7 (4) Economic Development Director's schedule for Declaration of Blight, Exhibit E2 (5) Video(DVD)of meeting,Exhibit F(to be provided later) (6) Example of letter from Brad Nicholson which was not read"into the record" Exhibit G 8 (7) Copy of email between myself and Economic Development Director's administrator regarding minutes being unavailable for the September 20, 2006,public hearing,Exhibit H 9 Relating to Planning Commission public hearing of September 20, 2006 10 (1) Affidavit of Publication is dated November 3.2006, Exhibit I (2) Parties of Record= 108 parties, ." Exhibit J 11 (3) Agenda for Council meeting of November 13,2006, Exhibit K (4) Minutes of the City Council meeting of November 13, 2006, Exhibit L 12 (5) Comments of interest from Council meetings November 13,2006 and on, Exhibit M 13 Relating to Highlands Comprehensive Amendment and Zoning Task Force 14 October 10, 2006 thru November 7, 2006 (1) October 4,2006,MEMORANDUM from the City's Economic Development Director to form 15 the task force, Exhibit N (2) October 4. 2006,email exchange between HCA President and Economic Development Director indicating confusion reigned regarding scope,participation and notice Exhibit 0 16 (3) October 6,2006,Brad Nicholson and Tern Briere discuss the roll of Task Force v Planning Commission,no public participation would be allowed, compressed schedule. Exhibit P 17 (4) October 10,2006.requested help from AG(Overstreet,the Ombudsman)because meetings were being kept private no video taping allowed,and no minutes were being recorded, Exhibit Q 18 (5) October 13,2006, invitation to Task Force and City staff to meet at Starbucks to discuss zoning, and note to City Attorney about Starbucks and task force meetings not being listed on the City's 19 website under Public Meetings. Exhibit R (6) October 14,2006,agenda packets not available on line as they are for the 20 Planning Commission, Exhibit S (7) October 15, 2006,Brad Nicholson regarding lack of information or opportunity to participate. City's position that Notice is not required Exhibit T 21 (8) October 30,2006,Affidavit of Publication for last two meetings of task force. Exhibit U 22 City's Duty to Act 23 Pro Se Recap of GMA,RCW 36.70A, with case law. Exhibit V Pro Se Recap of RMC, Exhibit W 24 25 Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW-9 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton.WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 1 2 3 PROOF OF SERVICE 4 On the 30th day of January 2007, I certify that I hand delivered this document with exhibits to: 5 1. Four(4)copies to the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board at 800 Fifth Avenue 6 #2356. Seattle, WA.on the date shown above. 7 2. One(1)copy to the City Clerk of the City of Renton at 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA,on the date shown above. 8 3. One(1)copy to the mayor of the City of Renton at 1055 S. Grady Way. Renton, WA,on the date shown 9 above. 4. One(1)copy to the City Attorney for the City of Renton at the offices of Warren Barber&Fontes PS, 10 located at 100 S Second St,Renton, WA, on the date shown above. 11 12 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and 13 correct. 14 Dated this 30th day of January, Year 2007,in Renton.WA. 15 16 1 7 Inez Petersen Declarant and Pro Se Authorized Representative 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 '*rn, Inez Somerville Petersen PETITION FOR REVIEW- 10 3306 Lake Wash Blvd N#3 Renton, WA 98056 Tel 425-255-5543,Fax 888-253-1074 CITY OF RENTON. WASIJTNGTOI\ ORDINANCE.NO AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2006 AMENDMENTS TO TEIE; ("1TY'S 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MAPS AND DATA 1N CONDINCCION THEREWITH. WHEREAS. the City Council of the City of Renton has heretofore adopted and tiled a 'Cornprchcnsisc Plan''and the City Council of Renton has implemented and amended said "Comprehensive Plan" from time to time, together with the adoption of various codes, reports and records, and WH ERE.AS. the Planning Commission has heretofore recommended to the City Council,. 1`rum time to time, certain amendments to the City's''Comprehensive Plan''. and WIIERE:AS, the City of Renton, pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act, has been required to review its-Comprehensive Plan-;and "r WHEREAS, the City has held a public hearing on this matter,and WIiEREAS, the Planning Commission has made certain findings and recommendations to the City Council, including implementing policies, and WIIEREAS.,the City Council has duly determined aRer due consideration of the testinnony and evidence before it that it is advisable and appropriate to amend and modify the Citv's 'Comprehcnsivc Plan", and W IIEREAS. such modification and elements for the"Comprehensive Plan"arc in the best interest for the public benefit. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COINC.II, OF THE CITY OF REls 1 ON. WAS!IPcOTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS- Exhibit A Page 1 ORDINANCE N'O `, > SF,-('TIO:N 1 The"Comprehensive Plan, maps, data and ral;nris in support of the"Comprehensive Plan" are hereby modified,amended and adopted as said"Conrptchensive Plane consisting of the fbllc wino elements Capital Facilities, Community Design, I.and I se and Land Use Map, and Transportation as shown on Attachments A, B, C, 1)and Li and incorporated hciein as it fully set forth SECTION It The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planninu Department Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to make the necessary changes on said City's"Comprehensive Plan"and the maps in conjunction therewith to evidence the atorementioued live amendments. SECTION III. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to File this ordinance as provided by law, and a complete copy of said document likewise being on rile with the office of the City Clerk of the City of Renton SECTION IV. 'phis ordinance shall he effective upon its passage. approval and live days after publication. PASSED FIY"THE CITY COUNCIL this ?,th day of 200o reZAI .L. `41 _.�✓:ups ✓` Bcnnnie t. Walton, City(clerk APPROVED BY TI M, MAYOR this 7! i day of Nov „_' r '006 i 1 Kathy Keolker, Mayor Exhibit A Page 2 ,0000, ORDINANCE NO 5 2)8 Appr ed as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date olPublication. 1.2; /'2,106 C OR D 1304 1 1/20/06ima Nio-fre d CAA a C° Pi CI*1 a t'V't e..44"t tvf- pe,(00,2J +; 72,-7A, Exhibit A Page 3 CITY OF RENTON WASI IINU1ON ORDINANCE NO. 5229 1N ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, 1%ASIIINCION, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION Of CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (('ARK ROAD PROPERTIES) FROM RESIDENTIAL, R [)1 AC (R-S) AND RI?SIDI N FIAL I() DE/AC (R-l0) ZONING TO RES[DEN VIAL 14 DI'/AC (R-I4), FIE: NO. LEA-05-163(CPA 2006-M-3). \1IIERIAS, under Section 4 2O20 of Chapter 2. Zoning Districts I ses and Standards. of title IV (Do clupment Regulations), ut Ordinance Nu. ,4200 entitled -Code ul General Ordinaries of idle CitS of Renton_ Washington- as amended, and the reaps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinhelo�', described has previoush been zoned as Residential S durae IR-Sj and Residential If)duiac(R-10). and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding (Or change of zone classification of said property I his matter tills referred to the Planning Commission Or investigation. study. and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20. 2000, and the matter ,u as considered ry the Planning Commission, and the zoning, request is in contormits with the I ity's Comprehensive Plan, as amended_ and the ('bv Council has considered all matters relevant thereto. and all parries have been heard appearing in snplrorl rheieot 01 opposition thereto, NOW. THEREFORE THE CITY f Ot NCIL OF THE CITY OF REN1ON, WASIIINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS SI:( 1IO.N I he follow i described property in the City ni Renton is herrhr rezoned to Residential 11 dinar, as ieienrhelow specified the Economic Development. 'Neighborhoods and Straier,_ic Planning Department ,<ldinniistratrui auilirnizcd and Exhibit A Page 4 %up., t.....e. iwimpt. ORDINAMT NO E229, _ dirtiyloil to ohanuy the maps ot dm/tannin,()bin/inlet:, as amended, to ei,i(1ence saal i-o/ornitii, wit tine 111m:it-lents -A ' 'dr and C.` attached hereto and made a part hereot as it itilli\ sot forth herein Can Road Properties) SECTION It the; ordinance shall he effective upon its passage. approt,al and use dioitt after its pnialication PASSED BY I HE C I FY COLNC11,this 2 i L 1! day of Nov El.Tnitt,er Bonnie F Walton_ ( at, Clerk APPROVED BY TIT[ MAYOR this 2 7 t h day or November 2i)oe 'New. Kathy Keolker. Mayor ?Lavtienee,I Warren (.itiv \ttoincv Date of Publication l 2/122006 l fl-nti-,ititt.;•, : ORD l'it"PJ irlfoic ma Exhibit A Page 5 NUM,' "roe '400.00, ON), ti 229 11 I 1(101E:\ I RIVER.st REZONT: 2006-VI-03 IZEZONI, 1,120\1 R-8 10 R-1-I LH;XI DES( t quittiLl ot the \ clua[tct o‘cq, R:trP,r...• FAM. I 11,k1 t(. An-Rif V: •.nitiate t. it\ Rcnton, .)1111.‘. dshin,21on 44140... Exhibit A Page 6 ',raw Nor? flINANCE No. Xfi ('ft\1LNF B li VEI?A REZONE 2006-N1-40 REZONE F ROM RAO FO R-I 4 1.1.:C.11. DES( Rh ') ION 1•:;:lst haft oitk (11.11\ku.-1 citlutcr 0v0p,,I)Lp \Li\I 1c-0,1.1. 4)1 \\;C:. 111;11',_Ii!1:', 10:".1 S. thdi r,',11'10111ing ,.outheri> (dthe iiu1 iii ol Lot 2 (1 01 Rcnton I0i comm Rct \ 19N90407000]: f.Sc, id ii IIT Rd -±1,2 oiRcnton. kitm ottnr.f. Exhibit A Page 7 Attachment C ,l Ley 47, `w/ Exhibit A Page 8 Carr Rd Properties Rezone to R-14 LUA 05-163 CPA 2006-M-03 0 500 1000 L 'Economic Development,Neighhonccxxls&Stretegi:. .'; ♦ ail, 7.CLWA1, KtralAt C I' E easel eta c,eur 2octi Renton City Lunits Rezone to R 14 (SITY OF hON_ A SIB INC/ION 1;N' OR1.)I\AM, t NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE (TF\ OF REN`I'ON, %AS111N(;TON, CHANGING '1-F11' ZONING ( LASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN I'ROPJ R IY IN:ITFFIN THE (TIN OF REN I.ON (SPRINGBROOR ,ASSOCIATES PROPERTY) FROM RESIDENTIAL 10 DE/AC (R-I(II ZONING TO( OMMERCIAL OFFICE ZONING (CO),. FH.F NO II A-0> 158 (('P 1 2O116-N1--4). \%HFRFAS tinder � :tton 4 0 (i of Chapter 2 toning District I!so and `1 iidar of 1 ttic 11 (Des eluprncnt Retwiatieast. of Ordinance vo- �1*t entitled "Code c de of (it-mural Ordinances ofithe(`itsi of RCIUOu. ‘1,ashinigtoil as amended. and the mar,and c-pails adopted in r.unurnelr.m t hereVVilh the prnperC deserilted has pteiimas1v been iol co Residential I tl dttiac (R-t(iP,and I1 HERE1S the(`it: of Renton initiated a prncir dine for chance of/one ion olfsaid property This matter waC referred to the I'Ianninu Commission flit inv:-7stitaticrn. aacldy_ and public hearing ;and a public hearinis was hc•;,i thereon on or about September .I'I, id)u_). and hie matter was considered by the Planning Cununtastoi. and the zoning request is in con hill rnuts with the(it ( oniprehensis c IPltn. as uru_rided and the city Council h ra considered all nrtiller-s relevant iheictu and all parties ha'.,:e been heard appearing in support thereof or III o1lxrsltion theieto NOW, THEREFORE II li tit l' COI_iNC 1t. Or rm. Cl i-) OF RI N Ho".. Dot-s ORD;11 s 1S i i,I.I sF:(:'I FON 1. The following de<cribed property in the Cit: at'Renton Ir,hciehy rezcrnerl to Commercial (1 i ce as hcnsinhelrrs specified the Lwnom is I)e•,elirpmenl Neighborhoods and Stiatedmc t'irrfflllil t Deparinherit Administrator is helehti' rritFrra m n;{1 and Exhibit A Page 9 ORDPsANCL 'is() directed to chance the maps of the Lonnur Ordinance. as amended, to ciciniie said rezoniniii, to- wi ec Aitachments and B attached henito and made a pint hercot' 11111N set forth herein (Sprinubrook Associates Propertv SECTION Jj This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage approval arid fin c driv' alit.; its puhliiiation P\SSE:1) 13Y Alit CH Y this tttc day of Ncivveil)eir Bonnie I Walton, City Clerk APPROVE D BY TIM MAYOR this 27th day of h000mOC 0 10 Kathy Keolker, Appryf.ed as to fir /4 PIA fini. rence.1 Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication 1 2/ 1it hflt ( i. ()RI) Hiri I i itch mc Exhibit A Page 10 %sr *err D U,,LA NCE NO. 32Ju l'ACI1NIFN1 SPIZINCIIIZOOK rzrzeiNE 2006-A1-94 1Z111ZONE FROM 1j1-10 '10 CO 1,111;11. I)I1 ( RIPT10N 1.(>1 H 01k (71 RunlmiLi \ 111,Alic;i1 Shou -7-1 1 Ni 7808151009 ricrd fKin‘i!. Cntinly. flithc S(mtlicast duaitet 1 \ th:Ilif) Nordi. idtftc , the( 0 of kenlon. Kul Count:N. W;1,41-1111n Exhibit A Page 11 > i co i: _. 0CC2 Ca 3 -o O CD O c O a CS) > '- En A 0 CD VJ • CD N 0 CD 0 �3 .., K,l t ,a 0 L , CD p _ Q . x O �< (: �: i i Page y- CITY OF Rt N'TON. 1.\ASI IINGTI N O) DI\ 1\CE \O. 31 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CIT 1' OF RENTON, WASHINGTO`.. CHANCING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF (:IRTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITA Of RE:NTON (P1 GET COLONY HOM1IFS) FROM RESIDENTIAL 8 DU/AC (R-8) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL 4 DU;AC (R-4) ZONING, PILE NO. I.UA-06-120 (CPA 20(16-A1-5). WHEREAS, under Sex Lion 4 2 020 of Chapter Zorrm, Districts - L1scs and Standards. oi'Title I1'(Development Regulations). o('Ordirrance 'tiu 42oo nlitied "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, W'ashinuton' as amended, and the maps and reports adapted ;rf conjunction iheiev itlr._ the prupeite lreicin!rrrluw dc,scrihed has previously been zoned as Residential 8 clu%ac (R-8j;and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classi Mau ion of said propedt\. )hrs matter was ruie led to the Planntna Commission for investigation, study, and public hcarin2_ and a public hearing was held Thereon on or about September 2t_), 0) 0x, and the mailer has been considered by the Planning Commrission, and the zoning request is in r-ualfurlraitt with the Citvis Comprehensive Plan. as amended, and the L itv ('onneil has considered all matters relevant 'herera and all parties have been heard appearing in support liter cor rir opposition thereto, NOW, THEREFORE,RE:FORE_ 1 HI'. (:II-Y COUNCIL, 01 ti-IF CITY OF RE\ 1'0\. vSHIN(iTO\. DOES OR[) 1!N AS I:01.10 SECTION 1 t h.2 following described property in the City ot'Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential 4 du/tic: as hieieldbciow specified Hie E,couunric 11e'clopnr/rrt, r crcrhbolltoodls and Strategic Planning Depart mein Adminislidrrrir It; 'Met) alltlrorr .ed dull Exhibit A Page 13 ORDINAN(A.' NO 323i dir;cted to change the mar,ot The toning Ordinance as amended. to evidence ',aid re:vening tn- v, See Attachment and -Fr attached hereto and made a part hereof asir fitFy set Forth herein tPit .ol Colony I tonics) SECTION Ii. 1 his ordinance shall he effective upon its passage. approval and e days alt.er its publication 1)-1Y+1) 13N-1 lir CFI COLNC11_,this ;;:/7_11 day 01' Novc:rnhcc 2("e' Bonnie I Walton. City Clerk AI'VR(JVI-11) BY I HF MAYOR this 2717-11 clay of N r Kathy Keolker Mayor Appr9Soci as to rtria-.. Lawrence 1 Warren. C itv Attorney Dale or Publication: 1 22 I/2çç sU:nrna ) ORDI 1. i(-0)(Trila Exhibit A Page 14 'war' 01 ,.) NH. 5231 Al 1 AC11)1EN F A Plit;FT(4.11,0N1- 2006-71.1-05 REZONE 1120‘1 R-8 TO 12-4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION h.,' c''“ ILO (',1I hi '..,,LnlIn‘.1.q 1ltiIttr 1 1 c Ni ii liuti qW LI it `"),CHH:I - I Inj 1.". North W SI. in Pcnson K LilLi!‘, .1,In;]'2I' Iry 1,1,1 Exhibit A Page 15 I Alr...t 'uM ;V'r B 1 } A r �, i � _ � � ...mix, Exhibit A; -Page fi , I Puget Colony Homes CPA 2006-M-05 () t,OQ 12((() Rezc)ne from R-8 to R-4 u �a:s. j ft-8'_3 f2 z i <C r' Frr_)m Res:lenbdl Single f"anvl Ic,i�ru gnu, t�c,�7u}Hurt, tii �hhorha,��d�,tlraic;ti 1'lalu,ine y } • I uc,t, rni-i,ms,o, R Sii e.fltl- taw Den,tity !v�O� �.,'. ,, r�or,tc)n( t v I.IP.l'ts, r.► ..r vow- ( I"11` O1 RI \JON. 1V,LSHI\G'lOI\ ORDINANCE 'sO --) 3 A\ ORDINANCE: OF TIIF: CITY OF RF:NTON, WASIIIN(.TO\, ESTABLISHING '111F ?,ONIN(: (I:ASSIFICATIC)\ OF CERTA I\ PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF 1*N TON'S POTENTIAL NTIAL ANNEXATION AREA (FOR.i1ER AQUA BARN PROPERI')) AS CO1'1\1ERC"IAL AI('I ERIAI:(CA)ZONING. (CPA 2006-\1-7) WHEREAS, under Section 4 It 0'0 of'Chapter 2. Toning Districts t_Ises and Standards t l.itle I\ (Development Regulations),of Ordinance No 4260 entitled _Code of(fencral Ordinances of the('ity of Renton. Washington' as amended_and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property- hereinbelow described has not been zoned in the C'il v of Renton.and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change or zone classification of said property Tink matter was termed to the Planning Commission fur investigation, study- and public hearing, and a public hearing l+as held thereon on or about September 20, 2000. and the mailer was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City s Contprehensire Plan, as amended. and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto and all parties have been heard appearing in support. therein or in opposition thereto. NOW. THEREFORE. THE CITY COI'NC11. OF THt' CITY OF RE.NTON. WAtil ONO"ION. DOES ORDAIN \S FOLLOWS. SECTION I The lollou inedescribed properr' in the('its- of Renton steall friar the following zoning designation once annexed to the City ofRenton C'ommercial Arterial (CA) as hereinitrrloca specified. 'I he Economic Developmeni. Ncialtbothoods and Strategic Planning Exhibit A Page 17 ORI)fNAN+ T.NO 52 32 Department Adminls'rator Is hereby authorized and directed to chun e 1 1e takps ✓l the Loino.e Ordinance, as amended,to evidence said rezoninsa,to-wii. See ;Attachments "A,- and AT' attached hereto and made a part he;eof i{.hail; set torn•, herein. thortnet Aquabarn Property) SECTION IT. This ordinance shah be effective upon its passaaae, approvaL and ,c( )da4 s.after;! publication h AwS2:13 f,4' f N1=( f 1 l`CC)l !JC1L this '' }; day of ttcro-. ...,aUttit.- - h €` Bonnie I Walton, t ity 'irsL APPROVED BY HEIL MAYOR this 27t.h day of e,:trec 000 Kathy Keolker. Mar or 4 srpeed as to forrn,->,..77, i.awreacr ?. Warren_ City Attorney Date of Publication a /112Oct3_ i,r��;n�t - ) Ciltl> 1tot, 1 Irl«:0h nna Exhibit A Page 18 'Now- Now (7RD I NANCE NC, VIFACIINII•A I A .kt.)1.:A BARN REZONE REZONE FRO\I KING COI NTY NB TO CITY OF RI NTON CA LEG 11. DESCRIVVION KinCount Short nit T.99S301'), Tv,reconkci in VolL. HQes 101. 04 A. (}41i And Ht unduercuoitinw nuinhcr 2001 WO 1,!(.0007. or,k +t onnly: ;ituate in the South quartcr lSccticn 2:;. township 2.=. North. Rine K ounty. ;r;hington Nair- Exhibit A Page 19 7 '; o CS) cr:, : co O� F J t`,r w '� ` ty 'ci CD ';4 p � Ave-, ti cK a) ( a 7 a. 0 rn ry '< , N �' - *', oa 5 © E- N L a i1 J ty , lr /- "- ISd E,...J 1, " =� i � ExhiEnt A. Paisote r r NMP" 'NOW 4.11111/ CITY OE RON ION. WASHING-ION ORDINANCE NO 52 i AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RF'NTON, WASHINGTON. ESTABLISHING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CER`LAIN PROPERTI' WITHIN TILE CITY OE RENTON'S POTENTIAL: ANNF:NA"IION AREA (FORMER AQI;A BARN PROPERTY) AS RI SIDENTIAL:-14 DWELLING LNI'I'S PER ACRE. (R-I-i) ZONING (CPA 2096-•tit-7). WHEREAS, tinder Seclrun•t 2.1)11)of Chapter 2,/oniri Districts Uses rind Standards. of Title IV (Development Regulations),of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled'(`ode of General Ordinances of the City of Renton. Washiiicton. as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has not been zoned in the Cite of Renton, and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for channe of zone classification of said property .this matter was reterred to the Planning Commission for insestigation, study, and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2000, and the matter was considered hi the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended_ and the City Council has considered all matters ides thereto, arid all parties hale been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition hereto: NOW, THEREFORE, TI Il: ( t I COLNCII.OF fH1.-.Cl T Y DI- KEN I WASI IINGTON, DOFIS ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION f The following described property in the Cite of Renton shall hear the following,zoning designation once annexed to the City of Renton I{caidtrrrtial-14 dwelling units per acre(R-l41 as hereinbelow specified The Economic Development, Neighborhoods Exhibit A Page 21 1 Now' "tor ORDINANCE: NO. .3 and Strategic. Pianniny I)eparin!cnr Administrator is herehv aarthr,rized and direcied tr- change the maps eat the Zoning,Ordinanee as amended, to evidence said rezoning to wit- See Attachments ,A and "B" attached hereto and made a parr hereof as if tirily- sot lorth herein, (Former Aquaharn Property) SECTION II. "Ibis ordinance shall be effective upon its passage. approval, and five( )dad;adder its publication PASSLD BY III (A IN t (_'Ut.NCII) this %7 L IJ day of Nevccioc.,e , =t I Bonnie I Walton; C C'Icik APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 27 tf", day or NU'';e1 ,r e' , 2006. Kathy Keolkcr. Aiayor Appr dastertsffr'rr :-f;rr / l+/t%�` '•a`'`; I ae�rence.I. Warren, (iiv Attorney Date otPublication: 12/1/ OOG ( r:c:rnery) ORD I.-s!17.I I l i ii Ort ma Exhibit A Page 22 r,.. ,21; NO. I 1ACIINIEN1 A A0LA BARN REZONE REZONE 1RON1 KING ( ()UNIFY R-12 TO CFR OF RENTON 12-14 LEGAL DESC-RWFION A-, Kin Cn1,, Short Plm 1,(NS.;'019, recorded in Vol. tOR and 104( under r,„-cordirw,villt111-kT 200 (JY,3190000.2. fe:or(L:‘11 AllsittLit(.in the Soutliwei quarter of Section 1.cm nship 23 North, Rarr:!,.' \VAL King( ounty_ N-V-tshinoon +ow*Nor Exhibit A Page 23 C;G'a'T3A1,:.." AC)_ c, 3,3 j it�9 I E _ 03 r-•S33 O n f1 C Y x N Yi 2 C. tJ _ Y'! _. a ; 7 -J �. - ,' "'T bra fi V ,-a ;, p 9^. 7. 14.`•r3 n ,:' f s Imo` I 0 - o T I a. z v 1 H k ), E-1. Y rY1iy Y t -tom t' %`, 5�.r, ,/ -----# `F PI 'Page 24 • � rr C'I'I'Y OF RENTON, WASHINOI N ORDINANCE NO S234 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON. WASHINGTON, ("LANCING IN( `ME ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON (UPPER KENNYDAI.F .AREA) FROM RESIDENTIAL S DU/AC (R-8) ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL 4 DU/AC (R-4) ZONING; FILE NO. LUA-06-122 (CPA 2006-M-8). WHEREAS, under Section 4 2.020 of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts Uses and Standards. ofTitle 1V (Development Regulations), of Ordinance No 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances ofthc City of Renton, Washington" as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith. the property hereinbeloo described has previously been zoned as Residential 8 duiac(R-8); and WHEREAS, the City of Renton initiated a proceeding for change of zone classification Now of said property. This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study. and public hearing, and a public hearing was held thereon on or about September 20, 2006, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the zoning request is in conlornm� with the C'ity's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council has considered all matters relevant thereto. and all parties have been heard appearing in support thereof or in cip position thereto. NOW.THEREFORE, Fill'CITY COUNCIL. OF TFIF CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON. DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS. SECTION I. The following described properly iii the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residential 4 du/ac(R-4)as hereinbelow specified The Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Division is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to wit. Exhibit A Page 25 Name Iwo 'vow, ORDINANCE NO 5234 See Attachments"A and"i3-attached hereto and made a part hereof as 111511 set forth herein -pper Kennydale Area) SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, apt-nova!and e days afterits publication PASSED BY THE CITY COI INCtt.this 27t h day of November . 2000 Bonnie I Walton,Cii), Clerk APPROVED I3Y 'HIE MAYOR this 27 day Of_ NG vemher ?WO Kathy Keolker. \la%or Appr as to La\A•rence J Warren. City Attorney Date of Publication i ., ],20e s rm ) ORD I 3t)/i. I/17/06 ma Exhibit A Page 26 Nage '4.1100e () U1AtCF itO.. 234 ATTACIIMENT I'PPER KENNVD:1LE REZO.NE 2006- 1AIS REZONE FRONI R-8 It-4 LEGAL I)LSCRIPTI()N th,o;c t'olvaincd \\ithiri the folhwtio,t, descrihed hounddr.:, licirunn.s:at the ((metal I rant 21)I o; he ha ct ( t). I i,Iman l.ade \\,:alungton Datien all:1(.1cn ,\ddition to Seattle Division No. -I, r,;-...orevi in oltimc 8.:d records of Kiri Vk:islungton: I hene:'. .,outherl:, alow,.!the,:outherl:, e\iten,,,ion of the east line at sani I rant, o ill inicr,eetion kith ale cchIcriirk:ol Ni: 6th c;i: hence svesierlv atan.7. said centerline to an intersection with the centerline oHones Ave I hence !--,otitherl> ajo4 said median OLJOI1CS.'\Ve Ni.. to :At interic,Jum ciii tic e\tenSiot) (.3.1 the SOUth line al I;-act 32 )ot the Plat()I( J). IiiIIiitaii \Yashintiron 'ran Icn Addition to Seattle I)ivision No. I ivy. Ine Hit wow, thereof', ecoided in Volume Iol hats. 'ate t. records(0'sail ecuats hc.'nee alonp stud extension and the -;oulh line of slid "rn-ict to its iniersc,lion kith the easterly rwnt at interstate hc•nec•northerl> alon,,L die variou:,-,Ci ms H saki caNterly margin to the south line at Lot al the 1-1d()Ii .\ rcs. ft•:i,:ordlity to the plat thercoi, recorded in \'olum,..‘ I I Ol [Cccoi,r,cis colmtv: I hence castcriv along the south line of said ot.4 To the`-:,,oui,11\,.ew,, corner ci siX a! tire rel.) Subdivision accordin,c the plat thuTeol recorded in Volume SN tit eCt hence nail herl-:, dna the wc-.1 MC 01 arid HO, it and the northerly exicn,,,,ion thereat to the cerneilinn at '‘,1• I hence can idane said I..!eni.2rline., to its IlliCrs•;CCIlofl With the centerline NI hence north triana said ccnterline to an intr.2Necnon with the easterN ,..7xrenion of the north Inc or rant 278 of said Mat a] C.D. I lilinmn Lake '\\'it.:-.,hin,,Iton (.J.Ardcri l'ictot \ddrt ion to Seattle Dii 5jci1 N 4: Exhibit A Page 27 ',war '.41true- CRDINAINICL NU. 5234 rLAC:1IN1EN'l CIt (.' St11(1C,IAC*. C'st((.11, 011 011(i nail 100111 line to Notlhcj!1 Lop,R0 (01 Oi 4(0 ( in i Rcitt011 St0((rt P];(I ,000-067 i. ((_'((tit(10,i tinder Kin: (O('Illft( tine o47(0000(1)t lteree tfoirtheri:r ilium thL.!L'al.;1 line /I nani01 4II:, the `-,otitiici.ts,,. nih,•as[ eornef i)eir !,a 'i)oini on the south line Ofnail Hi:l 1 herder.; ',At:tiled"iy alon,,,Ith,.! :-;outh hue ol met i7O to lie lrica.i ,.:orncr 1 Lot 11„. ut Renton ot ine Aflitrfnucul ,li•Xtoll if)an rer:tircied under Kim! I ()inn Kee N . I,)P,(4),/221)(:) Illent.t: !tunnel alice tl1C cant line it Said 1 ii he I hence southerly crossiri2 NI 2(1`- Pi. in the Norilwa.-4 corner it I 01 2 utmini lot line adiestment; itcnL southerk the ci0 line ol nail lot to ',hi,:southeas; corner thereof. said •••,(1',Itlic;tst corner heinet a point im the north line of kreel 2O' of said Plat c,“ filltuan .; l,“ke Oard,zn Ut lde \t .Hon mien No t hence cAsterk ;11ori.: the ia oth hns,.•of.saldI ract to the notihe;1,,, tionier I iteucc uiithet im Jone the ett, t laeoi said I Fact 295 to an inits.r,c:c.ti,olv.ith the noith tine of ihe feet or bract 2.X.3 of raid plat: 'Nor, I ft.:MC(2 eaIcrIr alone said north iiflc.Lu its mt-erst-ciion ;AI the w;.•sterk r1,0 ctwpv ithir,J.H] It kenncv,ink \ye Ni : lI:cnecauiilierlr ihuine mail v“.-a;:.-rly margin i Ii ritA:rscction ntiiiinecmtedr :..!5lu2rision it the noitherk\ line of Lot I of li1C Plat olSains:21 I 1dm. ecorded 160 ut Pin , lane 51 re(..(1,rtis ot at ,Ieotult). hence etsicrly alone maid extension rind the north line of said Ii 1 in the northel collier iherenf said Northeast coiner hcing un the o! Lot I ot sLud Hat. knee nu111,erls liii mail tenet line u the Norllierci u_uui)er liii ui 11: bL'Ilce eloleri alonn the north lines 1 1 la I 1. .2 Id ut sdRi plat. to the art man flier 01 11: Hence socitlleils atone the cam) tine fill maid I.L4 I .,111,..! its souther-I% cntennum eroftttin„t ‘i,l1 24 t to the !fount:It, rut hi ui tear ruerri3iii thereof: i hence ,,vciiterly it on ii SOUllicriv In ii rn i the, (...•;,,;1 I thc01the the Last halt itie North _DJ() eel of Kant 211 ol raid Plat ot C.D. I llllln:mmin lake n I lardLlt ut deli \dchilon No Exhibit A Page 28 —fter '411pawr° ORD I NA NC E 7.“") !_)23/-1 ATTACHMENT A h;nce s,nitherk .11i)n!J cast hilc,I the ,!0S1111 flrie 01 the North 2.00 letil ol said I roc! hello: \%csierl said north line. to the west me tit !tact 'et Hal plan hence southerk idone the east lines oldr, 21!; & 24 ti stud pLo to on interst_timon it.11,111he north line nl the He of I rant 272 ollsoid glit hence co-tens along said north line In he east lincn.1111,2 cl Lo feet 1;;;:iid I cocci hclicc :11()111.! !;ild east hue and its onitlieris enition crossing Al20L Si to the southerly right of w ay margin thereof: Iwucc vsc:lorl> ilonO iii ittiherIv 1/1Urs!ifl, to the northc-t;t HR." tract 0! Lind i(k211t;fled as-VI ILI FIES AN1)OPEN SPICF LASIAIEN H on set 2 oH 0 the l'hit fiti,atei os recorded in Volnme I 17) of Mots. lees-1•1-4o, rcunfd, hence southerls alontt the\arious courses of the easternhoundar. of said tract of land to the ltsltimhtiiist e.irner there !. sold southc:1,1 could heine in die norilierit rieh kit snv tam (}f I hence along the \ t:onrses or the souther!\ houndiai. of!said tidoo to if, intersection with the west line of said tract said west line also being the west line iit race 270 of said Plin of I liliman's taLe ashimhon (larden of I den 1aIdiiiitn to Seattle I)isishin N . di I hence northerly along said west line oh-tract 770 inut .771tO the \itithwe a corner std Iniet 271. said Northwest corner also hetne a point on the .southerl) light of way margin ofNh 200 St: I hence n eterIs thong said southern. margin to the Northeast corner of ract 292 tit said plot: [hence t.t.cant.wrlie along the east lines.of said tracts 2i)! to the ilof tad . in ectinn lonaltip North N-1 s 011:.,•n!nn. king Exhibit A Page 29 'ewe 1.4.w Attachment B , . , ..._, .. -— ----- - - '• ' ' 1 ' . "/,`,1",:.`1,4K,;'"a".'''' , ': -- , ,- ;'• , ..."-; 1 i,..,!.'`'''''',,-'4,c..e I ... - ,.- 1 , i ; _,:ri:..„...„:110,,xrsif.4„,,,sei!:,,•,,,,.,,..,,,.„,,, , , , , , . . - "^ - ' :,,,-;,:',..,,,'"''''W-iNFO'.,4,-•.:- , ,:-; : r- —,..--, i ..,:g,,,;":im-.',--';'.•:.7,o--;.!..-,' - - -- - --- ,,,,,M,"-, , - .,,..,,, :-,- ( - ',' ' , '.' j I s.•-1-,x1;,..,44-','-mi:,tg,,,, ,.,,, ,,,,,,,,-.,' I, - ' 1 '1..,,,''''`r-24,141:4,gt;tg-i--.4!.,..;,:,-;,,4e-gg .r,-.....•*.i„--,,:......,,,,,..,,..4.,-,;,,,-ii,--,&,4,-,4--;31::,,,. .1.tzwit , I ..cf„.„,,-,4,,,,,,..;,,,,,,,-..„;.,,,,,!•,,,,,..,,,,,1„;,,,,,,,,e.,::,,,,,Ak.,-„ , , __,:., . __ , . , -- V,,---‘4„,,,.,,•,,,k,'„4-7„r"-,‘"1,,,,,'-'7,1T-4„'•,'„!,,rF-fr,,,,,,,t1,7,4,,:: 1' -, ' ,, •: • .•-, 4-',-,,,.:4f-,-*,0:5-,t:•::,1,14-,_,--,,,„ _ , : , , , -.-tlkgre.lk,:04:,,,A.2•tit..• -• ' , : 1 .- - - , 1,-,,Az,:ifoit-a-4:::4,5-,1-,;,kf:,-,-,,g1,4„.4• ,,, , , _._.„ 1;6,,,,,:',,,,,,,,„--t.,iti r,':4,„;,„!.,,,„4„,„1:31...„144-.,,,„‘:,,,,Fil...'„„.-„,,1/4',,,,,,,1--, ,•:- ,:. „:,, , , „ ,,,,„„ .,•• „ , 'iku.k•:-T,:k,•rm-,,,:,•,-::,T':fi,k. ' ' , . " -I ,. I __ ,_ 4.4.• _...4l./.',4-„,4,,:::4".,,,,',A,,,,,4..1:.r,,,,t , ,. '. , , ' • I ', ' .:Nizai;?-i•-,400,,,,ikwi„,i-plk,'",; -' „ __ . __. __- - - -4.!-§sce,o.*:-4:0A-M.7:- - --2,-•,,: , , - 1 , . , , • fn.; .... . ... -''',..:,;.•01k1t,',V1,•,1; ;'.,, ' .- ' •' .X,'V.•.'li..*•1'- ' . '. ,, ; , .. . g.A.-',Z1:,•;1-,•.;77.:i.,.., ' 't ' . 1, ' - f. I I.,,,,-<,,-!.4„..,-,,1;:+r,..,;14,1•104 =-1 ' ' •••••• -' •• . • . . ` ,'..$11016V.1.,%,-• , , , , ,L.. , V.,Wiffi:i::Afip,,:q• i , 1 ' 1 „ ,,, ... , , , . 41%44' :`4..a.M, • I 117 1. ' 1' ' ,. . __ • - ',•.".•'.,.. '''''' '' — -- '---- , '' • —. , '---:- - -"'--- , --- • 4 . , . .1 , • T.L. , ___ _ I 1 :-' ' ----:'-- 1 ' '• , .. , t ' ' , 1 . . , , '. • : 1 '' 1 Exhibit - A ,. ' Page 30.-, ,,-- , ,i. ),, .,__ .. , . ..._ _ .., Upper Kennydale Rezone from R-8 to R-4 ( LUA 06-122 CPA-2006-M-8 0 600 1 200 ..--..,-;:,.....,..,...,.:-, .2 L.:co:on:tic Develop:n=4 Neigithortioods 6L.Strattipc Pliuutog 1 : P.,,Pb'A Imu 'u,',,,, tNA; Rezone R-8 to R-4 7200 •',„7-' ,,' CI,Fr-as.; 1/241,00. )i-+H. •,: ::.,•„- ,.. CONIPR.VHFASIN 1;:. Pl....„‘N,,, 1 A w()scie,a1 Supplen)(lit A, ,,iippik.-i::-., Ili h, A N:pt NA -,.-.'Cr:, t f,f. of Pfifff 4! ( offirfff..11cfi--,1, I'Lffi. ffficiP1cf: 'Nk''', 1.1:..r: \, 1-„h H, m•w',LltrEmi.-. r•,,,Iir.JcHL,n .-r,-.,.:; .i.; ', !,_. 1.,,,ii—,, .,,:;:,, . L“ 1-,1,..d1h.,--.. kic )',vvi ' Hi ( .ipliri LicWlic.-. *oar i\ ,Lip..),imos, .':jr. i r„--,r,„1-Lf i\ f In0'2. 1 ) •-. 1 1 0,, H 1 0.',.-1 fiffofff„fff I ,,,, ;f1 Vf if',11),po,,l‘fiHor': 1 if. ,11ciff V. if,fft,,porLif ff,n 1 If...-!!:,:fff . I 1 fff*ffif_H; ‘,1 : I'itL,,f, \I-! t1 ro1, ( hcr, i,..': 11 I •:frol ', ,".c;,-H f ),„-,•,-; ,:,H i '. ,'_.q. 1 kik:w,l, I,o., \\ \ sift.. Exhibit B Page I of 1 i `SY ()e U • " 44 • NrvO� 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments INDEX Amendment# Applicant Description Tab Map Amendment to change Neighborhood 2006-M-1 Wan Chee Commercial/Single Family to Neighborhood A Commercial 2006 M 2 Map Amendment to change the Kennydale Blueberry Susan Larson-Kinzer Farm from Resource Conservation to Residential B Single Family 2006 M 3 Manuel Rivera Map Amendment to change Residential Single (Patrick Hanis,Hanis Family to Commercial Corridor C Greaney Attorneys) Springbrook Associates Map Amendment to change Medium Density 2006-M-4 (Cliff Williams, Residential to Commercial Corridor D Vineyards Construction) 2006-M-5 City of Renton Map Amendment to change Puget Colony from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density 2006-M-6 City of Renton Map Amendment for Highlands Study Area F Map Amendment to change the former Aqua Barn site from Neighborhood Business in the King 2006-M-7 City of Renton County's Comprehensive Plan to Commercial G Corridor to be consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to consider changing the 2006 M 8 City of Renton designation for a 49 acre area of Upper Kennydale from Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning to Low Density Residential with R-4 zoning 2006 T 1 Text Amendment to update Capital Facilities City of Renton Element to incorporate adoption of Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plan 2006-T-2 Text Amendment to update Land Use Element to City of Renton reflect changes in the Center Village 2006 T 3 Text Amendment to update the Land Use and City of Renton Community Design Element with housekeeping K changes 2006-T-4 City of Renton Text Amendment to update the Transportation Element to reflect changes in the capital projects Text Amendment to update the Land Use Element to 2006 T 5 City of Renton allow Residential Manufactured Home zoning to be an implementing zone with the Low Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation Highlands Zoning Package N H:\EDNSP\Planning Comm\Admin\2006\CPA Index 2006.doc REVISED SEPTEMBER 21, 2006 AMENDMENT 2006-M-01 - CHEE DESCRIPTION: The owner of the parcel at 1315 N. 30th Street submitted a land use action request to amend the Comprehensive Plan and rezone the property. The 0.45-acre property fronting on N. 30th Street in the Kennydale neighborhood has split zoning. The front portion is zoned Commercial Neighborhood (CN),but the rear portion is zoned Residential 8 (R-8). The owner of has either near term or long-range plans to redevelop the property. A rezone to Commercial Neighborhood would require amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation on the rear portions of the lot from Residential Single Family to Commercial Neighborhood. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Would two different zones make unified development difficult, or would development be improved by rezoning to a single zone? 2. Should that single zone be Commercial Neighborhood? 3. Should the amount of commercially zoned land in the N. 30th Street commercial district be expanded beyond the existing amount? Is sufficient information available at this time to determine the impacts of such an action? 4. Would the Vision of the Comprehensive Plan be furthered by this rezone? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: The Planning Commission is recommended to deny the rezone request for the property at 1315 N. 30th Street, Amendment 2006-M-01. ANALYSIS: West Kennydale Business District The proposed rezone is located in the West Kennydale neighborhood, which consists of about one square mile between Lake Washington and Interstate 405 between I-405 exits 5 (Park/Sunset) and 7 (Quendall). West Kennydale is largely a quiet, residential area consisting primarily of well-maintained, single family homes constructed following World War II. The area along N. 30th Street was annexed into the City of Renton in 1969. Parcels in Kennydale were platted to more rural configurations and have, in recent years, been subdivided into multiple-lot infill residential projects, thereby increasing the number of residents throughout the area. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-01 Chee\CPA issue paper Revised September 21,2006.docLast printed 11/13/2006 10:21 AM Planning Commission Issue Paper Amendment 2006-M-1 Amended September 21,2006 Page 2 of 6 Traditionally, commercial development has been limited in the area. It has consisted primarily of those commercial uses situated along N. 30th Street, which includes both neighborhood-shopping and interchange-dependent uses. The Commercial Neighborhood(CN) zoning was applied in 2004 when the Convenience Commercial (CC) designation was reconfigured. There was no significant change in the allowed uses or the development standards of the zone however. The CC zone had been in place since 1993. Prior to that time, the zoning along N. 30th Street between Park Avenue N and I-405 was a mix of G-1 (single family residential) and B-1 (business use). The following are existing uses in the commercial area along N. 30th Street: 1) The Crest at Kennydale, an 8-unit apartment complex built in 1962 (set back from the north side of N. 30th Street), zoned R-8 2) Shell convenience store with gas station built in 1968 (abutting interchange on the north side of N. 30th Street), zoned CN 3) Chevron convenience store with gas station built in 1968 (abutting interchange on the south side of N. 30th Street), zoned CN 4) A 7- Eleven convenience store(fronting on north side of 30th Street), zoned CN 5) A 2,200 square foot office building built in 1976 (fronting on south side of 30th Street), zoned CN 6) Audio Plus, a 1,800 square foot home audio equipment store (fronting on south side of 30th Street), zoned CN 7) An insurance brokerage firm located in a 960 square foot building built in 1975, zoned CN 8) A 1,032 square foot office building built in 1960 and located on the northeast corner of N. 30th Street and Park Avenue N, zoned CN 9) An unpaved Park and Ride lot located at the southeast corner of N. 30th Street and Park Avenue North occupies about half of a 1.33-acre parcel. It also has split CN/R- 8 zoning. The Kennydale United Methodist Church owns the parking lot and several other vacant or developed properties in the area. The church is located on an almost quarter acre lot on the northwest corner of N. 30th Street and Park Avenue North. Park and Ride lots are allowed in the R-8 zone on parking lots that are required for non-residential accessory parking. Parking as a stand-alone use is not allowed in either the CN or R-8 zones. Zoning The uses allowed in the R-8 zone are primarily various forms of residential. There are no commercial uses that would be viable in an urban neighborhood permitted in the R-8 zone. The intent of the Commercial Neighborhood zone is to allow businesses that serve the needs of people living within the immediate area. Commercial Neighborhood zones do not typically have high volumes of pass-through traffic. Although the N. 30th Street commercial district is adjacent to an 1-405 interchange, the destinations from I-405 are primarily residential. Planning Commission Issue Paper Amendment 2006-M-1 Amended September 21,2006 Page 3 of 6 Commercial Neighborhood zoning allows uses that are small in scale and have limited volume of business. The maximum amount of commercial allowed in the CN zone is 5,000 g.s.f and the maximum amount of office is 3,000 g.s.f. per parcel. Typically, CN businesses are expected to generate low vehicular traffic and require a small amount of on-site parking. Examples of CN uses are eating and drinking establishments (excluding drive-through, fast food service); general, medical, and dental offices with size restrictions; retail; and on-site services. Allowed retail uses are flower/plant and floral supplies; mini-marts; craft products and craft supplies; gift shops; and specialty markets. On-site services are establishments primarily engaged in providing individual or professional services within the place of business, such as beauty and barber shops; retail laundry, including coin-operated; garment alterations and shoe repair; photography,photo studios, and photo processing; pet grooming; personal accountants; entertainment media rental or other indoor rental services; and repair of personal or household items. Excluded services include vehicle repair; real estate offices; fitness centers; adult retail sales; dry cleaning; service and social organizations; and off-site services. Residential development is allowed in the CN zone, when it is on upper levels with allowed Commercial Neighborhood use on the ground floor. Environmental Factors Although there may be isolated 15 to 25 percent slopes in the area, there are no significant environmental issues apparent on either property. Topographic mapping and geotechnical studies to verify subsurface structural conditions should accompany future development proposals. Chee Property The Chee property is approximately 0.45 acre in size. Its development potential is somewhat limited due to its configuration, which is long and narrow(64 feet wide). The"commercial' north portion, fronting on N. 30th Street, is 7,710 square feet and has an existing single-family residence built in 1927. The condition of the house is not good. The rear, residentially zoned 11,845 square foot portion, is currently vacant. Mr. Chee, the proponent of this land use action request, has proposed a project for the property located on the south side of N. 30th Street. The conceptual plan submitted proposes a retail use building on the north portion of the property, fronting N. 30th Street in the existing CN zone. Surface parking to serve the retail use would be located at the rear of the building. Although some of the proposed retail uses are specifically not allowed in the CN zone (dry cleaner, fast food), a wide variety of retail and on-site services would be allowed and are perhaps currently needed by the Kennydale neighborhood, which is underserved at the present time. Planning Commission Issue Paper Amendment 2006-M-1 Amended September 21,2006 Page 4 of 6 A three-story, apartment or condominium building with ground-level,under building parking has been provided as an example of the kind of development desired by the property owner for the southern, R-8 zoned portion of the parcel. The proponent has been advised that this project, as proposed, would not be allowed in the Commercial Neighborhood zone. Residential is allowed,but must be located on upper stories of a building having commercial use on the ground level. Residential units in the CN zone are limited to four(4)per structure. This can be accomplished with the current zoning, at the north portion of the property. Rezone to a more intensive use, such as CN, would require a fifteen-foot(15') setback along the property line of the subject parcel on the side and rear where it abuts the R-8 zoned property to the west and south. This reduces the already narrow lot even further, to 49 feet wide, at its southern half and would make a building of the size proposed difficult to realize at this location. Without the rezone, the south portion of the property could be developed for single-family residential with access off N 30th Street. If, at some time in the future the property is subdivided, access to the subdivided rear parcel could be assured by an access easement. No easement is required until that time, since the property is under a single ownership. At approximately 11,845 s.f. and 64 feet wide, the area could accommodate two 64 foot x 92 foot, single-family residential lots of approximately 5,920 s.f. each. Based on these factors, it does not appear that the proponent of this rezone would accomplish his goals through the requested rezone. Nor is there evidence that the rezone would further the goals of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan(see below). Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the zoning request. For these reasons and upon due consideration, staff recommends that the Planning Commission support the existing zoning at this location. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: Development of the parcel with the current zoning could possibly yield • a three-story structure with 3,000 s.f. of ground level office or commercial space employing up to 7 employees • 4 dwelling units of about 1,500 each on the second and third floors (maximum allowed is 4 dwelling units per building) • 9 parking stalls at the rear of the building. • Two 5,000 s.f. single-family residential parcels, with access from N. 30`h Street shared with the surface parking lot, could be created from the R-8 portion of the property by a short subdivision. With the requested rezone,based on buildable lands methodology, development would consist of • Planning Commission Issue Paper Amendment 2006-M-1 Amended September 21,2006 Page 5 of 6 Noir • 4 dwelling units of about 1,500 each on the second and third floors (maximum allowed is 4 dwelling units per building) • 3,620 s.f of commercial space employing 9 people. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: Renton Municipal Code requires that a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment proposal demonstrate that the requested amendment is timely and meets at least one of the Review Criteria(Title IV 4-9-020G). Review Criteria There is nothing in the material presented by the proponent of the rezone, nor in the analysis by staff to indicate that the review criteria would be met by the proposed rezone, as shown below: 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, The request to enlarge the business area by increasing the amount of commercially zoned land does not support the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan because the Commercial Neighborhood zone is intended to remain small in scale and not grow in size as is typical of other commercial zones in the City. In fact, the proposed rezone is specifically not supported by the following Commercial Neighborhood policies: Policy LU-424. Commercial Neighborhood designated areas should not increase in scale or size to the point of changing the character of the nearby residential neighborhood. Policy LU-425. The small-scale uses of Commercial Neighborhood designated areas should not increase in intensity so that the character of the commercial area or that of the nearby residential area is changed. 2. The request supports the adopted business plan goals established by the City Council, The City Council-adopted business plan for 2006-2011 includes a stated goal to "Promote citywide economic development. " Viable economic development is possible in the Kennydale neighborhood business district with the current zoning. The property for which the rezone has been requested can be fully developed for viable uses with the current zoning. 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, Not applicable 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. Planning Commission Issue Paper Amendment 2006-M-1 Amended September 21,2006 Page 6 of 6 Not applicable ZONING CONCURRENCY: Decision Criteria for Change of Zone Classification (Title IV 4-9-180F): 1. Criteria for Rezones Requiring a Comprehensive Plan Amendment: The Reviewing Official shall find that: a. The proposed amendment meets the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G; This has not been demonstrated by the proponent's application for amendment and rezone or by staff analysis. b. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; This has not been demonstrated by the proponent's application for amendment and rezone or by staff analysis. 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; That is the case. ii. Since the most recent land use analysis of 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. No such change has occurred. CONCLUSION: The requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone should be denied. 3 \,(Th ,_ <1 I 1 I Area to Remain Single Family 40 8 S 20 I i ''hee CPA 2006-M-01 0 ° 400 tinning Commission Recommendation Gti�Y Study Area Commercial Neighborhood m O,{ Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning —ch, scator — Renton City OM Residential Low Density Alex C.E.Feasel Limits I I Residential Medium Density 1.67\To$ 13 November 2006 I I Residential Single Family AMENDMENT 2006-M-2 -BLUEBERRY FARM DESCRIPTION: The owners of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm have requested a rezone from the current Resource Conservation (RC) zoning to either Residential- four units per net acre (R-4) or Residential- eight units per net acre (R-8). A rezone to R-8 would require an amendment to the Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan from a designation of Residential Low Density(RLD) to Single Family Residential (SFR). ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. What is the appropriate zoning for the Blueberry Farm? 2. If rezoning the Blueberry Farm is considered, is a larger area suitable for rezone under the same criteria? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: The Kennydale Blueberry Farm should be rezoned from RC to R-4. Consideration should be given to rezoning a larger portion of the surrounding neighborhood to R-4 from R-8. ANALYSIS: The Kennydale Blueberry Farm was originally planted in the 1940s and has been in service as a u-pick farm ever since. Sue Larson-Kinzer and Darrell Kinzer, the current owners of the farm, have owned and operated the farm for the last two decades. They approached the City in Fall 2005 about rezoning their property. Since the Blueberry Farm was already part of a larger City-initiated review of lands designated as RLD, staff notified neighbors and began a preliminary analysis of the proposed rezone. Several interested parties submitted comments both for and against the potential rezone of the property. It was not possible to complete a thorough analysis prior to end of the year, so the issue was held for formal application and consideration during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle. The Blueberry Farm owners submitted a formal application. Their request for rezone is based upon the argument that the farm is currently spot zoned, and the current RC zoning has failed to protect it from incompatible land use changes in the surrounding area. Also, the applicants argue, the Comprehensive Plan Vision directs development at higher density than is allowed in the RC zone. There has been a fair amount of land use change in the area surrounding the Blueberry Farm in the last two decades. Development around the farm has been allowed at the R-8 zoning standard. Increased impervious surface has increased storm water runoff. Development of the Heritage Glen plat, immediately northeast of the Blueberry Farm, required a major dewatering in order to construct basic infrastructure. The City eliminated the Higate lift-station and installed new sewer infrastructure. In total, piecemeal development has altered the hydrology of the area. At the Blueberry Farm, these changes have affected the viability of the blueberry bushes and made it difficult to continue the operation of the farm as a business. RC zoning was created in 1992 as a way to protect and preserve lands for semi-rural agricultural use. Protection of critical areas and public open spaces was mentioned, but the ."' primary purpose of the zone was to protect agricultural lands from adjacent uses which may interfere with the continued use of land for the production of food. The Blueberry Farm was H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-02 Blueberry Fann\Issue Paper(7-06).doc appropriately zoned RC at this time,based upon its agricultural use for the production of food. However, the purpose of the RC zone has changed over time. Protection of critical areas and open spaces is the primary purpose of the zone today. The continuation of small-scale farming operations is mentioned, but the language requiring the protection of agricultural lands from adjacent uses was repealed in 1995. In fact, the Comprehensive Plan now directs the City to minimize the effects of agriculture on adjacent residential uses in Policy LU-139. At present time, the RC zone is only appropriate for the property if it continues to operate as a small scale agricultural operation, a public open space, or to protect a critical area. Property owners have concluded that their small u-pick business is no longer feasible in this location. Public open space may be a viable option if the City, or other community group,purchased the property and devoted the time and funds necessary to continue the use of the property as a public amenity. Absent the continuation of the use as a farming operation or a public amenity, however, the only purpose for which the property can remain zoned RC is for the protection of critical areas. Critical areas are likely to exist on the property. The headwaters of Kennydale Creek, although not shown on any map, are attributed to this area of upper Kennydale. A class four stream runs through a hand dug ditch along the east and north sides of the property. According to critical areas regulations, a class four stream requires a 35 ft. buffer. In the City's mapping inventory, a potential wetland area is shown, covering a little more than one third of the property. The mapped wetland encompasses nearly all of the stream area on the Blueberry Farm property. However, the map also shows the potential wetland covering a much wider area, including several parcels in both the Higate and Heritage Glen plats, as well as covering about 350 ft. of NE 20th Street. Clearly, the presence and extent of a wetland in this area is in question. A fair amount of work has been done to classify and delineate that portion of the wetland that lies north of the Blueberry Farm and NE 20th Street. In 1987, the Pohl short plat across the street from the Blueberry Farm noted the presence of a wetland and the generally poor drainage conditions. Regulations at that time did not require delineation of the wetland. In 1990, the environmental checklist from a City initiated culvert replacement did not characterize the area of the culvert, which takes the stream under NE 20th Street, as environmentally sensitive. A 1994 application for a long plat across the street from the Blueberry Farm by WA Developers, Inc. references a wetland report which found a Category III wetland on that property. Work done in 1999 and 2000 for the elimination of the Higate Lift Station, found some Category II wetlands on the north side of NE 20th Street as well. No wetland was found in the area of the Heritage Glen plat, but a native growth protection easement was set aside for the buffer of the wetlands previously delineated on adjacent property. There has never been a wetland report or delineation done south of NE 20th Street in the area of the Higate plat or the Blueberry Farm. The Higate plat was fully developed before wetland protection was required. A sizable utilities and open space easement, about an acre in size, was created as part of the Higate plat. It shares almost the entire eastern property line of the Blueberry Farm. There doesn't appear to have been any regular maintenance or upkeep of this easement and a wintertime visit revealed that the easement appears to take up some of the H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-02 Blueberry Farm\Issue Paper(7-06).doc area's storm water. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) did a preliminary evaluation of the Blueberry Farm property for use as off-site wetland mitigation as part of the Interstate 405 widening project. Based on aerial photos and observation from NE 20th Street, an experienced biologist with WSDOT indicated that the Blueberry Farm may contain a rare peat wetland habitat, or at the very least, had preserved some of the original peat and had conditions favorable to restoration. A geotechnical report on the property, done in 1983 for Schneider Homes, Inc. did find the presence of peat soils and a high water table, and the WSDOT analysis is consistent with this. The Blueberry Farm does contain a pond near the back of the property, located out of the mapped wetland area. However, it is important to note that the WSDOT biologist did not visit the site, take soil samples, or do any formal classification or delineation of the property. Given this information, the following conclusions can be drawn. This area of Kennydale probably had many wetland features prior to residential development. Those features and functions have been lost over time as the land has been put to use for housing, roads, and agriculture. Small areas of wetlands do exist on some properties, but they have been classified as Category II and III, meaning that they have been disturbed and have reduced function. There may be a wetland on the Blueberry Farm, but without a formal delineation it is difficult to determine how much of the property could be a wetland and what type of wetland it may be. Wetland determinations are not required for rezones or Comprehensive Plan amendments. However, calculating the developable area of a parcel using the mapped data is standard review procedure. The mapped wetland area is highly problematic and clearly does not accurately represent the wetlands in that area. It likely over estimates the size of any wetland area on the Blueberry Farm. On the map the wetland area is shown as consolidated on the property- taking up most of the eastern half of the parcel. Since the property has been in use for agriculture for more than 60 years, any wetland on the property is likely to be disturbed and have limited functionality. If the entire mapped wetland area was considered a Category III wetland, it would be required to have a 25 ft. buffer, leaving a developable area of 1.5 acres. If the entire mapped wetland area was considered a Category II wetland, it would be required to have a 50 ft. buffer, leaving a developable area of 1.15 acres. Based on the available information on critical areas, the Comprehensive Plan Residential Single Family (RSF) designation is not appropriate for this property. It is the purpose of the RSF designation to build larger subdivisions, rehabilitate existing housing, and provide infill development. None of these purposes would be served by rezoning the Blueberry Farm. Alternatively, the purpose of the RLD designation, the development of lower intensity residential uses where land is constrained by sensitive areas, suits the property perfectly. Thus, since the property is already in the RLD designation, a Comprehensive Plan change for the Blueberry Farm property is not warranted. There are three zones that implement the RLD Comprehensive Plan designation: the RC zone, the Residential- one unit per net acre (R-1) zone, and the Residential- four units per net acre (R-4) zone. Policy LU-135 in the Comprehensive Plan provides guidance for the mapping of these three zones. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-02 Blueberry Farm\Issue Paper(7-06).doc For the purpose of mapping four dwelling units per net acre (4- du/ac) zone areas as contrasted with lower density Residential 1 (R-1) and Resource Conservation (RC_ ,N areas, the prevalence of significant environmental constraints should be interpreted to mean: 1) Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area; 2) Developable areas are separated from 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 setback/buffers 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. The Blueberry Farm has not been designated as an urban separator in the Countywide Planning Policies, so criterion four does not apply. Mapped critical areas cover about 35 percent of gross area of the property. However, even accounting for possible buffers, the mapped developable area is a consolidated chunk of land including the entire west half of the parcel. There is potential access to over an acre of contiguous, developable land. Under an R-4 standard, between one and four dwelling units per acre would be allowed the potentially developable portion of the property. Given the consolidated nature of the mapped wetland, buffering and shielding of the critical area as required by the Renton Critical Areas Ordinance, should adequately protect it. Based on a review of the criteria in policy LU-135, R-4 is the most appropriate zone for the Blueberry Farm property. In the purpose statement of the RLD land use designation, it notes that lands that can be adequately protected by critical areas regulations should be zoned R-4. R-4 zoning of the Blueberry Farm also meets the purpose of the zone as established in RMC 4-2-020 D. This section notes that the R-4 zone is established to promote single-family residences in urban neighborhoods with amenity open spaces. It is appropriate, then, to consider rezoning the Blueberry Farm property to R-4. Rezoning the Blueberry Farm R-4 does not require a Comprehensive Plan amendment because the property is already designated for RLD land use. However, it does not make sense to rezone a single 3.4 acre piece of property. Spot zoning is generally undesirable if it provides different development options for similarly situated people and properties. The Blueberry Farm was originally spot zoned to protect the agricultural use, which was a valid reason for the spot zone. Given that the property is not feasible for commercial agriculture any longer, the development rules and regulations should be the same for the Blueberry Farm property as for the properties around it. Properties around the Blueberry Farm are similarly situated. There are nine parcels over an acre in size within a quarter mile of the Blueberry Farm, and large parcel sizes are predominant in this area. Many of these parcels are subject to similar conditions as the NIS Blueberry Farm, including the presence of the type four stream, identified wetland conditions (both mapped and confirmed), and being located at the "headwaters" of H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-02 Blueberry Farm\Issue Paper(7-06).doc Kennydale Creek. Some parcels also abut steep slopes along Interstate 405. Recent development of some of the surrounding land at the R-8 level of intensity has affected the hydrology of the area, suggesting that the R-8 zone may be too intense for this area. Rezoning a larger portion of upper Kennydale to R-4 is recommended and would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The area is already consistent with the Comprehensive Plan RLD designation. Objective LU-EE calls for R-4 zoning in areas suitable for urban levels of service, but suitable for suburban estate style single family development. Most of upper Kennydale has already developed in the manner consistent with the RLD designation of the Comprehensive Plan. Existing development also is consistent with the R-4 zoning and development standards. R-4 zoning would preserve the existing large lot estate style development pattern. There are a number of other benefits to an area rezone. Neighbors who sent letters and provided testimony in 2005, when the issue of rezoning the Blueberry Farm was first discussed, noted how much they enjoyed the open spaces and wildlife that used them. These parties were concerned about the effects of development downstream on Salmon in Lake Washington, about the loss of green and natural areas, hydrology changes, and the loss of wetlands. If less intense future development were allowed in a wider area, there would be greater preservation of open space amenities and less alteration of natural systems in the neighborhood. Thus, the community may benefit from a rezone of more than just the Blueberry Farm property. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: The area of upper Kennydale proposed for rezoning to R-4 currently is approximately 49 acres. It is estimated that there are currently 96 dwelling units. Under the current zoning, there is capacity for 205 total units (this includes the existing 96 units). Under the proposed zoning, there is capacity for 110 total units (including existing units). As a result, if the proposed zoning were to be enacted, there would a reduction in future capacity of about 95 units. Citywide, there is enough capacity to accommodate this potential growth elsewhere. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed rezone of several blocks in upper Kennydale must meet at least one of the following criteria in RMC 4-9-020 G. It meets the criterion that the change supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan. The adopted Comprehensive Plan vision calls for a diversity of housing types to cater to the variety of needs and wants in the community. It also calls for a commitment to protect environmental quality in the City. ZONING CONCURRENCY: This request complies with the decision criteria for rezones in RMC 4-9-180. It is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed zoning is consistent with the adopted policies for the RLD land use designation. Although the Blueberry Farm property was reviewed during the 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle, the issue of its rezone was specifically held over until this year. Zoning of the property and the surrounding neighborhood has not been considered since 1992, when the Blueberry Farm was zoned RC. H:\EDNSP\Comp P1an\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-02 Blueberry Farm\Issue Paper(7-06).doc CONCLUSION: Unless the Blueberry Farm property was to continue to be used for agriculture, or to be used as an open space, it does not fit with the RC zone. The property best Norif meets the policies and purposes of the R-4 zone. However, much of the neighborhood surrounding the Blueberry Farm should be zoned R-4 also. This would provide the maximum environmental benefit, while still allowing minimum urban densities in the upper Kennydale area. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-02 Blueberry Farm\Issue Paper(7-06).doc (VC O ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, C , NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC ' ._� • PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: September 29, 2006 TO: Ray Giometti, Chair Planning Commissioners FROM: Erika Conkling, Senior Planning SUBJECT: Future of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm In written and oral testimony on the rezone of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm, many people expressed their disappointment at the loss of the Blueberry Farm. Clearly, this small scale u-pick operation is unique and has been a valuable resource in Renton for many decades. However, the Blueberry Farm is a business, and like all businesses, the City cannot control the decisions of a business owner to come, leave, or stay in Renton. Unless someone purchases this property and continues its operation as a small scale farm, this parcel is unlikely to continue as a Blueberry Farm. The current owners have purchased property elsewhere and will be selling the property and leaving the area. Given this reality, it is important to understand that many variables affect the future of this property. While we do not know the full extent of the critical areas on the property, it is very likely that a portion of the property is encumbered by a wetland. Our best estimate is that more than two acres of the 3.4 acre property contains a wetland. The protection of this resource will be directly related to the care and maintenance of the property by its owner. A future owner could preserve the blueberry bushes and maintain the small scale agricultural use. If a future owner preserved the agricultural use, there is no guarantee they would manage the property naturally and avoid the use of chemical fertilizers and sprays, as the current owners have done. A future owner could also remove the bushes and halt the agricultural use. 3.4 acres is a significant amount of property to maintain in any case. Without the full time work that has gone into keeping the property maintained over the last few decades, the property could easily become overgrown. The way critical areas regulations works, implementation of full protective regulations are triggered by a development permit. Under RC zoning, no additional units would be allowed on the property, so the chances of a development permit application would be very small. With R-4 zoning, it is far more likely that the City would receive a permit application for an additional dwelling on the property. This permit would trigger a full review of the critical areas on the property and wetland delineation. Critical areas would h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to pc(10-06).doc Ray Giometti Page 2 of 2 September 29,2006 likely be set aside as a Native Growth Protection Easement, which would protect the resource in perpetuity. While critical areas regulations are in effect whether or not a permit application is filed, without an application for a development permit, the City has no way of knowing exactly what is out there, exactly where it is, or which regulations apply to its protection. It is very difficult to enforce critical areas regulations without this information. In addition, land owners are allowed to make many vegetation changes without a required permit. These incremental changes result in the net loss of critical areas. Removing few trees a year, putting in a new lawn,bringing in a couple yards of topsoil, fencing an area to keep an animal, and other such changes do not(and should not)require a permit. However, these incremental changes alter the functions and values of nearby critical areas. It is highly likely that such changes altered the functions and values of the wetlands that have already been delineated across the street from the Blueberry Farm. Maintaining the RC zoning does not necessarily protect the potential resources present on the Blueberry Farm. City critical areas regulations will protect the potential wetland resource on the farm, if given the chance to be fully implemented and enforced. The Citizens of Renton have been extremely lucky that the current and past owners of the Kennydale Blueberry Farm have been excellent stewards of the land. Future owners of the property may be excellent stewards as well,but there is absolutely no guarantee that this will be the case. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-02 blueberry farm\memo to pc(10-06).doc us 2vin I 1111 -- im re rz -.iu nUll 12,i.-:: rI ill If .. 1 4111111111111111 ■ I—il I ■■■■■I1 mir ‘ 1 ft, Ill (1) IIIIP El 1 ; II PAT. in .1 IR a. IN Mal 0 imi di ■■ =I ir. :41 1 - iiii i 1 - 2 \ l ■ 1.111 hi:: n I 1 I I II/ 111 , II - 1 1 r1 Q 1 NI _ E or 4 u, L...)- I 1 L =_ \ i 20tn S . lINa El ■■ ■■ ■■■ LI ■I MM. /MEI ft aIIIIIte■ > (13 :74:44,, 1111114vili a41 . ,I, k 1141 OIL A , . .b e '''".. 1111" liAtilli TIM _I in_ • ■� ILI ��■ ■ 6th S-, - . I I 1 , irk] 'Blueberry Farm CPA 2006-M-02 0 400 800 Planning Commission Recommendation 1 I R-s ...............,............ ® Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning 1 . 4800 . A �e� ® From Resource Conservation to R-4 C.E.Fcre1 Remain Residential Low Density 13 November 2006 REVISED RECOMMENDATION AMENDMENT 2006-M-3 - RIVERA DESCRIPTION: A request has been submitted to change the zoning on a 2.09-acre property located on 851 S. Carr Road, one parcel east of the intersection of Smithers Ave. S. and Carr (see Attachment `A'). The current zoning is Residential 8 (R-8), a single-family residential zone. The Comprehensive Plan designation is Residential Single Family(RSF). A rezone to the requested Commercial Office (CO) zone would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from RSF to Commercial Corridor (CC). Commercial Office is an implementing zone of the Commercial Corridor designation. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Is the subject parcel is suitable for residential or commercial land use? 2. Would the Commercial Corridor or Residential Medium Density Land Use designation be more appropriate for the parcel? 3. Should the Comprehensive Plan review expanded to the contiguous Edlund property, also in commercial use, and the former Edlund property across Carr Rd. (that is owned by the City of Renton and will be developed for park use)? Expansion to include 20 acres would allow the City to consider Residential Medium Density zoning for the property. 4. Does the commercial use allowed in the Medium Density Residential implemented by R-14 zoning make both the commercial activities at the Rivera property and the Edlund property conforming uses? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: REVISED • Deny the request to redesignate and re-zone property the Corridor Commercial with Commercial Arterial Zoning • Approve re-designation of this property and the adjoining parcels within the city limits to Residential Medium Density with concurrent R-14 zoning. The R-14 zoning designation allows small commercial uses using the development standard of Neighborhood Commercial zoning. Sferfr H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-03 Rivera\CPA Issue Paper to PCReavised Sept 18.doc ANALYSIS: Vicinity Property on the north side of Can Road at this location is still within unincorporated King County. Property on the south side of Carr Road, including the subject property, was annexed into the City of Renton in 1987. Can Road is also identified on some maps by the Renton address of S. 43`d Street and the King County address of S. 179th Street. The area is served by the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. Uses and zoning in the area consists of the following: 1. Edlund LLC property, a 3.7 acre property, within the City of Renton, zoned Residential 8, abutting the subject property on its east and south sides. 2. Valley View Heights, a 41 unit condominium complex, within the City of Renton, zoned Residential Multi-Family, located abutting the subject property on the west side. 3. The R.W. Scott Construction Co. 3.28 acre property, located on the north side of Can Road (aka S. 179th Street) in unincorporated King County and having County R8S0 zoning. 4. Three parcels totaling 9.73 acres owned by the City of Renton,but located in unincorporated King County, are across Carr Road from the subject parcel. The zoning on the west and middle properties is R1 SO and R12S0 on the east parcel. Subject Property A single-family house on the property suffered serious damage from fire in about 2002 and was subsequently rebuilt in 2003. Records from the King County Tax Assessor indicate there is a second, small dwelling unit, or accessory dwelling unit on the property. Currently, a real estate mortgage business is located in the single family house. The owner of the property/business would like to place a sign at the front of the property in view of vehicle traffic on Carr Road, a high volume arterial. Businesses, except for home occupations, which are accessory to residence, are not permitted in single family residential zones in the City, nor are commercial signs allowed. It is not clear in the record how long the property has been used for business purposes but the current use is only allowed in the R-8 zone as a home occupation. The City issued a home occupation business license in May 2005. As a home occupation, the use is limited to a business that is clearly incidental to the residential use and can not employ more than one non-resident. No exterior signage is allowed except for non-electric and non-illuminated signage of 2 square feet attached to the building wall or window. A home occupation is limited to 8 customer visits per day. The use of the property appears to be beyond the scope of the home occupation H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-03 Rivera\CPA Issue Paper to PCReavised Sept 18.doc provisions. The applicant has also expressed a desire to expand the business and post business signage. Environment The area is within the Black River Basin and the Panther Creek Sub basin. Two branches of Panther Creek(or Panther Creek and a tributary) and a Class 2 Stream, cross the property from the northwest to the southeast. The creeks have formed a deep ravine with steeply sloped sides. These, together, render portions of the property inaccessible. These environmental conditions would make development beyond the existing single-family house difficult. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: Capacity with Commercial Arterial Zoning Although the buildable lands data base indicates the property, if rezoned to Commercial Office, could yield 28,140 square feet of office development capacity with 113 employees (assuming 250 s.f. per employee). However, given the abovementioned environmental conditions capacity would likely be reduced to about 2,100 square feet and 8 employees. Capacity within the R-14 Zone If rezoned R-14, the subject property would have a capacity for either two residential units or approximately 1,900 square feet of commercial capacity with 7 employees (assuming 250 s.f. per employee)under the constrained environmental conditions. The Edlund LLC property, which would also be considered for rezone to R-14 would have the capacity for either 12 residential units or approximately 9,800 square feet of commercial development with approximately 39 employees (assuming 250 s.f. per employee) under estimated environmental constraints. Commercial use The existing single-family house is 2,480 s.f The same formula for determining potential employees (250 s.f per employee) would indicate that fewer than 10 would be assigned to this property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: Title IV 4-9-020 states that all amendments must meet at least one of the following review criteria: 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\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-03 Rivera\CPA Issue Paper to PCReavised Sept 18.doc 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 proposal meets the first criterion because it supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan because it meets Land Use Element Goal Five, which reads: "Pursue the transition of non-conforming uses and structure to encourage more conforming uses and development patterns." Commercial Development is allowed in the R-14 zone by policy LU-181. It also meets the R-14 mapping criteria in Policy LU-159 as the property is adjacent to an arterial, near a commercial corridor designation, includes more than 20 acres, is buffered from single-family zoned areas, and development is achievable on the site. ZONING CONCURRENCY: The Decision Criteria for rezone in Title IV 4-9-180F have also been met because the proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan, as demonstrated above and the circumstances affecting the subject property have changed since the last analysis. CONCLUSION: A rezone of the subjectproperty, the Edlund LLCproperty, and the ro property across the street p p Y owned by the City and slated for park development to R-14 would be the best solution to for allowing the best use of these properties in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. rnr H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-03 Rivera\CPA Issue Paper to PCReavised Sept 18.doc ilrill411 L.P IIICity Owned Par els U n i corportate. Area V 0 iiiik R-14 R-14 R-10 Wing Zoning Zoning (Existing) 111111 III 00 400 Rivera CPA 2006-M-03 9 _____ anning Commission Recommendation — Commercial Corridor NM Residential Low Density GticY 04, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Study Area I I Residential Medium Density • s� •♦ Alex Pietsch,Administrator — "�� c.E.Feasel — Renton City Residential Multi-Family 'P.NTo'$ 13November2006 Limits I I Residential Single Family REVISED September 5, 2006 AMENDMENT 2006-M-04: SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES DESCRIPTION: Springbrook Associates requested a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Residential Medium (RM) to Commercial Corridor for the 5.61-acre property located just south of South 37th Street, and west of the dead-end at South 38th Street west of Talbot Road. Concurrent with this request is a requested rezone from Residential-10 (R-10) to Commercial Office (CO) for this same parcel of land. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Whether the parcel in question meets policy requirements for Corridor Commercial with Commercial Office zoning given its geographic location and site constraints? 2. Would a designation of Medium Density Residential with R-10 zoning or Single Family and a concurrent R-8 zoning designation be a better fit for the parcel? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Approval of the application changing the land use designation from Residential Medium to Corridor Commercial with a concurrent CO rezone. BACKGROUND: Land Use The comprehensive planning for this parcel has been reviewed and considered several times over the last ten years. The parcel was originally rezoned in 1975 to P-1 public use by the Planning Commission. This prior zoning allowed office development as part of the Valley Medical complex. The site platted in 1979 before the Hearing Examiner as part of a four lot short plat for development of a medical clinic application. At the time of the prior staff briefing on this application, information about this original plat was lost. In response to staffs initial negative recommendation on the re-zoning the applicant researched the file and provided documentation that demonstrates the original planning for the property. The plat required an additional access road S. 38th Ct. that provided access to the remaining undeveloped lot 4 (subject of this rezone request). The fact that the plat was approved with a dead end public street without a cul-de-sac or turn-around on lot four indicates that a future site plan allowing adequate traffic circulation and turn-around was anticipated. This would occur with commercial development on the site. The file documents that restrictive covenants were applied to the property upon re-zoning in 1975 . A 50 foot public easement was to be dedicated giving access to the entire property (all 4 lots) and that access was not to occur off of South 37th St. Restrictive covenants also required that development H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-04 Springbrook\2006-M-4 Issue Paper.doc 1)provide for protection of the existing ravine and creek 2)required detailed landscape plans 3)provided for buffers to residential uses 4) limit access to Talbot Road 5) Planning Commission review of further development. In 1979 site plan review for the first phase of commercial development on In 1979 the Hearing Examiner granted a revision allowing a narrower roadway into the site, but access was still limited to Talbot Road. The 5.61-acre parcel currently under review was zoned P-1 (public use), similar to the Valley Medical Center complex south of this parcel, at the time of the original platting. When Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995, this parcel was designated Center Institution (CI) along with the Valley Medical Center south of this property, and the medical/dental offices to the east. By 1999, the parcel's zoning designation was changed from P-1 to Commercial Office (CO) along with the medical/dental offices abutting on the east. The Valley Medical Center south of this parcel was also changed from P-1 to CO as the P-1 zone was phased out. In 2002, the property owner requested and received a re-designation and rezone from commercial office to the present residential classification. The subject site is vacant. Panther Creek runs along the southern edge of the parcel and flows into the Panther Creek wetland west of the property. Properties to the north and west of the parcel are designated Residential Single Family and zoned Residential-8 (R-8). The properties to the north consist of single-family homes. Access from Talbot Road is feasible from S. 38th Court. Environmental Conditions The subject property consists of a fairly level area characterized by tall grasses on the northeastern portion of the property with some wooded slopes that descend to Panther Creek that runs along the southern portion of the property. It is physically separated from most of Valley Medical Center by a steep ravine and Panther Creek. This wooded ravine presents a physical barrier that is unlikely to be overcome due to critical area regulations. The steep slopes and stream on the property will be protected by critical area regulations under any scenario, and will provide a passive open space for whatever develops on the northern portion of the property. The level northern portion of the property is the area most likely to develop in the future, while critical area regulations will most likely preserve the southern portion of the property in some sort of Native Growth Protection Easement. ANALYSIS: The three most likely options available for this piece of property include: ruin H:IEDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-04 Springbrook\2006-M-4 Issue Paper.doc 1. Remaining Residential Medium designation with a Residential-l0 (R-10) zoning designation as a transition between the medical center to the south and east, and residential areas north of the site. 2. Changing the designation back to allow office use with Corridor Commercial land use with a Commercial Office (CO) zone; 3. Changing to a Residential Single Family (RS) designation with a Residential-8 (R-8). The property owners request consideration of returning this site to the former commercial land use designation. They are also requesting rezoning to the Commercial Office zone. They state that there is potential for development of a medical office similar to the two facilities located east of the site on South 38th Street. The property owners changed their marketing plan for this site, and believe that office is the best use of the property. Retirement residence would still be an allowed use under the Commercial Office zoning. A wide range of office uses with surface parking would be allowed in the Commercial Office zone. Building height to ten stories is allowed in the office zoning. If the property were to remain Residential Medium designation with R-10 zoning, it would allow a mix of small-lot single-family detached unit types, townhouses, and small multi- family structures that are compatible with a single-family character. Alternately, a development could occur that was 100% detached single-family houses. Any development would be clustered with a large, passive open-space amenity(the wooded ravine and stream to the south) for residents. A development option that allows a mix of residential types could provide convenient housing for medical professionals working in the nearby medical center, or other commercial uses in the Green River Valley. In addition, retirement residences would continue to be a development option under this Comprehensive Plan/zoning scenario. If the property were to change to the Residential Single Family Comprehensive Plan designation with R-8 zoning, it would allow development primarily of single-family houses that would likely gain access from Shattuck Avenue South or an extension of South 38th Street. There are few options for redevelopment under this scenario, as the primary and most economical use in this zone is single-family residences. Development under the R-8 zone must meet a minimum of 4 dwelling units per acre density. CC/CO Scenario RS/R-8 Scenario RM/R-10 Scenario Commercial Office Yes No No or Medical Office Retirement Yes No Yes Residence Single-Family No Yes Yes Attached No No Yes Townhouses ,.. Attached Flats (no No No Yes more than 4 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-04 Springbrook\2006-M-4 Issue Paper.doc attached per building) NNW CAPACITY ANALYSIS: Modeled theoretical capacity is 48 dwelling units under the R-10 option. Under the R-8 option, theoretical capacity would drop by 14 units to 34 dwelling units. Existing theoretical capacity of the CO zone at this location is 365 employees or jobs. This is the assumed amount increase in employment capacity with the proposed rezone to CO. These figures assume that approximately 0.54 acres of land will be undevelopable due to steep (40%+) slopes, and wetlands located on the site. Information gathered at the project level may find more accurate land measurements for critical area calculations. The applicant has not supplied any potential development scenarios for this site. REVIEW CRITERIA(Find at least one) • The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or • The request supports the adopted Business Plan goals established by the City Council, or • The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or ,4110. • The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council Commercial zoning would support the adopted Business Plan by promote economic development(Business Plan Goal#1). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: In 2004, the Center Institution Land Use designation was eliminated, and policies for a new Corridor Commercial designation were adopted. The Corridor Commercial designation includes policy direction and mapping criteria for Commercial Office uses. The site meets policy criteria for Commercial Office zoning under the umbrella of the Corridor Commercial Land Use designation when the original plat and access road to the entire commercial area is considered. . Mapping criteria for the Corridor Commercial designation are set in Policy LU-133 and include the following three criteria 1. parcel is located on, and having access to, streets classified as principle arterials; 2. location has high traffic volumes; or 3. location has a land use pattern characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. ..4400 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-04 Springbrook\2006-M-4 Issue Paper.doc Talbot Road is a principal arterial, and , this site has functional access to Talbot Road through South 38th Ct., a public road created in 1978 to give access to the four parcels created for future development of a medical clinic. The existing land use pattern on the three developed lots of this plat is commercial office. The site does meet four out of six of the mapping criteria for Residential R-10 zoning: 1. Development patterns conducive to medium-density development are established; 2. Vacant lots exist or parcels have redevelopment potential for medium-density infill development; 3. The site can be buffered from existing single-family residential neighborhoods having densities of eight(8) dwelling units or less; or 4. The site can be buffered from adjacent or abutting incompatible uses. ZONING CONCURRENCY: A concurrent change from Residential-10 (R-10) to Commercial Office (CO) to zoning designation is proposed. DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION Based on the information available, staff make the following findings for a rezone of this property based on the following review criteria. 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 2. Since the most recent land use analysis or 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. Since the most recent zoning review of this property new information was submitted to the city documenting the original plat, site improvements and intent to use the land as part of a commercial four lot short plan. Since the last zoning review of the property the City's new Critical Areas regulations adopted stream buffer standards. This site is constrained by Panther Creek, a Class II stream that has a standard 100-foot minimum buffer. The property owner has submitted a site plan documenting how commercial office development can occur consistent with Critical Areas regulations. CONCLUSION: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-04 Springbrook\2006-M-4 Issue Paper.doc Although the parcel is abutting the medical center to the south, it is cut off from that use by Panther Creek ravine. The medical offices to the east block visibility of the parcel from Talbot Road. In the last zoning review of this site, the City found that the property has its best development potential in some form of residential use. However, new information about the roadway access to the site created in 1979 and a site plan demonstrating how commercial development can be achieved meeting critical areas regulations demonstrates new information that change the conclusion reached in 2002. The subject property contains a number of critical areas including a riparian corridor and steep slopes of varying degrees. This calls for efficient development of the site in order to maximize economic use of the property while protecting critical areas. Adopted Commercial Corridor Land Use Designation Text Purpose Statement: The Commercial Corridor 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 Commercial Corridor 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. Commercial Corridor 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. Commercial Corridor 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 Commercial Corridor 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; 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 Commercial Corridor Land Use designation should be mapped in areas with the following characteristics: 1) Located on, and having access to, streets classified as principle arterials; H:IEDNSP\Comp P1an\Amendments1200612006 Map Amendments12006-M-04 Springbrook12006-M-4 Issue Paper.doc 2) High traffic volumes; or 4,err' 3) Land use pattern characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. Policy LU-334. The Commercial Corridor designation should be implemented through Commercial Arterial, Commercial Office, or Light Industrial zoning. Policy LU-335. Increased demand for commercial uses should be accommodated primarily through redevelopment and intensification of existing business area designations rather than expansion of those areas. Objective LU-EEE: Create opportunities for development and re-development of land in portions of the Commercial Corridor 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, and residential uses. Policy LU-336. Portions of the Commercial Corridor 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. Objective LU-FFF: Create opportunities for intensive office uses in portions of Commercial Corridor designations including a wide range of business, financial, and professional services supported by service and commercial/retail activities. 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. Adopted Residential Medium Density Land Use Designation Text 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 infill 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. I-:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-04 Springbrook\2006-M-4 Issue Paper.doc Policy LU-157. Residential Medium Density designated areas should be zoned for either Residential 10 dwelling units per net acre (R-10), Residential 14 dwelling units per net acre (R-14), or new zoning designations that allow housing in this density range. Policy LU-158. Residential Medium Density neighborhoods may be considered for Residential 10(R- 10)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 zoning for flats or other low-density multi family use; 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 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-04 Springbrook\2006-M-4 Issue Paper.doc dam_ 11 O O ; 0 4 lil Aiiriallill IIII8° liii' •• o .. il El 0 lIME 0 3 I � ca css N c c E v v E 1 'a) o m x cc I I — 44 al a) Q E E CO quipii OinUv� re6 ...it, LI O E co 0 0 .* I gliimmir, cm co U i L . PI = <a^ �a c� Q AMENDMENT M-5 - PUGET COLONY DESCRIPTION: Residents of the recently annexed 18.8-acre Puget Colony Homes subdivision request a change in land use designation from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. They are requesting this change because they do not want to see lots greater than 10,000 square feet in area in their neighborhood subdivided into smaller, 5,000 square foot lots. The latter, they believe, would be out of character with the larger 9,000-plus square foot lots that typify this neighborhood. The subject subdivision was annexed into the City in January 2006 as part of the 65-acre Mosier II Annexation. Puget Colony Homes Subdivision consists of three cul-de-sac streets, SE 133rd Street, SE 134th Street, and SE 135th Street. It also has homes fronting on SE 132nd Street on the north and homes fronting on SE 136th Street on the south. There are 61 lots in the Puget Colony Homes Subdivision of which 23 are greater than 10,000 square feet in area, and presumably, could be subdivided if existing building layouts were not a constraint. Four lots are greater than 15,000 square feet and presumably could be subdivided into three lots if existing building layouts were not a constraint. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Whether the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map should be amended so that the 18.8-acre Puget Colony Homes Subdivision would be designated Residential Low Density? 2. If the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map is amended, changing the current land use designation for this area from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density, should the subject site be rezoned R-4 consistent with this new land use designation? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: A change in land use designation from RS to RLD with concurrent R-4 zoning would be more in character with this existing subdivision. The current average density for the Puget Colony Homes Subdivision is only about 3.25 dwellings per acre and the plat is 75% built out. The Administration is therefore recommending that the 18.8-acre Puget Colony Homes Subdivision be redesignated Residential Low Density and concurrently be rezoned R-4, four units per net acre. Staff are also recommending that the Planning Commission consider expanding this CPA to include the nine lot Kimberly Lane subdivision to the immediate west on the north side of SE 136th Street, 13508 138th Avenue SE, a 1.1 acre parcel, west of Kimberly Lane subdivision, and the 31-lot Hideaway Home Sites subdivision on the south side of SE 136th Street since all of these lots are greater than the R-4 zones 8,000 square feet minimum. If the Commission concurs, a detailed capacity and land use analysis, similar to what follows for the Puget Colony Homes subdivision, will be prepared. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-05 Puget Colony\CPA M-5 Puget Colony.doc ANALYSIS: Based upon Figure 1, it appears that out of the 61 lots in the Puget Colony Homes subdivision, 46 lots are currently developed with single-family detached structures. 15 lots are vacant and presumably could support future development. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: This analysis considers land area only and does not consider the feasibility of removing or redeveloping structures. There currently are 61 lots in the Puget Colony Homes subdivision. Of these, 26 lots are 10,000 square feet or larger in size, but less than 15,000 square feet in area, and potentially could be subdivided into two or more 5,000 square foot lots with R-8 zoning based on parcel size without consideration of the location of existing houses. Four of these lots are 15,000 square feet or greater in area, but less than 20,000 square feet, and could accommodate three 5,000 square foot. Thus, with R-8 zoning, 24 new lots could theoretically be developed. With R-8 zoning and 5,000 square foot minimum lot sizes, 83 lots could be created if sewer service is provided. With R-4 zoning and 8,000 square foot minimum lot sizes, four lots would become legal non-conforming because these lots are less than 8,000 square feet in area. Two lots are larger than 16,000 square feet in area, and theoretically could be subdivided into two lots each, for a net increase of two lots, bringing the total number of lots under R-4 zoning to 63 lots. Existing Non". potential TiOT � Future Lots conforming New LOT4 Net Lots Lots Density R-4 Zone with 8,000 4.31 sc . it. 61 4 2 63 du/net minimum acre lots R-8 Zone with 5,000 5.82 sq ft. 61 0 24 85 du/net minimum acre lots COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: Pursuant to Title IV 4-9-020, proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments are required to meet 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 pan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-05 Puget Colony\CPA M-5 Puget Colony.doc 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. Amending the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for this area from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density appears to be consistent with the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan in that it helps ensure that the City has "well established neighborhoods and a growing diversity of housing to match the diversity of the population with its various needs and wants."' Such a Comp Plan Amendment is also generally consistent with Policy LU-134 which states that: "Density should be a maximum of 4- du/net acre (Residential 4) on portions of the Residential Low Density land where [environmental] constraints are not extensive and urban densities are appropriate. In fact, because the area is an existing established neighborhood with an average density of 3.36- du/net acre, at full development (63 lots) under Residential 4 zoning, densities would be approximately 4.3-du/net acre. Designating the 18.8 acres Residential Low Density also appears consistent with Objective LU-EE which states: "Designate Residential 4 du/acre zoning 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." As an existing, already developed, neighborhood that provides suburban style single-family dwellings, R-4 zoning would seem more appropriate for the area than R-8 zoning. Even at full build out a density of only 4.3 would be achieved. With R-8 zoning an anticipated density of 5.68 du/net acre could be achieved, assuming 22 new lots. ZONING CONCURRENCY: Pursuant to Title IV 4-9-190, the following criteria must be met for a change in zoning classification: 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: i) 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. 'From the Vision for the City:"Renton:A world-class city where people choose to live,work,and play." H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-05 Puget Colony\CPA M-5 Puget Colony.doc This proposed CPA, as seen above, does meet the criteria in RMC 4-9-020G. Also, it is potentially classified for R-4 zoning in that it is contiguous to an existing RLD land use 4 1101 designation to its east and south and the area to the east across Hoquiam Avenue NE, recently brought into the City, is currently zoned R-4. This specific reclassification was not considered at the time of the last land use analysis and area zoning and, in fact, there are material changes that do affect the subject 18.8-acre site. These include the annexation of the site as well as the surrounding area to the north, east and west into the City as well as the construction of new subdivisions to the west and east of the site. Concurrent R-4 zoning would be consistent with a redesignation of the 18.8-acre site from RS to RLD and better reflects the existing density of 4.18 du/net acre. CONCLUSION: The proposed redesignation of the 18.8-acre Puget Colony Homes subdivision site from Residential Single Family (RS), as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, to Residential Low Density (RLD) appears consistent with the provisions of Title IV, 4-9-020G. Similarly, the proposed concurrent reclassification of this site from the City's R-8 zone to its R-4 zone appears consistent with the provisions of Title IV, 4-9-120, since this site was not considered for this zoning classification during the last area land use analysis and area zoning. Consideration should also be given to amending the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for two existing subdivisions to the southeast of Puget Colony Homes subdivision. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-05 Puget Colony\CPA M-5 Puget Colony.doc 1 ----)-L- , , _. H �i � ' \ E, 2nc St `�� , c I I, 1 , r 1 1I I D., o L In y Q 3 110 _. , RI MI EIM 1 ....k ,---) v. fak Ili 1 0 140 *16 0. 3 * 1111161Ly 3 * li s, 111 All * 4, Puget Colony Homes CPA 2006-M-05 4 -fanning Commission Recommendation 0 200 400 iY Wiz::::<:::: ;:::.: ........................ c. 04, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Study Area +I Alex Pietsch,Administrator �/ G.Del Rosario — — Renton City ® Residential Low Density . / 13 November 2006 Limits I I Residential Single Family , AMENDED RECOMMENDATION September 20, 2006 AMENDMENT 2006 M- 6 CITY OF RENTON HIGHLANDS CENTER VILLAGE LAND USE DESIGNATION MAP AMENDMENTS DESCRIPTION: This application proposes that the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations in the Highlands Study Area should be revised in several locations. ISSUE SUMMARY: • Area A on hearing notice South of Sunset to NE 9th This area is now in the Center Village with Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning. The proposal is to remove this area from the Center Village(CV) and designate it RM-F Land Use with RM-F zoning. • Area B(bullet 1 on hearing notice) North of NE 16th St.to approximately NE 20th St. This area is currently designated Residential Medium Density (RM-D) with R-10 zoning. The proposal is to add the area to the CV Designation. • Area B (bullet 2 on hearing notice) Lots fronting on Harrington Ave. south of NE 9th St. to two parcels south of NE 6th St. This area is currently designated RM-D with R-10 zoning. The proposal is to added this area to the CV Designation with proposed R-14 zoning. • Area C (bullet 2): South of NE 8th St. and east of Harrington This area currently has RM-D Land Use with R-10 zoning. The amendment will review whether it should be changed to a Residential Single Family (RS-F) Designation with R-8 zoning. • Area C (bullet 1): West of Monroe Ave between NE 12th and Sunset Blvd. This area is currently designated RM-D with R-10 zoning. The amendment will evaluate whether this area should be RS-F with R-8 zoning. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Recommendation: Area A Change the Comprehensive Plan Map to remove this area from the CV zone, designate it RM-F and retain the multi-family zoning. Area B The original recommendation was to amend the Comprehensive Plan to add these areas into the CV zone, but to retain the R-10 zoning. This recommendation is now revised to request that the Commission recommend concurrent re-zoning to R-14. The revised recommendation will require an additional public hearing at the City Council to process concurrent re-zoning to R-14 zoning. Area C The original recommendation was to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change these areas from RM-D to RS-F, but to retain the R-10 zoning for a later zoning action. This recommendation is now revised to request that the Commission recommend concurrent re- H.\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-06 Highlands Study Area\Highlands Map Amendment 2006 Issue paper.doc zoning to R-8. The revised recommendation will require an additional public hearing at the City Council to process concurrent re-zoning to R-8 zoning. ANALYSIS: Area A This area is developed with garden style multi-family structures that will likely not redevelopment into the pedestrian oriented urban scale development envisioned in the CV. Policy LU-331 prohibits garden style apartments. Policy LU-328 calls for compact urban redevelopment, while Policy LU-323 calls for parking structures. LU-317 calls for mapping the CV Designation to areas that are candidate locations for a higher density mixed-use type of development. After review of the structures and development patterns in this area, staff concluded that the redevelopment pattern was likely more consistent with the RM-F policies. The CV and RM-F Policies are included in Attachment 1. Area B The CV Land Use designation envisions compact urban development that is pedestrian oriented and promotes an intensive form of urban mixed use development. The properties in Area B are now designated RM-D with R-10 zoning, but these area areas that are candidate locations for higher density mixed use development as envisioned in Policy LU-317. The CV and RM-D Policies are included in Attachment 1. • The area North of NE 16th St. to approximately NE 20th St. is developed with duplex properties on large lots,the Hillcrest School, and the Renton Housing Authority properties. • The area fronting on Harrington Ave. south of NE 9th St. to two parcels south of NE 6`h St. is developed with duplex through fourplex properties that would need the additional density incentive to stimulate redevelopment. Area C These are developed with single-family uses and redevelopment meeting the objective of the RM-D Designation is unlikely. The area west of Monroe Ave between NE 12`h and Sunset Blvd. has covenants on many parcels prohibiting further subdivision at greater densities. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: Area A This area is built out with multifamily development and has minor if any additional capacity. Zoning would Area B The area north of NE 16th St.to approximately NE 20th St. would potentially have a capacity increase of 88 units with the CV Land Use designation and R-14 zoning. The area fronting on Harrington Ave. south of NE 9th St. to two parcels south of NE 6th St. would potentially have a capacity increase of 43 units or 83,000 SF of commercial assuming CV rather than R-14 zoning. H•\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-06 Highlands Study Area\Highlands Map Amendment 2006 Issue paper.doc Area C �..• This area is built out with single-family forms of development and has minor if any additional capacity. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed Comprehensive Plan Map amendments satisfy the following findings in Title IV 4-9-020. Area A Finding#3. Amending the Comprehensive Plan from CV to RM-F eliminates conflicts within the existing zoning of RM-F and the CV Comprehensive Plan designation. Area B Finding #1. The map amendment changing from RM-F Density to CV supports the Vision adopted in the CV Designation. Properties in Area B have lot configurations and existing low development densities that will allow redevelopment to occur consistent with the CV. Area C Finding #2. The map amendment changing from RM-F Density to RM-S meets the Goal 2 of the adopted Business Plan"Promote Neighborhood Revitalization." ZONING CONCURRENCY: Additional review and hearing on zoning concurrency will be required. Properties redesignated into the Center Village will require R-14 zoning; Properties redesignated Single Family residential will require R-8 zoning ATTACHMENT 1 CENTER VILLAGE LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Center Village (CV) 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 providing for compact urban development, transit orientation, pedestrian circulation,and a community focal point organized around an urban village concept. Objective LU-CCC: Develop CVs, characterized by intense urban development supported by site planning and infrastructure that provides a pedestrian scale environment. Policy LU-317. Apply the CV 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-06 Highlands Study Area\Highlands Map Amendment 2006 Issue paper.doc 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. Nati 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-325. Encourage shared parking to use urban land efficiency. Policy LU-328. Encourage more urban style design and intensity of development (e.g. building height,bulk, landscaping,parking)within CVs than with land uses outside the Center. Policy LU-330. Residential development within CVs is intended to be urban scale, stacked, flat and/or 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. RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) 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. The RM-F designation is implemented by RM-F zoning. Objective LU-JJ: Encourage the development of infill parcels with quality projects in existing multi-family districts. Policy LU-182. RM-F designations should be in areas of the 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 RM-F designation areas should be used to meet multi-family housing needs, without expanding the area boundaries, until land capacity in this designation is used. RM-F designations have the highest priority for development or redevelopment with multi-family uses. Policy LU-184. Expansion of the RM-F designation is limited to properties meeting the following criteria: 1) 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 RM-F 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. 3) Any such expansion of the RM-F land use designation should not bisect or truncate another contiguous land use district. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-06 Highlands Study Area\Highlands Map Amendment 2006 Issue paper.doc RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Residential Medium.Density (RMD) designation is intended to create the opportunity for neighborhoods that offer a variety of lot sizes,housing, and ownership options. RMD 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 infill development, encourage use of transit service, and promote the efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. Objective LU-GG: Designate land for 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. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Lands in the Residential Single Family (RS-F) 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. 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 RS-F neighborhoods. Policy LU-148. A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet should be allowed on in-fill parcels of less than one acre (43,560 sq. ft.) in RS-F designations. Allow a reduction in lot size to 4,500 square feet on parcels greater than one acre to create an incentive for aggregation of land. 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-150. Required setbacks should exclude public or private legal access areas, established through or to a lot, and parking areas. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-06 Highlands Study Area\Highlands Map Amendment 2006 Issue paper.doc Policy LU-151. Maximum height of structures should not exceed two (2) stories in single-family residential neighborhoods. Policy LU-152. 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-153. 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 identified to notify residents of future roadway connections. Policy LU-154. Interpret development standards to support new plats and infill project designs incorporating street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes that address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. NIS H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-06 Highlands Study Area\Highlands Map Amendment 2006 Issue paper.doc -- — __ yam.■+����� ■■���1- ■p ■ F d• .___, :,-; ii.,. Milm II ii Pk si i/113 I/I ■■ �' ��, r. In 1 MN in Mfg 9.-'- `44 MEE m mzi lEn IMMIUMME 0 0 14.• I A . A1:• 111 —i •�I . t!■■ ■�i iwiai■■ Iu1m■ri Ii - fa— amE. IMP u/ ��� E•N • ■uaI3;.lI■■■Iraw— pm 2,d4-1 LIE EEEEELE,III►� p'�w .�logre'W, grovel '�j:L tem in is ■n■ 111 ��I 1��9n ■■�.��■ /' I!!•� 1111111i■■■■ m difiWW1 • A II ■o I:■11 IIn11 YY ;1 St St -f. i+ Erie KEDCJ�J1���� _ ■` w ik � Et� 11I11I/111 !!1L ra■ ■ II II11■ ■+ NE 20th MIMEr■ 'E° - n1n1►� r.=j : `1��� ■�/ t ` ■■■■■, 4, ME A litIle: ii oN l ■■■ Nontu1�i I , 1 MY• ',II ma/PI ■■■ s p - • ■�■ t iiI '6tFa• maid =IIL ■ sa ■ciOngP ■ ii KV, 9111111remill 11111 --■ C ■a NPHIW. IIMEMP gioppr;it o , 10 ammo ■u MI iff, um •I II in■_ENI sl111111 o EMI n� 111112 ®l. INA Ili in t hI'! ." IV No in Ifgl ----0 Eillimm ,N:_ .,:min asion El A - inisum.e *I ..4.4 all u•-•444"11111110001111: ow 4 NE th ■r.�■ � ■ i�%�i1 respivill edigiAll',.. II to. :i �■ U■■� ■ D''� !n\■1 n NA moiligilliiiiiinnin ,� ►�jtia izons/�! Cr�tr11 t q ;� — ■11■�ea��ata■■■■■ C1�aa■■■S _■M.. ..LiLi ii :: M i■� : c� 1■111 reginnum i maim 11111 �3 w\J Y�I� i i Imago I�: Ga ii �� IFMI KM 1wolP ue' 1 ■■Ili1 Gi1 i mpilm . r IA wWM o . owl: :,. :I■ t• ���� l�■ ■�r� ■r l >■ r� ���i�! i�� M. ■I�ye. ` : me: ,■ r/♦r p.� at�I :1■■1■■ ■M ■1■. pc !� .•, E' mr r r ■ e t♦� . E. ■ g yv` . +4+ :• •'• . O��� 141 ►IJ ._� .1 �1=; MINIM 1I111/I.1140S. Ij i, a II ;i,m ,►i:W fit■ 111■ Sri ' • ��1:'1��� 1 ■ 1■/�J E!� !♦♦ li�aIISIII\���wV7r • �/`.Mill% a wit �I •� /� ems . � �I� 4S, le GS II gm • -\ 111 m •1 •0j At 421 ♦I%•t1 Vs a ■■ .■ims �■ IIIR!■ '� Cry �� EA lima`■ Ate ■P'I+SU* i• ■■ t r'■ IIIICia ■IIGa w: Ii1 rE�■■ ■■ e'� 11111111 nuunur Inll�la :. 1!�i; �� _ ��.II�i111 IIIIiP ,� ��� Y% ■ ��ii•\■!■ u� ■ um �/�� ►♦,� �1I1■■■ ■ ■■ ,�1 r =�O_ i n ono �� �16 �,� ��/►�I ■ %IP all■ „ter! ;►ors�� 4ir� °....r;;■�In Hiahiands Subarea ® RLD 0 1000 2000 I IRS 'S'. Proposed Land Use -Task Force I I RMD ® RMF 1 : 12000 Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning ■■ CV C Alex Pictscb,Administrator C.E.EaselMO CC 03 November 2006 L111I!i!I I1Ii\ er çIiTjems MI ' . ■■■ wed ■ ■■■■■■III: I% ii ■1 /�1■: ■■■ � �r7 !!11ail mil amaniaina�iMEN E." mill ill NE It r.Tl1:LEMUR t L'l1I5 10 Hp . ■so no ■1r'■ ■1annum ■� mumI..■F"■ :gm -d■■ gilt; Vow" �� A Emma P1iR11r ' ` �■ `�0j•�� 4fa sill■II■ . �� ■ ■ fir' ..4 t w wH�n um lmm. ■� ■ 111 :1st StAiello Yi .in'. il all QA ■. Iw� ■ . ■cam in - � • � �� � ■ YL1I�ii::1��i11i %A■11■ ■ NE 20th ■ � •�■� a� ■� !!' ,t . ■� 28 r■■ rill! 111111 Q 41 , `'4:` *1111 II■Rip EN ■. -�- Ni i■C� ...mom ■■\ ; /m m w ■11 I •som ii1t!: L!€ ■■. �■i�___fir■� ■"■� 11�.`YL'EIc� ■■■■ ill11111 i II Run= 11 DIPS III titu 1I !I!1 IE �r �� H -'gill ■ ��i �_ ■Ciwe ■r. locale, = c � •xis ms`-J �`i3 - ,-'. iiipituiel . 1 Isla 11 tri Lad III - 'I t'" g.is. mi , . aij! I ■■I/m emoteno1. _ _ 1 alliM111-114-1- NI mill 'gt-' Er' . El ; ; ; g awl MVO;OEN num mi 1 on hi II: am MB 11111 ji ila al E.� � hEwill id 11 � �Iw Wisi. ■ � Ilill mein �900 IN if.. ■W■■■al■■ ■■■■I14 lai ■►�,�. �■ ■ tom*mr ■■■■■■■■ ■'•EP1 IN II .w C. .,« ---TT___ w:. ., iii.,L r ■ ■C6�7■Il� i L■ �`�1 re�woi rm ��� MEL OW. MO IL,40 NM - ■ a, �Y ■YCIHYL'ilas m I Bea 11mG ■ IIIii kr, 11114N1■ ■1111:� �I j - r 11111111■ III III 11,11Irm �, �1�i[7T�I: Q■ c� Ems■ ma !7 ui S4► ■ A■ ■■ ■ A■ ■ swt ..a ■� i` �ad 3 w\<JiY■11■ r■ ■I■ 111010 I ■ MN ■ mom so 1s rim wok �♦ m 9th .. ■■ one ifJI i■ t'ii'!R.I tILl l >: rr ■lidoft. C! •�/I■ ■IH■ti. ■�■ ■1■.M•1 IN OP III� E41 ■ . �� ■■■■mnis 11711•!lwR11111111m'1'I1: mre �'ris 4a Ui■�y 1 - a""m oh e..,• 4 - P11 Iry r . :rm. a ,�■IEa ►�oi„ n�. ■tm, , on ,f is t HIE Sail �`' <v N ?A•4R �■■!A �/ e.^^. �� ■■��% am.. mewl E���� `�` L�?INSIl1\�,�7s•y�r F+: . w�� 'Pitan RI, Si:, iti IRO' �v1■ Iowa rf►Ma =`s ', Of t� O a a okrbokriea • ` %i s A •A. I sr■ 1111R!■ i'�� pr r �'a \III/�vj mumw 1 .N.„a ♦� • ..• Iwo i■ T, 1111uia = 111ta�■ iM �I■ a am r i ■ . N�s 111111111 mumnr■nll�B■E :": 1! Ow AIL la V I.112111 milli, , 4.2111 ■�s Ls \■■■it a m ■ ■■n■ ,��, w�,, `��� ��17L'jJf : w le ``„�! I Ili ■ >•� ■ t�,Y A V �3 a■ tom ' C umfl���H ..t- ��i'. .411PA ■■ —�Ir■ �s�'� �1►ma c u Highlands Subarea_ St. Proposed Zoning - Task Force ® RC R-14 0 1000 2000 r--'I R-1 I■ RM-F ss ::.::.s.....:........ .. 0Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning I I R-8 ■ CV -; Alex Pictsch,Administrator I I R-10 ® CN 1 : 12000 C.E.Feasel 03 November 2006 ` Y ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, &.. �� NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC I ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT �` - MEMORANDUM DATE: November 8, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council CC: Kathy Keolker, Mayor Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Alex Pietsch STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind SUBJECT: Development Agreement for Comprehensive Plan Application#2006-M-7, Former Aqua Barn Properties The attached draft development agreement is forwarded to you for consideration during the public hearing on November 13, 2006. The development agreement is proposed as a condition of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the former Aqua Barn property on �.. the Maple Valley Highway. This property is in the extended Maplewood Addition Annexation and is expected to become part of the City in January 2007. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is a change in the Land Use Map from Residential Low Density to Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial zoning to allow development of a commercial shopping area on the Maple Valley Highway. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is needed to allow commercial development of the property to proceed as planned under King County zoning. Zoning for this commercial development was approved by King County in 1998 as part of a rezone approval that included the multifamily development currently constructed on the rear portion of the site and created a 3-acre commercial pad for future development along the highway. The development agreement is intended to bridge the gap between Renton and King County zoning as it applies to this project. The concept for this project evolved as part of King County's Neighborhood Business zoning, which includes design requirements. Renton's Commercial Arterial zoning allows residential uses as a mixed use within buildings and these types of projects would generally trigger site plan review. In this case, the commercial pads and anticipated commercial development are on different parts of the site and they are small enough that the City's site planning requirements might not otherwise be triggered. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-07 former aqua barn site\issue paper development agreement.doc Randy Corman,Council President Page 2 of 2 November 8,2006 The development agreement accomplishes three things: 1) It will restrict the range of uses allowed in Renton's Commercial Arterial zone, as the City's zoning is broader than County zoning. 2) The agreement also requires design considerations to insure that the site development provides a transition to the residential area. 3) The agreement provides for transfer of traffic mitigation fee credit be granted up to $252,799 against traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the property. Developers of this property contributed $337,066 to King County for intersection improvements including a traffic signal and turn lanes at SR-169/152nd Avenue. The commercial portion of this site is estimated to account for 75 percent of traffic generation used a basis for establishing the need for the signal and intersection improvements during the King County review process. Uses that ordinarily are allowed in the Commercial Arterial zone but would not be allowed on this site include the activities listed on Page 3 of the draft agreement. These uses include: resource recovery, kennels, group homes, higher education institutions,big box retail, outdoor retail sales, vehicle sales, adult retail, adult entertainment, card rooms, dance halls, not for profit gambling, sports arenas, outdoor recreation facilities, hotel/motel,medical institutions,body shops,parking garages, dedicated park and ride facilities, outdoor storage, self-storage, and all industrial uses. Some uses would be allowed subject to specific conditions including: • Drive through windows for retail and fast food, which would be limited to a percentage of the site. The percentage to be specified is still under discussion mod with the applicant and will be reviewed by the Planning and Development Committee. • Vehicle rental establishments which would be limited to space within a shopping center building(not free standing) and have a maximum of 10 parking spaces. • Car washes would be limited to 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. operations and no self-service bays would be allowed. • Vehicle repair and service is limited to businesses conducted within a building, and buildings with a design comparable to Jiffy Lube or Oil Can Henrys. The proposed design standards include requirements for the equivalent to Renton's site plan review even though the proposed development will likely be below Renton's current site plan review criteria. These standards are imposed because they are consistent with the design criteria that would have been required under King County's Neighborhood Business zoning. In addition, specific design requirements are included to require the two separate legal parcels to be developed with a common architectural theme and to require quality materials, roofing, fenestration, signage, and architectural elements. Additional requirements are added for landscape buffers, street tree requirements, and paving standards for sidewalk areas abutting commercial buildings. h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-07 former aqua barn site\issue paper development agreement.doc Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055 Please print or type information Document Title(s) (or transactions contained therein):(all areas applicable to your document must be filled in) 1. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Reference Number(s) of Related Documents: N/A Grantor(s) (Last name, first name, initials) 1.AQUA BARN RANCH,INC.,a Washington corporation 2. Additional names on page of document. Grantee(s) (Last name first, then first name and initials) 1.CITY OF RENTON,a municipal corporation of the State of Washington Additional names on page of document. Legal description (abbreviated: i.e. lot,block, plat or section, township, range) LOTS 3 AND 4 OF KING COUNTY SHORT PLAT NUMBER L99S3019 (AFN 20010831900002) Additional legals are on Page 1 of document. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number ❑Assessor Tax#not yet assigned 2323059210 and 2323059211 The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the information provided on the form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein. vit DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES This Development Agreement (this "Agreement") is made and entered into effective this day of , 2006 by and between the CITY OF RENTON ("City"), a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, and AQUA BARN RANCH, INC., a Washington corporation, the owner of the parcel of property within the area covered by this Agreement("Owner"). RECITALS Nui WHEREAS, the City has initiated processing a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment and Zoning Map amendment of the property that is now legally described as follows (the"Property"): LOTS 3 AND 4 OF KING COUNTY SHORT PLAT NUMBER L99S3019, ACCORDING TO THE SHORT PLAT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20010831900002, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. WHEREAS, the Property currently lies in unincorporated King County within the expanded portion of the boundaries of the proposed Maplewood Addition Annexation (Expanded), a proposed annexation to the City that was before the State of Washington Boundary Review Board for King County on May 4, 2006 and May 8, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Property's King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation is Neighborhood Business Center; and WHEREAS, the Property's King County Zoning Map classification is Neighborhood Business (NB); and DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 1 41001 WHEREAS, the City has previously recognized the Property's King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and Zoning Map classification; and WHEREAS, not later than the point in time at which the Property is officially annexed into the City, the Owner and the City both wish to have the Property (a) designated Corridor Commercial (CC) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and (b) zoned Arterial Commercial (CA) on the City's Zoning Map, subject to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, on September 20, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing concerning the proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment; and WHEREAS, on November 13, 2006, the City Council held a public hearing concerning this then-proposed development agreement; WHEREAS, the City Council has taken into account the public comments presented at the Planning Commission public hearing and at the Council's public hearing; and WHEREAS, on , 2006, the City Council adopted a Planning and Development Committee report concerning the proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment and this then-planned development agreement; WHEREAS, this Agreement has been reviewed and approved by the City Council of the `` City of Renton, Washington; and WHEREAS, this Agreement appears to be in the best interests of the citizens of the City of Renton, Washington; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do agree as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORITY Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170(1), the City and persons with ownership or control of real property are authorized to enter into a development agreement setting forth development standards and any other provisions that shall apply to, govern, and vest the development, use, and mitigation of the development of the real property for the duration of such development agreement. SECTION 2. SUBJECT PROPERTY A. Illustrative Map: The Property is graphically represented in the drawing attached hereto as Exhibit A. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 2 B. King County Property Identification Numbers: 2323059210 and 2323059211 SECTION 3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION AND ZONING SUBJECT TO SITE SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS ON ALLOWABLE LAND USES: A. Site-Specific Land Use Limitations. The parties hereby agree that, in conjunction with both (1) the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Designation described in Subsection B, below, and (2) the Zoning Map classification described in Subsection C, below, the following site-specific land use limitations (the "Site-Specific Land Use Limitations") shall apply: 1. The following particular uses ordinarily allowed in the CA zone as set forth in Renton Municipal Code Title IV Section 4-2-070K shall be inapplicable to the Property: (a) The "Natural resource extraction/recovery" use listed under the "AGRICULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES" use category; (b) The "Kennels, hobby" use listed under the "ANIMALS AND RELATED USES"use category; (c) The "Group Homes I" and "Group Homes II for 7 or more" uses listed under the "OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND HOME OCCUPATIONS"use category; (d) The "Other higher education institution" use listed under the "SCHOOLS"use category; (e) The "Adult retail use", "Big-box retail", "Horticultural nurseries", "Retail sales, outdoor", "Vehicle sales, large" and "Vehicle sales, small"uses listed under the"RETAIL"uses category; (f) The "Adult entertainment business", "card rooms", "Dance clubs", "Dance halls", "Not for profit gambling", "Sports arena, indoor", "Sports arena, outdoor" and "Recreation facilities, outdoor" uses listed under the "ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION" use category; (g) The "Hotel", "Motel", "Off-site services", "Convalescent centers" and "Medical institutions" uses listed under the "SERVICES" use category; DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 3 %NS (h) "Body shops", "Express transportation services", "Parking garage, structured, commercial or public", "Parking, surface, commercial or public", "Park and ride, dedicated" and "Transit centers" uses listed under the "VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES" uses category; (i) "Outdoor storage" and "Self-service storage" uses listed under the "STORAGE"uses category; and (j) All uses listed under the "INDUSTRIAL" uses category. 2. The following particular uses ordinarily allowed in the CA zone as set forth in Renton Municipal Code Title IV Section 4-2-070K shall be allowed on the Property but with the following corresponding special restrictions: (a) "Drive-in/drive-through, retail" uses provided that not more than C) free-standing drive-in/drive through fast-food restaurant buildings shall be permitted on the Property and all such uses shall have customer seating; (b) "Vehicle rental, small" use listed under the "SERVICES" use category provided that: (i) The use is included as part of a commercial development; (ii) A maximum of 10 parking stalls assigned and marked for rental vehicles shall be allowed on the premises; and (iii) The assigned and marked parking stalls shall be considered to be part of the number of total parking stalls otherwise permitted under applicable parking provisions of the Renton Municipal Code (i.e., the parking stalls assigned and marked for rental vehicles shall not be allowed in addition to the total number of stalls otherwise permitted); (c) "Car washes" use listed under the "VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES" use category provided that (i) hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 am to 9:00 pm and (2) no self-service washes shall be allowed on the premises; and (d) "Vehicle repair and service, small" use listed under the"VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES" use category provided that (i) all repair and service be conducted within a building, (ii) the building has a design comparable in quality to that of a Jiffy Labe® or Oil Can """' DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 4 Henry's® service building. vitie 3. The design standards set forth on Exhibit B, attached, shall apply to commercial development on the Property. B. Comprehensive Plan Map Designation: The parties agree that, subject to the Site- Specific Land Use Limitations listed in Subsection A above, the Property shall have a Corridor Commercial (CC) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation. C. Zoning: The parties further agree that, subject to the Site-Specific Land Use Limitations listed in Subsection A above, the Property shall have an Arterial Commercial (CA) Zoning classification. SECTION 4. TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE CREDIT The Owner has submitted to the Renton Development Services Division documentation for the Division's review and consideration of the following facts: (1) Around 2003 (while the Property and two abutting parcels to the south that were also part of the original "Aqua Barn" site were still located in unincorporated King County), a total of $337,066 in private funds (the "Overall Aqua Barn Site's Intersection Contribution") was contributed to the construction of intersection improvements (including a traffic signal and turn lanes among other improvements) at the SR 169/152nd Avenue SE intersection (an intersection that lies at the Property's northwest corner) on account of the entire then-proposed "Aqua Barn Mixed-Use Development", a development proposal that entailed both (a) retail development of the Property (which has not been developed yet) and (b) residential development of the two residential parcels to the south (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 232305-9185 and 232305-9209, both of which have subsequently been developed); and (2) According to that certain "Aqua Barn Mixed-Use Development, Supplementary Traffic Impact Analysis" prepared by The Transpo Group dated April 4, 2004, an estimated 75 percent share of total traffic trips expected to be generated from the entire site of the Aqua Barn Mixed-Use Development at the critical PM peak-hour left-turning movement at the northbound to westbound left turn lane of that intersection were expected to be attributable to future development of the Property (the "Property's 75 Percent of Peak Hour Trips Share") while the other 25 percent of such trips was expected to be attributable to the residential development of the two residential parcels to the south of the Property. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 5 The Owner has (a) contended that, in view of the Property's 75 Percent of Peak Hour Trips Share, it is appropriate to attribute 75 percent of the Overall Aqua Barn Site's Intersection Contribution (i.e., 75 percent of the total $337,066 = $252,799.50) to the Property and (b) requested that such amount be credited against City of Renton traffic mitigation fees that will become due upon development of the Property. The Development Services Division has reviewed that documentation and the Owner's contention and request. Based upon the documentation provided by the Owner regarding (i) the funds spent on the intersection improvements and (ii) the previous traffic impact analysis, the Development Services Division has agreed with the documentation, the Owner's contention and the Owner's request and has recommended to the City Council that credit for a 75% share of the $337,066 funds expended be granted up to but not to exceed $252,799.50 against City of Renton traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the Property until the credit has been fully expended. Based upon the Development Services Division's recommendation, the City hereby acknowledges and agrees that a sum equal to $252,799.50 shall be credited against City of Renton traffic mitigation fees due upon development of the Property until the credit has been fully expended. This Section 4 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. SECTION 5. EFFECT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Unless amended or terminated, this Agreement shall be enforceable during its term by the City and the Owner and the Owner's successor or assigns in interest with respect to the Property; provided, however, only the City may enforce the Site-Specific Land Use Limitations. Development of the Property shall not be subject to a new zoning ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance or to a development regulation or standard adopted by the City after the effective date of this Agreement unless (a) otherwise provided in this Agreement or (b) agreed to by the owner(s) of any of the portion(s) of the Property to which such new zoning ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance or development regulation or standard shall apply or (c) in the case of a new or amended development regulation the regulation is one that the City was required to adopt or amend because of requirements of state or federal law. Any development permit or approval issued by the City for the Property during this Development Agreement's term must be consistent with this Agreement. SECTION 6. AUTHORITY RESERVED Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170(4), the City reserves its authority to impose new or different regulations to the extent required by a serious threat to public health and safety. SECTION 7. RECORDING Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.190, this Agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of King County. During the term of the Agreement, the Agreement is binding on the parties and their successors. `"" DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 6 SECTION 8. TERM This Agreement shall run with the Property until amended or rescinded by the City Council in accordance with Section 9,below. With respect to any portion(s) of the Property that are not developed, the parties to this Agreement agree to evaluate the Agreement periodically, but not less than every ten (10) years. Where appropriate, periodic review of the Agreement shall generally coincide with the City's evaluation of its entire Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 9. AMENDMENT The provisions of this Agreement, before the expiration of ten (10) years from the date of execution of this Agreement by all of the parties hereto, may only be amended with the mutual written consent of the parties; provided, however, that the owner(s) of portion(s) of the Property shall be entitled to amend this Agreement from time-to-time (with the consent of the City) as it relates to their particular portion(s) of the Property. After ten (10) years, the City may change the zoning and development regulations pertinent to the Property as part of its normal process of alteration to its Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Development Regulations. CITY OF RENTON By: Kathy Keolker, Mayor Attest: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney AQUA BARN RANCH, INC., a Washington corporation By: Janette L. Can, President STATE OF WASHINGTON ) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 7 *4010 ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that on the day of , 2006 KATHY KEOLKER appeared before me and acknowledged that she signed the instrument, on oath stated that she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Mayor of the City of Renton, the Washington municipal corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said City for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and stated that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said City. Dated: Name (print) Signature Notary Public Title My Appointment Expires STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that JANETTE L. CARR is the person who appeared before me and acknowledged that she signed the instrument, on oath stated that she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as president of AQUA BARN RANCH, INC., a Washington corporation, to be the free and voluntary act of such corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Name (print) Signature Notary Public Title My Appointment Expires C:\CF\2320\009\Dev Agnnt\Dev-Agmt D6(DLH 11-8-06 clean).doc DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 8 EXHIBIT A IS a 1.74.-,'_-;:i .x 6�� its i , W:ayi,._ r (d ,_( >sa ti, SITE ca .n , °l Q a z 4, t 5f in i',' Z 7®83 792 ii Eti *PHI t4^^'" - ty r x7a; p (F Z +A. $< a*4k., � 5E 1STF#PL , 11111110 .60 l' ate€� M « . ^ d } i ic, F R 4 N., R^ ,„. 4. %J! V pfp I�! two,* 3tt# . a 1f r.vr v..T , 44.1 0 4,+�„40 ;xgttt btbts#°r: t #.a#.; I EXHIBIT B AQUA BARN SITE CA ZONE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Purpose: The intent of the following design standards is to set forth the desired character of future commercial development on the two visually prominent abutting parcels of land totaling approximate three(3) acres and fronting SR 169 on a portion of the former Aqua Barn site. The intent is that any commercial development on either of these two parcels be of a quality that will fit in with its residential and nearby rural surroundings rather than being garish or"Disney-like" in its setting near the urban/rural Urban Growth Boundary. The intent, also, is that both parcels, if developed independently of each other, share common thematic elements such as building forms, materials, signage, and landscaping to the extent reasonably practical in view of the ultimate uses on the parcels. Unless otherwise specified herein, all other relevant code requirements set forth in Title IV shall be met. Standards: 1. Site Master Plan: A site plan for either or both of the two parcels at the time of development shall include information on building type, location,phasing(if any), etc. a. Buildings: All proposed buildings shall be identified as to type, size, use, and location. b. Parking: All proposed parking areas shall be identified as to location, number of stalls, location of drive aisles, points of ingress and egress, lighting, proposed landscaping and pedestrian walkways related to them. c. Open Spaces: Common open spaces (if any) and their locations shall be identified, including open spaces such as larger landscape areas, storm retention ponds, etc. d. Pedestrian Features: Proposed pedestrian walkways shall comply with RMC 4- 3-040F.1.e and shall be identified as to location, materials, and what they are connecting or linked to. 2. Common Thematic Elements: Building elements such as those identified below are to be used throughout each of the two parcels to create a unifying architectural statement for the development of each parcel and both parcels when seen from the Renton—Maple Valley Highway(SR 169). a. Materials: Drawings submitted for review and approvals shall identify exterior materials such as masonry or concrete block that will be used on the façades of all buildings; b. Fenestration: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify location of openings and types of glazing proposed, including color of glass and frames; c. Roofing: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify roofing style (flat, gabled, pitched, mansard, etc.), material, pitch, and color, and ensure that these are consistent throughout the development of each parcel; d. Additional Architectural Elements: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall include type and location of awnings (if any), their proposed materials and color, and all exterior lighting should be shown on all relevant elevations and perspectives. Glass and metal awnings (or awnings of other permanent materials) or overhanging eves shall be provided on all facades visible from public streets. e. Other Architectural Embellishments (if any): Drawings submitted for review and approval shall include decorative roof treatments, decorative lighting, decorative paneling, etc., which are encouraged and, if proposed, shall be shown in all relevant building elevations and perspectives. f. Signage: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify all proposed exterior signage including façade signs. Any allowed freestanding signs shall be ;,40 ground-oriented monument type signs. Pole and roof top-mounted signs shall be prohibited. 3. Landscaping Along Street Frontages: Landscaping along abutting street frontages shall comply with the following provisions [provisions that are derived from the portion of the table in RMC 4-3-040D (Development Standards for Uses Located within the Renton Automall Areas A and B) concerning "Landscaping — Street Frontage Landscaping Requirements" for"All Uses in Area A, Dealerships and Related Uses in Area B"]: a. 15-Foot Wide Landscape Strip Required: A 15-foot wide landscape strip shall be required along all street frontages. This is in lieu of requirements in Chapter 4-2 RMC. Unimproved portions of abutting street right-of-way can be used in a Once"[d]rawings submitted for review and approval" have been approved by the Renton Development Services Division, unless the approval is appealed and the approval decision is modified, any development(s) actually constructed shall be consistent with the approved drawings unless drawing revisions consistent with this Exhibit B have been reviewed and approved by the Development Services Division. Notwithstanding RMC 4-9-200D.2.a.ii, no building façade modifications (such as the location of entrances/exits, changes in materials, fenestration, roofing, additional architectural elements or signage or aesthetic alterations) that relate to the subject matter of this Exhibit B shall be made without the approval of the Development Services Division. combination with abutting private property to meet the required 15-foot landscape strip width. b. Street Tree Requirements: Unless the existing trees within the 15-foot wide landscape strip are retained, the landscaping provided in the 15-foot wide landscape strip shall include a minimum 30-inch high berm and 21/2 inch caliper red maples (Acer robrum) planted 25 feet on center. 4. Landscape Materials: Common landscape elements shall be used throughout each of the two parcels to create unifying statement for the development of each parcel. a. Plant Materials: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify all proposed living plant materials of a permanent nature including species and size at time of planting. b. Paving Materials: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify all paving materials including driveways, parking areas, and pathways. In regard to buildings greater than 5,000 square feet in size, a minimum 8-foot wide concrete sidewalk with decorative banding shall be provided along the building side(s) abutting parking areas. Such sidewalks shall be raised from the grade of the abutting parking areas a minimum of four inches except for ramps for handicapped access and rolling of shopping carts. c. Exterior Lighting: Drawings submitted for review and approval shall identify all proposed exterior lighting, including parking lot lighting, and decorative lighting along pedestrian corridors. 5. Surface Water Detention Ponds: Surface water detention ponds (if any) shall be screened and landscaped with sight-obscuring evergreen plant materials. Where pond fencing is required, it shall be decorative in appearance and use permanent materials such as metal or decorative concrete block. Landscaping should buffer the exterior of all such fencing or walls. AMENDMENT 2006-M-7- FORMER AQUA BARN SITE DESCRIPTION: The tenants of two + 1.5-acre parcels at the southeast corner of 152nd Avenue SE and the Renton—Maple Valley Highway(SR 169), the former Aqua Barn site, have requested that the City amend its Comprehensive Plan land use designation for this area from Residential Low Density (RLD) to Commercial Corridor (CC), with concurrent Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. The City has agreed to sponsor this request because of a large eminent annexation that will change the area's zoning from the County's designations to City's designations. The subject site is currently zoned Neighborhood Business (NB) on the County's Zoning Atlas. This zone does not restrict the size of individual uses; rather parcels are restricted by a Floor Area Ratio (FAR), which in this case is 1.0/1.0. Thus, a 3.0-acre site could theoretically support 130,680 square feet of neighborhood business uses. City staff believes this review should be expanded to also evaluate the land use designation for the two multi-family developed lots to the south because they were part of the original parcel and project reviewed by the County in 1998. These two additional parcels and Tract A associated with them are currently designated Urban Residential, Medium, 4-12 dwelling units per acre(du/ac),by the County. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. What is the appropriate land use designation and zoning for the commercial portion of the former Aqua Barn site fronting on SR 169 (3.02 acres)? 2. What is the appropriate land use designation and zoning for the residential multi-family portions of the former Aqua Barn site (27.22 acres)? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Staff is recommending that commercial Parcels 9210 and 9211 of the former Aqua Barn site which front on the Renton — Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) be redesignated on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from RLD to CC and that residential Parcels 9209, 9185, and Tract A (open space), be redesignated Residential Medium Density (RMD), also from RLD. ANALYSIS: Background: The Aqua Barn site, located in Renton's PAA, has been a historical recreational site for picnicking, swimming, and horseback riding for generations of families both in the immediate Renton area as well as the region. In the late 1990's, the original owners approached King County and sought to change the land use designations and zoning on the 33-acre site. In 1996 the County had proposed rezoning the front ten acres of the site to NB. At that time the applicant had a conditional use permit that allowed a proposed 240-unit lodge. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn site\Issue Paper(7-19).doc In 1998, the County proposed reducing the ten-acre portion fronting on SR 169 that was designated Neighborhood Business Center to three acres. The remaining seven acres were to NIS receive their Urban Residential, Medium designation and R-6 zoning that could potentially be increased to R-12 (12 units per gross acre). Under this proposal, approximately 16 acres would eventually be available for residential development at a density of 12 units per gross acre, allowing up to 192 new multi-family units on the site. The proponents, in exchange for this density increase, agreed to set aside the southern steeply sloped 16.3 acres as permanent open space. The resulting average density over the non-commercial portion of the site was estimated to be 6.2 du per gross acre using the King County system and 17.58 du per net acre using Renton's system that would have excluded the steeply sloped open space tract. For the two residential parcels currently under consideration, the average density is now 17.58 du/acre. The City supported this revision. Fewer vehicular trips would be generated with less commercial business, and the steep slope set aside were both seen as positives. The current review is looking at the five properties that made up the original Aqua Barn site. These include four parcels and one tract: Parcels 9210, 9211, 9209, 9185, and Tract A. The first two, 9210 and 9211, are designated Neighborhood Business Center on the King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and zoned NB. Parcels 9209 and 9185 are designated Urban Residential, Medium, 4-12 du/ac on this same exhibit and zoned R-12, 12 du/ac by the County. The northern five acres of Tract A are zoned R-12 and the southern nine acres are zoned R-1. The County allowed the density on Tract A to be transferred to Parcels 9209 and 9185 to the north. The subject site as well as most of the 340-acre expanded Maplewood Addition Annexation site is currently designated RLD on the Renton's Comprehensive Plan. The City needs to modify its Land Use Map to better reflect the existing land uses in this area. Currently, there is a proposed retail development on the commercially designated parcels fronting on SR 169 that would be jeopardized if the land use designation and zoning are not changed this year. Commercial Neighborhood: For the purpose of mapping the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) land use designation, areas should have the following characteristics: 1) Within one-quarter mile of existing and planned residential areas; 2) To the extent possible, outside of the 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. The subject site would appear to meet the mapping criteria for the CN land use designation. Clearly, the subject two commercial parcels are within a quarter mile of existing residential areas that abut the site to the south and east. The subject site is outside the trade areas of other small-scale commercial uses since the nearest commercial area is more than 1.9 miles to the west on the Renton—Maple Valley Highway. Also, the site abuts a major arterial. However, given the high numbers of vehicular passersby and the likelihood that most patrons will arrive by automobile, CN seems inappropriate for this major location between the highway and the area's major north-south connector. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn sitelissue Paper(7-I9).doc Commercial Neighborhood is implement through the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zone, which allows uses to have a maximum gross floor area of 5,000 square feet. This is clearly oriented more to neighborhood walk-in uses than those catering to passersby on a major highway and north-south arterial (152nd Ave SE/154thAve SE/156th Ave SE). Commercial Corridor: For the purpose of mapping the Commercial Corridor (CC) land use designation, areas should have the following characteristics: 1) Located on, and having access to, streets classified as principal arterials; 2) High traffic volumes; or 3) Land use pattern characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. The 200-feet deep 3.0 acres comprised by Parcels 9210 and 9211 are located on the Renton - Maple Valley Highway (SR 169), a designated principal arterial, and have access from it. Also, SR 169 is characterized by high volumes of traffic. The land use pattern in this area, however, is not characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. Redesignating this area CC seems to be a better alternative than the CN designation since the proposed uses are larger, more community than neighborhood oriented, and most likely would serve a larger sub-regional market area. Also, they are located along a high volume traffic arterial. Commercial Arterial: For the purpose of mapping Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning, areas should meet the following criteria: 1) The corridor is served by transit or has 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. Metro transit currently provides bus service along SR 169 and historically, the Aqua Barn Ranch entertainment complex fronted on the highway. Whether this could be considered historical strip commercial is up to one's interpretation. Large surface parking lots historically existed both on the Aqua Barn site and the Renton Assembly of God church next door has a large surface parking lot that accommodates hundreds of cars. Future development on the three-acre site is anticipated to have parking in front, oriented to the H.\EDNSP1Comp PIan\Amendments\200612006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn site\Issue Paper(7-19).doc SR 169 with retail/service uses located towards the back of the site. Until the original Aqua Barn site was subdivided into its current configuration in the late 1990's, it was defined as a larger parcel fronting an arterial with multiple buildings located throughout the site. And, finally, the SR 169 corridor does not exhibit a grid system. Where cross streets exist, they are often hundreds of feet and in some cases miles apart. Therefore, it would appear that the subject 3.0-acre site (Parcels 9210 and 9211) does meet the mapping criteria for Commercial Corridor zoning. Residential Medium Density: For the purpose of mapping Residential Medium Density (RMD), areas should have access, topography, and adjacent land uses that create conditions appropriate for a variety of unit types including both single-family and multi- family development types. Policy LU-159 states that RMD designated neighborhoods may be considered for R-14 zoning where a site meets the following criteria: 1) Adjacent to major arterial(s); 2) Adjacent to the Urban Center, Highlands Neighborhood Center, or Commercial Corridor designations; 3) Part of a designation totaling over 20 acres (acreage may be in separate ownership); NIS 4) Site is buffered from single-family areas or other existing, potentially incompatible uses; and 5) Development with the density range and of similar unit type is achievable given environmental constraints. The site is adjacent to SR 169 with access from it. If the front site is designated CC, it meets criterion 2 in that it would be adjacent to a CC land use designation. With the inclusion of the 16.3-acre open space tract (Tract A), owned by the homeowners association of Parcel 9209, the rezone area totals more than 20 acres, meeting the intent of criterion 3. Since the density on Tract A was transferred to Parcels 9209, it seems appropriate to include this area in any subsequent rezone. The net density for these three parcels is estimated to be 17.6-du/net acre, slightly less than the maximum density of 18- du/net acre, allowed under the R-14 zone. In regard to criterion 4, the site abuts a manufactured home park to the east with the nearest single-family area over 600-feet to the east. Neither of these nearby uses are considered incompatible with the existing multi-family developments on these two parcels. The density on these two parcels, as noted above, is +17.6 units per acre. This density is below the maximum 18 du/net acre allowed in the R-14 zone. If the 14-acre steeply sloped permanent open space set-aside (Tract A) is averaged in, the net density of the resulting 27.22 acres would be slightly more than seven units per acre, somewhat less H:IEDNSP1Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn site\Issue Paper(7-19).doc the minimum density for this zone. Rezoning Parcels 9209, 9185, and Tract A would appear to generally comply with the criteria for R-14 rezoning set out in Policy LU-159. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: The 10.92-acre residential portion of the site has an estimated 192 dwelling units on it at an average density of 17.6 units per acre. This is slightly less than the estimated total of 198 units estimated in 1998 with the transfer of 78 units of the 16.3 acres set aside as permanent open space. Because the site is fully developed, there is no additional capacity left on it. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed rezone of the existing two commercial parcels and the existing two residential parcels on the former Aqua Barn site must meet at least one of the criteria in RMC 4-9-020 G. These rezones would appear to meet the criterion that the change supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan. The adopted Comprehensive Plan vision calls for a diversity of housing types to cater to the variety of needs and wants in the community. It also calls for a commitment to protect environmental quality in the City, which the set-aside of the steeply sloped portions of the site to the so do. And by providing nearby retail and service uses that serve the immediate, as well as the surrounding community, transportation impacts within the City will be reduced. ZONING CONCURRENCY: This request complies with the decision criteria for rezones in RMC 4-9-180. It is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed zoning is consistent with the adopted mapping policies for RMD land use designation. Zoning of the subject parcels and the surrounding neighborhood has not been considered since 1998. CONCLUSION: Changing the land use designations for the two commercial zoned parcels fronting on the Renton — Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) from RLD to CC, with concurrent CA zoning, appears to be consistent with relevant mapping criteria and policies. Also, this appears to be the only viable alternative, since the area does not comply with either the CN or Commercial/Office/Residential land use designation mapping criteria. Changing the land use designation for the two residential zoned parcels abutting and south of the commercial zoned parcels from RLD to RMD, with concurrent R-14 zoning, appears to be consistent relevant mapping criteria and policies. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\2006-M-07 former Aqua Barn site\Issue Paper(7-19).doc 4\', Rent °n Mapj V laivtelf all q eY WP le 0 i ilw ' al • A R. a iiitAiii eV .4*41 ftillilissil - it '\qua Barn CPA 2006-M-07 0 300 600 S, " -fanning Commission Recommendation Commercial Corridor •�>:::__ _ >:::�>: :�> .... ......... w/CA Zoning 1 : 3600 tii5. EconomicDevelopment,Neighborhoods strategic Pig x-. Residential MediumDensity AkPib, strator t) j.- caF w/R-14 Zoning esxo� xfzoob (y ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, Ca � NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: September 1, 2006 TO: Ray Giometti, Planning Commission Chair Planning Commission Members FROM: Erika Conkling, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Upper Kennydale Rezone Community Meeting DESCRIPTION: Staff meet with property owners from upper Kennydale to discuss a proposal to down zone a portion of the area to R-4 (Residential- four units per acre) from R-8 (Residential- eight units per acre). This paper reports the results of that meeting. ISSUE SUMMARY: • Should a portion of upper Kennydale be rezoned R-4? • Should the Planning Commission hold a public hearing to consider this issue? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: The Planning Commission should take the original staff proposal to public hearing on September 20,2006. BACKGROUND: Last fall a group of property owners approached the City with concerns about the loss of critical areas and environmental degradation in the upper Kennydale area. Residents turned out to speak before the Planning Commission in opposition to the idea of rezoning the Kennydale Blueberry Farm. Citizens also took interest in an attempt to reclassify a type four waterway in the area. Prior to the events of the last year, there have been active groups of property owners who have spoken against, and appealed, development decisions in the area. The concerns of property owners indicated that further investigation was needed to determine if the land use designation for this area was correct. Currently the area is in Residential Single Family(RSF) land use designation, with R-8 zoning- with the exception of the Blueberry Farm property which has a Residential Low Density(RLD) land use designation and RC (Resource Conservation) zoning. At the time in which the R-8 zoning was put into place for this area, the zoning choice was between R-1 (Residential- one unit per acre) or R-8. There was no intermediate R-4 designation, as now exists. Development in the area has organically occurred at about the same level of intensity as ,�, an R-4 zone. The majority of the development in the area occurred prior to the Ray Giometti Page 2 of 3 September 1,2006 implementation of the R-8 zone. Permit history shows that development has affected the hydrology of the area. Although each project has complied with the rules and regulations .4010 in effect at the time of development, the cumulative effect of the projects has resulted in some changes. Recent development that has realized the full extent of the R-8 regulations has been especially noticeable and has resulted in neighbor response. Critical areas are likely to encumber some the properties in the area. A sizeable wetland has been mapped on both sides of NE 20th Street, in the vicinity of the Blueberry Farm. Wetland determinations in some areas where the wetland has mapped have shown class II and class III wetlands, and in other areas there have been no wetlands found. A type four waterway meanders through the area with drainage ultimately ending up in Lake Washington via Kennydale Creek. Steep slopes exist between the area and the freeway, affecting some properties on Jones Road. The area as a whole gently slopes up toward the north,but the area could be characterized as rolling with a series of ridges and depressions. Specific properties that are free of critical area constraint are still part of the environmental and hydrological system. Based on research and on land use designation and zoning criteria in the Comprehensive Plan, staff proposed an area for rezone to R-4. This proposal was explained and discussed with the potentially affected property owners. For a week after the meeting, Staff collected comment sheets from property owners and interested parties. 28 comment sheets were returned,representing 23 property ownerships. Nine respondents lived just outside the proposed rezone area, and they all favored the R-4 zoning proposal. Of the property owners within proposed rezone boundary, seven favored the R-4 zoning r,,,r►+ proposal and six favored keeping the zoning at R-8. One respondent was undecided. Those in favor of R-4 cited a series of arguments favoring lower density. People were concerned about the character of the neighborhood. A general worry was expressed that those who wanted R-8 zoning did not intend to live in the neighborhood, and would not be around long enough to deal with the effects of development at R-8 intensity. Respondents who favored R-4 were concerned about intensive development and its effect on wetlands, streams, wildlife, and the natural features of the area. They expressed their dislike of recent developments that they feel leave too little space for yards, for open space, and for resident parking. Concerns about increased traffic in an area with few sidewalks and a growing number of children were expressed. Those in favor of keeping the zoning R-8 also expressed a variety of arguments. This group of people purchased their property at least partially for investment purposes. Some plan to subdivide property or to sell to someone who will. Others purchased property to live on,but also to be banked for later development to finance retirement plans, or to be sold in case of family emergency. These respondents tended to believe that it was too late to preserve the truly natural features of the neighborhood. The critical areas that are left will be adequately protected with critical areas regulations. Owners who wanted to keep R-8 zoning tended to be owners with larger parcels, or owned adjacent parcels. They felt that the issue and its economic impacts had not been well considered. • Ray Giometti Page 3 of 3 September 1,2006 Rezone of the area would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and should be considered with the other proposed amendments this year. This will give the Planning Commission the opportunity to hear directly from property owners before formulating a recommendation. CONCLUSION: There is no consensus, and not even a majority amongst potentially affected property owners, on a vision for the neighborhood. For this reason, staff recommends holding a public hearing on the proposed rezone area on September 20th O ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, vow 0 NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: September 28, 2006 TO: Ray Giometti, Planning Commission Chair Planning Commissioners FROM: Erika Conkling, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Taxation issues and concerns- Upper Kennydale Rezmie In some of the public comment on the subject of the proposed R-4 rezone of the Upper Kennydale area, citizens have expressed concerns about issues of taxation. Hopefully, this memo will provide some additional information to help you better understand these issues. One issue that has been mentioned in both written and verbal comment has been that property owners have been paying taxes based on R-8 zoning for many years, so it would not be fair to adopt an R-4 rezone. Property taxes are based on assessments of two independent figures: the value of the land and the value of the improvements. Larger parcels of land are not assessed higher taxes based on their potential for subdivision. It is only once parcels have been subdivided that higher taxes are assessed. This is clearly the case in the proposed rezone area. Parcels over 20,000 square feet in size are clearly subdividable under the current R-8 zoning, yet these parcels are assessed around$4-$7 per square foot.* At the same time, parcels that have already been subdivided, and are clearly too small for further subdivision at less than 10,000 square feet, are assessed at significantly higher rates. These smaller parcels are assessed between $12-$20 per square foot.* If owners of larger parcels had been taxed on their potential for development under the R-8 zone, the value of the land assessments would have been similar for parcels regardless of size. This data clearly shows that land has been taxed based on the development that has already occurred, and not the potential for development. Another issue mentioned is that current residents are paying for a sewer assessment based on future capacity in the area. There are two districts in the area: the NE 20th and Jones Road Assessment District and the West Kennydale Special Interceptor Assessment District. The NE 20th and Jones Assessment District was established in 1984. When property owners connect to the sewer they are assessed a fee based upon the square footage of their property, not on the potential for development. Once the full fee is paid,no h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-08 upper kennydale rezone\memo re-taxes.doc Ray Giometti Page 2 of 2 September 28,2006 additional amount is owed. Some larger parcels are permitted to pay only a portion of the cost, based upon the agreement that the remainder of the fee would be paid when additional lots were developed. The property owner owes the full amount whether or not the property is redeveloped. However, this payment system gives the owners of larger parcels a bit of a break from paying for the full cost of the assessment at once. West Kennydale Interceptor Special Assessment District was established in 1992. This facility provided capacity needed to serve all of the West Kennydale Subbasin area, including the NE 20th and Jones Avenue NE portion. In this assessment district, the City has established a connection fee system. Fees are charged when each connection is made. In order to have an existing connection, the fee must be paid in full, with no additional fees owed. Larger lots must subdivide to receive additional connections. These assessment districts are used throughout the City so that utility systems can be built to provide benefit to existing development, as well as provide capacity for future development. By using these assessment methodologies, the City only charges existing properties for the benefit they receive at the time of connection. It also allows the City to collect from future developments the proportionate share of costs of establishing the utility system. As a result, the facts simply do not demonstrate that existing residents have already borne the cost of sewer extension for future development. * These figures are based upon the land value assessment figure only. Data table is provided below. 2006 Tax Address Land Area Assessment* $/square foot 1521 Jones 4,701 $97,000 $20.63 2306 Jones 5,540 $99,000 $17.87 1800 Jones-lot A 5,999 $113,000 $18.84 2312 Jones 6,020 $100,000 $16.61 1800 Jones-lot B 6,659 $113,000 $16.97 1800 Jones-lot C 6,664 $113,000 $16.96 1513 Jones 8,505 $97,000 $11.41 1704 NE 20th 8,965 $108,000 $12.05 1818 Jones 20,515 $120,000 $5.85 2301 Jones 21,190 $131,000 $6.18 2619 Jones 27,100 $126,000 $4.65 2216 Jones 35,106 $156,000 $4.44 2208 Jones 35,305 $133,000 $3.77 1813 NE 24th 65,775 $421,000 $6.40 h:lednsplcomp plan\amendments\2006\2006 map amendments\2006-m-08 upper kennydale rezonelmemo re-taxes.doc 4, ... MIIIMIIMik mmillINIIIIIIIITEmTil / am Ilia -----------„_____________ r am >, ,_____, Iu I' - , ___( , IN 1 . , 1 4. in) . lin.P r;htill‘k 1 to 1 pAol II \\ i g Ii 1 , r , 2z-tri � � I 14 I J. s ,� -, �-s mw , � .1.� ''..,P',,i ,,,:>,,,, :i----;:„;1,-,7:N/,mi ..___ . rj ofr,:fr:,- -:-'.34. .„-- -:.,f‹-y''.. No Ili a) , IMI --I • wirst,>!:::*:::k7r,..1.6;;:,1,401 11,71,%'!:-::27,4:fttliet1 .;744.': I I I_ II MOP ` �-� 1 C--- it, ,.„, ....„ ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„•, , .„:„,.. ,,,,,,,,,,,,:;* \ ." �, ' �WK. . U ,,„4,-,A-.,:,..e,t I 1 Y 1_ riA si\tii• . , .4k ,,, , t,,z/v„, , , , , , ,, „, ,t,.. dk1/44 IV I i Ir mill I 16th rii ICI .... wf,,,k liri ,r. ,, I ! roposed Kenn dale Rezone o 400 goo Kenny dale Recommendation t I R-4& Residential Low Density `:.:.:":.:;.::.: ® mx Nd s&S I I R-8& Residential Single Family '�!• IIIIII R-4 proposed under application CPA 2006-M-2 1 : 4800 13 Novmbc NOS AMENDMENT 2006 T-1 — CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT UPDATE SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEES DESCRIPTION: The proposed text amendment would specifically adopt the current Issaquah and Kent School District Capital Facilities Plans by reference. This adoption is required to collect school impact fees on behalf of these School Districts pursuant to the Growth Management Act. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Should the City amend the Capital Facilities Element to adopt the Issaquah School District Capital Facilities Plan? 2. Should the City amend the Capital Facilities Element to adopt the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Adopt two new policies specifically adopting the Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans (CFP) by reference and authorizing implementation through the collection of school impact fees. ANALYSIS: Four different school districts are included within the City of Renton and its Potential Annexation Area (PAA): Kent, Issaquah, Tahoma, and Renton School Districts. Under the Growth Management Act, school districts can request that local governments collect growth related impact fees on their behalf at the time development occurs. In order to collect these fees, a district must request that the local government adopt a Capital Facilities Plan or recognize its capital facilities plan. The Issaquah School District is located in the East Renton Plateau area. At the present time, the City collects impact fees for only the Issaquah School District. The Kent School District is located in the Benson Hill/Fairwood area. No impact fees are collected for the Kent School District at this time. Renton is now annexing the first Kent School District properties into the City with the Anthone annexation. In response to notification of this annexation proposal, the Kent School District recently contacted the City and submitted the District Capital Facilities Plan for consideration. The Renton School District encompasses the majority of the City and major portions of the PAA in the Benson Hill/Cascade and West Hill areas. The Renton School District has not requested that the City of Renton collect school impact fees on its behalf because the growth occurring within the Renton District can still be accommodated within existing school facilities. The amount of the Tahoma School District's land within the PAA is very small (less than 24 acres). Current adopted city policy CFP-6 states that the City should"Evaluate levying impact fees on development for municipal services and/or school district services upon the request of each school district, if a compelling need is established through means such as presentation of an H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-01 Capital FacilitiesUssaquah Kent Capital Facilities Plans.doc adopted Capital Facilities Plan and demonstration that such facilities are needed to accommodate projected growth and equitably distributed throughout the district". This is a general policy that applies to municipal impact fees for parks, transportation, fire services, and school services. For school services, the policy does not recognize the different school districts in the City and the PAA, and it does not adopt by reference the school district capital facilities plans. In the past, the City Council preferred a general policy because they wanted to recognize the need to collect impact fees to accommodate growth, but allow the City to set a different fee than requested in a District's Capital Facilities Plan. In the past, the City of Renton did not collect the full amount of the impact fee for the Issaquah School District as stipulated in the ISD Capital Facilities Plan because the fee supported growth occurring outside the Renton portion of the attendance area. The City Council changed this position in January 2006 based on new information presented to the Council Finance Committee about improvements to Issaquah schools within the Renton portion of the Issaquah School District. Issaquah School District The Issaquah School District issued a 2005 CFP, with an impact fee of $5,115 for single- family residents. There is no multi-family housing within the Issaquah School District portion of Renton or its PAA. This CFP shows that nearly every school in the District, including those serving Renton residents, is exceeding capacity. In October, the Issaquah School Board initiated an improvement campaign that will include improvements to Briarwood Elementary, Maywood Middle School, and Liberty High School. The campaign will be primarily financed *4104 by a Capital Levy and Construction Bond that was approved by voters on February 7, 2006 but will also include funding derived from school impact fees. Kent School District The Kent School District 2006 CFP documents a need for a $3,034 multi-family and a $4928 single-family impact fee. The Kent CFP anticipates additional capacity is needed within the Renton PAA at Kentwood High School. The CFP also identifies replacement of Panther Lake Elementary and a future new elementary to accommodate growth. Future school sites are identified within the Renton PAA in the Fairwood and Lake Desire areas. In 2006, Kent voters approved a bond issue for capital improvements that included the construction funding for a new elementary school, replacement of Panther Lake elementary, and classroom additions to high schools. Some impact fees will also be applied to those projects. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: None COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: EXISTING CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN POLICIES Policy CFP-1. The Capital Facilities Plan should be updated on a regular basis as part of the city's budget process, and such update may include adjustments to growth projections for the ensuing six years, to level of service standards, to the list of needed facilities, or to anticipated funding sources. For the purpose of capital facilities planning, plan for forecast growth at the high end of the projected range and targeted growth as a minimum. Ip H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-01 Capital Facilities\Issaquah Kent Capital Facilities Plans.doc Policy CFP-2. Level of service standards should be maintained at the current or at a greater level of service for existing facilities within the City of Renton, which the City has control over. Policy CFP-3. Adequate public capital facilities should be in place concurrent with development. Concurrent with development shall mean the existence of adequate facilities, strategies or services when development occurs or the existence of a financial commitment to provide adequate facilities, strategies, or services within six years of when development occurs. Policy CFP-4. No deterioration of existing levels of service that the City of Renton has control over should occur due to growth, consistent with Policy CFP-3. Policy CFP-5. Funding for new, improved or expanded public facilities or services should come from a mix of sources in order to distribute the cost of such facilities or services according to use, need, and adopted goals and policies. Policy CFP-6. Evaluate levying impact fees on development for municipal services and/or school district services upon the request of each school district, 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. PROPOSED AMENDED AND NEW POLICIES Policy CFP-6. Evaluate levying impact fees on development for municipal services and/or school district services upon the request of each school district, if a compelling need is established through means such as presentation of an adopted Capital Facilities Plan and demonstration that such facilities are needed to accommodate projected growth and equitably distributed throughout the district Policy CFP-7 Adopt by reference the Kent School District#415 Capital Facilities Plan 2006-2007— 2011-2012 and adopt an implementing ordinance establishing a school impact fee consistent with the District's adopted Capital Facilities Plan Policy CFT-8 Adopt by reference the Issaquah School District #411 Capital Facilities Plan 2006- 2012 and adopt an implementing ordinance establishing a school impact fee consistent with the District's adopted Capital Facilities Plan ZONING CONCURRENCY: Ordinance 5194 modified the Issaquah School District Impact Fee February 1, 2006. A new ordinance adopting a Kent School District Impact Fee will be required. CONCLUSION: Refinement of Renton policy to specifically include adoption of Issaquah and Kent School Districts Capital Facilities Plans will create a stronger policy basis for City support of school funding within those portions of the City within these two School Districts. When and if a similar request is received from the Renton School District, a similar policy should be adopted to support Renton School District capital programs. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-01 Capital Facilities\Issaquah Kent Capital Facilities Plans.doc Adopted 11/01/04 CAPITAL FACILTIES ELEMENT 2005 to 2010 GOAL Develop and implement the capital facilities plan for the City of Renton. III-1 Adopted 11/01/04 TABLE OF CONTENTS CAPITAL USE FACILITIES Growth Management Act III-4 Growth Projections III-5 Capital Facilities Plan Policies III-7 Transportation Capital Facilities Plan III-8 Water Capital Facilities Plan III-16 Wastewater Capital Facilities Plan III-21 Surface Water Utility Capital Facilities Plan III-25 Park,Recreation and Open Space III-29 Public Safety Capital Facilities Plan III-41 Fire Capital Facilities Plan III-42 Economic Development/Administration III-46 ,, 4400 III-2 Adopted 11/01/04 Purpose The purpose of the Capital Facilities Plan is: ,.... • to identify the new or expanded public facilities that will be needed to accommodate--at an established level of service--the growth projected to occur within the City of Renton in the first six years of the Comprehensive Plan; and • to identify the sources of public financing for these public facilities. Methods and Process The Capital Facilities Plan relies heavily on the analyses and policies presented in the other seven elements of the Comprehensive Plan as well as in the Fire Department Master Plan, Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan,Long Range Wastewater Management Plan, Issaquah,Kent and Renton School District's Capital Improvement Plans.and City of Renton Annual Capital Improvements Plan_. For detailed information and explanations concerning growth projections, land use determinations, existing facilities, level of service, etc., the reader must consult these documents. The Capital Facilities Plan incorporates by reference the information and analyses presented in these other documents and the annual updates to these plans concerning existing facilities and level of service standards. Based on these other documents, the Capital Facilities Plan establishes policies for determining which public facilities should be built and how they should be paid for, and presents a six-year plan for the use of public funds toward building and funding the needed capital facilities. The process for arriving at the six-year plan involved identifying existing facilities and level of service standards and then applying the projected growth in residential population and employment to identify the needed capital facilities. The timing of the facilities was established through a combination of the requirements of the city's concurrency policy and the length of time it takes to implement the needed facility. Type and Providers of Capital Facilities For the purposes of complying with the requirements of the GMA,the Capital Facilities Plan proposes a six-year plan for the following capital facilities and providers: transportation City of Renton domestic water City of Renton sanitary sewer City of Renton surface water City of Renton parks facilities City of Renton fire City of Renton police City of Renton economic development City of Renton 1I1-3 Adopted 11/01/04 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 financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years." (RCW 36.70A.070(6)) The Act also requires that: ...cities shall perform their activities and make capital budget decisions in conformity with their comprehensive plans. (RCW 36.70A.120) Administrative Regulations (WAC 365-195) In support of the GMA legislation, state administrative regulations require that the Capital Facilities Plan consist of at least the following features(WAC 365-195-315(1)): 1. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities. 2. A forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities. 3. The proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities. 4. At least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes. 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)) III-4 Adopted 11/01/04 GROWTH PROJECTIONS 4411110, 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. Incorporated Adjusted Target/Capacity Capital Facilities Annualized Renton Reflecting Plan Planning Estimate 2001-2022 Growth/Annexation/Land Incorporated (21 yrs) Use Changes in 2001 and Renton 2002 2005-2010 Forecast Growth 9,723 units None 2,778 units 463 units 33,600 jobs 9,600 jobs 1,600 jobs 22,266 (21 yrs) population* 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 14,194 (19 yrs adjusted population* for remaining target) Capacity 11,261 units 9,634 units NA NA established by 32,240 jobs* 30,699 jobs Buildable Lands 25,788 population* *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. Population increase estimates are based on a household size of 2.29. For the purpose of developing a six-year capital facilities plan for the period from 2005 through 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. III-5 Adopted 11/01/04 Renton's growth over the first years of growth management is occurring more rapidly than originally forecast. The estimate for 2001 was 48,456 persons however the actual population by April 1,2001 was 51,140, exceeding forecast growth by 2,684 persons housed in 1,177 housing units over a 6 year period(196 units per year). By April 1,2004,the City population was 55,360, representing an increase of another 4,220 residents and an estimated 1, 850 units. The number of units realized between 2002 and 2004 exceeds the forecast projection of 1,389 units by 461 units(153 units per year). Some of this development can be explained by new housing developed in areas annexing to the City. However,the increase exceeds the proportional share of housing target and forecast growth assigned to this annexation area and assumed by the City upon annexation. For the purposes of the next phase of the planning cycle,the 2005 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 2010 is forecast as 61,694 persons. To be sure, growth will not occur precisely as projected over the next six-year or the 21-year period. Recognizing this fact,the Capital Facilities Plan should be updated at least biennially. In this way local governments have the opportunity to re-evaluate their forecasts in light of the actual growth experienced,revise their forecasts for the next six years if necessary,and adjust the number and timing of capital facilities that would be needed during the ensuing six-year period. The City performed such a review of the Capital Facilities Plan in 2004 and determined that there was not a need to adjust the growth forecast or the number and timing of capital facilities. This conclusion was based on a finding that although actual growth was higher than forecast,the level of service standards were being maintained. Subsequent reviews may result in revisions to the growth projections and the number and timing of capital facilities if actual growth continues to exceed the forecast growth As stated in Policy CFP-1,this Capital Facilities Plan is anticipated to be updated regularly as part of the city's budget process,thereby ensuring that the Plan reflects the most current actual statistics related to growth in Renton,and that capital facilities are slated for implementation in accordance with both the level of service standards and the city's concurrency policy. It is anticipated that the City will fully implement this policy(CFP-1) in the annual budget process. 1II-6 Adopted 11/01/04 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN POLICIES Policy CFP-1. The Capital Facilities Plan should be updated on a regular basis as part of the city's budget process, and such update may include adjustments to growth projections for the ensuing six years,to level of service standards, to the list of needed facilities,or to anticipated funding sources. For the purpose of capital facilities planning,plan for forecast growth at the high end of the projected range and targeted growth as a minimum. Policy CFP-2. Level of service standards should be maintained at the current or at a greater level of service for existing facilities within the City of Renton, which the City has control over. Policy CFP-3. Adequate public capital facilities should be in place concurrent with development. Concurrent with development shall mean the existence of adequate facilities, strategies or services when development occurs or the existence of a financial commitment to provide adequate facilities, strategies, or services within six years of when development occurs. Policy CFP-4. No deterioration of existing levels of service that the City of Renton has control over should occur due to growth, consistent with Policy CFP-3. Policy CFP-5. Funding for new, improved or expanded public facilities or services should come from a mix of sources in order to distribute the cost of such facilities or services according to use, need,and adopted goals and policies. Policy CFP-6. Evaluate levying impact fees on development for municipal services and/or school district services upon the request of each school district within the City limitsthe 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. '""' Policy CFP-7 Adopt by reference the Kent School District#415 Capital Facilities Plan 2006-2007—2011-2012 and adapt._an implementing ordinance establishing_aschoolimpactfeeconsistent with the District's adopted Capital ital Facilities Plan Policy CFT-8 Adopt by reference the Issaquah School District#411 Capital Facilities Plan 2006-2012 and adopt an implementing ordinance establishing a school impact lee consistent with the District's adopted Capital Facilities Plan (See the Public Facilities and Annexation Sections of the Land Use Element, the Parks, Recreation Trails and Open Space Element, the Utilities Element, and the Transportation Elements for policies related to this Capital Facilities Plan.) 111-7 Adopted 11/01/04 TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2005-2010 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 alternatives to SOV travel. 111-8 Adopted 11/01/04 Fig. 7-1 Existing Street/Highway System Existing Street/Highway System • "--4t) (2003) s Legend W 1440 u city Limit E y Transportation ;' . ` . ~ Plan ;/A II Renton ...� -Alps,,., a tki ensue Planning Area i+p „.' r _ . x " „ ��: - f t q. ,3,,,,.... ,,,,.....Ana A � y „1 TlucToSale ��� t A ''4.4."•,, .'': * ''' **' ",'*.* :' ''.* 406111111N, Iliad g __11 : jriginikk4 vm„..-",-.1...,;-1,-, ''', ..::,'•";,-,";:'-',.:2,,„- Ergs wi 2i I , i ii ofiallli r#11011‘. ..44 -„ .' '.; -- .:-"::- -:-..--, ofisillifil 44-744,h1Pre ' i a"lit '- _-='� e'er ` 4+� it^i _ , - glib ia-,11.11111:?'" , 111k antripmpatfil :, :_6::::E,:ki_....zluiaiuiruikaeEirihivtNravikkiotv;_it.,ti,t.aij iii;1;91‘1:11,::_:1:4:171141Pn e7to:111 kl . . ilikwoup .44iiire 5 , 6,:lk..\,,,,;\\ , 2,,...:741.4 r w...inotrizooki.2 i II 06:,.9____,7_4_, ,...—fair- ,,iiiiii ji L.: I /10,, if em s '��,;;®;I •nig:, fir[ �� .411 ' p Ili%ift- i,---_L-.....-_-..,-' .t- ' III ifil Imigt." -‘911 4,1 - iiiiii„...... . ma Nial 1, vasiirin vi-a, F401, w ---\ C 4 - g i . tsa °` 111111 / .. b „/ + is V . . As --ilk,. t1 l —VIII a ,. a _____ --pi %-e-41-- } , ,� �ii si 1 ---- ;- r. , J ) =xg _ gc:' III-9 Adopted 11/01/04 Figure 7-2 Traffic Flow Map i''''&21 = 1.,,v r r r awti 0. ...- .44...--.4hP '. < / iitaltj I 1E4..1.l''' ..e... ' 1 w - i , IF ...c..14 c) .:,s,.. c,cp.... , .,::, le=, . , , : q.... c,„ ,,..,.. c, .., 0 0 t02,0' � g t) t 44 —46„, ‘11111,111.1IV ez,"'-,,,,, Nt, s) ,--,:', c' kt::,_".=> fk4. ti 4s Q s- �3 + ,k, , CITY OF RENTON F® 0 ,a 2002 �( , TRAFFIC FLOW MAP t„ I .,,.: "' . OEPARUCHI Or PIAtNMNCIOUNINNCI VOLI0 NAM /] �w N - OPETtAIRANSPINEVA i1DNS 1qN � arJ440 p i o �0 F = yo 0 ��Fgl [%vC[ 0 SCALE:t'. 100,000,KNICIES 0T 1 - _ r "IN IHOOSANOS OF C(M1ECHONK MENACEONLY'FROM HOVE INTERSTATt WS AND STATt HOWE 302 (SOOIM OF•I-WS)ARE T4O AT IOU JkC I-405 1 1 -4O5Mill ;,=, it / ; lc O � 'St. Mt st Gf ��'� �r 41:::0 . w Y T YAM YT hit St a 0 r J a t : I d 4';, „ ,ae YT 4} {f�i ;'..uMr , � >r� #OeYtn CITY OF'.'.RE:NTOFf 0 r i 0 AA V btNAkTKtat bI *AAR. rt"00iVli - - i 2002—TRAmc now MAP _a III-10 Adopted 11/01/04 Fig. 7-3 2022 Daily Traffic Volumes ti 34 tea. ' - itilikv c:4„4.1.... ..-...,..4-,,r7;...,_.i.,,c, 41._,,_,T, y''''','''''''''r. P Am r, - ' i► iiiicastle �. ,, :.• pI> r �M► iI'�', b 3 i �xa' ei •.'�•11.1•�i i�� isigiiiiii, N---f-k.:: :„:-.7::, --7 . ' -.., -, ' s:::'', .4osint71-.”- :""" it amer.414/11nlam — -:":4111 I.:' ,4111114N7,1k4 irmk.:',..,.: ' ' ,; impi'immun 1 7,01..ell .160 Ill 1 I NV ..k. ' '• , II Irti i Riff _ I, Ilk WO @ glita P .1‘17,4 ' .. ; In:rkallUtritts r b. mo gititibm,ifie..,..- - 1 sarAipuikitilliii iiiiiii ' Alio A lirmiSE CIL"-,'.. , ,.. Wy` Vire' !RAI =Ns. I I — 1 : A ,,..q.,.....,.....,m.. , D14i1E11M1I;sII 0 .,id.-,g„.,„.t ,.. ui1n11lne11a..=r.1,1-9,,2:_2._.,= 4, lik.\Is, .tea : :�. 4 __ .ioll ..L........;...,-...d.Lra..t..i..l, --.k,; )1 iitiir a? Fp ________, ._ ,,,,..\\,,, ri..,,, ,,,,,,,,„„‘,I,,,,..,„..„„jiji,„r,,,,,,,,,,„...,,(L..,,.„_.ih,,, ,, , ,,,.,__ 866 !+ ' „ „h'' Benton C�1- �= 1 _t i 1/4\ 4 ' 1<gI _l '169_ g* 1 - li // ‘ - i 401;41:61trr ni ,o, -----.. op405 e.I* Vielt% 11,4* - o1111rl1'i11 4('4. t ®/.► Y�il I . ill® L'iAn 11 ' "' _ 1 trozi' 4 „ `` 2022 Daily Traffic Volumes 41 %AN 1• yet -lit _ kit) — Y Legend 2 / .4— ^ Average 4 1 Daily Traffic Transportation i/t — j City Limit I` / `/ Plan ,ii, i,, . 1 Renton l it,oro ! Planning Area e r: III-1 1 Adopted 11/01/04 The LOS policy is based on travel time contours which in turn are based on auto,transit, HOV,non-motorized, and transportation demand management/commute trip reduction measures. The LOS policy is designed to achieve several objectives: • Allow reasonable development to occur; • Encourage a regionally linked, locally oriented, dynamic transportation system; • Meet requirements of the Growth Management Act; • Meet the requirements of the Countywide Planning Policies Level of Service Framework Policies; • Require developers to pay a fair share of transportation costs; and • Provide flexibility for Renton to adjust its LOS policy if the region decides to lower regional LOS standards by not providing regional facilities. The City of Renton LOS standard is used to evaluate Renton citywide transportation plans. The auto,HOV,and transit measures are based on travel times and distance and are the primary indicators for concurrency. The non-motorized and TDM measures assist in meeting multi-modal goals of Renton and the region. The Level of Service Standard Methodology The following table demonstrates how the LOS policy is applied. A 2002 LOS travel time index has been calculated for the City by establishing the sum of the average 30-minute travel distance for SOV,HOV and Transit as follows: Average PM peak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOV HOV 2 Transit 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 SOV 30-minute travel distance is forecast to decrease by 2022. Therefore, SOV improvements will need to be implemented to raise the SOV equivalent or a combination of HOV and/or transit improvements will need to be implemented to raise the HOV and/or transit equivalents to maintain the LOS standard. Renton's Transportation Improvement Plan Arterial,HOV and Transit Sub-Elements have been tested against the above LOS standard to assure that the Plan meets the year 2022 standard. City-wide Level of Service Index(Year2002): Average PM peak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOV 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. I11-12 • Adopted 11/01/04 City-wide Level of Service Standard(Year 2022): Average PM peak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOV 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,2005-2010 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 revenue would continue at no less than$0.35 million per year; that grant funding would be maintained at $3.90 million per year; .business license fees would continue at $1.88 million per year based on the current 85%of the annual revenue generated from this fee that is dedicated to fund transportation improvements; and that $0.57 million per year from mitigation fees would be maintained. Based on forecasts of total new vehicle trips from development, a mitigation fee of$75 per trip has been established. Developers are required to implement site-specific improvements to ensure that on-site and adjacent facility impacts are mitigated, as well as paying their required fees. 1I1-13 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 7-1 2005-2010 Six-Year TIP Total Project Costs Total Project Costs Previous ; 'Six Year Total TIP Project Title Costs 2005 2006 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 Period Fatal Cost i Street Oveda Pro,ram 1,050,002 405 000 405,000 405.0001 405 000 405,000 405,000 2,430 000 3 480,002 ©SR 167/SW 27th SUStrander By 355,174 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 55 000 410,174 3 Strander Bv1SW 27th St Connect. 1,705,460 800,000 9,394,540 28,000,000 26,500,000 64.694,540 66,400,000 4 SR 169 HOY-140th to SR900 2,000,392 10,000 55,100 3,680,000 2,350,0004 6,095,100 8,095,492 5 Renton Urban Shuttle(RUSH) 20,169 5,000 5,000 5.0001 5,000 5,0001 5,000 30,000 50,169 e Transit Program 32,584 20,400 20,400 20,400i 20,400 20,400 20,400 122,400 154,984 7 Ra€nierAv Corridor Study/lmprov, 267.710 20,000 20,000' 20,000 261,000 2,964,000 3,165,000 6,450,000 6,717,710 a NE 3rd1NE 4th Corridor 323,892 315,300 807,500 5,017,000 2,100,000 2,100,000 10,339,800 10,663,692 9 Walkway Program 317,533 236.600 250 000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,486 600 1,804,133 to S Lake Wash.Roadway knprov, 1,500,009 1,850,000 14,300,000 23,800,000 39,950,000 41,450,000 11 SR 169 Corridor Stud 50,000_ 50 000 50,000 12 South Renton Project 156,800 18,200 240,000 258,200 415,000 13 1.405 Improvements in Renton 42,166 30,000 20,000 10,0001 60,000 102,186 14 Project DevelopmentlPredesign 271,363 175,000 175,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,150,000 1,421,363- 15 NE 4th St/Ho•uiam Av NE 55,100 344 900 344 900 400,000 10 Rainier Av•SW 7th to 4th PI 80,000 585,000 2,150,000 855,000 3,590,000 3,670,000 17 Benson Rd-S 26th to Main 20,000 459,400 2,500 461,900 481,900 is Arterial Circulation Pro•ram 195 308 200,000 200,000 200,000' 200 000 250,000 250,000 1,300 000 1,495,308 10 Bridge inspection&Repair 120,411 40,000 140,000 40,000 615,000 40,000 30,000 905,000 1,025,411 20 Loop Replacement Program 57.441 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 177,441 21 Sign Replacement Program 13,427 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 45,000 58,427 22 Pole Pro•ram 47,974 25 000 48 400 25,000 25,000 25,000 25 000 173,400 221 374 ®Sound Transit HOV Direct Access 46,523 10,000 5,000 15,000 61,523 Traffic Safe Pr••ram 233,791 80,000 40,000 40,000' 40,000 40,000 40 000 280 000 513,791 25 Traffic Efficiency Program 250,505 251,900 114,400 75,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 531,300 781,805 2e CBO Bike&Pad.Connections 25,212 50,000 50,000 10,000 590,000 410.000 5,000 1,115,000 1,140,212 27 Arterial Rehab.Prog. 537,800 195,000 240,000 205,000 340,000 230,000 180,000 1,390,000 1,927,800 20 Duvall Ave NE 667,781 1,258,700 1,692,000 2,950,700 3,618,481 20 Sunset/Duvall Intersection 115,000 381,000 381,000 - 496,000' 30 RR Crossing Safety Prog. 5,198 5,000 5,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 35,198 st :.M Program 100,670 64,200 64,200 64,200 64,200 64,200 64,200 385,200 485,870 32 Trans Concurrency 1,764 40,000 10,000 40,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 140,000 141,784 33 Missing Links Program 36.350 30.000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 216,350 34 GIS Needs Assessment 44.874 35,000 35,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 150,000 194.874 36' Grady Wy Corridor Study 5.000 35,000 120,000 80,000 230,000 1,810,000 1,020,000 3,295,000 3,300,000 36 Bicycle Route Elev.Program 24,798 20,000 18,000 18,000 110,000 80,000 80,000 326,000 350,798 *011.0 37 Lake Wash.By-Park to Coulon Pk 329,900 79,500 149,100 228,600 558,500 30 interagency Signal Coord, 26,572. 12,000 12,000 38,572 39 Environmental Monitoring 223,711 85,000 75,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 285,000 508,711 40 Trans-Valley&Soos Creek Corr. 7,300 5,000 5,000 12,300 41 WSDOT Coordination Program 18,857 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 80,000 78,857 42 i%tor the Arts 20.000 50.000 30,000 30,000 50,000i 30,000 30.000 220,000 240,000 43 Arterial HOV Program 125,354 10,000 10,000 i 20,000 145,354 44 Park-Sunset Corridor 7,889 25,000 50,000 390,000 1,691,000 1,059,000 3,215,000 3,222,889 45 Lind AvSW 16th-SW 43rd 5,000 5,000 5,000 1,914,000 626,000 2,550,000 2,555,000 44 Benson Rd S I S 31st 5t. 138,500 61,500 61,500 200,000 47 Logan Av Concrete Panel Repair 460,000 460 000 460,000 40 Carr1Mill Signal 5,000 10,000 20,000 340,000 400,000 10,000 785,000 785,000 48 Transit Priority Signal System 1,280,315 30,000 30,000 1,310,315 50 Transit Center Video 26,391 10,000 10,000 36,391 61 Houser WyS-Main to Burnett 810000 810000 810000 52 Trans Valley ITS 50,000 5,000 5,000 10,000 60,000 53 Lake Wash.Br Slip Plane 629,400 10,600 10,600 640,000 54 Monster Road Bridge 500,000 12,000 12,000 512,000 35 SW 7th St/Lind Ave SW 273.577 26,423 26,423 300,000 6e Duvall Ave t4E-34,r.Cots 547 858 1„,311342 2.810,800 1 4.122142 4 670,000 T4141S00r444 t4,938,838 7,986,465 9.710,700s 3,364300r 28.954840 56,821.100i 98.367,100 184,214305 179.1993.141' III-14 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 7-2 2005-2010 Six-Year TIP Summary of Funding Sources i 1 0000':00-0 OO ( IC O c, 0 1 I0100: 1 0000000 oo Pi 0 000 It000 (000 (0U) U r 00 0) 02v- <0 001- O 0) (00 0N).- 6o N oN0 (0oN r U e- 0C 0 CD ND0e-M MO � 00 Ps CD � 0 CO O e- e- e N e7 0 et 03 ,- N et M C3)O() -I- 0 of 0 0000000 00 COO 0 CO O O V0 0000000 O O COO 0 00 0 O O (D 0CD00 U)r 00 U) 0) N OD CD Oete- U) 4 D N O) 0) ' M ( e- OO tiN O) tn O tN-- O M CO et M O) N N U) O 0 et 4' O 0 et 0 N CD N OetOr- 0e-0 MO. t- M r e- oo N is et (t) C.e- M h Ct) et 0 V U) O 000000 00 Ps CD Ots00 OMO O et O O O O et 0 O [t 0 O et 0 O O CA et 0 oO (Oet000 O0 CO et N (000 OO(O O 4' O0h-O)( et 00 NU) 0)t(00 (0(O O e- (0 0 N ( N CD CC) 0 Me- 0) U7 N CO 000 O 4.0 M 1- CO CA N- CO M 0) CO N O t- CO at N 0Mr`e- 00 e- N(CM e'r`0) N e-(Si 0 O 00 0000 00 U) U) 00 0 Q. 00 0000 00 .- 00 00 0 CO ,- 0*- 0000 e-- 0) NM M n 0 (0 0)o o)e7 CO r) o v et 0 03 e- 0) 0 (o 0 (0 0 CO 0 et (0 (0 0 00 N- '-- e--M M 0 00 M M N e- M , M M Q0 00 O000 00 Mf- 00 0 00 0000 00 r CO 00 0 X N et ONON- 00 U) Oh Ps O > W co et- 00) (M0 ((000 (0O 00) O (0D Cr o S� G. o 0 CON (O00NN. M (D 00 COP- t` F tY N r.. o) e- (4 N N O) 0) o -i 2ce O V 'iw' Z }}--- W (? 00NM00U) O o CO N- U7 U) U) OOetN000 00 NC)) et tD0 CD el CV 0 et to v. 0)0 } X 6 (t) (MM e et 4' - 0)(D 0)OO e-- (0 to ILZ Z 0 00) U) O (ON0 U) O 0) N 03 CO • Z Cl) 0 USt` et e7 M M 0 M CD. O CA r a?. 0) QZ IL ,- M h.: .- ,- N. N N- r` Q O LL F- o O V m 1- s > 00 NM00U) 00 OM (t) 0000 0N-U) CD et of N 0 0 0 0 0 e- et et O) 0 0 CD0 0 0EX en < w O d7NMo0e-M o0 e- O tr 00 O M Z 0 O 2 c o r. U)o)0 ((S v o 0 0)0) (D o o o If r)er Z LZ O 2 F (0000) 0) MCOr 00 NM MON (0 t-e C'4 = -O U) OU) ONON ...... co 0 ,- e- U') ti 000(H .Z.� Z 0 `O MNON ),-et NO) OS OS (0 (N 00 co-is .- ! ,- CO ttrDD a � . Cu.. c -p000gi; LL oco 0 cm x w ao ° !L° c ID o O 0 0 my 0 },., O ,d � UW 0 cS N .0 N O O a -0Z > 0 U 0 0 N V = C E o.a Q 0 C= o c c- (� J �O = O O ty._.LL. ow v 'U � ' 00V- c apa E 08 wvta)f- c.) ._ . cgp a, n caQc, 0 Ijaa. tioo08i e- co O2JOLLC92J0m1 < LL 0 )- 0 >• ' w X Z ND X W O LL ti 0 0 4 O w a) 0 0 w t- 0 c r J >,. .t X th U. Cl)00 * U 0' III-15 Adopted 11/01/04 WATER CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2005-2010 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 all parts of the distribution system at adequate pressure during peak demand or fire. This ability is determined by the physical condition of the system and the capacity of supply, storage,treatment,pumping and distribution systems. Level of service standards for the water system vary according to the component of the overall system and are determined by the requirements established by local, state, and federal regulations. Water supply is regulated by the Washington State Department of Ecology(water rights),and the Washington State Department of Health(quantity guidelines),water quality is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(Safe Drinking Water Act)and the Washington State Department of Health(primacy over Safe Drinking Water Act), system design and construction requirements are regulated by the Washington State Department of Health. The Water Utility maintains a hydraulic model of the water system. The model incorporates the pipe size and location, booster pumps,and storage to determine the flow and pressure available in each segment of the distribution system. The Utility can evaluate the impact of a specific development on the system using the model. The Water Utility reviews each development in terms of flow,pressure and water supply required. The Water Utility's goal is to provide an adequate supply of potable water under the"worst case"scenario. This 4.600 scenario considers the following conditions: failure of the largest source of supply, failure of the largest mechanical component,power failure to a single power grid,and/or a reservoir out of service. Under this scenario,the Water Utility strives to meet the following primary requirements: Pressure: Maintain a minimum of 30 pounds per square inch(psi)at the meter during normal demand conditions and a minimum of 20 psi during an emergency. Maximum allowable pressure at the meter during normal demand is 130 psi and a maximum of 150 psi during an emergency Velocity: Under normal demand conditions, the velocity in a transmission main is less than 4 feet per second (fps)and less than 8 fps during an emergency. Supply: The water supply must meet the maximum day demand and replenish storage within 72 hours with the largest source of supply out of service. Storage: Storage volume must be maintained to provide for peak demand and adequate volume for an emergency(fire). Transmission and Distribution: The Water Utility uses design criteria approved by the Washington State Department of Health. Treatment and Monitoring: The Water Utility treats all sources with chlorine and fluoride and corrosion control. Water quality monitoring is conducted as required by the State Department of Health under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The City implements a cross connection control program to prevent cross connections with non potable sources and a wellhead protection program. Fire Flow: Fire flow required by a development is as established in the fire code and can vary from 1000 gallons per minute to 5500 gallons per minute. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2005-2010 III-16 Adopted 11/01/04 Based on the projected growth in population and employment by the year 2010,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. II1-17 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 8-1 On-Line Supply Sources—Existing Water Supply Capacity Name Pumping Rate(gpm) Pumping Rate (mgd) Springbrook 600 0.86 Well RW 1 2,200 3.17 Well RW-2 2,200 3.17 Well RW-3 2,200 3.17 Well RW-5A 1,400 2.02 Well PW 8 3,500 5.04 Well PW-9 1,200 1.73 Well PW 11 2,500 3.60 Well PW 12 1,500 2.16 Well PW-17 1,500 2.16 TOTAL 18,800 GPM 27.07 MGD GPM: gallon per minute MGD: million gallon per day Total annual water rights are 14,809 acre-feet per year III-18 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 8-2 Water Capital Facilities Summary of Water Utilities Capital Improvement Projects 2005-2010 Most par Year x 1,000) 2005-2010 Project ID Description 2005 2006 2007 2008 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 S-3 196 Zone Reservoir and Pump Station 200 500 2,000 1,000 3,700 S-4 196 Zone Emergency 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 Water Quality Improvements WQ•1 Maplewood Water Quality Improvement and Treatment Facility 2,000 2,000 WQ-2 Well 5A Water Quality Improvement Treatment FactGly 400 500 500 1,400 Subtotal-Water Quality Improvements 2,000 400 500 500 0 0 3,400 Water Main Rehabilitation WM-1 Water Maki 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-1 Reservoirs Recoating,Cathodic Protection and Exterior Painting 100 100 50 50 50 50 400 M-2 Emergency Response Water Projects 50 50 100 100 100 100 500 M-3 Water System Security 40 40 40 40 40 40 240 M-4 Rehablitation of Wells 1,2,and 3 200 200 M-5 Automatic Meter Reading Conversion 200 500 200 200 800 ` er-- _ Subtotal-Major Maintenance Projects 190 190 390 890 390 390 2,140 Water Utility Regulatory Compliance Programs RC-1 1 Regulatory Conplance Programs 1 1201 801 901 901 801 1881 665 Subtotal-Regulatory Compliance Programs 120 80 90 90 90 195 665 TOTAL WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 3,650 4,110 3,320 3,020 4,020 3,185 21,205 Sources of Funds 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 OperatingRevenuesBonds 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 5,597,000' 1,340,000 5,350,000 1,340,000 5,832,000 I1I-19 Adopted 1 1/0 1/04 Figure 2-2 Existing Water System 1410 1, , , -111.1411141/41111 r. ,, r„., _ -145141 g , . . .. 01tni1:1.4.1 1: .7't:.1 2 1•ir:t.:::6•i -MERCER - : ', . ,--.,,,_ • ,.. I..,-....--,;•,-,-,0, 4..*,..-..tilksirs.. . •; tt.tif,-,'11:„.;:•:*ga,.., ISLAND•: , :::.3;. ;.,Z-- r. ,„ .. , ". v.::..:: 1-.,, ?r,, ,...,,........ ,mrirk - ,-eV,W;. .."-t-.- NtwOrk,SItt '--''''-- :,:'-•''-' ,•• ,',..7:11:::-;:,--_:::::::::.::.;::::;..; :z...i.:,:e.N.. ',.,'2.i-,:5,.:,-.'i,.(.:4-11:::::::•;;-'''.: -' : . . ' ... ,, -,. ' ' -.':' '...'''-' - ...-;,,-'4.zif;f*liiit-i-E.E .RJ.,'--;`.,f•-:Ez,i-:.:*'.k-,-,...,-..ft.-,..,,,..t,:::-::1:i.o.,,,,:.4,7-.:,.-.,?g.,• _;,::m.-, • .. _, ,, , .,., : . , .,.,.. ';-1--4i-iiiitilf-f-•614"--S-V-:-.0--- ....:k.4.?-;;-4Ak'45-.',9!-M7.1,..?.-1-4w . .•, . -.-. - --'-itz-irmi-mkt:2t4t4.??•wi te.j.Fiivr:+z.D.In.e.-:Tizia0-4.,1-? - , -' ''.." .4-51';t-;.2.-131-2;7-igtzil'zgitk.E.t-i-Aslz.i.•,5-...ezg-0.-7.;:!...5:1.,-J.N,.- - _. ,,,,... . ,.. ''-';-;11.::--1--';';i)N"'47.37!"-ii'ikilliffliriffitti141111.1.4iiiiiiiiiiitt,. r. a - .- -iietriilaielik-_-, :=•-= :16'."'41r- -- --• ., .4-•,'„.-•:_--7,-,1,,,,,s ,•-s.„.1--i-t-4i-,14,-,-..,.;t:.,•,..7*-_,-, -- --...--_ -.-,.----,,,,,-2-,---!,2,...-_•,•-1-±,fti, - •-- -- ••- • ., w ,: - -,..,----,::--,.,•-,--,-..,,,,,..-a,...it.22,3.1-02•...r.ttrl,,,,Ai,-,,Kivizitir, ., -:- -•- . - ''. ,- . ,-- ' ' :- s :i''', -- .:'•ii.•*•,' ,.,:-.'''''''-`-'-'21-51itat.flit:2,t411t.'giE.:Milzt4.1 , -- . .-.Jr:--- - , ..: !-'.-.. ,,,,,,,'-.!-,-, 0,-.-4,: i.'",:-.., :::: .-,-;.v.k*itittlteitatEgl.tir:20.7t:-: .- '' •' .r r. ''' '11 '''':,, , tt.g 43t41fte•1.1. '.,k'T:7...',4i1:1 r•''';1'f':..11K,i11 rit.gORM'egittb14:+4 , , ' 4 •; - , 1..,I.,,;''..;q‘..;,;;;''',;I:' ''t' ., •')16,r i.;:/,'';'',••\',';11.:';-":..e:24513,1tigi:•,;iN•tr#•;',r7 ''7''1 ' '1:. .'r..r:'.4 A':..;;:;.:'r;:.•'..:T...1141r44:1tittatli4.',, '' . '.... '• ''... '','''-'''N'.3:;233r.r;c:,•„4.7./.;3,..:,,3, k 6.. .. -,...4 .•?",:.4 ;;fl.r- . .• ._ ,,..-:,.7- _ "4,4,41-::,-- • .X..,.. .v. .r.. ,r<0. ' - ' '- 4' '-'',-): -':_-"_.-.3'.:-,-- li;.,-';',-,:."•'%......7.-'•': -:-::-.V...,i',- ':‘,';:f.4 '.`it'.....,,, :._ . -,,; ! ; '' --:'' -,7.•-.•-••-.•'.•'„. ..,..,-- S.k;. .:..--,.....-'--..t-4--41, k.,,1."."47,‘":"';', ' ' ', :r.-.lic,... " '',' '-',.-i',J•4':;-4,,,::.;:: ''‘'(',"'...'t -."'-''.4-Z.;';,710,*1-4‘'',..,,.,•175''..,'';'.;4'.,„;,•:: 1,23 ,,..::C,'. :.„,..'"...'.•.:1:2;, -., . Vi's•3•-•;?.r•fei.,3'33,tc.:3,7; • • • •- - " ..-..!,s. :.,,t,...-:'•'..''.''',,.. ..;',',,,•-.;..;....3k.':.:,... ,''ii;' iitc*,133x.“.c3: c.,c, ' ' - ' ''l'P'"• ,''-• ' i:',44't.4:3";1, t-,.. 3(` • _ -.: • . ",-_-,1.3,,.. c,..7 ,,,,,..:....,_., , • --, ,•-c,,--,.. .- 3) ''.!... .-3-s,':Iv.i j 44,3'.-,f T.''''':.,,,'„ ,,cc'L..\,c3!.;!'•?;;',•'•"•..'''.'''')•:-•if " . - 443 '•• 73'.3!:''''',.•;'!:'.!:';7 ',,: 4, '4 !':3'• ''''''''''"''",.„5!..r* - - ,'.I'3%:'('IP I, '.+."•''''(.,''h'' • ..,1 ,,,f-,',-:,•--;,...,:..7..?„-, - •-, ;::;:-.,!.••.`;';•:J.,!- •;,,,,-.'-',.;‘,`_:W,i;',--.,,..•... -' - --- • '•.'. '11'1 . •,:.--R ''.. - .-:'''. --•:..;..,:*:••i'',:•.--t,r•-'..-. : ,, ,,.,-,,::7:.-,1-_,,•;: i i.:,-,i..!,-,, -~',-:_ •,,..ei, , : ,,,,,, ,.i. ,...,,._...„,..? ...I, 1-,,_ ,,,..,....;,,, ...,,,,-..,•,..-:,,n .....4,14!:,, ,%,,, ..,,, -,,,,,--,,-.4-,;:!.'0-,'.:-1,,,r-t-:-:".-i!,'`.'1.' . t.--,...,.„- 7,!1.,"4,..4. ..„.- ..,..,_-,-:,-.4.,4..,,-77-- 4. -'''' .A ..'-.4";;;-!:,:r°;,i'l'-;:::-,`4.:70-r.,1Y-,'i,','''-' ' '-''..: ' ',7'`:;',".;.7"•3:•'.'-,':',,,,, .,.,-,•4...,,,,_.;:',-1..,r,f-, 1;--::,'," Nall-..;:•r:,;'-••.;-N-•k•::-,72 ''..,-!";.::-..-',--::-.;-•,-,:-:_-_,,,.•.i.'.'t'.:-:-.,':'''.st.i.:17:7--z,:' ,----,',-l' •-•.'i.,o-,--n %,.!- 4 41' ..- ;frill 7'1. '--,',.;':,i7,•1:•- 7.,,-,..,,. ,,,:r,.;.::.,,,,,.:.A.,,,,, -,, — .,•-•...,,..,,,,i ...,-; ,.--,-,,;t•.f....... ...,- .4'''' .;''i...n.':, ::.:'T..'4" ''.. F, .:;'',4-,. i.." -......,.. . , : '''. it'-'0.''''''/3,.- .. ',.".::".1'..''1','-;-,--",.::-•.•!• i'•'-.A :23....! '. ••_:,,• ,-•.::".:"-•3.3: ' , '3-... ,,--,• '•-•:-' ,•,..?"• '''.•.'•!.•;,''3,:7,-,f 3'. 3r 5-4.'3 i'',-.. Z;'';1::';,'•.', 3., , • .- ' '- ':-. ,.°,.,:•.,"''.. '3:.:•2.3.', ' ' . it .!!!!!'..-;•6•','-',‘:;1.1 • '''•2‘,,, , r.'..' ':..'. ; .,. .f.-..„'.••';....;)".:,::',;'.;.;.r.15:-.„,: .: ..„,...-.1 „'„,::'-`,;( '..1-4:,:.•;,._.‘.; %?..,,.:";...05Y;;:. .)• ;: --:- 4,/=,' E,..,.,..;:,..x.:,:::,.:. .,-:,.,, ...t,..,:,..-,,,,, \--.'''''s r'''". -''''''.,;:jr,r,;. :'.i .;" ''...4%-:'..7.1'.. ;,..:11.ol ''- -',...,5;..i.-a''.-,:: -4'....-s.,, Z''..;., ' t•..,..72cUX l', . '''', :.%'• .34',..3-.'''''••‘.r.:i-'. ..!-..-•?.' i';i3.,•: '• '3'''''7" '''. .C.';''''f'.'''-'3 4'.trf--,.. ... 3 -3 --.'- •:• , ,i-,c*:,..'.',..:,:"°2.'.";.,,,',. C';'..'.'3, ‘::C .',7* .,, ,,. , ,„'::, ---,r) i :=:i;1;:?,:,:',:':..;,.A,,:•!`..q:;;;-.!,-;:".;',ieff: .,,e , '4' ;" : '',... i. :A-. l'::7.';•;;'.•,.''1;rre.:.:.:.;.4..;.7.f.f..:1:411:;,!'i:: ."''----- ,:-.7 _•13:'Iq.!.,..I,IT'?.?;:•.:;•:A.,;-•"..., .:. .. I , ;3 : • c, •,.:,3 ., .:— .1.,:•;.;.••-',,.:'.t?.;.-3.C...-" :.....'.„,•'' '-',": 1 ":, ,:-..:.;,- ••,•••. t ' . 1.rj.,‘ .. . • , ''...f r‘r"4 .',.'; ' .',',.;•;,...t i.!.., .'1' • '.... ' f' " .,•: ,j ....,.... . • ; , . .'. . (i;.•;::';12,1.1:..;.,..,.:,..! .,, liji:....,, ,:.---- ,,-.,'- -, i , . .-...: r '''' •' ; 1 i ''.. '''' '': : '' . ''.. ' r :r ' r r' ' 1 rr .rr'r '.'':..,:t.'''' ..;. r''r'.1::,',•: "'11'1 r''''rj Are. •:; . , • , . .; ' ' , 1 • (,.;:-_,:::;.r.:rr ;.-4.-0. Jr: ' .YE? ' ,..' '.,r;.:'4..•' :::;1:7E,:; ,..•.,, KENT ;,,........, 196 Pressure Zone NMI 495 Pam=Zone BM 565 Pressure Zone CITY OF RENTON mos 300 Pressure Zone 1111011 Water System Plan IIIIIIII 320 Pressure Zone 590 Paean Zane w Metered Intertie awin 350 Pressure Zone EXISTING WATER SYSTEM ems 370 Pressure Zane a PRV Station IBM 395 Prague Zone „-, nuesosee sass woo ONakY 11.11,8•1 PO" NM 435 Presage Zone >20. Lgrurr arras o 1500 300, : I= :=1 1 =IN 490 Pressure Zone Municipal Boundariesra=1 ...... I000 *4110 I 11-2 0 Adopted 11/01/04 WASTEWATER CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2005-2010 Inventory of Existing Facilities Renton's sanitary sewer system consists of about 184 miles of gravity sewers,23 lift stations with associated force mains, and approximately 3,400 manholes. Wastewater is discharged to regional facilities at over 70 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 13,800 customers, which includes approximately ninety-five percent of the city's population and eighty-five percent of the city's land area. The remaining five percent of the population currently utilizes private, on-site wastewater disposal systems,typically septic system, while the balance of the land area either utilizes private systems or remains undeveloped. The capacity of the existing facilities is adequate to handle the current demand. The Lake Washington East Basin while currently having sufficient capacity,needs some improvements to 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. As part of the Wastewater Utility's update to its Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan scheduled for 2005,a full hydraulic model is being developed to evaluate, system wide,the long term need and timing for upsizing of existing interceptors and the timing for additional interceptors for new portions of our service area. Level of Service Level of service for Renton's Wastewater Utility is defined by the ability to move sewage from the point of origin,the customer,to the treating agency,King County, in a safe and efficient manner. This ability is determined by the physical condition of Renton's system and the capacity available in the system. It is the Renton Wastewater Utility's responsibility to maintain the system in a safe condition and monitor the standards for new construction. The Wastewater Utility is also responsible for ensuring that capacity exists in the system prior to new connections or that the capacity is created as part of the new development. The level of service for Renton's Wastewater Utility is developed through coordination with and subject to the policies, design criteria, and standards used for planning and operating a sanitary sewer system as established by the laws and policies of several agencies. Those agencies, in order by authority, are the Department of Ecology(Criteria for Sewage Works Design),King County(King County Wastewater Treatment Division), and the City of Renton. The Wastewater Utility has maintained a simple hydraulic model of the sewer system. This model uses the size,type, and slope of the pipes to determine the capacity of the each component(segment)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,with our current model,to provide a standard statement on the capacity available in Renton's sewer system. As stated above, the Utility is developing a new hydraulic model that will allow the Utility to perform dynamic analysis on any portion of its interceptor system given any scenario, to determine capacity within the system. The model is also based upon two years worth of wet-weather data that was developed as part of a regional effort by King County. This new tool will give us much greater ability to predict future capacity within our interceptors. The Wastewater Utility's goal is to have sufficient capacity to handle what the Utility considers the'worst case scenario'. That is,the amount of waste if everybody was discharging their highest amount at the same time and the system was experiencing the highest amount of inflow and infiltration anticipated. 111-21 Adopted 11/01/04 For existing and projected development Renton uses the following criteria for flow projection: Average Single Family Domestic Flow 270 gallons per day per unit Average Multi-Family Domestic Flow 190 gallons per day per unit 441100 Light Industrial 2800 gallons per acre per day Heavy Industrial site specific Commercial 2800 gallons per acre per day Office _ 2800 gallons per acre per day Recreation 300 gallons per acre per day Public 600 gallons per acre per day Manufacturing Park 2800 gallons per acre per day Peak Infiltration(New System) 600 gallons per acre per day Peak Inflow(New System) 500 gallons per acre per day Peak Inflow/Infiltration(Existing System) From Sewer Hydraulic Model Peaking factor for system average 2.0 X Depth to Diameter Ratio 0.80 (eight tenths) The criteria listed above are based upon Table IV-3 of the 1998 Long Range Wastewater Management Plan,with an amendment for actual Inflow and Infiltration values based upon our updated hydraulic model. 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 2005-2010 '44 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 East Cedar River Basin and Lake Washington East Basin. In order to maintain the desired level of service and accommodate the projected growth, facility improvements will be needed in the Lake Washington East Basin over the next three years. Another factor affecting level of service is the age of the existing system. A significant portion of the city's wastewater collection and conveyance system is over fifty years old. Some of these mains cannot be relied upon to provide the desired level of service without major repair and/or replacement. Consequently,the primary component of the six-year facility plan is the repair and replacement of the existing system in order to maintain the current level of service. Some of the geographic areas in which these mains are located will experience more growth than will others,but facility improvements will be needed regardless. It is currently the policy of the Wastewater Utilities that all parcels connecting to the sewer system pay for their fair share of the system. This is accomplished in a combination of three methods: 1. Local Improvement Districts may be formed with the city installing the sewers using LID bonds encumbering the participating parcels; 2. The Wastewater Utility may front the cost of new sewers and hold Special Assessment Districts against benefiting parcels; and 3. Developers or potential users will front the cost of extending the main with the ability to hold a latecomer agreement against the other parcels that potentially benefit. Projects that replace and rehabilitate the existing system, as well as operation and maintenance costs, will be funded 440 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. III-22 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 9-1 below lists the projects needed to meet growth, along with the sources of funds for them for the period 2005- 2010,based upon the six-year growth projections and the desired level of wastewater service. Table 9-1 Wastewater Capital Facilities 2005-2010 Wastewater Projects 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Sanitary Sewer Main Extensions 2,000 - - -Total Sources of Funds: Oper.Rev/Bonds 2,000 Licenses and Fees Other Taxes Grants Loans Not Funded Total 2,000 - - - - 'NOW- *4101, I11-23 Adopted 11/01/04 Fig. 9-1 Sanitary Sewer Trunk Lines T ti tx N O O ON w W e O Q • .� w i.CI) Z a c 0 °' v�� O G4 U) S :5 A a" o W '> .t . Oj1o s9 p ? 00 0 Q8 g �5aO ~ 1— C. b co $ .Q .--+ .. i> OJ d o2 co Z l c3 a v Uvl w° w Q •F i k• • • I. ra , h 7`I U O 1 r. 3 o • III-24 Adopted 11/01/04 SURFACE WATER UTILITY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2005-2010 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 of a majority of these basins that discharge into either the Green/Duwamish River or into Lake Washington. The Surface Water Utility's service area within the existing City corporate boundaries is approximately 17.2 square miles. The existing surface water system includes rivers, streams, ditches, swales, lakes,wetlands, detention facilities (pond and piped systems),water quality swales,wetponds,wetvaults, oil/water separators, coalescing plate oil/water separators,pipes, catch basins, manholes,outfalls and pump stations. The natural surface water systems (rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands) are shown on Renton's Critical Area Maps. A majority of the water quantity and quality facilities are privately owned and maintained on-site as required in accordance with the Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance(RMC Chapter 22, Section 4-22). The Surface Water Utility owns,maintains and operates all storm and surface water management facilities located within public right-of-ways and easements dedicated for storm and surface water management purposes. The Utility currently owns, operates and maintains approximately 204 miles of storm pipe systems including approximately 8000 catch basin and manhole structures, 19 detention facilities and 37.67 miles of ditch systems. A combination of the public and some of the private storm system is shown in the Surface Water Utility Storm System Inventory Maps and Attributes data base which is too large to present here. Level of Service Background The Surface Water Utility's policies, design criteria,and standards used for planning, engineering, operating and maintaining the storm and surface water systems are based upon requirements that originate from many sources. Together,these regulations define the acceptable level of service for surface water. The 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 Agencies/Regulations: a. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA): i. Federal Clean Water Act ii. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit) b. Army Corps of Engineers(ACOE) i. Nationwide/404 Individual Permit Requirements ii. Federal Emergency Management Act standards III-25 Adopted 11/01/04 2. State Agencies/Regulations: a. Washington State Department of Ecology(WSDOE): i. Stormwater Discharge Permits (NPDES). ii. 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 vii. 2001 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington b. Washington State Department of Fisheries and Wildlife(WDFW) i. Hydraulic Project Approval Permits 3. Local Agencies/Regulations a. Cedar River Basin Plan b. May Creek Basin Plan c. Green River Basin Plan d. Green River Flood Control Zone District/Green River Basin Program e. King County Flood Hazard Reduction Plan e. King County Surface Water Design Manual as adapted by Renton Level of Service Standard in Renton The Surface Water Utility level of service is the adopted surface water design standards which are consistent with the above referenced federal, state and local regulations as specified in the City of Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage ordinance(RMC 4-22). New surface water management systems are designed to accommodate the future land use condition runoff based upon the city's Land Use Element and the future land use plans of neighboring jurisdictions. The 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 10- 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 are 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 100-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 100-year design storm without over-topping. As a condition of SEPA,the City requires projects in areas of the City that drain to streams that flow down steep ravines to comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual requirement and to meet the Level 2 Flow Control and Duration standard. Projects have also been required to comply with the surface water design standards in the 2001 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington when deemed appropriate by the City as a condition of SEPA,or because it was required as a condition of another agencies permit. It is anticipated that the City will be adopting new storm and surface water design standards within the new two to five years to be 44400 equivalent to the 2001 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. The update is expected to be required as a condition of the pending Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System National Pollution Elimination I1I-26 Adopted 11/01/04 System Phase 2 storm water permit that will be issued to the City for the discharge of runoff into waters of the United States in accordance with the Federal Clean Water Act. 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,2005-2010 The capital facilities estimated to be needed to solve current surface water management problems and to prevent future surface water management problems associated with the 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; 2. Permit 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. Army 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 Salmon Recovery Funding Board and other grants that may be available from the County, State or Federal Government to improve fish habitat; d. Washington State legislative appropriations approved for Special Surface Water Utility projects (Cedar River Delta project); and 11. Other unidentified federal, state and local grant programs. As is evident in Table 10-1 on the following page,the Surface Water Utility proposed to use all or any combination of the financial sources to fund the needed capital facilities. III-27 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 10-1 Surface Water Utility Capital Facilities 2005-2010 Surface Water Projects 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Wetland Mitigation Bank 50 150 1,300 - - Storm System Improvement 900 1130 800 1120 1580 675 Springbrook Creek Improvements 150 850 0 100 200 Cedar River Basin Plan - - 130 700 - Green River Ecosystem Restoration 10 10 10 20 10 10 May Creek Basin Plan Implement. 275 - - - - Lower Cedar River Sediment 275 250 250 250 600 1300 Management Program Small Drainage Problems Program 180 150 150 150 150 150 Miscellaneous&Emergency 50 50 50 50 50 50 Projects Plans and Program 110 110 110 110 110 115 Total(dollars are 1000's) 2000 2700 2800 2400 2600 2500 Sources of Funds: Oper. Rev. Bonds 1490 2200 2300 1900 2100 2000 Licenses and Fees 500 500 500 500 500 500 Other Taxes Grants 10 Loans Not Funded 4.010 Total 2000 2700 2800 2400 2600 2500 *1100 1I1-28 Adopted 11/01/04 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2005-2010 Inventory of Existing Facilities The City of Renton is the primary provider of park and recreation services within the city limits. These services include parks, indoor facilities, open space areas and recreation programs. Other suppliers that provide facilities and services include the Renton School District and several private enterprises. 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 Summary Type of Facility 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 683.11 236.00 919.11 Linear Parks&Trails 91.21 0.00 91.21 Special Use Parks&Facilities 190.02 0.00 190.02 TOTAL 1,242.52 348.70 1,591.22 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 PAA. 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. I1I-29 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 11-2 Public Park and Open Space Areas in Renton Detailed Listing Park Acres Status Neighborhood Parks(20) Earlington Park 1.54 Developed Glencoe Park .42 Developed Heather Downs Park 4.30 Undeveloped Jones Park 1.18 Developed Kennydale Beach 1.76 Developed Kennydale Lions Park 5.66 Developed Kiwanis Park 9.00 Developed Maplewood Park 2.20 Developed Maplewood Roadside Park 1.00 Developed North Highlands Park 2.64 Developed Philip Arnold Park 10.00 Developed Riverview Park 11.50 Developed Sit In Park 0.50 Developed Springbrook Watershed Park 16.00 Undeveloped Sunset Court 0.50 Developed Talbot Hill Reservoir 2.50 Developed Thomas Teasdale Park 10.00 Developed Tonkins Park 0.29 Developed Tiffany Park 7.00 Developed Windsor Hill Park 4.50 Developed *4400 TOTAL 92.49 Acres Community Parks(7) Cedar River Park 23.07 Developed Cedar River Trail Park 24.20 Developed Highlands Park 10.40 Developed Liberty Park 11.89 Developed Narco Property 15.00 Undeveloped Piazza&Gateway 0.80 Developed Ron Regis Park 45.00 Developed TOTAL 130.36 Acres Regional Parks(1) Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park 55.33 Developed TOTAL 55.33 Acres Open Space Areas(10) Black River Riparian Forest 92.00 Undeveloped Cedar River Natural Area 237.00 Undeveloped Cleveland Property 23.66 Undeveloped Honey Creek 35.73 Undeveloped Lake Street 1.00 Undeveloped May Creek/McAskill 10.00 Undeveloped May Creek Greenway 29.82 Undeveloped Panther Creek Wetlands 73.00 Undeveloped III-30 Adopted 11/01/04 Renton Wetlands 125.00 Undeveloped Springbrook Watershed 38.00 Undeveloped Edlund/Korum Property 47.90 Undeveloped ,,,,,,,. TOTAL 683.11 Acres Linear Parks&Trails(7) Burnett Linear Park 1.0 acre Developed Cedar River Trail 4.5 miles Developed Honey Creek Trail 1.0 miles Developed Springbrook Trail 2.0 miles Developed S.W. 16th Trail .5 miles Developed Garden/16`h/Houser 1.0 miles Developed Lake Washington Blvd 1.5 miles Developed TOTAL 10.5 Miles. 1 Acre Special Use Parks &Facilities (10) Boathouse 4,242 s.f. Developed Carco Theatre(310 seats) 11,095 s.f. Developed Community Garden/Greenhouse .46 acres Developed Highlands Neighborhood Center 11,906 s.f. Developed Maplewood Golf Course 190 acres Developed Maplewood Golf Course/Restaurant/Pro Shop 15,508 s.f. Developed Maplewood Golf Course Driving Range 11,559 s.f. Developed North Highlands Neighborhood Center 4,432 s.f. Developed Renton Community Center 36,000 s.f. Developed Renton Senior Activity Center 18,264 s.f. Developed Veterans Memorial Park 0.2 acres Developed TOTAL 181,825 Sq. Ft., 190.66 Acres CITY-WIDE TOTAL 1,152.95 Acres 10.5 Miles 181,825 Square Feet w 111-3 1 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 11-3 Public park and open space areas in Renton's Proposed Annexation Areas (PAAs) Detailed Listing Maplewood Community Park Site 40.0 Acres Undeveloped Petrovitsky Park 50.0 Acres Developed Sub-Total(Community Parks) 90.0 Acres Sierra Heights Park 4.7 Acres Developed Maplewood Park 4.8 Acres Developed Cascade Park 10.7 Acres Developed Lake Youngs Park 2.5 Acres Developed Sub-Total(Neighborhood Parks) 22.7 Acres May Creek Greenway 150.0 Acres Renton Park 19.0 Acres Metro Waterworks 10.0 Acres Maplewood Heights 5.0 Acres Soos Creek Greenway 52.0 Acres *000 Sub-Total(Open Space) 236.0 Acres Total,Public Park and Open Space Within Renton's Proposed Annexation Areas 348.7 Acres 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. III-32 Adopted 1 1/01/04 Table 11-4 Specialized Facilities within the Renton City Limits Number Facility Comments Ballfields City-owned: 1 Cedar River Park 1 Highlands Park 1 Kennydale Lions Park 1 Kiwanis Park 2 Liberty Park 2 lighted 1 Maplewood Park Small Field 1 Ron Regis Lighted 1 Philip Arnold Park Lighted 1 Thomas Teasdale Park 1 Tiffany Park TOTAL 11 FIELDS Within the city limits but owned by others: 2 Hazen High School 2 Highlands Elementary School Small Fields 1 Hillcrest School Small Field 4 Honeydew Elementary School Small Fields 3 McKnight Middle School 4 Nelson Middle School Small Fields 4 Renton High School 1 Talbot Hill Elementary Nifty 1 Tiffany Park Elementary TOTAL 22 FIELDS Number Facility Comments Football/Soccer Fields City-owned: 1 Cedar River Park 1 Highlands Park 1 Kiwanis Park 1 Philip Arnold Park 1 lighted 1 Ron Regis Park 1 lighted 1 Thomas Teasdale Park 1 Tiffany Park TOTAL 7 FIELDS Within the city limits but owned by others: 1 Hillcrest School 2 Honeydew Elementary School 1 Kennydale Elementary 1 McKnight Middle School 1 Renton High School 1 Renton Stadium 1 lighted TOTAL 7 FIELDS Tennis Courts City-owned: 2 Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park 2 Highlands Park 2 lighted 2 Kiwanis Park III-33 Adopted 11/01/04 3 Liberty Park 3 lighted 1 North Highlands Park 2 Philip Arnold Park 2 lighted 3 Talbot Hill Reservoir 2 Tiffany Park TOTAL 17 COURTS Within the city limits but owned by others: 4 Hazen High School 4 McKnight Middle School 2 Nelson Middle School 5 Renton High School TOTAL 15 COURTS Swimming Pools Within the city limits but owned by others: 1 Hazen High School Indoor TOTAL 1 POOL Level of Service Standards for park and recreation levels of service were first established nationally based on "Standard Demand" and have been modified at state and local levels to meet local needs. The national level of service(LOS) standards were established by committees of recreation professionals based on practical experience in the field, and are felt to be most useful in quantifiable terms, i.e. acres of park land per population served. The most recognized standards are those developed by the National Recreation Park Association(NRPA). In 1983 that organization published a report titled"Recreation,Park and Open Space Standards"that is well recognized in the recreation field. The Park CFP establishes a 2-tiered approach: 1)an overall LOS standard based on total population and total acreage; and 2)LOS standards for individual neighborhoods and for specific types of parks and facilities within parks. The overall LOS is a gauge of whether the City is meeting overall concurrence for GMA. The second tier identifies areas where deficiencies exist so the City can target its funds to eliminate those deficiencies while still maintaining overall LOS. The proposed LOS standard for park and open space land established for Renton in its Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space plan is 18.58 acres/1,000 population. The 2004 LOS in Renton is 20.83 acres/1,000 population. The LOS within Renton's Potential Annexation Areas(PAAs)is only 6.9 acres/1,000,which reduces the 2004 overall Planning Area LOS to 14.17 acres/1,000. Continued acquisition of park and open space lands will be needed as the City's residential growth continues within its existing boundaries, and as it expands into its underserved PAA's. The recommended service levels for Renton were developed after discussions with City staff and the 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. I1I-34 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 1 ,,u„ EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) - OVERALL Park& Open Existing LOS Space Land Population (Acres/1,000) City of Renton 1,153 55,360 20.83 Renton's PAA's 348.70 50,600 6.9 Total Planning Area 1,501.7 105,960 14.17 Starting below, existing service levels and recommended standards by park types within Renton are given. Each park type compares the NRPA Standard to the existing service levels and the recommended standards. This information is provided to indicate how Renton's current level of service compares to national and local standards. III-35 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 2 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE(LOS)—BY PARK TYPE Figures shown are in acres/1,000 population Park and Open Space Areas 1. Neighborhood Parks Definition: Neighborhood parks are small park areas(usually 2-10 acres in size)utilized for passive use and unstructured play. They often contain an open space for field sports, a children's playground, a multi-purpose paved area,a picnic area and a trail system. For heavily wooded sites,the amount of active use area is substantially reduced. NRPA Standard 1-2 Acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Renton): 1.8 Acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning Area) 1.1 Acres/1,000 Population Recommended LOS Standard: 1.2 Acres/1,000 Population Comments: The recommended standard reflects the shifting emphasis on larger parks and open space recreational opportunities that cost less to maintain and operate than do neighborhood parks. 2. Community Parks Definition: Community parks are traditionally larger sites that can accommodate organized play and contain a wider range of facilities. They usually have sport fields or other major use facilities as the central focus of the park. In many cases,they will also serve the neighborhood park function. Community parks generally average 10-25 acres in size with a substantial portion of them devoted to active use. Sometimes, smaller sites with a singular purpose that maintain a community-wide focus can be considered community parks. NRPA Standard: 5-8 acres/1,000 population Existing LOS (Renton): 2.5 acres/1,000 population Existing LOS (Planning Area): 2.1 acres/1,000 population Recommended LOS Standard: 2.5 acres/1,000 population Comments: The low existing ratio reflects a past emphasis within Renton on neighborhood parks. While the recommended standard is well below the NRPA standard, it represents a shifting emphasis to community parks. 3. Regional Parks Definition: Regional parks are large park areas that serve geographical areas that stretch beyond the community. They may serve a single purpose or offer a wide range of facilities and activities. In many cases they also contain large areas of undeveloped open space. Many regional parks are acquired because of unique features found or developed on the site. III-36 Adopted 1 1/01/04 NRPA Standard: 5-10 acres/1,000 population Existing LOS (Renton: 1.1 acres/1,000 population ••.. Existing LOS (Planning Area): 0.5 acres/1,000 population Recommended Standard: 1.08 acres/1,000 population Comments: Renton has the potential for developing another regional park located in the Cedar River corridor. The recommended standard of 1.08 acres per 1,000 population recognizes the potential for creating a Cedar River Regional Park consisting of the following Special Use Parks: Cedar River Park, Maplewood Roadside Park, Maplewood Golf Course, and the Cedar River Property. 4. Open Space Areas Definition: This type of park area is defined as general open space,trail systems, and other undeveloped natural areas that includes stream corridors,ravines, easements, steep hillsides or wetlands. Often they are acquired to protect an environmentally sensitive area or wildlife habitats. In other cases they may be drainage corridors or heavily wooded areas. Sometimes trail systems are found in these areas. Existing LOS (Renton) 13 acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning Area): 8.9 acres/1,000 Population Recommended LOS Standard: 12.7 acres/1,000 Population Comments: 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 of land is wetlands, steep slopes, or otherwise not suitable for recreational development. 5. Linear Parks Definition: Linear parks are open space areas, landscaped areas,trail systems and other land that generally follow stream corridors,ravines or other elongated features, such as a street, railroad or power line easement. This type of park area usually consists of open space with development being very limited. Trail systems are often a part of this type of area. Existing LOS (Renton): 1.9 acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning Area): 0.9 acres/1,000 Population Recommended Standard: 0.3 acres/1,000 Population Comments: The majority of linear park land is found along the banks of the Cedar River and Honey Creek. There are other opportunities for linear parks utilizing utility corridors. 6. Special Use Parks and Facilities Definition: Specialized parks and facilities include areas that generally restrict public access to certain times of the day or to specific recreational activities. The golf course and major structures are included in this category. Existing LOS (Renton): 3.7 acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning Area): 1.8 acres/1,000 Population Recommended Standards: 0.8 acres/1,000 Population I1I-37 Adopted 11/01/04 7. Total Park Land Presently, Renton has 1,197.85 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 1,546.55 acres. NRPA Standard: 15-20 acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Renton): 20.83 acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning Area): 14.60 acres/1,000 Population Recommended LOS Standard: 18.58 acres/1,000 Population Comments: While the recommended standard of 18.58 acres per 1,000 population seems high,most of the acreage is in the open space category. Most of this land is undevelopable as steep hillsides,wetlands or environmentally sensitive areas. Specialized Facilities Below are the recommended levels of service for specialized recreation facilities. In addition to the NRPA standard and the existing facility ratio, an estimate of the participation level in Renton compared to the average for the Pacific Northwest is also provided. The existing inventory includes city-owned facilities as well as those facilities within the city limits owned by other public entities. 1. Ballfields(Includes baseball and softball fields) NRPA Standard: 1 field per 2,500 population Existing Participation: Average Existing Inventory: 20 fields * Existing Facility Ratio: .9 field per 2,500 population Recommended Standard: 1 field per 2,500 population * Small fields were excluded for purposes of evaluation. 2. Football/Soccer Fields NRPA Standard: 1 field per 10,000 population Existing Participation: 75 %below average Existing Inventory: 26 fields Existing Facility Ratio: .9 field per 3,000 population Recommended Standard: 1 field per 3,000 population Comments Because of the extremely high existing facility ratio and the below average participation rate,the recommended standard--while substantially above the NRPA standard—is roughly the same as the existing facility ratio. 3. Tennis Courts NRPA Standard: 1 court per 2,000 population Existing Participation: 15 %below average Existing Inventory: 32 courts Existing Facility Ratio: .9 court per 2,500 population Recommended Standard: 1 court per 2,500 population Comments Based on the substantially above average existing facility ratio,the recommended standard is almost equivalent to the existing facility ratio. 4. Swimming Pools (indoor) NRPA Standard: 1 pool per 20,000 population I1I-38 Adopted 11/01/04 Existing Participation: Average Existing Inventory: 1 indoor pool Existing Facility Ratio: .4 per 40,000 population Recommended Standard: 1 pool per 40,000 population Comments 5. Walking Trails Existing Participation: 16%above average Existing Inventory: 7.5 miles (off-street) Existing Facility Ratio: .15 miles per 1,000 population Recommended Standard: .20 miles per 1,000 population Comments The recommended standard reflects a strong local interest in walking trails and the fact that the city directed its efforts to other areas until recent years. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan—,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 forecast growth--and therefore,demand--occurs. The Table also includes potential funding sources for each project, where known. III-39 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 11 -4 Parks Capital Facilities 2005-2010 Park Projects 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Black River Riparian Forest - - - 85 75 Cedar River Ball Field Lighting _ 200 - - - - Cedar River Trail Extension 1,000 1,000 - - - Regis Park Athletic Field Expansion _ 500 600 - . - Heather Downs Development. 50 750 - - - Maplewood Community Park Dev. 500 3,000 - 3,000 New Maintenance Facility 5,500 3,000 0 - - Parks Contingency Plan - - - _ - North Highlands Community Center 150 2,000 - - - Pavilion Improvement - - - - , - Grant Matching Fund _ 200 _ 200 200 200 200 Carr Road Acquisition Henry Moses Aquatic Center 1,000 _ 500 1,000 500 _ Cedar River Trail Extension Golf Course Veteran's Memorial Park East Renton Plateau Acquisition 2,100 North Highland Redevelopment 1,000 600 TOTAL 7,100 8,950 4,300 2,285 3,775 2,700 This Section to Be Developed General Fund $2,100 $3,640 1,720 485 _ 815 300 Licenses and Fees*-User Fees 260 260 280 660 Other Taxes 1,000 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 Grants 750 750 1,000 500 1,000 1,100 Loans 3,000 3,000 Not Funded TOTAL $7,100 $8,950 4,300 2,285 3,775 2,700 *Includes Parks Mitigation Fees in 2001 and Golf Course fees to fund Golf Course Capital Improvements. Viti III-40 Adopted 11/01/04 PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2005-2010 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 128 employees. Based on Renton's 2004 population of 54,900,the current level of service of police department employees to population is nearly 2.33 employees per 1,000 residents. The current level of service for officers is nearly 1.6 officers per 1,000 residents. With the population of Renton projected to grow to over 61,694 residents by the year 2010,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 III 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,2005-2010 In 1999 the mayors of the five member cities of Valley Communication Board(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 five 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 Public Safety Projects 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Valley Communications Center* $150 $150 $150 $150 Total $150 $150 $150 $150 *Cost shown in 2001-2005 Capital Facilities Plan is split between the Public Safety and Fire Functions. Source of Funds 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Licenses and Fees $150 $150 $150 $150 Total $150 $150 $150 $150 1I1-41 Adopted 11/01/04 FIRE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2005-2010 NitiO 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. 19`i'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 1 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 fire 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 fire 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. .4440 III-42 Adopted 11/01/04 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,—2005-2010 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 2010, 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 "tow 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 of land, design, construction,hiring personnel, and purchase of equipment. Presently the northerly portion of the area is within the ten-minute response time standard but outside of the five-minute response time standard for Station 12. As pointed out in the Fire Department Master Plan, a new station 15 closer to I-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 Kennydale/Highlands area,as is some employment growth. This growth would increase somewhat the importance of providing improved service to the area in the near term. Given the residential and employment growth projected for the area after the year 2006,the importance of taking actions to improve the five-minute response time coverage increase substantially during that period. The solution recommended in the Fire Master Plan was to relocate Station 12 further to the east. This was accomplished in 2004. In the next six-year planning period,the City will build Station 15 to 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 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. I11-43 Adopted 11/01/04 Table 13-1 Fire Capital Facilities 2005-2010 Fire Projects 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Station 13 990 3,500 - - - Station 15 350 4,500 - - - Valley Communications Center 150 150 150 150 Total 1,490 8,150 150 150 This section to be developed Sources of Funds: General Fund 1,340 800 Licenses and Fees 150 150 150 150 Bonds Fire Mitigation Fees Total 1,490 8,150 150 150 1401 **0404 III-44 Adopted 11/01/04 Figure 13-1 Existing and Proposed Fire Stations Figure 13-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED FIRE STATIONS —i KCFD 25-2 Existing City A �U1 Fire Statione ( Bellows saves mkt Ic Existing County i �-7 contract Fire Stations is Proposed Fire Station j Relocations L. Proposed Hew K.w$Td.N ea / t1 Fire.Stalions / .•-� l ( / Station 15 1 LAKE �' 4 j WASHINGTON I. J _ 1 ` '1) 1•, t _ r 1 I i 7../qftk.wd: 1 KCFD 2 0-1 'e'"-------?e• i._ K $talidn 12 i w..t Hutt ,--i .1 i . -.,! A It -� Station 11 ' KCFD 25-1 �' I 1 L.... wick contract l .,.y lY! h.wtvw Nil/ w ;/�.. .a il tw�Ho 1 _ *ttt..y tor. 1 c Y.ti.T I .\ d...trtd Are* I '"'�M. Station 14 robot ant �` I ..J21r- I w KCFD 40-42 KCFD 40-41/ Ts I-•--.--•--._._. !"t-•, Renton Station 13 .1 tr_-_.. i i City of i~'1. RENTON, 5r WASH`INGTON Source: Renton Fire Department, 1985 et/Sept. 19a6 'err III-45 Adopted 11/01/04 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/ADMINISTRATION CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2005-2010 *104 The Neighborhood Grant Program provides $50,000 to be distributed in small matching grants to organized associations that from recognized geographic neighborhoods in Renton. The grant projects must be a benefit to the pubic,create physical improvements,build and enhance a neighborhood feature and be within Renton City limits. Funding for infrastructure implementation is provided for the Highlands Subarea Plan and the South Lake Washington Redevelopment Area. New development in these two areas will require additional transportation and utility investments needed to stimulate redevelopment. Table 14-1 Economic Development/Administration Facilities 2005-2010 Economic Development Projects 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010* Neighborhood Grants $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 Highlands Subarea Plan 75 South Lake Washington 50 Redevelopment Total $175 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 Sources of Funds: General Fund $175 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 Total $175 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 1I1-46 AMENDMENT #2006-T-2: CITY OF RENTON DESCRIPTION: Text Amendments to update the Land Use Element to reflect changes in the Center Village(CV) Policies. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Amended Policy LU-318 to delete Residential 10, 10 dwelling units per acre(R- 10) as an implementing zone and add Residential 14, 14 dwelling units per acre (R-14) as an implementing zone in the CV and clarify that the Residential Medium Density(RMD) zone with suffixes can implement the CV zone. 2. Amend Strategy 319.2 to reference a sub-area plan rather than a redevelopment plan. 3. Amend Strategy 319.3 to delete a statement that areas east of Edmonds and north of Sunset currently zoned Residential Multi-Family (RMF) are to remain in residential use and the area north of 12th St. currently zoned R-10 is to remain in residential use. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Approval of the text amendments as drafted is recommended. Recommend that the City Council hold an additional public hearing on concurrent zoning map amendments from R-10 to R-14 within the CV Land Use designation, and the City proposed zoning text amendments to the R-14 zone. ANALYSIS: Issue 1 Deletion of the R-10 zone and the addition of the R-14 zone as an implementing zone in the CV Land Use Designation. This text amendment establishes the R-14 zone as an implementing zoning within the CV zoning designation. The R-14 zone is an existing adopted zone in the Renton Municipal code and it is presently only applied within the RMD Land Use Designation. The R-10 zone is currently applied both within the CV and the RMD Land Use Designations. The R-10 zone and the existing R-14 zone have different densities, development standards, and allowed uses. The issue before the Commission is whether the R-14 zone is an appropriate implementing zone for the CV, and whether the Commission can support the City Council holding an additional public hearing on the concurrent re-zoning of properties currently zoned R-10 as part of the overall 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposal. As a result of public involvement about future land use and zoning in the Highlands Sub- Area, the City Council directed staff to revise the prior zoning proposal, the Center Village Residential (CVR) zone, proposed to implement the CV land use designation. The City has now formally withdrawn the prior zoning proposal. The City Council has determined that the current R-10 zone does not provide needed opportunities for property owners to redevelop their property consistent with the Center Village Land Use designation, and that it does not implement the CV. The adopted Comprehensive Plan calls for review and adoption of new zoning for the Center Village. The City Council has directed staff to prepare amendments to H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-02 Highlands\Highlands Text Amendment 2006 Issue Paper.doc allow the more flexible R-14 zone in the Highlands, rather than the new higher density zone that the Commission reviewed over the last several months. However, the R-14 zone is not currently an allowed implementing zone in the CV Land Use designation. For the Council to consider using the R-14 zone, the City must first amend the Comprehensive Plan to allow R- 14 to become an implementing zone. That is the action before the Planning Commission at the present time. The City Council has also directed city staff to draft amendments to the current R-14 zone to more efficiently implement the CV land use vision and urban forms. The revisions to the R- 14 zone text and the actual rezoning of property from R-10 to R-14 are not before the Commission at this public hearing tonight, and will be reviewed by the City Council in separate actions with an additional public hearing. If the R-14 zoning text amendments now under review were not adopted by the City Council, then the existing R-14 zoning would be applied in this area upon rezoning. The major difference between the two zones is summarized in the Table 1. Table I R-10 and R-14 Zoning Comparison R-10 zone Current R-14 zone Proposed Revisions to R- 14 zone discussed with the City Council. (Not yet available for review and " subject to additional public hearing.) Density Minimum 4 du.ac Minimum 10 du/ac Minimum 7 du/ac Maximum 10 du/ac Maximum 14 du/ac Maximum 14 du.ac No bonus Bonus 18 du/ac for alley Bonus 18 du/ac bonus access, open space and requirement still under design features. review. Affordable housing will be added. Use Single-Family Single Family Detached Single Family Detached Detached Attached Units up to 3 Attached Units up to 3 Duplex attached, up to 4 units attached, up to 4 units with Multi-family up to 4 with bonus. bonus. dwelling units Flats or Apartments up to 6 Flats or Apartments up to 6 units in one building units in one building allowed, allowed,up to 8 with up to 8 with bonus. bonus. 140011 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-02 Highlands\Highlands Text Amendment 2006 Issue Paper.doc CAPACITY ANALYSIS: This change would allow an increase of 4 dwelling units per acre to the base density and a potential bonus density of up to 18 dwelling units per acre in all areas of the CV currently zoned R-10. This change in capacity is estimated to allow an additional 196 units compared to redevelopment under the existing R-10 zone. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The implementing zoning with the CV needs to require uses, densities, and development standards that implement the following adopted Comprehensive Plan policies. CENTER VILLAGE LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Center Village (CV) 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. CVs 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 providing for compact urban development, transit orientation, pedestrian circulation, and a community focal point organized around an urban village concept. Objective LU-CCC: Develop CVs, characterized by intense urban development supported by site planning and infrastructure that provides a pedestrian scale environment. Policy LU-317. Apply the CV 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. Policy LU-318. Implement the CV Designation using multiple zoning designations including R-10, CV, and RMF. Strategy 319.1. Evaluate commercial and residential development standards in the CV and replace zoning designations or re-zone with the vision for a CV 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 2—5-year period. Strategy 319.3. Areas east of Edmonds and north of Sunset currently zoned RMF are to remain in residential use. The area north of 12th St. currently zoned R-10 is to remain in residential use. Policy LU-320. Allow residential density ranging from 10 to 80 dwelling units per acre in the CV 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-02 Highlands\Highlands Text Amendment 2006 Issue Paper.doc Policy LU-324. Use alley access where alleys currently exist. Encourage designation of new alleys in redevelopment projects. Policy LU-325. 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. Implementation of this policy should be phased within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-327. Encourage uses in CVs 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 CVs 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 CVs is intended to be urban scale, stacked, flat and/or 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. The purpose of the R-10 zone demonstrates that the R-10 zone is a lower density and lower intensity residential zone that does not support the land use policies in the CV. Density is 4 to 10 dwelling units per acre,and the emphasis is on maintaining the single-family character of the neighborhood. Purpose Statement Residential-10 DU/ACRE (R-10) Zoning: The Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Net 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 flats. 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(4) to ten(10) dwelling units per net acre. The zone serves as a transition to higher density multi-family zones. The purpose of the R-14 zone, in contrast,shows that this zoning provides the density and flexibility to implement the CV. Density and intensity are higher, a wider range of townhouse and multifamily development is allowed,but the structure size is regulated to achieve a quality neighborhood with a mix of detached, townhouse, and attached units. *014 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-02 Highlands\Highlands Text Amendment 2006 Issue Paper.doc Purpose Statement Residential-14 DU/ACRE (R-14) Zoning: 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, semi-attached, 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 net 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. Issue 2 Reference to Redevelopment Plan rather an Sub-Area Plan This amendment eliminates a reference to a Highlands redevelopment plan. The City Council has determined not to pursue a Highlands Redevelopment Plan at this time. The reference is changed to a"Sub-Area Plan"which is a planning policy document. Issue 3 Strategy 319.3 This amendment proposes to eliminate the restriction on non residential uses north of 12th St. and east of Edmonds. Both the R-14 Zone and the CV zone provide the opportunity for mixed use developments that could include non-residential uses. In addition, the existing Fire Station and library are non-residential uses and both are located north of 12th Street. The proposed amendments meet the findings required for Comprehensive Plan amendments in Title IV Section 4-9-020 in that it supports the adopted vision of the Comprehensive Plan(Proposal 1), it supports the adopted Council Business Plan Goal #2 of promoting Neighborhood Revitalization(Proposal 1 and 3), and amends the Comprehensive Plan to incorporate new policy directives of the City Council (Proposals 1, 2, and 3). ZONING CONCURRENCY: Concurrent rezoning will be required in the portions of the Highlands study area with current R-10 zoning to provide. Additional analysis and public hearing notification will be required for that action. CONCLUSION: Approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendments is recommended to provide better implementation and consistency with the overall Comprehensive Plan Vision as adopted by the City Council. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-02 Highlands\Highlands Text Amendment 2006 Issue Paper.doc 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 and 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 and 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-195. 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. Policy LU-196. Designate Centers in locations with the following characteristics: 1) A nucleus of existing multi-use development; 44.09 2) Potential for redevelopment, or vacant land to encourage significant concentration of development; 3) Center locations should be located on major transit and transportation routes; 4) 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 of land 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-201. 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. Policy LU-205. Identify major natural features and support development of new focal points that define the Center and 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. Policy LU-208. 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 of the project. Policy LU-210. Connect residential uses to other uses in the Center through design features such as pedestrian access, shared parking areas, and common open spaces. 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 I 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 providing for 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 ""' I development supported by site planning and infrastructure that provides a pedestrian scale environment. I Policy LU-317. Apply the Center Village dDesignation 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. Policy LU-318. Implement the Center Village Designation using multiple zoning designations including Residential 10 14 (R-1014)), Center Village (CV), and the Residential Multi-family zones (RMF, RM-U, RM-T). 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 Subarea.Plan is expected to occur over within a 2—5- year period from the 2004 GMA update. remain in residential use. The area north of 12 th St. currently zoned R 10 is to remain in residential use. Policy LU-320. Allow residential density ranging from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 80 dwelling units per acre in the Center Village Des =n >fdesignation. 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 Village. Policy LU-323. Accommodate parking within a parking structure. Where structured parking is infeasible due to site configuration,parking should be located in the back or the side of the primary structure. Discourage Pparking lots between structures and street rights-of- way shall not be permitted. Policy LU-324. Use alley access where alleys currently exist. Encourage designation of new alleys in redevelopment projects. Policy LU-325. Encourage shared parking to use urban land efficiency. Policy LU-326. Develop design guidelines to provide direction on site design,building I design, landscape treatments, and--parking and circulation components of new development projects. Implementation of this policy should be phased within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 Centers. 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 and/or 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. AMENDMENT 2006-T-3 - COMMUNITY DESIGN AND LAND USE ELEMENTS, PROPOSED REVISIONS DESCRIPTION: Proposed minor corrections and more substantial revisions to the Community Design and Land Use Elements of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. The Land Use Element and other sections of the City's Comprehensive Plan were revised and appropriate objectives and policies moved to a new"free-standing" section of the Plan in 2004. This Community Design Element was adopted in November 2004. 2. Corrections and revisions of the Community Design Element are required for clarity and to reflect new policy. 3. The Land Use Element requires minor corrections and revisions. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Recommend that the Planning Commission approve corrections and revisions to the Community Design Element, as delineated below and in Attachment 'A'. Recommend that the Planning Commission approve corrections and revisions to the Land Use Element, as delineated below and in Attachment `B'. ANALYSIS: Community Design Element Since it was created and adopted in November 2004, the Community Design Element has been used as policy support for the Urban Center Design Guidelines (now called the Urban Design Regulations, RMC 4-3-100). In addition to minor corrections (see Attachment `A'), some revisions are suggested. They are as follows: The following proposed revision reinforces the policy that streets should be built through to other streets in a network. Policy CD-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 grid or "flexible grid"pattern of streets and pathways, with a hierarchy of widths and corresponding traffic volumes, should be used. Proposed Revised Policy CD-26. Streets, sidewalks, and pedestrian or bike paths should be arranged as an interconnecting network. The use of Dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs should be discouraged. A grid or"flexible grid"pattern of streets and H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-03 Land Use&Community Design Elements\CPA Issue Paper for PC(Comm Design and Land Use).docLast printed 11/13/2006 11:28 AM pathways, with a hierarchy of widths and corresponding traffic volumes, should be used. The following proposed revision recognizes that Renton will be seeing more multi-story structures,perhaps in mixed-use developments where there may be large expanses of roofs in view. Proposed Revised Policy CD-41: Rooftops that can be seen from public streets, parks, or open space should be designed to hide mechanical equipment and to incorporate high-quality roofing materials. Proposed Revised Policy CD-41: Rooftops that can be seen from higher elevations, taller buildings, and public streets,parks, or open space should be designed to hide mechanical equipment and to incorporate high-quality roofing materials. The following proposed revision reflects that it may be desirable to have signage that is animated, to enliven City streets, especially at night and also that the problem with billboards is not that they have moving parts so much as that they may be oversized in neighborhoods. Policy CD-73. All billboards with moving parts should be eliminated. Proposed Revised Policy CD-73. A-11—hBillboards with moving parts should be eliminatedin neighborhoods, where they are out of scale with surrounding buildings and uses, should be removed. Nuile Land Use Element The Land Use Element requires minor corrections of syntax, spelling,punctuation and similar changes, in some cases to increase clarity or provide consistency with other Elements of the Comprehensive Plan and/or the Municipal Code, as indicated in Attachment `B'. Adopted 11!01'04Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 1 of 15-15 �.,. ATTACHMENT 'A' COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT GOALS 1. To raise the aesthetic quality of the City. 2. To strengthen the economy through high quality development. 3. To ensure that a high quality of life is maintained as Renton evolves. Iv-1 Adopted 11'01'01Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 2 of 154-5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose Statement IV-3 Goals IV-3 I. Natural Areas IV-3 II. Urban Separators IV-4 III. Established Residential Neighborhoods IV-5 IV. New Development in Commercial Districts and New Residential Subdivisions IV-7 A. Site Planning IV-7 B. Gateways . IV-9 C. Views and Focal Points IV-10 D. Architecture IV-10 E. Landscaping F. Streets, Sidewalks, and Streetscape . IV-12 G. Signage IV-14 H. Lighting IV-14 I. Urban Center . IV-15 IV-2 Adopted 11'01;04Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 3 of 151-5 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 that are part of a better community. Recognizing that the exceptional quality of life in Renton is dependent upon a strong local economy, these policies are intended to further that economic health. They are based on the belief that a positive image and high quality development attracts more of the same, so that high standards can lcad 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 of life 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 urban separators. I. Natural Areas Summary: Natural areas are an important component of the community. The purpose of including 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-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. Policy CD-1: Integrate development into natural areas by clustering development and/or adjusting site plans to preserve wetlands, steep slopes, and notable stands of trees or other vegetation. Natural features should function as site amenities. Use IV-3 Adopted 11/01'04 Rev ised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 4 of 15-15 incentives such as flexible lot size and configuration to encourage preservation and lirof add amenity value. Policy CD-2: During development, effort should be made to preserve watercourses as open channels. Policy CD-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. Policy 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. 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. 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: Urban Separators are low-density residential areas, intended to establish edges between Renton and other communities. These transition areas will become more important as urban areas intensify. In some areas, natural features such as 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 CD-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. Policy CD-7:•: The function of Urban Separators should be to: a. reinforce Reinforce the character of the City, b. establish Establish clear boundaries between the City and other communities, c. Separate high-density intensity urban land uses from low-density intensity uses and resource lands, and d. Protect environmentally sensitive ander critical areas. IV-4 Adopted I 1/01!0'lRevised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 5 of 151-s Policy CD-B—: 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. III. Established Residential Neighborhoods Summary: The policies included in this section of the Community Design Element are intended to guide construction of new, small-scale infill residential development and modifications to existing residential and commercial structures. Objective CD-C: Promote re-investment in and upgrade of existing residential neighborhoods through redevelopment of small, underutilized parcels with infill development, modification and alteration of older housing stock, and improvements to streets and sidewalks to increase property values. Policy CD-9—_Support modification of existing commercial and residential structures 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. I Policy CD-10—: Sidewalks or walking paths should be provided along streets in 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. Policy-CD-11—_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. Policy 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 increase vitality to of neighborhoods. Policy CD-13—_Infill development should be reflective of the existing character of established neighborhoods even when designed using different architectural styles, and /or responding to more urban setbacks, height or lot requirements. Infill development should draw on elements of existing development such as placement of structures, vegetation, and location of entries and walkways, to reflect the site planning and scale of existing areas. IV-5 Nc'opted I 1/01'04Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 6 of 15-1-5 Policy CD-13.1: Project design, including location of access and dimensions of yards *Id and setbacks, should address privacy and quality of life on existing improved portions of sites. Rear and side yard setbacks should be maintained and not reduced to facilitate increased density. Policy CD-13.2: Setbacks and other development standards should not be reduced on newly platted lots through modification or variance to facilitate increased density. Policy CD-14,-_Architecture of new 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 of the structure. b. Garages, whether attached or detached, should be constructed using the same pattern of development established in the vicinity. Structures should have entries, windows, and doors located to maintain privacy in neighboring yards and buildings- . IV-6 ted--1/01/04Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 7of1513 IV. New-Development in Commercial Districts and New Residential Subdivisions Summary: Objectives and polices that address new commercial infill and residential subdivision 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 architecture, 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 points 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 of the development can be met, while keeping those elements in harmony with each other and with the context of the project. Objective CD-D: New neighborhood development patterns should be consistent with Renton's established neighborhoods and have an interconnected road network. I Policy CD-15—_Land should be subdivided into blocks sized so that walking distances are minimized and convenient routes between destination points are available. I Policy CD-16—jDuring land division, all lots should front streets or parks. Discourage single tier lots with rear yards backing onto a street. Where a 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. IV-7 Adopted 11'01'01Rcv.-iscd Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 8 of 154-5 a. 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-tier plat. b. Evaluation of environmental constraints should consider whether the location and extent of critical areas prevents a standard plat design. c. Review of fencing should ensure that the development does not"turn its back" to public areas. Policy CD-17—: Development should be designed(e.g. site layout`building orientation, setbacks, 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. I Policy CD-18—_Projects should only be approved at the upper end of density ranges when the following criteria are fully addressed in project level submission. 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 entry, 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 over-reliance on fencing, or • Prevent projections of building elements into required setbacks in a pattern that reduces provision of light, visual separation, and/or require variances of or modification of standards. Density may be reduced within the allowed range to bring projects into compliance with these criteria. I Policy CD-19—: During development, significant trees, either individually or in stands, should be preserved, replaced, or as a last option, relocated. I Policy CD-20— Development should be visually and acoustically buffered from ad- jacent freeways. I Policy CD-21—: Development should have buildings oriented toward the street or a common area rather than toward parking lots. Policy CD-22: When appropriate, due to scale, use, or location, on-site open space and recreational facilities in developments should be required. IV-8 ed-44/81-/04Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 9 of 1543 Policy CD-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. Policy CD-24—_Site design of development should relate, connect, and continue design quality and site function from parcel to parcel. Policy CD-25—_Site design should address the effects of light, 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. Policy CD-26—_Streets, sidewalks, and pedestrian or bike paths should be arranged as an interconnecting network. The uscDead-end streets and of cul-de-sacs should be discouraged. A grid or"flexible grid"pattern of streets and pathways, with a hierarchy of widths and corresponding traffic volumes, should be used. I Policy CD-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. I Policy CD-28—: 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. I Policy CD-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. I Policy CD-30—_If transit service is available, parking requirements may be reduced or shared parking serving multiple developments may be allowed. I Policy CD-31—_In mixed-use developments, residential uses should be connected to other uses through design features such as pedestrian walkways and common open space. I Policy CD-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 and bid welcome to the City or a more specific geographic area and bid welcome. Objective CD-E: Highlight entrances to the City through the use of the"Gateways" designation. Implementing code for Objective CD-E and policies CD-33, 34, and 35 will be put in place within five(5) years from the date of adoption of the GMA update. IV-9 Adopted 11 01'04Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-i-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 10 of 15-13 Policy CD-33—_Identify primary and secondary gateways to the City and develop them as opportunities arise. Policy CD-34—: The level of development intensity at a gateway should be used, with location, to determine whether it is a primary or secondary gateway. Policy CD-35—: Each gateway should have 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 of these 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. 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. Implementing code for Objective CD-F and Policies CD-36, CD-37, CD-38, CD-39 will be put in place within a five (5) year period from the date of adoption of the GMA update. I Policy CD-36—: Scenic views and view corridors along roadways in the City should be identified and preserved through application of development standards. I Policy CD-37—: Access from public roadways to views of features of distinction should be enhanced through the development of public viewpoints where appropriate. I Policy CD-38—: Neighborhood identity should be established by featuring views, highlighting landmarks, or creating focal points of distinction. I Policy CD-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. Objective CD-G: Architecture should be distinctive and contribute to the community aesthetic. IV-10 Adopted 11'01'01Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 11 of 15-i-5 y... Policy CD-40—_Structures should be designed (e.g. building height, orientation, materials, color and bulk;) to mitigate potential adverse impacts, such as glare or shadows on adjacent less intense land uses and transportation corridors. Policy CD-41—_Rooftops that can be seen from higher elevations, taller buildings, and public streets, parks, or open space should be designed to hide mechanical equipment and to incorporate high-quality roofing materials. Policy CD-42—_Design characteristics in larger.,new developments or individual building complexes should contribute to neighborhood and/or district identity. Objective CD-H: Ensure that structures built in residential areas are consistent with the City's adopted land use vision and Purpose Statements for each Land Use Designation found in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element, Residential Policies. Objective CD-I: New commercial 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 Purpose Statements for each Commercial and Centers Designation in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element, Center and Commercial Policies. Policy CD-43,—_A variety of architectural design and detailing should be encouraged as long as site functions connect to adjacent development. land innovative use of building materials and finishes should be promoted. Policy CD-44—_Development should provide appropriate landscaping and façade 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 also be used to reduce traffic noise levels and the effects of pollution. I Objective CD-J-: The City of Renton should adopt a citywide landscape plan that furthers the aesthetic goal of the City and provides guidance for future development and infrastructure improvements. Implementing code for Objective CD-J and Policies CD-45, CD-46 and CD-48 will be put in place within a five(5) year period from the date of adoption of the GMA update. I Policy CD-45—_Existing mature vegetation and distinctive trees should be retained and protected in developments. I Policy CD-46;_A comprehensive landscape architectural plan for the City should be developed. The plan should include recommendations for preferred street and landscape trees. IV-i i Adopted t 1'01r01Reviscd Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 12 of 1513 Policy CD-47—: Landscape plans should take into consideration the potential impact loS of mature vegetation on significant views so that future removal of view-blocking trees will not be necessary. I 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. I Policy CD-49—: Citywide development standards, for landscape design, installation, and maintenance should be developed. I Policy CD-50—: 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. Policy CD-51—_Landscaping is encouraged, and may be required, in parking areas to improve their appearance and to increase drainage control. I Policy CD-52—: Landscape and surface water drainage plans should be coordinated to maximize percolation of surface water and minimize runoff from the site. Objective CD-K: Site plans for new development projects for all uses, including residential subdivisions, should include landscape plans. Policy CD-53—_Landscape plans for proposed development projects should include public entryways, street rights-of-way, stormwater detention ponds, and all common areas. Policy CD-54,: Residential subdivisions and multi-family residential projects should include planting of street trees according to an adopted citywide landscape plan. Policy CD-55—: Maintenance programs should be required for landscaped areas in development projects, including entryways, street rights-of-way, stormwater retention/detention ponds, and common areas. I Policy CD-56—: Surface water retention/detention ponds should be landscaped appropriately for the location of the facility. F. Streets, Sidewalks, and Streetscape Objective CD-L: Promote development of attractive, walkable neighborhoods and shopping areas by ensuring that streets are safe, convenient, and pleasant for pedestrians. I Policy CD-57—: 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. IV-12 4Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 13 of 1544 NYIOW Policy CD-58—_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. I 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. I Policy 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. Policy CD-61—_Residential streets should be constructed to the narrowest widths (distance from curb to curb) feasible without impeding emergency vehicle access. Policy CD-62—=Landscaped parking strips should be considered for use as a safety buffer between pedestrians and moving vehicles along arterials and collector streets. Policy CD-63—: Intersections should be designed to minimize pedestrian crossing distance and increase safety for disabled pedestrians. Policy CD-64—_Evaluate existing intersections of arterial roadways for opportunities to create focal points, if such focal points do not reduce vehicular or pedestrian safety. Policy CD-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 Tannin r that allows garage access from the rear and reduces curb cuts and building mass on narrow lots. Policy CD-66—_Sidewalks or walking paths should be provided along residential streets. Sidewalk width should be ample to safely and comfortably accommodate pedestrian traffic. I Policy CD-67—_Street trees should be used to reinforce visual corridors along major boulevards and streets. Iv-13 Adopted 11 01'O1 Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 14 of 15-14 Policy CD-68:_Street trees should be protected. If removal is necessary for municipal purposes such as infrastructure improvements or maintenance, trees should be replaced with equivalent the same size and varietytype. Upon adoption of citywide standards, street trees should be upgraded consistent with those standards. Policy CD-69—_Appearance of parking lots should be improved by screening through appropriate combinations of landscaping, fencing, and berms. Policy CD-70—: Structural supports for overhead traffic signals should be designed to diminish visual impacts. Policy CD-71— All utility lines should be placed underground. G. Signage Objective CD-N: Commercial signs in Renton should be regulated by citywide standards. Policy CD-72=_Sign regulations should direct the type, size, design, and placement of signs in order to ensure reasonable aesthetic and safety considerations. Policy CD-73—: All bBillboards with moving partsthat are out of scale with surrounding buildings and uses, should be eliminatedremoved. Policy CD-74—:All bulky and unusually large or tall signs should be eliminated. .4409 Policy CD-75—_Sign placement should be limited to on-site locations. Policy CD-76—_Signs should be regulated as an integral part of architectural design. In general, signs should be compatible with the rest of the building and site design. Policy CD-77—: Consolidate information for mixed-use development to reduce the number of signs. Policy CD-78—_Locate signage to reduce light and glare impacts to residential areas. Policy CD-79:: Interpretive and directional signs for major landmarks, neighborhoods, and viewpoints should be established to enhance community identity. H. Lighting Objective CD-O: Lighting systems in public rights-of-way 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. Policy CD-80—: All exterior lighting should be focused and directed away from adjacent properties and wildlife habitat to prevent spill overspillover or glare. Policy CD-81—_Lighting should be used as one means to improve the visual identification of residences and businesses. vie IV-14 Adopted I 1./01!01 Revised Public Hearing Draft 2006-T-3 Sept. 15,2006 Page 15 of 1544 Policy CD-82— Lighting fixtures should be attractively designed to complement the architecture of a development, the site, and adjacent buildings. Policy CD-83. 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. IV-15 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review ATTACHMENT `B' LAND USE ELEMENT GOALS 1. 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. 2. Minimize risk associated with potential aviation incidents on the ground and for aircraft occupants. 3. Actively pursucPromote tionsannexation where and when it is in the best interest of Renton. 4. Maintain the City's natural and cultural history by documenting and appropriately recognizing its historic and/or archaeological sites. 5. Pursue the transition of non-conforming uses and structures to encourage more conforming uses and development patterns. 6. Develop a system of facilities that meet the public and quasi-public service needs of present and future employees. 7. Maintain the City's agricultural and mining resources as part of Renton's cultural history. 87. Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: a) Contribute to a strong sense of community and neighborhood identity; b) Are walkable places where people can live, shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; c) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; d) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; e) Are varied or unique in character; f) Support"grid" and"flexible grid" street and pathway patterns where appropriate; g) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; h) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and i) Provide a sense of home. I 98. Develop well-balanced attractive, convenient, robust commercial office, office, and residential development within designated Centers serving the City and the region. Page 1 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 419. Support existing businesses and provide an energetic business environment for *sile 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. I 4-1:10 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. led 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review I. REGIONAL GROWTH POLICIES 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 enee-ufage-result in sprawl and discourage redevelopment of inefficient or out-dated land uses, while insufficient capacity can make itdevelopment more difficult for}he market to workdue to high land cost. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan should provide sufficient direction to achieve a balance between excessive and insufficient capacity, in order to avoid difficulty in implementing the Plan. Responsibility for implementing the objectives and policies of the Regional Growth section ()Phis plan lies primarily with the City of Renton. 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 (PAA). Policy LU-1. 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: 1) 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. Policy LU-3. Provide for land use planning and an overall growth strategy for both the City and land in the designated PAA as part of Renton's regional growth policies. Page 3 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Discussion: The Growth Management Act and the Countywide Planning Policies establish urban growth areas where urban levels of growth will occur within the subsequent 21-year period. These areas include existing cities and unincorporated areas. Within the Urban Growth Area, the Potential Annexation Area(PAA) is designated for future municipal expansion and governance. Policies guiding annexation and provision of services within the PAA 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 2001 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: 1) 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: 458 jobs vad Policy LU-5. Amend growth targets as annexation occurs to transfer a proportionate share of Potential Annexation Area targets into Renton's targets. 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-one years (2001-2022). Policy LU-7. Plan for residential and employment growth based on growth targets established in the Countywide Planning Policies, as a minimum. (See Housing Element Goals and Capacity section and Capital Facilities Element, Policy CFP-1 and Growth Projection section. Policy LU-8. 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. Page 4 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Policy LU-11. Minimum density requirements shall be established to ensure that land development practices result in an average development density in each land use designation sufficient to meet adopted growth targets and create greater efficiency in the provision of urban services. Policy LU-12. Minimum density requirements should: 1) Be based on net densityland area; 2) Be required in residential zones, with the exception of the Resource Conservation, Residential 1, and Residential 4 zones, 2)Not be applied to lots created after 1995 of less than one half acre in size; 3) Not be required of individual portions or lots within the-a 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 I development should not preclude future additional development. Policy LU-14. Parking should not be considered as a land reserve for future development, except within the Urban Center. Policy LU-15. Amend capacity estimates as annexation and re-zonings occur. Objective LU-D: Maintain a high ratio of jobs to housing in Renton. Policy LU-16. Future residential and employment growth within Renton's planning area should meet the goal of 2-two jobs ilerfor each 4-housing unit. Policy LU-17. Sufficient quantities of land should 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-18. 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 day4iffiedaytimc activity, a high demand for infrastructure, a high tax base, and a high level volume of commuter traffic. Page 5 of 7777 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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. 40110 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 will increase the discrepancy between jobs and housing units within the City. However, the number of housing units in the unincorporated areas within Renton's Potential Annexation Area axis 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. Page 6 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review II. AIRPORT AIRPORT COMPATIBLE LAND USE POLICIES Goal: Minimize risk associated with potential aviation incidents on the ground and for aircraft occupants. Discussion: In order to meet a mandate of the Growth Management Act, the City of Renton has developed a set of objectives and policies to address land use compatibility between the Renton Municipal Airport and an area of the City known as the Airport Influence Area(see RMC 4-3-020). Renton's approach to planning for minimization of risk associated with potential aviation incidents was to analyze four primary categories of aviation operations in relation to land use compatibility. The categories used are, 1) general aviation safety, 2) airspace protection, 3) aviation noise, and 4) overflight. A "compatibility objective" was developed for each, with strategies to meet the objective, and measurement criteria to ensure that the objective is met. The objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, with the implementation included in the Development Regulations (RMC 4-3-020) meet the state requirement of GMA and the goal of this section. Responsibility fir implementing the Airport Compatible Land Use objectives and policies is shared by the City of Renton,proponents of projects within the Airport Influence Area, and the aviation community. General Aviation Safety Objective LU-E: Minimize risk associated with potential aviation incidents. 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. Page7of777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Policy LU-23. Provide maximum protection to Renton airspace from obstructions to aviation. '■rli 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-25. 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. I Policy LU-27. Residential use and/or density of new structures should be limited, within the Runway Protection Zone and the Runway Sideline Zone to reduce negative impacts on residents from aviation operation noise. Implementing code will be put in place within three years f the, ad„ption ante o+the 2001 r pdate.by November 2007. Policy LU-28. Non-residential use and/or 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 of land 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. Page 8of777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Policy LU-31. At the time of land use approval (i.e. subdivision of land) avigation easements should be granted to the City in areas of Renton subject to negative aircraft overflight impacts. Policy LU-32. At the time of land use approval (i.e. subdivision of land) 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 forums, 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. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption date of GMA update. Page9of777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review III. ANNEXATIONS Goal: Actively pursue annexations. Discussion: The growth of the City through annexation is expected to continue throughout the planning cycle. The policies in this section are intended to guide the annexation process. The City recognizes that fiscal impacts are is only one of many criteria to be evaluated, and must be balanced with other annexation policy goals, such as transition to urban land use, protection of sensitive areas,provision of public service, governmental structure, provision of infrastructure, aquifer protection, and community identity. Responsibility for implementing annexation objectives and the policies lies primarily with the City of Renton. 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-35. The City will 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 of the 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- I sultant City of Renton, making the City a good place to-work, live, work-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 Page 10 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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. 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 of the neighborhood between City and County jurisdictions; and 5) Inclusion of natural corridors either as greenbelts or urban separators between the City and adjacent jurisdictions. Policy LU-44. Existing land uses: and development, and or redevelopment potential should be considered when evaluating a proposed annexation. Policy LU-45. Commercial uses that do not conform to Renton's land use plan should be encouraged to transition into conforming uses or to relocate to areas with compatible land use designations. 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. Page 11 of 77 Revised September I 5, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies or otherand City of Renton development standards. This policy should be implemented within five years of the adoption date of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-51. 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. visif Policy LU-52. 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-53. 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 of the annexation proposal. Policy LU-54. Appropriate zoning districts should be designated for property in an annexation proposal. Zoning in the annexation territory should be consistent with the comprehensive plan land use designations. Policy LU-55. Larger annexations should be encouraged, when appropriate, in order to realize efficiencies in the use of City resources. Policy LU-56. 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. vie Page 12 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Policy LU-57. The City should respond to community initiatives and actively assist --' owners and residents with initiating and completing the annexation process. Policy LU-58. 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-59. 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 each area proposed for annexation. Page 13 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review IV. HISTORICAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES I Goal: Maintain the City's cultural history by documenting and appropriately recognizing its historic and/or archaeological sites. Discussion: Renton has a rich and interesting history as a community. It was the site of an established Native American settlement and changed through the years of early European immigration into a pioneer town. The City incorporated in 1901 and later became a major regional employment center and residential area. The following policies are intended to guide efforts to recognize and integrate Renton's past into future development as the City evolves into a dynamic urban community. 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. I Policy LU-62. Natural and Ceultural resources should be identified by project proponents when applying for land use approval, as part of the application submitted for review. Policy LU-63. Potentially adverse impacts on cultural resources deemed to be significant should be mitigated as a condition of project approval. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-64. The City should work cooperatively with King County by exchanging resource information pertaining to natural and cultural resources. Policy LU-65. 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 site development proposals should be encouraged to incorporate displays about Renton's history, including prominent families and individuals,businesses, and events associated with downtown's past. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Page 14 of 777-7 • Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review V. NON-CONFORMING USE Goal: Pursue the transition of non-conforming uses and structures to encourage more conforming uses and development patterns. Discussion: As a community grows, changes in land use policies sometimes result in "non-conforming uses" as remnants of an earlier land use pattern. Some of these non- conforming uses can retain a viable economic life for long periods of time and even become desirable reminders of the evolution of the City. These policies are intended to guide decision-making about non-conforming uses and structures in the context of current land use policy. Responsibility for implementing the objectives and policies of this section lies primarily with the City of Renton. 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. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 standards should be implemented in a manner that recognizes the overall character of the neighborhood. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Page 15 of 777 • Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Policy LU-70. Evaluate permits for non-conforming uses,based on the following criteria: Nee 1) Relationship of the existing non-conforming 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; I 4) Over cConcentration 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 substantial 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 due to current market conditions would not impede or delay the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Objective LU-Q: Ensure that the effects of non-conforming structures on character of the conforming patterns of Renton's neighborhoods are minimized. Policy LU-71. Evaluate applications to repair or expand non-conforming structures based on the following factors: %IS 1) Whether it represents a unique regional or national architectural style or an innovation in architecture,use of materials, or functional arrangement, and/or is one of the few remaining examples of such a style or innovation, 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 of the site with a conforming 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. Page 16 of 7777 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review VI. PUBLIC FACILITIES Goal: Develop a system of facilities that meet the public and quasi-public service needs of present and future employees. Discussion: The purpose of these policies 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. (Renton Technical College and Valley Medical Center are also addressed in the Commercial Corridor section of the Land Use Element.) Responsibility for implementing this objective and the following policies lies primarily with the City of Renton. 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 LU-73. Primary vehicular access to sites should be from principal or minor arterial streets. Policy LU-74. Internal site circulation should be primarily pedestrian-oriented. Policy LU-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 or ownership. Policy LU-77. Surplus public sites should be considered for alternative types of public use prior to sale or lease. Policy LU-78. 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-80. 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. Page 17 of 7774 Revised September 1.5, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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. 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 LU-85. 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 special locational 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 LU-91. The downtown library should continue to be the main facility for the City. 4010 Page 18 of 77 • Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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. 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 of these more intensive uses. Policy LU-94. Post secondary(beyond high school) and other regional educational facilities that require sites larger than five acres should be located in the Employment Area— Industrial, Employment Area—Valley, Commercial/Office/Residential, or the Urban Center designations. Policy LU-95. 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 LU-97. The City and the school district should jointly develop multiple-use facilities (e.g. playgrounds, sports fields) whenever practical. Policy LU-98. Community use of school sites and facilities for non-school activities should be encouraged. Policy LU-99. School facilities that are planned for closure, should be considered for potential public use before being sold for private development. Policy LU-100. Elementary schools should be located near a collector arterial street. Policy LU-101. Safe pedestrian access to schools should be promoted (e.g. through pedestrian linkages, safety features) through the design of new subdivisions and roadway improvements. Policy LU-102. 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-103. Health and/or medical facilities larger than five acres should be located in portions of the Commercial Corridor designation mapped with Commercial Office zoning, Employment Area—Valley, Commercial/Office/Residential or the Urban Centers designations. Smaller scale facilities should locate in the Commercial Arterial portions of Commercial.Corridor. Page 19 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission. Review Objective LU-X: Site religious and ancillary facilities in a manner that provides convenient transportation access and minimizes their adverse impacts on adjacent land °w i' uses. Policy LU-104. When locating in predominantly residential areas, religious facilities should be on the periphery of the residential area rather than the interior. Policy LU-105. Parking should be provided on-site and buffered from adjacent uses. Policy LU-106. Large-scale facilities should be encouraged to locate contiguous to an existing or planned transit route. Policy LU-107. Religious facilities should be located on and have direct access to either an arterial or collector street. Objective LU-Y: Accommodate large,commercial recreationrecreational uses that depends on open land and is-are intended to serve regional usersconsumer demands Policy LU-108. Commercial,regional recreational uses should be located contiguous to a principal arterial in areas with immediate access to an interstate or a state route. Policy LU-109. Commercial recreational uses should be located outside of the trade area of other commercial recreational areas offering similar recreational opportunities. [WHY?' Policy LU-110. Vehicular access to a commercial recreational site should be from a void principal arterial street with the number of access points minimized. 410 Page 20 of 77 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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 Residential Low Density Designations or on vacant land in commercial areas. Current policies recognize these existing uses and encourage them as cultural resources where they may be appropriate. Responsibility for implementing the objectives and policies of this section lies primarily with the City of Renton. Objective LU-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. Allow sale of products produced on site. Policy LU-111. Prohibit commercial agricultural uses that are industrial or semi- industrial in nature, and create nuisances such as odor or noise that may be incompatible with residential use. Policy LU-112. Limit access of large domestic animals to shorelines and wetlands. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-113. Control impacts of crop and animal raising on surface and ground water. Policy LU-114. Encourage public and private recreational uses in agricultural areas. Policy LU-115. Allow cultivation and sale of flowers, herbs, vegetables, or similar crops in residential areas, as an accessory use and/or home occupation. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-116. Recognize and allow community gardens on private property, vacant public property, and unused rights-of-ways. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Objective LU-AA: Maintain extractive industries where their continued operation does not impact adjacent residential areas, the City's aquifer, or other critical areas. Policy LU-117. Extractive industries including timber, sand, gravel and other mining within the City's Potential Annexation Area should be mapped and appropriately zoned Page 21 of 7777 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review upon annexation to the City. Policies governing these sites should be consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. °ram' Policy LU-118. Mining and processing of minerals and materials should be allowed within the City subject to applicable City ordinances, environmental performance standards. I Policy LU-119. Extractive sites, when mined out, should be regraded and restored for future development compatible with land use designations for adjacent sites. Implementing code will be in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-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 LU-121. Hours of operation of extractive uses should be based on impacts to adjacent uses. Policy LU-122. The City should apply conditional use permits or other approvals as appropriate for mineral extraction and processing 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, .wry 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. vied Page 22 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission. Review VIII. RESIDENTIAL POLICIES Goal: Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: j) Contribute to a strong sense of community and neighborhood identity; k) Are walkable places where people can shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; 1) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; m) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; n) Are varied or unique in character; o) Support"grid" and "flexible grid" street and pathway patterns where appropriate; p) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; q) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and r) Provide a sense of home. Discussion: The purpose of the Residential policies is to provide a Citywidecitywide 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.) Responsibility for residential objectives and policies lies with the City()Renton for implementation and the development community, which should propose projects that meet the residential goals, objectives, and policies of the City_ Objective LU-BB: Manage and plan for high quality residential growth in Renton and the Potential Annexation Area that: 1) Supports transit by providing urban 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; Page 23 of 77 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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 Land Use designations. Policy LU-124. Promote the timely and logical progression of residential development. Priority for higher density development should be given to development of land with infrastructure capacity and land located closer to the City's Urban Center. Policy LU-125. Encourage a city widecitywide 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 land capacity should occur in multi-family housing in parts of the City and PAA located outside of the Urban Center. Policy LU-127. Infrastructure impacts of the 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-128. Multi-family unit types are encouraged as part of mixed-use developments in the Urban Center, Center Village, Commercial/Office/Residential, and the Commercial Corridor Land Use designations. Policy LU-129. Small-lot, single-family infill developments and plats 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 LU-130. Adopt urban density of at least four(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. Page 24 of 77 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review RESIDENTIAL LOW 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 larger-lot housing stock, at urban densities of 4-du/net acre, to its inventory. Lands that are not appropriate for urban levels of development are designated either Resource Conservation or Residential Low Density, with Resource Conservation or Residential 1. zoning Zoning. Lands that either do not have significant sensitive areas, or can be adequately protected by the critical areas ordinance, are zoned Residential 4. Responsibility for residential objectives and policies lies with the City of Renton far implementation and the development community, which should propose projects that meet the residential goals. objectives, and policies of the City. I Objective LU-DD: Provide opportunities for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas of the 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 of the 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 (Resource Conservation) to 1 home per acre(Residential 1) on Residential Low Density (RLD) designated land with significant environmental constraints, including but not limited to: steep slopes, erosion hazard, floodplains, and wetlands or where the area is in a designated Urban Separator. Density should be a maximum of 4-du/net acre (Residential 4) on portions of the Residential Low Density land where these constraints are not extensive and urban densities are appropriate. Policy LU-135. For the purpose of mapping four dwelling units per net acre(4-du/ac) zoned areas as contrasted with lower density Residential 1 (R-1) and Resource Conservation (RC) areas, the prevalence of significant environmental constraints should be interpreted to mean: 1) Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area; 2) Developable areas are separated from 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; Page 25 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 4) The area is a designated urban separator; or 5) Application of the Critical Areas Ordinance setbacks/buffers and/or net density .40/0 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. Implementation of this policy should be phased in within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU 136. Rural activities, such as agricultural and animal husbandry, should be allowed. [DUPLICATIVE OF PREVIOUS SECTION ON AGRICULTURE.,] Policy LU-137. Warehousing, outdoor storage, equipment yards, and industrial uses should not be allowed. Where such uses exist as non-conforming uses, 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. Implementation of this policy should be phased in within two-three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU 139. Minimize impacts of animal and crop raising on adjacent residential uses and critical areas such as wetlands, streams, and rivers. [DUPLICATIVE OF 4.010 PREVIOUS SECTION ON AGRICULTURE] 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 conservation easements, trail easements or other public benefits through agreements with private parties. Objective LU-EE: Designate Residential 4 du/acre zoning 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 du/acre zoned 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. Page 26 of 777-7 • Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Policy LU-145. 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 as well as innovative site planning. Criteria should include: 1) Attractive residential streetscapes with landscaped front yards that are visible from the street; I 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 fbr surface water runoff; and 6) Significant native tree and vegetation retention and/or replacement. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Lands iedesignated Residential Single Family Designation areis intended to be used for quality residential-detached residential 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 of less than one acre(43,560 sq. ft.) in single-family designations. Allow a Page 27 of 774 Revised September 1.5, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review reduction in lot size to 4,500 square feet on parcels greater than one acre to create an incentive for aggregation of land. The minimum lot size is not intended to set the NIS 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-150. Required setbacks should exclude public or private legal access areas, established through or to a lot, and to parking areas. Policy LU-151. Maximum height of structures should not exceed two (2) stories in single-family residential neighborhoods. Policy LU-152. 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-152.1: Variances to standards in LU-152 should not be granted to facilitate additional density on an infill site. Policy LU-153. 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 identified to notify residents of future roadway connections. Policy LU-154. Interpret development standards to support new plats and infill project designs incorporating street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes that address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. Policy LU-155. 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-156. 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 of this Comprehensive Plan. RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATION Page 28 of 777-7 • Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Purpose Statement: The Residential Medium Density designation is intended to create Now, 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 infill 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. Policy LU-157. Residential Medium Density designated areas should be zoned for either Residential 10 dwelling units per net acre(R-10), Residential 14 dwelling units per net acre (R-14), or new zoning designations that allow housing in this density range. Policy LU-158. Residential Medium Density neighborhoods may be considered for Residential 10 (R-10) 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 zoning for flats or other low-density multi-family use; 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 % 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. I Policy LU-159. Areas may be considered for Residential 14 (R-14) Zoningzoning where the site meets the following criteria: 1) Adjacent to major arterial(s); 2) Adjacent to the Urban Center, Highlands Neighborhood-Center Village, or Commercial Corridor 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 Page 29 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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 LU-161. Support residential development incorporating a hierarchy of streets. Street networks should connect through the development to existing streets, avoid"cul- de-sac" or dead end streets, and be arranged in a grid street pattern(or a flexible grid street system if there are environmental constraints). Policy LU-162. Development densities 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-14 zoned portions of the Residential Medium Density designation, a bonus density of 18 four(4) additional dwelling units per 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 four(4) 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 LU-165. 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). I Policy LU-166. Very small-lots 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. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-167. A range and variety of lot 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 for passive recreation such as benches and fountains; and be unified by a design motif or common theme. vinet Page 30 of 7774 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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 if they 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. 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-171. Buildings should front the street rather than be organized around interior courtyards or parking areas. Policy LU-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 I Density designation should have a-maximum lot coverage by the primary structure of fifty(50)percent. Policy LU-175. 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 transition to and blend with existing development patterns using techniques such as lot size, depth and width, access points, building location setbacks, and landscaping. Sensitivity to unique features and differences among established neighborhoods should be reflected in site plan design. Interpret development Page 31 of 7777 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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 of a 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 of the building has a small scale multi-family character, rather than that of 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. Policy LU-181. Mixed-use development in the form of civic, 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 voilv 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-family and 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 (RMF) zoning. Page 32 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Objective LU-JJ: Encourage the development of infill parcels with quality projects in existing multi-family districts. Policy LU-182. Residential Multi-family designations should be in areas of the 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 the Residential Multi-family designation is limited to properties meeting the following criteria: 1) 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. Policy LU-185. Development density in the Residential Multi-family designation should be within a range of ten(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. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-188. Evaluate project proposals in Residential Multi-family designations to consider the transition to lower density uses where multi-family sites abut lower density zones. Setbacks may be increased, heights reduced, and additional landscape buffering required through site plan review. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Page 33 of 77 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission 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. [MOVE TO COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT?] Objective LU-LL: New Residential Multi-family projects should demonstrate provision of an environment that contributes to a high quality of life for future residents, regardless of income level. Implementing code will be put in place within two years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-189. Support project design that incorporates the following, or similar elements, in architectural design: 1) Variation of facades on all sides of structures visible from the street with vertical and horizontal modulation or articulation; 2) Angular roof lines 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. Policy LU-190. Support project site planning that incorporates the following, or similar elements, in order to meet the intent of the 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. Implementation of this policy should be phased within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-191. Residential Multi-family projects in the RMF zone should have a maximum site coverage by buildings of thirty-five (35)percent, or forty-five(45)percent yogi Page 34 of 7777 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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. [MOVE TO COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT?' Page 35 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review IX. CENTERS *JO 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-and 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 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 and 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-195. 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. vemoii Page 36 of 777-7 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review War- Policy LU-196. Designate Centers in locations with the following characteristics: 1) A nucleus of existing multi-use development; 2) Potential for redevelopment, or vacant land to encourage significant concentration of development; 3) Center locations should be located on major transit and transportation routes; 4) 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 I 2) -The amount of land 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-201. 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. Policy LU-205. Identify major natural features and support development of new focal points that define the Center and 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. Page 37 of 7777 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Policy LU-208. 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 of the project. Policy LU-210. Connect residential uses to other uses in the Center through design features such as pedestrian access, shared parking areas, and common open spaces. Objective NN: Implement Renton's Urban Center consistent with the"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 "w 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 I-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-213. 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. rwr/ Page 38 of 77 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review Policy LU-215. Site and building design should be pedestrian/people oriented with .... provisions for transit and automobiles where appropriate. 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, infill 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. I 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. I Policy LU-217. Development and redevelopment of Urban Center=Downtown should strive for urban density and intensity of uses. Policy LU-218. 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. I 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 heights (maximuml0 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. Page 39 of 7774 Revised September 15, 200E Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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 multi-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. Noist Policy LU-227. Density bonuses up to 150 du/ac 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-Wells 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 Page 40 of 7777 Revised September 15, 2006 Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review (i.e. retail goods and services) in order to generate and maintain continuous pedestrian activity in these areas. 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 of low- (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-235. Parking should be structured whenever feasible. Accessory surface parking is discouraged. I 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. I Policy LU-240. In order to maximize on streeton 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. Page 41 of 77 Revised September 15, 200E Public Hearing Draft Planning Commission Review 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. 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-245. 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-250. Pedestrians should be given priority use of sidewalks within the Urban Center—Downtown designated pedestrian areas. Policy LU-251. Block lengths and widths should be maintained at the pedestrian- friendly standards that predominate within the downtown. Policy LU-252. Where right-of-way is available and bicycle demand ;u t f ydemand justifies them,bicycle lanes should be marked and signed to accommodate larger volumes of bicycle traffic on select streets designated by the City. Policy LU-253. 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-254. Strong visual linkages should be created between downtown Renton and neighborhoods using landscaped arterial streets and connectors. Page 42 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-255. 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 of low-rise structures to avoid creation of the "canyon effect" (e.g. preserving historic façades, stepping façades back above the second or third floor). Policy LU-256. Downtown gateways should employ distinctive landscaping, signage, art, architectural style, and similar techniques to better delineate the downtown and enhance its unique character. Policy LU-257. 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-258. 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-259. 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 subareaSubarea). 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 Page 43 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Center is anticipated to attract large-scale redevelopment greater than that in the Urban Center-Downtown, due to the large available areas of land holdings under single 1.4 ewnershipavailable for redevelopment. 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. [THERE ARE NO OBJECTIVES FOR POLICIES LU-265 THROUGH LU-2961 Policy LU-265. Support more urban intensity of development (e.g. building height, bulk, landscaping, parking standards) than with land uses in the suburban areas of the 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. Policy 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-275. 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. Page 44 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Additionally, this will provide a physical 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-en-in 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. Policy LU-281. 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-285. 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 of the 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; 'tower 4) Distinctive focal features; and Page 45 of 7771 Adopted 11/01/04 5) Gateways. Policies for surrounding-Surrounding residential-Residential area-Area (north North Renton neighborhood-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 supports populations in adjacent residential areas as well as new development within 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-295. Support a partnership with community stakeholders such as the Renton School District to provide a transition for public properties adjacent 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 mixed-use activities, or physical re-development of properties addressing the needs of employees or residents of the Urban Center. Policy LU-296. Recognize the Renton Municipal Airport as an essential Essential public Public faeibtyFacility. (See Section section on Airport Compatibility Compatible Land Use Policiespolicies). Urban Center North Districts The proposed Urban Center-North is divided into two districts for planning purposes. I Each District district has a different emphasis in terms of range, 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. vold Page 46 of 77.74 Adopted 11/01/04 District One is envisioned to include a variety of uses. The intensity of these uses would require substantial infrastructure improvements. More extensive development, ultimately anticipated with the future development of District Two, will likely require even more significant infrastructure upgrades. Redevelopment in both districts of the 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 of the 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 Essential public Public facility 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 underutilized land north of N. 8th Street creates an immediate redevelopment opportunity for a first phase of development in District One. However, the industrial character of the surrounding developed properties, both within District Two 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 of low-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. Building facades, of one or two stories, are positioned adjacent to sidewalks and landscaped promenades. Destination retail uses that draw from Page 47 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 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- 11400 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. 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 uses. As this area is transformed into a mature mixed- vrwit 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. yard Page 48 of 777-7 Adopted I 1/01/04 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-301. Ensure that big-box retail functions as an anchor to larger, cohesive, urban-scale retail developments. Policy LU-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. 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-305. 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 the market will not support structural parking without subsidy. Policy LU-308. 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. Page 49 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 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 I Ongoing Boeing airplane manufacturing is supported by the City and expected 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 I consistent with the City's Urban Center NorthRenton Municipal 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 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 environments 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 natural environments 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 of N. 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. 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 Page 50 of 774-7 Adopted 11/01/04 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- should 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 lake shorelines. Policy LU-316. Should The Boeing Company elect to surplus properties in District Two support the redevelopment with a range and variety of commercial, office, research, and residential uses. ..,, 1) 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 of N. 8t" 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. Page 51 Of 77 Adopted 11/01/04 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 I areas that are pedestrian-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 providing for 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 I development supported by site planning and infrastructure that provides a pedestrian scale environment. I 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. Policy LU-318. Implement the Center Village Designation using multiple zoning designations including Residential 10 (R-10), Center Village(CV), and Residential Multi-family(RMF). 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 ,41.00 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. Subarea Plan is expected to occur over a 2—5- year period. Strategy 319.3. Areas east of Edmonds and north of Sunset currently zoned RMF are to remain in residential use. The area north of 12th St. currently zoned R-10 is to remain in residential use. Policy LU-320. Allow residential density ranging from 10 to 80 dwelling units per acre in the Center Village Designation. Policy LU-321. Encourage mixed-use structures and projects. I 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 Village. 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 exist. Encourage designation of new alleys in redevelopment projects. Page 52 of7774 • Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-325. Encourage shared parking to use urban land efficiency. Policy LU-326. Develop design guidelines to provide direction on site design, building I design, landscape treatments, and-parking, and circulation components of new development projects. Implementation of this policy should be phased within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. 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 Centers. 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 and/or 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. Page 53 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 X. COMMERCIAL Goal: 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) Commercial Corridor; 2) Commercial/Office/Residential; and 3) Commercial Neighborhood. These commercial areas range from intense retail corridors to major office parks to I neighborhood scale commercialbusiness districts. Many commercial areas are located along arterials where the high volumes of daily traffic provide a substantial customer base. COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Commercial Corridor district is characterized by concentrated, pre-existing commercial activity,primarily in a linear urban form, that provides velos 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 Commercial Corridor 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. Commercial Corridor 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. Commercial Corridor 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 Commercial Corridor 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; Page 54 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 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 Commercial Corridor Land Use designation should be mapped in areas with the following characteristics: 1) Located on, and having access to, streets classified as principle principal arterials; 2) High traffic volumes; or 3) Land use pattern characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. Policy LU-334. The Commercial Corridor designation should be implemented through Commercial Arterial, Commercial Office, or Light Industrial zoning. Policy LU-335. Increased demand for commercial uses should be accommodated primarily through redevelopment and intensification of existing business area designations rather than expansion of those areas. Objective LU-EEE: Create opportunities for development and re-development of land in portions of the Commercial Corridor 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, and residential uses. Policy LU-336. Portions of the Commercial Corridor 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 has 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-FFF: Create opportunities for intensive office uses in portions of Commercial Corridor designations including a wide range of business, financial, and professional services supported by service and commercial/retail activities. Page 55 of 7774 Adopted 11/01/04 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 Commercial Corridor 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 of the services offered should be located in areas of the Commercial Corridor 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 volt limited to ten(10) stories. Fifteen (15) stories may be obtained through a height bonus system. Policy LU-345. Height bonuses of five (5) stories may be allowed for office buildings in designated areas of the Commercial Office zone,under appropriate conditions, where sites provide additional public benefits such as plazas, parks, exceptional landscaping, and/or public art. Objective LU-GGG: Guide redevelopment of land in the Commercial Corridor I 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. void Page 56 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 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; 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. Policy LU-350. New development in Commercial Corridor designated areas should be encouraged to implement uniform site standards, including: 1) Minimum lot depth of 200 feet; 2) Maximum height of ten(10) stories within office zoned designations; 3) Parking preferably at the rear of the 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 defined activity nodes should be subject to additional design guidelines as delineated in the development standards. Policy LU-353. Structures at Commercial Corridor 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. Commercial Corridor intersections frequented by pedestrians, due to the nature of nearby uses or transit stops, should feature sidewalk pavement increased to form 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-355. 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 Commercial Corridor areas that front sidewalks abutting the principal 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-357. 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. Objective LU-HHH: Support methods of increasing accessibility to Commercial Corridor areas for both automobile and transit to support the land use objectives of the district. Page 57 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-359. Support routing of the citywide transit system to Commercial Corridor 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 Commercial Corridor areas. Policy LU-361. Public transportation transit stops located in Commercial Corridor 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. I 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 Commercial Corridor 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. ulad Page 58 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Renton Auto Mall Discussion: 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. Objective LU-KKK: Provide support for a cohesive Commercial Corridor 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. Policy LU-371. The Renton Auto Mall should be primarily located along SW Grady Way,between Oakesdale Ave. S.W. and Williams Ave. S.,but may be expanded beyond this area as warranted. Policy LU-372. The objectives and policies of the Commercial Corridor designation should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning within Auto Mall District A and by the underlying zoning in Auto Mall District B. Objective LU-LLL: In order to further 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-375. 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. Page 59 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-377. On-site landscaping should consist of a minimum two and one half percent (2.5%) of the gross site area. vole 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 LU-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. NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor Discussion: The NE 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, Nod 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 NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor at two stories or below, a scale that is generally consistent with the various forms of residential along the corridor. Objective LU-000: A special district should be designated along NE Sunset Boulevard. The purpose of this area 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. Implementing code will be put in place within three years of the adoption date for the GMA update. Policy LU-382. Within the NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor, a"Business District" should include the commercial properties along NE Sunset Blvd. from Duvall Ave. N.E. to west of Union Ave. N.E. Policy LU-383. The NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor, due to its location on the east boundary of the City, should include City gateway features. Policy LU-384. The NE Sunset Boulevard 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 I Neighborhood Center Village. veld Page 60 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-385. The policies of the Commercial Corridor designation and the NE Sunset Boulevard Corridor should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Policy LU-386. Vehicle sales businesses existing in the NE Sunset Boulevard Business Corridor should be encouraged to relocate to the Renton Auto Mall District. Northeast Fourth Corridor Discussion: The Northeast Fourth 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 housing projects has increased the market area for the Northeast Fourth Corridor considerably in recent years. Objective LU-PPP: A special commercial area should be designated along Northeast Fourth Street. The purpose of this area would be to enhance the commercial environment to increase revenue of local businesses and the City's tax base. Policy LU-387. Within the Northeast Fourth Corridor, the"Business District" should be bounded by Queen Avenue NE (on the west) and Field Ave N.E. (on the east). Policy LU-388. The policies of the Commercial Corridor designation and the Northeast Fourth Corridor Business District should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Objective LU-QQQ: The Northeast Fourth Corridor Business 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 a key entrance to the City from the east, the Northeast Fourth Corridor Business District should include gateway features. Policy LU-390. The Northeast Fourth Business District 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 Corridor Business 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. Policy LU-392. In the Northeast Fourth Business Corridor Business District, where buildings are set back more than fifteen(15) feet from the principal arterial, new development or redevelopment should: Page 61 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 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 4114 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 Corridor Discussion: The Rainier Avenue Corridor is one of the 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. Objective LU-RRR: A special commercial area should be designated along Rainier Avenue. The purpose of this area would be to enhance the commercial environment to increase revenue of local businesses and the City's tax base. Policy LU-393. Within the Rainier Avenue Corridor, the"Business District" 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 Commercial Corridor designation and the Rainier Avenue Corridor Business District should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Policy LU-395. Uses in the Rainier Avenue 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 Corridor, vehicular access and egress safety should be a primary consideration. Policy LU-396. In the Rainier Avenue Corridor access points to businesses fronting the principal arterial should be consolidated if at all possible and curb cuts reduced wherever feasible. I Policy LU-397. Business signs in the Rainier Avenue Busi-n€ssCorridor should be uniform in size, content, and location to reduce visual clutter. Monument signs are the preferred type. Policy LU-398. New billboard signs should be disallowed in the Rainier Avenue Corridor Business District due to the large scale of the signs in relation to the scale of the district. Existing signs should be we well maintained so that visual impact is reduced. Page 62 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 Objective LU-TTT: The Rainier Avenue Corridor Business 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 Corridor Business District, 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 corners whenever redevelopment occurs. Pavement should be increased for added pedestrian safety. Policy LU-400. On corners having high-volume pedestrian traffic, the paved sidewalk area should be increased in size. This may require a larger building setback at the corners of buildings when building facades abut the sidewalk. Policy LU-401. Pedestrian corners should include urban street furniture such as abeam or benches, an information kiosk, and a 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. I Objective LU-UUU: The Rainier Avenue Corridor Business Corridor District is one of the 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 Corridor should feature gateway elements to the extent made possible by redevelopment. Policy LU-405. Signage in the Rainier Avenue Corridor Business 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 public destinations. Page 63 of 77;7 Adopted 11/01/04 y r ti� - S anti uv ¢ * :, e -�, -4n sClaPk \ :, 4 v li.Li.,,..,,,,±..,i'.. '''.. ...-4:1,4 1.4-;,::::::::LLJ.i'::.'":;:ii",:,--1:'•in', ,''' 1 ,1111'0 ' a ' m sla �w d ,45 \NI .. : 1 ozi 49 \ ,',.........514,9k 1 an su I .."!-----1 \ \ As \\\*.sk ,,.:ii ,,i Trri • c°3 d, . . E E =ti 1 < . Pe: \a11tP� de Yo t7 .... may .. i_ , .',,‘ r kt- . ' . �I"' `�f`, . 4 Q J ..... ._ i� Ms ;'any sowota v t ., , / : ,,, , ,: .- .. .„ ':MS ,any i Mod • � finCW N \04 Q V r Oakes do,_ Ave U Page 64 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 • pAV oiGt.-,,. _ __, _ - --_ _- 3AV JfDAn b� :- ifi � t1 . , 7' A(i -E-+ U SJO3Duy •, i) i. ..a , , F3 +- +u�. ' CZ �,, I U3 c) w "f . —r-ham ' '.. . _ �� ' -+ SF p `/h F,, z i�� JOIFU f � f -_....,. ,,,.,,.‘,,,,.,2 , . --1 - , , - :: > �. any Uo l ja L,s — Sh � A - . ._.._ ...._z L �1 .x..- I Page 65 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 , .. . . : . •. .•. "•"' : •• . . : 1 : : . •. 1 —01.40A)------ . , ... N •,, ,,-::,. : .,,:,.-: . . . ,. • NO/ : : ,: •. .., . ..,..,-, -. : :;i.:,-.-:maPartr,ffiiz,4•-',, ; : : .. . -- ...._ .,,,,.,,,,I..L.J.,,,•:;.,:...[.,••,:',.„I.-,,-,.,,,7.......-. ','„,.-Z11,0#kka4•081 i FM:al: i•-•••••.-1.......:;-:- .••'...--•••:--' '--::::-.-; ''.;:„'',4151.10.03.1 LA..41trelSO : ! , .----i!-,••:--1-14"i---".-;••.;4.'2, l'.1X13:00ROVAS",,,,,. ' %.14,4$,V#0 i F....,:,:.....,,.,........7,1‘..,,,s.,...,-,•:,:i<\.,.',.,,,,",,,,".„.;.::',..T. ,,i44,4140..taigifw:lilt.f4;ek,:,4.4711.1 kt;:,,ftir22.,Wr . . : : 1 ;" ' . : •• ' : !2.:.1...'!"T-1-sr."0".\--7‘ '•,,...":"..,) ....4.00.43,,,41-.!vglilflitn? tio.,,A • , .::::E • , , , , -. , ,••: ..' -„,,,,,: Argivoge$,,,,,24.5,:,..;,,,,,,,,.,0,4 ..:...,,,,,,,„ .........„ -i: '410gt.t.1.0.434&•„4:,,,,,,,o,„,„„,,, rt,,,,,,,1 0 . , zwar,,,„„,,,,,,w,•,,,?,..:,„„.„:„Al.,, ..„„mi . • ; Iteit,d00,,,,00„,,,,1„,.-..,,,,,,0 kg,„,„„oi.. . . . .......... : , • ,,........._ .. _,_,___, , . . .......,....,,,...,..,J ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, •• :• , tistiega :• , . , „ .... • k' 34 '6A V 'fl bk "41.A..,4. r,,,...,„„.—,3 , , . ,,.... . . ,....,..,. ,,. ,41.10,,oft,,,,,,,,,,,4„,„:„.,,,,, ••0.e.-40 40:4,0,• , .. ', --,, ,- ,,- ..t.----- .tiatAiiti-4.40.40,fi!-gii,Nil iig:S§CPW4 1 9Af : \ •V 1.1 .' DA rIc -.. .......,,,.N.,,,,...4.,„4.0,0&„,,,e,,,,,14. ,,,„,„.„1„,,,,,,,,„,„,„.,,,,4 ,,,•••••..., ••••••!••••,...,..! „,...„,,• , , , , 750,4,,,,w,,,,„61,0:1,,„,,,,„„„,„m,,,,,,,,,1 tt„„„,,,,,,a3,,,3 .,:v5„, , , . . • c : .• f , A. : • V) , , ,, i L..... •,WV,,,,,*•41,,,W,,,•1Zi•R,•'•.•,,r,,,,,,•,,•:',"•,•,4,;•',•:, V.•:::•,:r•••,4,,,,' ... i . ...... . r:: = i ;::: -1, , [ 1/2'''''''.040440,,,,P2,4,1r,;:r'.,:,•,,,:•ii*,F.,,,,U= P,9],30,6,i,,,,iii:44, k---,1 :• 1 CO ,' :,,-•-•-..-,.`-----•-• ' ' -•J:, ' --..., 1110.',4,69:,.!F•.%iY:::;1„',:',!';';; ;I k.,;2V•Sg44,41gb . : . taitilliiiiiite.illft.g.-'M-1!4'. .:,1 kig401$1.0 , . , • „..................... .. ....: liOlia WGi 0 : ••. . • : .. . ,„ , ,' WORT-C.41113NMEmNu,11. 0.,„,.,„ ' •• 1401fategic,Plialiiii@A V : ivonoot,Al --e.mvp::, :;,,.;;;a Og'441'.4.'N•ci 11.110.06,'k*Silili Affttg`'4;EgPi4iNi eVirVsAir.:.,P . . . •. . . Ite.'4:Uvoefo'i5:0-Aie..);941.7.17.0.,„.0 .3.!,,,,,,,,.,...,0KAkt • • fe,AZ,A.--*,..4,.gdpX,,,,,',4ak!,:$,N,.•,:.,...,;f....]R t-;,,,V, P.V...4.: .01411.4=NOVV-,,%e#,:i:;• ;i;:i'i.S',i;;;;;N:' kgrelt*,14 . , .. ..,fi ; • ,,,,,,:isaklAir.,,KWA'''''"''''''''''''''''"-- ''''' t.''''''''''''' '',...40,•,..,..„,,,,,A.,!,,,.;•;.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„ k,,,,,(..,,,,,,,,,,,,t, N -,.7,,.- • ,•.. • i<,E, Illgaintr,,i.A0igUrA-Ai.WA:. F.VatFOORAWO.14 1 . .• . P -M4PWIPitrOgiNit6F.°:,•;A:,,,i4:*;.t• •0,,;;Rgai•O•A4,3WVP • . 1 ...); AltaliffirigAtAtiatig,W. . kgEhNigi106011# , • • . , allier0.600,?;.:4;10 P,';."..-1-.32.illielli .., 11 ,, ,,..„,t,m40,4:at::,e7,,,,VA '''''.•;•''',',8*:;MCA.,12.401 .. . :•• ,..,420,-...•..r.-AaRikg:xt;z:::..a.1:°,5,v.;.4...1 i.;,•0•,,-;.:.,m:3..,%:,.,,,,i,,,,,‘, . ,..... ts7-,..-'1,,...,-Aian.q0...00:;;y.,4i,„;,...,:a 0:0:),,k. :4:;.elcczt.k4tionqp • i :•: •.;44-4'1,0**70.N.•••'.. .,•,tg'.; ,.!.4?,;301000,1t..4,0700:044. 1, ttilailtini,49.01-1 tgallitilitailigid •• , : ,.- kr(Rw•ifalliiek,- ,:e,,, ,,,,,t,„;,,ti.,,,-,,;..:; int,,s,:i0]:.,,igon.q..1immoio. :• ,: 1 ,-i 1 ..,m..0,-..40,semr:€0;,,,,,,,,.. .4„,,,,-,.0 p,!,,,,,,:,,,,,i,,a,N..v,m,r,,,,,,,,,mose•:,,,,02€,,g, . ....... .. „ .... „ -'40,,,Aiongootq:;,:;;L:.::,,,m,,,,,:sz.L;:.,,,,L,,,,.. f•;:::::'-.,;:oq.3.,..vitimiafoolig,, „....etv.r,04.0,,,,,,,,ww.,,,,,,,,,,v:::-z.•:, ,-.,..1-:;..L.,-1,,,,,,L4...v4ow.,,,,,,,L0,..gel.,,,,,w; . . . • .:14:11,Ikt,..,,,,,,,A,A,4„.:!.:::0...,..,,,,,-,,,,,NL, r,...,-,:.•',;',,-..,•,,v,:.!,,m,,,,,•-Amo•"-.•wo,•4 -'4•-'.'&• ':".ffierdON N'!V,];;;!!:!:',.;:;!;! •-::::*,.,,*;:x;W:e.A•t!-°,0;,,P4 '1 0-41 1 1 1! •;---- i.1%tiiigt,50.6fflina:!;)!•il!!!''',4 f"!•#. 0.;i.°";.ii4iftiltift. ' . i !"-----; T.- .4••••0 •• ,_ !,telP.,: 4.-a:PNI54•1;;.;4!,-;!•":1;i,',41• ,..,..„,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,..4,,,,,,,,,e.,.,,,, : ........ TAVO.:W::,•••:•' • ••••;:•:•:„.•...:i;.,...f.-:::••'.•":40 :11# - : ,--•..----.. : i i I -V14691.P.tri".-"W*A.,1Ma,,•:-:-si,,,,,,I f•'`••-2-••••:•••••,,,,,,,,,,,,,We'2114,.., .: • : L.,.........,, : • :: *••,•440:0:Arien..01,*.2.:;•-i-,.•;;::••;::,••4-•.4 C.:0•V:::1•.`-••:;•:.;.Z,140400•Z '-'".-, • 1 •,•-• 4 ,.... •MOM -h',03,,,,,,:,,A1:,,ii,i,,,Z,n6;:<:,6,,,,,,,,,,, tr,:'..',:3;,;,,,M:,,,,,,,,::8:,:?k,01§,§.1,5:44,,, . . .,.....„...„.. : . - ,,,,ar,z•amgAtia,,a, . .— , ............. , .,1"--,;\.-..-__I_.-_-I.-:..•1.--•--------,:--.'•.:,..•-,'•--:.',.---.-..-1--.-.--,„----.-,.•-.:.- 1 :0p4rR4..rV4,.....-,....1::.,:-,= 0, 0,,,sPrp,g,,.,.,,,,,,,,,,, -A,,.::' oMAe 0-4T-1i,,H i-r.'Tji?•:"::'1:;' i r O I0m kAMffiW - i pvgma '.••., H,!.•- .: ,•! " a.(c..Io..). 1I a). ......... : ,••••, r ---! 4 ';": ••• . _. . . . -.....„ ........, cia, . .!.:!..!!!::,7 . •. : : . • C i , . , :., ,..,:...... ' ..; .----.1 IlariktatiPitEl! intiegtil • • 1, , ,,,,, ,tm :;:i,!:;::::f',,i Clie,.4,1 1, . . •=NM 4 61,Via! .i.5gr.,, i":10-i. ,..-..,', i I ,.' ,'''''----....'"'' .w.g"-V, g•;:•!tkU't!!E'CM:,:i ---• • , ; • ' 1 1 = 1 L_ • : . gelF.1, fi:54:01,1 • I ca i• I : r..::::::::-..1:,•-•••, :.: , , II ' -„,,-•----, w,,,,,,,,44:::,,, 1,,,,o...?..„.,,,::•„:„1„:06,1,1 ti4p,,,A$ ,.:•:,,z, ,n,,,,,,fol- 0 __J ,, Vi.-00 45'.0100:10 -, f , CZ ..agifflti plAVM., : . . :• , ••;.,.....4,4; .."0.X..•% .,,,,,.,.* : , ', tagigaitIM • . -:•-.:•:1': ii 1 III I 1711......4 1r 0,214 ,i,•itt•O•':•:•::•,:•§:".:0P.k•V : • ••. : .••• : • . : I I •••• •.•••••4,9 r4400:•,f43,X0 .• • , , i , , , , . 1 , 4 --C i i Z 0 --- 111401° 1 Page 66 of 77 Adopted 1 1/0 1/04 ve • 7<0)..)--r-' 1 n• " '• : . • . : ra) . : ...._.. ._ - - --:.-Cr):. . r ' IC 4-•- • : . . , •• . • _L_Ii : ,• : , . : Q.),; ' • •,,,, ,,;• . .r :: .... ''-.C----i.:. 4m4A Pe..,•••a..lgt.a•X la•'-t•' ' -•A S 2 n d St , ..,,Q)! teiagaff EfeliaiSs,Wrat;V„kil4',4$•:i1:,i7:,•,,,:-, - . f Sky ii- •-•'• ' . ' •„:„:„:„:„:„..,........, ...„..,•••„•„,,.,..„,,,,,,,,,,..„.„.„.„:„.-„,,.....:... -,,, : tof,„?...,,.,..„,„ .,...00.01.,14,,,,,•:,,,, ,,,,..,•,,,,,,,o.,,;,:,,,,,,, L • 4i,,,,,e0,,,,,,,,,,i,o,;4, r.•,v.,,i4-p,04.tTm,,,,,;,,,,A•4g.t„,:,„4.,„,•,,,,„,•:, • ...„ . • _ • • • C) ' tiltn,,a€Za A:aili4.(iMez;.,pk:.4- 5N.g:40...fatik1i1 r;-,.. ;,-,..,, ; , .r. i 1 .- „0110 0)1' . ; P.,,,'"''',1,r'y'rk,'''1e-''';"; Mi1-^1ni14:q0.;:k1g:;;,.7;• ••. ,`, .4410106:;AY : 'A-1J -.... up ; 11 -. .' --„--,,-L*1, .COrt.L-'•• -........). •-•Z-: 1M---;,JON..,-A44;t" ti114W.°1'.1f,;k21.,::•. 0p1n%V4 k:-'1.11•1,i`g ttp;;;,.A.ttgf: ;., ---..,r ;, . , . r ,,r - -„„/?01; r .'141,P,A0i4.17.44, ';',,-'citge1',.,•3,40511j1g*q! "111.;"iti....4415;01M1 ._._, ..., ,,, ' ',.,',$14,41Ar44:34.1T., kil.WVi,MA.4.je..,A.VII.geMc1c.'11z-i't;;W:11',14?- , j..,W.' .- .e'd'x4-'-t.t?•31.41,,t1Niti tt,44401.1•Ailieili:1!;: .1,,1'irlirSti„.01115,3 - -.., }' ; •Q-)-• , . :„...,40,...,,,,,,,,, .,01,-,,,,,,..,...,..a.,,,,,,,,,,,•,4,-..,, ..$•-,,,,,.---,A,;‘,,,,,,,,I.,•.,- , .. -...__ ›.. , „,..a.); .--',!,-;„.',„„....: ,,„,'• •,„,..r .,-' .„,. 00.10,1a.,4,R=11,••' V.041:01,:nliiit-4/*ff..4:440N41,4-, ; --<C "•• ___--- -......P41.a.M11 ,:,,,,,nsia::,..,,, `-`,1.,,,,4,*•,•;41P . , .p.•_ . 1 , I I: ;..-.':•::"---; ''''' ''--;';'-'-''''•-• '---';- '''''':‘-VW. 1414fti:„ ,..e.r.,,. VIO,.17.;1!i?4V.i1,0:,i;','MR;.!.;::,::Rigi,.;:''kilig*: '. C !, " C?) , ''','„,„., - ,' re.rie.*Megriffek ItitiggIRt.0':ii%i'.?'.!EFFC.:'.?..W.V, . ,.-4--, f.g.:ftgeNSCROMIZA VA,,t'a;0 R.c.:11p,,,0.1 4.7i.b tz4;;;,v4kb04::0 :-. --i...: ..:•7--:7, : •,.Q..) . ei,;40.1giVenzlitz:0!!:!,., Ve,•;:::1.;;,.0,:m.i..,,,,:.,::;,,,;..:.2:...1,.:..,,,,zse....A.k..te : 0: , - ,, .,.... N.7:•,,,,,:,,,,,,fr. --'' ,•"."- '' 40:4911ISKIVIAltik It," • ''' 1-Q.) . (i) -''i -'4061:404f9.01SW:gfiAti*F.';!:E.:4.th l''' A,014it.Wf•Fieg:3iii.Ni:53 i i-4--, '.... 1 -,, , . .,. ,,, :.: ..• .,sto:mte.<k0.tk**.?.••o'...s<:g .v Vox ,,,,i.ix,:e..; • :;:,...;:::v,.:1,:14.. ::AN::01 •,--.., -'•J .• ..- ' ,,-. '. 4,47.*43r$Z.,..e1.00:3,x60:14Z16 ..&'°!;.N.???.10Tp, .,,,,....A.;,,,,,..,,,,N;;,,,r:, ,..,f;,,,,,,•i„,..••••*',,, ,,,.,,t , . :,,, - ' : , a.40.1,464,0_,W,WiNgt,gii.::',OPPT.Z7 ,410. tik,h3,;.3L.;. ..4;',, ,N,21PZA!'•.,VailA '. .--___.-' . . i -'''' ''' / ; ; rt'Agekt*IC::,TAr.:34-,,it;NigA;',V,W..e.r" 'v.„5•Yfg.f.'..'Wri',.f.i'::.'4:;:4i• :i!f: igil ' •- .:• • .. '. i . .; ''.---- ;•*.SP,PAT;A,74,e.',i,..a.l.r., 11',,,,,,,!.::::§..,;$4'4,31,01 V.:5:::::,Garl&i!`..v.,3;'j;f::::•:,:04:1F,i4 , „.„_, .. .,...tv-,,,t.,,,,..:.,':,•,,,:4;..,,,,,:,=•pf...41 . : • .F...WW:4,ittikr01:::: ;441,iiN:4.1,,e;14.sel, kt„',C,1'•,,,,,..,.,....,..,„,..,„.,.... ...,.,,,,.. ,, , , . .....•--(7 jy•..:-.. ,' , r,.. -riiaRiNge.g.,%1K.,4Zik. fro,4i?.q..0•1:44,11`,A, ge.:44":?,. &,,'.i t'.;!:.."4Y,,,,i..?7,;,,:::.'. ' •.'--- . -- . ' , ,..6,.,,,,,,,. .w,,,.•„414;141,A0,, ,,,,•:-•:ii...r•,'.4..rs;.‘,9.1,..;,ik.R.,., -,;:.‘y,,,r4Yvf,;.i."?..:...,,,...,..,...1.;:,,(0:;;;Not . ,, • ---- ''.•,, k"-.,,i'......4.MWM,14-110, Z N;:gni'4,r`?;,:,:,:,°„•;4,t:.,..;',. :;::0» : •' , '. ':. .•,:i.,,, ,,,•4.M,••,,,V,..,;,'.;;,. .f.•,:ni‘.]'•:::,;. ,•-; , ,,,,,1,•:•: ::;:•.D.-::,,,:•,.i.:',';. 1.9,:y...,,,,.);.„.:1 . :] . • . ,.,.; ., .:1.••:••-•;;;.!..?•;Y::.?.,.:=',::::•,•:::.,,,...`.Y., en:i1,, :•,•:•••,,-'•:,.,•-,.,,i,...,.....,"..,....,.'•,4. ] ,:------- ,---• -:. . : • '‘,. C1f...t.;').'14').:0.,').;-i.44tlii.§ .'41V.:i?•,,,i,•:.•;:.,::4;z%,•:0:.;!,;;As,:•,f.;i,%•gik \t•i, =:.::::-. ;,'„,:..;..,,..,;,,,,,,ik• :', : : . ] :. • ,•,' ‘.., ir•e4,04,„,st.,'Rjr,443:24,1,1,,,i.,,A,:r»':',,,:;:'•.,•::::.4,5::"4:''.:.:::: .«'',:',,t,•tl, i.,;•;;:;.,. .....-:...!...:.....i•.. ..,....r..,•.:,,,,,J • . • ,,' ' 1,:„..'rit'lftiii,t,t.';':.:f;74. ,;.-,..':;:%',:4'3.E,.V'A.f.,;:;;WAigito,, Ti:.";. :4••`,..°:`,$.'°,•'.,..:-:,.='-', ',2..1 ;•••-.,- i .,;;-". „„ • vt,'31.41c*v2':'::;,.:,::;,0:,'.45,k1'.',T,',... -..-:.•,:;:*,3,,:-.,,,:=1:',..,,:,.,,,,,,:,..„ *:::•:•,!'<,..f.:'...,:.S.,..,,,,,,,,,'". . ..... , , '411111.` ,..t.,,,.. .2:;A:.,;,01,;t1W;;,•?.::;,g2:•,02,1:,:':,::]:".1,,,,...',C. ANA '''... , . -,,, . , 2, teiniiqn;;,,,,,>'.:...,4.:,.:y,y,:;.9;•1.P.,.0 igi<i:.:,;]...?!,:VEM:,%:e.t.'1IPO' ,.-...,, . - ...•,,,,,:%;Kal:', A*. .4.,:A...:...4%:::•i.:,,:,i,:k,..,e'VE%44',....,::440. ,... ,..;,°.,:,..Y:::,,,',,,,t,,F,:e.,4,,,,,,,,,,,,,..;;;,.„....,!3.,,,,,g.44;A:,WX,.?",:,:',.;,';',;!::: *„.1.‹,V:;;',$:::','.%• •It',. !' , ' ..„ '4.S.:t]?1.:.,•4.:;.;i:*?5,:.:.},:g.e.,!••:..,;F:Z,. .., !*.k.q.,5,5,,, ,,,..:,,,,,,:i,:Ze, it.:.::',..Z,:!:•:...•F,,.4,1,•.''''' i . • . , . ., ..- -\E.,,,,,Z.iP:;*....;•4!e.W: In:.POJ;.',:1"3:::3.:.]:!*.1 ,Nttlf,V4?:T4 , \ V:'...%':';' ;,`,.?..?n,,,••;k4:,.:;';,:..:::5:!•;0;:&:;M:AVSA'''''''' , ‘.. ......---(1),.., ., .:' - . !- ' \ ..'re0Vi5.i:IV.i.,:Z.,.k,',4,41:'•Z'WZ:0..'"'• -•'‹ '---. IS- . - ''.-' -' t. ,..-... • - . .--- . i .„..„.-- ' 1 , -i:-. -....-!. ' ! ......„..- ' '-• — .......„--- ,.--• ' i- ..• t—; q i \ . i I._:::---•''--''• --S ...._.0'•_1„,! •, •• _..„. - , ; i ..---;_• 1::: • • ,,, • ! . . •., , ..,; / --` • . RD .! ',._.... ..•------,! . !'• !-; i...,.... !, .. • . • •.. SW 7t1 St '' . CA , " ,_• , •. ., . .„. • I.:.-I- 5 •• 71.1,-i- ., , • ,..71 , - ,_•••• •••••.. .........•••__, „ „....... ,F---.i ; ; -; ; .-; - 1 , i ; - i t A. . '''''• , • , im - . .,_ . / '' C A(0 , Rainier Business District - 10401“4610 Nonstoparrat,lficiffaborhoods&Staataigto Mean*, ,,... •. trer,.—‘,.....Iteee. •!,:fia Business District Page 67 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) designation provides opportunities for large-scale office, commercial,retail,and multi-family projects developed through a master plan and site plan process incorporatierling 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 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. Policy LU-406. Designate Commercial/Office/Residential in locations meeting the following criteria: 1) 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, Commercial/Office/Residential lad 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-408. Uses in Commercial/Office/Residential designations should include mixed-use complexes consisting of office, and/or residential uses, recreational and 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 Commercial/Office/Residential 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. 41400 Page 68 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-411. Individual properties may have a single use if they can be developed at the scale and intensity envisioned for the COR designation Commercial/Office/Residential 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. If lack 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-415. 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. Commercial/Office/Residential 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, Commercial/Office/Residential 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. Commercial/Office/Residential developments should have a combination of internal and external site design features, such as: Page 69 of 777 Adopted 11/01/04 1) 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. Page 70 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE DESIGNATION r... I Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Commercial Neighborhood 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: Commercial Neighborhood 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 Commercial Neighborhood designation should be implemented by Commercial Neighborhood zoning. Policy LU-423. Commercial Neighborhood designated areas should be located: 1) Within one-quarter mile of existing and planned residential areas; 2) To the extent possible, outside of the 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. Commercial Neighborhood designated areas should not increase in scale Niimw or size to the point of changing the character of the nearby residential neighborhood. Policy LU-425. The small-scale uses of Commercial Neighborhood 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 Commercial Neighborhood designated areas. Policy LU-427. Commercial Neighborhood 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 Commercial Neighborhood 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. Page 71 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-430. Commercial structures in Commercial Neighborhood designated areas should be compatible with nearby residential areas in height, fro front yard setbacks, lot coverage, building design, and use. Page 72 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 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 LU-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-YYY: 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. Page 73 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-435. 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: The Employment Area-Industrial designation is intended to provide continued opportunity for manufacturing and industrial uses that create a strong employment base in the City. 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 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 ensure that industries do not impact their neighborhoods with noise, traffic, and other nuisances and hazards. For these reasons, although commercial areas may see more diversity and mixing of uses, industrial areas will remain somewhat isolated from other uses. 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-436. The primary use in the Employment Area- Industrial designation should be industrial. Policy LU-437. A mix of offices, light industrial, warehousing, and manufacturing should be encouraged in the Employment Area-Industrial classification, with conditions as appropriate. Policy LU-438. Industrial uses with a synergistic relationship should be encouraged to locate in close proximity to one another. Policy LU-439. 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-440. 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. Page 74 of 777-7 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-441. 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-442. 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-443. Light industrial uses that result in noise or odors, should be located in the Employment Area-Industrial designation. EMPLOYMENT AREA-VALLEY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Employment Area-Valley designation is to allow the gradual transition of the Valley from traditional industrial and warehousing uses to more intensive retail service and office activities. The intent is to allow these new activities without making industrial uses non-conforming and without restricting the ability of existing businesses to expand. Objective LU-AAAA: Provide for a mix of employment-based uses, including commercial, office, and industrial development to support the economic development of the City of Renton. Policy LU-444. 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-445. Non-employment-based uses, such as residential, are prohibited in the I Employment Area -Valley. Policy LU-446. Multi-story office uses should 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-447. 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-448. Uses such as research, design, and development facilities should be allowed in office designations and industrial designations when potential adverse impacts to surrounding uses can be mitigated. Page 75 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 Policy LU-449. 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 regulatory processes by allowing a variety of zoning designations in the Employment Area-Valley designation. Policy LU-450. 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-451. Commercial Arterial (CA) should be supported only when the proposed commercial use has access to SW 43rd Street, and/or East Valley Road south of SW 27th Street or is located north of I-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-452. Zoning supporting industrial uses should be established when a mix or wider range of uses is not yet appropriate for a site. Policy LU-453. 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-454. Commercial Office zoning should be supported where a site has high visibility,particularly in those portions of the Valley that are gateways and/or along the I- 405 and SR 167 corridors, where larger sites can accommodate more intensive uses, and where sites can take advantage of existing and/or future multi-modal transportation opportunities. Objective LU-CCCC: Ensure quality development in Employment Area-Valley. Policy LU-455. 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-456. Vehicular connections between adjacent parking areas are encouraged. Incentives should be offered to encourage shared parking. Policy LU-457. Site design for office uses and commercial, and mixed-use developments should consider ways of improving transit ridership through siting, locating of pedestrian amenities, walkways, parking, etc. Policy LU-458. 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-459. New development, or site redevelopment, should conform to development standards that include scale of building,building façade treatment to reduce perception of bulk, relationship between buildings, and landscaping. vird Page 76 of 7777 Adopted 11/01/04 Page 77 of 777-7 AMENDMENT 2006-T-4 - TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT REVISIONS DESCRIPTION: Although the City updated the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan for the 2004 update, the City's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is updated annually. As a result, the Transportation Element needs to be updated to reflect changes that have occurred since its last update. The current proposal is intended to bring the Transportation Element and the TIP more consistent with each other. In addition, because of recent annexations that affect a number of County funded projects, project priorities have had to change in order to ensure the continuation of County funding. Changes to Table 8.3 reflect the latest adopted City of Renton Six-year TIP. In addition, revisions to associated text have also been made. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Which transportation projects need to be amended or deleted and which transportation projects need to be added to Table 8.3 of the Transportation Element to update it for 2006? 2. Should the recently adopted Six-year Transportation Improvement Program, rather than the previous year's TIP,be included in the update? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Update Table 8.3 to reflect the City of Renton's latest adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and adopt associated text amendments explaining these changes, as delineated below and in Attachment 'A', ANALYSIS: The Growth Management Act (GMA)places special emphasis on transportation making it unlawful to approve development for which the approving jurisdiction cannot demonstrate the availability of facilities, strategies, and services, which are needed to accommodate the growth in traffic at an adopted level-of-service within six years. By April of each year, the legislative body of each city is required to prepare a six- year transit development and financial program for the calendar year and ensuing five years. The TIP must be consistent with the comprehensive plans adopted by counties, cities, and towns. This year's updates to the Transportation Element are intended to ensure that the TIP and Comprehensive Plan are consistent. Renton's Comprehensive Plan text already contains the necessary information to fulfill the GMA mandate to provide information on land use assumptions used in estimating travel, facilities and service needs (including an inventory of air, water, and land transportation facilities and services), level of service (LOS) standards for the transportation system to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the transportation system, ten-year traffic forecasts based upon the adopted land use plan, and identification of system expansion and transportation system management needs to meet current and future demand. It also includes financing information with a multi-year financing plan based on the needs identified elsewhere in the Comprehensive Plan, discussion of funding sources, and how land use assumptions will be reassessed, if necessary, to ensure that the LOS standards are met. Revisions to Table 8.3 reflecting the latest adopted six-year TIP and revisions to associated text pages will complete 00, the update to Renton's Transportation Plan. AMENDMENT 2006-T-4—Transportation Element Revisions REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G(at least one): Nod 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 proposed amendments are within the vision embodied by the Comprehensive Plan and eliminate outdated information. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The recommended changes comply with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and in particular, General Policies T-1 and T-2,below: Policy T-1. Land use plans and regulations should be used to guide development of the Transportation Element for the City, and Policy T-2. Transportation improvements should support land use plans. CONCLUSION: Updating the Transportation Element by revising Table 8.3 to reflect the latest adopted City of Renton Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan and associated text pages (XI-66 through XI-70) is consistent with GMA, Countywide Planning Policies, and 40010 criteria for Comprehensive Plan amendments. In the future, efforts should be made to adopt the City's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan by the end of the first half of the year so that it can be incorporated in that year's Comprehensive Plan update for the Transportation Element. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Map Amendments\Transportation Element\Issues.doc Adapted 1 4TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT ATTACHMENT'A' 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. I The City of Renton's adopted 2005 20102006-2011 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, I ongoing project development). The following lists various 2005 20102006-2011 TIP projects under each of the chapters of the Transportation Element. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-04 Transportation\Attachment A(Transportation Element).doc Adopted il/Ol/84TRANSPORTAT[ON ELEMENT ATTACHMENT`A' TABLE 8.3 CITY OF RENTON SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2005 20102006-2011) IAdopted 1 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT ATTACHM ENT'A' Total Project Costs Previous Stk Year otai TIP Project Ttde Costs 2005 2004 2007 2008 2009 2010 Period Total Cost i Street Overlay Program 1,050,002 405,000 405,000 405,000..... 405,000 405,000, 405,000 2,430,000. 3,480,002 2 SR 16715W 27th St/Strander By 355,174 10,000 10,000 10,000. 10,000 10,000, 5,000 55,000 410,174 3 Strander BvtSW 27th St 0onnect. 1.705,480 800,000 9,394,540 28,000,000i 26,500,000 64,694,540 66,400,000 4 SR 169 HOV-140th to 5R900 2,000,392 10,000 55,100 3,680,000 2,350,000 6,095,100 8,095,492 5 Renton Urban Shuttle(RUSH) 20,169 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5.000 30,000 50,189 s Transit Program 32,584 20,400 20,400 20,400 20,400 20.400 20,400 122,400 154,984 7 Rainier Av Corridor Study/knprov. 267,710 20,000 20,000 20,000 261,000 2.964,000 3,165,000 5,450,000 6,717,710 s NE 3rdtNE 4th Corridor 323,892 315 300 807 500 5,017 000 2,100,000 2 100 000- 10,339 800 10 863,692 mg Walkway Program 317,533 236,600 250,000 250,000 250,000 250.000. 250,000 14686, 0 1,804.133 S Lake Wash.Roadway knprov. 1 500 000 1.50,000 14,300,000 23 800.000 39 950 000 41,450 000 ROB SR 169 Corridor Stu. 1111.11111111 50 000. 11111.11111111.11111111M1.1.1.11111.1 50 000 50 000 12 South Renton Pro ect 156 800. •• 240 000. __ 258,200 415,000 13 1-405 kn wm - proents in Renton 42,186 30,000 20,000 10,000 60,000 102,186 14 Pro- Dew•. -nt/Predes•n 271 363_ 175,009 175 000 200,000 200,000 200 000 200.000 1 150 000 1.421 363 ®NE 4th StlHoqutam Av NE 55,100 344,900 344,900 400,000 Rainier Av•SW 7th to 4th Pi 80 000 585 000 2 150 000 855 000 3,590 000 3870 000 17 Benson Rd-S 26th to Main 20,000 459,400 2,500 to Arterial Circulation P•.ram 195,308 200 000 200 000 200,000 200 000 250,000 250,000 1,300 000 1,495,33008®Bred.a ins•.-••n&' • it 11111.10ani40 000 140 000 40 000 615 000 40,000 30 000 905 000 1,025 411_ Loop Replacement Program 57,441 20,000 20,000 20.000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 177,441 Sign Replacement Program 13.427 7,500 7,500: 7 500 7 500 7 500 7,500 4 000 58 427 Pole Program 47,974 25,000 48,400 25,000 25,000 25,000, 25,000 173,400 221,374 Sound Transit NOV Direct Access 46,623 10,000 5,000 15000'. 61 523 ®Traffic Safety Program 233,791 80,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,0001 40.000 280,000 513,7'91 Traffic Ethic - ' •.ram 250 505 251 900 114,490 75 000 30,000 30.000 30 000 531 300 781 805 lilCBD Bike&Pod.Connections 25,212 50,000 50,000 10,000 590,000 410,000 5,000 1,115,000 1,140,212 Arterial Rehab.Prog. 537,800 195,000 240,000 205,000 349,000 230,000 180,000 1 390 000 1 92 ..,r �� :-: • 1 238 700 1 692 .. _ 2,950 700 3 618 481 ,� Sunset/Duvall Intersection 115,000 381 0N00 111.1111.111111.10111111 381 000 496 000 RR Crossing Safety Prog. 5,198 5,000 5,900 10,000 10,000 30,000 35,198 TOM Proggram 100,670 64,200 64,200 64,200 64,200 64,200 64,200 385,200 485,870 Trans Concurrency 1,784 40,000 10,000 40.000 10,000 10,000 30,000 140,000 141,784 Miesing Links..•• m 36,350 30 000 30 000 30 000 30,000 30.000 30.000 180,000 216 350 ®GtS Needs Assessment. 44,874 35,000 35,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 150,000 194,874 G •.• Corridor St ••. 6,000 35,000 120000- 80000 230000 1,810,000 1,020,000 3295000 3,300,000 Bicycle Routs Dry.Program 24,798 20,000 18A00 18,000 110,000 80,000 80,000 328,000 350.;798 Lake Wash.Bv'Park to Coulon Pk 329,900 79,500 149,100 228,800 555,500 fnteragency Signal Coord. 26,572 12,000 12,000 38,672 Environmental Monhorkrg 223,711 85,000 75,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 285,000'. 608,711 Trans-Valk &Soo,Creek Corr. 7300 5000. 5000 12300 ®WSOOT Coordination Pro.ram 11111111111ME 10 000 10 000 10 000 10 000 10,000 10,000 80,000 42 1%tor the Arts 20,000 50,000 30,000 30,000 50,000 30,000 30,000 220,000 240,000 43 Arterial HOV Program 125,354 10,000 10,000 20,000 145,354 44 Park-Sunset Corridor 7,889 25,009 50,000 390,000 1,691,000 1,059,000 3,215,000 3,222,889 45 Lind Av-SW 16th-SW 43rd 5,000 5,000. 5,000 1,914,000 626,000 2,550,000 2,555,000 46 Benson Rd S/S 31st St : 138,500 61,500 61,500 200,000. *MOW' 47 Logan Av Concrete Panel Repair 460,000 460,000 480.000 4e Canr/7410 S19801 5,000 10.000 20,000 340,E 400,000 10,000 785,000 785,000 4e Trenek Priority Signet System 1,280,315 30.01 30,000 1,310,315 50 Transit Center Video� - 28381 10000 i i 10•k• 36391. Fl 50.000 5,000: 5.000.1111111 810,000 810,000 8/0090 10 000 60,.... 53 Lake Wash.By Slip Plane 629400 10,600 10,600. 640,000 54 Monster Read Bridge 500.000 12,000 12.000 512800 55 SW 7th UMWAve SW 2731S77 26,423 14 300,000 54 Olean Ave NB-kl *Hots, 547,854 1,311,342 2,610,800 4/1 C,870,000. Biel Sources 14,035,$36 7.685,465: 0.7AO700 3.364340 28, •• 55,62/400 58.30!.tee 154. 14,. .+ 179'tS3:t41. Abe„« /O4TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT ATTACHMENT`A' Total Pro act Costs Pravlous 4 Slalom Total TIP Projact Otte Costs 2006 2607 210a 2009 2010 2011 Padod Trial Coat 1 Street0v91100P ogra t 1,003,800 - 065400' 405000 406000 - 405,000 405,000 405000 22700,000 3.773,500, NS a SR10715192711 StlStrnaMr By 358,506 10,000 10,000 10000 10,000 10.000 5,000 55,000 413,596 a ,Straohir> W27015tCornect. 2,491,727 6,369403 1750400 34,174,000 5,246000 48441400 50,532,727,: 4 Urban tea(RUSH) 6,142 6,000 5.000 5,000 5,000 5. 5400 30.000 36,142;? a �rigtam 322,359 20,400 20,400 20,100 20 20,400 20,400 122i400 164,759; r • Rake*A*Corridor 019941 rmprov., 237,,55�2_ 20,000 20000 20000, .• . 20= 20003 120,000 4t%7,652... t Kalmar Av-•4th PI to 8 2#2 10,000- , ' 2107.000 1 0-43= - 2 60000, 6.300.000 6�10.000 a Hari*?maw Tart0914WS-adal ,, 190,000 � •• tt,070400 SAW 15,1474300 15,337000-. a"'PS$ dth Corridor �t 147 - 314,000 304400 41000 6 7 0 3.300403 3 0 12' 1,, 12,5Qb47 to alks.yProgram 316.a32 250,000 '250,000 260,000 250••• 260000. 1300,600 222316,532 11'Rabdar2924 SW 7dt i3o 4th PI 323,454 671;000 1 1,t100000' 3360,030 20400 6;535;000. 11,859,454 1# IS Wash.Roadway prov. 2,050,773 17,007,000 3i �. 16,930000 372319= 34439,773 14 Soul♦!Renton Pra t 306,000 395000 "75•,. 470,000 775,000 14 I4061mprovtmanlsit Renton 72371 30,000 20••• 10,000 10,000 10,000 10.000 00000 162,271 to 274706, 176�0 17 200,000 200000 200000 200,060 1,150 1424.708 is- f111/1691910#AvlE 172.200 227,800„ 227400 400.000 17 'Program 324,711 200,000 200,000 200000 200.000" 25027060 ' 250400 _ 1.300400 1 4.711 1a &Repair 125.534 220000 •40,000 4t0Ott 40.000 40,000 40,000 420 1a M ' ima Potalokeofmet 20`Cd0 710000 _ 5. 4009 Program 33,E 15 ., M 15000- ' =4000 � 20.000 20 20 1 135,r907; - Program 44,200 20000 430 20 00- " . 25,000 25,104 42.. 135.,, 1 ,�0 tra sound 1709 D�<t-A .i 58,9a7 5,000 6,•,� 4 3367 u Zt 1F' 145,351 20000 20,000 00t 4opoo ,000 � 325361 24 Tr+ ��m - 600� 1Gr1 '•' Ii60Qa � �, � 994080 as 080 le tat 6 Pad.Cortrtacdona 742156_ " 60.0�00 .50,000 ' 50•,• 50p00 50,000'-- 300,000 3244956 et Artwial Raltalx.Pros. 388,916 240000 205000 •230.••• 160000 160460_ 1.376,000 1,763,916 26 Otvall Ave NE 1 11t119 2.474 600 447.000 2,0021,800. 4.303210 25 Croaslno Safety Proa 5.162, 5,000 6,00 10,000- 0 0 30, 35a9 a0 TOM Program 11 5 64,200! - 64•'300 64 �S 504.000----. 51 "ram any 40r047 1a000 WOO 10 0J 30.000 10003 10 150 as`3110096 UN%Program 56 30 30000 sa,,. 30,000 160�. ,860 W G 1124aadaA ntnnt 36,t182 36 _ 20�kt $.. _ 135,000. 171,582 00 eStayc 1 34442 20442 ,000 116,16000 1A r.... 31611619 as t.aksvisor.- .` -.s'-,;'Pk 317 ', 84,80l 41,000 - 000 00 543.510'. W'6.0103 t � 1 ,�• Rk.0 :- �� 300000 I.,Rdtlltol'xp •� `- 164 ,,O00 ,; - ,30,003 30,000 429438 .. ,,568866 ' �- 40 /iter � 2,137 1 11 10000 10 10 1 6670. 89137 41 › ` .. 33 -30000 - spa 30400 _� ,* 263,228, 263 4a Artarlal P 127354 1 - ,354 4$ P+Isk +t- 26377. '..300;000, _ - 440,000 466377 44 Old Av 1 6 1243441 5,000 000 1414,000 ,, .' 2445,000 2,560. -, •. 44 69 106- v=1+oattO 2!,015,391, 1,755,400. --2,030420 3 602,000' 0335.400, 8.�.791Noilif 442 � ASt 23A0 225 t63,,,• 44.Loco v sospor 460.1X0 40 - :. . 20a0 3. S,0000; 10,000 400400 !0 IN 770 'as Smoot 94272.910610 Burnett - 610, ` 271'j,COG 810 to'Loa Watar.• sop 45322100 2,400 2,400 640000;. sa,Pu County 2101•14 1666 624 22 2T 563,364 total ,6oa9 1 9 . # 17.at a od 4s 1 �06 a.1 3a724,10a • t4c32.tan tat, Y 179f Id Adepte4/$1/84TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT ATTACHMENT'A' Street Network • South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements (TIP#1-012) • Rainier Avenue—SW 4th Place to SW 7th Street(TIP#4-611) • Grady Way—Main Avenue to West City Limits(TIP#3534) • Lind Avenue S.W.—S.W. 16th Street to S.W. 43rd Street(TIP#4544) • Duvall Ave N.E.—Sunset Boulevard to Renton City Limits(TIP#28) • Mill Avenue South/Carr Road(TIP#4849) • Strander Boulevard—SR-181 to Oakesdale Avenue S.W. (TIP#3) • Sunset Boulevard/Duvall Avenue NE(TIP#2947) • Benson Road South 26th Street to South 31s' Street(TIP#16) • N.E. 3`d/N.E. 4th Corridor Improvements (TIP#49) • Rainier Avenue Corridor Study/Improvements (TIP#76) • Lake Washington Blvd.—Park Avenue North to Coulon Park(TIP#3-736) • Park Avenue North/Sunset Boulevard—North 6th to Duvall Avenue N.E. (TIP#4443) • S.W. 7th Street/Lind Avenue S.W. (TIP #55) • South Renton Neighborhood Improvements(#1213) • N.E. 4th/Hoquiam Avenue N.E. (TIP#1516) Also included are expenditures for study of the SR 169 Corridor(TIP project#11). Included in the Six-Year TIP is the Arterial Circulation Program(TIP#1817), 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#4-415)for development of future TIP projects and grant applications for currently proposed and future TIP projects. Transit • Transit Program: facilities to support regional transit service, local transit service improvements; development of park and ride lots,transit amenities(TIP#85) • Renton Urban Shuttle(RUSH)Program: operation of the shuttle bus service within Renton. (TIP #54) give priority to transit vehicles. (TIP#49) Also,the HOV Chapter improvements identified below will be designed to enhance transit service. HOV th • SR-167/S.W. 27—Street HOV(TIP#2) • Sound Transit HOV Direct Access(TIP#23) • SR-169 HOV—Sunset Blvd.to east City Limits (TIP#445) It should be noted that the expenditure shown for Sound Transit HOV Direct Access (TIP#23) 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#4342), 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. Adepted-44,10444TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT ATTACHMENT'A' Non-Motorized • Benson Road Improvements—South 26th to Main Avenue(TIP# 46) • CBD Bike and Pedestrian Connections(TIP#26) Also included in the proposed Six-Year TIP is the Walkway Program(TIP#110), which will provide funding for sidewalk and handicap curb ramp needs identified in the City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Program. The Bicycle Route Development Program(TIP#3635)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. Implementation of the non-motorized element falls into two categories-walkways/sidewalk and bike facilities. Each of these components are described below. Walkways/Sidewalks Implementation. The implementation procedures for the City's comprehensive walkway/sidewalk program is detailed in the City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study. This report identifies the sidewalk and curb ramp needs within the City. Specific improvements will be prioritized and will respond to the needs of school children,the aged and persons with disabilities, and will support increased use of transit. Bike Facilities Implementation. Bicycle facilities include lanes along roadways and signed bicycle routes. Current funding is provided for the construction of segments of the Lake Washington Loop Trail. Bicycle route designation and signing along City roadways is provided on an as-needed basis by the Transportation Systems Division of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. Project prioritization is determined by the Transportation Systems Division in coordination with the Community Services Department. Funding for bicycle signing is provided through the capital improvement programs and the General Fund operating budgets of the Transportation Systems Division. Signing specifically identified as part of transportation projects will be funded through the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP). Trails Implementation. Many 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,are coordinated with the Transportation Plan. The Long Range,Parks,Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan contains the recommended six-year trails development program. Only projects that are specifically identified as transportation facilities will be included in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP). TDM/CTR • Transportation Demand Management Program: implement Commute Trip Reduction Act requirements, other TDM programs (TIP#34.30) Funding Assessment A 20-year transportation program has been established having an estimated cost of$134 million. This program was the basis for determining an annual funding level of$6.7 million. Assuming this annual funding level can be maintained over the 20-year period(2002-2022), it is reasonably certain that the 20- year transportation program can be implemented. Annual reassessment of transportation needs, continuing Adeptcd '�R, 'r� 4TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT ATTACHMENT'A' 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 r.. the 2022 transportation program can be achieved. The City of Renton's proposed 2005 20102006-2011 Six-Year TIP includes 56 53 individual projects and programs,with a total estimated cost of$179.-1-5-28 million. Of this total cost, approximately$164.2161.6 million is to be expended over the 2005 20102006-2011 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$45-18 million represents expenditures prior to year 20052006. The projected revenues over the six-year period,based on the established$6.7 million annual funding, will total $40.2 million. The TIP identified expenditures of$164.2161.6 million is about $124 121 million more than the projected revenues. Of this $124 121 million, approximately$64-61 million represents the amount of participation anticipated by the State, Sound Transit,King County, neighboring jurisdictions, and private sector contributions on joint projects. As previously discussed,transportation improvement expenditures of other jurisdictions have not been included when establishing the$6.7 million annual funding level. Therefore,the Six-Year TIP expenditures exceed projected revenues by$60 million. In order for projects to be eligible for projected funding, they must be, by law, included in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP). Because it is not possible to know which projects will qualify for funding,the Six-Year TIP includes a cross-section of projects to provide a list of projects that will be eligible for funding from the various revenue sources,when and if, such funds become available. The result is a Six-Year TIP which has expenditures exceeding projected revenues. The challenge for the future will be to secure enough funding for the City of Renton, Cities of Tukwila and Kent,King County, Sound Transit,and the state to implement the improvements to their respective v ,.- facilities included in the Transportation Plan. However, several strategies for acquiring needed funding are evident at this time. They include: • Establish interjurisdictional funding mechanisms, such as payment of mitigation fees to address impacts of growth within adjacent jurisdictions that affect the City of Renton. • Update transportation priorities annually and incorporate in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program. • Continue to work more aggressively with adjacent cities,King County,Washington State Department of Transportation and other agencies to fund their respective improvements in the Transportation Plan,i.e.,through joint projects. • Continue to work with regional agencies to encourage them to find and fund regional solutions for regional transportation problems. Mitigation Process There are new laws and regulations that have tremendous impacts on land use, the need for new or different kinds of transportation projects and programs, and costs and funding of transportation projects. Examples are the Wetlands Management Ordinance, Surface Water Management Ordinance, the Clean Air Act, Commute Trip Reduction Act, Endangered Species Act, and the Growth Management Act. As a result, a transportation mitigation policy and process has been developed as part of the transportation plan. This Adopted 1 rol mITRANSPORTAT[ON ELEM ENT ATTACHMENT'A' AMENDMENT 2006-T-5 - LAND USE ELEMENT UPDATE, RESIDENTIAL POLICIES DESCRIPTION: Policy text amendments are proposed to provide a density exception and mapping policy for existing manufactured home parks in the City's lowest density residential designation, Residential Low Density (RLD). This is a citywide amendment but the change in policy would apply primarily in the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) specifically in the Maplewood Addition Annexation. Policy direction is already established for the manufactured home parks within the existing city limits. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Should the City support preservation of the manufactured home parks in the Maple Valley Highway Corridor? 2. Should the City evaluate land use in the entire corridor as part of this process? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Approve a text amendment to the Low Density Residential designation to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning to be applied to the two existing manufactured home parks in the Maplewood Annexation immediately. Also, consider a larger land use analysis and Comprehensive Plan Amendment in the 2007 work program for the remaining land uses in the Maple Valley Corridor focusing on consideration of Residential Medium Density. ANALYSIS: In June, the State Boundary Review Board expanded the Maplewood Addition annexation to 340 acres along the SR 169 valley floor. At that time, future Renton residents at the Wonderland Mobile Home Park (113 units), requested that the City Council support retention of the affordable housing at this location. A second manufactured home park, Condo Mobile Home Park (95 units), is located farther to the east within the annexation area. The Valley View Mobile Home Park (50 units) was not included within the annexation boundary, but remains within the PAA. The Wonderland Mobile Home Park is an older facility with a mix of singlewide and doublewide units. Most of those units are not movable and many do not meet current certification and code requirements (percentage not known at this time). It is developed on an internal private access loop road with private yards and lot areas. Residents have the opportunity to maintain small yards and have off street parking with either one or two (tandem) spaces available in the side yard. There is approximately a ten percent vacancy rate including both empty units and empty lots. The park includes a community room and outdoor community lawn area. Tenants are interested in purchasing the park. The park is currently H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2006\2006 Text Amendments\2006-T-05 RMH Policies\T-5 RLD RMH Issue Paper.doc affordable housing and is restricted to occupants age 55 and older. The park currently has King County R-12 zoning and is developed at 10.2 dwelling units per gross acre (du/gross vied acre). The Condo Mobile Home Park (name not confirmed) is new and has a lower density of approximately 4.1 du/gross acre, although it also has King County R-12 zoning. In this park, residents have the opportunity to purchase a condominium ownership. The park is developed on a similar private internal road system with private lots. Amendment 2006-T-5 would change the Comprehensive Plan text to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) zoning to be an implementing zone within the Low Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation. This amendment would allow the City Council to consider Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone within the Low Density Residential designation for existing affordable mobile home parks. An expanded analysis of land use in this corridor still needs to be done to determine the best fit between City and County land use designations. Analysis of future capacity and visioning for eventual build-out along this corridor needs to occur once annexation is realized. The proposed text amendment started as a response to residents' request to address the future of the manufactured home park within this annexation area. However, as staff began to review land use in the corridor in greater detail, the larger issue of other land use in this corridor and the consistency between Renton and King County comprehensive planning and zoning emerged as significant. The issue of potential commercial use at the former Aqua Barn site is already being reviewed as part of another 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendment (2006-M- 07). The City participated in rezoning discussions of that site in 1998 when King County reviewed the rezoning application and is on record as supporting a commercial designation at a portion of that site. However, land use in the remainder of the corridor is largely unstudied. To do a thorough analysis and involve property owners and residents, staff will need more time than available now to research and review the issues in this corridor. Manufactured Home Park Issue Retention of the manufactured housing in this corridor could be accomplished in three optional ways: • A map amendment to Single Family Residential: The Single Family designation would allow the RMH zoning. The density of the existing park is now at 10.2 du/gross acre under County regulations. The park would be 10.8 dwelling units per net acre (du/net acre) under City regulations. The park would be non-conforming for density. • A map amendment to Residential Medium Density: The Residential Medium Density designation allows up to 14 du/net acre with a bonus to 18 du/net acre in a wide range of housing types including attached and detached units. Implementing zones include R-14, R-10, and RMH. • A text amendment to the RLD designation allowing the RMH zoning: The proposed amendment would add language allowing additional density for existing manufactured home parks, and specifying that Residential Manufactured Home Park is an implementing zone in this designation. Land Use in the Remainder of the Corridor The development patterns in this corridor approved under the County land use system do not translate readily into the Renton land use classifications. Significant differences include the following items: • The King County Plan allows a wider range of uses and more density than the Renton Plan. • The County zoning system uses gross density rather than net density. While in the Renton system critical areas and roads are deducted from the net developable area and no density credit is allowed for these areas, the County system does allow density credit and clustered development patterns up to 18 du/net acre on the developable portion of a site. • The Renton system specifies use types and differentiates between single-family and multi-family use, whereas the County system allows all residential use types in one zone and only differentiates by density. While the gross density of lands in the corridor is close to the density called for in the Low Density Single Family designation, the net density of development, and the use types are quite different. • Condominium structures and apartments would be non-conforming. • Overall density would be non-conforming. The Renton designation that is the most consistent with existing development is Residential Medium Density. The Medium Density designation would allow all of the existing use types along the corridor as conforming uses. The Low Density Residential designation would only allow the single-family detached uses and the manufactured home park uses (with the proposed amendments). The recent development within this corridor including condominium, apartment, park, and higher single-family uses would be non-conforming under the Low Density Residential designation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed text amendment would resolve the issue of how to preserve the manufactured home park on a short term basis, without changing the existing Low Density Residential comprehensive plan designation. The Comprehensive Plan text amendment meets required finding #1 Title IV 4-9-020 "the request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan"by supporting the vision of a transition between rural and urban uses, and by supporting affordable housing. The existing manufactured home parks in Renton's PAA are located at the edge of the city in portions of the PAA with lower land costs. These areas abut the Rural Designation and in all cases where the City has designated Low Density Residential land use, the areas provide a transition to the rural area. This condition is present along the Maple Valley Highway where the Rural Designation is adjacent to the roadway, and it is also at the "Henderson" property now developed with a manufactured home park along the Sunset Highway adjacent to 148th St. The Residential Low Density policies provide for a transition of uses and densities to the rural area. Manufactured home parks are generally denser than other uses in the Low Density Residential because they are very small living units occurring in a private park configuration. However, they are also a smaller, non-suburban land use that does provide a type of transition to the rural area. Although they have density like multi-family uses, they really are not comparable to multi-family living environments. The units are typical of the older affordable single-family housing often found in these areas. Individual manufactured homes located on acreage are also frequently located in rural areas. These parks do comply with the Objective LU-DD of the Residential Low Density policies in that they provide for a range of lifestyles adjacent to both urban and rural development in areas providing a transition to the rural designations. The lifestyle in this case in a compact community providing affordable housing to individuals who want a small single family detached type of unit in a location adjacent to open space and rural forms of development. ,4140 Objective LU-DD: Provide for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas of the City and Potential Annexation Area constrained by extensive natural features, proving urban separators, and/or providing a transition to rural Designations within King County. The proposed amendment to the purpose statement of the Residential Low Density would acknowledge the role these existing parks have in making a transition to the rural area. "Lands developed with existing manufactured home parks that provide a transition to adjacent Rural Areas and/or are adjacent to critical areas but were established uses in King County prior to annexation may be considered for Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning." The proposed policy amendment to LU-134 is intended to exempt these parks from the low- density limit. Policy LU-134a A density exception to the 4 dwelling unit per acre maximum is allowed for pre-existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation. Upon cessation of the manufactured home park use, these properties should be considered for Residential 4 zoning. The Housing Element also provides policy guidance for low-income housing and for manufactured home parks (the underlined text shown below highlights relevant sections of these policies). The existing parks within the PAA are viable low-income housing for existing residents. If protected through zoning, these units can be maintained and as a result, long term housing opportunities will be expanded (Objective H-E). The parks provide a form of ownership (H-29), and a form of single-family housing. Due to limitations on expansion or redevelopment of parks protected by zoning, preservation of these parks will implement preservation and long-term affordability goals (H-28, H-29, H-33). The location of these parks adjacent to the rural area meets policies for dispersion (H-29). Low Income Housing Policies 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-28. Establish the following sub-targets for affordability to households earning 50 percent or less of county median income, to be counted toward the 20 percent target: 1. Ten percent of new housing units constructed in the City. 2. A number equal to five percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that are given long-term affordability. 3. A number equal to five 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-29. Support proposals for low-income housing for households earning less than 60 percent 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. 5. Long-term affordability. Policy H-33. Encourage preservation, maintenance, and improvements to existing subsidized housing and to market-rate housing that is affordable to low and moderate-income households Objective H-H: Continue to allow manufactured 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: 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 standards. 3. Site planning includes pedestrian amenities, landscaping, and a community facility. ZONING CONCURRENCY: Consideration of Residential Mobile Home Park zoning within the Low Density Residential Designation will occur as a separate zoning action upon annexation, or as a separate rezoning. However, as this proposed amendment is a new policy, none of the sites to be considered will have been considered for this form of zoning prior to an area-wide land use analysis. This situation will facilitate the required finding for rezoning under Title IV 4-9-190. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: This amendment does not change land use capacity. CONCLUSION: *1100 Amending the Comprehensive Plan text to expand the City's ability to protect existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation supports a number of adopted policies and objectives of the City. The larger issue of land use in the Maple Valley corridor needs further review and discussion and should be deferred to the 2007 Comprehensive Plan annual review cycle. At that time, the longer term vision for this newly annexed portion of the city can be considered. In the short term, the proposed policy change will allow the City to consider zoning for the existing parks that will allow their continued maintenance and operation.