HomeMy WebLinkAboutCapitol Improvement Program (1983-1988) II"'
f ++
707
o
AIL
04
CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM
1983 - 1988
City of Renton
CITY OF RENTON
Mayor
Barbara Y. Shinpoch
City Council
Earl H. Clymer, President Randall Rockhill
Robert J. Hughes Richard M. Stredicke
Nancy L. Matthews Thomas W. Trimm
John W. Reed
SIX YEAR
II
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
For The
CITY OF RENTON
1983 - 1988
Adopted
August 1982
i I
6
II
On August 23, 1982, a public meeting of the Renton City Council was held to
consider the proposed 1983-88 Capital Improvement Program and the Mayor's
11 recommended priorities. After discussion, it was MOVED BY COUNCILMAN
TRIMM, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN MATHEWS, THAT COUNCIL
ACCEPT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AS PRESENTED, WITH
THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DESIGNATION OF CBD FOR SANITARY
SEWER PROJECTS WILL BE CHANGED TO COMMERCIAL AREA. MOTION
CARRIED.
* * * * - * * * * * * *
�I III ,
� I
II
1 This document was produced for the Mayor's Office by the Policy Development
Department with the assistance of other City departments.
PARTICIPATING STAFF
Mayor's Office
Michael W. Pamess
I Policy Development Department -
David R. Clemens, Director
Gene N. Williams
Willis V. Roberts
Carolynne F. Lombard
. I I .
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
! I,
Pagg
SECTION I: TAX SUPPORTED FUNDS
Funding Sources
Mayor's Recommendation 3
Description of the Mayor's Recommendation 5
Departmental Project Analysis 9
SECTION II: SEWER FUND PROJECTS
I �
Mayor's Recommendation 50
Departmental Project Analysis 51
SECTION III: WATER FUND PROJECTS
Mayor's Recommendation 62
Departmental Project Analysis 63
SECTION IV: AIRPORT FUND PROJECTS
Mayor's Recommendation 76
Departmental Project Analysis 71
APPENDIX 1: SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM:
II
•
I,'
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING
The purpose of the Six Year Capital Improvement Program is to develop a long range
orderly schedule for major public improvements within the City. Capital improvement
programming is a continuing process, with periodic review and revision.
The Capital Improvement Program provides the City Council and administration with a
long range view of necessary physical improvements and a means of coordinating
capital projects with the annual operating budget. This allows for optimum use of
personnel, equipment, debt capacity, and revenue.
Other benefits of capital improvement programming include the ability to schedule
purchases of land or equipment so that costs are favorable and opportunities re not
lost; the ability to take better advantage of federal and state grants or matching funds;
a mechanism to avoid hasty decisions that may result in unnecessary public
expenditures; and a stabilized program so that all City departments and other public
' agencies are well informed and may plan accordingly.
The long term scheduling of public improvements is determined by establishing priorities
1 based on the need or importance of such improvements, and on the present and _
anticipated ability of the City to fund the improvements. The priorities of the Capital
Improvement Program should also be consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive
Plan, and should become a primary means of implementing the public aspects of the
Plan.
RECENT HISTORY OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The City of Renton has been successful in implementing its Six Year Capital
Improvement Program through the years. Representative high priority projects that
have been accomplished in recent years include:
Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Development
Cedar River Trail Acquisition
New Computer System
Liberty Park Community Building
Talbot Hill Reservoir
Earlington Park Development
Fire Station #13
Fire Station #11
Burnett Linear Park
Senior Center
Cedar River Trail Development
These projects involved over $17,000,000 of federal, state and local funds! The
magnitude of these sums underscores the value of a clear and logical capital
improvement program.
III
GUIDE TO 1983 - 1988 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
•
The Six Year Capital Improvement Program is generally separated into two categories.
First, projects from the Tax Supported Funds such as the Current, Park, and Library
Funds are separated from the Enterprise Funds which include the Water and utilities
Funds and the Airport Fund. Projects have been separated into these categoriesldUe to
the distinctions in funding available. The Tax Supported Funds rely heavily upon the
property, sales, and utility taxes while the Enterprise Funds rely on user charges for
direct services provided, and various user and connection fees.
For ease of reference, the presently adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement
Program has been included as the last section of this document. Thus all C pital
Improvement Projects proposed by the City for the six year period between 1983 and
1988 have been compiled within this document.
The following four sections contain the Mayor's recommendations and descriptio s of
each of the projects for the Tax Supported Funds, Airport Fund, Sewer Fund and Water
Fund.
i li
i I
(,-
,
,
••%.:•:•:, 1
••••••••:•:•:::::::::::.....f. ,
••f••••.:•:.::::::::::::::,w,.:::::::::::MEN:::Ngi ii::: .
4:•:•:•::::::::i*:::;::::::::::.:::::::::.....:.4..: ::i:::iK*iiiiM:i:i *i::iii:i!
'..‘ M::::::::::::::::.::::::.%•:%:::::::::::::::::::::t:::::::.::::.:.::::.x.::::.:.::::.:.:.*:.:.::1:.
/
:::•:*::::::*:'::::i:.""‘" ::::::•::::::-::::•::*.;:::::::::::::::::::::*:::::;:::::**::: ::;:.
.:t::•:•:•:::::::•:•:::`c.::•:•:•::•:•:•:.:•::::.>:x.::::.:•::::.:•::::.:•::::.:•::::.:•::::.;;;.:
1:::•::::::::•:::::.::::•:>:•:::::•:•::::.•::•:•:•:.•:•::•:•:•::•:•:•::•:•:•::•:•:•::.:•:•::.:•:•::.:. 1
:•:•:::•:•:*:::•:•::•:•::.'•::::•:•::::•:•::•:•:::.:::::•:•::::•::::::•:•::::•::::::•::::::::::::.::: 1
.:•::•:•:•::::•:•::::•::::•:::%:•:::::•:::::::::•14::••:•::::.::::.:.::::::.::::.;::::.:.::.:::.::::.:
rI.
11111111
. .. :.:.:%:•:....:•:.:..:•:.::...•::.:•;,•::.:•::.:.::::.:. •.:.:...:::.:.:...,....:.:.:„....::.:.:.:
.:.:.::•:.:.::•:.:::N.:4:..x.::.:.-...................x:.:.:.:•..„.:.::::.:.::::.:.:::: 1
:•:.::.:.:.::.:.:-.. ::::•:••• ::::.:....:-.-:-..:..........:•:.::::•:••....::::•:.::::•:•::::.:.::::.:• 1
:::::::::*•:*:.:*::*::. :*i**:,••:...*::::•:•::.....:::::::::0*i**::::*:* 1
I
0
7 0 7 iii:::::::iii4: :.iiAiiii,::::4:,::.:!:.::i:.ii:::::!1::::1iig,:::Di'i:K:':::'•
,
0 7 ..i.::igiiIi::iiiieiiaii::::iiig..........:.:i:i:::.:.:-:•:ii.i.i.iiii.iiiii.:1.:::::;ii.i:i.i:.i:i:i:::: ,
,
••••••:•:Ii•i‘li:iii:i:: i:iiiii:i:::::iii::%iliwiiilii::ii::,:216,,,. ......:.:e. ::.::::ii4
,
..i:iiiiiiii:i:: ::iiiii:igl......:.....:.:...-i• .„,„„,.,,..77:,z7:::iii: iii:::::
ii:i:Ki,i;i;i:i:::i:i*iiiili:i•ii:i:::i::.:iiii::: :*i:ii:i:::i ::•.i::::::::::::::::ii:Iiii?, :::::i:Kiii:::ii::imiiiiiiiii :::::::::::i:::::4ii::::::::::iiiiiialimiii:i:i
..:-:.::::::i*::: iii:igi:•.::::-:.::iiiiiiii::iiii:i:iiiiiiii:ii::::•••••viiiiiiiii:i iiiiiiii::::::i:iiiii:iiiiii:K:iiiiiii::::::iiiiiii:i:iiiii:igliiiiiim:ii
: .. ::.::•:.:: :0;:::: :::::1:11.
::,.i.'•.&: ::i:: :::•:ii:::::::: :: :::::::::
..:::::i:i:i:::*i::::.::::::
......
........x....x...:.:..x.x......x..:.:.:
::::.::::::::::::::: •:.::::..........-.......-.....:-........-:, ....:......: ...:......x....:... .......:......:......:.....
%••••••-%%•4::.:.::.:.::.:.:::::::::::...::::::::::::::::::::.:::: .:.... •:::::::::::: .::.:.::::.:.::::.:..:.x.x........... -•
.::Ki:::::::: ::ii::-::.i:Iii ::?:i:i:.:::.:::i::::i::ii::::; ii::i* ....ii....:ii.:.. .ii:_::
ii;::::.:.:„..........
!!!!!!!!*!::::i.:::::: :i:iii:*iiii:1:i:i.:* :::i:::..:::::.:.:.:..i.:.:.:''''''::i:i:iK:ii:i:.:ii:i::*:::::::.:.::.....
: 1
,
)
,
1
I .I Tax Supported
Funds .
,
(1)
.
_
,
.
i
FUNDING SOURCES
Com.uted as of 6/1/82:
Bonding Capacity - Total City Property Value = $1,994,;5.6,518
1. Inde tedness for General Purposes - without a
vot- of the people:
Legal limit: 3/4 of 1% on property value $ 14;958,799
1 Installment Notes & Contracts $ 605,113
.0. Bond liabilities 3,250,000
ess redemption fund assets 88,277
:xcess of liabilities over assets $3,766,836
Tot-1 Net General Indebtedness $ 3;766,836
Margin of Indebtedness Still Available $ 11,191,963
i
2. Indebtedness for General Purposes - with
3/5th vote of the people:
Legal limit: 2i% on property value $ 49;,862,663
1
Ind-btedness incurred -0-
Net general indebtedness from Section 1 above $ 3,766,836
1
Marvin of indebtedness still available $ 46,095,827
1
3. Ind-btedness for Utility Purposes - with
3/5 vote of the people:
Leg=1 limit: 5% on property value $ 99,725,326
1
Ind-btedness incurred -0-
Total indebtedness from Sections 1, 2 and 3 $ 3,''66,836
Margin of indebtedness still available $ 95,958,490
4. IIn•ebtedness for Open Space and Park Facilities -
:wi■h a 3/5th vote of the people:
!Le•al limit: 7i% on property value $ 149,587,989
Indebtedness incurred $7,680,000
Less redemption fund assets 99,279
Excess of liabilities over assets $7,580,721
Total Net Open Space and Park Indebtedness $ 7,;580,721
To al indebtedness from Sections 1, 2, 3 and 4 $ 11,347,557
Ma gin of indebtedness still available $ 138,240,432
(2)
I
1
d
1
1 MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
1
Project Total Cost Potential
Description Annual Funding
Priority. I & Location Acquisition Improvements 0 & M Sources* 1
#1 Maintenance Shop $3,452,000 Unknown (CurrentbJ Funded)
(p.14) I Facilities (Adjacent '
to County Shops) '__1
II
#2 -leather Downs Park $240,000 $ 1,000 Park Acquisition Fund
(p.16) Acquisition i__
#3 Renton High School $150,000 $10,000 Community Facilities Fund
(p.18) Field Reconstruction IAIC
Renton School District
II
#4 'Main Public Library $660,270 $13,750
(p.38) AI!ddition & Renovation
#5 Cedar River Park $4,100,000 $200,000 Pro—Parks Bond Issue
1
B
(p.17) Community Center
#6 N. 3rd Street $250,000 $825
(p.40) 1 & Sun
set Blvd. I
Intersection
II Improvements
I
#7 1 5. 7th Street $100,000
(p.43) & Rainier Avenue S. '-
1 Intersection
Improvements J
#8 I Construct $180,000 $550,000 $460,000
(p.34) Fire Station #14
In Kennydale
#9 Old Shop Site $82,300 $6,000 H/CD Block Grant
(p.19) I Redevelopment
I
* Only revenue sources other than general Funds, General Obligation Bonds, Councilmanic Bonds and
Revenue Shl';ring are indicated.
II , 1
I I -
I
(3).
1
i
I '
MAYORS RECOMMENDATION (Continued)
Project Total Cost Potent'1l
Description Annual Funding
Priority & Location Acquisition Improvements 0 & M Sources*
#10 I E try Point Street $100,000 $5,000
(p.10) Enhancement
I ,
#11 Street Lighting $60,000 $10,000
(p.44) Modification in
the CBD
#12 S-nior Housing and $230,450 $266,000 $4,000 H/CD Block Grant
(p.20) P-destrian Corridor
#13 .ignal Controller $200,000 $14,025
(p.41) Modernizations
#14 Relocation of $700,000 $400,000
(p.35) ire Station #12
in Highlands
#15 Sie ra Heights/Glencoe $240,000 $2,000 Park Acquisition Fund
(p.22) -ark Acquisition
I I
I ;
* Only revenue sources other than General Funds, General Obligation Bonds, Councilmanic Bonds and
Revenue Sharing are indicated.
(4)
DESCRIPTION OF THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
I - I
II 1. Maintenance Shop Facilities (Relocation)
Relocation of City maintenance operations includes the construction of new offices,
shops, garage, storage and vehicle parking facilities. These new facilities will be
located off Monroe Avenue N.E. next to the King County Shop site. Operation of
Maintenance Administration, Street / Storm Sewer / Sanitary Sewer / Water System
Maintenance, Central Garage, Equipment Rental, Sign & Paint, Survey, and Signal /
Communications crews, and the Carpentry Shop will be located in the new facilities.
The construction of new shop facilities is currently funded.
2. Heather Downs Neighborhood Park Acquisition
This project involves the acquisition of 7 to 10 acres of land for a future neighborhood
park in the Heather Downs area. Renton's Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan
-- adopted in 1978 -- identified this project as the number one acquisition priority for
the City.
A neighborhood park would serve residents within about a one-half mile radius. In
I 1980, over 1300 people resided in the Heather Downs neighborhood. Since that time
I additional multiple family and single family housing has been completed in the area.
More residential growth is planned. Renton's adopted recreation standards is 10� acres
of neighborhood park space per 1000 inhabitants. Based upon this standard, the City's
Comprehensive Park Plan, the escalating cost of land, and the diminishing choices for
potential sites in the area, timely acquisition of the Heather Downs Neighborhood Park
is a high priority.
Total estimated cost of this project is about $240,000, with minimal maintenance costs
prior to development.
3. Renton Hiq_h School Field Reconstruction
Redevelopment of a nine acre site adjacent to Renton High School is currently in
progress. The City and Renton School District are working closely together to improve
the facility and maintain it. Active recreation programs, such as football, soccer,
baseball, softball and jogging, will make use of the site. Active sports participants of all
ages from throughout the City will benefit from this project.
I �
Prior public ownership of the land and co-management of the facility will minimize cost.
Total cost is estimated at $150,000. A portion of this is currently budgeted.
4. Main Public Library Addition and Renovation i
This project will provide a second floor addition to the Main Library, as well as improve
building safety, security and energy conservation and institute an automated circulation system. The 3,000 square foot addition will increase book shelving capacity for the
growing collection. Building renovation will include new carpeting, replacement
equipment and furniture, and necessary repairs. Energy conservation measures are
intended to reduce future heating and cooling costs. Automated circulation andl book
security systems will improve service to the public, increase security of materials and
reduce additional staff needs.
Estimated cost of this project is $660,000. Maintenance costs would be about $13,750
per year.
(5)
5. Cedar River Park Community Center
This multi-purpose center would provide classrooms, craft rooms and equipment; group
kitchen and recreational facilities for the entire community. Existing cultural and visual
arts and crafts facilities must be expanded to accommodate demand for these activities.
A gymnasium for basketball and volleyball and racquetball/handball courts would also
be included. This project was recommended in the City's adopted Comprehensive 'ark
and Recreation Plan.
The total estimated cost of the community center is about $4,100,000. ;Yearly
operations and maintenance would be about $200,000, partly self-generated. This
project is currently included in the proposed Pro-Parks bond issue.
6. North 3rd Street & Sunset Blvd. Intersection Improvements
I i
The intersection of N. 3rd Street and Sunset Blvd. is one of the principal vehicular
traffic junctions in the City of Renton. Much traffic in and out of Boeing, down/own
Renton, 1-405 and the N.E. 4th corridor passes through this intersection. Congestion is
a major problem. During the afternoon peak period, the intersection is operating at full
capacity. This project involves improved signalization, resurfacing, channelizatior , as
well as curbs, gutters, sidewalks and street lighting. These improvements will increase
the efficiency and safety of this intersection.
Estimated cost of this project is $250,000.
7. South 7th Street and Rainier Avenue S. Intersection Improvements
The intersection at S. 7th and Rainier Avenue S. is one of the busiest in the city rand,
with anticipated industrial and commercial growth in the area and the completion of SR
515, more congestion is probable. This project would channelize and widen approaches
to the intersection and modify signalization. Enhanced capacity and safety will result
from these improvements.
The project is estimated to cost $100,000.
8. Construction of Fire Station #14 in Kennydale
Site acquisition and construction of a new fire station in Kennydale is necessary to
improve emergency response time and to serve new development in the area. Current
response time to much of Kennydale is in the range of six to eight minutes. IA new
station in the vicinity of N.E. 30th and 1-405 would lower this time to three to four
minutes.
A new fire station would provide primary response to more than 1,300 households and
up to 3,500 people. In conjunction with the relocation of Station #12 to the east and
with new development proposed for the area (specifically the Port Quendall project),
the new station would serve upwards of 5,000 residents. Early stages of the Port
Quendall Project will result in about 600 new housing units and 1,200 people. High
value commercial and office space -- some located in buildings up to twenty I stpries
high -- is also a major part of this development. Both the Northeast R nton
Comprehensive Plan and the Fire Station Location Study support construction of,a new
fire station.
Proposed fire apparatus for Station #14 includes a pumper, ladder truck and aid car.
Total estimated cost of this project is $730,000 with annual operations and mainten nce
of about $460,000.
(6)
9. Old Shop Site Redevelopment
City maintenance shop facilities, currently located adjacent to the Senior Center at the
Cedar River, will be moved to the Renton Highlands in 1983. Relocation will allow
re-use of the Cedar River property for other purposes. This project involves
redevelopment of the site for additional Senior Center parking and a community
I pea-patch. Existing parking at the Senior Center is inadequate, especially at midday.
I The remainder of the property will be converted to a pea-patch, until such timle as a
long term use is determined for the property. Demolition of the existing sheds and
gravel bin will improve the appearance of the site, as well as providing badly needed
parking and a unique recreational experience.
Costs of this project are estimated at $82,300, with $6,000 per year maintenance.
Some funds are available through the Block Grant program.
10. Entry Point Street Enhancement
This project would provide signs and landscaping at six points along major streets
entering the City of Renton. The signs would welcome travellers and commuters to the
city and thank them for their visit. Purposes of the project are to enhance the City's
image, give definition to the City's boundaries, and improve unsightly roadsides. This
project would hopefully be accomplished in conjunction with other street improvements.
If six entry points are enhanced at a cost of $10,000 - $20,000 each, total costs of this
project would be about $100,000.
11 11. Street Lighting Modification in the CBD
This project involves the elimination of 54 unnecessary street lights in the Central
Business District, and installing smaller lamps and painting the remaining street lights.
Existing lighting is far in excess of minimum lighting standards and is expensive to i '
I operate. Replacing and upgrading street lights in the CBD will provide more uniform
lighting at a substantial reduction in maintenance and operation costs.
Total costs of this project are estimated at $60,000.
12. Senior Housing and Pedestrian Corridor
This project is designed to provide additional senior housing near downtown and to link
, the Cedar River Trail and Senior Center with the Central Business District. The site is
the abandoned Burlington Northern railroad right-of-way between Burnett and Logan
Avenues. The project involves acquisition of the site, development of the pedestrian
corridor to downtown and site preparation for the housing structure. Housing
construction would be separately financed. The City of Renton, King County and the
Renton Housing Authority would participate in the project.
Total cost of the project is about $500,000. Block Grant funds ($230,450) to purchase
the land have already been secured.
(7)
II -
13. Signal Controller Modernizations
ecause of age and the difficulty of obtaining replacement parts, a number of ,traffic r;
ignal controllers are obsolete and need replacing. This project would upgrade.signal
ontrols at seven intersections along N.E. Sunset Blvd., four intersections on N. 4th .c
treet, three on N. 3rd Street, and at three other locations.
Estimated cost is $200,000, with about $14,000 yearly maintenance.
14. Relocation of Fire Station #12
This project involves the relocation of existing Fire Station #12 (Highlands) eastward to 'la,
he vicinity of Sunset Blvd. N.E. and Union Avenue N.E. When Fire Station #114 is rtirl.
onstructed in Kennydale, Station #12 should be moved to provide improved fire vid
rotection and emergency response time to the developing areas of the East, Re ton ;f
lateau. The existing station is in need of major repairs and, because it was
onstructed in 1943, is located to serve the central Highlands area. New residential 1.
rnd commercial development on the north and east fringes of the city necessitate
elocation to balance response times. This project is consistent with the Northeast di
rent0n
Comprehensive Plan and the Fire Station Location Study.
•
Total estimated cost is $1,100,000, with minimal increases in annual operations costs. pF:
5. Sierra Heights/Glencoe Neighborhood Park Acquisition
he Sierra Heights/Glencoe area of Renton is not currently served by neighborhood y it
ecreational facilities. Only a small tot lot exists in this heavily developed area. This !o
roject would acquire 8 to 10 acres for future development of a neighborhood park.
his neighborhood supports about 1800 City residents and a total of 3300 people in both 3t<':
incorporated and unincorporated areas. Renton park standards suggest 10 acres of
neighborhood recreation per 1000 inhabitants. By this standard, recreation needs are e�
of being met. Further, acquisition of a park in this area is recommended as the second ;c°
ighest priority in the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan.
ecause a major portion of the neighborhood lies outside City jurisdiction, acq k isition di.
•nd development could be shared with King County and/or the school district.: ring hcli
ounty owns a small undeveloped site in the area. Estimated cost of park acquisition is pp
240,000.
1
•
I a
(8)
II
1
DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARIES OF ALL. PROJECTS
JOINT PROJECTS
I f
Page
1. Entry Point Street Enhancement 10
2. Lake Washington Boulevard Bike Lanes 11
3. Maple Valley Railroad Tracks Trail 12
il
III
4. Wetlands Acquisition 13
•
5. Maintenance Shop Facilities Relocation 14
•
II
(9) �. _
I ,
FINAL PRIORITY #
'JOI T MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # 10
DEP RTMFNT! POLICY DEVELOPMENT/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 1
PRO ECT TITLE: Entry Point Street Enhancement
PRO ECT DESCRIPTION:
Provide for architecturally enhanced entry points including landscaping and signs at
six (6) key corridors.
ESTI ATED COSTS: LAND$ minimal
IMPROVEMENTS$ 10-20,000 per entry
TOTAL $ 100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000
FINA CING 1) 1/2 cent gas tax
OPTI•NS:
2) General Revenues
3) Developer Improvement
4) L.I.D.
BAC GROUND:
!The City has a number of entry points/corridors with minimal, if any, identification and
'bea tification. This proposal will provide for installation of landscaping and signing
;of ey locations to enhance the City's image with the travelling public. Enhancement
'wou d be constructed with concurrent street improvements.
1
POT NTIAL SITE:
1) Rainier Avenue North at airport entry
12) Sunset Boulevard North at FAI-405
3) Maple Valley Highway at Maplewood Roadside Park
,4) Rainier Avenue South at FAI-405
15) Grady Way S.W. at Valley Parkway
6) Sunset Boulevard S.W. at Powell S.W.
FACT•RS 1) Each site serves in excess of 20,000 vehicle trips per day.
SUPP KING
PRO ECT: (Who 2) Enhances the community's "image" at minimal cost.
or wh-t programs
are s-rved? Why 3) If combined with development, improvements will further enhance the
this p oject?) esthetic value.
4) Supports 6-year T.I.P. project: #1, #6, #10, #18.
5) 1
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTE-NATIVES 1) No action - none $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indi4te which 2) Less locations - items 2, 3 $ 20-80,000 $ 0-4,000
supporting factors
Can b- met.) 3)
4) $ $
5) $ $
(10)
u
FINAL PRIORITY#
JOINT MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION#
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS/POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 2 -
PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washington Boulevard Bike Lanes
P IIIOJECT DESCRIPTION:
1
Bike lanes on road shoulder for 3.9 miles from FAI-405 to Park Avenue.
,
E TIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 100.000
TOTAL$100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000
F ANCING 1) 1/2 Cent Gas Tax
01 TIONS:
2) H/CD Block Grant
3) L.I.D.
4) --
1
B CKGROUIVD:
'he Lake Washington Boulevard Bikeway is one of five regional links that joins a total
icycle network in South King County. It is the major link between bicycle facilities in
ellevue and those in Renton and South King County. The route is a part of Renton's
Iicycle plan and has been identified in the King County General Bicycle Plan: Focus
990, and the King County Urban Trails Plan.
The Lake Washington Boulevard Bikeway is located on the eastern shore of Lake
PeTENTIAL SITE: Washington between the central business district and the Kennydale neighbor-
F
oodCTORS to the north. It is approximately 3.9 miles in length and extends from the intersection
°if Riverside Drive and Bronson Way to the May Creek Interchange of FAI-405 at N.E. 44th Street.
he route will follow Park Avenue North to 5th Street and then will turn east to Garden Ave-
ue. It will then head in a northerly direction until linking with Lake Washington Boulevard.
he route will then follow this course until reaching its terminus at N.E. 44th Street.
i
1) Alternative locations will require land acquisition in fee or by ease-
SiPP0FTING ment with the potential cost exceeding $8 per foot. The only alterna-
1
P, OJECT: (Who 2) tive routes parallel to Lake Washington Boulevard are the Burlington
ol,whatprograms Northern railroad tracks (possible easement) and FAI-405.
are served? Why 3)
,
t Is project?) I '
1 4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M'
- possible hazard on the current
•LTERNATIVES 1) No project $ 0 $ 0
NO THIS PROJECT: underdevel oped street.
(ndicate which 2) BN railroad - possible railroad opposition. $125,000 $ 5,0001
supporting factors
d n be met.) 3) Freeway I-405 - safety related considerations. $100,000 $ 0 1
4) $ $
5) $ $
1 (11)
I FINAL PRIORITY #
1JOI T MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION#
DEP RTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS/POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 3
i
PRO�ECT TITLE: Maple Valley Rail road Tracks Trail
PRO ECT DESCRIPTION:
'Con.truction of the soon to be abandoned Maple Valley railroad tracks to a multipurpose ,
sped-strian and bicycle trail.
ESTI ATED COSTS: LAND$ 100,000 1
IMPROVEMENTS$ 200,000
TOTAL 300.000 '
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000
FINA CING 1) 1/2 Cent Gas Tax
OPTI•NS:
2) H/CD Block Grant
3) IAC Grant
1
4) Joint King County/WSDOT Project
BACKGROUND: '
I The existing tracks are being considered for abandoment by the Burlington Railroad. These
will be available from Renton to Lake Wilderness. City of Renton portion to S.E. 140th
; Street would make an unique Burke-Gilman type multipurpose trail along the Cedar River.
POT=NTIALSITE: Burlington Northern Railroad tracks along Cedar River
FACTORS 1) Critical bicycle/pedestrian link to County park.
, ;SUP ORTING
PR JECT: (Who 2) Access improved to City greenbelts.
for w at programs
fare erved? Why 3) Major public recreational project.
'this roject?)
4)
5)
i
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALT RNATIVES 1) No project - continued use of Maple $ 0 $ 0
TO HIS PROJECT: Val 1 ey Highway.
'i(Indicate which 2) Al ternate off-tracks right-of-way more $ 0 $ 0 '
sup.ortingfactors expensive.
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $ 1
5) $ $
(12)
i
FINAL PRIORITY a
JO NNT MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a — .
DE IARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION/POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a '
PR JECT TITLE: WETLANDS ACQUISITION
PR JECT DESCRIPTION: .
Acquisition of 40-80 acres of Wetlands in the Renton area.
E:i 'MATED COSTS: LAND$ 800.000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - o - •
TOTAL $ 800.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 10.000 undeveloped '
FIN1iNCING 1) City - no funds currently budgeted. ,
OPTIONS: '
2) Proposed County-wide Bond Issue (opportunity fund)
3) Local Bond Issue
4) IAC - Potential for 50-75% funding (current chance of submitting
successful grant very bleak)
' I
EAC GROUND:
The need to acquire Wetlands as an integral part of the Park system is supported by
!the City's Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan and Renton Wetlands Study.
POT:NTIAL SITE: 4
. East and West of Valley Freeway. —.
F.�C ORS 1)Acquisition at this time would preserve rapidly vanishing Wetland areas as
SUP IIORTING well as negate inflationary trends in land values.
PRO ECT: (Who 2)Wetlands support a number of wildlife species as well as unique plant life.
or w at programs Dwindling numbers of natural areas in the urban environment mandate acqufsi-
aie s rved? Why tion now or loss of these species in this area. _.
this oject?)
3)Acquisition could aid efforts in controlling drainage problems associated
with this area.
II
1 I ,
COST: CAPITAL O&M
!AI.TE NATIVES 1) Acquire only the most valuable sites at $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT: this time.
(ir.dicte which 2) Work with King County and the State to $ - 0, - $ - e -
suppc tang factors acquire identified areas.
can •e met.) 3) Work with developers to preserve areas $ - 0 - $ - 0 - ,---1
under development pressure. . 1
4) Continue to work with King County, the Soil $ .- 0 - $ - 0 - '
Conservation Service, and neighboring suburban
•cities on the P-1 channel project or the various •
alternatives being suggested.
(13) I
FINAL PRIORITY #
JOINT MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # ll
DE-ARTMENT: Public Works - Street/Water/Sewer DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # —
I '
PR*JECT TITLE: Maintenance Shop Facilities
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
' Construction of new maintenance shop facilities on recently purchased site south of
N.E. 4th Street adjacent to King County shops.
ES (MATED COSTS: LAND $ -0-
IMPROVEMENTS $3,452,000
TOTAL$3,452,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Unknown
I I 'I Fl ANCING 1) "316 Fund" - $ .632,000
O-TIONS:
2) Utility Bond Funds - $ 320,000
3) Interest Income, etc. - $ 200,000
4) Councilmanic Bonds - $2,300,000
$3,452,000 Total
B•CKGROUND:
Ne offices, shops, garage, storage and vehicle parking facilities to be built on site'
,f purchased from King County - south of NE 4th Street and east of Monroe Ave. NE, adjacent)
to the new County Shops. Will house Maintenance Administration; Street/Storm Sewer/Sanitary'
!j Se er/Water System Maintenance crews plus Central Garage/Equipment Rental, Sign and Paint
c ew, Carpentry Shop, Survey Crew and Signal/Communications crew. Document storage will )
bz included together with space for Police Department evidence storage and vehicle searches.
'I P•TENTIAL SITE:
Aijacent to County Shops south of N.E. 4th Street. Land already purchased. I
I 1 'j F CTORS 1) Current shop facilities are outdated and undersized.
, S PPORTING
P OJECT:(Who 2) New and expanded offices, garages, shops, storage and parking
o what programs facilities will improve all maintenance operations in the City.
a e served? Why 3) All maintenance operations can be placed together in a- central
t Is-project?) location.
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
LTERNATIVES 1) Continue to use existing shops with Water $ $
T THIS PROJECT: Maintenance in "temporary" leased property.
''I (ndicate which 2) Continue to use existing shops but purchase $ $
sj,pporting factors or construct building for Water Maintenance.
dddan be met.) 3) Downgrade the proposed New Facilities in size ~ $ $
and features.
li 4)
5) $ S
I I
(14)
I y I
I I
PARK AND RECREATION PROJECTS
(In Department Priority) '11 '
Page
1. Heather Downs Neighborhood Park Acquisition 16
2. Cedar River Park Community Center 17
3. Renton High School Field Reconstruction 18
4. Old Shop Site Redevelopment 119
1 5. Senior Housing and Pedestrian Corridor 20
6. Highlands Administration Building Renovation 21
7. • Sierra Heights/Glencoe Neighborhood Park Acquisition 22
8. Cedar River Trail Development 23
9. Golf Course Acquisition 24
10. Sports Park Acquisition 25
11. Heather Downs Neighborhood Park Development 26
I 12. Talbot Hill/Springbrook Neighborhood Park Acquisition 217
1113. East Kennydale Neighborhood Park Acquisition 2I
l 14. Mothers Park Recreation Center Renovation 29
1 15. Tiffany Park/Benson Hill Neighborhood Park Acquisition 30
16. Cushion Turf Field 31
•
1 �
it I
I1
II
(15) 4
1
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
I,. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a 2
DEPA TMENT: PArrys_k RFrRF-AT OM DEPARTMENT PRIORITY n 1 -
PROJ CT TITLE: HPAthPr Downs_Neighborhood Park Acauisition 7-10 Acres
PROJ CT DESCRIPTION:
cquisition of a neighborhood park in the Heather Downs area of Renton.
I
ESTIM TED COSTS: LAND$ 24ft ono 1
IMPROVEMENTS$ - 0 -
I TOTAL$ 240.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 1.000 undeveloped
35,000 developed
FINA CING 1) Park Acquisition Fund #1689 I I
OPTIeNS:
1 2) Use agreement with City Water Utility for use of existing utility land'
' on Union Avenue.
3)
4)
,
BACK ROUND: I
;The acquisition of this neighborhood park site was identified in the City of Renton's ' '
-- : Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan adopted by the City Council in March, 1978. Develo'pm nt
of he park site would be mandated in the not to distant future as development of the area is
trap dly occurring.
1
DOTE' TIAL SITE:
Hea her Downs area of Renton (Neighborhood #8 - City of Renton Comprehensive Park and 1
Rec eation Plan).
d • 1
. FACTORS
SUPP•RTING 1)Renton citizens in the Heather Downs area would directly benefit from
this park. 1
PRO ECT:(Who 2)This Park is designated as the number one acquisition priority in the '
Or wh-tprograms City's Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan.
are s=rved?Why •3)Cost of land in this area is escalating rapidly while the number of viabl
this p oJect?) potential sites is rapidly vani?king. Acquisition at this time would be
I fiscally prudent and would insure the City's ability to provide future!
park services.
I 4)Development of this area has proceeded rapidly in recent years mandating
provision of local park services at a neighborhood level.
i
COST: CAPITAL O&M
A-- LTE-NATIVES 1)No action (service area with existing $ - 0 - $ - 0' -1
• TO I IS PROJECT: facilities at Kiwanis Park)
(Indic=fey/Filch 2)Purchase smaller site (5 acres) $125,000 acq $1,000 undev.
aupp•rting factors
can •e met.) 3) Initiate trade/purchase agreement with $ 50,000 acq $1,00,0 undev.
City Utility. - 20,000 deVI
4) Initiate joint use agreement with City $ - 0 - acq $1,0010 undev.
-- • Utility. 20,000 deli,.
5) Utilize existing City owned site (2.2 acres) $ - 0 - acq. $ 500 undev.
10,000 de .
I
(16) I 1
1 1
• I
I i
FINAL PRIORITY u
-cr--
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION rr 5
D'PARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 2
111 1
P III OJECT TITLE: CEDAR RIVER PARK COMMUNITY CENTER
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Development of a Community Recreation Center in Cedar River Park.
E TIMATED COSTS: LAND $ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS $4,100,000
TOTAL $4,100,000 •
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 200,000 (up to 40% could be financed by
revenue collected at the Center)
FIII�ANCING 1) Proposed PRO-PARKS County Bond Issue.
OPTIONS:
2) City Funding - G.O. Bonds.
3)
II
4)
BACKGROUND:
1
Need for this facility is established in the City of Renton Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan. Existing facilities are outdated and need major renovation.
P ENTIAL SITE: •
Cedar River Park
FAo.TORS 1) All facets of the Renton Community should benefit from this project as
SU 1P ORTING facilities included have community-wide scope and interest. •
PR JECT: (Who 2) This project has been identified as a high priority in the City's
or hat programs Comprehensive Park Plan and the Six Year C.I.P..
arelserved? Why 3) Current facilities are outdated and in need of major renovation.
thisiproject?)
4) Population growth and increased interest in activities requiring indoor
facilities of this nature are creating pressures for development.
5)
1,1 COST: CAPITAL O&M
AL RNATIVES 1) No Action. $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO HIS PROJECT:
(Ind cafe which 2) Renovate existing Mothers Park Center $ 1,500,000 $200,000
sup.�ortingfactors adding more facilities (short term benefit)
can be met.) 3) Develop facility in two (2) Phases. $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
I�I
(17) '
1 FINAL PRIORITY # 1
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION n 3 1
1 •EPARTMENT: PARK & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY n 131
i t
•ROJECT TITLE: ::+a •, : h. .;•1• C COMP EX
-ROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Redevelopment of a nine (9) acre site adjacent to Renton High School currently in School
District ownership. Development and maintenance costs to be shared by the City and Schoo
District. Football, baseball, softball, soccer and jogging facilities would be included.
•
STIMATED COSTS: LAND$ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS $150,000 •
TOTAL$150.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 10.000 City Share
' •INANCING 1) Federal Revenue Sharing.
PTIONS:
1 2) IAC (Funding Restrictive).
3) Renton School District - $50,000 currently budgeted.
4) Community Facilities Fund - $22,000 currently budgeted.
I I
ACKGROUND:
•
The City and School District work very closely in providing joint use of public facilities
for educational/recreational use. The co-development and maintenance of this project was
consumated with the signing of an agreement by the two (2) parties in 1981. Total community
use of existing property in public ownership providing badly needed facilities will result
from this action.
-OTENTIAL SITE:
Renton High School
1
ACTORS 1) Residents of all ages who participate in sports activities will dire tly
•UPPORTING benefit as will students attending Renton High School.
-ROJECT:(Who 2) By developing property already in public ownership, the City willlnoi
•r what programs need to purchase additional land for the same purpose.
I re served? Why 3) Joint maintenance will lessen the cost to the City and School Distri t.
his project?)
4)-The property in question has an ideal location for the designated,use
and is currently underutilized due to its condition and lack ofldev oped
facilities.
1
COST: CAPITAL O8•
LTERNATIVES 1) No action. $ - 0 - $' - 0 -
O THIS PROJECT:
indicate which 2) Purchase a new site and develop $ 300,000 acq $I 40,100
pporting factors similar facilities. 360,000 dev. ,
an be met.) 3) $ $I
•
4) $ $
5) $ $
1
(18)
it
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # 9
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 4I
11 PROJECT TITLE: OLD SHOP SITE REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
II This project involves redevelopment of the present City Shop Site into an improved park
setting which will include additional parking for the Senior Center and a pea-patch for
use by the general community. The project is intended to meet an identified need for
11 additional parking at the Senior Center, improve an unsightly part of the central City,
and provide a new recreation experience for the entire community.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND $
IMPROVEMENTS $ 82,300
TOTAL $ 82.300
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 6.000
II
IFINANCING 1) Housing & Community Development Program ($10,677 secured, additional
OPTIONS: funds anticipated in 1983 & 1984).
2) City - Na funds currently budgeted.
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
The City will be moving its present shop site to the Renton Highlands in the Fall of 1983.
At its meeting of February 22, 1982, the City Council officially accepted this plan for
use of the site (pea-patch portion meant to be interim use). The preliminary estimate for
the complete project is $82,300, $10,677 was secured through the 1982 Block Grant Program.
These funds are programed for demolition of sheds which run the length of the south property
jline and the gravel bin located on the northwest corner.
POTENTIAL SITE:
City of Renton Public Works Shop Site, 105 Williams Avenue North.
•
1 ACTORS 1) The Senior Center presently has only 72 parking stalls, with approximately
UPP ORTING 100- 25 vehicles using the facility at the noon hour, parking is a major
-ROJECT: (Who 2) prob�em.
I When the Senior Center site was designed it was anticipated that additional
r what programs parking would be added at some later date.
re served? Why 3) The present shop site is unattractive and is in direct contrast to the re-
his project.) vitalization efforts that have occurred in the immediate area.
4) The pea-patch will provide a new and unique recreation experience for the
S) entire community, and will not be a high maintenance item.
Because of its location within the NSA, Block Grant funds are available.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
iLTERNATIVES 1) Minimal action (health & safety). $ 5,750 $ 500
O THIS PROJECT:
Indicate which 2) Purchase additional property for parking. $ 46,800 land$1,000
pporting factors 10,000 dev.
• n be met.) 3) Work within existing parking constraints and $
encourage car poo in , mini-buses, and im-
provement of public transportation.
4) Various seduction of scope including:
- demolition of structures, sheds and in- $ 25,800 $ 500
stallation of encing.
- Above items plus installation of parking lot. $ 35,300 $ 6001
- Above items plusp installation of landscaping $ 54,350 $1,000
sidewalks an wal ways.
(19)
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a 1 2 I
1 .EPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 5
-ROJECT TITLE: SENIOR HOUSING & PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT
1 I
i -ROJECT DESCRIPTION;
This project involves the acquisition and development of a senior housing complex and
pedestrian corridor along the abandoned Burlington Northern railroad right-of-way be-
tween the City, the Renton Housing Authority, and Ring County with the City acting as
coordinator for the project.
:STIMATED COSTS: LAND $ 230,450 (funds secured)
1
IMPROVEMENTS $266,000 * * Senior Housing site ($116,000)
Pedestrian Corridor/LinelarPark
1 TOTAL $ 496.450 ($150,000)
I ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 4.000
-INANCING 1) Housing & Community Development Program ($247,832 securred, additilon 1
uPTIONS: funds anticipated in 1983 & 1984).
1, 2) City (if additional property is needed or desired).
I 3) Street fund (street improvements portion of project).
1{ 4) L.I.D.
,I
:ACKGROUND:
The project will link the downtown business district with the Cedar River Trail encoura;ing
pedestrian movement and at the same time improving the aesthetics of the area. It,wi11 also
complete the linear link-up along Burnett tying together Burnett Linear Park on the sou h,
' the Burnett Parking Lot system and the Cedar River Corridor. The project has received block
Grant funds ($249,332) over the past two years. Utilizing these funds, the City is pro eed-
ing with acquisition of Burlington Northern property and parcel along Logan AvenuelSou0i,
relocation responsibilities, and preliminary design of the corridor. An additional $116,000
I will be available for development of the housing site once financing is securred forlth'
-OTE f 9 E: '
I That portion of the abandoned railroad right-of-way between Logan Avenue South and! Burnett
1 Avenue South extending northerly from the Metro-Park'n' Ride lot to the river. A small
parcel located between the right-of-way and Logan Avenue is also included to accomodate
parking and access. The park'n' ride lot will be incorporated into the project in som
I manner.
ACTORS 1) Lack of senior housing units in downtown area, close to services.
II UPPORTING
-ROJECT: (Who 2) Residents of Cedar River Terrace have difficulty traveling to downtcwn.
! •r what programs l I
re served? Why 3) Site is presently over grown with weeds and blackberry bushes, area is
1 his project?) blighted and need of revitalization.
4) Project may stimulate Metro into maintaining present Park'n' Ride Lot.
5) No park land exists for downtown workers, shoppers and residents.1
-- 6) Because of its location within the NSA,-Block Grant funds are available.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
1
LTERNATIVES 1) No action (abandoned plans to purchase property,$ 1,000 $. - 0 -
1 0 THIS PROJECT: return Block Grant funds). Attorney's fees I
indicate which 2) Acquire property, delay development. $230,450 $ 500
upporting factors
an be met.) 3) Acquire other site for senior housing. $270,000 $ 500
4) $ $ ,
1 5) $ $I
I
I
(20)
1 I
I
1
•
I ,
FINAL PRIORITY a
11 MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION x
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY 6
II PROJECT TITLE: HIGHLANDS ADMISTRATION BUILDING
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Renovation of an existing building in the Renton Highlands for Community use.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND $ - 0 -
1
IMPROVEMENTS $250,000 -
•
I �
TOTAL $250,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $No Increase
it
I FINANCING 1) City Funds (property taxes).
' OPTIONS:
2) Federal Revenue Sharing ($23,425 budgeted in 1982).
3) Housing & Community Development Funds.
4)
BACKGROUND:
This building has housed a variety of governmental and community functions over the past
42 years and
past
it are hopelessly has the decade. The outdated. The building iscurrentlybeingstudiedd mechanical systems
underings angrant
It is highly likely that a major portion of the building will be recommended for demolition
as a result of the energy audit.
POTENTIAL SITE:
1 Highlands Administration Building, 800 Edmonds Avenue N.E..
' FACTORS 1) The residents of the Highlands area rely on this facility for
SUPPORTING community recreation and meeting space.
fPROJECT: (Who 2) A small maintenance area is currently being utilized by the Water
or what programs Division and could have future value for similar functions.
Iare served? Why 3) Rapidly increasing utility rates and construction costs mandate
Ithis project?) immediate attention and a decision on the feasibility of renovating
all or part of this building.
COST: CAPITAL O&IM
'ALTERNATIVES 1) No action. $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
ITO THIS PROJECT:
1(indicate which 2) Renovate only a portion of the building $ 100,000 $50,000
'supporting factors demolishing the rest. (support factors #1 & f)3).
can be met.) 3) Demolish the entire structure and rely on the $ 20,000 $ - 0 -
Highlands Elementary School for recreation
and meeting space. •
1
(21)
•
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # 1 5
DDEP RTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 7
PROJECT TITLE: SIERRA HEIGHTS/GLENCOE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACQUISITION (8-10 Acres)
!PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
•cquisition of an 8-10 acre neighborhood park site in the Sierra Heights/Glencoe
-rea of Renton.
ESTI ATED COSTS: LAND $ 240,000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - 0 -
TOTAL $ 240,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ .2,000 undeveloped
'FIN NCING 1) IAC Funding (60-75% - unlikely at this time).
lOPT ONS:
2) Federal Revenue Sharing.
3) G.O. Bonds.
4)
,BAC GROUND:
Sie ra Heights/Glencoe Neighborhood Park acquisition is identified in the City's Comprehensive
Par and Recreation Plan as a high priority. The City constructed Glencoe Tot Lot as an
lint rim measure but it is wholly inadequate to meet current demand. King County owns a 4.7
acr undeveloped park in the western portion of this neighborhood outside the City limits.
Coo erative or joint development with King County or the School District could reduce local
cos s.
POT NTIAL SITE:
ISie ra Heights/Glencoe area of Renton (Neighborhood #11 - City of Renton Comprehensive Park
'and. Recreation Plan).
•
•
,'FAC ORS 1) Need for acquisition is established in the Comprehensive Plan adopted
SUP ORTING by the Renton City Council in March, 1978.
!PR JECT: (Who 2) Escalating land costs and diminishing availability of suitable sites
for w at programs mandates action as soon as possible.
•
are erved? Why 3) Residential growth in this area has created a need for recreation
;this roject?) facilities for all members of the family.
4) This project has been recognized by the City Council in the 1981 Six
Year C.I.P..
5)
COST: CAPITAL 08M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No Action. $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
ITO HIS PROJECT:
(indi ate which 2) Purchase additional property (3-4,acres) $ 110,000 $ - 0 -
Isup•ortIngfactors adjacent to County park property (factors #1-4)
can •e met.) 3) Work with Renton School District and King County $ 300,000 $ 20,000
to co-develop Sierra Heights Elementary School
property & King County Park property (factors
#1-4).
4) Purchase smaller site in eastern portion of '$ 120,000 $ 1,000 undev
area (5 acres). 20,000 dev.
(22)
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # —
IEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 8 1
I
"IROJECT TITLE: CEDAR RIVER TRAIL DEVELOPMENT/NATURAL ZONE
•IROJECT DESCRIPTION:
his project involves development of the Natural Zone of the Cedar River Trail System.
thematic plans includes construction of trails linking the eastern terminus of the present
Frail (City Hall) to the King County Cedar River Regional Park, and other desirable amenities _
orestrbom structure, footbridge, picnic shelter and interpretive center).
1TIMATED COSTS: LAND $ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS$ 630,000 ' .
. 1
TOTAL $ 630.000 -
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 40.000 ,-
1
I
NANCING 1) Proposed PRO-PARKS County Bond Issue.
giPTIONS:
2) City - No funds currently budgeted. 1
3) Housing & Community Development Program (Matching funds).
4) IAC - Potential for 60-75% funding (unlikely at this time). j
1
: CKGROUND:
•. June 14, 1976, the City Council through the adoption of the Cedar River Master Plan re-
.ssured a previous commitment to incorporate a recreational system along the Cedar River
°om Lake Washington to the King County Regional Park. Since completion of the Industrial
. rk and Urban Zones, attention has been turned toward the Natural Zone. With acquisition
.f the Thomas Property the acquisition phase is now complete. The construction estimate i�s
.I-sed upon a system of trails and recreation nodes. A majority of the property will be prie-
--rved in its natural state.
P,TENTIAL SITE:
nle proposed trail extension will run adjacent to the southern edge of the Cedar River between
•I 405 and the King County Regional Park (east of Maplewood Golf Course). This recreation
.-lt contains 151 acres of City owned property, and 13,375 of water front.
F•CTORS 1) Acquisition phase is complete.
S PPORTING
P"OJECT: (Who 2) Maintenance/operation costs are minimal due to nature of project.
or lwhat programs --
at served? Why 3) Large population served (estimated at over 100,000).
th s project?)
4)
5)
1
COST: CAPITAL O&M
7
A ERNATIVES 1) No action (serve trail users with existing $ - 0 - $ 1,000
T THIS PROJECT: facilities).
(i icate which 2) Maintain area in natural state as a conservancy $ - 0 - $ 2,000
su.portingfactors with the City's role being that of stewardship.
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
1 1
(23)
•
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION #
DE-ARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 9
PR•JECT TITLE: GOLF COURSE ACQUISITION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of the Maplewood or other golf course facility to preserve both the
recreational and esthetic value of such a large scale open space.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 3,275,000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - O -
TOTAL $ 3,275,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $
FINANCING 1) PRO-PARKS Bond Issue - County.
OPTIONS:
2) G.O. Bonds - City.
3)
4)
BA KGROUND:
•
T e City is interested in preserving or providing a golf course in the Renton area. The
✓ development of Earlington Golf Course into an industrial park has severely limited the
o portunities in this area. The Sherman Report recently completed for King County indicates
at this area has approximately 50% fewer courses on a population basis then the rest of
t e country. Development pressure on Maplewood Golf Course merits an investigation into
i s potential acquisition by 'the City.
I I
P TENTIAL SITE:
1. Maplewood Golf Course.
2. General Renton area (new course).
•
FACTORS 1) Recreation potential for golf.
SUfrPORTING
PROJECT: (Who 2) Potential for other recreational activities-on-site.
or hat programs
ar served? Why 3) Open space/green belt/urban buffer for Maple Valley Highway.
thi project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
- I
AL ERNATIVES 1) No Action. $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
T THIS PROJECT:
(in icate which 2) Work with potential developers to preserve $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
su porting factors nine (9) holes
ca i be met.) 3) Work with King County to acquire/develop $ '
a course.
4) $ $
5) $ $
I '
(24)
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION #
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY u 10
PROJECT TITLE: SPORTS PARK ACQUISITION b
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of 20-30 acres in the Renton area for future development as an Athletic
Complex for soccer, softball, baseball, and football.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$450.000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - O -
I
TOTAL $450.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 1.500 undeveloped
1 ,
FINANCING 1) City - No funds currently budgeted.
,OPTIONS:
2) IAC - 60-75% potential (unlikely at this time).
3) Proposed .,PRO-PARKS Bond Issue.
4)
BACKGROUND:
The City has been impacted by tremendous growth in the demand for recreational sites
and facilities that support various team sports. Multiple use of existing facilities
has created a major M&0 problem which will result in major renovation costs.
-OTENTIAL SITE:
General Renton area as long as proper site selection criteria are followed with an
emphasis on accessibility to the entire community. Due to the acreage necessary,
a northeast location is probable.
IACTO RS 1) Sports programs for all age groups; especially soccer.
.UPPORTING
-ROJECT: (Who 2) Land availability and rising costs make acquisition now a cost effective
or what programs and necessary action.
°re served? Why 3) Open space/green belt use.
is project?)
4)
5)
II COST: CAPITAL O&M
LTERNATIVES 1) No Action (service area with existing parks) $ - 0 - $ - 0
0 THIS PROJECT:
ndicate which 2) Work with King County and/or Renton School $ ? $ ?
pportingfactors District to acquire property or develop
an be met.) existing publicly owned property. $ $
3) Acquire and develop numerous small sites. $ $
(25)
•
• FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION #
DE-ARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 11
P-OJECT TITLE: HEATHER DOWNS NEIGHBORHOOD PARK DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Develop a 7 to 10 acre site for active recreation fields, play equipment,
hard surface courts and picnic facilities.
ES (MATED COSTS: LAND$ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS$ 300.000
TOTAL$ 300.000
1 ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 35.000
FINANCING 1) City - No funds currently budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2) IAC - Potential for 60-75% funding (unlikely at this time).
3)
4)
B CKGROUND:
he need for development of this park is established in the City of Renton's Comprehensive
ark and Recreation Plan. Recent development of multi-family units in the area has further
-mpacted the area's immediate park needs.
P TENTIAL SITE:
eather Downs area of Renton (Neighborhood #8 - City of Renton Comprehensive Park and
ecreation Plan).
F CTO RS 1) Neighborhood recreational needs of Heather Downs area residents.
SUPPORTING
PF�OJECT: (Who 2) Nearest park land is Kiwanis Park which is not within easy walking
or what programs distance of this area and separated by major automobile traffic•corridor.
ar served? Why 3) Need for this development established in City's Comprehensive Park and
this project?) Recreation Plan.
4) Development costs are high but the present bid climate is favorable.
Future costs will no doubt escalate rapidly.
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No action - serve area with present $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
T9 THIS PROJECT: facilities.
(irldIcate which 2) Do development in phases - Phase I $ 150,000 $ 15,000
pporting factors Phase II 150,000 20,0d0
c n be met.) 3) Continue to work with developers to $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
include recreational amenities on-site.
4) $ $
5) $ $
(26)
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # --
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 12 ,
PROJECT TITLE: TALBOT HILL/SPRING BROOK NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACQUISITION
1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
I
Acquisition of a ten (10) acre park in the Talbot Hill/Springbrook Neighborhood I
of Renton to serve active recreation needs.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$240,000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - 0 -
TOTAL $240,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 1.000
FINANCING 1) City - No current funds budgeted. ,
OPTIONS:
1 2) IAC - Potential for 60-757 funding (unlikely at this time).
i
3)
d 4)
BACKGROUND: ,
The need for acquiring this park was established in the City's Comprehensive Park
, and Recreation Plan adopted in 1978. --
r
POTENTIAL SITE:
Talbot Hill/Springbrook area of Renton (Neighborhood #4 in the City's Comprehensive
Park and Recreation Plan).
(FACTORS 1) Renton citizens in the Talbot/Springbrook would directly benefit•by
SUPPORTING the potential addition of neighborhood recreation facilities.
PROJECT: (Who 2) Land availability and rising costs make acquisition now a cost-effective
or what programs and necessary action.
are served? Why 3)
Ilthis project?)
4)
1
q 5)
. COST: CAPITAL O&M
(ALTERNATIVES 1) No Action - (service area with existing $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
ITO THIS PROJECT: facilities at Talbot Hill Park).
,(indicate which 2) Purchase 4-6 acre site. $125,000 $ 1,I1000 uncle,
supporting factors 20,000 dev.
can be met.) 3) Work with. City Utility at Springbrook Water $ , $
Shed in additional purchase and joint use.
I 4) Continue to work with developers for set $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
aside of recreational land and development
of on-site recreational facilities.
.
(27-) ,
II i
11
•
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # —
DE-ARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 13
PROJECT TITLE: NORTHEAST KENNYDALE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACOUISTmTnN (7-10 acres)
PR*JECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquire 7 to 10 acres for future development of an active recreation site.
.
ES IMATED COSTS: LAND$ 250,000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - 0 -
TOTAL $ 250.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 1.000 undeveloped
40,000 developed
FIN NCING 1)City - No funds currently budgeted.
OP IONS:
2)IAC - Potential for 60-75% funding (unlikely at this time).
3)
4)
BA KGROUND:
he need for acquiring an East Kennydale Neighborhood Park is established in the City's
omprehensive Park & Recreation Plan adopted by the City Council in 1978.
P TENTIAL SITE:
ast Kennydale area of Renton (Neighborhood #13 - City of Renton Comprehensive Park and
ecreation Plan).
•
FA TORS 1)Renton Citizens residing in the affected area would have land for
SU PORTING future neighborhood recreation services.
P OJECT: (Who 2)Land availability and rising costs make acquisition now a necessary an.
or hat programs cost effective action.
ar served? Why 3)
thi' project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
A ERNATIVES 1)No action (service area with existing $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
T THIS PROJECT: facilities at Kennydale Lions Park).
(In Icate which 2)Purchase 4-6 acre park site. $ 125,000 $ 1,000 undev.
su porting factors 20,000 dev.
ca be met.) 3) Continue to work with developers to set $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
aside recreational land and on-site
development of recreational facilities.
(28)
i
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 14.
PROJECT TITLE: MOTHERS PARK RECREATION CENTER RENOVATION
iPROJECT DESCRIPTION: ,
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND $ - 0 -
1
• DEVELOPMENT$ 750,000
I TOTAL $ 750.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 16,000 additional
NANCING 1) Federal Revenue Sharing
/.PTIONS:
2) H&CD
3) Bond Issue
1 4)
:ACKGROUND:
,others Park Recreatoin Center was constructed in 1939 and has served the City well for over
forty years. It is still heavily used and is the City's only major Community Center. The
venter is very limited in it's ability to serve our residents due to its small size and lack
.f facilities to meet current needs. Renovation of the existing building and construction
.'if additional:facilities is planned.
-3TENTIAL SITE:
635 Park Avenue North
y
FACTORS 1) This site was donated to the Cit for recreational use onl .
Y Y
Si'PPORTING
P' OJECT: (Who 2) There is an identified need and demand for additional facilities of
o i what programs this kind.
a,e served? Why 3) If renovation does not occur soon, this facility will continue to
t 's project?) deteriorate in its ability to serve its purpose as a community recreational
facility.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
A1TERNATIVES 1) No action (provide existing level of services $ - 0 - $
To THIS PROJECT: until the building is no longer usable). ,
(i dicate which 2) Phase renovation. $ 7 $
s .porting factors
c n be met.) 3) Complete a feasibility study and if feasible, $ 10,000 $
a Master Plan leading to renovation and
enlargement.
i4) Construct a new facility. $4,000,000 $
(29)
J
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION #
DE-ARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 15
' I
PR CJECT TITLE: TIFFANY PARK/BENSON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACQUISITION (7-10 Acres)
PRo JECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of a 7 to 10 acre site suitable for active recreation to serve the
southern portion of this neighborhood area.
! EST MATED COSTS: LAND $ 240,000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - 0 -
TOTAL$ 240,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 1,000 undeveloped
40,000 developed
•
FIN•NCING 1)City - no funds currently budgeted.
OP IONS:
2)IAC - potential for 60-75% funding (unlikely at this time)
3)
4)
I BA KGROUND:
T e need for acquiring a Tiffany Park/Benson Hill Neighborhood Park is established in the
City's Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan adopted by the City Council in 1978.
I I I
P•TENTIAL SITE:
I
1 :enson Hill area of Renton (Neighborhood 115 - City of'Renton Comprehensive Park and
'ecreation Plan).
II I
FA TORS 1)Renton citizens residing in the affected area would have land for ,
SU PORTING future neighborhood recreation services.
P OJECT:(Who 2)Land availability and rising costs make. acquisition now a necessary
or what programs and cost-effective action.
' ar served? Why 3)
thi project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
' A TERNATIVES 1)No action (service area with existing $ - 0 - $ - 0
Tv THIS PROJECT: facilities at Tiffany Park).
(1 dicate which 2)Purchase 4-6 acre site. $125,000 $ 1,000 undev.
su•porting factors 20,000 dev.
c-n be met.) 3)Continue to work with developers to set $ - 0 - $ 0 -
aside land for park use and on-site
development of recreational facilities.
I I I I
I I i
(30) _
l
ANAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # — '
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION • DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 16
PROJECT TITLE: CUSHION TURF FIELD
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
1 Development of an all-weather sports field for football and soccer primarily.
11 Incorporate, if possible, with lighted field at Philip Arnold Park. __
I
,ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND $ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS $100,000
i
TOTAL $100,000
y ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 5.000
t
FINANCING 1) City - No funds currently budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2) IAC - Potential for 60% funding (very doubtful).
II 3)
4)
1
'ACKGROUND:
Fall-Winter sports are currently wreaking havoc on our turf fields causing undue
maintenance and associated costs. One way of meeting this demand is the installation
Il
III of a cushion turf field at Philip Arnold Park which has existing lighting. The lighting
obviously permits extended hours of use which is particularly valuable during the fall-
winter months.
I ,
POTENTIAL SITE:
Philip Arnold Park.
Fi'CTO RS 1) This project would triple the capacity of an existing lighted sports
SI�PP ORTING field and allow year-round inclement weather use with little negative
P OJECT: (Who impact on M&O funds.
o'i�what programs ' -
aIe served? Why 2) All of the major outdoor team sports would benefit with soccer receiving
t is project?) a major boost. Current participation is heavily youth with substantial _'
growth in adult levels.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
A �TERNATIVES 1) No Action (serve users with existing $ - 0 - $ - 0 -'
T THIS PROJECT: facilities).
(i Idicate which 2) Acquire and develop 20-30 acre turf $ B00,000 $ 40,000
supporting factors complex for soccer.
c be met.) 3) Renovate Philip Arnold Park Athletic field $ 100,000 $ 5,000 ,
with drainage, new soil, and turf.
4) Work with King County and the Renton School $ ? $ ?
1 District to upgrade their facilities.
5) $ $
(31)
1
, I
FIRE DEPARTMENT PROJECTS
(In Department Priority)
Page
1. Fire Training Center 33
2. Construct Fire Station #14 in Kennydale 34
3. Relocation of Fire Station #12 in Highlands 35
, 4. Construct Fire Station #15 in Green River Valley 36
i .
(32)
ill
FINAL PRIORITY #
1
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION #_-�� 1
PARTMENT:Fire DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 1
OJECT TITLE: Construct Training Center
i
7OJECT DESCRIPTION: Develop a training facility that will include a 5 story tower,
• gas props and materials storage, any remaining storm drainage, fencing, drafting
pit, classroom .and storage. Blacktop and cement surface for drill and driving area 1
a'1d provide hydrants.
I.TIMATED COSTS: LAND$ city owned
IMPROVEMENTS $ 600,000
I
TOTAL $ 600,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 50,000
F NANCING 1) General funds
OP• TIONS:
1 2) GO bonds
3) Councilmatic bonds
1 4)
:ACKGROUND: The facility we are now using is located in Carco Park adjacent to Carco
rheater. It consists of a wooden 3 story tower. The area is too small for proper
tlaining and the tower itself is deteriorating due to age. We need a complete train-
i g facility to properly train our firefighters in all phases of firefighting.
-OTENTIAL SITE: Lind Ave. SW and SW 20th. This site has been designated as a training
•te and is ideal for this type of use. We would need the total of 6 acres to build a
•°mplete facility as outlined above.
1 '
'ACTORS 1) Need to train all firefighters in all phases of firefighting
PPORTING
ROJECT:(Who 2) Present site not adequate I
what programs '_
- e served? Why 3) Present site needed by the Park Department
t 'Is project?)
4) Cost to train at outside facility prohibitive ;
III 5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
LTERNATIVES 1) Find other site for training of firefighters $ -0- $ 30,000.
• THIS PROJECT: •
( idIcate which 2) No training - City liable $ -0- $ -0-
s pportfng factors '
•-n be met.) 3) $ $
I 4) $ $
1 5) $ $
1
(33)
I -
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION n 8
DEPARTMENT: Fire DEPARTMENT PRIORITY z 2
PROJECT TITLE: Construct Station #14 - Kennydale area
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 3 apparatus (pumper, aid car, ladder truck) Station 14 should be
const ucted in conjunction with the relocation of Station 12 (Highlands) to maximize
cover ge and minimize response times.
ESTI ATED COSTS: LAND $ 180,000.
IMPROVEMENTS $ 550,000. •
TOTAL $ 730,000.
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 460,000.
FINA CING 1) General funds
OPTI NS:
2) GO bonds
1 3) Councilmatic bonds
4)
'BAC GROUND: This area of the City is developing at an accelerated rate, both
comm rcially and residentially. The proposed Quendall complex will include three to
thir y story structures and will require ladder responses. Our response time to
this area is now in the six to eight minute range. We must be able to reach this
area within a four minute time span. The Master Plan recommended this facility and
a P1 nning Department study done in 1972 also recommended a station in this area.
IPOT NTIAL SITE: Preferably the station location should be in the vicinity of NE 30th
and Highway 405. The area is zoned for business.
1FAC ORS 1) 3500 existing residents would be served
SUP ORTING
'PROJECT: (Who 2) 2000 new residents are anticipated in the Quendall project
or w at programs
;are erved? Why 3) Response reduced from 6 to 8 minutes to 4 minutes
this roject?)
4) Aid response reduced from 6 minutes to 3 minutes.
5) 72 responses were made to the area in 1981
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
'ALT RNATIVES 1) 2 bay station - no aid vehicle (supports $ 650,000 $400,000
TO THIS PROJECT: 1, 2 and 4)
(indicate which 2) 2 bay station - no ladder truck (supports $ 340,000 $310,000
'supporting factors 1, 3 and 4)
can •e met.) 3) 2 bay station - pumper only initially $ 250,000 $217,000
(supports 1 and 3)
4) Interim leased space in Quendall phase 1 $ 80,000 $217,000
pumper only (supports 1 and 3) •
5) $ $
(34)
.
Il
I
FINAL PRIORITY x
ll
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # 1 4
,EPARTMENT: Fire DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 7
iiROJECT TITLE: Relocate Sta. 12 to Sunset Blvd NE in the vicinity of nninn Aua NP
II ROJECT DESCRIPTION:
I
I
STIMATED COSTS: LAND $ 700,000
IMPROVEMENTS $ 400,000 -
TOTAL $ 1,100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal -
INANCING 1) General funds
OPTIONS: _
2) GO Bonds
III ' I -
3) Councilmatic bonds
4)
: I
:ACKGR OUND: Station 12 was built in 1943 and remodeled in 1959. The station was
'iuilt to provide fire protection for the Highlands area which as grown substantially
1lince 1943. In a 1972 Planning Department study on fire station locations, it was
ecommended that this station be moved east to better serve the rapidly growing
rea. The present station is in need of major repair because of its age. Relocation
rust be preceded by the construction of the Kennydale station.
I
IOTENTIAL SITE: Area of Sunset Blvd NE and Union NE. We understand there is
roperty in the area zoned Rl.
II
1
ACTORS 1) Sell present station and site - $200,000 I
UPPORTING
i ROJECT:(Who 2)
r what programs
Ore served? Why 3)
his project?)
II
4)
I 5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
h
LTERNATIVES 1) Provide service from the present location $ -0- $ -0-
O THIS PROJECT: •
indicate which 2) $ $
311 pporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $ !
d
1
1,1 (3 5)
1
.
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # —
DE-ARTMENT: Fire DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 4
PROJECT TITLE: Construct Station 15
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct Station 15 in the Earlington industrial area and
rel•cate Station 13 if expansion warrants.
ES IMATED COSTS: LAND $ city owned
IMPROVEMENTS $ 450,000. .
TOTAL$ 450,000.
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 475,000
Fl ANCING 1) General funds
O TIONS:
2) GO bonds
3) Councilmatic bonds
4)
B CKGROUND: , As the Earlington industrial area continues to grow, the need increases
fo a centralized station located in this area. The City owned property on Lind Ave. SW
co id be utilized for this facility along with a training center.
If annexation and development continues to move south and east of our present Station
13, because the facility is temporary, it could be moved to a more advantagous location.
P TENTIAL SITE: Lind Ave. SW and SW 20th
Relocate Station 13 when necessary or consolidate with District 40
F CTORS 1) Need for fire and aid protection in the southeast area of the
S PPORTING City
FiROJECT: (Who 2) Improve response times to 4 minutes from 6 to 7 minutes.
or what programs
Ire served? Why 3) Serve rapidly developing industrial/commercial area.
t is project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
LTERNATIVES 1) None $ $
O THIS PROJECT:
indicate which 2) $ $
upporting factors
•an be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $ ,
5) $ $
(36)
If � �
I I'
LIBRARY PROJECTS
Page
jl
1. Main Public Library Addition and Renovation 38
I I '
II
I� I '
(37)
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # 4
•EPARTMENT: LIBRARY DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 1
-ROJECT TITLE: RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY Addition & Renovation
-ROJECT DESCRIPTION: Addition of a 3,000 square foot second floor, bookstacks, carpet
replacement, energy conservation measures, repairs, equipment and furniture, a book
security system, circulation control system that is fully automated, and possible
conversion or replacement of heating system with an energy efficient heating/cooling
system.
STIMATED COSTS: LAND $
IMPROVEMENTS$660,270
TOTAL$660,270
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $13,750
INANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS:
2) Councilmanic Bonds
3) G. 0. Bonds
4)
:ACKGROUND: Addition will provide needed book storage capacity for a growing collection
that will meet most library service needs of Renton residents. Renovation will focus on
safety, security of building and materials, energy conservation, needed repairs,_and a
general upgrade of a building that is showing the wear and tear of 16 years of heavy use.
Energy conservation measures are estimated at $26,383. This estimate is subject to
possible drastic revision once the City has the results of the consultants energy study
on the Renton Public Library due to be completed this summer.
"OTENTIAL SITE:
Renton Public Library -- Existing building includes a roofed clearstory
area of 3,000 square feet planned as a future second floor addition to structure.
ACTORSING 1) Need for book stack area to shelve growing collection of books.
-ROJECT:(Who 2) Population growth and information growth results in greater demand
•r what programs for library resources and services.
-re served? Why 3) Safety, security, and comfort measures will benefit and protect
his project?) the public and the building.
4) Energy conservation is a cost avoidance measure.
5) Automated circulation control system will greatly lessen need
for additional circulation staff as the City grows.
COST: CAPITAL Q&
LTERNATIVES 1) Addition, bookstacks, carpet, energy
O THIS PROJECT: conservation, repairs (supports 1,2,3,4) $ 404,313 $ 3,750
Indicate which 2) $ $
upporting factors
an be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(38)
I
II
PUBLIC WORKS/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PROJECTS
(In Department Priority)
Page
4 Improvements
Boule
vard
Sunset 1.
North 3rd Street and Intersection0
iI
2. Signal Controller Modernization 41
3. Traffic Signal Interconnect 42
4. South 7th Street and Rainier Avenue Intersection Improvements 43
5. Street Lighting Modifications in the CBD 44
II 6. South 3rd Street/Wells and Williams Intersection Improvements L5
' I
7. Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption 46
8. CBD Decorative Light Modifications 47
9. N.E. 3rd Street and Edmonds Avenue Intersection Improvements 48
'I r ,
II
i I '
(39)
-
FINAL PRIORITY x
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION* 6
'EPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY + 1
PROJECT TITLE: Sunset Blvd. & N 3rd Street
i I
-ROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed project is aimed at improving traffic operations at the intersection of'
Sunset Blvd. and North 3rd Street. The project involves resurfacing and channelizatlon
as well as curbs, gutters and sidewalks on the approaches to the intersection. Also
included is improved traffic signal detection and indication equipment as well as street
lig htingg
' ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 250,000
TOTAL$ 250,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 825
FINANCING 1) Federal Funds (FAUS, FASP, etc.)
OPTIONS:
2) State Funds (UAB)
3) General Funds
4) Developer Mitigation Fees
BACKGROUND: •
!
The intersection of Sunset Blvd. and North 3rd is a major intersection in the Renton
transportation network. The intersection serves as access to the NE 4th corridor which
is realizing a rapid rate of growth of both commercial and residential properties. The
intersection is operating at a LOS E during PM peak period. We also have significant
accident patterns that could be corrected with proposed improvements. I
POTENTIAL SITE:
Existing location. •
i I
FACTORS 1) This intersection has been high on our high frequency locations llis
SUPPORTING for the past three years (20 accidents in 1981).
PROJECT:(Who 2) Approximately 50,000 vehicles per day use this intersection.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
! this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL I OQty1
ALTERNATIVES 1) Maintain "as is." $ $ 1,250
TO THIS PROJECT: •
(Indicate which 2) $ $ F
' supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $
4)
$ S
5) $ $
' (40)
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION x 1 3
I�
DEPARTMENT: Publ is Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 2 ; ;
-ROJECT TITLE: Controller Modernization
a
-ROJECT DESCRIPTION:
he project is aimed at replacing obsolete traffic signal controllers at the locations
ndicated in "Potential Site."
STIMATED COSTS: LAND$ -0-
IMPROVEMENTS $ 200,000
TOTAL $ 200,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 14,025
INANCING 1) Federal Funds
PTIONS:
2) 1/2t Gas Tax
3) General Funds
4) Revenue Sharing -
-'ACKGROUND:
:lecause of the availability of outside funds and the City's need for improved traffic con rol ,
'arge amounts of funds were expended on the purchase of traffic control equipment in the late
Ii0's and early 70's. Consequently, we have the majority of our equipment in the 10 - 15 year i
ategory. Unfortunately, the average life span of traffic control technology is approximately
1, years. Therefore, we are unable to purchase replacement parts. If we experience failure
1I
f critical parts, traffic control at specific intersections could be non-operational.
OTENTIAL SITE:
The following locations need to be replaced:
y lunset 6 NE 10th Sunset 6 Edmonds N 4th 6 Garden N 3rd 6 Garden N 4th 6 Mohroe
unset 6 Harrington Sunset 6 Park N 4th 6 Williams N 3rd & Factory
inset & NE 3rd N 4th 6 Factory N 3rd 6 Williams Lake Wash./Park/Garden
F►CTORS 1) Traffic circulation in the City
Si'I PPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Traffic safety in the City
or what programs
ave served? Why 3)
His project?)
III
4)
5)
i
COST: CAPITAL O&M
A'TERNATIVES 1) Maintain "as is." $ $ 21 ,675
T THIS PROJECT:
(I Idicate which 2) $ $
s porting factors
c.n be met.) 3) $ $ .
4) $ $
5) $ $
(41)
FINAL PRIORITY x
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION I —
D PARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY x 3
P-OJECT TITLE: Traffic Signal Interconnect •
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
nstall traffic signal interconnect cable and conduit (where necessary) to specific 1
orridors listed under "Potential Sites" from City Hall .
E•TIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $100,000
TOTAL$100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 1,000
it •
FNANCING 1) Federal Funds
•PTIONS:
2) General Funds
3) City-Wide Traffic Mitigation Fees
4)
B CKGROUND: •
T e City
is currently
rently in the process of purchasing and installing a Multisonics VMS 220
c mputer system to replace the existing Multisonics 201 master. The new system master
will have the capability of controlling 96 intersections. The current master can only
c ntrol 40 intersections. The City is presently operating 70 signalized intersections.
A ' a result, necessary provisions should be made to coordinate specific heavily travelled
c rridors listed below.
1
OTENTIAL SITE:
T e proposed sites include Sunset Blvd. from Park Drive to Duvall, N 3rd/N 4th from Logan
t Sunset, Park Avenue from N 6th to Sunset Blvd., and S/SW 43rd from Talbot Road to West
lley Road. Also, interconnect must be provided from City Hall to each of the specific
1 cations.
F CTORS 1) Need to coordinate signals in heavily travelled corridors
S PPORTING to improve traffic circulation.
ROJECT:(Who 2) Need to coordinate signals to enhance safety.
o what programs
a e served?Why 3)
this project?)
• 4)
I I
5)
COST: CAPITAL 1O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) With full installation of cable TV - the $ $
T THIS PROJECT: cable will become an option. At this time,
(ndlcate which 2) it is too costly and system is not complete. $ $
pporting factors
e n be met.) 3) $ $
I 1i
4) S S
5)•
$ $
(42)
FINAL PRIORITY x__
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION x ')i
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY x 4
t PROJECT TITLE: Rainier Ave. South & South 7th Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Channelization, widening of South 7th Street and signal modifications.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 100,000
TOTAL$ 1 00.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ no increase above existing
FINANCING 1) Federal Funds (FAUS, FASP, etc.)
OPTIONS:
2) State Funds (UAB)
3) General Fund
4) Developer Mitigation Fees
(BACKGROUND:
•
This area of the City has experienced significant growth during the last several years.
We anticipate significant future growth with extensive development along the SW/S 7th
Street corridor. Furthermore, this intersection has been high on our High Frequency
Aria . rpo in
to improveccidentLi safetyst du and ng trafficthel ast circulation ye rs in the The Rain p oier Ave.sed mprovement South/SW and isn a South 7th ticipated
Street corridor.
POTENTIAL SITE:
IExisting intersection.
FACTORS 1) High accident frequency (23 accidents in 1981)
SUPPORTING
IPROJECT:(Who 2) Serves 51 ,000 vehicles per day
or what programs
Tare served? Why 3)
(this project?) 4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Maintain "as is." $ -0- $
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2)
supporting factors
lean be met.) 3) $ $
4)
5) $ $
(43)
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION x1 1
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY st'--5
PROJECT TITLE: Street Lighting Modifications and Maintenance in CBD
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Eliminate approximately 54 of the existing 123 street lights in the Central Business
District. Replace the existing 400 WHPSV lamps with 250 WHPSV. Also paint all 69
remaining luminaires.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LABOR X1M $ 30,000
IMPROVEMENTSS 30,000
TOTALS 60,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 10,000
FINANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS: -
2) G.O. Bonds
3) Councilmanic Bonds
4) Other Grants
•
BACKGROUND:
This project is proposed because of the following deficiencies in the existing CBD light ng
system:
1) Minimum lighting standards required by City ordinance are exceeded by 6 times
with existing lighting design.
2) Budget and energy considerations have necessitated eliminating 20 luminaires
from operation.
3) Existing steel luminaire poles have been damaged by rust and need to be repainted
POTENTIAL SITE: at this time (cost estimate $30,000).
'All painted steel luminaire poles in the Central Business District.
FACTORS 1) Reduced cost of lighting CBD area from $940 per month to $360 per
SUPPORTING month or an annual savings of $7,000.
PROJECT:(Who 2) Provision of good uniform lighting instead of existing light and
or what programs dark areas currently experienced when random lights are turned off.
are served? Why 3)
thls project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Paint the existing poles and maintain existing $ 30,000 $17,000
TO THIS PROJECT: 1 um i na i res.
(Indicate which 2) Replace the steel poles with aluminum poles. $ 150,000 $ 6,000
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(44)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION I
DEPARTMENT: Publ ic Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY 6
PROJECT TITLE: South 3rd Street - Wells & Williams Intersection Modifications
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Eliminate existing trees and shrubbery, relocate crosswalks to be in line with the curb,
extend traffic signal arms over roadway and repave curb area with concrete.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LABOR IMIWIt$ 8.000
IMPROVEMENTS $ 2.000
TOTAL$ 10,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $
FINANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
The project is being proposed to eliminate sight distance and signal visibility problems
at the intersection of South 3rd & Wells and South 3rd & Williams. Street trees and
shrubbery have created sight distance problems for vehicles and pedestrians particularly
in relation to the traffic signals visibility. Maintenance of the trees and shrubs
' have been a continuous problem.
•
POTENTIAL SITE:
Intersections of South 3rd & Wells and South 3rd & Williams.
FACTORS 1) Better visibility for the motoristand pedestrian.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Reduced maintenance cost.
or what programs
are served? Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Maintain "as is" $ $
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4)
II
5) $ $
(45)
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION x =
{{ 'EPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY +r 7
-ROJECT TITLE: Emergency Vehicle Preemption
-ROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Provide emergency vehicle preemption for all intersections listed in the "Potential Sites "
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 80,500
TOTAL$ 80,500
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 1.000
•
FINANCING 1) General Funds
I OPTIONS:
2) Developer Fees
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
•
The City of Renton Fire Department has requested that emergency vehicle preemption lie
provided along all strategic emergency access routes within the City. To accomplish the
goal, the Public Works Department has defined equipment requirements at key intersection .
The purpose of the preemption is to protect emergency vehicles from side street inter-1
ference.
POTENTIAL SITE:
The following sites have been defined as requiring additional preemption equipment:)
Airport & Rainier Park & N 6th S 3rd & Rainier S 4th & Logan
Airport & Logan Park & N 10th Talbot & Grady
Airport & Shattuck Lake Wash./Park/Garden Talbot & S 15th
FACTORS 1) Fire response time throughout the City i
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Safety considerations for emergency vehicles as well as the general
or what programs public.
• are served? Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O.M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No acceptable alternatives have currently $ 1
TO THIS PROJECT: been identified.
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ i$
5) $ $
(46)
FINAL PRIORITY w
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic En
9• DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 8
PROJECT TITLE: CBD Decorative Light Modifications
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Remove existing 4,048 - 69 watt incandescent lamps and replace with 1 - 50 watt sodiu
vapor lamp on the existing 130 short poles. The lamps on the street light poles would be
completely eliminated.. Other operational options become available.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $126,500
TOTAL $126,500
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Reduction of $3,300 per year (holiday operation
only, as existing)
II FINANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS: •
2) Councilmanic Bonds
3) G. 0. Bonds
4)
BACKGROUND:
•
The existing CBD decorative lights are costly to maintain and operate. Currently the
City can only afford one month of operation per year. The concept is to replace the
existing design with a design which is energy and cost conscious. With the improved
design we could maintain and operate the system (including power) for what it costs to
' operate for one month with the existing design.
POTENTIAL SITE:
All 253 decorative lamps within confines of: the Renton Central Business District.
FACTORS 1) City beautification
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Energy consciousness
or what programs
are served? Why 3) Cost consciousness
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remove all decorative lights $ -0- $ -0-
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) Replace 69 watt bulbs with 25 watt bulbs $ 18,100 $ 1,000
supporting factors or less
can be met.) 3) Maintain "as is"
4) $ $
5) $ $
(47)
•
FINAL PRIORITY# i
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION x
DE-ARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY x 9
IPR eJECT TITLE: NE 3rd & Edmonds Intersection Improvements
PR JECT DESCRIPTION:
IWid-ning and channelization of NE 3rd and signalization of the complete intersection.
I ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $ 150,000
• TOTALS 150,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 2,500
FINANCING 1) Developer funds
OPTIONS:
2) General Revenue Funds
3) Federal Funds
4)
•
BACKGROUND: •
Ed onds Avenue is being constructed from NE 4th to NE 3rd as a part of The Terrace
de elopment conditions. This action will create an intersection with NE 3rd Street.
I Be ause of the anticipated traffic volumes and sight distance problems, signalization
is necessary. The City was unable to require the developer to install the signal.
I Ho ever, each developer has participated according to his fair share.
•
P TENTIAL SITE:
NE 3rd and the extension of the Edmonds Ave. Right-of-Way.
j F CTORS 1) Intersection will meet signal warrants
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Sight distance problems on NE 3rd
or what programs
are served? Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
LTERNATIVES 1) Do not allow left turns at this intersection $ 2,000 $ 100
T THIS PROJECT: •
(I dlcate which 2) S $ •
pporting factors
c n be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ S
(48) •
•
•
.(6fi.)
•
pun j aanlaS •11
1
::::.
.....„„„:„.......„:„.„.„,„*„„*„:„„: ,,,,, 4 0.,„ „„„„
......::::::::::::: . ,,
. .
..,t,„,„:„:„.:55:.:„.„„,.:„.:5,.,tt,., ,.,.
,,
„:„,..:.„,x............:,.."....„..:„...„:„.„ .:„..:.
..".....
,......",,
.............
,.....::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::,*:::/...:,:::::,,: ::::::::::.:, ::::.::::::.: „:„.......„...:.: ::::::::::,:,::::: ..
to 4
,.„..:.:,........„:„..::„:„.:::.„,„*„.......„,,............... :„.......:......„....:::„*„...„:„:„,..„.5.5.5„ ...„...,...„
::*m......:55„..:55x55..„."„xt,,,,,,,,ii,...,:....,,.. :5.,„:„...55„:5.55.,..„„5.,,, ,,.„.„„. .
....„......::::::„:::::„.....::::::...„."....„.....:„..„:„.::::„.::::::.:.::::.:.::::: :.::::.:.::::::.::::.:.::::::.::::.:.::::::.:.::::.:.:.::::.:.::::.: .::.:.::::.:.::::::.:.::::.:.:::::
.,,„„ :..... :55,5„..5„:55..,.,55. ,.,.,,,,...... ,,,,.,x.,.,,,..: „,,,,,,,,,,
......,..„.„:„5„:„.„5„ ,
.5:.:::::'...5''''':.. -x':::*:m*:::%:*:::Kw.::::K :55**55.5A,..*,......,...... . ,
'''''' • .:.•'*":*: :::::::mx*z:mw.:::5.- ,:,,,.„„....
, ,
::::::::::::::ii!!!!!!! !!!!!!! ;;,,,':i.,1:*,:::::::::,,:,:-:-...,:-:-..i: .
N .:::::::::,,: _„::.:.::::::::.::::::::.:::::::„........::::::.„.........„._._:.,
11'1 I
,,
I ▪ •::• 1•••:•••!::!.:::::::..!•:::::::!::::::::!•::::::::::::::::.:::::!•...:•••::::::::::::::::..!:::::..::::::::.:::•:::::::::::::•:::::.::::::...:::::::..:......:::...:•...:•••:::••••:.•::::::::......LH::::::::.:*::.1.::.:1:!•:.:11.:!!••:.!•:..1:'
, .175:: . - .. i:i:...::::::::::::::::::::.:::;......
xaxaf�
:; "' '' l
e.:!:::::::::::::%.' A5X-X.
.
1 I
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
1
Project Total Cost Potential
Description Annual Funding
Prio it & Location Improvements 0 & M Sources -
# Honey Creek $672,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p. 1) Interceptor Ref. 39
_ I
# CBD Sewer $700,000 Slight Utility Fund
(p.6') Replacement Reduction
1
# I South Renton Sewer $600,000 Slight Utility Fund
(p5I6) Replacement Reduction
#! North i Renton Sewer $700,000 Slight Utility Fund
(p.5 ) Replacement Reduction 1
Phase 1
#- North Renton Sewer $600,000 Slight Utility Fund
(p.5o) Replacement Reduction
Phase 2
#= Renton Avenue $200,000 Minimal L.I.D.
(p.5-) Interceptor Utility Fund
Ref. 39
# Black River $140,000 $10,000 L.I.D.
(p.5 ) Interceptor Developer Extension
#8 Heather Downs $80,000 $5,000 L.I.D.
,(p.518) Interceptor Developer Extension ,
-Upper Basin- Utility Fund
#9 West Kennydale $150,000 $5,000 L.I.D.
(p.5 ) Interceptor Utility Fund I
Ref. 39
#1u East Kennydale $95,000 $5,000 L.I.D.
(p.6o) Interceptor Utility Fund
Ref. 39
I
(50) 1
. I
FINAL PRIORITY x
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION r: 1
D;EPA TMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY rr 1
PROJ CT TITLE: Honey Creek Interceptor and Pump Station
PROJ CT DESCRIPTION: Honey Creek Interceptor from Sunset Lift Station to May Creek,
and Connect to Either Future May Creek Metro Sewer or New
Interim Pump Station.
I '
ESTIM•TED COSTS: LAND $
IMPROVEMENTS $672,000.00
TOTAL $ 672,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal
FINAN ING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTI•NS:
2) Referendum 1139 - Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
3)
4)
BACK ROUND: The northeast section of Renton's sanitary sewers are at capacity,
and further connections are prohibited. The project would elimi-
nate overflows of sewage and allow further development.
P,OTE TIAL SITE: Honey Creek Ravine is only alignment possible.
FACT RS 1) The project is critical to protect water quality and to allow
SIJPP RTING continued development.
PROJ CT: (Who 2)
on wh t programs
are se ved? Why 3) ,
this pr ject?)
4)
'5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTER ATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indica,e which 2) $ $
suppor.ing factors
ca'n be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(51)
i
FINAL PRIORITY z
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 2
DE ARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY . 2
PR JECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replacement
PR JECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace Sanitary Sewers in Central Business District of Downtown - Bounded
by Mill Avenue South, Shattuck Avenue South, Houser Way South and the
Cedar River
EST MATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 700,000.00
TOTAL$ 700.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$Slight Reduction
FIN NCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OP IONS:
2)
3)
4)
BA,KGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
POTENTIAL SITE: City Right-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups. 1
SU (PORTING
PR ' ro((Who
or hatat programs 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
ar ,I served?Why 3)
this project?) ,
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O M
AL IERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ $
TO THIS PROJECT: 0 Increasing
On tcate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve $ 700,000 Reduced
su porting factors
car be met.) 3) $ $
1
4) $ $
5) $ $
1
(52)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 3
UTILITY (Sewer) Division 3
DEPARTMENT: DEPARTMENT PRIORITY#
PROJ:CT TITLE: South Renton Residential Area Sewer Reolacement
PROJ:CT DESCRIPTION:
Replace Sanitary Sewer in residential area of South Renton - bounded by
Main Avenue South, Shattuck Avenue South, Railroad Tracks and South Grady
Way.
ESTIM TED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 600.000.00
TOTAL$ 600,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Slight Reduction
it
FINAN ING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIO S:
2)
3)
4)
•
BACK LROUND:
The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
P,OTE TIAL SITE:
City Rights-of-way
F'ACT•RS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPP O RTING
PROJ•CT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
o wh-t programs
are se ed? Why 3)
this pr Ject?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $Increasing
TO TH S PROJECT:
(Indica e which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sieve. $ 600,000 $Decrease
suppo ing factors
can b met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(53)
FIND L PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION#. 4
D PARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 4
--OJECT TITLE: North Renton Sewer Replacement - Phase 1
!
--OJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace Sanitary Sewers in a portion of North Renton - Bounded by North
3rd Street, Bronson Way, Burnett Avenue North and Houser Way.
= TIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 700,000.00
TOTAL$ 700,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Slight Reduction
NANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
(1,PTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
OTENTIAL SITE: City Right-of-way
ACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
-UPPORTING
ROJECT: (Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
r what programs
re served? Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve $ 700,000 $ Decreased
supporting factors
Can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
(54)
1
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 5
DE-ARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 5
P-OJECT TITLE: North Renton Sewer Replacement - Phase 2
P'•OJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace Sanitary Sewers in North Renton residential area - Bounded by
North 6th Street, North 3rd Street, Burnett Avenue North and Garden Avenue
North.
ES IMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 600,000.00
TOTALS 600,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Slight Reduction
Fl ANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
O-TIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BA KGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
PO ENTIAL SITE: City Right-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SU•PORTING
PR+JECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or hat programs
are served? Why 3)
thi project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
AL ERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(In•Icate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve $ 600,000 $Decreas-=
sup•orting factors
ca be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(55)
I ',
•
FINAL PRIORITY rs
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION rs 6
D:-ARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY rr 6
P IOJECT TITLE: Renton Avenue Interceptor
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from Victoria Place West to Existing
Earl ington School Pump Station
ES IMATED COSTS: LAND $ '
IMPROVEMENTS$ 200,000.00
TOTAL $ 200.ono_Do
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal
FI 4ANCING 1) Local Improvement District
O_TIONS:
2) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
3) Referendum 39 - Municipal Waste Water Funding Program
4)
B C KGROUND: Provides gravity sewer service to this west side of City replacing
pump station and force main.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and Public Rights-of-Way
I '
F CTORS 1) Provides gravity sewer service to unsewered and pumped sewer
S PPORTING area.
P IOJECT: (Who 2)
or what programs
ar served? Why 3)
th I project?)
4)
I I
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
yERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 Slncreasing
THIS PROJECT:
icate which 2) $ $
suportIng factors
c-7 be met.) 3) $ $ -_
4) $ $
5) $ $
(56)
FINAL PRIORITY #
.I MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # 7
DEPARTMENT: Ut i 1 i ty (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY r/ 7
PROJ CT TITLE: Black River Interceptor
PROJ CT DESCRIPTION: New 15" - 3,500' Long Sanitary Sewer Along Monster Road and
Container Corporation Site to Serve Extreme West Portion of
Black River Drainage Basin
ESTIM•TED COSTS: LAND $
•
IMPROVEMENTS$ 140.000.00
TOTAL S140.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 10,000.00 •
FINA CING 1) Local Improvement District
OPTIuNS:
2) Developer Extension
3)
•
4)
BAC GROUND: This new interceptor would provide sewer service to the north and
west part of Black River Drainage Basin near the Black River Quarry,
west of the current City limits.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and public rights-of-way in and west of Monster Road.
I
f,;ACT RS 1) This project will provide sanitary sewers to undeveloped areas.
SUP ORTING
PRO ECT: (Who 2)
or w at programs
are s rved? Why 3)
this p oject?)
1, 4) •
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTE NATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0 •
TO T IS PROJECT:
(indic.to which 2) $ $
supp•rting factors
•
can •e met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) - $ $
(57)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 8
' DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 8
PROJECT TITLE: Heather Downs Interceptor - Upper Basin
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New 12" 2,000' long Sewer Interceptor from N.E. 4th Street South
to existing Heather Downs Interceptor.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$_ 80.000.00
TOTAL$ 80.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000.00
FINANCING 1) Developer Extension
OPTIONS:
2) Local Improvement District
3) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
4)
BACKGROUND: Provides gravity sanitary sewer service to the Cascadia Annexation area in
the northern portion of Heather Downs drainage basin and south of N.E. 4th
Street.
POTENTIAL SITE: Public rights-of-way and easements.
FACTORS 1) Project allows development of Cascadia Annexation.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT: (Who 2)
or what programs
I are served? Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4)
5) $ $
(58)
FINAL PRIORITY ::
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION r. 9 1 '
•
DEPART ENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY ::_9
•
PROJEC TITLE: West Kennydale Interceptor
•
• PROJEC DESCRIPTION: New West Kennydale Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from Kennydale School
to N.E. 20th St.
•
•
EST MAT D COSTS: LAND $
IMPROVEMENTS$ 150,000.00
ii TOTAL $ 150.000.OP
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 5,000.00
•
FINANCI G 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTION•:
2) Local Improvement District
I
3) Referendum 1139 - Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
4) • I
BA C KG-OUND: The proposed line serves the west half of upper Kennydale via
Jones Road.
li
POTENT AL SITE: Easements and Public Rights-of-Way
FAQTO'S 1) Provide sanitary sewers to area of poor septic tank operation •
SUPPO 'TING •
•
PROJEaT: (Who 2) Eliminate water quality and health risks
or what programs
arellserv-d? Why 3)
thislproj ct?)
4)
5)
• COST: CAPITAL O&M
AL ERN•TIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0 •
• TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicat: which 2) $ $
supporti g factors
can be et.) 3) $ $
I •
11
4) $ $
5) $ $
•
•
(59)
' a
I i
- �I
FINAL PRIORITY u
II MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION tr 10
DEP RTMENT: Ut i I ity (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY u 1 n
PROJECT TITLE: East Kennydale Interceptor
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New East Kennydale Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from N.E. 27th St.
Southeast to N.E. 23rd St. and Aberdeen Ave. N.E.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND $
IMPROVEMENTS $ 95,000.00
TOTAL S 95.ono_o0
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 5,000.00
FINA CING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTI m NS:
2) Local Improvement District
3) Referendum #39 Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
4)
BAC GROUND: Provides sanitary sewer service to north and east portions of Kennydale,
presently unsewered.
POT= TIAL SITE: Easements and public rights-of-way
FACT1 RS 1) Provide sanitary sewers to area of poor septic tank operation
SUPP v RTING
PROJ1 CT:(Who 2) Eliminate water quality and health risks. I
or wh.t programs i
are s-Irved? Why 3)
this ploject?)
4) -
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTE`NATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0
TO T IIS PROJECT:
(Indic Ilte which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can b•I met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(60)
II
I
-
11
::tS�SlR
�" •: :;
x o xa x
I �� x
C
:.:.:.::,:::ii:1:::::::i,::::i: ::::::"1::iii:::::iii::iii::::::".kiii::::iiiiii:::ili.:":":::::!-: i.!.ii::::,:::,:iiiii.,!:::,::::::::•:::.:iiii::,:iiiiiii:Iii;
I i l�
.S�LlS
•. t
yvy �'.
t
•:,:.::::::::...•••••••••:::Ky: :::*::*:::::K*0::*:.:::*:•::::::::::::::.:•:•:. ::,::::::::*:::.::::::.::::.:.::::::::.::.:;.;:.::::::„.„,,,,,,,,,,,:::▪.:„:„,:::::::::::§,,,,.,
Z.
AIL
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.;:;::.:::§nii.::..:....:::•::•:::::;:::::.:• •:.;::::::::::::::::.::::::;:::
o F!‘
411 :..............:......x....••...:.:....:.:.:..:...•...x......:.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.::::.:.:
::::::::::::::::::.*::::::.::.::::::::::.:::.::::::.::::.:.::::::::.::::::.:..::::.:..7 4..::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::'::::::::::::::::::::::!::::::
.:.:.:.::.:.:.:::::„:.::: :::.:.::::.:.:::....::.:.::::.:.:.::.:.::::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.::::
,:.:....:.......:. .......:.:.:..:.x....••.:.:.:..:.:.:....:.:....:.:....:.:.:..:.:.:..:.:.:..:.:.:..:.:.:.:
.:.:::::::::::•:•::::::i:::::*::::.:...::*::::*::::„::::.:.:::::*::::*:::::.:::::*:::::::.:.:.:..
: :
:::::::::;:i
....
...
, :::::::::::::::::"::::::::::°':gKg::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::*::'
-,
4 ::::::::::.::::::.::::.:.:.::::::....:...:::::.:::. ...:.:.::::.:::„...:.::::::.::::::.:::::.:::::::.:.::
:__,
it
' I I I . Water Fund
(61)
i- I
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
Project Total Cost Potential
Description Annual Funding
Priority & Location Acquisition Improvements O & M Sources*
#1 Well #9 $150,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.63) Cedar River Park Ref. 38
#2 2 I" Transmission Main $350,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.64) through CBD
#3 West Hill Reservoir $1,200,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.65) & Pump Station Ref. 8
Joint Funding with
Skyway Districts
#4 berdeen Avenue $200,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.66) ransmission Main
#5 South Talbot Hill $50,000 $650,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.67) Reservoir
#6 S!pringbrook Springs $200,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p68) W-tershed Acquisition Ref. 38
Joint Purchase
for Park
it
(62)
II )
•
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION # 1
DEP RTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 1 !I
IPRO ECT TITLE: Well No. 9
i?RO CT DESCRIPTION: Construction of Well No. 9 Pump Station, a new water supply source.
ESTI TED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEtENTS S 150,000.00
TOTAL 3150.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal
FINA CING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTI'NS:
2) Referendum #38 - Municipal Water Supply Funding Program
3)
•
4)
AC •GROUND: When Well 38 was drilled and constructed in 1968, an exploratory well
was also drilled. This was used as an observation well at that time,
with the eventual use to be as the site of future Well No. 9. A new
casing will be installed in 1982. Due to the possible conflicts with
the D.S.H.S. and well construction in the Cedar River this project •
should be done as soon as possible. The facility will provide addi-
tional water supply to the City's supply. This will allow for con-
tinued growth and expansion of Renton.
POT:NTIAL SITE: The site for future Well No. 9 wiJl be at the present observation well
location in the northeast corner of the Cedar River Park. There
should be no cost for the site and no zoning problems.
FAC •RS 1) The City of Renton can pump water from the Cedar River ground
SUP-ORTING water at a lesser cost than if water was purchased from the
PROJECT: (Who 2) City of Seattle (the only other water purveyor in the area).
qr what programs All existing watermains in this area have been designed to
are served? Why 3) accept water from proposed future well sites.
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
Major
ALTE-NATIVES 1) Purchase water from the City of Seattle at an $ 0 $ Increase
TOT IS PROJECT: increased cost.
(Indic-to which 2) Remain as is, and eventually be short of water $ 0 $ 0
supp•rtingfactors supply to serve the City of Renton.
can •e met.) 3) S S
4) S $
5) $ $
(63)
! I
II
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION n 2
DE-ARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY x 2 1
PRI JECT TITLE: 24" CBD Transmission Main
PR•JECT DESCRIPTION: Complete installation of 24" Transmission Water Main through
the Central Business District.
ES (MATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$350.000.0Q •
TOTAL$350,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$Minimal Increase
Fl :NCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
O- IONS:
2)
3) 1
4)
B KGROUND: This project was first proposed in the 1965 Water Study Comprehensive
Plan. It was also one of the projects proposed in the 1975 Water and
Sewer Bond Issue. The completion of this transmission line will balance _
the flows from the Talbot Hill Reservoir and the Mt. Olivet Reservoir.
This project will increase the fire flows and reliability of the system
in the C.B.D. and also improve the entire water system reliability. —
P•TENTIAL SITE: The location of the remaining portions of this project are in Talbot
Road South from South Grady Way to South Renton Village Place; Burnett
Avenue South from Houser Way South to South Tobin Street; South Tobin
Street from Burnett Avenue South to Williams Avenue South; Williams
Avenue South from South Tobin Street to South Riverside Drive; South
Riverside Drive from Williams Avenue South to Wells Avenue South; across
Wells Avenue Bridge to North Riverside Drive; then in North Riverside
FA TORS Drive to Liberty Park and then through Liberty Park to Wells #1 and #2.
SU, PORTING
P OJECT: (Who 1) There will be no cost for right-of-way for the watermain.
or hat programs
ar ,served? Why 2) This will increase the fire flows and reliability of the C.B.D.
this project?) as well as the reliability of the entire water system.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
A TERNATIVES 1)Remain the same. $ 0 $ 0
To THIS PROJECT:
(I I•Icate which 2) $ $
sulporting factors
c be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(64)
FINAL PRIORITY u
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION u 3
DE•ARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 3
' PR•JECT TITLE: West Hill Reservoir and Pump Station
PR•JECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of West Hill Reservoir, 1 million gallons, pump
station and transmission mains.
ES (MATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 1,200,000 •
TOTAL$ 1,200,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
Fl ANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
O-TIONS:
2) DSHS Referendum #38 Municipal Water Supply Funding Program
it 3) Joint use and funding from Skyway Water Districts
4)
BACKGROUND: The West Hill is served by water purchased from the City of Seattle.
There is insufficient water supply for fire protection in some areas
of West Hill. The only storage presently available is in the City
of Seattle Transmission line. The City of Seattle imposes a penalty
demand charge when a system has insufficient storage. Renton is
presently paying this penalty charge.
P•TENTIAL SITE: The City owns one potential site presently on N.W. 4th Street at
84th Avenue South. The latest design might require a different
site. This new proposed site would be at Thompson School, which
is located at South 123rd Street at 82nd Avenue South in King
County. The use of this site would have to be negotiated with
the Renton School District. There could be zoning or King County
opposition to the construction of an elevated tank at this site.
FACTORS
SUPPORTING 1) The cost benefit would be the elimination of the demand charge
PFtOJECT:(Who for lack of storage that Renton is presently paying to the City
or hat programs of Seattle.
ar served? Why
thi project?) 2) Additional benefits would be in improved system reliability and
fire flow capability.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
A TERNATIVES 1) Remain the same. $ 0 $ 0
T THIS PROJECT:
(In icate which 2) $ $
su porting factors
ca be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(65)
FINAL PRIORITY
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION J: 4
DE ARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY =7 4
PROJECT TITLE: Aberdeen Ave. N.E. Transmission Main
PR vJECT DESCRIPTION: Install 16" Transmission Watermain in Aberdeen Ave. N.E. from
N.E. 14th Street to N.E. 28th Street
ES IMATED COSTS: LAND $
IMPROVEMENTS $ 200.000.00
TOTAL $2on,nnn nn
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal
Fl ANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
O'TIONS:
2)
3)
4)
B. KGROUND: This project was in the 1965 water study. It would improve the
fire flows to the northwest section of the Highlands, but is
basically designed to increase the fire flows in the lower
Kennydale area where there is anticipated commercial and multi-
family growth in the near future.
P•TENTIAL SITE: The location of this project is all in public right-of-way of
Aberdeen Ave. N.E. Therefore there is no costs for property
involved.
FAI:TORS 1) The benefit of this project would be increased fire flows to the
SU-PORTING aforementioned areas.
P-••.JECT: (Who 2)
or ( hat programs
ar:. served? Why 3)
thi..project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
AL ERNATIVES 1) Remain the same, and limit building and develop- $ 0 $ 0
T THIS PROJECT: ment to meet the existing fire flows the system
(inricalc which 2) can presently deliver. $ $
supporting factors
ca be met.) 3) $ $
4)
5) $ $
(66)
FINAL PRIORITY sa
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION n 5
DEPAR MENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY 5
PROJE T TITLE: South Talbot Hill Reservoir - 1.5 Million Gallons
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New Reservoir in South Talbot Hi11 Area Above Valley General
Hospital.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND $ 50.000.00
IMPROVEMENTS $650,000.00
TOTAL $700_000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal
FINANCNG 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPITIO S:
2)
3)
•
4)
BAC KG-OUND: The reliability of any water supply is the capability of supply-
,I ing water under adverse conditions such as power failures, etc.,
and at a quantity to meet the requirements or demands of the
system. The 350 ft. hydraulic pressure zone that this proposed
reservoir would serve is presently planned to meet its fire
service demands by pumping water through the south Talbot Hill
Pump Station. The system is intertie with two pressure reducing
stations to the Rolling Hills elevated tank system. These inter-
ties are not sufficient to supply the complete system demands.
POTEN IAL SITE: The approximate location of ;he site for this proposed reservoir
is just south of Carr Road and west of the Benson Road (SR 515)
extended. The cost of the site is estimated to be $50,000.00
FACTO S 1) The benefit would be increased reliability of the existing system.
SUPPO TING
PROJE T:(Who 2)
oriwha programs
are served? Why 3)
this pro•ect?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTER ATIVES 1) Remain as is.
$ 0 $ 0
TO, THI• PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
ca'n be met.) 3) $ $
4)
5) $ $
(67)
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION n 6
D•I PARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 6
PfIOJECT TITLE: Sprinqbrook Springs Watershed Acquisition
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquire three or four adjoining properties to Springbrook Water
Shed for sanitary protection and further source development.
E 'MATED COSTS: LAND$ 200,000.00
IMPROVEMENTS$
TOTAL$
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal
FI ANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
0=TIONS:
2) Referendum #38 Municipal Water Supply Funding Program
3) Possible joint purchase and development as passive park
4)
I
B 1CKGROUND: The Springbrook Springs are the City's oldest source of water, 1
operating now at about 2.5 million gallons per day since 1902.
' When the springs were developed at the turn of the century, the
area was all rural. Now with urban development, buffer areas
must be purchased to remain in undeveloped states.
PeTENTIAL SITE: Osterhouse property - .4 acres
Weaton property - 16 acres
Entrance parcel - 2 acres
Fish farm - 8 acres
•
F TORS 1) Allow City to control sensitive neighboring properties for sanitary -
S 7 PORTING control.
PROJECT:(Who 2) Acquire adjoining lands for future source development.
or`I hat programs
ar- served? Why 3) -
thll project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
AL ERNATIVES 1) Remain as is
TO THIS PROJECT: $ 0 $ 0
(In cate which 2) Lose control and allow urban development. $ 0 $ Major
Isu Porting factors Increase
can'be met.) 3) $ $
I '
4) $ $
I
5) $ $
(68)
.
1II
II
•
•
tit----- -i-:-:-i-iSii:-Ka :i 1�+ ..OR
I
JElL
:.r. .
::V
:
•.YY:...
.+ Y
T•i Al
pp
:::::*::::::.::::i*:. .:::::::*::::::*::::::: 0..::::*?..;:ii:
�C
. .....•.•...• .::::.........x.... .::::: :::..
,,,z;:.:a.. .„::::::...........:.:%-" ,...,
-"%ve....% -.xx.:- x.::::.:.: :.% ::: :*::
x::::::::::::::*:„....,x:..:*:::*mo . ::::::: :...::::...%i::.?:::.::
' ::iiii::.:;:.:";:. i.:::.::::::.:::.::::::::::.::::::.:.i.:1 .44,. ........:.....:!....:::1...:...
. ....:.:.ii!.:!.....x.:.::::::•:•:.::::•:•:•:::••••••:••••:•••:.:••••::::::.:.:::::::::::::::::•::::::::.::::.::::„...4
joi
,._
....::::::::::::::::::::::::::....::::::.:.:.::::::„:::*::.::::::„:„:„...........
, ••••••..........
•••••••••
ikt.••••••
,_
....
.- ,
, , .
_ ,
•
, .
•
V. Airport ort Fund
I
(69) i
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION •
Project Total Cost Potenti I
Description Annual Funding
Priority & Location Improvements 0 & M Sources
jl
Water Main Extension $72,000 Minimal Airport Fund
(p.►1) -S.E. Corner-
••, Water Main $108,000 Minimal Airport Fund
(p. ,2) - Loop System
Instrument Landing $75,000 By U.S. Federal ADAP
(p.r3) System Gov't Funds
i I
(70)
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION s 1
D PARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRP,)RT1r• DEPARTMENT PRIORITY+r 1'
P-OJECT TITLE: WATER MAIN - Upgrading (SE Corner)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 12" water service extension from Logan Bridge to Boeing Bridge. Tie-
i new 12" line to Renton's water system, providing more reliable water service to SE
corner. Removes fire line from Boeing system allowing City system to provide domestic
s?rvice.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND $ -
IMPROVEMENTS $ 72,000
TOTALS 72,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal
'I ANCING 1) Airport Fund
D-TIONS:
2)
3)
4)
3 CKGROUND:
E entual goal is to service Airport completely from City's water system instead of continuing
t use Boeing's water system.
•
' TENTIAL SITE: N/A
CTORS 1) Improved reliability of system
,UPPORTING
'ROJECT:(Who 2) Removes customers from Boeing water system and transfers them to
,rI what programs City system
le served? Why 3)
Is project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
TERNATIVES 1) Leave service as it is - on Boeing system $ 0 $ 0
THIS PROJECT:
li dlcate which 2) $S. • $
�pportIng factors
.an be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(71)
I
FINAL PRIORITY a "
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION x 2
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRPORT) DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 2
PROJECT TITLE: Water Main - Completion of Loop System
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete a loop system around the Airport by extending main line
along east and north sides to the northwest corner.
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ -
IMPROVEMENTS$ 108,000
TOTALS 108,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Airport Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
This would complete the process of up-grading the water supply system on the Airport an.
would remove the last of the Boeing system supply lines.
•
POTENTIAL SITE:
•
FACTORS 1) Increased reliability of system for Airport tenants and users.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Improved fire flow capacity.
or what programs
ire served? Why • 3) Facilitates installation of fire hydrants in affected area of the
(this project?) field.
4) Completes the switch from Boeing water system to City's water system.
5) -
. II
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Continue with existing arrangement. S 0 S 0
ITO THIS PROJECT:
((Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ S
4) $ $
5) $ $
(72)
•
•
. •
FINAL PRIORITY •
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION • 3
, DE ARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRPORT) DEPARTMENT PRIORITY •�3
PR JECT TITLE: Instrument Landing System (ILS)
PR JECT DESCRIPTION:
; •
,! ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ -
IMPROVEMENTS $ 75,000 •
TOTALS 75,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
FIN NCING 1) Federal ADAP Funds @ 100%
OP IONS:
2)
3)
4)
•
3A KGROUND:
•
FA' is presently reviewing potential Airport installations of ILS System. If Renton Airporu
is selected then Federal funds will be provided. If not, we will continue without ILS.
I '
•
.3O ENTIAL SITE: N/A
•
'A TORS 1) Improved operational capacity and safety.
3U-PORTING
3R•JECT:(Who 2)
x hat programs
ire served?Why 3) .
hI project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
, ERNATIVES 1) Continue operation without ILS. S 0 $ 0
10 THIS PROJECT:
In.Icats which 2) 5. • S
.up•oiling factors
:a be met.) 3) S S `
+) • $ $
5) $ S
(73)
Appendix 1
Six Year
Transportation Improvement
Program
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1983 — 1988
CITY
PRIO, ITY # ANNUAL ELEMENT PROJECTS
1 Grady Way Bridge Replacement
2 Renton Area Transportation Study
3 Miscellaneous Street Improvements
4 NE 4th St./NE 3rd St. , Union Ave. NE to Sunset Blvd. N
5 SW Grady Way, Lind Ave. SW to Longacres Dr. SW
6 Wells Avenue Bridge Replacement
7 Sunset Blvd. N & N 3rd Intersection Improvements
8 Controller Modernization
9 Sunset Blvd. & Union Ave. NE
� 0 Garden Ave. N, N 4th St. to N 8th St.
SECOND YEAR PROJECTS
� 1 Monroe Ave. NE, NE 6th St. to NE 12th St.
2 Logan Ave. S, S 2nd St. to Airport Way
THIRD YEAR PROJECTS
13 Talbot Road S, S 16th St. to S 41st St.
114 SW 16th St. , Lind Ave. SW to Monster Road SW
115 Lind Ave. SW, SW 16th St. to SW Grady Way (Bridge I-405 Overpass)
+ 6 Renton Ave. S, S 3rd St. to S 7th St.
FOURTH - SIXTH YEAR PROJECTS
17 S 7th St. , Rainier Ave. S to Smithers Ave. S
8 Valley Parkway SW, SW Grady Way to SW Sunset Blvd.
9 Sunset Blvd. N, Bronson Way N to FAI 405
10 Valley Parkway SW, SW 41st St. to SW 16th St.
P1 Valley Parkway SW, SW 16th St. to SW Grady Way
112 Lake Wash. Blvd. North, N Park Dr. to North City Limits
P3 SW 27th St. , Valley Parkway SW to West Valley Road
m4 SE Puget Dr. , Jones P1. SE to Edmonds Ave. SE
1i5 Sunset Blvd. NE, FAI 405 to NE Park Dr.
r6 Taylor Ave. NE/Taylor P1. NW, Renton Ave. Ext. to Stevens Ave! NW
.7 NE 12th St. , Lynnwood Ave. NE to Union Ave. NE
1,8 Union Ave. NE, NE Sunset Blvd. to NE 24th St.
1;9 Edmonds Avenue Extension
it
-- _ I5IA1172 SlX==`'EAR--TRAN8PORTATION-IMPR0vEMENT-PROGRAM-1583-T0--1-98f8=== - —Page--1--cif-5 --------
— OBLI6ATIO June 28, 1982
Hearing Date
EXHIBIT "A" Adoption Date July 12. 1982
. City/County No. I _Keypunching Note:Data entered in tole I-8 must Resolution Number 2460
CitCounty ND. Il to I�la 9 a this be an all
camas punched from .
_ PR EJECT COSTS'IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
u PROJECT IDENTIFICATION oY sa o 1 OBLIGATION SCHEDULE .FUNDING SOURCE
Title,Route,Road Log No., Section No., . Total d
c,o Work. b Y_E .A R FEDERAL TOTAL
E Location/Termini,Deecrlption of Works ,3 Code Length ;.,�;0 1st
*u Beginning Milepost 4. bridge No. • ; {Miles) ix E men) - 2 nd 3 rd 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
.: o 6-Ph AIrIDUNT PROGRAM
i -I 1!sa3 4 40 41 g 44 4 7 47 4e '9 IN 0—0.. - 5510 11 1s 40 6364 13 r1 00 14 11 V 15 7Is 70 16. ,e 00 17' es
1. G,R,A,D,Y, ,W,A,YI ,B,R,I1D,G,E1 ,RIE,PILIAICIEIM,EIN 4 j A,B,D1H ,0i1,0 M U X 4101010, 4,0,010. , , I • 1 I , ,7101010. I 1 1 .'I I I .1101010, 1 ,81.0,010.
g P (jointL Bridge Forward
Bridge Re lacement with Tukwila) Construction.
Repl. Thrust
2. R,E,N,T,O,N, ,A,R,E,A, ,TIR,A,N,S,P,O,R,TI ,S,T,U,D,Y 8 i//U, , , , l , U 11610 all , 1 1 1 1 , 1 , , , III i L6,0 ( I , 16,0
Develop a multi-modal transportation plan for the .
city. (Phase I) ,
3. M,I,SICIE,L,L,A,N,E101U,S1 IS,T,R,EIE,T, IIIMIP,R,O,V 4 D. , 1 , 4 1 111719 _11,210 ,11310 121710 1 I I I I I I I I 16,919 111619,9
Street Division overlays. See attached sheet with
listings.
N,E, ,4,T,H,/,3,R,D, 1U1N,I,O,N, tT,O, ,S,U,NIS,E,T, 2 B1D1F,G ,014,5 M U ,3,0,0 lit I I I I I I III I I I let 13,0,0 1 1 131010
4. H
Drainage, resurface, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and 100%
widen to 5 lanes. (2-way left turn centerlane) - L.I.D.
5. Slid, IGIRIA,D,Y, ,L,IINID, ,TIO, ILIO,N1G1A1C,RIE,SI 2 BID,FIG , A7,0 S it 5 0 0 1 5 0 0
I I I 11510,n Ili I 1 1 , ill Ili I I I I 1, l 1 1 ill 1 1
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, illumination, H J L 100%
channelization, P-i BR. 56' roadway taper w/half to L.I.D.
44'
6. W,R,T.,L,SI ,A.V,E, ,B,RIIIDIG IEI E,
,R, PIL,A,C,E,M FI. ABF 1, ,
4l G , j0,4 S_ U X 11010,0 16 810 , 1 , 1 , , 1,3,4,4 33E 16 I , , , , , 1 , 810
Bridge Replacement. H J L
7. S,U,N,SIE,T, 1BIL,V,DI INI I&I ,NI 13,R,D1 1I,M,P,R10 6RA,B,D,F , 4 , M U 111010. I I I I I I , I I I 1180 FIA,UIS , 1 I 1 .117 1_ , 11,010
Signal improvements, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, H I
channelization, paving and signing.
8. CIO,N,T,R,OIL,L,E.R, IMIOIDIEJR,N,I,Z,A,TII,0,N, , , 7X , , , , U 11,0j9 I I I ill.I lit, , , I , , I , 1 I 1110,9
♦ I 1 ,11 OI 9
Purchase of traffic signal controllers--to replace Local
obsolete equipment. (See attached list.)
MS-T R!B UT-ION
1 COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENGINEER
DOT 140-049 I COPY C.R.A.B,(COUNTIES ONLY)
Jan. 1500
Is IA a-2 51 X YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 19 8 3 TO I9 8_8 Page 2 of 5
- -- - - - — -
- OBLIGATION PROGRAM ` Hearing Date June 28, 1982
EXHIBIT "A" Adoption Date July 12, 1982
City/County _Keypunching Note:Data entered in cola 1-8 must Resolution Number 2460
City No. 1 0 7 10 y-a be on all cards punched from ,,
County No. 11 7 7-8 This form. a 'SS PROJECT COSTS'IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
e PROJECT IDENTIFICATION O 0' OBLIGATION. SCHEDULE FUNDING SOURCE
2 Title,Route,Road Log No., Section No., 2 0 Work -Toc
otal a ,� __..Y._E A FP
f Location/Termini,Deecripiion of Work, 03 Code Length &\ 4 1st FEDERAL TOTAL
N Beginning Milepost 4- Bridge No. • o (Miles) Element) z nd • 3 rd 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
. cc #Gib AMOUNT PROGRAM
1. E S. 4 5 878 9 10 . ` 11 12 19 14 15 16 17•
-! ._ •e ea 40� 44�,a,s A7{e W n...- ea>d ee Go ap cr p 11 a rs+c le ao es
9. S1U,NtS, L
EiTr IB,LIV,DI i&i ,U,N,I,OIN, IAIV1E1 INIE1 6 II 1 I . ► 1 M U 1 1416j , 1 • , I A • i 1 14, 11_3L 0FIAiSIP. 1 1 1 • 1 1110, L i 1 19164
New signal controller and add left turn phase. 90/10
10,G1A1R,D,E,N1 ,A,V,E, 1-, ,N, ,4,T,H, ,T10, ,N, ,8,T1H 2r0B,D,F,G , 42,5 S U 13,010 1 1 1 L I t , , 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 I , l , t31QQ, 1 L 131010
Drainage, paving, curb, sidewalks, illumination and H J
channelization.
11,14I0INIRIOIE, IA1V1E,-1N,E, 16,T,H1 IT101 INIE1 ,1,21T 2 n B,D,F,G , &3,8 C U 11 1 1 , 1 1,51810 I I 1 I I I III 1 I 1 1151810 1 11151810,
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, illumination, H J 25%
channelization, 36' roadway. �/J� LID
12.L•O,G,A,N,-is, ,2,N,D1 LT10L IA,IARLPPOLR,T, _,W,A1Y, 4MA1Dj . _ , 4_2,5 i I 13L0 , 1 1 _ 1 1 1 1 I I i 1 I , 1 I L 140 I I I 1310_
Overlay
13.T-IA,L1B101T1 1R1D1-1S, 1l,6,T1H1. 1T10, 1S, 14,1,S1T1 2 M B1D,F,G ,li8,0 C U 1 1 t 1 , 1 ,11010 1 1 1 III III I I 1 111010 1- I 1110,0
Drainage, paving, shoulders, pre-level, channeliza- H J 50%
tion (joint with King County). County
14. s,w. ,1,6,TIIL ,L1I,N,D, LALV,E4 1T10, j4,0,N,S,T,FIR 21gB1D,F,G , 49,0 C U 1 1 , 1 , , 2,0,010 Li 1 , , 1 1 1 1 , 1 I 2101010 1 ,2101010
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, illum- H J L
ination, channelization, bridge and 44' roadway. LID
��// LID
15. L,I1N,D, ,A,V,E1 ,S1W1l16,T1H1 1T101 1S1W1 ,G,RiAIDiY 20,B,D,FIG ,0A210 S U III III 1 1 1 2141010 11 1 III 1 1 1 2141010 1 1214,010
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalk, illumina- HIJL Developer
tion, signal, channelization, bike route, landscaping, M 0
,FAI-405 Bridge, 44' roadway.
1
164R,E1N,T,O1N, ,A,V1 ,S1-1S,3,R,D, ,T,O, ,S,7,TLH, ,S,T 4ZBID,FIG ,044,0 C U III ill 15,010 , 1 1 1 , 1 1 i 1 1 , I 151010 1 1 1510,0
Drainage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, J
illumination, undergrounding.
DISTRIBUTION
I COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENGINEER
DOT 140-049 I COPY C.R.A.S.(COUNTIE5 ONLY)
Jan, 1900
012 - 51 X YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1983 TO 1988 Page 3 of 5 '
- OBLIGATION PROGRAM - Nerving Date
June 28, 1982
EXHIBIT "A" Adoption Date July 12, 1982
City/County _Keypunching Mote:Date entered in cols 1-8 must Resolution Number 2460
City No. 9a be on all cards punched from 1 .County No. 111017(0
1 7z-a this form. -8 PROJECT COSTS'IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
- PROJECT IDENTIFICATION aY G 1 OBLIGATION SCHEDULE FUNDING SOURCE
2 Title,Route,Road Log No., Section No., Si Work Total & _ .Y_E A.
E Location/Termini,Deecription of Work, ,.3 Length \,o FEDERAL TOTAL
u Beginning Milepoef + Bridge .;4 Code (Miles) u: let 2nd 3rd 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
"" 9 0 IF Element) ¢Gth AMOUNT PROGRAM
t y _2 3" 4 5 S 7 8 9 -. JO . II 12. 13 14 15 116. 17_
i3 ao{I 44,4,2 48 47 INsz.--_ ss so se CO ilPp el M 11 12 75 x 76 an es
17. S, ,7,T,H1 ,RIA,IINIIIEIRI 1T101 ISIM,IITIHIEIRISI I 2F%G A,BIDIF , L510 S U I 1 I . i- , toilio 121210, I I I . 1 1 1 4,'1 I 1 121210, I , 1212104
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, ilium- Devel-
ination, channelization, 44' roadway, Rainier to oper &
Shattuck contingent on developer. LID
18. V,A,LIL,E,Y, ,P,K,W,Y, IGI .,A,DIY1 ,T,OI 1114,01TIH1 1Y//��AIB,D,F ,1j0,0 M U 1 1 I 1 1 , ill 5151 010 11 1 I I I ill 515,0,0 1 .5,51010
Grading, drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, gutter, GHIJ Devel-
illumination, signal, bike route, channelization, L M 0 oper,
landscaping, bridge, 56' roadway.
19. S1U,N1S,E1T, 1B,L1V1D, ,B1RI0,N,S,01N, IT101 1I,4,015 2 P R,D,F,G ,0A5,0 M U I I 1 1 , I , 1 I 181410 I I I 11 1 1 i 1 ,81410 1 1 181410_
Drainage, paving, sidewalk, gutters, signal, H I J - 20% LID
g curbs,
illumination, channelization, widen to 68 feet.
20. V,A,LIL,E,YI ,P,K,W,Y1 IS1W,411,S1T TO S,W,1,6,T 1 M AIBID,F '1147,0 M U It ' ill , 1 I 6,01010 lit lit , , 1 610,,0 1 ,6,0,010
Grading, drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalk, GHIJ
illumination, signal, bike route, channelization, L M 0 Devel-
landscaping, bridge. oper
21. VIAILILIEIY•I ,P1K,W,Y1 IS,W1116,TIH1 1T10, IGIR,A,DIY 1 K A.B,D,G ,0,l,0 M U 11 , ill 1 1 1 5,010,0 1 1 1 1 i 1 I I 1 5101010 1151010,0
Grading, drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalk, HIJL
illumination, signal, bike route, channelization, M 0 20% LID
landscaping, bridge, 66' roadway.
22. L,K, ,W,A1S,H, ,BIL,VID, ,Ni 1P1K, 1T,01 ICII,T,Y, ',1, 2�f BIDIF,G 134013 ,S U 1 .1 1 i , I I I I 4181010_ I I I I I I I I i 4181010 11418'010
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalks, gutter, illumin-
25% LID
anon, channelization, bikeway. ��//
23. S'W' 1217,TIHi IVIAILILI 1PIK,W,YI IT,O, _ON IVIAIT,IT, 1 A,B,DIF_ ,0A513 S U I I I _ I I I I I I 219'010 I I 1 III I I I 2151010 1 12151010
Grading, drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalks, GHIJ Devel-
illumination, signal, bike route, channelization, L M 0
landscaping. 44' roadway. oper
24. S1E, ,P,U,GIE,T1 1D,R, ,J,O,N,E,S, ,T,O, ,E1D1M,O,N,D 2j%B1DIF,G 07,8 S U , , , , 1916,0 ill III , I , 1916,0 J. I 1916104
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, gutter, illumin-
ation, channelization,- 44' roadway.
DISTRIBUTION -
1 COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENGINCER
DOT 140-049 1 COPY C.R.A.B.(COUMTIE5 ONLY)
.Inn. MP"
s A I.E 51 X YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 19 8 3 TO 19 8 8 Page 4 of 5
-- —--BBkter-A l'01.4—PRoa -M------- - Nearing Date June 28, 1982
Cif /Coup EXHIBIT "A" Adoption Date July 12, 1982
y ty .keypunching Note:Data entered in cola I-8 must
City No. I1 0 7 I015-p be on all cards punched from Resolution Number 2460
County No. 1 l7�T-8 this form.
v PROJECT C05T5 tN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
G PROJECT IDENTIFICATION a +-' o 1 OBLIGATION SCHEDULE
eY .o FUNDING SOURCE
z Tit Ie,Routh,Road Log No., Section No., -o Work -Total V •� Y_E.Al R
Location/Tertnini,Descr:ption of Works �3 Code Length \ g FEDERAL _ TOTAL
u Beginning Milepost Bridge No. •a a (Miles c r t'(A1ooal - End 3 rd 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
__ w Element) its th AMOUNT PROGRAM
a 2 S.. 4 5 878 9 . JO . II - IZ .
is NI m_I 44 4r,44_47 b !t 52..__ e5 so ee CO e e 13 r NI14 ii it 15 76'li 16 78 do I es
25. S,U,NISIEIT-I IBILtVIDI II1410151 ITlO. 1PiAtRIK1 IDIR 2 , B,D,FIG .0L9,0 S U I I t t 1-. , t • „ I •lI.8,Q 0, 1 I I • I I I 1 1 1 t , 1181010• 1 ,118t0104
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, gutters, channel- H J
ization, illumination and bikeway. [I!��/J
26. T,A1Y,L,O,RL ,MIW, ,RIEINITIO,NL ,T,O, IStTIEIVIE,NIS 21///BIDIF,G ,046,0 C U ill I , , ill 17, 210 t 1 1 1 1 , ill 171;10 1 1 17,2,0
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, ilium- H J
ination, channelization. 25% LID
27. NiEI 11121T,H1 ,L,YININ,W,0101D, 1T101 IUINII,01N, I 2RB,D,F,G ,0a6,0 C U I t 1 , I t 1 1101010 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1_010,0 t 11,010,0
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, ilium- H J
ination, channelization. 50% LID
28. U,NII,OIN, IA,V,- ,NISI IS,U_LNIS,E,TI ITA_O, 1NiE,2141T 2 B,D1F.G 1017,0 S,U I 1 1 I , , 1 1 l- 1610_1_0 I- I. 1 t 1 I 1 1 1 161Q10 , i 16,010
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalk, channel- H
ization. pp�� 50% LID
29. EIDIMIOINIDIS, 1A,V1E1 IE,X,TIE,NISII,0IN, I I 1 I I 1Y/IeA,B1D,F , + I U 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I , 111 1- 1 1 1 1
GHIL
K
• MI. MI 1_1 1 t 4 , 1 1 1 111 III ill 1 1 1 111 ill III , 1 1 , 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 , I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I Y//4 I t 1 1 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III III III III I , 1 1 1
I Wilt . ..AI 1 1 1 ill 11 1 III III t 1 1 I , 1 III 1 1 1 1 1
— _____015TRIBU710N _ - -
1 COPY DISTRICT STATE AID rNISI trER
0T 140 p 9 I COPY C.R.A.B.(COUNTIES ONLT)
-
--
_ _ 1 --- I -- --- '------- - -- ---- - - - ' - - --- -- - I 1 --- I-
•
15^I t-E 51,X_Y-EAR TRAN8PORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 19 8 3 TO 198 8 Page 5 of 5 '
— OBLIGATION PROGRAM — EXHIBIT "A" Hearing Date June 28, 1982
Adoption Date July 12, 1982
.'City/.County J<eypunching Note:Data entered in cole I-8 must ADDENDUM #1 - STATE HIGHWAY PROJECTS Reaolution MUM ber 2460
City No. I1 to I7 10 s_Q be on all cards punched from
' County No. 1 7 7-8 this form. R PROVECT COSTS'IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
• PROJECT IDENTIFICATION O G °1 OBLIGATION SCHEDULE FUNDING SOURCE
z Tit la,Roy e,Road Log No., Section No., Work Total d -_,...Y._E A (�
E Location i,Deecription of Work, 03 Code Length €\.4 1st FEDERAL TOTAL
t Beginning Milepoet 4 5rid9e No. •e c (Miles) o I:(AI;et.' z nd 3 rd 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
_2_ a a 6 Element) 4 GM AMOUNT IIRDfiRAM,
4 .2 S - 4 5 6 7 8 5 ..-.. JO . II 12 - IS • 14 15 16 17'.
-9 ._ »KU�a 40 41 444ri4S4740 ' IIII02..._ NW soulisW sirs 713 757G 'Mao es
F,A.II ,410151 iNs lC,I,T,Y, ,T,O, tS, ICIIITtYl i i 2 V/ , I t ,61.4,4 M U 1 1 i 4 1. , 1i , . 1 . 1 1 1 , I I I , 1 1 1 o'I l l , 11 1 . 1 I 1 , 1 ,
State DOT Project - capacity improvements. HOV lanes.
S,R, ,1,6,9, ,Q,U,E,EIN1 LSIE, ,T,O, ,1,4,9,T,H, ,S,E 1 , , , ,144,4 M U tit 1 It ill , I I I I I II . I , I 1 1 . $ I I I I
State Project - construct five lane roadway. r
' SIR' 1910,0, IR,EINIT,O,N, IT,O, ,IIS,SIAIQIU,A,H, I 2F'//. , L , 1,140,0 M U 1 1 1 1 , I , I I I I I 1 1 1 _ I 1 1 II , I I I III I I
State Project - widen to four lanes with five lanes
at intersections. yy//�/
, 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 •<i< I I ' , L I I f 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 l 1 l I I 1 I III 1 I 1 l ` I ,
11 I I 1 I , , 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 , I 1 I 1 1 1 1 M 11 1 , 4 , 1 I 1 I 11 I I I 1 1 , III I I I I I I I I I 11 1 1 1
I I 1 Li . . I r11 '
1 4 I I I I I I , I I , I I I 1 , I , I I I I I I I I ,
•
1 I I t 1 I 1 1 1 I , 1 1 I 1 , 1 1 1 1 I , . 1 , I l . . . 1 i 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I , III 1 1 I I I I
1-1 . 1 1 I--1 I-I 1- 1 1 I , _I- , 1 C I I--, I I-I--, -1- M-1 I I I 4 I Ili III t I 1 III III I I I ilk Ili I I l 1 1
•
D18TRt BUT ION
I COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENGINEER
DOT 140-049 I COPY C.R.A.B.(COUNTIE5 ONLY)
Jeri. 19B0
I ,
1983 OVERLAYS
1/2t GAS TAX PROJECTS
Williams Ave. South between !,
South 4th Street 6 Grady Way $ 22,000.00
Aberdeen Ave. NE between
Sunset Hwy. & NE 12th Street $ 17,000.00
NE 12th Street between
Edmonds Ave. NE & Lincoln Place NE $ 22,000.00
Camas Ave. NE between
1 NE 12th Street & Dead End $ 3,000.00
NE 16th Street between
Aberdeen Ave. NE & Edmonds Ave. NE $ 24,000.00
Kennewick Ave. NE between
NE 16th Street & NE 14th Street $ 4,000.00
Lincoln Ave. NE between
NE 16th Street & NE 14th Street $ 4,000.00
Monterey Ave. NE between
NE 16th Street & NE 14th Street $ 4,000.00
NE 14th Street between
Monterey Ave. NE & Jones Ave. NE $ 7,000.00
NE 20th Street between
Edmonds Ave. NE 6 Jones Ave. NE $ 22,000.00
NE 24th Street between
Edmonds Ave. NE & Jones Ave. NE $ 22,000.00
Dayton Ave. NE between
NE 24th Street 6 Dead End $ 3,500.00
1 North 1st Street between
Park Ave. N & Burnett Ave. N $ 24,500.00
$179,000.00
1984 $120,000.00 ESTIMATE
1985 $130,000.00 ESTIMATE
1986 $130,000.00 ESTIMATE
1987 $140,000.00 ESTIMATE
TRAFFIC CONTROLLER MODERNIZATION
1983 UPDATE •
Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program 1983 to 1988
Itemized List for Item No. 8
Location Cost
1 . North 4th & Factory $ 10,000
2. North 4th & Garden 10,000
3. North 4th & Williams 10,000
4. North 4th & Logan 10,000
5. North 3rd & Williams 10,000
6. North 3rd & Garden 10,000
7. North 3rd & Factory 10,000
8. North 3rd & Sunset 17,000
9. North 6th & Park 12,000
10. Lake Washington, Park & Garden 10,000
TOTAL AMOUNT $109,000
•
I ,
a
0.
1 ;;.'...: .: .- ..::...Ys'_ ':-,•;.'; /.;:.,:: ").';, i. ::.;.i,.,..-,:,,.7,--- '--"i:':''',::::i'""-
'.. ' .'. :' i.--''':'',.-;-C • 4::','''',-,':"%';:': •C::::-:-t'----,:. i';',',,,,-) .• 071 H
:_. _ _.... -•''' 1..,: i4 ':::! .2:::::';' 'Ll."•:".:; i',.;:i1;k1 iLii" 1
I
I .
IIIIIIII
dilh..
i . X:
rirg7M 111 I
1 I -
I •
707 i
o
7 07 ---
._.. 4,
........-14 - ,1
6 . ........
... .. ...--- -
... , .
•1 ;.P.1
} I
1
,
. 1
CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT .
. •
, .
PROGRAM
•
,
1 9 Ir-.,,3 - 1988
1 ,
,
, .I
, • _, .
•
. • City of Rentari . - . . .
,
)
•
CITY OF RENTON
Mayor
Barbara Y. Shinpoch
City Council
Earl H. Clymer, President Randall Rockhill
Robert J. Hughes Richard M. Stredicke
Nancy L. Matthews Thomas W. Trimm
John W. Reed
- i
I i
SIX YEAR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
For The
_•
CITY OF RENTON
1983 - 1988
I �
August 1982
I /
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SECTION I: TAX SUPPORTED FUNDS
Funding Sources 2
Mayor's Recommendation 3
Description of the Mayor's Recommendation 5
Departmental Project Analysis 9
•
SECTION II: SEWER FUND PROJECTS
Mayor's Recommendation 50
Departmental Project Analysis 51
ECTION III: WATER FUND PROJECTS
Mayor's Recommendation 62
Departmental Project Analysis 63
ECTION IV: AIRPORT FUND PROJECTS
Mayor's Recommendation 70
Departmental Project Analysis 71
• PPENDIX 1: SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING
The purpose of the Six Year Capital improvement Program is to develop a long range '
orderly schedule for major public improvements within the City. Capital improvement
programming is a continuing process, with periodic review and revision.
The Capital Improvement Program provides the City Council and administration !with a
long range view of necessary physical improvements and a means of coordinating
capital projects with the annual operating budget. This allows for optimum use of
personnel, equipment, debt capacity, and revenue.
Other . benefits of capital improvement programming include the ability to schedule
purchases of land.or equipment so that costs are favorable_and opportunities are not
lost; the abilit.y...to take better advantage of federal and state grants or matching funds;
a mechanism to avoid hasty decisions that may result in unnecessary 'public
I expenditures; and a stabilized program so that all City departments and other public
agencies are well informed and may plan accordingly.
The long term scheduling of public improvements is determined by establishing priorities
based on the need or importance of such improvements, and on the present and
anticipated ability of the City to fund the improvements. :The priorities of the Capital
Improvement Program should also be consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive
Plan, and should become a primary means of implementing the public aspects Of the
Plan.
RECENT HISTORY OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The . City. of : Renton has been successful in implementing its Six Year Capital
mprovement Program through the years. Representative high: priority projects that
ave been accomplished in recent years include: - -
Gene Co.ulon.,Memorial Beach Park Development
Cedar River Trail Acquisition
New Computer System
Liberty Park Community Building
Talbot Hill Reservoir
Earlington Park Development
Fire Station #13
Fire Station #11
Burnett Linear Park
Senior Center
Cedar River Trail Development
hese projects involved over $17,000,000 of federal, state and local funds. The
agnitude of these sums underscores the value of a clear and logical capital
I provement program.
� I
I I
. I
GUIDE TO 1983 - 1988 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
•
The Six Year Capital Improvement Program is generally separated into two categories.
First, projects from the Tax Supported Funds such as the Current, Park, and Library
Funds are separated from the Enterprise Funds which include the Water and Utilities
Funds and the Airport Fund. Projects have been separated into these categories due to
the distinctions in funding available. The Tax Supported Funds rely heavily upon the
property, sales, and utility taxes while the Enterprise Funds rely on user charges for
direct services provided, and various user and connection fees.
For ease of reference, the presently adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement
Program has been Included as the last section of this document. Thus all Capital
Improvement Projects proposed by the City for the six year period between 1983 and
1988 have been compiled within this document.
The following four sections contain the Mayor's recommendations and descriptions of
each of the projects for the Tax Supported Funds, Airport Fund, Sewer Fund and Water
Fund.
I I
i e
/ \ '-N\
:Y
}
•:;•x':
1 O
�
.w:
'��lL
p
•77'
:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii:i*i. „::,::::::,:::,:::,::::::„,:..,
.x.x.:.:.:.:.::::: .::.:,:,:,*,„,„,:,:,:, ..Y
::.:,:,:,:. :,:,:,:,:,....:.::::,:.,:,:,:?::.::::,:,:,:,:,:,:,::::....:.::,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,*,:,:,:::::,:,
...................:
....................
.................... :::::::::::::::::::::::::rli,,,. :::::::::::::. ::::::::::::::,,,::::::::::::::::::::::.:,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
.::::::::::::::::*. :i:x:x:i:x:i0 .:E:,:i:,:,:, ::::im,......::,:i:K:,:i:::,:i:,::::.:...::,:x:E:,:,:i:,:i:,,:i:isi,:x*i:ioN
1,, :,i,i,E:::::::::::„ ..iiiiiiiiii:Iiiiiiiiiiiii:- .P-4,:,.. „„*,:,*,:,:x::.:,..:.:.::,:,:x:,:,:,:,:,:x:,:,:x:,:,:,:,::..:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:
,............................. ................................. .. .. ............ .......................... .............e...........•...................•.......•.................•.........
,4,::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::..„..:.::::::::,:::,:::::::::::::::.......:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,:,:::
J
I'. Tax Supported Funds
-
•
( I 1)
,
1 f
FUNDING SOURCES I
Computed as of 6/1/82:
Bonding Cap city - Total City Property Value = $1,994,506,518
1. Inde tedness for General Purposes - without a
vote of the people:
1
Lega limit: 3/4 of 1% on property value $ 14,958,799
I stallment Notes & Contracts $ 605,113
G.O. Bond liabilities 3,250,000
Lessi redemption fund assets 88,277
Excess of liabilities over assets $3,766,836
Total Net General Indebtedness $ 3,,766,836
Margin of Indebtedness Still Available. $ 1141i91,.963
2. Inde tedness for General Purposes - with '
3/5 vote of the people:
Leg 1 limit: 2i% on property value $ 49,862,663
Indetedness incurred -0-
Net general indebtedness from Section 1 above $ 34766,836
I
MIargin of indebtedness still available $ 464095,827
3. Ind btedness for Utility Purposes - with
3/5 ote of the people:
Leg 1 limit: 5% on property value $ 99,725,326
Inde tedness incurred ' _0-
Tot 1 indebtedness from Sections 1, 2 and 3 $ 3,766,836
Margin of indebtedness still available $ 95,958,490
4. IInde tedness for Open Space and Park Facilities - 1
with a 3/5th vote of the people:
Leg 1 limit: 7i% on, property value $ 1494587,989
ndebtedness Incurred $7,680,000
ess redemption fund assets 99,279 .
xcess of liabilities over assets $7,580,721 .
Tot 1 Net Open Space and Park Indebtedness $ 7,580,721
Tot 1 indebtedness from Sections 1, 2, 3 and 4
$ 11,347,557
Mar in of indebtedness still available $ 138,240,432
1 .
(2)
a t
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
Project Total Cost Potential
Description Annual Funding
Priority & Location Acquisition Improvements 0 & M Sources*
#1 Maintenance Shop $3,452,000 Unknown (Currently Funded)
(p.14) acilities (Adjacent
to County Shops)
II
#2 eather Downs Park $240,000 $ 1,000 Park Acquisition Fund
(p.16) Acquisition
#3 enton High School $150,000 $10,000 Community Facilities Fund
(p.18) ield Reconstruction IA�
Renton School District
#4 ain Public Library $660,270 $13,750
(p.38) A•dition & Renovation
#5 Cedar River Park $4,100,000 $200,000 Pro-Parks Bond Issue
(p.17) Community Center
#6 N. 3rd Street $250,000 $825
(p.40) & Sunset Blvd.
Intersection
Improvements
#7 S. 7th Street $100,000
(p.43) : 1 Rainier Avenue S.
Intersection
Improvements
#5 Construct $180,000 $550,000 $460,000
(p.34) Fire Station #14
In Kennydale
#9 Old Shop Site $82,300 $6,000 H/CD Block Grant
(p.19) Redevelopment
* Only reveue sources other than general Funds, General Obligation Bonds, Councilmanic Bonds and
Revenue Sharing are indicated.
•
(3),
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION (Continued) .
Project Total Cost Potential
Description Annual Funding
Priority & Location Acquisition Improvements 0 & M Sources*
#10 Entry Point Street $100,000 $5,000
(p.10) nhancement
#11 Street Lighting $60,000 $10,000
(p.44) lodification in
the CBD
#12 Se ior.Housing and , - $230,450 $266,000 $4,000 H/CD Block Grant
(p.20) Pe estrian Corridor
#13 Si nal Controller $200,000 $14,025
(p.41) odernizations _ .
1
#14 elocation of $700,000 $400,000
(p.35) Fire Station #12
in Highlands
#15 Sierra Heights/Glencoe $240,000 $2,000 Park Acquisition Fund
(p.22) ' P-rk Acquisition
,
* Only revenue sources other than General Funds, General Obligation Bonds, Councilmanic Bonds and
Revenue Sharing are indicated.
(4) ,
DESCRIPTION OF THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
1. Maintenance Shop Facilities (Relocation)
Relocation of City maintenance operations includes the construction of new offices,
shops, garage, storage and vehicle parking facilities. These new facilities will be
located off Monroe Avenue N.E. next to the King County Shop site. Operation of
Maintenance Administration, Street / Storm Sewer / Sanitary Sewer / Water System
Maintenance, Central Garage, Equipment Rental, Sign & Paint, Survey, and Signal /
Communications crews, and the Carpentry Shop will be located in the new facilities.
The construction of new shop facilities is currently funded.
2. Heather Downs Neighborhood Park Acquisition
This project involves the acquisition of 7 to 10 acres of land for a future neighborhood
park in the Heather Downs area. Renton's Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan
-- adopted in 1978 -- identified this project as the number one acquisition priority for
the City.
A neighborhood park would serve residents within about a one-half mile radius. In
1980, over 1300 people resided in the Heather Downs neighborhood. Since that time
additional multiple family and single family housing has been completed in the area.
More residential growth is planned. Renton's adopted recreation standards is 10 acres
of neighborhood park-space per 1000 inhabitants. Based upon this standard, the City's
Comprehensive Park Plan, the escalating cost of land, and the diminishing choices for
potential sites- in the area, timely acquisition of the Heather Downs Neighborhood Park
its a high priority.
Total estimated cost of this project is about $240,000, with minimal maintenance costs
prior to development.
3. Renton High School Field Reconstruction
Redevelopment of a nine acre site adjacent to Renton High School is currently in
•rogress. The City and Renton School District are working closely together to improve
he facility and maintain it. Active recreation programs, such as football, socer,
Baseball, softball and jogging, will make use of the site. Active sports participants lof all
-ges from throughout the City will benefit from this project.
rior public ownership of the land and co-management of the facility will minimize cost.
otal cost is estimated at $150,000. A portion of this is currently budgeted.
Main Public Library Addition and Renovation
II his project will provide a second floor addition to the Main Library, as well as improve
•uilding safety, security and energy conservation and institute an automated circulation
Ilystem. The 3,000 square foot addition will increase book shelving capacity for the
u rowing collection. Building renovation will include new carpeting, replacement
!quipment and furniture, and necessary repairs. Energy conservation measures are
tended to reduce future heating and cooling costs. Automated circulation and book
security systems will improve service to the public, increase security of materials and
-duce additional staff needs.
stimated cost of this project is $660,000: Maintenance costs would be about $13,750
er year. -
(5)
5. Cedar River Park Community Center
This multi-purpose center would provide classrooms, craft rooms and -equipment, g coup
kitchen and recreational facilities for the entire community. Existing cultural and visual
arts and crafts facilities must be expanded to accommodate demand for these activities.
A gymnasium for basketball and volleyball and racquetball/handball courts would also
be included. This project was recommended in the City's adopted Comprehensive Park
and Recreation Plan. I
,
he total estimated cost of. the community center is about $4,100,000. Yearly
Operations and maintenance would be about $200,000, partly self-generated. (This
Project is currently included in the proposed Pro-Parks bond issue.
6. North 3rd Street & Sunset Blvd. Intersection Improvements
I
The intersection of N. 3rd Street and Sunset Blvd. is one of the principal vehicular
traffic junctions in the City of Renton. Much traffic in and out of Boeing, downtown
Renton, 1-405 and the N.E. 4th corridor passes through this intersection. Congestion is
a major problem. During the afternoon peak period, the intersection is operating at' full
capacity. This project involves improved signalization, resurfacing, channelizationi, as
4ell as curbs, gutters, sidewalks-and street lighting. These improvements will increase
t e_efficiency and safety of this intersection. .
Estimated cost of this project is $250,000. '
__ 7. South 7th Street and Rainier Avenue S. Intersection Improvements
The intersection at S. 7th and Rainier Avenue S. is one of the busiest in the city and,
�ith anticipated industrial and commercial growth in the area and the completion of SR
515, more congestion is probable. This project would channelize and widen approaches
do the intersection and modify signalization. Enhanced capacity, and safety will result
from these improvements.
The project is estimated to cost.$100,000. 1
8. Construction of Fire Station #14 in Kennydale
ite acquisition and construction of a new fire station in Kennydale is necessary to
improve emergency response time and to serve new development in the area. Current
response time to much of Kennydale is in the range of six to eight minutes. A new
Station In the vicinity of N.E. 30th and I-405 would lower this time to three to four
minutes.
A, new fire station would provide primary response to more than 1,300 households ;and
Up to 3,500 people. In conjunction with the relocation of Station #12 to the east and
with new development proposed for the area (specifically the Port Quendall project),
the new station would serve upwards of 5,000 residents. Early stages of the Port
Quendall Project will result in about 600 new housing units and 1,200 people. High
value commercial and office -space -- some located in buildings up to twenty stories
high -- is also a major part of this development. Both the Northeast Renton
Comprehensive Plan and the Fire Station Location Study support construction of a new
L
fire station.
TProposed fire apparatus for Station #14 includes a pumper, ladder truck and aid car.
otal estimated cost of this project is $730,000 with annual operations and maintenance
of about $460,000.
(6)
9. Old ShopSite Redevelopment
velopment
City maintenance shop facilities, currently located adjacent to the Senior Center at the
Cedar River, will be moved to the Renton Highlands in 1983.. Relocation will allow
re-use of the Cedar River property for other purposes. This project involves
redevelopment of the site for additional Senior Center parking and a community
pea-patch. Existing parking at the Senior Center is inadequate, especially at midday.
The remainder of the property will be converted to a pea-patch, until such time as a
long term use is determined for the property. Demolition of the existing sheds and
gravel bin will improve the appearance of the site, as well as providing badly needed
parking and a unique recreational experience.
Costs of this project are estimated at $82,300, with $6,000 per year maintenance.
Some funds are available through the Block Grant program.
10. Entry Point Street Enhancement
This project would provide signs and landscaping at six points along major streets
entering the City of Renton. The signs would welcome travellers and commuters to the
city and thank them for their visit. Purposes of the project are to enhance the City's
image, give definition to the City's boundaries, and improve unsightly roadsides.- This
project would hopefully be accomplished in conjunction with other street improvements.
If six entry points are enhanced at a cost of $10,000 - $20,000 each, total costs of this
project would be about $100,000.
11. Street Lighting Modification in the CBD
This project involves the elimination of 54 unnecessary street lights in the Central
Business District, and installing smaller lamps and painting the remaining street .lights..
Existing lighting is far in excess of minimum lighting standards and is expensive to
operate. Replacing and upgrading street lights in the CBD will provide more uniform
lighting at a substantial reduction in maintenance and operation costs.
Total costs of this project are estimated at $60,000.
12. Senior Housing and Pedestrian Corridor
This project is designed to provide additional senior housing near downtown and to link
the Cedar River Trail and Senior Center with the Central Business District. The site is
'the abandoned Burlington Northern railroad right-of-way between Burnett and Logan
Avenues. The project involves acquisition of the site, development of the pedestrian
corridor to downtown and site preparation for the housing structure. Housing
'construction would be separately financed. The City of Renton, King County and the
Renton Housing Authority would participate in the project.
Total cost of the project is about $500,000. Block Grant funds ($230,450) to purchase
the land have already been secured.
•
(7-)
'3. Signal Controller Modernizations
ecause of age and .the difficulty of obtaining replacement parts, a number of traffic
ignal controllers are obsolete and need replacing. This project would upgrade signal
;3
controls at seven intersections along N.E. Sunset Blvd., four intersections on N. 4th
Street, three on N. 3rd Street, and at three other locations.
Estimated cost is $200,000, with about $14,000 yearly maintenance.
'4. Relocation of Fire Station #12
This project Involves. the relocation of existing Fire Station #12 (Highlands) eastward to
the vicinity of Sunset Blvd. N.E. and Union Avenue N.E. When Fire Station #14 is
constructed in Kennydale, Station #12 should be moved to provide improved fire
protection and emergency response time to the developing areas of the East Renton
Plateau. The existing station is in need of major repairs and, because it was
Constructed in -1943, is located to serve the central Highlands area. New residential
And commercial development on the north and east fringes of the city necessitate
relocation to balance response times. This project is consistent with the Northeast
Renton Comprehensive Plan and.the Fire Station Location Study.
1 otal estimated cost is $1,100,000, with minimal increases in annual operations costs.
5. Sierra Heights/Glencoe Neighborhood Park Acquisition
he Sierra Heights/Glencoe area of Renton is not currently served by neighborhood
ecreationai facilities. Only a small tot lot exists in this heavily developed area. This
roject would acquire 8 to 10 acres for future development of a neighborhood park.
This neighborhood supports about 1800 City residents and a total of 3300 people in both
iicorporated' and unincorporated areas. Renton park standards suggest .10 acres of
rlIleighborhood recreation per 1000 inhabitants. By this standard, recreation needs are
riot being met. Further,acquisition:of•a park in this area is recommended as the second
highest priority in the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan.
Because a major portion of the neighborhood lies outside City jurisdiction, acquisition
and development could be shared with King County and/or the school district., King
County owns a small undeveloped site in the area. Estimated cost of park acquisition is
$240,000.
•
I
(8)
DEPARTMENTAL.SUMMARIES OF ALL. PROJECTS
JOINT PROJECTS
Page
1. Entry Point Street Enhancement 10
2. Lake Washington Boulevard Bike Lanes 11
3. Maple Valley Railroad Tracks Trail 12
4. Wetlands Acquisition 13
5. Maintenance Shop Facilities Relocation 14
(9)
1
i I
FINAL PRIORITY#
JOINT MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 10
DEPARTMENT: POLICY DEVELOPMENT/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 1
PROJECT TITLE: Entry Point Street Enhancement
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Provide for architecturally enhanced entry points including landscaping and signs at
six (6) key corridors.
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ minimal
IMPROVEMENTS$ 10-20,000 per entry
TOTAL$ 100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000
FINANCING 1) 1/2 cent gas tax
OPTIONS:
2) General Revenues
3) Developer Improvement
4) L.I.D.
I I
BACKGROUND:
The City has a number of entry points/corridors with minimal, if any, identification and
beautification. This proposal will provide for installation of landscaping and signing
of key locations to enhance the City's image with the travelling public. Enhancement
would be constructed with concurrent street improvements.
POTENTIAL SITE:
1) Rainier Avenue North at airport entry
2) Sunset Boulevard North at FAI-405
3) Maple Valley Highway at Maplewood Roadside Park
4) Rainier Avenue South at FAI-405
5) Grady Way S.W. at Valley Parkway
6) Sunset Boulevard S.W. at Powell S.W.
FACTORS 1) Each site serves in excess of 20,000 vehicle trips per day.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Enhances the community's "image" at minimal cost.
or what programs
are served?Why 3) If combined with development, improvements will further enhance the
this project?) esthetic value.
4) Supports 6-year T.I.P. project: #1, #6, #10, #18.
•
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No action - none $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) Less locations - items 2, 3 $ 20-80,000 $ 0-4,000
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $ •
4) $ $
5) $ $
•
(10)
•
i I .
FINAL PRIORITY a
JOINT MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS/POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 2
PROJECT TITLE: Lake Washington Boulevard Bike Lanes
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Bike lanes on road shoulder for 3.9 miles from FAI-405 to Park Avenue. •
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$100,000
TOTAL$100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000
FINANCING 1) 1/2 Cent Gas Tax
OPTIONS:
2) H/CD Block Grant
3) L.I.D.
4)
BACKGROUND:
The Lake Washington Boulevard Bikeway is one of five regional links that joins a total
bicycle network in South King County. It is the major link between bicycle facilities in
Bellevue and those in Renton and South King County. The route is a part of Renton's
bicycle plan and has been identified in the King County General Bicycle Plan: Focus
1990, and the King County Urban Trails Plan.
The Lake Washington Boulevard Bikeway is located on the eastern shore of Lake
POTENTIAL SITE: Washington between the central business district and the Kennydale neighbor-
hood to the north. It is approximately 3.9 miles in length and extends from the intersection
of Riverside Drive and Bronson Way to the May Creek Interchange of FAI-405 at N.E. 44th Street.
The route will follow Park Avenue North to 5th Street and then will turn east to Garden Ave-
nue. It will then head in a northerly direction until linking with Lake Washington Boulevard.
The route will then follow this course until reaching its terminus at N.E. 44th Street.
FACTORS 1) Alternative locations will require land acquisition in fee or by ease-
SUPPORTING ment with the potential cost exceeding $8 per foot. The only alterna-
PROJECT:(Who 2) tive routes parallel to Lake Washington Boulevard are the Burlington
or what programs Northern railroad tracks (possible easement) and FAI-405.
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4) •
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No project - possible hazard on the current 0 0
TO THIS PROJECT: underdeveloped street. $ $
(Indicate which 2) BN railroad - possible railroad opposition. 5125,000 $ 5,000
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) Freeway I-405 - safety related considerations. $100,000 $ 0
4)
$ $
5) $ $
•
(11)
I •
FINAL PRIORITY#
JOINT MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION#
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS/POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 3
PROJECT TITLE: Maple Valley Railroad Tracks Trail
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Construction of the soon to be abandoned Maple Valley railroad tracks to a multipurpose •
pedestrian and bicycle trail.
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 100,000
IMPROVEMENTS$ 200.000
TOTAL$ 300,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000
FINANCING 1) 1/2 Cent Gas Tax
OPTIONS:
H/CD Block Grant
IAC Grant
4) Joint King County/WSDOT Project
BACKGROUND:
The existing tracks are being considered for abandoment by the Burlington Railroad. These
will be available from Renton to Lake Wilderness. City of Renton portion to S.E. 140th
Street would make an unique Burke-Gilman type multipurpose trail along the Cedar River.
POTENTIAL SITE: Burlington Northern Railroad tracks along Cedar River
•
I �
•
FACTORS 1) Critical bicycle/pedestrian link to County park.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Access improved to City greenbelts.
or what programs
are served?Why 3) Major public recreational project.
this project?)
4) •
5) •
•
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M /
ALTERNATIVES 1) No project - continued use of Maple $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT: Valley Highway.
(Indicate which 2) Alternate off-tracks right-of-way more $ 0 $ 0
supporting factors expensive.
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $ •
I
(12)
•
• •
FINAL PRIORITY a
JOINT MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION/POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a
ti
PROJECT TITLE: WETLANDS ACQUISITION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of 40-80 acres of Wetlands in the Renton area.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$800,000 •
•
IMPROVEMENTS $ - 0 -
•
TOTAL$ 800,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 10,000 undeveloped
FINANCING 1) City - no funds currently budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2) Proposed County-wide Bond Issue (opportunity fund)
3) Local Bond Issue
4) IAC - Potential for 50-75% funding (current chance of submitting
successful grant very bleak)
• BACKGROUND:
The need to acquire Wetlands as an integral part of the Park system is supported by
the City's Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan and Renton Wetlands Study.
POTENTIAL SITE:
East and West of Valley Freeway.
FACTORS 1)Acquisition at this time would preserve rapidly vanishing Wetland areas a •
SUPPORTING well as negate inflationary trends in land,values.
PROJECT:(Who 2)Wetlands support a number of wildlife species as well as unique plant life.
or what programs Dwindling numbers of natural areas in the urban environment mandate acqui�i-
ate served?Why tion now or loss of these species in this area.
this project?)
3)Acquisition could aid efforts in controlling drainage problems associated
with this area.
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1)Acquire only the most valuable sites at $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT: this time.
(Indicate which 2)Work with King County and the State to $ - 0,- $ - -
supporting factors acquire identified areas. •
can be met.) 3) Work with developers to preserve areas $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
under development pressure.
• 4) Continue to work with King County, the Soil $ 0 - $ - 0 -
Conservation Service, and neighboring suburban
,cities on the P-1 channel project or the various I
alternatives being suggested.
(13) ,
•
•
• • r;,:
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
JOINT MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION u 1
DEPARTMENT: Public Works - Street/Water/Sewer DEPARTMENT PRIORITY n —
I
PROJECT TITLE: Maintenance Shop Facilities
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Construction of new maintenance shop facilities on recently purchased site south of
N.E. 4th Street adjacent to King County shops.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ -0-
IMPROVEMENTS$3,452,000
TOTAL$3,452,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Unknown
FINANCING 1) "316 Fund" - $ .632,000
OPTIONS:
2) Utility Bond Funds - $ 320,000
3) Interest Income, etc. - $ 200,000
4) Councilmanic Bonds - $2,300,000
$3,452,000 Total
BACKGROUND:
New offices, shops, garage, storage and vehicle parking facilities to be built on site
purchased from King County - south of NE 4th Street and east of Monroe Ave. NE, adjacent
to the new County Shops. Will house Maintenance Administration; Street/Storm Sewer/Sanitary
Sewer/Water System Maintenance crews plus Central Garage/Equipment Rental, Sign and Paint
crew, Carpentry Shop, Survey Crew and Signal/Communications crew. Document storage will
be included together with space for Police Department evidence storage and vehicle searches.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Adjacent to County Shops south of N.E. 4th Street. Land already purchased.
FACTORS 1) Current shop facilities are outdated and undersized.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) New and expanded offices, garages, shops, storage and parking
or what programs facilities will improve all maintenance operations in the City.
are served?Why 3) All maintenance operations can be placed together in a central
this project?) location.
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Continue to use existing shops with Water $ $
TO THIS PROJECT: Maintenance in "temporary" leased property.
(Indicate which • 2) Continue to use existing shops but purchase $ $
supporting factors or construct building for Water Maintenance.
can be met.) 3) Downgrade the proposed New Facilities in size $ $
and features.
is) $ $
5) $ $
(14)
•
•
PARK AND.RECREATION PROJECTS
(In Department Priority)
Page
1. Heather Downs Neighborhood Park Acquisition 16
2. Cedar River Park Community Center 17
3. Renton High School Field Reconstruction 18
4. Old Shop Site Redevelopment 19
5. Senior Housing and Pedestrian Corridor 20'
6. Highlands Administration Building Renovation 21
7. • Sierra Heights/Glencoe Neighborhood Park Acquisition 22
8. Cedar River Trail Development 23
9. Golf Course Acquisition 24
10. Sports Park Acquisition 25
11. Heather Downs Neighborhood Park.Development .26
12. Talbot Hill/Springbrook Neighborhood Park Acquisition 27
113. East Kennydale Neighborhood. Park A•cquisition • 28
14. Mothers Park Recreation Center Renovation 29
15. Tiffany Park/Benson Hill Neighborhood Park Acquisition 30
16. Cushion Turf Field 31
•
(15)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION u 2
DEPARTMENT: raeKs_h RECR IQN DEPARTMENT PRIORITY++ 1
PROJECT TITLE: Aesrher nnwns.Neighborhood Park Accuisition_7-10 Acres
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of a neighborhood park in the Heather Downs area of Renton.
I .
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 240 non
IMPROVEMENTS$ - 0 -
I - I
TOTALS 240.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 1.000 undeveloped
35,000 developed
FINANCING 1) Park Acquisition Fund #1689
OPTIONS:
2) Use agreement with City Water Utility for use of existing utility land
on Union Avenue.
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
The acquisition of this neighborhood park site was identified in the City of Renton's
Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan adopted by the City Council in March, 1978. Development
of the park site would be mandated in the not to distant future as development of the area is
rapidly occurring.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Heather Downs area of Renton (Neighborhood #8 - City of Renton Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan).
FACTORS
SUPPORTING 1)Renton citizens in the Heather Downs area would directly benefit from
This park.
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs This is designated as the number one acquisition priority in the
City's
s Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan.
oreserved?Why 3)
Cost of land in this area is escalating rapidly while the number of viable
this project?) potential sites is rapidly vaniphing. Acquisition at this time would be
fiscally prudent and would insure the City's ability to provide future
park services.
4)Development of this area has proceeded rapidly in recent years mandating
provision of local park services at a neighborhood level.
COST: CAPITAL O&
ALTERNATIVES 1)No action (service area with existing $ - 0 - -
TO THIS PROJECT: facilities at Kiwanis Park)
(Indicate which 2)Purchase smaller site (5 acres) $125,000 acq$1,000 undev.
supporting factors
can be met.) 3)Initiate trade/purchase agreement with $ 50,000 acq$1,000 undev.
City Utility. 20,000 dev.
4)Initiate joint use agreement with City $ - 0 - acq$1,000 undev.
Utility. 20,000 dev. '
5)Utilize existing City owned site (2.2 acres) $ - 0 - acq.$ 500 undev:
10,000 dev.
I �
' I
(16)
, I
•
•
- — — -m
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a 5
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 2
PROJECT TITLE: CEDAR RIVER PARK COMMUNITY CENTER
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Development of a Community Recreation Center in Cedar River Park.
ESTIMATED•
COSTS: LAND - 0 -
$
IMPROVEMENTS$4,100,000
TOTAL$4,100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 200,000 (up to 40% could be financed by
revenue collected at the Center)
FINANCING 1)Proposed PRO-PARKS County Bond Issue.
OPTIONS:
2) City Funding - G.O. Bonds.
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
•
Need for this facility is established in the City of Renton Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan. Existing facilities are outdated and need major renovation.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Cedar River Park
FACTORS 1) All facets of the Renton Community should benefit from this project as •
SUPPORTING facilities included have community-wide scope and interest.
PROJECT:(Who 2) This project has been identified as a high priority in the City's
or what programs Comprehensive Park Plan and the Six Year C.I.P..
are served?Why 3) Current facilities are outdated and in need of major renovation.
this project?)
4) Population growth and increased interest in activities requiring indoor
facilities of this nature are creating pressures for development.
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No Action. $ - 0 - $ - 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) Renovate existing Mothers Park Center $1,500,000 $200,000
supporting factors adding more facilities (short term benefit)
can be met.) 3) Develop facility in two (2) Phases. $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
•
(17) '
1
i I
•
FINAL PRIORITY tt
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a 3
DEPARTMENT: PARK & RRCRE.ATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 3
PROJECT TITLE: RENTON HMI SCHOOL ATHLETIC COMPLEX
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Redevelopment of a nine (9) acre site adjacent to Renton High School currently in School
District ownership. Development and maintenance costs to be shared by the City and School
District. Football, baseball, softball, soccer and jogging facilities would be included.
• ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS 5150,000
•
TOTAL$150.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 10.000 City Share
FINANCING 1)Federal Revenue Sharing.
OPTIONS:
2) IAC (Funding Restrictive).
3) Renton School District - $50,000 currently budgeted.
4) Community Facilities Fund - $22,000 currently budgeted.
BACKGROUND:
The City and School District work very closely in providing joint use of public facilities
for educational/recreational use. The co-development and maintenance of this project was
consumated with the signing of an agreement by the two (2) parties in 1981. Total community
use of existing property in public ownership providing badly needed facilities will result
from this action.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Renton High School
' I
FACTORS 1) Residents of all ages who participate in sports activities will directly
SUPPORTING benefit as will students attending Renton High School.
PROJECT:(Who 2) By developing property already in public ownership, the City will not
or what programs need to purchase additional land for the same purpose.
are served?Why 3) Joint maintenance will lessen the cost to the City and School District.
this project?)
4) The property in question has an ideal location for the designated use
and is currently underutilized due to its condition and lack of developed '
facilities. •
COST: CAPITAL 08.KI
ALTERNATIVES 1) No action. $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) Purchase a new site and develop $300,000 acq$ 40,000
supporting factors similar facilities. 360,000 dev.
can be met,) 3) $ $
•
4) S $
5) $ 5
(18)
II
•
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY n
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION u 9
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY u 4
PROJECT TITLE: OLD SHOP SITE REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project involves redevelopment of the present City Shop Site into an improved park
setting which will include additional parking for the Senior Center and a pea-patch for
use by the general community. The project is intended to meet an identified.need for
additional parking at the Senior Center, improve an unsightly part of the central City,
and provide a new recreation experience for the entire community.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $ 82,300
•
TOTAL$ 62,300
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 6.000
FINANCING 1) Housing & Community Development Program ($10,677 secured, additional
OPTIONS: funds anticipated in 1983 & 1984).
2) City - No. funds currently budgeted. •
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
The City will be moving its present shop site to the Renton Highlands in the Fall of 1983.
At its meeting of February 22, 1982, the City Council officially accepted this plan for '
use of the site (pea-patch portion meant to be interim use). The preliminary estimate for
the complete project is $82,300, $10,677 was secured through the 1982 Block Grant Program.
These funds are programed for demolition of sheds which run the length of the south property
line and the gravel bin located on the northwest corner.
POTENTIAL SITE:
City of Renton Public Works Shop Site, 105 Williams Avenue North.
I .
FACTORS 1) The Senior Center presently has only 72 parking stalls, with approximately,
SUPPORTING 100- 25 vehicles using the facility at the noon hour, parking is a major
PROJECT:(Who 2) When the Senior Center site was designed it was anticipated that additional
are served?Why 3) parking would be added at some later date.
this project?) The present shop site is unattractive and is in direct contrast to the re-
4) vitalization efforts that have occurred in the immediate area.
• The pea-patch will provide a new and unique recreation experience for the
S) entire community, and will not be a high maintenance item.
Because of its location within the NSA, Block Grant funds are available.
COST: CAPITAL O&M •
ALTERNATIVES 1) Minimal action (health & safety). $ 5,750 $ 500
TO THIS PROJECT:
• (indicate which 2) Purchase additional property for parking. $ 46,800land$1,000
supporting factors 10,000 dev.
can be met.) 3) encourraage�carxpooliiii parking
a mini-buses,randtim and- $
im-
provement of public transportation.
4) Various !eduction of scope including: •
- demolition off structures, sheds and in- $ 25,800 $ 500
stallation o renting.
- Above items plus installation of parking lot. $ 35,300 $ 600
- Above items plus installation of landscaping $ 54,350 $1,000
sidewalks and wal ways.
(19)
i I
•
FINAL PRIORITY
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a 1 2
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 5
PROJECT TITLE: SENIOR HOUSING & PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project:involves the acquisition and development of a senior housing complex and
pedestrian corridor along the abandoned Burlington Northern railroad right-of-way be-
tween the City, the Renton Housing Authority, and Ring County with the City acting as
coordinator for the project.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$230,450 (funds secured)
IMPROVEMENTS$266,000 * * Senior Housing site ($116,000)
Pedestrian Corridor/Linear Park
TOTAL$ 496.450 ($150,000)
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 4.000
FINANCING 1) Housing & Community Development Program ($247.832 securred, additional
OPTIONS: funds anticipated in 1983 & 1984).
2) City (if additional property is needed or desired).
3) Street fund (street improvements portion of project).
4) L.I.D.
BACKGROUND:
The project will link the downtown business district with the Cedar River Trail encouraging
pedestrian movement and at the same time improving the aesthetics of the area. It will also
complete the linear link-up along Burnett tying together Burnett Linear Park on the south,
the Burnett Parking Lot system and the Cedar River Corridor. The project has received Block
Grant funds ($249,332) over the past two years. Utilizing these funds, the City is proceed-
ing with acquisition of Burlington Northern property and parcel along Logan Avenue South,
relocation responsibilities, and preliminary design of the corridor. An additional.$116,000
will be available for development of the housing site once financing is securred for the
POiltVFALur51TE:
That portion of the abandoned railroad right-of-way between Logan Avenue South and Burnett
Avenue South extending northerly from the Metro-Park'n' Ride lot to the river. A small
parcel located between the right-of-way and Logan Avenue is also included to accomodate
parking and access. The parkin' ride lot will be incorporated into the project in some
manner.
FACTORS 1) Lack of senior housing units in downtown area, close to services.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Residents of Cedar River Terrace have difficulty traveling to downtown.
or what programs
are served?Why 3) Site is presently over grown with weeds and blackberry bushes, area is
this project?) blighted and need of revitalization.
4) Project may stimulate Metro into maintaining present Parkin' Ride Lot. •
I '
5) No park land exists for downtown workers, shoppers and residents.
6) Because of its location within the NSA, Block Giant funds are:avafiable.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No action (abandoned plans to purchase property,$ 1,000 $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT: return Block Grant funds). A,ttorney's fees
(Indicate which 2) Acquire property, delay development. $230,450 $ 500
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) Acquire other site for senior housing. $270,000 $ 500
4) $ $
5) 5 5
(20)
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 6
PROJECT TITLE: HIGHLANDS ADMISTRATION BUILDING
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Renovation of an existing building in the Renton Highlands for Community use.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS $250,000
•
TOTAL$250,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$NO Increase
FINANCING 1) City Funds (property taxes).
OPTIONS:
2) Federal Revenue Sharing ($23,425 budgeted in 1982).
3) Housing & Community Development Funds. -
4)
BACKGROUND:
This building has housed a variety of governmental and community functions over the past
42 years and has deteriorated badly in the past decade. The buildings mechanical systems
are hopelessly outdated. The building is currently being studied under an energy grant.
It is highly likely that a major portion of the building will be recommended for demolition.
as a result of the energy audit.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Highlands Administration Building, 800 Edmonds Avenue N.E..
•
•
FACTORS 1) The residents of the Highlands area rely on this facility for
SUPPORTING community recreation and meeting space.
PROJECT:(Who 2) A small maintenance area is currently being utilized by the Water
or what programs Division and could have future value for similar functions.
are served?Why 3) Rapidly increasing utility rates and construction costs mandate
this project?) immediate attention and a decision on the feasibility of renovating
all or part of this building. •
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No action. $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
. TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) Renovate only a portion of the building $100,000 $50,000
supporting factors demolishing the rest.,'(support factors #1 & #3).
can be met.) 3) Demolish the entire structure and rely' on the $ 20,000 $ - 0 -
I Highlands Elementary School for recreation
and meeting space. •
(21)
•
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY n
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a 1 5
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 7
PROJECT TITLE: SIERRA HEIGHTS/GLENCOE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACQUISITION (8-10 Acres)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of an 8-10 acre neighborhood park site in the Sierra Heights/Glencoe
• area of Renton.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 240,000 •
IMPROVEMENTS $ - 0 -
•
• TOTALS 240,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 2,000 undeveloped •
FINANCING 1)IAC Funding (60-75% - unlikely at this time).
OPTIONS:
2)Federal Revenue Sharing.
3)G.O. Bonds.
4)
BACKGROUND:
Sierra Heights/Glencoe Neighborhood Park acquisition is identified in the City's Comprehensive
Park and Recreation Plan as a high priority. The City constructed Glencoe Tot Lot as an
interim measure but it is wholly inadequate to meet current demand. King County owns a 4.7
acre undeveloped park in the western portion of this neighborhood outside the City limits.
Cooperative or joint development with King County or the School District could reduce local
costs.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Sierra Heights/Glencoe area of Renton (Neighborhood Ill - City of Renton Comprehensive Park
and.Recreation Plan). •
•
•
FACTORS 1) Need for acquisition is established in the Comprehensive Plan adopted
SUPPORTING by the Renton City Council in March, 1978. •
PROJECT:(Who 2) Escalating land costs and diminishing availability of suitable sites
or what programs mandates action as soon as possible.
are served?Why 3) Residential growth in this area has created a need for recreation •
this project?) facilities for all members of the family.
4) This project has been recognized by the City Council in the 1981 Six
Year C.I.P..
5) •
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No Action. $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) Purchase additional property (3-4 acres) $ 110,000 $ - 0 -
supportingtactors adjacent to County park property (factors 01-4)
can be met.) 3) Work with Renton School District and King County$ 300,000 $ 20,000
to co-develop Sierra Heights Elementary School
property & King County Park property (factors
41-4).
4) Purchase smaller site in eastern portion of $ 120,000 $ 1,000 undev
• area (5 acres). 20,000 dev.
III
.(22) •
•
•
•
TI
•
•
i
•
FINAL PRIORITY sr
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 8
PROJECT TITLE: CEDAR_RIVER TRAIL DEVELOPMENT/NATURAL ZONE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project involves development of the Natural Zone of the Cedar River Trail System.
Schematic plans includes construction of trails linking the eastern terminus of the present ..
trail (City Hall) to the King County Cedar River Regional Park, and other desirable amenities
(restrbom structure, footbridge, picnic shelter and interpretive center).
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS$ 630,000
TOTAL$_630.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 40.000
FINANCING 1) Proposed PRO-PARKS County Bond Issue.
OPTIONS:
2) City - No funds currently budgeted.
3) Housing & Community Development Program (Matching funds).
4) IAC - Potential for 60-75% funding (unlikely at this time).
BACKGROUND:
On June 14, 1976, the City Council through the adoption of the Cedar River Master Plan re-
assured a previous commitment to incorporate a recreational system along the Cedar River
from Lake Washington to the King County Regional Park. Since completion of the Industrial
Park and Urban Zones, attention has been turned toward the Natural Zone. With acquisition
of the Thomas Property the acquisition phase is now complete. The construction estimate is
based upon a system of trails and recreation nodes. A majority of the property will be pre-
served in its natural state.
POTENTIAL SITE:
The proposed trail extension will run adjacent to the southern edge of the Cedar River between
FAI 405 and the King County Regional Park (east of Maplewood Colf Course). This recreation
belt contains 151 acres of City owned property, and 13,375 of water front.
FACTORS 1) Acquisition phase is complete.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Maintenance/operation costs are minimal due to nature of project.
or what programs
are served?Why 3) Large population served (estimated at over 100,000).
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No action (serve trail users with existing $ - 0 - $ 1,000
TO THIS PROJECT: facilities).
(indicate which 2) Maintain area in natural state as a conservancy $ - 0 - $ 2,000
supporting(actors with the City's role being that of stewardship.
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $ ,
5) $ $
(23)
•
1
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION • DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 9
PROJECT TITLE: GOLF COURSE ACQUISITION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of the Maplewood or other golf course facility to preserve both the
recreational and esthetic value of such a large scale open space.
u .
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 3,275,000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - 0 -
TOTAL$ 3,275,000 •
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$
FINANCING 1)PRO-PARKS Bond Issue - County.
OPTIONS:
2)G.O. Bonds - City.
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
•
The City is interested in preserving or providing a golf course in the Renton area. The
redevelopment of Earlington Golf Course into an industrial park has severely limited the
opportunities in this area. The Sherman Report recently completed for King County indicates
that this area has approximately 50% fewer courses on a population basis then the rest of
the country. Development pressure on Maplewood Golf Course merits an investigation into
its potential acquisition by*the City.
POTENTIAL SITE:
•
1. Maplewood Golf Course.
2. General Renton area (new course).
FACTORS 1) Recreation potential for golf.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Potential for other recreational activities on-site.
or what programs
are served?Why 3) Open space/green belt/urban buffer for Maple Valley Highway.
this project?)
4) •
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No Action. $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) Work with potential developers to preserve $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
' supporting factors nine (9) holes
can be met.) 3) Work with King County to acquire/develop $ ? $
a course.
4) $ $
5) $ $
(24)
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 10
PROJECT TITLE: SPORTS PARK ACQUISITION
a
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of 20-30 acres in the Renton area for future development as an Athletic
Complex for soccer, softball, baseball, and football.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$450.000
IMPROVEMENTS $,- 0 -
TOTAL$450.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 1.500 undeveloped
FINANCING 1) City - No funds currently budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2) IAC - 60-75% potential (unlikely at this time).
3) Proposed.'RO-PARKS Bond Issue.
4)
BACKGROUND:
The City has been impacted by tremendous growth in the demand for recreational sites
and facilities that support various team sports. Multiple use of existing facilities
has created a major M&0 problem which will result in major renovation costs.
POTENTIAL SITE:
General Renton area as long as proper site selection criteria are followed with an
emphasis on accessibility to the entire community. Due to the acreage necessary,
a northeast location is probable.
FACTORS 1) Sports programs for all age groups; especially soccer.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Land availability and rising costs make acquisition now a cost effective
or what programs and necessary action.
are served?Why 3) Open space/green belt use.
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No Action (service area with existing parks) $• - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) Work with King County and/or Renton School $ ? $ ?
supporting factors District to acquire property or develop
can be met.) existing publicly owned property. $ $
3) Acquire and develop numerous small sites. $ $
(25)
I '
_ I
•
FINAL PRIORITY tt
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION tt -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 11
PROJECT TITLE: HEATHER DOWNS NEIGHBORHOOD PARK DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
I �
Develop a'7 to 10 acre site for active recreation fields, play equipment,
hard surface courts and picnic facilities.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS$ 300.000
TOTALS 300.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 35.000
FINANCING 1) City - No funds currently budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2) IAC - Potential for 60-75% funding (unlikely at this time).
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
The need for development of this park is established in the City of Renton's Comprehensive
Park and Recreation Plan. Recent development of multi-family units in the area has further
impacted the area's immediate park needs.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Heather Downs area of Renton (Neighborhood #8 - City of Renton Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan).
FACTORS 1) Neighborhood recreational needs of Heather Downs area residents.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Nearest park land is Kiwanis Park which is not within easy walking
or what programs distance of this area and separated by major automobi]etraffic corridor.
are served?Why 3) Need for this development established in City's Comprehensive Park and
1hIs project?) Recreation Plan.
4) Development costs are high but the present bid climate is favorable.
Future costs will no doubt escalate rapidly.
5)
I•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No action - serve area with present $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
. TO THIS PROJECT: facilities.
(Indicate which 2) Do development in phases - Phase I $150,000 $ 15,000
supporting factors Phase II 150,000 20,000
can be met.) 3) Continue to work with developers to $ - 0 - $' - 0 -
include recreational amenities on-site.
4) $ $
5) $ $
(26)
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a —
DEPARTMENT: PARKS 6 RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 12
PROJECT TITLE: TALBOT HILL/SPRING BROOK NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACQUISITION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of a ten (10) acre park in the Talbot Hill/Springbrook Neighborhood
of Renton to serve active recreation needs.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$240.000
IMPROVEI•IENTS $ - 0 -
TOTAL$240.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 1.000
FINANCING 1) City - No current funds budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2) IAC - Potential for 60-75X funding (unlikely at this time).
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
The need for acquiring this park was established in the City's Comprehensive Park
and Recreation Plan adopted in 1978.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Talbot Hill/Springbrook area of Renton (Neighborhood #4 in the City's Comprehensive
Park and Recreation Plan).
FACTORS 1) Renton citizens in the Talbot/Springbrook would directly benefit'by
SUPPORTING the potential addition of neighborhood recreation facilities.
PROJECT:(Who 2) Land availability and rising costs make acquisition now a cost-effective
or what programs and necessary action.
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No Action - (service area with existing $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT: facilities at Talbot Hill Park).
(indicate which 2) Purchase 4-6 acre site. $125,000 $ 1,000 under
supporting factors 20,000 de4.
can be met.) 3) Work with City Utility at Springbrook Water $ 1 $ 1
Shed in additional purchase and joint use.
4) Continue to work with developers for set $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
aside of recreational land and development
of on-site recreational facilities.
(27)
i I
.
•
' I
FINAL PRIORITY u
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
I
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 13
PROJECT TITLE: NORTHEAST KENNYDALE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACOUISITION (7-10 acres)
I '
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquire 7 to 10 acres for future development of an active recreation site.
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 250,000
IMPROVEMENTS $ - 0 -
TOTAL$ 250.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 1,000 undeveloped
40,000 developed
FINANCING 1)City - No funds currently budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2)IAC - Potential for 60-75% funding (unlikely at this time).
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
The need for acquiring an East Kennydale Neighborhood Park is established in the City's
Comprehensive Park & Recreation Plan adopted by the City Council in 1978.
POTENTIAL SITE:
East Kennydale area of Renton (Neighborhood 813 - City of Renton Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan).
FACTORS 1)Renton Citizens residing in the affected area would have land for
SUPPORTING future neighborhood recreation services.
PROJECT:(Who 2)Land availability and rising costs make acquisition now a necessary and
or what programs cost effective action.
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
•
I I
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1)No action (service area with existing $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
• TO THIS PROJECT: facilities at Kennydale Lions Park).
(Indicate which 2)Purchase 4-6 acre park site. $125,000 $ 1,000 undev.
supporting factors 20,000 dev.
can be met.) 3)Continue to work with developers to set $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
aside recreational land and on-site
development of recreational facilities.
g
(28)
._ i
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 14 •
PROJECT TITLE: MOTHERS PARK RECREATION CENTER RENOVATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: .
•
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ - 0 -
• DEVELOPMENT$ 750,000
•
TOTAL$ 750.000
•
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 16.000 additional
FINANCING 1) Federal Revenue Sharing
OPTIONS: .
• 2) H&CD
3) Bond Issue •
4)
- I
BACKGROUND: •
Mothers Park Recreatoin Center was constructed in 1939 and has served the City well for over
forty years. It is still heavily used and is the City's only major Community Center. The
Center is very limited in it's ability to serve our residents due to its small size and lack
of facilities to meet current needs. Renovation of the existing building and construction
of additional facilities is planned.
•
POTENTIAL SITE:
635 Park Avenue North •
•
FACTORS 1) This site was donated to the City for recreational use only.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) There is an identified need and demand for additional facilities of
or what programs this kind.
are served?Why 3) If renovation does not occur soon, this facility will continue to
this project?) deteriorate in its ability to serve its purpose as a community recreational
facility.
COST: CAPITAL O&M L
ALTERNATIVES 1) No action (provide existing level of services $ - 0 - $
TO THIS PROJECT: until the building is no longer usable).
(Indicate which 2) Phase renovation. $ ? $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) Complete a feasibility study and if feasible, $ 10,000 $
a Master Plan leading to renovation and
enlargement.
•
4) Construct a new facility. $4,000,000 $ •
• I
•
(29) ,
•
•
•
•
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION- DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 15
PROJECT TITLE: TIFFANY PARK/BENSON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACQUISITION (7-10 Acres)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Acquisition of a 7 to 10 acre site suitable for active recreation to serve the
southern portion of this neighborhood area.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 240,000
IMPROVEMENTS $
TOTAL$ 240,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 1.000 undeveloped
40,000 developed
FINANCING 1)City - no funds currently budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2)IAC - potential for 60-75% funding (unlikely at this time)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND:
The need for acquiring a Tiffany Park/Benson Hill Neighborhood Park is established in the
City's Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan adopted by the City Council in 1978.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Benson Hill area of Renton (Neighborhood #5 - City of Renton Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan). •
•
FACTORS 1)Renton citizens residing in the affected area would have land for
SUPPORTING future neighborhood recreation services.
PROJECT:(Who 2)Land availability and rising costs make acquisition now a necessary
or what programs and cost-effective action. •
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1)No action (service area with existing $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT: facilities at Tiffany Park).
(Indicate which 2)Purchase 4-6 acre site. $125,000 $ 1,000 undevl-
supporting factors 20,000 dev. •
can be met.) 3)Continue to work with developers to set $ - 0 - $ - 0 -
aside land for park use and on-site
development of recreational facilities.
•
•
•
' I
(30)
•
•
I '
I
•
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a -
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION • DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 16
PROJECT TITLE: CUSHION TURF FIELD
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Development of an all-weattrer sports field for football and soccer primarily.
Incorporate, if possible, with lighted field at Philip Arnold Park.
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ - 0 -
IMPROVEMENTS $100,000
•
TOTAL$100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5.000
FINANCING 1)City - No funds currently budgeted.
OPTIONS:
2) IAC - Potential for 60% funding (very doubtful).
3)
4)
•
BACKGROUND:
Fall-Winter sports are currently wreaking havoc on our turf fields causing undue
maintenance and associated costs. One way of meeting this demand is the installation
of a cushion turf field at Philip Arnold Park which has existing lighting. The lighting
obviously permits extended hours of use which is particularly valuable during the fall-
winter months.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Philip Arnold Park.
FACTORS 1) This project would triple the capacity of an existing lighted sports
SUPPORTING field and allow year-round inclement weather use with little negative
PROJECT:(Who impact on M&O funds.
or what programs
are served?Why 2) All of the major outdoor team sports would benefit with soccer receiving
this project?) a major boost. Current participation is heavily youth with substantial
growth in adult levels.
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No Action (serve users with existing $ - 0 - $ 0 -
TO THIS PROJECT: facilities).
(Indicate which 2) Acquire and develop 20-30 acre turf $ 800,000 $ 40,000
supporting factors complex for soccer.,';;:
can be met.) 3) Renovate Philip Arno13 Park Athletic field $ 100,000 $ 5,000
with drainage, new soil, and turf.
4) Work with King County and the Renton School $ ? $ ?
District to upgrade,their facilities.
5) $ $
(31)
• - i :.
•
FIRE DEPARTMENT PROJECTS
(In Department Priority)
Page,
1. Fire Training Center • 33
Construct Fire Station #14 in Kennydale 34
3. Relocation of Fire Station #12 in Highlands 35
I 4. Construct Fire Station #15 in Green River Valley 36
i1
I •
� I
(32)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# —
DEPARTMENT:Fire DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 1
PROJECT TITLE: Construct Training Center
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Develop a training facility that will include a 5 story tower,
LP gas props. and materials storage, any remaining storm drainage, fencing, drafting
pit, classroom and storage. Blacktop and cement surface for drill and driving area
and provide hydrants.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ city owned
IMPROVEMENTS$ 600,000
TOTAL$ 600,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$,_50.000
FINANCING 1) General funds
OPTIONS:
2) GO bonds .
1 3) Councilmatic bonds I
4) .
I I
BACKGROUND: The facility we are now using is located in Carco Park adjacent to Carco
Theater. It consists of a wooden 3 story tower. The area is too small for proper
training and the tower itself is deteriorating due to age. We need a complete train-
ing facility to properly train our firefighters in all phases of firefighting.
POTENTIAL SITE: Lind Ave. SW and SW 20th. This site has been designated as a training
site and is ideal for this type of use. We would need the total of 6 acres to build a
complete facility as outlined above.
•
FACTORS 1) Need to train all firefighters in all phases of firefighting
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Present site not adequate
or what programs
are served?Why 3) Present site needed by the Park Department
this project?)
I 4) Cost.to train at outside facility prohibitive •
1 5)
COST: CAPITAL' O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Find other site for training of firefighters $ -0- $ 30,000.
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) No training - City liable $ -0- $ -0
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(33) '
. L i .
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 8
DEPARTMENT: Fire DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 2
PROJECT TITLE: Construct Station #14 - Kennydale area
•
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 3 apparatus (pumper, aid car, ladder truck) Station 14 should be
constructed in conjunction with the relocation of Station 12 (Highlands) to maximize
coverage and minimize response times.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 180,000.
•
IMPROVEMENTS$ 550,000.
TOTAL$ 730,000.
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 460,000.
FINANCING 1) General funds
OPTIONS:
2) GO bonds •
3) Councilmatic bonds
•
4)
BACKGROUND: This area of the City is developing at an accelerated rate, both
commercially and residentially. The proposed Quendall complex will include three to
thirty story structures and will require ladder responses. Our response time to
this area is now in the six to eight minute range. We must be able to reach this
area within a four minute time span. The Easter Plan recommended this facility and
a Planning Department study done in 1972 also recommended a station in this area.
I I
I ,
POTENTIAL SITE: Preferably the station location should be in the vicinity of NE 30th •
and Highway 405. The area is zoned for business.
•
FACTORS 1) 3500 existing residents would be served
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) 2000 new residents are anticipated in the Quendall project
or what programs
are served?Why 3) Response reduced from 6 to 8 minutes to 4 minutes
this project?)
4) Aid response reduced from 6 minutes to 3 minutes. •
5) 72 responses were made to the area in 1981
COST: CAPITAL O&M •
ALTERNATIVES 1) 2 bay station - no aid vehicle (supports $ 650,000 $400,000
TO THIS PROJECT: 1, 2 and 4)
(indicate which 2) 2 bay station - no ladder truck (supports $ 340,000 $310,000
supporting factors • 1, 3 and 4)
can be met.) 3) 2 bay station - pumper only initially $ 250,000 $217,000
(supports 1 and 3)
4) Interim leased space in Quendall phase 1 $ 80,000 $217,000
pumper only (supports 1 and 3) •
5) $ $
•
(34)
•
•
•
I',
FINAL PRIORITY P
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION x 14
DEPARTMENT: Fire DEPARTMENT PRIORITY u v
PROJECT TITLE: Relocate Ste. 12 to Sunset Blvd NE in the vicinity of Iminn A,n MP
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ Z00,000
IMPROVEMENTS$400,000
TOTAL$1,100,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
•
FINANCING 1) General funds
OPTIONS:
2) GO Bonds
3) Councilmatic bonds •
4)
BACKGROUND: Station 12 was built in 1943 and remodeled in 1959. The station was
built to provide fire protection for the Highlands area which as grown substantially
since 1943. In a 1972 Planning Department study on fire station locations, it was
recommended,that this station be moved east to better serve the rapidly growing
area. The present station is in need of major repair because of its age. Relocation
' must be preceded by the construction of the Kennydale station.
POTENTIAL SITE: Area of Sunset Blvd NE and Union NE. We understand there is
property in the area zoned R1.
FACTORS 1) Sell present station and site - $200,000 .
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Provide service from the present location $ -0- $ -0-
TO THIS PROJECT: •
(indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
I j
5) $ $
(35)
I ,
•
•
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# —
DEPARTMENT: Fire DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 4
PROJECT TITLE: construct Station 15
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct Station 15 in the Darlington industrial area and
relocate Station 23 if expansion warrants.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ city owned
IMPROVEMENTS $ 450,000.
TOTAL$ 450,000.
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 475,000
FINANCING 1) General funds
OPTIONS:
2) GO bonds
I I
3) Councilmatic bonds
4)
BACKGROUND: As the Darlington industrial area continues to grow, the need increases
for a centralized station located in this area. The City owned property on Lind Ave, SW
could be utilized for this facility along with a training center.
If annexation and development continues to move south.. and east of our present Station
13, because the facility is temporary, it could be moved to a more advantagous location.
POTENTIAL SITE: Lind Ave. SW and SW 20th
Relocate Station 13 when necessary or consolidate with District 40
FACTORS 1) Need for fire and aid protection in the southeast area of the
SUPPORTING City
PROJECT:(Who 2) Improve response times to 4 minutes from 6 to 7 minutes.
or what programs
are served?Why 3) Serve rapidly developing industrial/commercial area.
this project?)
4)
•
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) None $ $
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
' 4) $ $
5) $ $
i I
•
.
(36)
LIBRARY PROJECTS
Page
1. Main Public Library Addition and Renovation 38
-(37).
I �
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 4
DEPARTMENT: LIBRARY DEPARTMENT PRIORITY u 1
PROJECT TITLE: RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY Addition & Renovation
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Addition of a 3,000 square foot second floor, bookstacks, carpet
replacement, energy conservation measures, repairs, equipment and furniture, a book
security system, circulation control system that is fully automated, and possible
conversion or replacement of heating system with an energy efficient heating/cooling
system.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $660,270
TOTAL$660,270
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$13,750
FINANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS:
2) Councilmanic Bonds
3)G. 0. Bonds
4)
i I
BACKGROUND: Addition will provide needed book storage capacity for a growing collection
that will meet most library service needs of Renton residents. Renovation will focus on
safety, security of building and materials, energy conservation, needed repairs, and a
general upgrade of a building that is showing the wear and tear of 16 years of heavy use.
Energy conservation measures are estimated at $26,383. This estimate is subject to
possible drastic revision once the City has the results of the consultants energy study
on the Renton Public Library due to be completed this summer.
POTENTIAL SITE:
Renton Public Library -- Existing building includes a roofed clearstory
area of 3,000 square feet planned as a future second floor addition to structure.
FACTORS 1) Need for book stack area to shelve growing collection of books.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Population growth and information growth results in greater demand
or what programs for library resources and services.
are served?Why 3) Safety, security, and comfort measures will benefit and protect
this project?) the public and the building. .
4) Energy conservation is a cost avoidance measure.
5) Automated circulation control system will greatly lessen need
for additional circulation staff as the City grows.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES t) Addition, bookstacks, carpet, energy $ 404,313 $ 3,750 •
TO THIS PROJECT: conservation, repairs (supports 1,2,3,4)
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(38)
' I1
1;.
PUBLIC WORKS/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PROJECTS
(In Department Priority)
Page
1. North 3rd Street and Sunset Boulevard Intersection Improvements 40�
2. Signal Controller Modernization 41
3. Traffic Signal Interconnect 42
4. South 7th Street and Rainier Avenue Intersection Improvements 43
5. Street Lighting Modifications in the CBD 44
6. South 3rd Street/Wells and Williams Intersection Improvements 45.
7. Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption 46
8. CBD Decorative Light Modifications 47
9. N.E. 3rd Street and Edmonds Avenue Intersection Improvements 48
' I
(39)
1
FINAL PRIORITY s
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION+ 6
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 1
� 1
PROJECT TITLE: Sunset Blvd. &.N 3rd Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed project is aimed at improving traffic operations at the intersection of •
Sunset Blvd. and North 3rd Street. The project involves resurfacing and channelization
as well as curbs, gutters and sidewalks on the approaches to the intersection. Also
included is improved traffic signal detection and indication equipment as well as street
lighting
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$250,000
TOTAL$ 250,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 825
FINANCING 1) Federal Funds (FAUS, FASP, etc.)
OPTIONS:
2) State Funds (UAB)
3) General Funds
4) Developer Mitigation Fees
BACKGROUND:
The intersection of Sunset Blvd. and North 3rd is a major intersection in the Renton
transportation network. The intersection serves as access to the NE 4th corridor which
is realizing a rapid rate of growth of both commercial and residential properties. The
intersection is operating at a LOS E during PM peak period. We also have significant
accident patterns that could be corrected with proposed improvements.
POTENTIAL SITE:
•
Existing location.
FACTORS 1) This intersection has been high on our high frequency locations Iist
SUPPORTING for the past three years (20 accidents in 1981).
PROJECT:(Who 2) Approximately 50,000 vehicles per day use this intersection.
or What programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Maintain "as is," $ $ 1,250
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
• supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
• (L10)
•
FINAL PRIORITY,*
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a 13
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 2
PROJECT TITLE: Controller Modernization
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
I '
The project is aimed at replacing obsolete traffic signal controllers at the locations
indicated in "Potential Site."
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ -0-
IMPROVEMENTS $ 200,000
TOTAL$ 200,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 14,025
FINANCING 1) Federal Funds
OPTIONS:
2) i/2C Gas Tax
3) General Funds
4) Revenue Sharing
BACKGROUND:
Because of the availability of outside funds and the City's need for improved traffic control,
large amounts of funds were expended on the purchase of traffic control equipment in the late
60's and early 70's. Consequently, we have the majority of our equipment in the 10 - 15 year
category. Unfortunately, the average life span of traffic control technology is approximately
7 years. Therefore, we are unable to purchase replacement parts. If we experience failure
of critical parts, traffic control at specific intersections could be non-operational.
POTENTIAL SITE:
The following locations need to be replaced:
Sunset & NE 10th Sunset 6 Edmonds N 4th 6 Garden N 3rd & Garden N 4th 6 Monroe
Sunset 6 Harrington Sunset 6 Park N 4th & Williams N 3rd & Factory
Sunset & NE 7th Sunset 6 Duvall N 4th & Logan Park 6 N 6th
Sunset & NE 3rd N 4th & Factory N 3rd 6 Williams Lake Wash./Park/Garden
FACTORS 1) Traffic circulation in the City
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Traffic safety in the City
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Maintain "as is." $ $ 21,675
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
• supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $ I
5)
(41) •
•
•
•
•
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY•
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# —
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY• 3
PROJECT TITLE: Traffic Signal Interconnect
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Install traffic signal interconnect cable and conduit (where necessary) to specific
corridors listed under "Potential Sites" from City Hall.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $100,000
TOTAL$100.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 1.000
FINANCING 1) Federal Funds
OPTIONS:
2) General Funds
3) City-Wide Traffic Mitigation Fees
4)
•
BACKGROUND:
The City is currently in the process of purchasing and installing a Multisonics VMS 220
computer system to replace the existing Multisonics 201 master. The new system master
will have the capability of controlling 96 intersections. The current master can only
control 40 intersections. The City is presently operating 70 signalized intersections.
• As a result, necessary provisions should be made to coordinate specific heavily travelled
corridors listed below.
POTENTIAL SITE:
The proposed sites include Sunset Blvd. from Park Drive to Duvall, N 3rd/N 4th from Logan
to Sunset, Park Avenue from N 6th to Sunset Blvd., and S/SW 43rd from Talbot Road to West
Valley Road. Also, interconnect must be provided from City Hall to each of the specific
locations.
FACTORS 1) Need to coordinate signals in heavily travelled corridors
SUPPORTING to improve traffic circulation.
PROJECT:(Who 2) Need to coordinate signals to enhance.safety.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?) •
4)
5)
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
• ALTERNATIVES 1) With full installation of cable TV - the $ $
TO THIS PROJECT: cable will become an option. At this time,
(Indicate which 2) it is too costly and system is not complete. $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $ •
4) $ $
5) $ • $
•
(42)
` ,
k.
" '1•-:t,1,t III • ,
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION+ 7
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY is 4
PROJECT TITLE: Rainier Ave. South & South 7th Street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: •
.Channelization, widening of South 7th Street and signal modifications.
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 100,000
TOTAL$ 100.000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ no increase above existing
•
FINANCING 1) Federal Funds (FAUS, FASP, etc.)
OPTIONS:
2) State Funds (UAR)
3) General Fund
4) Developer Mitigation Fees •
BACKGROUND:
This area of the City has experienced significant growth during the last several years.
We anticipate significant future growth with extensive development along the SW/S 7th
Street corridor. Furthermore, this intersection has been high on our High Frequency
Accident List during the last several years. The proposed improvement is anticipated
' tb improve safety and traffic circulation in the Rainier Ave. South/SW and South 7th
'Street corridor. •
POTENTIAL SITE:
•
•
Existing intersection. •
FACTORS 1) High accident frequency (23 accidents in 1981)
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Serves 51,000 vehicles per day
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4) •
•
5) •
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Maintain "as is." $ _0_ $
TO THIS PROJECT:
•
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors •
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
•
5) $
•
(43) •
1:
■
FINAL PRIORITY a j
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION sr 11
• DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 5
PROJECT TITLE: Street Lighting Modifications and Maintenance in CBD
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Eliminate approximately 54 of the existing 123 street lights in the Central Business •
District. Replace the existing 400 WHPSV lamps with 250 WHPSV. Also paint all 69
remaining luminaires.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LABOR MO$ 30,000
IMPROVEMENTS$ 30,000
TOTAL$ 60,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 10,000
FINANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS:
2) G.O. Bonds
3) Councilmanic Bonds
4) Other Grants
BACKGROUND:
This project is proposed because of the following deficiencies in the existing CBD lighting
system:
1) Minimum lighting standards required by City ordinance are exceeded by 6 times
with existing lighting design.
2) Budget and energy considerations have necessitated eliminating 20 luminaires
from operation.
3) Existing steel luminaire•poles have been damaged by rust and need to be repainted
POTENTIAL SITE: at this time (cost estimate $30,000).
'All painted steel luminaire poles in the Central Business District.
FACTORS 1) Reduced cost of lighting CBD area from $940 per month to $360 per
SUPPORTING month or an annual savings of $7,000.
PROJECT:(Who 2) Provision of good uniform lighting instead of existing light and
or what programs dark areas currently experienced when random lights are turned off.
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Paint the existing poles and maintain existing $ 30,000 $17,000
TO THIS PROJECT: 1 um i na i res.
•
(Indicate which 2) Replace the steel poles with aluminum poles. $ 150,000 $ 6,000
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(44) •
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION s —
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 6
PROJECT TITLE: South 3rd Street - Wells & Williams Intersection Modifications
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Eliminate existing trees and shrubbery, relocate crosswalks to be in line with the curb,
extend traffic signal arms over roadway and repave curb area with concrete.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LABOR M $ 8.000
IMPROVEMENTS $ 2.000
TOTAL$ 10,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$
FINANCING 1) General Funds •
OPTIONS: •
2)
•
3)
4)
•
BACKGROUND:
•
The project is being proposed to eliminate sight distance and signal visibility problems
at the intersection of South 3rd & Wells and South 3rd 6 Williams. Street trees and
shrubbery have created sight distance problems for vehicles and pedestrians particularly
in relation to the traffic signals visibility. Maintenance of the trees and shrubs
have been a continuous problem.
•
POTENTIAL SITE:
Intersections of South 3rd & Wells and South 3rd b Williams.
FACTORS 1) Better visibility for the motoristand pedestrian.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Reduced maintenance cost.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?) •
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M . i.
ALTERNATIVES 1) Maintain "as is"
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
I•
5) $ $
•
(45)
• •
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY 1r
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# —
DEPARTMENT: Publ is Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 7
PROJECT TITLE: Emergency Vehicle Preemption
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Provide emergency vehicle preemption for all intersections listed in the "Potential Sites."
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 80,500
TOTAL$ 80,500
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ I.000
FINANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS: •
2) Developer Fees
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: -
The City of Renton Fire Department has requested that emergency vehicle preemption be
provided along all strategic emergency access routes within the City. To accomplish the
goal, the Public Works Department has defined equipment requirements at key intersections.
The purpose of the preemption is to protect emergency vehicles from side street inter-
ference,
POTENTIAL SITE:
The following sites have been defined as requiring additional preemption equipment:
Airport & Rainier Park & N 6th S 3rd & Rainier S 4th 6 Logan
Airport & Logan Park & N 10th Talbot & Grady.
Airport & Shattuck Lake Wash./Park/Garden Talbot 6 S 15th
FACTORS 1) Fire response time throughout the City
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Safety considerations for emergency vehicles as well as the general
or what programs 'pub!i c.
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) No acceptable alternatives have currently $ $
TO THIS PROJECT: been identified.
(Indicate which 2) • $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ S
4) $ $
5) $ $
' I
(46) •
� I
a
FINAL PRIORITY•
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a —
DEPARTMENT: Publ is Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 8
PROJECT TITLE: CBD Decorative Light Modifications
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Remove existing 4,048 - 69 watt incandescent lamps and replace with 1 - 50 watt sodium
vapor lamp on the existing 130 short poles. The lamps on the street light poles would be
completely eliminated.. Other operational options become available.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$126,500
TOTAL$126,500
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Reduction of $3,300 per year (holiday operation
only, as existing)
FINANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS:
2) Councilmanic Bonds
3) G. 0. Bonds
4)
BACKGROUND:
The existing CBD decorative lights are costly to maintain and operate. Currently the
City can only afford one month of operation per year. The concept is to replace the
existing design with a design which is energy and cost conscious. With the improved
design we could maintain and operate the system (including power) for what it costs to
operate for one month with the existing,design.
POTENTIAL SITE:
All 253 decorative lamps within confines of::the Renton Central Business District.
FACTORS 1) City beautification
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Energy consciousness
or what programs
are served?Why 3) Cost consciousness
this project?)
4)
•
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remove all decorative lights $ -0- $ -0-
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) Replace 69 watt bulbs with 25 watt bulbs $ 18,100 $ 1,000
supporting factors or less
can bemei.) 3) Maintain "as is" $ $
4) $ $
5)
(47)
FINAL PRIORITY or
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: Public Works/Traffic Eng. DEPARTMENT PRIORITY• 9
PROJECT TITLE: NE 3rd & Edmonds Intersection Improvements
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Widening and channel ization of NE 3rd and signalization of the complete intersection.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $ 150,000
TOTAL$ 150,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 2,500
•
FINANCING 1) Developer funds
OPTIONS:
2) General Revenue Funds
3) Federal Funds
4)
•
BACKGROUND:
•
Edmonds Avenue is being constructed from NE 4th to NE 3rd as a part of The Terrace
development conditions. This action will create an intersection with NE 3rd Street.
Because of the anticipated traffic volumes and sight distance problems, signalization
is necessary. The City was unable to require the developer to install the signal.
' However, each developer has participated according to his fair share.
POTENTIAL SITE:
NE 3rd and the extension of the Edmonds Ave. Right-of-Way.
•
FACTORS 1) Intersection will meet signal warrants
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Sight distance problems on NE 3rd
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4) .
5) '''
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Do not allow left turns at this intersection $ 2,000 $ 100
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors, •
can be met.) 3) $ $
li
4) $ $
I i
5) $ $
(48) •
•
•
• j;
. •1,1
•
•
•
..N110.
, :::::iii1:3'..••:*:..a.*::::::::::::::::...::::.....:. z, :::.:::::::::::
cz...
-7"- • ••:•:•:•:•:•::::•:.x.x.:•::::.:,. 166 6 ............%
•:::::•:•:* : ..:::::•:•:•:•:•::::::.:•:.:.::::::: :.:.:.:.:.:: .i-
:::::**". ••:•:•:':%%••••:•:•:•:••••••••:•:•:•:•:' M, •••••:•:•:% t
%
:::i::•:.:. ::.::::::••••:::.::::::::::•:•:•:•::::::::%*•••••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:%."':•:•:•::::::.
::•:•:•:••••••....•... ••-••••:•:.•:•:*:%%•:••••••:•:•:•:•:•:•:%%; ......%%%••:•::.
•
.I
, .:::.::•:::::••••:::.:::••••:••••••:••%::::i::::••••:.:••••:•:::::::::::::" .• ......"
'::::::••••••••::::•::.:•:i::••••iti:i:::.::i:::;::•.....5i:i:i::*i: •:•:•:•..iiii pig: L 'I- • ---
,,, ..,.;,,•:IP
• ,
:::::*:*••••••::•:•: :*::::. .•:•:%*•:.:••.•:••••:.:•:•:•:•:•::.:.:.. •• •..:•::.:.:.
....•. .. .. . ..... .......... ... ......,
*..:•:::"•••:::•::•.%•*.••:••:•:•:••••••.•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:;.:.••:•:•:•::::::.:.:..'%'•••..:.:.:.:•::::::
i‘wer
' 1
, ..
:•••••:::::::•:::•:•.*::•.••••••-..* .•:•:•::::::::::::::.:.::::::::::.:.:.:.:::::...:...x.:::::2::v r1/4
••••••% 4•::••••••:•:•:•::::::::::::.•:•:':*:••••:•:•:':%%••:•:•:•:•:••••••:•:•:•:•••• '•:•:•.%%:•••.•••••:.:
•••• %%*•••••••••••.% .........................................................
1;iji:lililiiiii..:::,:::::::::::::•••::::::::::.::::::::::.:•:•::::::::::::1:::::::::::::::::::::::::$1:1:1:.::::•:.:1:1:1:•:::• ••• •••••Iiii•::i':•:•:•:•:1:1 :1:1:1:•:::•:.:*:•:":•:':•:*:•:•:•:::•:::•:•%:::•:::ili:.1•:.:•:1:1::•:.:•1:.:.:1:.i.:.:....:...:.......
•:•?•!...;•:•:••••:.;
.........":".:". .::::::•:•:•::::::::•:•:•:•::::::.:.:.::
• ..•••:::0':::::......;:i:i::: .
•:•:::::•:. %X.:•:::::ye:•X:::M.: — ....:............ 1
i:.:•.: ::!:::::::••:i::::::::::: ::•:•;::::::::::::::::::::::•:•::::::::••:•:':••••:•:•::*:*:•:•::::: ::::::::**•:::::::::%:•::::::•:•:•........ ..••;.*....::•.•::••i:i: ::;: I
, ':•.%•:%."X'X':%t.:•Ne •::...X.X%.:.X.:.:::::::::.::::::::—:.::::::::::,::::::::::.::: mi::::::::::::::x0:::::.::::x. ......: :::: ,.....x.::::::::::.:.::::
. ..."*".ve"............ ...........••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••• ••..••••••••••••••••••••••• •••• "•••• •...•• ••........••.........
. ...:::•i: ii.:::.:N:? :::%IX.X..Xt:..X.'X%X.X.::;:;: i:: :•:.:•:•::::::•:':'X':**......X.X..:.:e.:.:.....:.:.:.:.:::.., .:.:...x.x...:..:....x.:...:::. , .
•::•::::::::::::::::••:::,:::.::,-::.::!:::::;::::•:i•:••'N&I.. •::::.•:.:,-:::: :::::::::::::::•:••••....::::::::::,:::?rf::::::::::::e....:::::::.::*::::::::::.;:::::::::::::.:.:
%.::::::::::::::::::::::. ....:-.-..:.••••••••••-:-.-.;* .'11:". •:::!:::::::::: ::::::•:?•••••••••::::::•*::::::*:if••••::::*:•: ::::::•••••••••::::••;i:i:i::::::••.::.*if:::::::.::i::::.::::•::.: ,
•:•:••••:•:••••::••••:-:• lillk.•••:*:••••:*:• *:':•::•:•:•:::›50:•::•:•:•:•:•:•:::::•..:•::::.:.:•:•:•::::.:.;.:.:•;:::.:....:.:.:.::.:.:.:.:.:
•••••..........• ................
:•:•:::•:•:.::;::
•••
Iv •••••• . ••••••••••••••...•••• ..•••...................................
•••.....• .••.........................................................................
i::.*:.::.:i:*::::: .::::•:•:::•:•::::.:.:.:. ,. .:.:.:.:..:. .:.:.:.:.:.:..:::.:.:.:.:.:..:.....:.:..:.:.:.:.:.............:.:.:..:.:.:.:....:....:.......:.:.:..:.:.:.:.:.:....
••:::::::::•::::::::::.... •••:•:•:•:•.•:•::.:.:.:.:.: •••• •••••••••••••......• ••.................................................................
:::::::::.::::::.::::.. t:::::::::::::::::::.:.:i. 1:•:i::-:i:::' :::::::::i:i::::::::.::::::.:i?..i::::::iig::.:::::i::::ii::•:•:iiii:•::::....i...ii:::.::::;::: :iii.::iii:i::i...ii
:•:•••••••••••••:%:•:•:.:.:.:.::::•:•:•:•:•::::•:•:-:•:•::::•:•:•:-:•::::•:•: :::::•:..:•::::•:•:•:•::::: .:.,.:.:...................... .
•
, .
1
1
IL Sewer
r Fund
I
• .
CL19)
. .I
•
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
Project Total Cost Potential
Description Annual Funding
Priorit.l & Location Improvements 0 & M Sources
#1 Honey Creek $672,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.51 Interceptor Ref. 39
#2 CBD Sewer $700,000 Slight Utility Fund
(p.52: Replacement Reduction
Phase 1
#3 CBD Sewer $600,000 Slight Utility Fund
(p53) Replacement Reduction _ .
Phase 2
#4 CBD Sewer $700,000 . Slight Utility Fund -
(p.54) Replacement Reduction
Phase 3
#5 CBD Sewer $600,000 Slight Utility Fund
(p.55) Replacement Reduction
1 Phase 4
#6 Renton Avenue $200,000 Minimal L.I.D.
(p.56) Interceptor. Utility Fund
Ref. 39
#7 Black River $140,000 $10,000 L.I.D.
(p.57) Interceptor Developer Extension
#8 Heather Downs $80,000 $5,000 L.I.D.
(p.58) Interceptor Developer Extension
-Upper Basin- Utility Fund
#9 I West Kennydale $150,000 $5,000 L.I.D.
(p.59) I Interceptor Utility Fund
Ref. 39
#10 I East Kennydale $95,000 $5,000 L.I.D. .
(p.60) Interceptor Utility Fund
Ref. 39
(50)
•
FINAL PRIORITY n
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION rr 1
DEPARTMENT: Ut i I i ty (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY rJ 1
•
PROJECT TITLE: Honey Creek Interceptor and Pump Station
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Honey Creek Interceptor from Sunset Lift Station to May Creek,
•
and Connect to Either Future May Creek Metro Sewer or New
Interim Pump Station.
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $672,000.00
TOTALS 672,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
•
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Referendum #39 - Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: The northeast section of Renton's sanitary sewers are at capacity, •
and further connections are prohibited. The project would elimi-
nate overflows of sewage and allow further development.
POTENTIAL SITE: Honey Creek Ravine is only alignment possible.
FACTORS 1) The project is critical to protect water quality and to allow
SUPPORTING continued development.
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL .-4 O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing
•
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) •
$ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ S
•
(51)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 2
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 2
PROJECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Phase 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace CBD Sanitary Sewers in Southeast Portion of Old Downtown - Mill Avenue South
to Shattuck Avenue South - Houser Way South to Cedar River.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 700.000.00
TOTALS 700,000.00
•
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Slight Reduction
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
•
POTENTIAL SITE: City Right-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ increasing
TO THIS PROJECT: •
(Indicate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve. $700,000 $ reduced
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) S $
4) $ $
5) S $
(52). •
•
• •.I. 1'� •
' 1 .
•
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 3
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 3
PROJECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Phase 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace CBD Sanitary Sewer in Southwest Portion of Old Downtown - Main Avenue South
to Shattuck Avenue South Railroad Tracks to South Grady Way.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$600,000.00
TOTAL$600,000.00
• ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$Slight Reduction
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
POTENTIAL SITE: City Rights-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4) '
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing'
TO THIS PROJECT: •
(Indicate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve. $ 600,000 $Decrease
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(53)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 4
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 4
PROJECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Phace 3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace CBD Sanitary Sewers in North Portion of Old Downtown - North 3rd Street
to Bronson Way - Burnett Avenue North to Houser Way.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 700.000.00
TOTALS 700,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Sl ight Reduction
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay- Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and not maintainable.
POTENTIAL SITE: City Rights-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve. $ 700,000 $ Decrease
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(54)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 5
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division r)EP.ARFMF.NT PRIORITY# 5
PROJECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Phase 4
' I
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace CBD Sanitary Sewers in North Renton residential area - North 6th Street
to North 3rd Street, Burnett Avenue North to Garden Avenue North.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 600,000.00
TOTAL$ 600,000.00
•
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Slight Reduction
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
' I
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
POTENTIAL SITE: City Rights-of-way
I •
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPPORTING •
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 Slncreasing
•
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2y In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve. $600,000 SDecrease
supporting factors •
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) S $
I 5)
(55)
•
' I
,
•
1
' I
FINAL PRIORITY ::
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION it 6
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY u 6
PROJECT TITLE: Renton Avenue Interceptor
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from Victoria Place West to Existing
Earl ington School Pump Station
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ '
IMPROVEMENTS$200,000.00
TOTAL S 200.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Local Improvement District
OPTIONS:
2) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
3) Referendum 39 - Municipal Waste Water Funding Program
4)
BACKGROUND: Provides gravity sewer service to this west side of City replacing
pump station and force main.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and Public Rights-of-Way
•
FACTORS 1) Provides gravity sewer service to unsewered and pumped sewer
SUPPORTING area.
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3) •
this project?)
4) 0
•
5) •
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
•
(56)
•
1
•
FINAL PRIORITY rr
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION +r ?
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY it 7
PROJECT TITLE: Black River Interceptor
•
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New 15" - 3,500' Long Sanitary Sewer Along Monster Road and
Container Corporation Site to Serve Extreme West Portion of
Black River Drainage Basin
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$140.000.00
i I
TOTAL$140.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 10,000.00
FINANCING 1) Local Improvement District
OPTIONS:
2) Developer Extension
3)
•
4)
BACKGROUND: This new interceptor would provide sewer service to the north and
west part of Black River Drainage Basin near the Black River Quarry,
west of the current City limits.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and public rights-of-way in and west of Monster Road.
I ,
I '
FACTORS 1) This project will provide sanitary sewers to undeveloped areas.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2)
' or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
•
' 5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
dl (indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) • 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
I.
•
(57) I,
•
•
•
i 11f
' r
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 8
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 8
PROJECT TITLE: Heather Downs Interceptor - Upper Basin
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New 12" 2,000' long Sewer Interceptor from N.E. 4th Street South
to existing Heather Downs Interceptor.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS S. 80,000.00
TOTAL$ 80,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000.00
FINANCING 1) Developer Extension
OPTIONS: •
2) Local Improvement District
3) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
4)
BACKGROUND: Provides gravity sanitary sewer service to the Cascadia Annexation area in
the northern portion of Heather Downs drainage basin and south of N.E. 4th
Street.
POTENTIAL SITE: Public rights-of-way and easements.
•
FACTORS 1) Project allows development of Cascadia Annexation.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) $ $
supporting}actors
can be met.) 3) $ 5
4) $ 5
5) S 5
(58)
FINAL PRIORITY rr
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION is 9
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY++9
PROJECT TITLE: West Kennydale Interceptor
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New West Kennydale Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from Kennydale School
to N.E. 20th St.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 150,000.00
TOTALS 150.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000.00
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Local Improvement District
3) Referendum 1139 - Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
4)
BACKGROUND: The proposed line serves the west half of upper Kennydale via
Jones Road.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and Public Rights-of-Way
FACTORS 1) Provide sanitary sewers to area of poor septic tank operation
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate water quality and health risks
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
• ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ S
' I
5) $ $
(59)
I �
•
•
•
I', A
.
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION It 1 0
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 10
PROJECT TITLE: East Kennydale Interceptor
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New East Kennydale Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from N.E. 27th St.
Southeast to N.E. 23rd St.'and Aberdeen Ave. N.E.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $95,000.00
TOTAL$ g5.000_Iy)
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000.00
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay -.Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Local Improvement District
3) Referendum 1139 Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
4)
BACKGROUND: Provides sanitary sewer service to north and east portions of Kennydale,
presently unsewered.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and public rights-of-way
FACTORS 1) Provide sanitary sewers to area of poor septic tank operation
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate water quality and health risks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(60)
i .
e ' ,
. .
'I
i
,
•
- ,
•
1 .
1 1
11
. •
_- ...
11,
1:1 ••• ••••••:•::!N 4•::::::::::::::::::iiiii:K.•:Iii:':•::::•.::•ii.::.::.:•.*::::$:.::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::i:.1.::*:;::::::::.
•••••••:•::::::::•:•:•:-:-:•:•:•:•:•.•••••:::.:::..:.::_: *:::::::........:. :::::::::::*: :::::::::::::::::::i:::::::.
...:::einili gIsPIN :iAi::ii ::i::igiiii ....,..,,,.5 i:i:ii:z:.: i:i:i:i:i::::ii:•:::::::::::::i:::::i:.::::ii.:: .
:::::::::"::::911:::i:::::*:' ii0C1 :::•;:,:::::!:::::::: :::::::•:-:::::::::: x
1: .•:!::.:::.i.i.:.:.:
111:, •::::i:i:::::::::*i*::::::::i§: §c ,-9- %;:i:Kiii::: :ei*:::i*:::!::g::::::::::::*::::::::::i x:::::::*:::::**i*i:::::::iK:K:::
......
[,1
1 ,
.:.:.:.:.: -:-:-:-:::::::!:•!:•!:•::•::-::-::::.-•:•.-•,-.-i„.•,..:.................••%•:•:•:•:•:::i:K:::::- :::::::::*:*:::::::i;A::::::::K:::::::::::::..r.::::i*i::::::::.:.:,:::::::::::: ::.:;:,..:
.......x..• ":":.x.x.:-"-"-..;'"'"-•-•-"'"*:**•Ar...*':*::::':*:':':': x':'::::•:•:•:•:*::::v3:-:•:••:•:•:•:•::::•:•x•*•::-:•:•:•:•:•::i.:;.. ::::::i;i:i::: :
]:1 •::::::::6-*".^-^----':::::::::::::::::::::::::**::::::::::•:+::::K*-*--,%:•:•:::::::: :::::::•:•:•::::::::•:::•:::-.;;K:::::::..:•:•:•:::: .v:•:•:::•:•*....::::: •:•:•::::::::::.:.:.
,' . :-:•:::::......:.•:•:•:•:•%**:....-..".••:.•:.:.::::::.:.:.:.:.::::::•:0...... ..•.•...:0:6 .:.:0::::::::.:.:.:.::.:::.:....:.:.:. .:.::::::.% ::.%...:.:.:.::.,1,,,,:.:.:....:.:.:.:.:.:
' '.:.:.":.:.:.:.:.......:.:**..:.:...::.:.::.;.:..::.:.:::...::::::.:.:::.•'1 n::;i:::: ::::::.;;;;;;;;:::.•::::::.•;7:"..:::::::0;'. S.%;:.....:::::::;;.;.Y•'•.0.:.::*:::::::::i:i:::
.;.:.•..•.•;•;";••:•. .•;•;•;•.:.:•;•.....:.:.:.;•. 0.:.:•;•;•::::.:.:.:.:.:. ..:•::::::.:. .:.:.:.::::::.:.: ,. ..::.::.:.:.: :..:.:•:.::::;..,...::::.:.:.:.:.:::::..:.:.:.:::::
'I i
'1 I
1 I :::I.:::I::::.::::::•::::::•:•••::.::::::::::::il:::::.:::.::P.::i:::.::::•••:i:::i:••••.:
1 .:!:.:::.;::::::::::::;;;• .•.•;::*.. :•:.::.:::::::::11:1::•::::.•:.:::.:•::i:::::::.::::::.:::::•:::::i:i:i::ii:l::il:i:::::N:.::: ..P:::;::i:::.:::;:1::.:::.::::.•:1. ' 4,..:.i 4:....!..i:.:..:i..i::..::::.:..•::".::•i.::::.;.:::..:..;:::.::.::•.::.::•.:.:::•:::::•:::::•::::.:::::.:::•.::::..::::•:.::::•;.::::..:::..::.:.::.::.:0.::::::
::::::::::::.;;•;.•.• .0.0....•:::.0•X.:.:.:.::0:0:0:.:.:.:.::4:•:•..0....:..:.:.:0:•::::::::::•.6' 1 i;!.....:.:0:0:.:.:.:,;;;;;::::
:: I
1 "6:•X.:.::::::::•::::*;•.%;...•.::::i::::::::::::::::.:•:.:•:.:.:•:.O..•0•.•.•.....;... ;Ir
1 '
.
••.. .• •.::•:•:•:.:.:.::::::::::::::•::::::.:.:.:.:.:.:....:.:.:.:::......x.:
.................
..:.::::::::::::.::::::.X.X.:;:;•;.;.;.;.;;;;;;•;•;•::::::::::.:.:::::::::• .*::::::.•:.r.:...:::::: .
AdilL.
h.h.
:•:•:•:••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•::.:.:.:.:.:.::.:.:.:.:.:.x:.........,,,,_ .. "..::::....:.::::
.:.::::::•:•:•:•:•::::::•:•:•:•:::•:.••........„:„. c. .........,, ....:..,:.::
1 i .
• :::•:•::::::::::::•:•:•::::::,:::,. . ,,,,,,,,,47............::.
_ . .
:::•:•-....:::•::::::::::::::::
,1
•:•:•::•:•:.:•:•:•::::::.:•:•:•:•::::.:.............;„•,:!::.:..i:ii;....:.:.::::::......:.::::.:
•:+:.x%:.".,....+ .....„...........„..„.„+„:„.,
-.---.. ••••••,...-.. •-••••••••••••••••......................................e......
:::::::::::::: :•:•:•::•:•:•:•:•:•••-..:.:.:„.„:•::.:.:.:.:.:.::::.:.:.:.:.:.::.:.:.:.:.::::: .
hi
-••••••••• ••:•%:•:•:•:•::•:•:••••....:.:•:•:•:•::::.:.:.:.:.::::.:.:.:.:.:.::,.:.:.:.:.::.....:.:
......::.:::......................................:.:,
......"......... ....................,.........,...................
,, k .1 • .
] . , N....- ' • . .
•
. . •1 '
' .
1 .
,.i
11
li
•
•I
1
]
Iii •
11
.•
li
11
.11
III .
Water Fund
II .
•
.1 . . .
1,
•
,•,
1,
.11
•i
(61)-I. .
,.;
,.,
. .
11
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
Project Total Cost Potential
Description Annual Funding
Priority & Location Acquisition Improvements 0 & M Sources*
#1 Well #9 $150,000 Minimal Utility FlLnd
(p.63) edar River Park Ref. 38
#2 24" Transmission Main $350,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.64) through CBD
#3 W st Hill Reservoir $1,200,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.65) Pump Station Ref. 38
Joint Funding with
Skyway Districts
#4 Aberdeen Avenue $200,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.66) Transmission Main
#5 S uth Talbot Hill $50,000 $650,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p.67) Reservoir
#6 Springbrook Springs $200,000 Minimal Utility Fund
(p68) Wat;rshed Acquisition
Ref. 38
Joint Purcc,hase
for Park
(62)
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 1
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 1
PROJECT TITLE: Wel i No. 9
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of Well No. 9 Pump Station, a new water supply source.
, I
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $150,000.00
TOTAL$150.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Referendum 1138 - Municipal Water Supply Funding Program
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: When Well 38 was drilled and constructed in 1968, an exploratory well
was also drilled. This was used as an observation well at that time,
with the eventual use to be as the site of future Well No. 9. A new
casing will be installed in 1982. Due to the possible conflicts with.
the D.S.H.S. and well construction in the Cedar River this project •
should be done as soon as possible. The facility will provide addi-
tional water supply to the City's supply. This will allow for con-
tinued growth and expansion of Renton.
POTENTIAL SITE: The site for future Well No. 9 wijl be at the present observation well
location in the northeast corner of the Cedar River Park. There
should be no cost for the site and no zoning problems.
FACTORS 1) The City of Renton can pump water from the Cedar River ground
SUPPORTING water at a lesser cost than If water was purchased from the
PROJECT:(Who 2) City of Seattle (the only other water- purveyor in the area).
or what programs All existing watermains in this area have been designed to
are served?Why 3) accept water from proposed future well sites.
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
Major
ALTERNATIVES 1) Purchase water from the City of Seattle at an $ 0 . $ Increase
TO THIS PROJECT: increased cost.
(Indicate which 2) Remain as is, and eventually be short of water $ 0 $ 0
supporting factors supply to serve the City of Renton.
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
' I
(63)
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a 2
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 2
PROJECT TITLE: 24" CBD Transmission Main
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete installation of 24" Transmission Water Main through
the Central Business District.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ •
IMPROVEMENTS$350.000.0Q
TOTAL$350,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$Minimal Increase
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
•
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: This project was first proposed in the 1965 Water Study Comprehensive
,Plan. It was also one of the projects proposed in the 1975 Water and
Sewer Bond Issue. The completion of this transmission line will balance
• the flows from the Talbot Hill Reservoir and the Mt. Olivet Reservoir.
This project will increase the fire flows and reliability of the system
in the C.B.D. and also improve the entire water system reliability.
POTENTIAL SITE: The location of the remaining portions of this project are in Talbot
Road South from South Grady Way to South Renton Village Place; Burnett •
Avenue South from Houser Way South to South Tobin Street; South Tobin •
Street from Burnett Avenue South to Williams Avenue South; Williams
Avenue South from South Tobin Street to South Riverside Drive; South •
Riverside Drive from Williams Avenue South to Wells Avenue South; across
Wells Avenue.Bridge to North Riverside Drive; then in North Riverside
FACTORS Drive to Liberty Park and then through Liberty Park to Wells #1 and #2.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 1) There will be no cost for right-of-way for the watermain.
or what programs
are served?Why 2) This will increase the fire flows and reliability of the C.B.D.
this project?) as well as the reliability of the entire water system. •
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1)Remain the same. $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT: •
(Indicate which 2) $ $ •
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
� I
5) $ $
(64)
� n
I;_
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 3
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 3
PROJECT TITLE: West Hill Reservoir and Pump Station
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of West Hill Reservoir, 1 million gallons, pump
station and transmission mains.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$1,200,000
1 I
TOTAL$1,200,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital-Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) DSHS Referendum #38 Municipal Water Supply Funding Program
3) Joint use and funding from Skyway Water Districts
4)
BACKGROUND: The West Hill is served by water purchased from the City of Seattle.
There is insufficient water supply for fire protection in some areas
of West Hill. The only storage presently available is in the City
of Seattle Transmission line. The City of Seattle imposes a penalty
demand charge when a system has insufficient storage. Renton is
presently paying this penalty charge.
•
POTENTIAL SITE: The City owns one potential site presently on N.W. 4th Street at
84th Avenue South. The latest design might require a different
site. This new proposed site would be at Thompson School, which
is located at South 123rd Street at 82nd Avenue South in King
County. The use of this site would have to be negotiated with
the Renton School,District. There could be zoning or King County
opposition to the construction of an elevated tank at this site.
FACTORS
SUPPORTING 1) The cost benefit would be the elimination of the demand charge
PROJECT:(Who for lack of storage that Renton is presently paying to the City
or what programs of Seattle.
are served?Why
this project?) 2) Additional benefits would be in improved system reliability and
fire flow capability.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain the same. $ 0 $ 0
• TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
' I 5) $ $
(65)
-
1
1 �
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION n 4
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY!r 4 ,
PROJECT TITLE; Aberdeen Ave. N.E. Transmission Main
•
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install 16" Transmission Watermain in Aberdeen Ave. N.E. from
N.E. 14th Street to N.E. 28th Street '
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $ 200,000.00
TOTAL$,nn nnn nri
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
•
BACKGROUND: This project was in the 1965 water study. It would improve the
fire flows to the northwest section of the Highlands, but is
basically designed to increase the fire flows in the lower
Kennydale area where there is anticipated commercial and multi-
family growth in the near future.
POTENTIAL SITE: The location of this project is all in publlc right-of-way of
Aberdeen Ave. N.E. Therefore there is no costs for property •
involved.
FACTORS 1) The benefit of this project would be increased fire flows to the
SUPPORTING aforementioned areas.
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain the same, and limit building and develop- $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT: ment to meet the existing fire flows the system
(Indicate which 2) can presently deliver. $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(66)
•
' I
FINAL PRIORITY 4
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION " 5
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY ,J 5
PROJECT TITLE: South Talbot Hill Reservoir - 1.5 Million Gallons
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New Reservoir in South Talbot Hill Area Above Valley General
Hospital.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 50.000.00
IMPROVEMENTS $650,000.00
TOTAL$700.000.0n
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: The 'reliability of any water supply is the capability of supply-
ing water under adverse conditions such as power failures, etc.,
and at a quantity to meet the requirements or demands of the
system. The 350 ft. hydraulic pressure zone that this proposed
reservoir would serve Is presently planned to meet its fire
service demands by pumping water through the south Talbot Hill
Pump Station. The system is intertie with two pressure reducing
stations to the Rolling Hills elevated tank system. These inter-
ties are not sufficient to supply the complete system demands.
POTENTIAL SITE: The approximate location of phe site for this proposed reservoir
is just south of Carr Road and west of the Benson Road (SR 515)
extended. The cost of the site is estimated to be $50,000.00
FACTORS 1) The benefit would be increased reliability of the existing system.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3) • •
this project?)
4)
5) .
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES $ 0 $ 0
• 1) Remain as is.
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(67)
' I
•
• 1 }
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION# 6
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 6
PROJECT TITLE: Sprinqbrook Springs Watershed Acquisition
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquire three or four adjoining properties to Springbrook Water
Shed for sanitary protection and further source development.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 200,000.00
IMPROVEMENTS S
TOTAL$
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M S.Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Referendum #38 I1uniclpal Water Supply Funding Program
3) Possible joint purchase and development as passive park
4)
BACKGROUND: The Springbrook Springs are the CIty's oldest source of water,
operating now at about 2.5 million gallons per day since 1902.
• When the springs were developed at the turn of the century, the
area was all rural. Now with urban development, buffer areas
must be purchased to remain in undeveloped states.
POTENTIAL SITE: Osterhouse property - 4 acres
Weaton property - 16 acres
Entrance parcel - 2 acres
Fish farm - 8 acres
•
FACTORS 1) Allow City to control sensitive neighboring properties for sanitary
SUPPORTING control.
PROJECT:(Who 2) Acquire adjoining lands for future source development.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 S 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) Lose control and allow urban development. $ 0 $ Major
supporting factors Increase '
can be met.) 3) $ S
4) $ $
5) $ $
(68)• i'i
I'
11.0 *
i:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•:•:•:•:•:::::::::::::::: \ ' Fi•
•::::::::::::::::::::*::::::::::::::::::*::::KM:;::::::::i* INN
= • - •,::::*:**ii*K:::::::::::::::::::::: •:•::.;-•'$::::::::::::::$ Liws
• •:•:•>:•:•:•:•:•:•:•::::::::::::::::%:::::::.%::::,;':•::::::•:•:•:
•••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:::•:•:•••:•.••:•:•:,...••:•:•::•:•:.
:41E0 .
. iiii:::i;i0K::•:•:•:•:•:•::::::::::::::::::.•:::::::%%:::::::i:
In .
• ..... . ....
:* *:*!::::::WAM*X*: :-.::.: :.,..'.:
0 •Co '
:::::i::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:***'•i*x...:,:•x:i 1 \ ' .
• :::::•:•:•:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:. Li.:.::::::::•:::::•:::::•:•:•:::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:0„,.%:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:
•IM• .
:•:•:•:•:. ,,-
1:?•••,k:X:!:!
•••••.•.•54:..•'.::::::::::::::: •
..5b:.•.2::•. :::1•:•:::::::
\ < •
iiiiiii::.1...:•:::•:•;•:•:•:•:::•:::::::::•:::•:g,...iiiiiiiiii ,
:::*i:i:i*:::::E:ii:::*::ii:*ii:ii::::: ::::•:•::*:: :.:::.ii::i'
••:- '
t.::::::::::::::.:.:::::::::*::::::::*:::::.: :::::::::::•:•:•:•:•:., %.„,„ .- •
•
e?:::::::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:::•:7N :•::::::::::::::::::$::::::::::::::::::::::::::::*:*:*:':*:::::::::eN
.....:.:.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•%::::::•:•:::::::::::::....: :•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:::::::::::•:•:•:•:•.•:•:.
:.:.:.:.:.:.x.x.x.;:.:.:.x.:.:.:.•.• .....-. ...........X.. •:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:
,:;,.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:......•.•.:.:.:.:.::::kt:•:•:,-,K*•:::::::::::: :•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•••••••••••••.*•'•:, •
.•:•••••••••••••••••• .....::::::•' ... ... .... *::::: *:::::::::'-:%%.*%•••".....••" .o.. ::::::: 01
>
Mx LD
......"
••• •x''''')``''%1::::::::...;:r..'.ti,,,.•...:::$: ::::•. ::::::::::::::::..wir:.6&:•:•:•:*i.
:•:'L••1:1:•••%•.• ..:::::::::::::.::::::::.::::::::::*::: *:.::.::.:i:i•..:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-.;: ..41 -:*:::::
,:i:i',4•_•%4.,•.•:.••:::::•:::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::•:::•:•:•:::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:::::::::::•:•:::::::•:•:•:•:•:•.•;::
• :::::.::.:.:.:.:.:.:.....:•:•:-•:•:::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:• :•:•:•:•:•:::•:::::::•::::::$::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::$::•:::•:•:•:
'::::::::::::::ii:::::!::::KM::r•::::::::::::KM:i ‘ :$:K:::::ii:::::::.::::::::::::::::::::i::*i:K*Mi:X
iii:i:ii:i:i:ii::::i:::E:ii:i§:i:::i:ii:i:::•:..iiii:.1i:::::::i:K: iiii::::ii:::i:i:iii:iii:§!::iii:i:iiM:i:iiii::iiiiii:ii::ii::i
, • ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i*::•*..:::::.:%:::::K:i::: i*?.::::N:K:::•:::::X:K::::::•:•:•:•:•:::::::::::•::::::::::
• • •:•:•:•:•.•:::•:•:•:•:•::::•:-.•:•:•:::•:.:•:....•••••*%.••:•:•:•:•• ••••••••••%•••••••••:••••::•:•:•:: '::::::*::i:::
.:::::::::•:::•:::•:•:•:•:.•:•:•:•:•:•:•:.:•:•:••.•:-.•:•. • ••:•:•:: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•%* •:•:•:::•:•:
..::::::::::i:::N$i::::::::::::•;::•*.•:::::::::::::•. *•::: :::::::::::$::::•:•:••••• :. . .... . .... ..... . ....
..i::0§:iii:ii:::. -- *K::•:::•:::::-.... •:•:•:•:•:. _ .
:•:•:•:•:•:
•.•.•.••:•:•:.x•D%•:•:•:•:•%%:•. %:•:-.•.•:•:•:•:.•. • ::::::•:::•:•:::::::::•:•.. ::•:•:•:+
-••%55544.%%%% ::::::,%:::::$$0,e..§: - :•:•:•:,)x+x..x.:•y...x.. ;SZ:;::
, ,,,,.„,.-----,,,.„.„,,,,,--,—. :...x.:.. 7-,.: ex.$:. •::::,x.x.x.x.x.:::•:.m.%% ...x,x-:$.: •,.:. .2„,....,„,,,,,w ..:.....:.:::::::::.........:::::..... .:.......:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•.•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•.........:•:•:•:•:•:•:•.•:•.•
• vocc•oc, %,...w., ,,,x.:. .:ex.x.:•:+x.:*:.x.x.x.:+x.x.x.:•:•:•:•:•:•:.x.:
,.... ,----.. •:•:•:•. ••:••.•:•:•:•:•:•:::•:•:- •:•:•:•:•::::::::::::•:•::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
• iiiii:...::..:•::K:::::K:K:K::.;:gi:::•.....:i:§§:iiiiii::iii iii:ii::iiiiii:iK:ii:ii:i::*::i:i:i::::::::::*K*:::*i:K::::.:::
\. ' '' • • ' I .
. :
•
•
. .
. ., .
.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
Project Total Cost Potential,
Description Annual Funding
Priory $ Location, Improvements 0 & M Sources
#1 Water Main Extension $72,000 Minimal Airport Fund
(p.7)) -S.E. Corner-
#2 Water Main $108,000 Minimal Airport Fund
(p.72 Loop System
#3 Instrument Landing $75,000 By U.S. Federal ADAP
(p.73 System Gov't. Funds
(70)
FINAL PRIORITY x
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION s 1
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRPQRT1_ DEPARTMENT PRIORITY+► 1
PROJECT TITLE: WATER MAIN - Upgrading (SE Corner)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 12" water service extension from Logan Bridge to Boeing Bridge. Tie-
in new 12" line to Renton's water system, providing more reliable water service to SE
corner. Removes fire line from Boeing system allowing City system to provide domestic
service.
• ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ - '
IMPROVEMENTS $72,000 •
TOTAL$ 72,000
• ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
:INANCING 1) Airport Fund
DPTIONS:
• 2)
3)
4)
3ACKGROUND:
Eventual goal is to service Airport completely from City's water system instead of continuing
to use Boeing's water system. •
•
•
'OTENTIAL SITE: N/A • .
•
•
ACTORS 1). Improved reliability of system
;UPPORTING
• 'ROJECT:(Who 2) Removes customers from Boeing water system and transfers them to
a what programs City system
ire served?Why 3)
hlS project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
\LTERNATIVES 1) Leave service as it is - on Boeing system $ 0 $ 0
'0 THIS PROJECT:
indicate which 2) S• $
' upporting factors
:an be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
(71)
•
I . \, •
FINAL PRIORITY•
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION* 2
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRPORT) DEPARTMENT PRIORITY r 2
PROJECT TITLE: Water Main - Completion of Loop System
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete a loop system around the Airport by extending main line
along east and north sides to the northwest corner.
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ -
IMPROVEMENTS$ 108,000
•
TOTALS 108,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Airport Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
•
BACKGROUND: •
•
This would complete the process of up-grading the water supply system on the Airport and
would remove the last of the Boeing system supply lines.
•
•
POTENTIAL SITE:
•
•
FACTORS 1) Increased reliability of system for Airport tenants and users.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Improved fire flow capacity.
or what programs
ere served?Why ` 3) Facilitates installation of fire hydrants in affected area of the
this project?) field.
4) Completes the switch from Boeing water system to City's water system.
5)
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Continue with existing arrangement. $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
•
4) $ $
5) $
(72)
•
•
t F
•
•
•
I.
I '
•
FINAL PRIORITY•
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION w 3
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRPORT) DEPARTMENT PRIORITY• 3
PROJECT TITLE: Instrument Landing System (ILS)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $ .75,000 •
TOTAL$ 75,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
•
FINANCING 1) Federal ADAP Funds @ 100%
OPTIONS: •
2)
3)
•
•
4)
•
BACKGROUND: •
FAA is presently reviewing potential Airport installations of ILS System. If Renton Airport
is selected then Federal funds will be provided. If not, we will continue without ILS.
•
POTENTIAL SITE: N/A
'i •
.
•
ACTORS 1) Improved operational capacity and safety.
SUPPORTING
'ROJECT:(Who 2)
u what programs
Ire served?Why 3) •
his project?)
4)
5)
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES ' 1) Continue operation without ILS. $ 0 $ 0 •
10 THIS PROJECT:
Indicate which 2) S. • $
.upporting factors
:an be met.) 3) S S
4) • $
:
5) :
(73)
•
"' ' ,I
• • I
I i
•
Appendix 1
pp
•
•
. . . Six Ye.ar I
Transportation Improvement
Program
•
•
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1983 - 1988
CITY
PRIO TY # ANNUAL ELEMENT PROJECTS
Grady Way Bridge Replacement
Renton Area Transportation Study
Miscellaneous Street Improvements
NE 4th St./NE 3rd St. , Union Ave. NE to Sunset Blvd. N
SW Grady Way, Lind Ave. SW to Longacres Dr. SW
Wells Avenue Bridge Replacement
Sunset Blvd. N & .N 3rd Intersection Improvements
Controller Modernization
Sunset Blvd. & Union Ave. NE
11 Garden Ave. N, N 4th St. to N 8th St.
SECOND YEAR PROJECTS
1 Monroe Ave. NE, NE 6th St. to NE 12th St.
1 Logan Ave. S, S 2nd St. to Airport. Way
THIRD YEAR PROJECTS
1 Talbot Road S, S 16th St. to S 41st St.
1I, SW 16th St. , Lind Ave. SW to Monster Road SW
1 Lind Ave. SW, SW 16th St. to SW Grady Way (Bridge I-405 Overpass)
1: Renton Ave. S, S 3rd St. to S 7th St.
FOURTH - SIXTH YEAR PROJECTS
1 S 7th St. , Rainier Ave. S to Smithers Ave. S
18 Valley Parkway SW, SW Grady Way to SW Sunset Blvd.
19 Sunset Blvd. N, Bronson Way N to FAI 405
20 Valley Parkway SW, SW 41st St. to SW 16th St.
21 Valley Parkway SW, SW 16th St. to SW Grady Way
22 Lake Wash. Blvd. North, N Park Dr. to North City Limits
23 SW 27th St. , Valley Parkway SW to West Valley Road
24 SE Puget Dr. , Jones P1. SE to Edmonds Ave. SE
25 Sunset Blvd. NE, FAI 405 to NE Park Dr.
26 Taylor Ave. NE/Taylor P1. NW, Renton Ave. Ext. to Stevens Ave. NW
27 NE 12th St. , Lynnwood Ave. NE to Union Ave. NE
28 Union Ave. NE, NE Sunset Blvd. to NE 24th St.
29 Edmonds Avenue Extension
.
i •
'S► it-a
31 X YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1983 TO 19 R R Page 1 of 5 '
— OBLIGATION PROGRAM' Hearing Date June 28, 1982
_Keypunching Note:Data entered in cols I-8 t EXHIBIT "A"
City/CountyJ g mus
Adoption Date July41G2
City No. 1 . 1982
fI fI7 To 9.o be on all cards punched from ReaoJution Number
County No. 11�D717-8 tht. form. 8 R PRO-JECT COSTS 1N THOUSANDS OF'DOLLARS
' • PROJECT IDENTIFICATION oY ' 1 OBLIGATION SCHEDULE .FUNDING SOURCE 1
z Title,Route,Road Log No.,Section No., zi t Work Total & •11 YEAR_ .
Location/Termini Deecri lion of Work, 3 Length \ ' FEDERAL _ .TOTAL
u BeginningMilepoetQBrld9e9�lo. .ao Code (Miles) --a.? Alotdl - Znd 3rd 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
F ' 0 Element) Q 6 tti AMOUNT PROGRAM
•
1 y .E S_. 4 5 0 7 8 9 - .10 . 11 !2 .13 - 14 15 18 17
55 5a 57 4041 44 45 48 47 4D ' 51 tt.._ as 4O e9 90 53 04 17 de. 11 a 75 78 7D flD es
1. G,R,A,D,Y, ,W,A_,YI ,B,R,I,D,G,E, ,R1E,P,LIAIC,E,M,EIN 4t%/��/A,B,D,H ,0i1,0 M U X 4,OIOtO 4,0,0,0 , , 1 , 1 1 1 7,01010. I I 1 4-, I , 4,11010,0 1 ,8,0,010,
L Bridge Replacement (joint with Tukwila) Construction. Bridge Forward '
Repl. Thrust
2 R,E,N,T,O,N, ,A,R,E,A1 ,T,R,A,N,S,P,O,R,T, IS,T,U,D,Y 8 IM U, , , , t , U , 1610 t , I , 1 , , , , , , I , , , I , , 1 ,6,0 , , , ,6,0
Develop a multi-modal transportation plan for the
city. (Phase I) •
•
3 MIIISIC,E,L,LIA,N,EIO,U,S, 1S,T,R,E,E,T1 II1M,P,R,O,V 4 D, , , . . . 1117t9 ,1,20 ,11310 ,21710 1 1 I 111 , I I 1619,9 I I ,61919
Street Division overlays. See attached sheet with
listings.
N,E, ,4,T,H,/,3,R,D, ,U1N,I,OIN, ,T,O, ,S,U,N,S,E,T, 2 rl B,DIF,G ,014,5 M U ,3,0,0 , , , , , t , I t , I I I , , lit 13,0,0 , , ,3,010
4. Drainage, resurface, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and H
100%
.
widen to 5 lanes. (2-way left turn centerlane) L.I.D.
5. S,W, 1G1R1A,D,Y, ,L,I,N,D, ,T,O, ,L,O,N1G,A,C,R,E,S1 2 4 B,D,F,G , i7,O S U , , , 1,5,0,0 , 1 1 I I , III III I I , 11510,0 ,- ,1,5,0,0
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, illumination, H J L 100% I
channelization, P-1 BR. 56' roadway taper w/half to L.I.D.
• 44'
6. W,E,L,L,S, ,A,V,E, ,B,RIIIDIGIEt IRIE,P,L,AIC,E,M,EIN 4 y AA,B,F,G , j0t4 S U X 110,0,0 16,8,0 , , , , I I 113,40 1 , , . 1 I t3,3t6 t ,116,810
Bridge Replacement. H J L
7.
S,U,N,S,E,T, ,B,L,V,D, ,N, t&t ,NI 13,R,D1 ,I,M,P,R10 6 A,B,D,F , ♦ , M U ,1,010 1 , , III III 11813 FIAIUIS I , , 1 1117 1 , ,1,0,0
Signal improvements, curbs, gutters, sidewalks,.. H I
channelization, paving and signing.
C,O,N,T,R,O,L,L,E1 R, ,M,O,D,E,R,N,I,2�A,T,I,O,N, , , 7�j , , , U , '9 1 0
8. , , , 1 1 f , 1 , , , 1 l 1 , , I I 1 1 , , 1 I l tD,9 , , Ili Dt 9 '
Purchase of traffic signal controllers to replace Local
obsolete equipment. (See attached list.)
_ I D157R1BUTION
I COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENOINCER
----DOT-140.049--- --Jon. 1980 I COPY C,R.A.B.(COUNTIES ONLY) --- - - - - - - — - - -
---- --- --- --- - - - -- - -- - _-- - - - - -- - --- --- - — - - - - I- - - -- -
•
•
151Ake 51 X YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1983 TO 1988 Page 2 of 5 ' I
— OBLIGATION PROGRAM— Hearing pate June 28, 1982
EXHIBIT "A" Adoption Date July 12, 1982
:City/.County _Keypunching Note:Data entered in cols I-8 must Reeolution Number 2460
• City No. 1 0 7 Jo 1 s_6 be an all cards punched from ; • .
County No. 1 7 7-8 thin form. I R PROJECT COSTS IN THOUSANDS' OF•DOLLARS
• PROJECT IDENTIFICATION oY t) 0/ OBLIGATION-SCHEDULE .FUNDING SOURCE i
• z Title,Route,Road Log No.,Section No., 2 o Work Total e -•g -..Y__E. A R -
Location/Termini Deocri Lion of Work 3 Length \ ' FEDERAL TOTAL
mBeginning Milepost 4 Bridge No. .g o Code (Miles) :t't(Aln - 2 nd 3 rd_ 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
.+ a Element) 4 6th 'AMOUNT PROGRAM
a 2 S 4 5 9 7 8 9 _-. JO . II 12 • • 13 .. 14 . 15 I$ 17
9 • A684r//A�7 40,41 4445404740 ' f16Z..._ 65'10 as co es04 . ,n35 71'R' 7310 79 AD 88
9. S,U,N,S,E,T, ,B,LIVID, ,6, ,U,N,I,OIN, ,A,V1E1 INIE, 6Y/G+1 1 f , i 1 MU 1 1416h 1. 1 4 , , I , I I 1 , I 1316.F1Al S1P.'1 1 1 , I 1110 l , I 14t6,
New signal controller and add left turn phase. 90/10
10 G,A,R,D,E,N, ,A,V,E, 1-1 IN, ,4,T,H, ,T,0, ,N, -,8,T,H 2 MB,D,F,G , 12,5 S U ,3,010 , 1 I , I I , I , III I I , I , 1 13,0,0 I 1 13,010
Drainage, paving, curb, sidewalks, illumination and 1t J
channelization.
`11.MIOINIRIO,E, IA,VIE1-1N,E, 16,T,H, 1T,O1 INIE1 11,21T 2 l B,D,F,G , t3,8 C U III 1 , 1 1,5,8,0 1 1 1 ill I I 1 , I I 1,5,810 111,51810
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, illumination, H J 25%
channelization, 36' roadway. LID ,1
12 L,O,G,A,N,-1S, ,2,N,D, tT10, ,A,IIR,P,0,R,T, ,W,A,Y, 4 4AIDI , ,2i5 lit 1 i310 . . I II I II , III , 1 I 1 ,3,0 1 , 11310
Overlay
13 TIA,L11310,T1 ,R,D,-,S, t1,6,T,H, ITI0, IS, 14,1,8,T, 2 M B,D,F,G ,1&8,0 C U 11 I I I , ,11010 , 1 , I I I Ili I'I , ,11010 11 1110,0
Drainage, paving, shoulders, pre-level, channeliza- H J 50%
tion (joint with King County). County
S,W, ,1,6 T H, ,L I,N,D A V E, ,T,O, M10 N,S,T E R 2 B D F,G 9 0 C U 2 0 0 0 ,2 0 0 0
1[). 1 , , 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 ) �� 1 1 I j f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I I I l l I 1 1 , 1 1 21f1,010 1 1 , 1
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, illum- H J L 100%
ination, channelization, bridge and 44' roadway. LID
15.L,I,N,D, ,AIV,EI ,S,W11,6131H, ,TIO1 ,S1W1 ,G,R,A,D,Y 2 G B,D,F,G ,042,0 S U III lit 1 I 1 2141010 I I I III 11 I 2141010 1 ,2141010
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalk, illumina- HIJL
tion, signal, channelization, bike route, landscaping, M 0 Developer
FAI-405 Bridge, 44' roadway.
16.0121E,N,T10,N, 1A,V, ,S,-,S,3,R,D, ,T,0, ,S,7,T,H, ,S,T 4rABID,F,G ,044,0 C U , , , 15,0,0 , , , 1 1 I 1 I 1 , I I ,51010 1 1 151010
Drainage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, - J
illumination, undergrounding.
DISTRIBUTION
-_ .1 COPY DISTRICT STATE AID E NOINrER
- DOT 140-049 4-Gnw—C.R.A-B.,Ca0N7lE3OMM - --
_ _ -- nn-1.98O-
ig►AI,-z S1 X YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1583 TO 1988 Page 3 of 5
— OBLIGATION PROGRAM— June 28, 1982
Hearing Date
EXHIBIT "A" Adoption Date July 12, 1982
.'City/County _Keypunching Mote:Da+a entered in cold I-S moot Resolution Number 2460
City No. I1I0I7,0-3-a be an all cards punched from 1 "
'C
ounty ounty No. 1 7 7-e thin form. a x PROJ.ECT COSTS'1N THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
i; - �' a v OBLIGATION SCHEDULE
pRO,JCCT IDENTIFICATION �.- FUNDING' SOURCE
Z Title,Route,Road Log No.,Section No., ,-°`o Work Total I=.a __.Y-E.A R
Location/Termini,Deecrlption of Work, .g Code Length :.\"o FEDERAL TOTAL
a Beginning Milepoei Bridge �'� (Miles) u s1 let nd2 3rd 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
B 5 9 .5,$Element) at Gth AMOUNT PROGRAM
•
a 2 S" 4 5 078 9 . . O . II 12 - 13 . 14 15 IS 17
-1 .. 4! 4041 44 45 48 47 d ' ST 52.— as W 119 CO Fl u •el on 7t R 79 76 II r 9 eR
j17. S. ,71T.HI [B.A.IiNtI.E,Ri-,T,O, ISIM.IITIHIEIRIS, 1 2Y//,AIB,DIP , AS10 S U 1 1 t , 1- 1 14 , , I . I21210, I I I 1 1 I .•1 1 I , 121210, 11 12 12 10,
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, ilium- Devel-
ination, channelization, 44' roadway, Rainier to oper s
Shattuck contingent on developer. ���� LID
18 V,A,L,L,E,Y, ,P,K,W,Y, ,G,R,A,D,Y, ,T,0, ,1,4,0,T,N, 1 E1 A.B,D,F ,140,0 M U , II , , 1 . . , 5.5,010 I I I I , , 1 , I 5151010 115151010
Grading, drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, gutter, GHIJ
Devel-
illumination, signal, bike route, channelization, L M 0 oper
landscaping, bridge, 56' roadway.
19. SIU,N1S,E,T, IB,L,VID, 18,1/10,N,S101N, IT10, 11,4,0,5 2 ,B,D,F,G ,0L5,0 M U 1 1 I I , I . I I 18.410 1 I I 11 1 11 1 181410 i 1 .81410
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, gutters, signal, H I J
20% LID
illumination, channelization, widen to 68 feet.
20- V,A,L,L,E,Y, ,P.K,W,Y, IS.W,411,SIT, ,T,0, ,S,W11.6,T 1 4 A,BID,F .147,0 M U , 1 1 1 1 1 . , 1 61010.0 I I , , I , , , , 610.0,0 , ,6,0,010_
Grading, drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalk, GHIJ _
illumination, signal, bike route, channelization, L M 0 ODPerl
landscaping, bridge.
21. VIA,LILIEIYI IP,KIW,Y1 1S,W1116.T1H, ,TIO, IGIR,AIDIY 1 MAIB,D,G ,041,0 M U I , , ill Ili 510,010 1 1 1 I I i I I I 5101010 115,0,0.0
' Grading, drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalk, HIJL
20% LID
illumination, signal, bike route, channelization, M 0
landscaping, bridge, 66' roadway.
22. L,K, L,W,A,S,H. ,B,L,V,D, IN, 1PIK1 ,T,O, ,C,I,T,Y, , 2 FI B1DJP,G ,310,3 S U Ili , , , 1 1 1 4,81010 III 1 , 1 , I , 4,8,0,0 , ,4,S,010
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalks, gutter, illumin- 25% LID
ation, channelization, bikeway.
. 23. S,w. ,2,7.T.H. IV.A,LILI ,PIKIW.YI IT,O, IW, IV,A,1,1T, 10 A,B,A,F .0a5,7 S 11 III I I I 11 I 7,51010 I I I I t 1 Ili 215.0.0 , ,2.5,010
Grading, drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalks, GHIJ
Devel-
illumination, signal, bike route, channelization, L M 0 oper
landscaping. 44' roadway
S1E, ,P,U,G,E,T, ,D,R, ,J,O,N,E,S, ,T,0, ,E,D,M,O,N,D 2 WB,D,F,G ,047,8 S U , , i pit t 1 , . ,91610 t , 1 Ili I Ali, ,9.6.0 11191610
24. .
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, gutter, illumin-
ation, channelization, 44' roadway.
• D15TRIBUTION
- - I COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENGINEER -
DOT 140-049 _-I-COPY_C.R.A.B.(COUNTIES ONLY)
_ _ ___ Jnn ,onn -- - - - __ -_—_ - - -- __ —_ __
•
S 1 X YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM I913 TO 19 88 Page 4 of 5 '
— OBLIGATION PROGRAM Hearing pate June 28, 1982
EXHIBIT "A" Adoption Date July 12, 1982
City/County _Keypunching Note:Data entered in cots I-8 must Resolution Number 2460
City No. 1 0 710 s_e be on all cards punched from I .
County No, 1 7 7-e5 this-form. S R PRO"J:ECT COBTS'IN THOUSANDS OF•DOLLARS
C PROJECT IDENTIFICATION eY 11
OBLIGATION-SCHEDULE FUNDING SOURCE
Title,RoutA,Road Log No.,Section"No., t o Le
Work Total •h • Y._E.A R
Location/Termini,Deocreption of Work, 3 Code ngth \'g FEDERAL TOTAL
f Beginning Milepost 4 Bridge No. a`o (Miles P't(A����l 2 nd 3 rd 4,5 U.A.B. LOCAL FUNDS
„ I f ii-ce r$ Element) 6 th AMOUNT PROGRAM I.
2 s 4 5 8 7 8 9 JO . lI 12 - $5 t4 •
15 16 • 17
J - 35 1Mr,�- Si 40 41 44 4�S 4Q 47 48 - a 52.:-_ 55 70 5360 CJ 04 ICI MI T 3 75 7a le 40 S6
S,U,N,S,E1T1 1B,LIVID, 1i,4,0,5, 1T10, 1P,AIR1K, ,D1R 2 F/�B1D1FIG ,0i9,0 S U , 1 , ,. , 1 , , 18"t,11O
25. 1 10,
Drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalk, gutters, channel- H J
ization, illumination and bikeway. -
26. T,A,Y,L,O,R, ,N,W, ,R,E,NITIO,N, IT,O, ,S1T,E,V,EINIS 2 K1 B,D,F,G ,046,0 C U , I 1 1 I 1 I I I ,7,2,0 1 1 1 I I , I , 17,2,0 t 1 171210
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, ilium H J {
_ 25% LID .
ination, channelization.
27. N1E1 11,21T,H1 ,LIYtN,N,W,010,D, IT101 IUINiI101N1 1 2 l B,D,F,G C U I , I 1 , I , I I 1101010 11 I I I I , I I 110,0,0 i 11101010
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, ilium- H J
ination, channelization. y//` SOB LID
U,N,I,O,N. ,A,V, ,N.E1 SIUINIS,EIT, ,T,0, ,NIE,214,T 2F!`,B,D F,G 10 7 0 S II 6 0 0
28. � 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 ! I 161Q,D „ 160I0
Drainage, paving, curbs, gutter, sidewalk, channel- H
ization. phi SOB LID
29. EID,MIOIN,DISI ,AIV,EI IE,X,TIE,NISII,OI N, 1 1 1 1 1 1►/l A1B,D,F , 1 U I I I , I I I III II ) 11 1 1 I 1 Ill III I I III
GHIL•
p�
K
P11 1 . • 1 4 1 III III III ill III I I I ill III 1 1 1 1 1
, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1%!. 1 1 1 1 4 1 III Ill III III III III III III 1 1 1 1 1
M , , I , 4 1 1 I i III III III I , , III I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1
•
Dt57RIBUTIOAI
I COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENOINrER
DOT 140-049
Jon. 1990 I COPY C.R.A.B,(COUNTIES ONLY)
P.
F.
•
Is 1A1,-z
51X YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 198 3 TO 19 S 8 Page 5 of 5. .
— OBLIGATION PROGRAM— EXHIBIT "A" Nearing Date June 28, 1982
Adoption Date July 12, 1982
City/County _keypunching Mote:Data_entered in Cole I-8 must ADDENDUM #1 - STATE HIGHWAY PROJECTS Resolution Number 2460
City No. 1 o Io 9_4 be en all card&punched from
County No. 1 7 T-6 this form. 2 R
_ PRO"J:ECT COSTS'IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
• PROJECT IDENTIFICATION oY =' t OBLIGATION SCHEDULE FUNDING SOURCE
a Title Rout Road Go No.,Section No., .Total a b _.Y_E A R
Z C1 9 �o Work Length \'o FEDERAL _ .TOTAL
Location/Termini,Deocriptionof Work, �3 Code (Mis) 9 'a 1st' .2nd 3r� 4 5 U.A.B. LOCAL. FUNDS
u Beginning Milepoof Bridge No. a a c t(Annual 41 6th AMOUNT PROGRAM
1 _ _i e,C3 Element)
i 1 �2 ——-- S 4 5 0 T 8 9 .10 . ll 12 • - 13 14 15 16 17
piss e7 40 vI 44 45 46i77 411 - IN 02.._ e5 10 so,6e 6S 1>. CI M 11 R 7516 18 Ae 1!
F,A.II .410151 INI ICIIITIYI ,TIO1 IS, ICIIITIYI 1 1 2 re 1 1 1 ,6014 M U I I I . 1.I L . . . I . I 1 I I I I I . I I I e'I I I . l I 1 , I I 1 1 I .
State DOT Project - capacity improvements. HOV lanes.
��
SIR, .1,6,9, ,Q.U.E,EINI IS1E1 .T10, I1,4191T.H, .S1E 1 M. 11 . ,114,4 M U 11 I 11 I ill 1 I I ill 11 . I . I I I I _ toil ' t�
State Project - construct five lane roadway. - 1
' SIRt 19,0,0, IR,EIN1T101N, IT,01 111S1SIAIQ1U1A,H, , 2 ! . . I 1,140,0 M U I I I 1 I 1 . 1 1 I I I III III I I I t I I IIIII
1 State Project - widen to four lanes with five lanes
at intersections.
1 1 1 1 1 I I I I . I I I I I Pd III III III III . I 1 tit ILL III I ILL 1 I I 1 I
{
I . 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I , I I I I I I I l I 1 1 1 1 K I . . tat let 1 1 1 ill ill III 1 I l III 11 1 lilt ,
•
1 We I-I . Ili 1 1 1 III Ili ill ill III III III 1 . 1 1 1
II I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I . 1 1 Y/!. . . I IA . III III III III III III III III IIIII
kI I 1 I I I ; I I I 11 I III III III III III ' lilt ,
DISTRIBUTION - -
I COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENSINrER -
- DOT 140-049 (-COUNTIES--
- Jon. L9Y0 1 COPY CRAB, ONLY - - - ---- - _ - - - - ---- --- - - _ _. --- —_-
1983 OVERLAYS
1/2C GAS TAX PROJECTS
Williams Ave. South between
South 4th Street & Grady Way $ 22,000.00
Aberdeen Ave. NE between
Sunset Hwy. & NE 12th Street $ 17,000.00
NE 12th Street between
Edmonds Ave. NE & Lincoln Place NE $ 22,000.00
Camas Ave. NE between
NE 12th Street & Dead End $ 3,000.00
NE 16th Street between
Aberdeen Ave. NE b Edmonds Ave. NE $ 24,000.00
Kennewick Ave. NE between
NE 16th Street & NE 14th Street $ 4,000.00
Lincoln Ave. NE between
NE 16th Street & NE 14th Street $ 4,000.00
Monterey Ave. NE between
NE 16th Street & NE 14th Street $ 4,000.00
NE 14th Street between
Monterey Ave. NE & Jones Ave. NE $ 7,000.00
NE 20th Street between
Edmonds Ave. NE & Jones Ave. NE $ 22,000.00
NE 24th Street between
Edmonds Ave. NE & Jones Ave. NE $ 22,000.00
Dayton Ave. NE between
NE 24th Street & Dead End $ 3,500.00
North 1st Street between
Park Ave. N & Burnett Ave. N $ 24,500.00
$179,000.00
1984 $120,000.00 ESTIMATE
1985 $130,000.00 ESTIMATE
1986 $130,000.00 ESTIMATE
1987 $140,000.00 ESTIMATE_
i I
I i
TRAFFIC CONTROLLER MODERNIZATION
1983 UPDATE
I I
Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program 1983 to 1988
Itemized List for Item No. 8
Location Cost
1 . North 4th & Factory $ 10,000
2. North Garden 10,000
3. North 4th & Williams 10,000
4. North 4th & Logan 10,000
5. North 3rd E Williams 10,000
6. North 3rd & Garden 10,000
7. North 3rd & Factory Y 10,000
8. North 3rd & Sunset 17,000
9. North 6th & Park
12,000
10. Lake Washington, Park & Garden 10,000
TOTAL AMOUNT $109,000
I i
II
I i
�\!`r --•-'tcogeifALi /AieiiY '-.r
Renton City Council
May 9, 198
Page Two
Public Safety Department budget funds. The committee further recommended
Commiteel referral to Ways and Means Committee for proper legislation. MOVED
(continued) BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE REPORT. Upon inquiry by Councilman Stredicke, Mayor
Part-time Shinpoch explained the position had not been funded in the' 1983
Animal Control budget due to reliance on proposed agreement for animal control
Officer services with City of Tukwila; however, Council had authorized
the Administration to fund the position either from unanticipated
revenue or already budgeted funds if execution of the agreement did
not ultimately occur. Chief Wallis indicated receipt of. mories
from Immigration Service owed since 1981 , and noted addition of the
part-time position will bring level of service to 1982 level .
MOTION CARRIED.
Wehmeyer Councilman Rockhill presented a letter from Building & Zoning
Dangerous, Director Ronald G. Nelson advising issuance of the final order
Buildings by Superior Court declaring buildings owned by Josephine Wehmeyer
at 225 ;Sunset Boulevard North as dangerous. The letter noted lack
of cooperation by property owners to demolish two remaining
buildings and remove debris from the site, and requested
authorization to advertise for bid the remainder of the demolition
and removal of. debris 'at an estimated cost of from $4,0001 to $8,000.
Upon inquiry by Councilman Rockhill , Mayor Shinpoch advised that a
lien for recovery of project costs would be filed against' the
property. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL AUTHORIZE
BUILDING AND ZONING DIRECTOR-TO PROCEED WITH CONDEMNATION AND
REMOVAL OF BUILDINGS AT 225 SUNSET BOULEVARD NORTH. Councilman
Clymer; requested delay of a, vote on the matter to allow review of
project costs. City Attorney Warren cited legal authority to
recover costs since the property poses a public nuisance. MOTION
CARRIED.
Wellsi Street Councilman Mathews reported receipt of a letter from John A.
Bridge 'ublic Klasel'l , P.E. , of the State Department of TransportationHadvising
Hearing Federal regulations of the environmental process for public
hearing on the Wells Street Bridge project, stipulating publication
of the hearing notice 30 to 40 days and again five to 12' days
prior to the public hearing on the matter. Therefore, the public
hearing set on 5/2/83 for May 23, 1983, is not in compliance with
Federal regulations. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY TRIMM, PUBLIC
HEARING ON WELLS STREET BRIDGE BE RESCHEDULED TO JUNE 27, 1983.
CARRIED. ' i
I '
Util!itips Utilities Committee Chairman Mathews presented a report '
Comm!itt,e recommending referral of the Solid Waste Management Plan to the
Solid Waste Ways and Means Committee for a resolution. MOVED BY MATHEWS,
Manage ent SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE
Plan UTILITIES COMMITTEE TO REFER THIS MATTER TO WAYS AND MEANS
COMMITTEE FOR A RESOLUTION. CARRIED.
1983 S wer Utilities Committee Chairman Mathews presented a report,
Comprelensive recommending concurrence in proposed revisions to the 1983 Sewer
Plan R-visions •',.' _.._� _� :� 9 he Public Works Department as follows:
Defer: 1) Value Village alley due to building delays; 2) Garden
lAvenue Phase I due to proposed LID. Add: 1) Jones Avenue NE,
NE 20th to NE 27th Streets; and, Jones Avenue NE, NE 271th to
NE 24th Street to coincide with street overlay projects.; 2)
east of Shattuck and north of railroad - repair necessar1: and
3) miscellaneous pump station and telemetry - depending on cash
flow'. Additional projected costs of $45,000 are anticiipated;
and proposed funding sources are 1982 sewer fund carryovers and
portion of two watermain projects postponed because of delay in.
associated street improvements. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY
CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE UTILITIES
( COMMITTEE. Councilman Stredicke cited an error in earlier status
[ listings with Jones Avenue targeted for deferral . Councilman
Mathews clarified the project is an addition, contingentlupon
funding, and it 'should coincide with the street overlay project;
also, LID 301 , sewer improvement in that area, has been delayed
to coincide with overlay project. Responding to Councilman
Stredicke's report that residents in that area have expressed
concern with proposed projects, Mayor Shinpoch offered' 63 transmit
additional information if names of citizens are providedj. MOTION
CARRIED.
UTILITIES COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
I �
MAY 9, 1983
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN (Referred 4/18/83)
The Utilities Committee recommends that this matter be referred to the Ways
and deans Committee for a resolution.
1983 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SEWER REVISIONS (Referred 5/2/83)
The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence with the Public Works
Department' s proposed changes in the 1983 Sewer Comprehensive Plan.
Defer: (1) Value Village Alley - Due to building delays
(2) Garden Ave. Phase 1 - For proposed LID
Add: (1) Jones Ave. NE, NE 20th to NE 27th Streets; and, Jones Ave.
NE, NE 27th to NE 24th Street - To coincide with street
overlay projects
(2) East of Shattuck and north of railroad - Repair necessary
(3) Misc. Pump Station & Telemetry - Depending on cash flow
Additional projected costs: $45,000
Funding Source Proposed: 1982 Sewer Fund Carryover and portion of two
watermain projects postponed because of delay' '
in associated street improvements
I I
II
Nancy Mathews , Chairman
'Robert Hughes
Earl Clymer
' I
I
r .._, ter,
I f
I
Renton ity Council
May 2, 1983
Page !Fo r -
CONSENT AGENDA Public Works Director presented supplement to Boeing Lease
Apron " " for sublease of tie-down area on Apron "C" to be turned over
Sublease and to city by Boeing for temporary three year revocable period,
Temporary Lease and sublet to Cedar River Hangar Partnership. Refer leases to
Aviation Committee, Council concur in approval of interim
sublease use of portion of Apron "C" for the month of May, 1983.
Constirugtion Public Works Director presented Utility Division April 1
S a us Re o Construction and Program Status Report and 1983 Comprehensive
Sewer R visions Plan Sewer 'Revisions. Refer to Utilities Committee forlreview.
j 1 .
Animal Control Police Chief requested review of staffing level for animal
Staffing control services. Refer to Public Safety Committee. !
Thomas Property City Clerk requested ordinance for annexation of. Thomas
Annexation Property, 52.28 acres lying contiguous to southeast boundary
of city limits and across the river from Maplewood Addition;
Boundary Review Board Report received 4/19/83 citing no
I
request for review and no jurisdiction invoked. Refer to
Ways and Means Committee.
Kalk Court Summons and Complaint filed by Richard Kalk v Jane Vanderlinden
Case and City of Renton in Superior Court for injuries alleged in
pedestrian accident 12/20/82 on Park Avenue N. Refer to City
Attorney and Insurance Carrier.
Cottle ourt Court case and claim filed by Nancy Jean Cottle v Kimberly
Case & Claim Hatch and City of Renton in Superior Court for injuries'
alleged in accident 2/9/83 on 76th Ave. NE. Refer to City
Attorney and Insurance Carrier.. I
MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, ITEM 6.d. BE REMOVED FROM
CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED. '
MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL ADOPT CONSENT
AGENDA AS AMENDED. CARRIED.
Item 6.d. Municipal Arts Commission presented 1% for Art Procedural
Removed from Guidelines for Council review and approval . Councilman Reed
Consent Agenda: requested the matter be referred to Community Services
1% for rt Committee for discussion instead of Ways and Means Committee
Procedural as listed. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY REED, THIS MATTER
Guidelines BE REFERRED TO COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE. '
Upon inquiry, Administrative Assistant Parness indicated .that
the procedure is acceptable to all parties and the matter could'
have; been referred to either committee. Councilman Reed assured
I
Council there is no intent to eliminate 1% for Arts funding.
ROLL CALL: 4 AYES: TRIMM, HUGHES, REED, MATHEWS. 3 NAYS:
CLYMER, ROCKHILL, STREDICKE. MOTION CARRIED.
OLD BUSINESS Councilman Stredicke clarified intent of consent agenda item
Sublea�e of regarding sublease of Apron "C" to approve only the interim
Apron ' C" at agreement for the month of May, with permanent leases referred
Renton Airport to Aviation Committee.
Community Community Services Committee Chairman Reed presented al report
Services recommending acceptance of the low bid of $359,688.79 plus tax
Committee in the amount of $29, 134.79 for a total of $388,823.58by
City Shops Kohl Excavating, Inc. for the Municipal Shops Project scheduled
Project to commence on May 25, 1983. The report also recommended
authorization for the Mayor and City Clerk to sign theicontract.
MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE
COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK
TO SIGN THE CONTRACT. CARRIED.
Human Rights Community Services Committee Chairman Reed presented a status
and'Af airs report regarding proposed changes to the ordinance governing
Commission the Human Rights and Affairs Commission. The Commission feels
Ordinance that a cooperative agreement could be pursued between the city
and state Human Rights Commissions in matters of enforcement
action and subpoena powers; and the City Attorney was directed
to contact the state commission to determine necessary changes
• op
For.Use By City Clerk's, Office Only
A. I . # e , -�
AGENDA ITEM
RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING
-= ==-== = i =iifii33=C 3miiiiil T.===
SUBMITTING
Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. Public Works For Agenda Of
(Meeting Date) ,
Staff Contact Richard Houghton/Robert Bergstrom
(Name) Agenda Status:
SUBJECT: Utility Division April Construction Consent •
Program Status Report and 1983 Comprehensive Public Hearing
Correspondence
Plan Sewer Revisions Ordinance/Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc.)Attach
New Business
Study Session
A. Letter Status Report Other
B.
C. Approval :
Legal Dept. Yes No N/A
COUNCIL ACTIO RECOMMENDED: Finance Dept. Yes No. N/A
Other Clearance
c €ce r -h., t. ..1 A Ce,w.w. c-vkr reo.(W
t '_LOw®,
FISCAL IMPACT:
Expenditure Required $ Amount $ Appropriation- $
Budgeted Transfer Required
SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation)
(Attah additional pages if necessary.)
The April , 983 Utilities Division Construction and Services Program Status Report
is submitted for review and for informational purposes. Also attached with the Status
Report is tEie request to reprioritize and modify the 1983 Water & Sanitary Sewer1Con-
struction Program funded by Utilities Revenues.
PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED:
SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION.
f
aiF i
0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
o WO z
DESIGN/UTILITY ENGINEERING • 235-263
0 limo 9) MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON,WASH.98055
9,0 CO'
O ! P
91' t) SEP1 .
BARBARA YJ SHINPOCH
(MAYOR
April 21 , 1983 1
1
Honorable Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor
anid Members of the Renton City Council
Municipal Building
Renton, WA 98055
Suifbj ct: Utility Division Report i
Dear Mayor Shinpoch and Council Members:
I
The Department of Public Works would like to present our April , 1983 Status
Report on our major water and sanitary sewer projects and programs, and, in
addiilion, request a revised water and sanitary sewer utility construction
program for 1983.
_ The �pring of 1983 has been a busy period for the Utility. Both an increase
in p blic and private, building activity has placed a heavy work load onitIe
deparltment. The Water Department is completing four current watermain replace-
ments and new extension projects, and has three new projects out for bids! The
five small watermain replacement projects for 1983 are in the field survey
phas and the Renton Ave. South, Pressure. Reducing Stations and the Raymond
Avenge S.W./I-405 watermain crossing are nearing the bidding phase with, their
designs almost complete.
The ater and Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plans are to be completed soon for
submittal to the City' in May of this year. The West Hill Water System Improve-
ment are to begin their design phase, with consultant negotiations complete
and professional services contracts out for legal review and execution byllthe
Mayor. Negotiations ,with the City of Seattle and Water District No. 58' ai-e
continuing.
Sanitary Sewers
I
Engineering plans have been completed by the Engineering Design Division for all
of this year's sanitary sewer projects, as well as portions of the Kennydale
May Creek Interceptor. The Honey Creek Interceptor project's field survey and
base mapping work is complete, with easement preparation now under way. The
end of April is the estimated time for State Sanitary Sewer Construction Grants,
we will be monitoring the progress of our grant application for Referendum 39
funds. The Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan's TV in sewer line inspection has
unco�ered several critically damaged sewers in the south Renton area. The
Utility Division Report - 2 - April 21 , 1983
Rollig Hills sewer interceptor has been field inspected, pinpointing further
neededspot repairs.
Sanitary Sewer Projects Revisions
The Public Works Department proposed a slightly revised 1983 Capital Improve-
ment Program, reflecting our latest estimates of costs and individual project
progress. As outlined in the attached inter-departmental memo, the department
propo ed 1983 Sanitary Sewer Projects list be modified as follows:.
1 . N.E. 20th St. Budgeted Category "A" Build
2. ' Jones Ave. N.E. , N.E. 20th Not budgeted, but Category "A" Build
to N.E. 27th Streets key sewer inter-
ceptor in street.
overlay area.
3. Jones Ave. N.E. , N.E. 27th Not budgeted. - Category "C" Defe1r -
to N.E. 24th Streets part of street Check
overlay Cash Flow
I �
4. , CBD Repair Value Village Category "B" Defer until
Alley budgeted 1984
5. CBD Repair Moses Lane Alley Category "A" Build
budgeted
6. CBD Repair Wells Ave. So. Category "A" Build
budgeted
7. CBD Repair Garden Ave. Ph. I Category "A" Build
budgeted
8. CBD Repair Misc. Pump Station Category "C" Defer
& Telemetry Check Cash
budgeted Flow
9. CBD Repair Renton Ave. S. Category "A" Build
budgeted
10. CBD Repair East of Shattuck & Category "A" Build
north of railroad.
Not budgeted, but
requires repair
11 . Honey Creek w/Grant or Category "C" Build
Either
12.' Honey Creek w/o Grant Check Cash
Flow
As outlined in the attachments, the Category "A" projects are either needed
repai9 projects or important segments of trunk interceptor sewers in the Kenny-
dale Street Overlay Project area. The added work and our new up-to-date con-
struction estimates require more funds then were previously budgeted. The
DepaiHment proposes to utilize the approximately $45,000 in Sewer Fund Carry-
over money brought forward from 1982, and a portion of the two watermain projects
,;-
U
tility Division Report' - 3 - April 21 , 1983
postponed because the associated street improvements have been delayed.
i I
A. Wells Avenue Bridge Watermain $25,000
Bridge construction now scheduled for 1984.
B. Grady Way/Springbrook Crossing $18,000
No progress on street L. I .D.
This' e panded program of sanitary, sewer improvements can all be funded and move
toward construction this spring. Plans and specification are all complete and
await oordination with' the Kennydale Street Overlay projects. In addition,
thisi y ar's Utility budget still has adequate funds in unanticipated latecomers
fees a d in several other water projects that would be delayed until 1984it?
enable the City to make' available about $275,000 for the Honey Creek Interceptor.
After he late April grant prioritization by the State Department of Ecology, the
City c n reassess whether to move ahead on the Honey Creek Interceptor with or
withou State Grant money.
Your r view and approval of this report's findings is requested.
Very, truly yours,
•; A J1-14114-,
Richard C. Houghton
Public Works Director
REB:jft
1
. , 1 1
—f
UTILITY DIVISION REPORT '
April , 1983
1
Project Name Description & Comments Status
A. N.E. 27th St. - L. I .D. 3211 New watermain on Devil 's Elbow Construction
Street restoration by Street Dept. 100%
B. Taylor'lAve. N.W. Watermain Replacement Watermain - old 8" steel Construction
1 100%
C. 84th Awe. Water Co-op Replacement Watermain - old 4" and Construction
Watermain small steel 100% `1
D. N.E. 2nd St. Watermain City Shops Access Road - new 12" Construction 'k
and 8" watermain 100%
E. Rainier Ave./N.W. 12" 16"./N. 6th St. New and watermain crossing Call for Bids
Watermain Rainier Ave. to Airport Control
H Tower, First Phase of West Hill
I Project.
1
F. Well No. Drill new production Well No. 9 and Call for Bids
an additional test well. Test new
well for yield, quality and any river
interference.
G. Cedar Riv r Well Field New well water level and flow sensors Call for Bids
Telemetry and recorders on Wells 1 , 2, 3 and 8,
future No. 9 and Test Wells A & B.
Part of water rights test requirements
I set by Dept. of Ecology.
I
H. Raymond Ave. S.W./I-405 New 12" watermain tie between CBD and Design 80%
Watermlain Crossing Green River watermains. Crossing under WSDOT Permits
1-405 Freeway. Applied For
I . Pressure Reducing Station Three new PRV Stations - Benson Rd. & Design 50%
Talbot' Hill S. 26th St. and two at S. 23rd &
i Shattuck Ave. S.
J. Renton Ave. Watermain ' Replacement of existing watermains and Design 100%
services in conjunction with street
repair.
1
K. Tiffany ark Pump Station, Minor water piping repairs, electrical Design 0%
Repairs control and miscellaneous building
repairs.
L. Small 'Wa ermain Replacement 1 . Camus Ave. N.E. Field Survey
2. N.E. 10th St. & Union Ave. N.E. Begun
3. S. 134th St. , Lind Ave. S. &
j 1
Langston Road
4. Stevens Ave. N.W. & N.W. 7th St.
5. Seneca and Stevens
Small watermain replacement projects.
UTILITY DIVISION REPORT - 2 - Apri1 , ;1983
Project' Name Description &. Comments Status
M. Sanitary Sewer Replacement 1 . Value Village Alley Design 100%
2. Moses Lane Alley
3. Wells Ave. S. I
4. Garden Ave. N. Phase
5. Sewer Pump Station Telemetry
and Electrical Repair
Small sanitary sewer repair - See
letter for change in priorities.
N. Renton 'Ave. S. Sewer Main Repair of existing sanitary sewers Design 100%
in conjunction with street repair.
0. Airport East Watermain New watermain on East Perimeter Road Design 0°G
from Logan Bridge to Boeing Bridge
Airport Utility funded.
P. Water Comprehensive Plan and Completed studies due May, 1983 95%
Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive
Plan
Q. West Hill Water System New West Hill Reservoir, Pump Station, Professional
Transmission Mains and Well No. 9. Services Contracts
State Referendum #38 - $517,000 Grant for Design to City
Attorney & Mayor
for signing to
begin design.
R. Water System Telemetry New water system monitoring and Professional
operational controls. Services firms
being interviewed.
S. Well No. 3 Prepare plans for renovation of Professional
Well No. 3 in Liberty Park. Servilces firms
being interviewed.
T. Well No. 5 Investigate water quality and sand Professional
problems in old unused well at Servi1ces firms
N.E. 24th St. & Jones Ave. N.E. being interviewed.
U. New City Shops Architectural plans in to City, Building plans
site work plans prepared in-house. design 90%. Site
Work - Call for
Bids,
1
V. City of Seattle Water Continued negotiations. No major
Franchise' & Purveyors movement.
Contract
W. Water District No. 58 Ponderosa Estates Service Transfer
continued negotiations. Draft Agree-
ment prepared, engineering technical
review complete. Start financial impact I,
review.
� I
•
UTILITY DIVISION REPORT - 3 - April ; 1983
Project Name Description & Comments Status
X. N.E. 20th St. Sanitary Portion of Kennydale/May Creek Design 100%
Sewer Interceptor in conjunction with
street overlay. See letter for
increase in cost and scope.
Y. Honey Creek Sanitary Sewer A major sanitary J sewer project. Design 30%
Interceptor Possible Referendum 39 Grant.
Project Estimate $850,000 +.
Z. Water Reservoir & Springbrook Negotiations completed on Springbrook
Watershed Acquisitions Alberthal property. South Talbot Hill
Reservoir site.
Study beginning to determine optimum site for future Storage Reservoir for the Hospital area.
Initial contacts made on future Black River Quarry site purchase. Dimmitt Middle School
future West Hill Reservoir site soil testing complete; further discussions with School
District under'. way. Springbrook Springs Watershed - possible acquisition of Weston and
Osterhouse ;parcels. Possible joint purchase with State Grant and Parks Department being con-
sidered.
' I
. I
/`
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
August 23 , 1982 Municipal Building
Monday , 8 : 00 P . M . Council Chambers
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag
and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order.
ROLL CAL- OF EARL CLYMER, Council President, ROBERT J . HUGHES, RANDALL ROICKHILL,
COUNCIL MEMBERS RICHARD M. STREDICKE, JOHN W. REED, NANCY L. MATHEWS AND THOMAS W.
TRIMM.
CITY STAFF BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; DANIEL KELLOGG, Assistant City Attorney;
IN ATTENDANCE MICHAEL PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; MAXINE E. MOTOR, Acting
City Clerk; DAVID CLEMENS, Policy Development Director; RICHARD
HOUGHTON, Public Works Director; MICHAEL MULCAHY, Finance Director;
LT. DONALD PERSSON, Police Department; ED HAYDUK, Housing and Community
Development Coordinator.
PRESS Deeann Glamser, Renton Record Chronicle
MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, MINUTES OF AUGUST 16, 1982 BE
APPROVED AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
CONTINUED This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and
PUBLIC HEARING published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public hearing
Jackson to consider annexation of a portion of proposed Cypress Point Multiple
Annexation Family Development, an area of approximately 3.34 acres east of Fred
A-01'82 Nelson Middle School and north of Southeast 162nd Street (Jackson
Annexation File 0-01-82) . Policy Development Director Clemens re-
quested, on behalf of the applicant, the public hearing be closed
at this time and the application be held for re-advertising at a
future date. Applicant to pay city 's actual cost for re-advertising
and re-opening this public hearing. There being no audience comment
on this hearing, it was MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED.
PUBLIIC MEETING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and
19833'-89 Capital published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public meeting
Improvement to consider the 1983-89 Capital Improvement Program. Policy Develop-
Program ment Director Clemens reviewed the program.
MAYOR' S RECOMMENDATION - 1983-89 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Priority Project Description and Location
1 Maintenance Shop Facilities (Adjacent to County Shops)
2 Heather Downs Park Acquisition
3 Renton High School Field Reconstruction
4 Main Public Library Addition and Renovation
5 Cedar River Park Community Center
6 North Third Street and Sunset Boulevard Intersection
Improvements
7 South Seventh Street and Rainier Avenue South Inter-
section Improvements
8 Construct Fire Station #14 in Kennydale
9 Old Shop Site Redevelopment
10 Entry Point Street Enhancement
11 Street Lighting Modification in the CBD
12 Senior Housing and Pedestrian Corridor
13 Signal Controller Modernizations
14 Relocation of Fire Station #12 in Highlands
{ 15 Sierra Heights/Glencoe Park Acquisition
Renton ity Council
August ►3: 19,2
Page 2
Public 1eeting continued
1983-8' Capital Mayor Shinpoch noted that no sources of income for these projects
Improv . ent exist at the present time (except for current funding on Shop) ;
Progra and should funds become available, no project will progress without
first being reviewed by Council .
Audienc- Versie Vaupel , 400 Cedar Avenue South, questioned the use of "CBD"
Comment (Central Business District) in connection with sewer replacements
for North and South Renton residential areas. Policy Development
Director Clemens explained the report was prepared using CBD in
terms of the original Renton area rather than meaning specifically
the commercial area. Mrs. Vaupel made inquiries regardingreplace-
ment of sewer/water lines in the Central Business District and funding
for these projects, noting that improvements should be paid for as
they are used and those benefiting from such improvements slhould be
liable for payment.
continu=d Councilman Reed questioned the cost listed for construction of Fire
Station 14 in Kennydale of $550,000 versus the million dollar figure
discussed during the Port Quendall hearings. Policy Development
Director Clemens explained the $550,000 represented ground land facility
only and, should the facility become a reality, it would be decided
what percentage of the additional cost of trucks and/or buii,lding would
become the responsibility of Port Quendall developers. Councilman Reed
noted the Supporting Factors of this project listed 3500 existing resi-
dents would be served and 2000 new residents were anticipated in the
Port Quendall project, and this should be considered when costs for
this project are discussed. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL,
Council advance to the next order of business. Motion fail'ied. MOVED
BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM AS PRESENTED WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DESIGNATION OF
CBD WILL BE CHANGED TO THE COMMERCIAL AREA. CARRIED.
PUBLIC EETING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and
Fee Sch-dule published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public meeting
Revisio ; - to consider revision of the fee schedule regarding increase of zoning
Increas;n in and subdivision filing fees. Policy Development Director Clemens gave
Zoning/ .ub- a brief basis for the request for filing fee increases, notling building
divisio Fees permit fees remain unchanged. Clemens compared Renton fees to adjacent
jurisdictions and urged review of filing fees for appeals and variance
applications.
Audienc: Del Bennett, 18004 SE 147th, requested Council have a staff surveyof
Comment individual zoning and subdivision application requests (rezones, re-
plats - industrial and residential , etc. ) to determine actual costs
involved and increase fees on a type of application basis rather than
an across-the-board incrbease. Mr. Bennett also encouraged Council to
study King County's fee schedule and processing procedure.
Steve Eastman, 317 Powell Avenue SW, stated all fees required to
make a change of any kind should be charged to the person making that
change. 1
Delores Newlands, 1668 Lake Youngs Way, inquired regarding the fee
schedule for vacation applications.
MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, SUBJECT MATTER OF ZONING AND
SUBDIVISION FILING FEES BE RETURNED TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDATION. Councilman Clymer recommended that
developers assume more responsibility for adherence to ordinance
requirements. Councilman Rockhill requested Council notify the
Planning and Development Committee of their views regarding how
much, if any, the general public should defray the cost of applica-
tion fees. MOTION CARRIED.
AUDIENC:i Sanford E. Webb, 430 Mill Avenue South, objected to any change to the
COMMENT Board of Ethics in either its composition or function. Mayor Shinpoch
Board o' Ethics explained that her recommendation to the Committee of the Whole on
8/12/82 has been reviewed and a meeting has been scheduled in the near
future with the Board of Ethics.
Renton Clay Council
August 23? 1982
Page 2
Public Me-ting continued
1983-89 Capital MayorShinpoch noted that no sources of income for these projects
Improvement exist at the present time (except for current funding on Shop) ;
Program and should funds become available, no project will progressiwithout
first being reviewed by Council .
Audiene Versie Vaupel , 400 Cedar Avenue South, questioned the use o,f f'CBD"
Comment (Central Business District) in connection with sewer replacements
for North and South Renton residential areas. Policy Development
Director Clemens explained the report was prepared using CBiD in
terms'of the original Renton area rather than meaning specifically
the commercial area. Mrs. Vaupel made inquiries regarding replace-
ment of sewer/water lines in the Central Business District and funding
for these projects, noting that improvements should be paid for as
they are used and those benefiting from such improvements should be
liable for payment.
continue. Councilman Reed questioned the cost listed for construction of Fire
Station 14 in Kennydale of $550,000 versus the million dollar figure
discussed during the Port Quendall hearings. Policy Development
Director Clemens explained the $550,000 represented ground and facility
only and, should the facility become a reality, it would be decided
what percentage of the additional cost of trucks and/or .building would
become the responsibility of Port Quendall developers. Councilman Reed
noted the Supporting Factors of this project listed 3500 existing resi-
dents would be served and 2000 new residents were anticipated in the
Port Quendall project, and this should be considered when costs for
this project are discussed. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY, ROCKHILL,
Council advance to the next order of business. Motion failed. MOVED
BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM AS PRESENTED WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DESIGNATION OF
CBD WILL BE CHANGED TO THE, COMMERCIAL AREA. CARRIED.
PUBLIC M ETING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and
Fee Schedule published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public meeting
Revision - to consider revision of the fee schedule regarding increase of zoning
Increase in and subdivision filing fees. Policy Development Director Clemens gave
Zoning/Sub- a brief basis for the request for filing fee increases, noting building
division Fees permit fees remain unchanged. Clemens compared Renton fees to adjacent
jurisdictions and urged review of filing fees for appeals and variance
applications.
Audiejnc= Del Bennett, 18004 SE 147th, requested Council have a staff survey of
Comment - individual zoning and subdivision application requests (rezones, re-
plats - industrial and residential , etc. ) to determine actual costs
involved and increase fees on a type of application basis rather than
an across-the-board increase. Mr. Bennett also encouraged Council to
study King County's fee schedule and processing procedure.
Steve Eastman, 317 Powell Avenue SW, stated all fees required to
make a change of any kind should be charged to the person; making that
change.,
Delores Newlands, 1668 Lake Youngs Way, inquired regarding the fee
schedule for vacation applications.
MOVED B.Y ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, SUBJECT MATTER OF ZONING AND
SUBDIVISION FILING FEES BE RETURNED TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDATION. Councilman Clymer recommended that
developers assume more responsibility for adherence to ordinance
requirements. Councilman Rockhill requested Council notify' the
Planning and Development Committee of their views regarding how
much, if any, the general public should defray the cost of applica-
tion fees. MOTION CARRIED.
AUDIENCE Sanford E. Webb, 430 Mill Avenue South, objected to any change to the
COMMENT Board of. Ethics in either its composition or function. Mayor Shinpoch
Board of Ethics explained that her recommendation to the Committee of the Whole on
8/12/82 has been reviewed and a meeting has been scheduled in the near
future with the Board of Ethics.
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
August 23 , 1982 Municipal Building
Monday , 8 : 00 P . M . Council Chambers
MINUTES
CALL T ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag
and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order.
ROLL C LL OF EARL CLYMER, Council President, ROBERT J. HUGHES, RANDALL ROCKHILL,
COUNCIL MEMBERS RICHARD M. STREDICKE, JOHN W. REED, NANCY L. MATHEWS AND THOMAS W.
TRIMM.
CITY S1 'FF BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; DANIEL KELLOGG, Assistant City Attorney;
IN ATTE1 DANCE MICHAEL PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; MAXINE E. MOTOR', Acting
City Clerk; DAVID CLEMENS, Policy Development Director; RICHARD
HOUGHTON, Public Works Director; MICHAEL MULCAHY, Finance Director;
LT. DONALD PERSSON, Police Department; ED HAYDUK, Housing 'and Community
Development Coordinator.
PRESS Deeann Glamser, Renton Record Chronicle
MINUTE 'LPPROVAL MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, MINUTES OF AUGUST 16, 1982 BE
APPROVED AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
CONTINIED This being the date set and proper notices having been posed and
PUBLIC EARING published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public hearing
Jackso to consider annexation of a portion of proposed Cypress Point Multiple
Annexation Family Development, an area of approximately 3.34 acres east of Fred
A-01-8,' Nelson Middle School and north of Southeast 162nd Street (Jackson
Annexation File #A-01-82) . Policy Development Director Clemens re-
quested, on behalf of the applicant, the public hearing be closed
at this time and the application be held for re-advertising at a
future date. Applicant to pay city's actual cost for re-advertising
and re-opening this public hearing. There being no audience comment
on this hearing, it was MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY MATHEWS COUNCIL
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED.
PUBLIC EETING This being the date set and proper notices having been posed and
1983-8• Capital published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public meeting
ImprovQ' ent to consider the 1983-89 Capital Improvement Program. Policy Develop-
Progra ment Director Clemens reviewed the program.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION - 1983-89 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Priority Project Description and Location
I 1 Maintenance Shop Facilities (Adjacent to County Shops)
2 Heather Downs Park Acquisition
3 Renton High School Field Reconstruction
4 Main Public Library Addition and Renovation
5 Cedar River Park Community Center
6 North Third Street and Sunset Boulevard Interisection
Improvements k
7 South Seventh Street and Rainier Avenue South Inter-
section Improvements
8 Construct Fire Station #14 in Kennydale
9 Old Shop Site Redevelopment
10 Entry Point Street Enhancement
11 Street Lighting Modification in the CBD
12 Senior Housing and Pedestrian Corridor
13 Signal Controller Modernizations
14 Relocation of Fire Station #12 in Highlands
15 Sierra Heights/Glencoe Park Acquisition
For.Use .By City Clerk's Office Only
A. I . #
AGENDA ITEM
RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SUBMITTING
Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. City Clerk For Agenda Of August 23, :1982
(Meeting Date)!
Staff Contact Maxine Motor
(Name) Agenda Status:
SUBJECT: PU)3LIC MEETING - 1983-89 Consent
Capital Improvement Projects Publ ic'�earg )(
Correspondence
Ordinance/Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc.)Attach New Business
Study Session
A. Departmental Improvement requests Other
B.
C. I Approval :
Legal Dept. • Yes No N/A
COUNCIL ACTION 'RECOMMENDED: Public Meeting • Finance Dept. Yes_ No. N/A
Other Clearance
. 1 •
FISCAL IMPACT:
Expenditure Required $ Amount Appropriation-
Budgeted Transfer Required •
SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation)
(Attach- additional pages if necessary:) .
•
1983-89 Capital Improvement Program: Requests from Fire Department, Library,
Parks anid Recreation Department, Policy Development Department, Public Works
Departmentj •Utility (Sewer) Division, Utility (Water) Division and' Airport .
I '
PARTIES OF R:CORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED:
•
S ,B'MIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON. THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION. .�
I .: I
6— w
e` I
Renton CityjCouncil
August 9, 1982
Page 3 -
Correspondence and Current Business continued
Second-hand Letter from Doug and Helen Beth Betts, Doug's Shooter's Supplies,
Firearms 217 Wells Avenue South, and Holger Ingoldby, H&J Leather & Firearms,
Licensing 224 Wells Avenue South, requested reconsideration of ordinancejrequiring
two business licenses for second-hand firearms dealers and lack of en-
forcement for other second-hand dealers. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY
HUGHES, THIS CORRESPONDENCE BE REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE.
CARRIED. I
OLD BUSINESS
Aviation Aviation Committee Chairman Trimm presented a committee reporti recommend-
Committee ing Council approve the following priority order for Airport Capita l
1983-88 Airport Improvement Projects (1983-88) : 1 . Water main - upgrading of; s1outhwea...
Capital Improve- corner. 2. Water main - completion of loop system. 3. Instrument
ment Projects Landing System (ILS) . MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL
CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE AVIATION COMMITTEE. CARRIiED.
Block Party Councilman Stredicke questioned whether the matter of the Daytor1 Court
Approval i NE cul-de-sac block party could be considered by the Transportation
Committee and reported back to Council by the 8/21/82 party date. MOVED
BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, ITEM 6f ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BE RE-
WORDED THAT! COUNCIL APPROVES THIS BLOCK PARTY SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT. CARRIED.
Planning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill presented committee
Development report recommending the proposed revisions and amendments to the Zoning
Committee ' and Other L:and. Development Codes regarding storage areas as submitted by
Storage Area the Building, Zoning and Policy Development Departments be referred to
Changes to the Ways and Means Committee for proper legislation. Recommended revision,
Zoning/Other Land include clarifying the definition of 'bulk storage' uses, creating a defi-
Development nition for 'outside storage' , providing screen and surfacing requirements
Codes 'I for 'outside storage' , correcting procedural discrepancies in the Bulk
Storage Ordinance, amending the definition of 'parking lot' under Parking
and Loading Ordinance, adopting a definition for 'storage lot' in the
Parking and Loading Ordinance, and establishing screening and surfacing
requirements in the Parking and Loading Ordinance for 'storage lots' .
MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION
OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
Zoning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill requested a public
Subdivision meeting be set for 8/23/82 to obtain public input regarding revisions
Filing Fete to the zoning and subdivision filing fees to more adequately reflect the
Change City's true cost for providing this service. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDEC
BY HUGHES,, SET PUBLIC MEETING ON 8/23/82 FOR PUBLIC INPUT ON THE MATTER
OF INCREASED FEES. CARRIED. Councilman Rockhill noted that copies of
the proposed fee changes would be available.
Public Safety Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes gave an informal commiittee repor
Committee stating that the matter of collecting delinquent parking fines had been
Delinquent discussed with Chief of Police Wallis. Chief Wallis reported he has bee
Parking Fin s using volunteers from the police college and the program has1 been pro-
gressing well . He is also considering using officers on disability to
help in this problem.
Silent Witn-ss Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes also noted that the 'Si,lent Witnes
Program Program had been discussed with Chief Wallis. This programiwas started
in 1972 as the Citizens' Council Against Crime and offers cash rewards
to citizens providing information leading to the arrest of people involve,
in violent crime. Councilman Hughes explained that no Council action was
required; this is informational only.
•I
Renton Ci . Council
August 9, 982
Page 2
Consent A. -nda continued
Garbage Request from Rainier Disposal to include a garbage collection information
Collection sheet in the next monthly utility billing. This informationl sheetcompile'
InformatiI,' with ordinances and has the concurrence of the Public Works Director.
Sheet Council concur.
Block Part'. Request from residents of Dayton Court NE cul-de-sac to close off cul-de-
Request sac on 8/21/82 from approximately 3:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m. for a block
party. Refer to Police Department and Transportation Committee.**-'See
item 3, page 3: Council approve this block party subject to the approval
of the Police Department.
Municipal Report from Mike Parness, Administrative Assistant, noted Municipal Court
Court revenues for 1982 are anticipated to exceed budget estimate by approxi-
Appropriatlon mately $80,000. Due to increased workload, an additional $11 ,500 has
been requested to provide for overtime and operational costs, for remainder
of 1982. Refer to Ways and Means Committee for recommendation.
Appeal - Appeal has been filed by Loren Davis of Holvick deRegt Koering of the
Holvick Hearing Examiner' s Decision of 7/16/82 for approval with conditions of
deRegt Koe ing site plan approval for construction of five one-story buildings to be
SA 095-81 used as a business park or light warehousing; also requested1 a variance
to permit joint access driveways on common property lines. SA 095-81/
V 014-82 (North side of Powell Avenue SW at SW Seventh Street) . Refer
to Planning and Development Committee.
Appeal - Appeal has been filed by Loren Davis of Holvick deRegt Koering of the
Holvick Hearing Examiner' s Decision of 7/15/82 for approval with conditions of
deRegt Koe ing site plan approval for construction of four one-story buildings to be
SA 094-81 used as business park or light warehousing; also requested a' variance
to permit joint access driveways on common proeprty lines. SA 094-81/
V 014-82 (Southwest corner of Powell Avenue SW and SW Seventh Street) .
Refer to Planning and Development Committee.
Report from Land Use HearingExaminer regarding Mike Mastro I(R.W. Poitras)
Mike Mastro p 9 9
(R.W. Poit1as) Final Plat, File FP-093-81 , stating appeal period for this recommendation
Final Plat expired on 7/28/82 and the matter is now forwarded to Council for review.
FP 093-81 Refer to Ways and Means Committee for resolution.
LID 314 Finance Department recommended acceptance of low bid for interim financinc
Interim of LID 314 (street improvements, sanitary sewers, water mains, fire hy-
Financing drants and all associated improvements in the vicinity of SW 16th Street
from Lind Avenue SW to East Valley Road and East Valley Road from SW
16th Street to SW 41st Street) in the amount of $4,886,538.56 from
Peoples National Bank. Council concur and refer to Ways and( Means
Committee.
Consent Aglnda MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY TRIMM, COUNCIL ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS
Approved 1 PRESENTED. CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS
Executive Council President Clymer announced that Council would meet in executive
Session session following this meeting to discuss pending legal matters.
Pipeline Letter from Lawrence S. Braund, P.E. , JohnsonBraund Design Group P.S. ,
Right-of-Wly Inc. , requested review of existing use of City of Seattle pipeline right-
Usage Revi -w of-way between 304 Main Avenue South and Houser Way easterly, to Mill
Avenue South. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, THIS CORRESPONDENCE
BE REFERRED TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE WITH A REMINDER OF THE CITY' S
FISCAL SITUATION. CARRIED.
I '
I
August 9, 1982
AVIATION COMMITTEE REPORT
� I
REF: Agenda Item #6i - Meeting of Monday, August 9, 1982
Airport Fund Capital Improvement Projects 1983-1988
The Aviation Committee recommends that the Council approve the priority
order for the Airport projects as follows :
1 . Water Main - Upgrading (S.L. Corner)
2. Water Main - Completion of Loop System
3. Instrument Landing System (ILS)
•
•
/" ,.0 lit ?s--
Tom Trimm, Chairman
John Reed
I ,
andy ckhiE?zeil:4_20
C E R-T-I F I CAT 10 N
I i
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
ss.
COUNTY OF KING )
I , Le s/ie. L.. 1:190 hereby witify that ,5l
(G) copies of the above notice were p ted by me in a or more conspicuous
places on the property described and two copies were posted at th Renton
Municipal Building, 20,0 Mill Ave. South, Renton, WA on date of INS:
/'
Signed i . • i. AOSic)C,--
otary Public in and for the State of
Washin•ton, residing in King County
1/80
� I
j I
. .., , ,, ,,, .i,-,.•-••,..- •,-,.•.;••;1",!••:,...,73'7:2;."irr
. , ...• ' , . -. ... : •• . ;9 ' .. -:•-•.--:i•:.•••;:r ir r,•''.•,,,,.. .,''',;••;',,a...il.: ;:..?„,',.;;,,,•:,1,i.',.,..1,:,,,,';a..••.a...c....:-••-,••••••, ....:::.;11C.1,",,it,,,:,-, ,,,."..-
r•-,--,•,: .•-•,',-.•,,,,--:::,,---..- '•••••,:.a :: •••• ; .••:.'•,•:.:•:. ,:,.:,'„:.•••.• :,...• .. r.',.: - .•.,.....1 •••••,•••,•• .!' . : ••::•'•:i•••,r4,..,....• . . ..? ..:-..- . ,,,a a- ..a,, '' 1: 1: g.4..yr,--:-44,-,•',,i ,••41A:4•1u11,11,'•asi'll•
44;7••••,:„:,:,,•,.....,f,,,,,,..• •''•'`;',.1. ‘.. -:•:;.::,..;••• •-.'". • 7 ,.. , -, ,-..:-....,--••••:•. •„.;•• :•;::;.r.„. - .ia,.:::: .--,4,-..;:,•,!-;.•,:a-:;---•.•••-.:: 11-;;?•>.,1:1-1:,'.?.,.,9';'2,,la.;•:''1•'''••'•:••:-,h'''.'''fa-iii••01'.!4'0,,','.a. ..`
•,••••••:,•':.•,..;ft;•,•,•••. 1,;•,••••,•.4 .: ', ..I.4',4";" :" ..: ••: . ''," ; ''•• .:,. •',,Fr'4 :', '..,',,:i-,'-';',';id:'•:::,',;:'-';'17" ;:',1; '''',' ,--,:.
.',`.1 -- - -:t - .:':' ; - !!'.,'',,,'''''','••',..,,,-,',.-"',',.1a.:".;:, >'.,`,,,,',4.::;, .
',,,,,,I1,:„.-,,,'•::=r4,,,L,;;41;;;:ia;„!.,,!•:,)(;,;i:.,‘: :',',,:!:1;,,,,',.'. .;,,
`tk:'',:'.,:?,,,,.':,,;,;::,',,•;,,,..;...`.?;: ;'',,V''..; Is.;‘,''',,, .,,::,- , .'• • ' .
11'':'Ia,-1,.,,A,,:.:,,,,,'::,,,,: i'•, ::', '•:. :,'...,:. ,- a
. I ; . .:,.... , .,...i...1 Ft',)4'.:•,,,;,,,,.,;-7,;,,•1',,.:.1.141;i;,,11,';.,i,`,,;,111-.':,,,,,,,,,:.
, , .:, ., li;,.1.iittk.:?..i'::41.14:4';'11/'''llijaai!1•;1;'.7; ',a,,'E'.4.`1.--‘L
'$1,iii':i ir,!°) l',,„.$4.',61 ,4 •
'' ' .C4-:;.1,''''!;NF:r0'''71,41.,;:ly-'''':,4.1r,','''L.•:!,:„,.;,t1,1;1,7.,':;-,•
,
, . ,, •••, ;
:,-
. ,•.,.., ,,,,,,,'.,,,,,‘; •, 4,:•,..,,•:,:i„;;;;;;;;,,q 1;,:.:.,•41;;;;,,,Rti,ti.t,;4 oir,;;' ,,,,t:i.;,,, ....z'c'*0j:;.f0;;;•'::'_;-',,'•-.:.,.;,;''',',.:;.‘';•:.;--•.,,...,.\;,'...;'..1;';,'.;'!';-.',';,;....'....-.:.,::'.::':',::;.:j''.,r''-;'.:'.-,:.,•;;,;..-.;-':':i„.;.r-:;';.";-.•1••:,,..•,.,,';i,,-'..'-:':•,.1';:";•,';;,I:-'••',;'',:'f;,•::,; •' ;. .. ...:...
.
, ..
.• •
'
• •
l"i,; ••; . '—,...,-.
..' .
'.
RENTVk CITY COUNCIL
;i•i:;.•:,,;1,'17,''•',,4'1',:`te t1..tp1134,,:•fri•.ir•;,r:,,k-,i;:i»sfl,i1l Pilei4,,t:",,.it.,Ril-,.'1;.•.,i:-f-i.',;.'',''q1 4;•iC1r:,-.:'.41i',•4i4'?'i.:.t'.iit`i-.'..ki.:.••il!:,?1e•ll'l.•liytit..11lfl,rvlii.,.'I'PS..1,,4.,,,.•'.::v;,.d••'':5,'P.1.iI,.,'....,,,,,.iF:.,•-.,''i-i,,/':2'
.,;
'
..„‘, •.,..,: i..i.,,i;;;•,,a,ivi...9,i,-„1,f;141.0)t.T.,,,111,1:,w,..,,,,iiiiw,•'
• • - • . . - :,. .•.,. ....,•,,,i:,.,,,„.•:,..,-...,-,-?i1•7,:i,-.11,4-.;:i.-„,•;i:sil,.4,2iilli •i:1-1•tr..Ir'-.;l'''
P..:-.`7•:.--",- .•-•.--•" ,'•:?..- : .,.• . , , ... . . • . .
• -•• •.:: "':-,i': r'•••-'::.-:':'vr',:-;%:::',,:••••,''rit,,'-...5c."•I.4. 1i'll';',:q•-i'llM,'-V-C-•';'t-141,-:4;7,41i)I'' 'ifl,4.'F:f•:•:,1-'!'.1:•••:•
;#':,.•;•,.•.:::•;,•.•:*•;'„' •;:.:':•.•;':.; .: ,,•,, • •" ', ; ".: ::' : '; • -•.. : :: ; •, : " * • :: :''.: ; :•':•• •••'"• . '!,.:.; ,:.::1;:::5, :i'.1H. ,•:' :11!.‘:.;t'l•'•;1".'fl'I....:•.,0,....).. 1...,::: •'• ,.,`•-
td:::.:..,,,:•••.,::' •PUBLIC
:::'[. t:::_ :'r :,L';'',./;1. ...'..'.•:: .
,
I ,
..
,:
1.: ,.•tt,.•' '',i: ''ii. C.,',i/.
•
(.1:1''''h':•:::•'•:•.:
ET.,,, i.. i..;,,,,, ..,,r,..,,,,,:::::::,i,„..1 ... ,_,...„„; 11, ,„H'.14i,:i''''''''
,'1.,,•...::. A,.,•.,„ ...N•i,,.. ,:,
--4'..-.;:;"•::"..•;4:•,',
, , 4i,,. ,,,,,,,,..i1.•.; 2,,,..,,,,,,..e..., ..1,,,,,,, ,,I,... '••,•;1,..,.
%;-:-,,-..'',1i".7:.-!
t,',2,::;:c',..:-:;
• .',:::',1;-..j:, ' .,:-...,,,,,••, ,...,,, ,4. 1,.e., ''' [..-..-.1,.,:.,:,
• . .
. .. • . . . , . -• .. : i :=•..•--:.,:::,,,,r.,s.•;‘,.::::,..11,';',,,,,•!:',.:}1:-,f,',.‘,...i.` ‘ ' !,iviiIiiillif;,tti:,, ilki'.-,4.,....:•::
. , , , . , , , . .-, , ;:. .,..A,.,..„..„,.,,,
[i...v-,, :`-:•=',..-...,...,,..y;•..'..-- :.:- , -, 1•••.: .: ' . .• , . : . , • . , .. .-, . •• . r ,. , • , . :,t• •,-•,......•..,.•:.....:,.,....,,,.,,,,...., `,1 •-4.4. : ;•••••..!.P.-r 4. . , r, '4,3!.•r,•..
"
•:,•'r,-6.:.:•:•-,:i1);:•-,0,4:1...''.•;-•:::::-'1.:,::7-."::-• '....-,-..1:',..- :'i.' '.: ' ••.' ' - • ' :: ,•. '. • ' ' • ''. 1 '• ' :'.: - '--•'''--"...7,7-"•;:r*:,-::,11•'•-•I','Ir:'-'',.p V,Lr'•1;;L'r,..--7r:',..FAII:ifit.1-4ilril'-',,:401,1,..•,:
'4:,°.....,... 4:.'t.—.':•:, - ..? •. , , ,,, •• : • ,, . ,, ,,, , - ...
.• . :;•••••.• ' '.'-,f'..W''.1;11,1,';'i.'4:,`"','::11 4-4",4 ill'fi t•-•':: i_itrtl..r.1 -••7•I' r•I•7•:.
tl,• ,-••,• .',.•,- .I. ! . .. • ;' .• ..: •'••• ;. .••,..r•..,..-•::2',.7,.f.:';;'',..,.. :''' i,):;',„'''•,',',• it'ql 1.';',J,';' •,1'
. ' .' •: .:•, ..•,,•.•' •.% .'i..:''.;..: V.•:',1.)1:- "j•-..::',11-,;(,,V,k7,14;44. •e;.,,,.„;;1,11:v;i!..,',,
,...., ,,,,z:1 i,,,., : .,: , ,,..,.. :... ,. . ,,, ., , . , ,,,. .,, .. .., .,:,.i'.:,• '.: ' .• ', ';;!:;•1,,I . ,',i i''.;',... lir,illi;'!;Aligiiilrfl:l'N'i!li:."' '',
' ';,:,8 -00-', r.i.0 ,t,,f,,,, ,,
,,,:,,,,„...„..,....,:.„,,....... ........ . .r. ON
AUGUST: 23; ,,1982,,H . ...,•,.. ;.': AT.-.:„.'i :. , ,;,.[•,,' u.;'-ivt:41.;.iiitil,A,;.•;s4,4e.•,•!.';,!•/,
i.c,',-•,--.1.....,•-•4,•!:!-',•'' •°- - ---. ''. " ' ' . . i ,,',.. .• ...„.F..`,•''., lit°:;;,;;:..:''''`Irillt:::.; •1:713V•;ii;';'
'',.',,'•:::::.':'11.,:' ''.•••..,' :',','...'•*._;', 'I ' —
• ..
' •0.,.;',.,Vi."'„f--.•i'..,:-.r..7t,',`,.;.;-.;'.,..."..1:..;,-,,.,.,•••!••4,:"::,„,.I,,';,,-.c.'a:•I',-"••'•.:-„:;•,•I•.':::'1,',.;• i'..r:•--:. '' '-:-- '.. ' i,.,.':.: -' ;• ,.'. ',:.,-.':.,,,-,••. .,•'•„;:,. , :.,:,,.,1,.';,•i:•, -'—';•,'.•••'.'s'•;'--:,•',S..7:.;r•-.r,!'•,;-:-,,;,•.:-•,••.-.i---..•'-•".."..•'.'';,;'',,,;,'•.''7.-1.‘•:.!,,:;.'':.,:'..I•.,riyi:l.''r,,;•.::.,:.-,•-:7I:;-',;:..,',,;II•.11.i',1i:r.7:i"1 nj
I I f 1::•;-.•!t:7;-,•,-'.IY"r-,"-:rir-,i0,r1,t;„t,"••:::.:4:,',r7-;1'.,1,:••--7,;•6••1I.I,4ti4;'il14...qr0.-4••:1,1,,.ii.,t4.'L1)1;
•.r,...:I414:7,.•
rr-j•-;.,:f,:j;!::,•;7:7,,c:.•-!:',':',.i:•-•3",•,-.,-.;:f.,'.., ''•;•:;:::'-,"..-.;:::::::•.::•::•• - •,-:-..':'- '. :, •' • .;1 : : s' '.: 1 • •• •• : ,•'..: .,:- . :•'•-. •;•,....,„•••', ••,--.-,..' I,•:-',`•1';':.',.!1...1.4..rq:14:1q ll'i`:;:i-,:1:::/•47,9•I'iA':',111-',,l...-i:fitiltkl.:41',1'/'•
ki'l•:•j:•.-.:,..''r;,:-.,,,';',?-,.:::•••'•`r•-'::'t`,:-....;SI If,-.-:•'-',...-•;•:...•':.7.--.."'•,::-,-,1: '."' I •. -••-::'''.:". '' ••,';.:,'l' ":-, , ," .1,::. •,'•r :. ,,-.! !,•:'„7..• ‘:1,,:---',. :,:,Ir'":'-''i:r',1•:-1t";::!•1 t:::;',-1,l'C'''"'i''I''''iI4''9'''At Ni r• l''' '• ' .•1
-•,..".:'3•••,••..:';`"'.:',-", •••1'•::::',••..,;, ,..,:..••.': .•-: 4..,.. 4':: , • .;..•, .; -!, .1•,„.,.' 4',,,:,. •.; ,:,:'... e;; •'... ' ' :1; ;• : :...)!.0.1,, i'l •,4;,.1:,,..q• ,'...41,A.r.: ....i.,'..„,. ,"..t.l.'.J'‘
V.:i.,7:::;,.,L',,...1.;;;'t'•';',•.!;:'.,•'4,':':: .-,‘'.,',-;:.;;• MUNICIPAL-L-:,..': ; • '
'' : ' ;"N IL,,cm,„
• RENT0
,.. , _ ,T _
. . . .; , , ,, ,,,. ,,,,,, ,,„li,:11,,,J:,,i,.;iv.,i;itif.,i:.,,cit
....... ., . .: .. ..„.: -. , .. , : ........,,,.....,. ,. '.. '..s.' .: ,' : ;,:f•,' ' '.:?..';•-..s n'i";-n'T.,,.....`, C,;',';',;:n ,1.11n. .: ;',•;''i t . i.4,tL',;',Illi:4.,P.T;.14:,';',415Nr,
'., ,,..4,f,';elf,•;:.!;,,,r,,;.:,•-; ;;;.:',;,a,.::;2. ,,..:'2',,:'i';'.' :`:,;,..'-':-.;-: ••:•.!.'•,;', 1: ' :-...•:::•;...s.,,....:,,:‘ :...':: .:','--...;•..:;.;:r.: . ;;;:,-.; ..,•., ',.;;;,I':.;'-..',,',.; .';.V.l.",' '.,..0'.. '. ',1if ik.;:i;;:.14r4C;'•21411011,, ,Y,111,i114i'l.'k.''','-,;
li-lt.;:.1.'";•'.;:..,•';',,,•;;;,•;.-;,....!;, •,:-,.;,,i. :::.-,.—;; •;,;:,• : . ' '
!vti., .tn ;z,,,; - ;;;,:•7:-,;;.:, •,-..•.-,,,:.n • ,4)0 0•'•" ILL.,.AvENuE,....,souT
4•:•rn. s.,cii' ;.1.,`' •.'-.':''' ;•''' '''', ' ,r. FI„
I •1 '"'.:
. .
,. ., , .i i.i:...,-..r.a a...a.i.,1,!•avi.'ai-Fi•'•PP•a"
r., .:•;;N‘g • ' ',1..-pz.';,,,,.t,'Zi-,,,,,,,,;••:;:;;',•;:';:„,;;,-,.1,,-,,'",i,,,!'.;•:' A
iV !I'V,;':;11.7;,'";''';':".1:.'-':•.•':`1.4''..';'..-',.,::::.1... ..`:•;';-; :',...';'•,;,'.:.-;: ; • ; :• ..'.:..'•;.' .. -.;. • ; , , :;•::;,'..:',; ;;;;;.: ''•:' :•,,;..; ,.;,' , ,i;;::'•';'io;'-'•;;;:'';'1; ..:1thi';.".4.i:;'1; j.':-:'1;'•il iii",,H}f4'11•14!!!1Pi''iliii),'n Yi!.1i,,i1;!.!.:,.'''
,,l';Na,.;;;4,,,'!„,';',',::',:, -f,',':7;;;'•.. ',,,::,-,,:,,,„'.!:,'i'.;!: ..''::::''..;:'i,.. ,'"'' ,:.• ',..' '. '..:. .—';.:':-:"'''a'•'':":'•'•'a:"...';-';';.: •.:1,',4,._!:: '.''...,1 -:',•!'''.i'a,•!!'. .a'',..ja, . , ,',iill p a dt1;:ia!'i.i'fLt,:,,;;tii,,-;1:„:„afi;,',1'Via)•.14i,if„a..,1•.,-,
''-a;,''••••,;',./•-•:.74•'`';-°•.,:a:„.,...•:'-'4•4-•;',.,„-., .••1,'-',",i'..-.‘;').t.,••i°,,-r.:.4.-;••.:-":-: •..,•.:.:,‘',..•,:.,,....-.:•.,........ ....,:-...,:•,:•:.; -.•,•,..- .''..':-.i,•:.•.•:•.'',...:;::;..a.'.••,!;i10,.',...,:,... .....k..,•.:cl:tiFi.....:71I;L[JT•1,r;il,';,11:(11',1' I;e0: ':•••1•HIAr;•ri -i•4•,i,i4L,•ir,-",,I,
.r.,1-7-',-,, ;••.:7_•,'-'-.•[:".';',:. ":•.:•.',. ."•: , ' I',''.';'_,- ' , :•• .•;..:',..•' •••; -
proposed ''''' igt4§ iCAOITALAIY•iPRqVEM ' Ti,,,,,Ii,..'.,
Fr the of considering a .. - .... ... ,•,.., . .:•;;•.,„.....,.1.;•.••...,,•,, ;, ,, , .. .,i•:.: .,,i,i)c-,,,,,,.
0..'00:-604- :lii-::,-: :,11' . .REQUESTS .FROM: FIRE ,DEPARTMENT;,'.,•LIBRARYIPARKS,'.',.:AND,'.:IRECREATONt 14Cfl,..,:.:
•V'IvE.C,.,,r•:,,,.,'i'','.r,,::'41,1,,'''i.t45:'iA:',R.'?T M'' 'NT,; POLICY DEVELOPMENT-DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC''.'..''wo'.•RKS; D'•EPAR4.,, i„tiIbri tit, r,,, ,_ ;:'r::: ",4-, • • ,r r I:
AND 'AIRPORf'11''•:1:':'''';11.i`I''''tiii-:i44t';'1101t'rIrriff''''..1'''''','
.',„..,'.:,, ,--li$4.11,:,,Iiii, ,,..,,. irt.,,,,.,lit,,,,711,„. ; ,, •
(.,,SEWER Y::::-D IV:IS ION,,,:UT I L I Tr..,(WATER):.DIVISION, • . : .;:;,, , : „;..., ,.. 3,„,i1.....ti;, ,i.,tf...,74:,,,-,..;;; .'.74:E ,-,14;,:44•40-,,,',I,"4,1,,.. -..;';'.:'....,?• '.:-..'•••'•• :;'.1.:•'.:-.''::,':'. '.••'::i.' • ' . " ..' ' ' . •'' •;::: ' ''''.r: .'"i'l,'',::.!'':..''''.-' .• .'14.".IDY'il.'`,,° ''d:;1:`' i. li,bii0:•iiil'011'ill;1111°J flOot-t/iP,;•;',..,,
• ENERAVIOCATION OF. SUBJECT• PROPERTY:
'-..,... . ..-.. ,.. .-."i , ., , •,... • .,•ciI. TY77 ..',,.ti,1;••4( 1%. -1:10•;,, '1"1•?,,tiii;PIL. .i.
,..,..,., „,. ..,..,•;,!,.5RJ; ,,.1, .,.,..1,,iiii;!Fta.a4,45i•''''';4ivala rjad•''•-k'"':-
„ii,;,>! •,,•i;;,....•,t,,.;:..1:-.:,,.-.....a,..,-;;:•1 ,,,,, •!,-r.-..„;,.?„:,• .. :-•--, • ••.:',.....;:' •'.•.::,..-.: ;'; ; l.,,..:' , ,...' ‘. ;• •;-•;.--:',: th-- •.;.,a-...;,...1.'1•113i6..! ;, ,r.Of4:1(4;•,I;Plii ,. , ',J itte;.1i
'.1.1.?",•4,..•?..4.;.•',;,. ..1• .::i.•''.::• :•,"•,..,.•''' ,,''':-."•;,.•':.. '''.''';'',:''•.:1.',.. •••-•'.;•••: ':':•4:;'--:•,,4',•Ji:.',";.4.., i:'';;•-•1•';' ;••14' :,'•• '..'1';;Ii.',.',.; I : ',;.'•ilA'CA•t,i0lAkitlkti,'Ir'itil"F;
•1;',1,.." --;.:"..;`;'';;.!..ifii.,41';`'.•?-•>,..,,T...',',.`.?:'.,•.''',;.',':i'i,,,;•:•'' '-.''.1.:.:-.':, •'''-',.. ',"•". .•'. :i.'•:‘,.i,''.-,...'.,.-,„.;.•';.....: .,. ,:-...;•!:,:,.',.,,,'•,;::.!,:; .-, .......;;;..,:: ?,,yrii.;•,,..., ., , ,4,4,,•,i,u.ii•1,;;',•,1.14. 'f'j c',,1•..r!,..1,.-,4 ift'oi..-4:1••1... rorlii,V. 1,,i.li,,:,
g...,-r.;.;-•.f, ,,':,'„'',,,:• ,1,•`'i:-.,4.:. r7:,-r,'.'1:',::::;,:::,:•-i-;•.':,,,;';'' :::•.-•:,r".'r- -•:'::'„ ,'•' :::•,• .. ; ".: :•-•': ::•":','' ••••,--.„:"'''..'.1.;1'' ' =,','•,-,',1.'''."'••-•''',!:.:Ir-fIli'... 1:$11')ill ri.M r.'.';'•;'„01-Iiii,,,l ',III",1;4•j•likr. 4 I ,141:;.:.
,,,,,, ,•:,,„i,r,;., ,,,,••,..,.,,rr..,.1„, .,, , , .• , .',:.''.,- •,-: •• ': .•; .••'••:• :, r,t-,--'i; :•‘,-;' r:':'-:':t.- :7", ;•,,...,;,,...-..,:y.1,..;..,•.:••;.•.ii.:•A.,, ,1 ,1,,..,',.:01,1 14,,,,,v4i;,,i110:0410,,'0 k.,,,,,111;,;•••::
•;•:•,•::•,:-..!.1:::,-;....,I',-,'. ,,... ,..,'...•;;;.:,„ .,'• :••:•:;•••:-..,:...,-..•:,• .:.,•••-•". ••• •'". -' -•:,•,.... •,•••,••-•:..., •:a.;::a ,•:-r•a•:,-;. ..•••.!.i!-..,:.-,,ai .,,i,,,Nt•:•••'a-y,41t5.1-ii,..,t/1:-.:T,-z,-ft,,ce.kal.!si.,[4.1r),,,),,•ii„.,:l..,'
'7,3,a,-,. -,.. , ,,••-.,„•••.,,,,,,..,.:.„. ..f,,......I., ,.,,,,..:,,.,.•,,. ••.::• ;—, a '...'""';- .-. ' a a.::. ...a a.::::::,..'•• ..,- 'a.•.'..,•(.',.,'.• :;'.'-i.:,.'i.„,,Y,;;,,-,i':,,:liFfal,„411',1•,p„.•,... • ..,,i,„•,,,-,i,. 4'ti,:if.•;•E.cli(tt,r. :,Ili
;!....:,,,:2;4:::..1.,;,..1, 1,,.i.,•,...,1! ,it .1 o,;,...,. , ., , , . v ; . , i,..,,,,,Ii:i!'.'t,',4' 1:: ,.•:...;..ti.,.1 CA•$ 4.11.,il: h.,'6.4)• ,'l'.,li t'l.. .• 1,...•-,.P . '`:•!',;--•
r....i.,;.,,,. ,••;,..:-,,,,..,:r..,•';,•,•.,;••,r,,,•;;..r,„,.,,.. :::;.,-,•• :L ..,,,• ,, .. • ••••••••:.r... •‘;,.;,.....,,-•,,r. ••i ,.,.,. ...J.•,'..,:i ...••..:,.i."•••.;'. ',!;.•7,;(...:7,„••, :::',14',-.'•••••):•• ;',.,..:0:r•t•'..,i;11.--kirir ::.4-.; ..;:;,t-.117', 'I r4S;1•,',11,,?i:i::i
1 ',T..".:..4:i 1:-O'i. ,,"•1'j):,'''.i!,•:'•,t•:•,‘', '1, •'.! ''' ': . 1' ,f:2,••: •• :: .''I. :. ,•: •'...• .t••1 ;•,'‘.',. '.':j:• ::',/:::.j,., 4-.7",'::.:J.;• 'At:";';4 :'.i •-; ''',',i iiil 11.•::,;:Vill:' il :611': Iv r LI pyor,
.4'':•17':',:'.';;;:'.::3. -';'.:: •:, .-:•;• ::•''',• ,.•••-•: ..';', • :..' - • -::: ' *l. 4",•:;• ' ..".-I:LI, !I:`1,'. •;',.• , ,, •••;..Y,`,.',,,ir, ; ..4-;ii.:1•'::41;4: -.1,14 y101'41:4,0 rir•e'Ei,0 '};;I:.r .11,0,,...,, ,,
1.1.
:-.. .::-.I'. ,,*.',..'' -;''...,..rr.:::: :', .....,:- ,.-',.... :' :,:.'..•':' ,r':-..,' .','...,,-, ;'... . a -..,...' •;!,', .;--!'...;:;• :..H; ''.' ,.,,;,::,.',,-:.!-I,,;,;.•',,ii,.-,::,,...i.j,q,q;:-.4:4;ipr,;;•••;14.,ii, i' i?, ,,4, :: '..17,,,,,'..?„
F.,,,,.....,,-...4:::•• ••'. •:,..:;..,••,.:,• ,:,'..!.',.• :.••'; ;: . ..: ..:....'r,.. .''• : .. '• ,-, :-..;-. : ,, •: ,.d-.,..:.:‘..!:',',,.::::,1•',:,..-..;F:...:',:•..L.,:tr.'',.:r..,-,•:::!.?;.,AY,,11,3,0.11'-;;1,,t:,,,1-.-..i.r .,?, ,.:, ,i.i.a,:.0, . ikp,,,gc,,-.
,,,':,,,,,,,,,• ,,,.,,,,,,.„4,,,,..„,„:„„;•,,,it.,.,,,,,..,,,,..,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,, ,,,...,, ,, ,.,,, ., , •. ..,, ,. ;,, ,,,.,..,,.,„ ....,,,..,•„„•,..„:,;.,,,,...., ,-,,. ,...,,i,..,....,-,,,,.....,:r,'...,:!:;..Y•V„•,,,,,I,:p1;;Irr "••.r.iii [3,1, 'aft- 14":1;p:,!lc; , : '',,iii„.,,
,',,,-,i,,•,',-:,,$).,,.x.;%.,,,,,,;,1,;;,'::;:•,p;',,r' •-••1,,..,.,..-,.,...-..'; .. ' .'.••::);,; •: ;, 1r' ;'."' ."' 4'.. '• "4 ,'II''•1 • :-,:.: :..t.,;:',. .;.:...:.'',:"-:',:"J.,}1`,14`:-,. ;`,Iii!:.ii,P-41111 F.,a.4.5,.. 0.1.,i..,..,,,iii.':, it, '.,1 ':,•.y.
b:1,...,,,:....-4,-....-4.:;,„,,,:...5,?,,,..'.:i:,'?1,,.,-:•... .-; ',:•-,..:, . ',..:;•—•. ;,.... ., . . .,....• ,„...., •I ,,., .,,,,,...„ .,:i ,,.., :::::;J,,,,,.,,-:,..../.,,', ,-:;:.'.'...'',..r.-.,..4,,:r:•.,-.'-'..,-',;',... ,- .',..,(1:,...!;,•1::ILI..,, ?.kv,.f i,,, rt.,,144; ,Pl,
AA 1
:.,,,,c,%.i.t,,..r,'...•....;%,::',;:';'-';', .. ; ! . ' : 2... ',:. :. '.:1•:..-.;•'..;. ..„ ,'•. ,;'......:1•.':,!.i :..r..1,-;.......4.0•'f-triAi.,117t;, '.;Niip:g.53KYRKI,tlici. l
PI;;•,4.0..f:::':,t.4;;',..• :?•,:•,::':.:•::s! '..•,?: ..,•,..,-. ,,,•, : • ,i• ;• , • ' ' •' ', : , •", ; ..,•• c. ,In. :';..!"-".;..."..t I `,.‘ ..1,''•'.••':.1.c.'•:;-1.ii)1.'.1't,prf .1 .::',:i.'17:1;,::"":,'Jqi.:t14 1114''.:41''' ;
,„,-, •••;‘:',•i't::•' . l.',F'',:';'',•':,:rt.,` ,•:•;t' '• ••7'-.'• : • •••.'• - ... '' • • -; .;•-...J. '.I LI .•-',:'; •••••..'-;''''r'r-'•'.r.'•••'-.F.';'•:::••••.''':,;':':,i11::,,,fr'5•`1,7i..$14:1';,1 ir-i-' 7,..q,i)W "titrei4;f1! ,p11•, :,, ,,h,"ii,,.;
/,‘;',:r..',...j •.;, , --i•i•.:::,:',.-,,'...;-.:--; .; :,'•:'.,• -- ,., '-."; •••: :'•• .:-. '':''.:':.'' •.''- ''••••', '::', '.: -•-,:'-';•••!.. :-'.''?::-.7'.-I:::-.:--:.,-,••';',1,0„.. : :1:::.1.;,ri'iri r. ,,:I,r4. ifq •• i• ,,, ,,.,. . I, r.: .„.„j
11:',r..-:;•;:''.7.-:1•;:„'.14. •,.•. •-,,:'. 1'-',..•,..,„•••,•:-•-•:'• , , ,,,„: ,, • • , - •I' -•• ....•• 'f. '''.•-- •.•..';. -:•', '''-:,-; i•t;:r.':'-':0•:•:';:;•••''''''''•L':':,'41;•;,•••'•'•ga i'''''i•-''''I ''' ' '' - ' ' ' 'I".
'fr`i's••••••:4.7.;.-;---.!.r.,'L:•':,':r.:-.•••",-..,-.:-,-. 7:I,'". ,::` ..-'.•• ,7 . . • .--r :. 7:- :- •..'•-;-,I ' 1,:. ';','::':-.:;,:i ':' '• ,:.-,41-'.!':;':-:-,';',Y.- "•1:;.:7',.•'-::•''.i:': ','''',.4,1-7: 11‘.,1` .:Yit,U,
-:•,•,:: ,.., ...,' •P...,'•i't ,•:•,• •": • " •••.•.:'- . .• ":. .-. :•:". -.• ;:• •'':' . 7;' ' ,::!..-.',',',:'''':•:,,,7: '::;:'....c':!,-;i:!,:',...;,)kgi,„;:-,•,fietl,H ,,',,,!,,t,fi4 ii.' jr-i,:':11: 'q i?,471,t',':
0:ii,,,,-:-.;:r...,.-..::.,•...., 1,4'.:4':',-.,,:r.1:','.,:,• :y„',. ,-,•-. . , .. ..,.,... .: -, , ,,•.',,, ,, ..',!',. ..1-: :ii.,,,. ,., i,,':,.:,.;:•,-;,.::;,,•%.,!,iTi.:•.r',..:',',V.,:m:-::11Q;',...11,q0004,',.;;1,„,,.' A.fi,tiitg,!, 01 i,, li, ',.;4t,:-.
-:',_:'.., ....-'-'.;f;:;:.,-',1."./'':','`J'''''..'!';'..';-:..-;•:,;,t•'';';'••'''.'': -'':;:',. '' ' ' . ... ' ,'•n;';', . ;I:''f .:'11...; '
'. .‘.' • ..., ' '....' .: r.,%•:''4 '.,.'.,.:'•7:!•1:...Y.I.. :::1',r:;.:.!:.i IV. L; •al .:410,4‘ ;11Ha';'i!
If 1
•F-.4,7.:::•.' •-•„•:',- '''...,..''''•:•'`.. "'. ,.,i,..i.'' ' -...••.•:,,.....,•,'.-.:•
. ''• .... ',.;'' 'r. '...''''', -H.: • •,', :,......).?..i.' 'A.' '''':' •:•,'''..'".."•...'•'::.'. ...;':;''.,;:• ;:t!qtli.,ir.7,P.,%,114..'_,',gi,4: i ' ''' i' lit: ,1-• ,q7.•.,-,.: .
g.,,;-,:-.,,,ky.t-c-;•::-.;:,;,.,..,',.. ,•,::::'•.:, :-...)-. ! .,.,- '•,-:-.,.- :',....••, .:- .. •:,.;•.:- .• .,. .',, : •:-•::: .,. ,fr.• --•,,,:•::-.....,.!,..,.,::,:-', , Y••"-;'„v, •,, l ;41,.,iit,.q,4 . ,.. ,iii,R,A1 gl ''•,'qii ki„lr-•..
-;7:t,-.•;,-.,,,-.:.:j•,......,, ••-.., '.-,..j,:..,',...''..,...-•••••..., I,,, • • - .- •• ',- ,' ' • ..':',.r•' :,r-.,:l';''.:.:',I.'';''s •Yi; ;:'..";;':/.:: .. . ,.., ..,1,,V1,: i:. ill.145,1 '.4,i5;',) 01:1Sitli:
''..',;.y:-.1,:.':.,:.:i.,..f;':,:.-:,:v.,:::,;::. , :,,,.li-!.•.:.:• .,:;:::::;::,,',::',. .• ': :7' ::'':''.: :'-. i',. .: '.' ,••:.;•1; '" ','": I*..ir*i•kit'4, , lir:i4;,./14'PI,ITI q;:ia•40, •Na;(....,:.
; .. ' ':--- ''''' '' ' '''''•• ••• ' a.-. - • : -, •' '•••••••-:. . ;,, • : ,:: ,:- !' 'a.1 ! - •::a.',(-:'ia;ad,':',;;,.;•.1:.`.'a,,r,',..aait,,s.,•t.,-;;-.'„1:1.„);•.;',.p,41,4,,kfa•-..„.:g..•1.....akattl,i,,I.t i •,:„ p,,,,,,,;.,,,,
, „4,,,,,4.1].., , ; ,,I,,,,:• Al.,:
:,,,,,,,,,., ;,., ,..,,„,,,,, .,...„,, ),.,.. ,, , , ... ,, , .,,, , . .‘. . ,. ., .,,,,,i,.....,,,;:.,,..,.., •,,,,,i,....,i,.-; ,i,tin!':111•It•11....f.,1..,„i9-v,,T,„1,,,z,,. ,141 t. 11?„
..,..,..,, r..„,...,:„. ..,,,,:•-, , , ..,.....„ . ,,. ,.....; ,, . . ,• . .., .. . „: ,.0 •... .,.:. ,.., a: ,,,.,1; • • .;...1'.',...-1,.:1,c",.4.,'-...:.:.i-Y1V,:,:iQrri:•qi.,[i dv..r14,11'....i , t,:ri i.,Ai:4). .1, .i. , 1.1
,,•-•/:-..i,-.f,...-i-i.,...-,.., : ,:,•.:.; '.;-„, '.. :„.-:• .. ::.„ .. . ,.. .4„..-." :,.,•.' • ',. : t•: • ,... ^ ! -. ••'..:. ;l',..,.....i":44.,-:..-"I.,i',":, .(•'.r.:,,!„,'.1s1:,,r•.,c-'..i.:.):,ri"Ih.i,;-41;',,,N,- .4 ..;;.:.,,.1:: -• ,,,,i.1 . f'r".
'...• -;,..rty:r,,,;?,7-:'.7":',..:•:7'` '-;•.';': 1 •-••:: -.. . '' ' , •,•I.:.'-•'....,',: , ,.:,•._ ' ...., •.-:,'''•: ,: •:::,-,1,....-: : •,: ;„fci.7:::/.•,•••',':,:•":::::74.:.r.-.5.!;!"4.41:,lirlf.I'iiit c.4:; 'kali" ': . jPEO0'1.'•,.opi 14 ,,,,y,
;
•• :• :•I ., :•,, ,:,• ,,,• . ,..•:,,1 : .:,..::,,-,",•,,‘,", ,,,,,.. , ,,r... rilii-,..1., i1 ,.,1.•• 1.411.,• ?„•,-„,r0ifig•i -1-4„.t.,.
,,,,.,;-,..-_•.,1.:-,..-„,,.,••.;-,,.•,,;a„:.•_•,.., ;,•:-.•1.,J,,-..,•.;:-...z,•:,, -.: . . . . . ,. . • ..„,.. ., „., , . ...,„ .,1,...,,. ..,...,.. ...41,,;.•:.;:,,...,,:a:•.. (••••,•••?),•, ,,,-,i,t•,.;;; 4 'If'. ''--r•Li ri.,-' •. 7741...r1:41' .a,-4.11.. .,, - r•,-a•'
•1.f..: •,:.-..a.„;•(.,..:,!,-.,•••:.'';.•_•:.:'-•,•.-.--•,•,•.; ,,,i:-:-,,,..'-. ::-. '••... • •-•:.••••:. : '..a .a•a,,•,-• -a , ...--: - ,.• .';'-•,,•,- -;.*•:,,:au,',.a-..n .•:•;Z,...'1 , ';'.,•;1--*.::',i'.'. "," to 1:41-..1 id•' , a A.1?1`44-it. 11.1,, :2- kt;:Alt"'
':: ;;; ,;',?: ; ../:„.:j•;!;., ,:g; '::g. '!i . : ' ‘g ' :;i 1 '-'.-': !: '• '''' ''•g,:;';'''"C;* • '''' ;:g; ! :' '''.:::;'-:'‘.1:.: .1;'' .1,:f4;t:•:.::!//:t:
, ,.•,•. , ,. . .,: •• ,,,.............. „,„...,,,,„,,,,•,,,,,„,,,y,„„„„,,,,:,:,,„:„:,,,,,,,„„,,,„,:;„4,
;.1-";-:.:::..,4;';:',....,•::,...;•-•:`•''... •. • ,',,i
t"674 lite' lekil descilption &fii riller i?!formation available in -ili ei."City-:'1Cle rls.,..,..0,ffice !:.,--,:-.:,,,, i•,,,,,j,,,,,,.1„,P,,,..5. o
- ', ..!. •-, ,,.......- • ...-..,',. :,.. .,;.i:•••:; .r..AC.::-:.'
...... , .
• ,. .. , '. .-. •,.. ... .,. .,.: ::,....:,. :..:...:.1..,,.,•:..,•.: 1:.':•;1,-,.
.• • . .
., - • .
. .
Tito ioniovol;--isloittilatiOni, ,distr,oc* o, ,,,,,,,
...
• .:;,.or•cOne
a
i.,...
• ,, •. ..... .._ „„•
.,•, -
,,„,,,,,„2,,',;•,„A:4. .., •: imprise-non,..414i.,,...i,.:,,,,,..i,,-.„..i,,,iilril,r_ii ,:.gc, , fitt Lt,ii.j,.,,,I,,,,,,,,,,
,L.4,1;,,/,:f,T,. .. .:.: ,:-.•:• ,c.,-.a.•,•,,,...._;••. •.. a4...•,. .a .-.- .....a• . ,.
"k-----'''''.4s:):;''''''.:'4'. 7.'1:;:::"''''' --'1'::•••''• -•-'•''4 ": ; :• •: • • :,,:, ' II.;,.. ?••:;,1 ',,a t •,..
.
n
public Meeting
111 AUS altg/Ng
ro' oscd Cep)iivroverven* .983 -89
Fir Oe" 2. r Reci),WejiVif
trek o /ic aryr
1 70,
laCp/ice eff Ilverrhirjr.r Pf Au9. 6, 1982
0 S. iil,am5Avc.S.
5. )45 . 5t. f Shcittuclt
CD 1 St . * T4 for Ave.NW .
v4. 8! St . P POr,r Ave W .
N.Io )21r kftK land Aft N.E.
D N. 1 sf St. t 9 rKAve N .
•
MEMORANDUM
TO Maxine Motor, Acting City Clerk DATE Auaust 2. 1982
FROM I lob Bergstrom, Engineering Supervisor
� I
SUBJECT Capital Improvement Program - Utilities
� I
Attached herewith are the Capital Improvement Requests for public information.
I
1
, I
•
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REQUESTS
DEPARTMENT REQUEST
FIRE DEPARTMENT Construct Training Center
Construct Station #14 - Kennydale Area
Relocate Station #12 to Sunset Blvd N.E. In the vicinity
of Union Avenue N.E.
Construct Station #15
� I
LIB1ARY Renton Public Library Addition & Renovation
PARKS & RECREATION Heather Downs Neighborhood Park Acquisition (7-10
DEPARTMENT Acres)
Cedar River Park Community Center
Renton High School Athletic Complex
Senior Housing & Pedestrian Corridor Development
Wetlands Acquisition
Highlands Aministration Building
Sierra Heights/Glencoe Neighborhood Park Acquisition
(8-10 Acres)
Cedar River Trail Development/Natural Zone
Golf Course Acquisition
Sports Park Acquisition
Heather Downs Neighborhood Park Development
Talbot Hill/Springbrook Neighborhood Park Acquisition
East Kennydale Neighborhood Park Acquisition (7-10
Acres)
Tiffany Park/Benson Hill Neighborhood Park Acquisition
(7-10 Acres)
Cushion Turf Field
Old Shop Site Redevelopment
POLICY DEVELOPMENT •
Cedar River Trail Natural Zone - Acquisition
DEPARTiviENT Burnett Corridor-Senior Housing
Entry Point Enhancement
Wetland/Wildlife Habitat/Recreation Acquisition Green
River Valley'
Lake Washington Boulevard Bikeway
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Maple Valley Railroad Tracks Trail
Lake Washington Blvd. Bike Lanes
UTILITY (SEWER) DIVISION Honey Creek Interceptor and Pump Station
Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Mill
Avenue S. to Shattuck Avenue S. - Houser Way S. to
Cedar River
Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Main
Avenue S. to Shattuck Avenue S. - Railroad Tracks
to S. Grady 'vvay.
Central Business District Sewer Replacement - N. 3rd
St. to Bronson Way - Burnett Avenue N. to Houser
Way N.
Central Business District Sewer Replacement - N. 6th
St. to N. 3rd - Burnett Avenue N. to Garden Avenue N.
Renton Avenue Interceptor
Black River Interceptor
Heather Downs Interceptor - Upper Basin
%vest Kennydale Interceptor
East Kennydale Interceptor
UTILITY (WATER) DIVISION Well No. 9
24" CBD Transmission Main
West Hill Reservoir and Pump Station
Aberdeen Avenue N.E. Transmission Main
South Talbot Hill Reservoir - 1.5 Million Gallons
Springbrook Springs Watershed Acquisition
UTILITY SiWER i I4.. ir
. NI - ,
1 '
. f linett,.'
( 1-1-1
, !milk., .: I . - 11
. it 1 � I I
_, 1 1 i
././.4,,T.I.
: A : li . 1 1 1
EAST
&; WES .` ---- I
N I� -
...; ON K L,iI1 L. , i'1:-'.../At„,,\:tl...,.._ \• ..\1 il liiih e*i A l.LIPrPa r
\ 1
j '�.`� . LAKE A. II
i -
L "��?INWASHINGTON
'e !! ' e�a✓ \ 1
_swami .... \-s,
mr......,_ __ /: pv.--...i. rtz _dm , 1 .
.y • `�
ice . a
1 '.,` i Attu , i i _
II
1 .\\Illik 1 t ITN\ , • • . um ,
---r-,N. t ! - , --,,...:4* ‘;'::c1-. ' '
416 jigiLl--.14,607idjal‘i-1,W : '•;• ' 44410 ' 11 E A T-1-1 ft D 0 •
' 6___/-7 -'1111111111111■ThoWL . /1 li • i i I
jr
. ' ? . 41010117- : ;orif i -:(11'"• . E PA E M 1
..: in,
r::1, 1j,r41 k______:, _ ,,,---,,-, ;
___,_ .__ . ..... ,_,__. 1 - 1
: ,A, AV! .
\I . NI./01,,Iii I e-1..1:A illilij.gi.,.. , i • .,"4:-,,, .— ,
',. i 3 4p:ii,' ------___ . 1 ,____ __As
��� a Vrili"� • 1 I
1 If m1111 TiU , N-c \ FAi "LA 1
- --itilalili 'Lu-7 7 1 -1 —1-- r 111MIffiffoi f *a . ......... '
EIM _T----1
I it
Illti �IIIL '6Pill e wig
NEL m• T I ji A -4. ral I
rAii ; r, pa j
EMI . I —
1
! \____
■ 1 _ : ,!rI . >. 1 ,'
YOUNGS
' ii. ' : I 7 N
-' . ' 7,-/ ;1 1
• 1;,,r( ..... ,
Umitv WATER
. ,. .._...
, Nel“-- BIP ' l'' 1
' ( -1
411"4I Ack I i
"-4 , ,,, ,
-,,, ,1 ,
. . . 9 el . :
. ., , ., .: ,
/'1:f .
' 'L
(,' g-i -L ( _i__Lv . _____,_ ____
, 0 i,, 4
I ' & I 1,
'A :. E - .: 1
:: . _! 11 1
, . \\, I to ,
—oi 'T ,
�, cB E 1- -11 1.
\\\.: ill
—�. - ,N ---
sib. .
1
LAKE 1I'IiI
•b 9s1t 11io :vr1-11..,...1' ,. ,'r,i \—
ii! 10!....Kl.. iA At..il-p*r.,....s.g. %a,„l i t I_.,j...,N...,'.
1�j,�1SASTON
iTt \
,„kA 6.?mrlei1m4kl
in
.11k1k e.‘--4..1, 1'II-We71N4,T.11 I1I.i1N1-.-..-.c h1i-,iat,A ta.g1-0."om4r 1g1rra)1Ai.
,-i1Rfi1111i1ai",44Aia-*l m-_s' t11"11tg1 91i i11r Td'-iip WaLliil Hl1,pi1likmil i li.iilii‘.iiollgp l.4 1imV,u,1-Ms7,rg...-•4.1ii"1 - t1 Ali
i--,
.!_r.„m-A4m.E-w
ii ib1.ht„,•l1i•i
•.'tio0F...,..rs:71.i
.s:.
avt •p.i-1f;1i::,1
t - i
1
A i 1 V ii 'hi itti.littil r:.;;;....kill:NI:-.;;;;P2-'.::::--..----------14
__ --\
/mil y- ...-----�------ -- �•' i1•• ��// �__
,.
___io
�i..�■im 1 ,�� III d;� 1
��: .. .........._ . ..........
EitrillF a - --.. •k. -....1 --......
�I
T i ! _ �J C 7v4o4r1.1,w 7i 'i11II� .o
i: t - \., 7. 1— - '' \.........,
1 �=
C ` I F I '
" IN B: • 1 At • Si ) IY.i ' r .,..,..
,..,\I
.:, LAKE
3� YOUNGS
) ri , I L.,
I ,�1 • , 1
1 .
I'Y. •'ill; ,14
, 4 '4; '1 il r
H
•
jI ,. 1' 'I',1, ,, j., . . .
i •
, ,,.....,,: ........,,,,.,,„„ ,,,..,,,, ,,,,,,, , •
p , 1 le.1
ENTON CITY COUNCIL .';' 1,1 ''`� (1 'Ir
ihl
•
MEETING
.. .
,, . puBLIC
,
" . ,„„,,,,. ..,.
, :, ., . .. ,,,,. •,,,....., ,..4'.`,,t 1'111.1' ,"1'0 .;'
•
ir' 111! r.4
ON AUGUST 2 8:00
3, 1982, AT : r `,�::a ',;i,,i'�,1'.Ir .
iiHtviii I,
,,,,
: . . .,,,:i
,,:,;i1:,/11,
::,
. . : ,
„. , :, • !
tt: .,:
. :: .
..
'. . ' .1..,: 1 ,•'11i 1 .4'. {i• •.1�1, „ I�:I'.•i�'�1• '/1 't'' '..
Y.1
`-� RENT • BUILDING � �i: ;!:';;, _ON MUNICIPAL ,(CHAMBEl.•
200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH ,; '' , 114
..:. , . . ,
. .••1', • ...„...,:ii:;,i!.,.,10, ,,,,,,,",,,,
. .
. .,. , .
•
, .
. . ,
. „
.. . , ..
. .
. •• f `,►
. , • ,
, •
For the purpose o ,..;,•, . ,
,,
. .
„..,,, • •, - .
fproposed. . .. • . . ! „,„ .. . ,,, , ,, ,,, •i•,1 i
consideringa `� 1983-89 �A�.i�'� •' r ��+�! ' �
L;;,, . . . �I,E ,,, • ' , ,
4 '. PROGRAM: REQUESTS FROM FIRE DEPARTMENT, LIBRARY, PARKS AND,' :RECREATI,ON ;' i;,al
,. 'DEPARTMENT, POLICY .DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC WORKS, DEPARTMENT'Ji''.;UTIUTY'
• (SEWER) DIVISION, .:UTILITY (WATER) DIVISION AND AIRPORT ' �� j' ,",�i ' ''''
LOCATION1 .41''
GENERAL OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: CITY-WIDE 'l li� II „i ;,I; i,
• r • it, , j l• ;• ! l'1'' 1'•,11'. ,'' 1.
• i. . 1 I, 1 .ii`'r# ;.'�, ';l,.1i4t�l, �° ,1 ,}:;y111 �1
. •r. ,,. ;'' IL:1 lil�gl{� in)' I y{Ik r1;n II r - !9
ji ' 1^S E` ^'hi°(ilirt '7 It�1t '(cI'�It 1 `rt rl,
- „ 1 ! ,. {I„i ' dye F d {h '. i''• /'' l ' I 1 I!'h, f,
.. , , II 11 'II `' .111 t 11 I 17 I,� '
YYY I. , l 'NI; I
1.
•. ! + '131, '!iN'i,l�!'I P�+i. •'1 r1'al :1+ �1,�{ I,, i! i,,
1 } / ; .I „u r', ( rl lk,ii i +�Y� '{. II l ilh, ,� II I ,• , ,,.�,�r. fir' r ; Slil7 r.. ', .+Ili'1f. ,i!' 'c1{li�,Vi
•
1 r i,: .l..e 1I; + f •
i, 1 � ,Fill , ; ,.,;l'., 1-,I .'jl( „'9,,P 151 ;Ili ''14,i C
4f' I',1 t' . 'j11,011. '';;';II
N' ' I
) ;', . i A'I i y'i'
',' ' +' ii, f•j1 `I "LI I
•
•
� ' I n;11 l ry' , .,y1,. 11•IB:• ;',a it
•
( i,j•
s 1, ;, j�9 j,f,III SI•4''
' .f„' 4i { F� 7I '
I.''1 ',II• 11 jel I{.
:,' 111J1
15 1,,+n71 ',AID`'} .:I'!',`..+ti.''.+Ny ;[.rtl
I '•,'1'
•
'Comlate le al `' :;I„a� ;' ;;;1. . !Cr.., .1.,i' ,+;.�'I,
p g description further information available in 'the City Cleric Offio'ikw, ett5.' ,30
•al"•' ;ii'' j rl' "'
•
',,t.� v,'I. ' ' lip �roi.•.ri ➢'�. �1 !',
• • The removal,' iwviildtion . r st cf,� 1�',
er concealment of Hsi* netiti.i�,• �+iis�•,?;•�
r � ' d no anon punish bl ' .br',kfi '! 'd
1 : ' imprisonment. ;.:,' ,.' i ',s;• :air' - i, ;''. :,;., '.. i' 1 ;
:.;7+ ,, I,, J Ili, I'' i,i 1�,�' •I ,1'
' i',1, , .,•t 1.
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF PUBLIC jffittlitiCx MEETING
BY
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
NOTIC IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 23rd
dais of August , 19 82 , at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of
the Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington,
as the time and place for a public hearing to consider the following:
1983-89 Capital Improvement Program: Requests from Fire
Department , Library, Parks and Recreation Department ,
Policy Development Department , Public Works Department, I
Utility (Sewer) Division, Utility (Water) Division and
Airport .
I j
I I
Any ar1d all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval,
disapproval or opinions on same.
CITY OF RENTON
MAXINE E. MOTOR
Acting City Clerk
I I
DATE OF PUBLICATION:
August 6, 1982
I I .
Renton City Council
July 26, 1982
Page 3
Appeal by Mt. Olivet Cemetery Appeal . ROLL CALL: 3 AYES: TRIMM, REED,1 HUGHES;
Mt. Olivet) 4 NOS: CLYMER, MATHEWS, STREDICKE, ROCKHILL. MOTION FAILED. SUBSTITUTE
Cemetery I MOTION BY REED, SECOND BY HUGHES, Refer the matter back to the Hearing
SP 012-82 Examiner for review of the Colt Appeal in light of the Segale*decision.
continued ROLL CALL: 3 AYES: TRIMM, REED, HUGHES; 4 NOS: CLYMER, MATHEWS,
STREDICKE, ROCKHILL. MOTION FAILED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND BY
CLYMER, TO DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION.
Mr. Colt called attention to Councilman Clymer's statement that all
applicable city ordinances would be in force and enforced. ROLL CALL:
4 AYES: CLYMER, MATHEWS, STREDICKE, ROCKHILL; 3 NOS: TRIMM, REED,
HUGHES. MOTION CARRIED. %`Segale Decision (SP 032-82)
Audience Co ent
continued ' Marian Jordan, 13265 - 89th Avenue South, addressed the Council to
West Hill oppose the West Hill Pump Station Annexation explaining prior, ursuccess-
Pump Station ful attempt to annex residence. Public Hearing having been closed, Ms.
Annexation Jordan was instructed to contact the King County Boundary Reviei Board
Opposition for further information.
CONSENT AGENDA The following items are adopted by one motion which follows the items
included:
South Talbot Utilities Engineering recommended project and final pay estimate be
Hill Pump approved and retainage of $18,433.85 be released after 30 days if all
Station Final taxes have been paid and no liens have been filed on W-600 (CAG 017-81 )
Payment South Talbot Hill Pump Station - Teem Ventures, Inc. Council concur.
Zoning and Policy Development Department submitted a preliminary analysis of cost
Subdivision of processing zoning and subdivision applications recommending revisions
Fees to the fee structure commensurate with the city's actual cost of pro-
viding the service. Refer to Planning and Development Committee.
DAV "Forget Proclamation from Mayor Shinpoch delcared period of August 5r7; 1982,
Me Not" Day as "Disabled American Veterans Forget-Me-Not Days".
Consent Age�da MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND BY HUGHES, ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
Approved CARRIED.
CORRESPONDE CE AND CURRENT BUSINESS
Planning Letter from Planning Commission Chairman Michael G. Porter (by David
Association Clemens) requested Council approval to proceed with sponsorship of the
1983 Falll 1983 Fall Conference of the Planning Association of Washington. MOVED
Conference BY CLYMER, SECOND BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE REQUEST OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION. CARRIED.
OLD BUS I INESS
Utilities Utilities: Committee Chairwoman Mathews presented committee report
Committee .. approving the transfer of $20,000 from May Creek/Honey Creek/Kennydale
Honey Criee Sanitary Sewer Reserve Account to current working funds to obtain
Surveying professional land surveying services for the Honey Creek Sanitary
Sewers. Committee also recommended referral to Ways and Means Committee
for proper ordinance. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECOND BY TRIMM, CONCUR IN THE
RECOMMENDATION OF UTILITIES COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
1983-89 Utilities, Committee Chairwoman Mathews presented committee report
Capital approving the proposed Capital Improvement Programs and recommended
Improvement a public meeting be held to accept public comments. MOVED BY MATHEWS,
Program SECOND BY CLYMER, CONCUR IN THE UTILITIES COMMITTEE REPORT AND SET
AUGUST 23, 1982, AS THE DATE OF THE PUBLIC MEETING. CARRIED.
Cascade, Sewer Utilities Committee Chairwoman Mathews presented committee report
District - approving Administration' s recommendation to provide oversite on city
ULID 62 residents and property owners affected by this ULID, to review assess-
1
i �
Renton Citd Council
July 26, 1 ,82
Page 4
Utilities 'committee continued
Cascade Se ments and LID formation, and, if approved, to issue right-of-way
District construction permits and develop an interagency agreement to provide
ULID 62 for transfer of the completed sewers within Renton. MOVED BY MATHEWS,
continued SECOND BY TRIMM, CONCUR IN UTILITIES COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
i
Water Utilities Committee Chairwoman Mathews presented committee report
District 5: recommending directing the Administration to investigate transfer of
water service from Water District 58 to Renton in the vicinity of
Rolling Hills/Tiffany Park neighborhoods by negotiation with Water
District 58. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECOND BY TRIMM, CONCUR IN UTILITIES
COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
CHG Councilman Stredicke inquired regarding citations and/or fines issued
Citations in connection with the CHG/Sunpointe operation. City Attorney Warren
responded that the paperwork is being processed and will be filed with
the court with a possibility of 40 citations including fines of up to
$500 per citation. Mr. Stredicke noted this developer is having similar
problems in other developments near Renton and urged close developer
supervision in the future.
ORDINANCES 'END RESOLUTION
Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke recommended second and final
Committee readings of the following ordinances:
Ordinance 3.48 An ordinance was read approving and confirming the assessments and
LID 317 I assessment roll of Local Improvement District 317 for the construction
Assessment Roll and installation of an eight-inch water line and appurtenances in the
vicinity of South 132nd Street and South Langston Road. MOVED BY
STREDICKE, SECOND BY ROCKHILL, ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL
CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED.
Ordinance 3649 An ordinance was read imposing an excise tax on sale of real estate,
Real Estate', providing for the collection thereof, limiting the use of the proceeds
Transfer Tax therefrom and fixing penalties for violation of. Tax to be one-quarter
of one percent of the selling price. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND BY
ROCKHILL, ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES.
CARRIED.
First Readiigs The Ways and Means Committee recommended first reading of the following
ordinance:
McWilliams An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain
Rezone properties within the City of Renton from General Classification (G)
030-82 to Residence District (R-3). MOVED BY REED, SECOND BY ROCKHILL, CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT AND REFER ORDINANCE BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE
WEEK. CARRIED.
VOUCHER APPkOVAL The Ways and Means Committee recommended approval of Vouchers 40845
through 41100 in the amount of $582,183. 13 having received departmental
certification, that merchandise and/or services have been received or
rendered. Vouchers 40840 through 40844 machine voided. MOVED BY
STREDICKE, SECOND BY CLYMER, CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE VOUCHERS.
CARRIED.
NEW BUSINES
Political I Councilman Stredicke inquired regarding the city sign co,e as 'lit con-
Signs cerns political advertising. City Attorney Warren responded that
political signs are classified as temporary and have a Duration of 60
days, but must be removed ten days after the election u less it was
a primary election. Mayor Shinpoch reported that policing of political
signs would hold a priority directly relative to city staff and time
available.
Renton CitylCouncil
July 12, 1982
Page 4
Consent Agenda continued
Honey Creek Letter from Public Works Department requested transfer of $20,000 from
Sanitary Sewers Honey Creek/May Creek Sewers Cumulative Reserve Fund #3421 to Current
Land Surveying Water Works Utility Fund #401 in the amount of $20,000 to obtain ;pro-
fessional land surveying services for Honey Creek Sewer interceptor to
begin preliminary work for Honey Creek Santiary Sewers. Refer to Utilities
Committee.
Public Meeting Letter from Policy Development Department requested public meeting be
Jackson set for July 19, 1982 regarding 10% Notice of Intent Petition - Jackson
Annexation Annexation, a portion of proposed Cypress Point multiple-family develop-
ment northeasterly of Spring Glen Elementary. Council concur.
Public Hearing Letter from Policy Development Department requested public heariing be
West Hill pump set for July 26, 1982 regarding West Hill Pump Station Annexation
Station located between Renton Avenue and Renton Avenue Extension, adjacent
to city boundary. Council concur.
1983-1989 ' Letter from Policy Development Department submitted 19 projects 'for the
Capital 1983-1989 Capital Improvement Program. Three projects are related to
Improvement Airport, six to Water Utility and ten to Sewer Utility. Refer three
Program airport projects to Airport Committee and six water utility andlten
1 sewer utility to Utility Committee for recommendation on priority order.
Port Quendall Misty Cove Condominium Association Board of Directors requested Council
Approval Request record to indicate their support for approval of the Port Quendall
project. Refer to Planning and Development Committee for information
only.
State_) Highway Letter from State of Washington, Department of Transportation, presented
Route certification of state highway routes within the city limits as. of
Certification July 1 , 1982. Refer to Public Works Department.
Bid Opening - Letter from City Clerk' s Office presented summary of bid opening of
Wisconsin July 8, 1982 for sale of surplus 1957 Wisconsin Screening Plant. Six
Screening Plant bids received, high bid of $7,600 from Dulin Construction, Centralia,
Sale Washington. Accept high bid.
Sanford Webb Court case was filed by Sanford E. Webb contesting the Hearing 'Examiner' s
Court Case decision to uphold Public Works Department recommendation to deny his
application for permit to construct a staircase on Mill Avenue 'South
public right-of-way median (File #AAD 034-82) . Refer to City Attorney
and insurance carrier.
i
Claim for Claim for damages was filed by Jeffrey Bell for damages caused ' to rental
Damages : home in the amount of $477 due to alleged city sewer drainage back-up.
CL 39-82 ' Refer to City Attorney and insurance carrier.
Holvick deRegt Land Use Hearing Examiner recommended approval with conditions of Final
KoeringFinal Plat 096-81 located west of Powell Avenue Southwest, north of the exten-
Plat FP 96-81 sion of Southwest Tenth Avenue, east of the proposed P-1 Channel , and
south of the Milwaukee Railroad property; Holvick deRegt Koering. Refer
to Ways and Means Committee.
Appeal of E&B Appeal has been filed by Robert L. Anderson, attorney for BB Developers,
Developers Inc. , of Hearing Examiner' s decision of May 24, 1982, regarding rezone
Rezone 1 by E&B Developers of south side of SW Grady Way and north side of SW
R 026-82 12th Street between Seneca Avenue SW and Raymond Avenue SW. Refer to
Planning and Development Committee.
Consent Agenda MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND BY HUGHES, ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
-Approved CARRIED.
` I t
Renton City Council
July 12, 1 82
Page 3
Port Quendall There being no futher audience comment and all sides having had equal
continued speaking time, it was MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ACCEPT
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE TO ACCEPT THE
PORT QUENDALL PROJECT: Councilman Rockhill outlined committee procedure,
I adherence to Council instructions. Councilman Hughes spoke in favor of
the motion weighing negative impact against positive impact. ( Councilman
Stredicke questioned differences in the Port Quendall master plan approved
by the Planning and Development Committee from that plan submitted to the
Hearing Examiner. Councilman Clymer questioned city jurisdiction over
inner and outer harbor areas, possible conflict between the city, Port
of Seattle and the state; soil studies to support high-rise construction;
and site water pollution problems. Councilwoman Mathews stated she could
not fully support the majority report of the Planning and Development
I Committee. Councilman Stredicke offered a substitute motion which Mayor
Shinpoch ruled inappropriate. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND BY TRIMM, OVER-
RULE THE CHAIR' S DECISION WITH REGARD TO ACCEPTING A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
ROLL CALL: 4 AYES, TRIMM, MATHEWS, REED, STREDICKE: 3 NOS, CLYMER, ROCKHILL,
HUGHES. MOTION CARRIED. SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY STREDICKE, SECOND BY TRIMM,
to remand subject matter back to the Hearing Examiner. ROLL CALL: 3 AYES,
TRIMM, MATHEWS, STREDICKE; 4 NOS, CLYMER, REED, ROCKHILL, HUGHES. MOTION
FAILED. Assistant City Attorney Kellogg noted need to provide policy for
guidance to the Hearing Examiner in the event subject is remanded. ORIGINAL
MOTION: *MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ACCEPT1RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE TO ACCEPT THE PORT QUENDALL PROJECT.
ROLL CALL: 4 AYES, CLYMER, TRIMM, ROCKHILL, HUGHES; 3 NOS, MATHEWS, REED,
STREDICKE. MOTION CARRIED.
Recess MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND BY REED, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED.
12: 12 a.m. Council reconvened at 12:20 a.m. Roll Call : All1Council
Members present.
MOVED BY TRIMM, SECOND BY HUGHES, COUNCIL MOVE TO ITEM SIX ON tHE AGENDA.
CARRIED.
CONSENT AGE DA The following items are adopted by one motion which follows the items
included:
Position I Letter from Personnel Department recommended reclassification of the
Reclassifications Engineering Supervisor and Field Superintendent of the Public Works
Department to salary range 17 due to increase in designated responsi-
bilities and of the Parks Maintenance Supervisor to Grade 11 to align
with other position of comparable responsibility. Refer to Ways and
Means Committee.
Utility Plarlit Letter from Finance Department notified Council of Utility Plant value
Value as of 12/31/82 in the amount of $24,469,316.21 for consideration during
1983 budget preparation. Refer to Mayor and Committee of the Whole for
budget purposes.
Disabled Stldent Letter from Personnel Department recommended Mayor' s staff be authorized
Employment ' to conclude agreement with Renton School District for city participation
Agreement I in work experience/employment program for developmentally disabled
students. Council concur.
Park Department Parks and Recreation Department requested transfer of funds from CR 1894
Mue0imieFund Transf r p0 l0 a.Bnud iRlre to Wotaa yC aa DTMerant om mGdieortele rS erPvairck e for e roaomfo urnet-
of
Lease Exten ion Letter from Airport Division requested approval of two-year lease extension
LAG 06-76 to Fancher Flyways, Inc. (Addendum 3 to LAG 06-76) extending start and
completion dates for a tie down area from March 1982 and September 1982
I to March 1984 and September 1984. Council concur.
I
• For.Use .By City Clerkls Office Only
��,
A. I . # (Y0I f
AGENDA 'ITEM .
'RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING '
• - - ===== ==
SUBMITTING
Dept:/Div!/Bd./Comm. POLICY .DEVELOPMENT For Agenda Of
(Meeting Date])
I
Staff Contact DAVID R. CLEMENS
I (Name) Agenda Status:
•
SUBJECT: ENTERPRISE FUND CAPITAL. Consent
I •
I Public Hearing
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 198.3-1989
Correspondence
Ordinance/Resolution
I
1 Old Business
Exhibits:'' (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc.-)Attach• New Business
Study Session ,
A. I ,
Other
B. f
Approval :
C.
I Legal Dept. Yes_ No; N/A_
COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: s Finance Dept. Yes__ No. �� N/A
Other Clearance ,
FISCAL IMPACT: '
Amount Appropriation-
Expenditure Required $ $ $
Budgeted Transfer Required
SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) : .
(At ach additional pages if necessary.)
I
The Public forks Department has submitted nineteen projects for the 1983-1989 Capital Improvement
Program. I. T I ree projects are related to the Airport, six in the Water Utility, and ten F in the Sewer
Utility.' It i suggest that these projects be forwarded to the appropriate committee for prioritization
prior to incl Sion in the Capital Improvement Program document.
RECOMMEN ATION '
I '
Refer the tree Airport projects to 'the Airport Committee for recommendation on priority order.
Refer the six Water Utility and .ten Sewer Ulitity projects to the Utility C'omrmittee ' for
recommendation on' priority order.
PARTIES OF ECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED:
• UBMIT THIS COPY-TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION.;
OF I
..A
4.4 0 ° -. . o THE CITY OF RENTON�
U t%'.0
_ POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 235-2552
0 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055
0,9 � te
4'eD; SEP1-
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
July;2, 1982
Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor
Members of the City Council
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, Washington 98055
RE: ENTERPRISE FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 1983-1989
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
The t P blic Works Department has submitted nineteen projects for the 1983-1989
Capital Improvement Program. Three projects are related to the Airport, six in the
Water Utility, and ten in the Sewer Utility. It is suggest that these projects be
forwarded to the appropriate committee for prioritization prior to inclusion in the
Capital Improvement Program document.
RECOM ENDATION
Refer the three Airport projects to the Airport Committee for recommendation on
priority order. Refer the six Water Utility and ten Sewer Ulitity projects to the
Utility Committee for recommendation on priority order.
Very tr/laly yours,
•
(7/\g'0,4 1/ A...0(1,0
Hdvid R. Clemens
Policy Development Director
Attachments: Enterprise Fund Capital Improvement Projects
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRPQRfs DEPARTMENT PRIORITY+► 1
PROJECT TITLE:WATER MAIN - Upgrading (SE Corner)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 12" water service extension from Logan Bridge to Boeing Bridge. Tie-
in new 12" line to Renton's water system, providing more reliable water service to SE I
corner. Removes fire line from Boeing system allowing City system to provide domestic
service.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ -
IMPROVEMENTS $72,000
TOTAL$ 72,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
'INANCING 1) Airport Fund -
DPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
3ACKGROUND:
Eventual goal is to service Airport completely from City's water system instead of continuing
to use Boeing's.water system.
'OTENTIAL SITE: N/A
ACTORS 1) Improved reliability of system
,UPPORTING
'ROJECT:(Who 2) Removes customers from Boeing water system and transfers them to
it what programs City system
ire served?Why 3)
his project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
\LTERNATIVES 1) Leave service as it is - on Boeing system $ 0 $ 0
0 THIS PROJECT:
, indicate which 2) $. $
upporting factors
'.an be mat.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $ I
•
•
I I
FINAL PRIORITY r
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION•
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRPORT) DEPARTMENT PRIORITY+ 2
PROJECT TITLE: Water Main - Completion of Loop System
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete a loop system around the Airport by extending main line
along east and north sides to the northwest corner.
•
• ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ -
IMPROVEMENTS$ 108,000
TOTALS 108,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
•
FINANCING 1) Airport Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
•
4)
BACKGROUND:
This would complete the process of up-grading the water supply system on the Airport and
would remove the last of the Boeing system supply lines.
POTENTIAL SITE:
•
Ii
FACTORS 1) Increased reliab ility of system for Airport tenants and users.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Improved fire flow capacity.
or what programs
are served?Why • 3) Facilitates installation of fire hydrants in affected area of the
this project?) field.
4) Completes the switch from Boeing water system to City's water system. )
5)
I i
I I
• COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Continue with existing arrangement. $ 0 S 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) S $
•
•
•
• I —
UMW
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY•
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION R
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (AIRPORT) DEPARTMENT PRIORITY• 3
PROJECT TITLE: Instrument Landing System (ILS)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: •
•
ESTIMATED COSTS: LANDS
IMPROVEMENTS $ .75® •
TOTAL$ 75,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
FINANCING 1) Federal ADAP Funds @ 100%
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
•
3ACKGROUND: ' •
FAA is presently reviewing potential Airport installations of ILS System. If Renton Airport
is selected then Federal funds will be provided. If not, we will continue without ILS.
'OTENTIAL SITE: N/A
:ACTORS 1) Improved operational capacity and safety.
SUPPORTING
'ROJECT:(Who 2)
a what programs
ire served?Why 3)
his project?)
5)
•
COST: CAPITAL O&M
iLTERNATIVES 1) Continue operation without ILS. S 0 3 0
1'0 THIS PROJECT:
' Indicate which 2) $• • S
.upporling factors
:an be met.) 3) S S
a) • a s .
.
s) $ ,$
! I
•
� I
,
0
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION tt
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY m 1
PROJECT TITLE: Well No. 9
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of Well No. 9 Pump Station, a new water supply source.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $150,000.00
' I
TOTAL$150.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Referendum #38 - Municipal Water Supply Funding Program
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: When Well 38 was drilled and constructed in 1968, an exploratory well
was also drilled. This was used as an observation well at that time,
with the eventual use to be as the site of future Well No. 9. A new
casing will be installed In 1982. Due to the possible conflicts with
the D.S.H.S. and well construction in the Cedar River this project •
should be done as soon as possible. The facility will provide addi-
tional water supply to the City's supply. This will allow for con-
tinued growth and expansion of Renton.
POTENTIAL SITE: The site for future Well No. 9 wiJl be at the present observation well
location in the northeast corner of the Cedar River Park. There
should be no cost for the site and no zoning problems.
FACTORS 1) The City of Renton can
SUPPORTING pump water from the Cedar River ground
water at a lesser cost than If water was purchased from the
PROJECT:(Who 2) City of Seattle (the only other water purveyor in the area).
or what programs All existing watermains in this area have been designed to
are served?Why 3) accept water from proposed future well sites.
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Purchase water from the City of Seattle at an $ 0 $ Incrr
TO THIS PROJECT: increased cost. Increase
(Indicate which 2) Remain as is, and eventually be short of water $ 0 $ 0
supporting factors supply to serve the City of Renton.
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) . $ $
5) $ $
I I
' i I
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 2
PROJECT TITLE: 24" CBD Transmission Main
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete installation of 24" Transmission Water Main through
the Central Business District.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$350.000.OQ
TOTAL$350,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL OgM$Minimal Increase
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: This project was first proposed in the 1965 Water Study Comprehensive
Plan. It was also one of the projects proposed in the 1975 Water and
Sewer Bond Issue. The completion of this transmission line will balance
the flows from the Talbot Hill Reservoir and the Mt. Olivet Reservoir.
This project will increase the fire flows and reliability of the system
in the C.B.D. and also improve the entire water system reliability.
POTENTIAL SITE: The location of the remaining portions of this project are in Talbot
Road South from South Grady Way to South Renton Village Place; Burnett
Avenue South from Houser Way South to South Tobin Street; South Tobin
Street from Burnett Avenue South to Williams Avenue South; Williams
Avenue South from South Tobin Street to South Riverside Drive; South , '
Riverside Drive from Williams Avenue South to Wells Avenue South; across
Wells Avenue Bridge to North Riverside Drive; then in North Riverside
FACTORS Drive to Liberty Park and then through Liberty Park to Wells #1 and #2.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 1) There will be no cost for right-of-way for the watermain.
or what programs
are served?why 2) This will increase the fire flows and reliability of the C.B.D.
thlsproject?) as well as the reliability of the entire water system.
COST: CAPITAL O8M
ALTERNATIVES 1)Remain the same. $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
• (Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
• 5) $
I I
1T
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 3
PROJECT TITLE: West Hill Reservoir and Pump Station
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of West Hill Reservoir, 1 million gallons, pump
station and transmission mains.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$1,200,000
TOTAL$1,200,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS: •
2) DSHS Referendum #38 Municipal Water Supply Funding Program
3) Joint use and funding from Skyway Water Districts
4)
BACKGROUND: The West Hill is served by water purchased from the City of Seattle.
There is insufficient water supply for fire protection in some areas
of West Hill. The only storage presently available is in the City
of Seattle Transmission line. The City of Seattle imposes a penalty
demand charge when a system has insufficient storage. Renton is I
presently paying this penalty charge.
POTENTIAL SITE: The City owns one potential site presently on N.W. 4th.Street at
84th Avenue South. The latest design might require a different
site. This new proposed site would be at Thompson School, which
is located at South 123rd Street at 82nd Avenue South in King
County. The use of this site would have to be negotiated with
the Renton School District. There could be zoning or King County
opposition to the construction of an elevated tank at this site.
FACTORS
SUPPORTING 1) The cost benefit would be the elimination of the demand charge
PROJECT:(Who for lack of storage that Renton is presently paying to the City
or what programs of Seattle.
are served?Why
this project?) 2) Additional benefits would be in improved system reliability and
fire flow capability.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain the same. $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
' (Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) •
$ $
5) $ $
I
I _
I � n
FINAL PRIORITY
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION it
DEPARTMENT: Ut i I ity (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY rr 4
PROJECT TITLE: Aberdeen Ave. N.E. Transmission Main
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install 16" Transmission Watermain in Aberdeen Ave. N.E. from
N.E. l4th Street to N.E. 28th Street
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $ 200,000.00
TOTAL$ynn nnn no
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: This
project was in the 1965 water study. It would improve the
fire flows to the northwest section of the Highlands, but is
basically designed to increase the fire flows in the lower
Kennyda1e area where there Is anticipated commercial and multi-
family growth in the near future.
POTENTIAL SITE: The location of this project is all in public right-of-way of
Aberdeen Ave. N.E. Therefore there is no costs for property
involved.
FACTORS 1) The benefit of this project would be increased fire flows to the
SUPPORTING aforementioned areas.
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain the same, and limit building and develop- $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT: ment to meet the existing fire flows the system
(Indicate which 2) can presently deliver. $ $
supporting(actors
can be met.) 3) $ $
II) $ $
5) $ $
I I
FINAL PRIORITY
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY rr 5,
PROJECT TITLE: South Talbot Hill Reservoir - 1.5 Million Gallons
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New Reservoir in South Talbot Hill Area Above Valley General
Hospital.
I I
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 50,000.00
IMPROVEMENTS $650,000.00
TOTAL$700.000.On
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3) •
4)
BACKGROUND: The reliability of any water supply is the capability of supply-
ing water under adverse conditions such as power failures, etc., '
and at a quantity to meet the requirements or demands of the
system. The 350 ft. hydraulic pressure zone that this proposed
reservoir would serve is presently planned to meet its fire
service demands by pumping water through the south Talbot Hill
Pump Station. The system is intertie with two pressure reducing,
stations to the Rolling Hills elevated tank system. These inter-
ties are not sufficient to supply the complete system demands.
POTENTIAL SITE: The ap
proximate location of ;he site for this proposed reservoir
is just south of Carr Road and west of the Benson Road (SR 515),
extended. The cost of the site is estimated to be $50,000.00
FACTORS 1) The benefit would be increased reliability of the existing system.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) • $
5) $ $
I I
I I
' I
•
I
FINAL PRIORITY rr
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Water) Di v i s ion DEPARTMENT PRIORITY++ 6
PROJECT TITLE: Sprinqbrook Springs Watershed Acquisition
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquire three or four adjoining properties to Springbrook Water
Shed for sanitary protection and further source development.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$ 200,000.00 .
IMPROVEMENTS$
TOTAL$
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Referendum #38 Municipal Water Supply Funding Program
3) Possible Joint purchase and development as passive park
•
4)
BACKGROUND: The Springbrook Springs are the City's oldest source of water,
operating now at about 2.5 million gallons per day since 1902.
When the springs were developed at the turn of the century, the
area was all rural. Now with urban development, buffer areas
must be purchased to remain in undeveloped states.
,
POTENTIAL SITE: Osterhouse property - •4 acres
Weaton property - 16 acres
Entrance parcel - 2 acres
Fish farm - 8 acres
•
FACTORS 1) Allow City to control sensitive neighboring properties for sanitary
SUPPORTING control.
PROJECT:(Who 2) Acquire adjoining lands for future source development.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) Lose control and allow urban development. $ 0 $ Major
supporting factors Increase
can be met.) 3) $ $
4)
S S
•
5) S S
I '
r
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: Uti 1 ity (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY r+ l
PROJECT TITLE: Honey Creek Interceptor and Pump Station
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Honey Creek Interceptor from Sunset Lift Station to May Creek,
and Connect to Either Future May Creek Metro Sewer or New
Interim Pump Station.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $672,000.00
TOTAL'S 672,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Referendum #39 - Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
•
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: The northeast section of Renton's sanitary sewers are at capacity, )
and further connections are prohibited. The project would elimi-
nate overflows of sewage and allow further development.
POTENTIAL SITE: HoneyCreek Ravine is onlyal i nment g possible.
FACTORS 1) The project is critical to protect water quality and to allow i
SUPPORTING continued development.
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this projecl?)
4)
'5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION tt
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 2
PROJECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Phase 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace CBD Sanitary Sewers in Southeast Portion of Old Downtown - lull Avenue South
to Shattuck Avenue South - Houser Way South to Cedar River.
I I
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 700.000.00
TOTAL$ 700,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Slight Reduction
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4) •
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
POTENTIAL SITE: City Right-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve. $700,000 $ reduced
supporting(actors
can be met.) 3) $ S
4) $ S
5) . S S
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION#
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 3
PROJECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Phase 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace CBD Sanitary Sewer in Southwest Portion of Old Downtown - Main Avenue South
to Shattuck Avenue South Railroad Tracks to South Grady Way.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$600,000.00
TOTAL$600,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$Slight Reduction
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
•
•
4)
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
POTENTIAL SITE: City Rights-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL gam
•
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve. $ 600,000 $Decrease
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) S $
5) S $
•
•
FINAL PRIORITY n
•
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION#
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# 4
PROJECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replarement - Phase
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace CBD Sanitary Sewers in North Portion of Old Downtown - North 3rd Street
to Bronson Way - Burnett Avenue North to Houser Way.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 700,000.00
TOTAL$ 700,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ S1 ight Reduction
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4)
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and not maintainable.
POTENTIAL SITE: City Rights-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve. $ 700,000 $ Decrease
supporting(actors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) S $
i
FINAL PRIORITY u
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY a 5
PROJECT TITLE: Central Business District Sewer Replacement - Phase 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Replace CBD Sanitary Sewers in North Renton residential area - North 6th Street
to North 3rd Street, Burnett Avenue North to Garden Avenue North.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 600,000.00
TOTAL$ 600,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Slight Reduction
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2)
3)
4) •
' I
BACKGROUND: The sewers are 50 years old and are not maintainable.
POTENTIAL SITE: City Rights-of-way
FACTORS 1) Reduce maintenance costs and future sewer backups.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate infiltration from leaking sewer joints and breaks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
I �
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $Increasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) In line placement of grout or plastic sleeve. 5600,000 SDecrease
supporting factors $ $
can be met.) 3)
4) S S
5) $ $
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION ++
DEPARTMENT: Ut i I i ty (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY++ 6
PROJECT TITLE: Renton Avenue Interceptor
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from Victoria Place West to Existing
Earl ington School Pump Station
ESTIMATED COSTS: • LAND$ '
IMPROVEMENTS$200,000.00
TOTALS 200.000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ Minimal
FINANCING 1) Local Improvement District
OPTIONS:
2) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
3) Referendum 39 - Municipal Waste Water Funding Program
4)
BACKGROUND: Provides gravity sewer service to this west side of City replacing •
pump station and force main.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and Public Rights-of-Way
I ,
FACTORS 1) Provides gravity sewer service to unsewered and pumped sewer
SUPPORTING area.
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
• ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $Ir'creasing
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ S
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ S
FINAL PRIORITY it
d i
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION it
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY it 7 ,
PROJECT TITLE: Black River Interr.ntnr
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New 15" - 3,500' Long Sanitary Sewer Along Monster Road and
Container Corporation Site to Serve Extreme West Portion of
Black River Drainage Basin
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 140,000.00
TOTAL$140,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 10,000.00
FINANCING 1) Local Improvement District
OPTIONS:
2) Developer Extension
3) •
4)
BACKGROUND: This new interceptor would provide sewer service to the north and
west part of Black River Drainage Basin near the Black River Quarry,
west of the current City limits.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and public rights-of-way in and west of Monster Road.
FACTORS 1) This project will provide sanitary sewers to undeveloped areas.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
FINAL PRIORITY#
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION#
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY# ,8
PROJECT TITLE: Heather Downs Interceptor - Upper Basin
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New 12" 2,000' long Sewer Interceptor from N.E. 4th Street South
to existing Heather Downs Interceptor.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND
IMPROVEMENTS$ 80,000.00
TOTAL$ 80,000.00
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000.00
FINANCING 1) Devel oper Extension
OPTIONS:
2) Local Improvement District
3) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
•
4)
BACKGROUND: Provides gravity sanitary sewer service to the Cascadia Annexation area 7n
the northern portion of Heather Downs drainage basin and south of N.E. 4th
Street.
POTENTIAL SITE: Public rights-of-way and easements.
FACTORS 1) Project allows development of Cascadia Annexation.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2)
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is. $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
' can be met.) 3) $ $
4) $ $
5) $ $
. I I
I ,
FINAL PRIORITY a
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION a
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY:: 9
PROJECT TITLE: West Kennydale Interceptor
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New West Kennydale Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from Kennydale School
to N.E. 20th St.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS$ 150,000.00
TOTAL$ 150.000.Oo
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000.00
I •
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
• OPTIONS:
2) Local Improvement District
3) Referendum U39 - Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
4)
BACKGROUND: The proposed line serves the west half of upper Kennydale via
Jones Road.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and Public Rights-of-Way
FACTORS 1) Provide sanitary sewers to area of poor septic tank operation
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate water quality and health risks
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0 TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ $
supporting factors
can be met.) 3) $ $
4)
S S
5) $ $
FINAL PRIORITY tt
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION it
DEPARTMENT: Utility (Sewer) Division DEPARTMENT PRIORITY ++ 1 D
PROJECT TITLE: East Kennydale Interceptor
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New East Kennydale Sanitary Sewer Interceptor from N.E. 27th St.
Southeast to N.E. 23rd St. and Aberdeen Ave. N.E.
I �
ESTIMATED COSTS:
LAND$
IMPROVEMENTS $95,000.00
TOTAL$ 95.Dn0-no
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M$ 5,000.00
FINANCING 1) Capital Outlay - Utility Fund
OPTIONS:
2) Local Improvement District
3) Referendum 1139 Municipal Wastewater Funding Program
4)
BACKGROUND: Provides sanitary sewer service to north and east portions of Kennydale,
presently unsewered.
POTENTIAL SITE: Easements and public rights-of-way
FACTORS 1) Provide sanitary sewers to area of poor septic tank operation
SUPPORTING
PROJECT:(Who 2) Eliminate water quality and health risks.
or what programs
are served?Why 3)
this project?)
4)
5)
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) Remain as is $ 0 $ 0
TO THIS PROJECT:
(Indicate which 2) $ , $
v supporting(actors $ $
can be met.) 3)
4) $ S
5) •
$ SI
� r
SI° 010
OF ii:.4.,,,
�� � z I THE CITY OF RENTON
. 1 POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 235-2552
0- imIL �' MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055
9,0 ' i Gy
P
O,9gTFO SE ZE0O�
BARBARAi Y. �SHINPOCH
IvIAYoR MEMORANDUM
i
DATE: April 26, 1982,
TO: ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS
FROM: David R. Clemens, Policy Development Director
1
RE: I 1983 = 1989 SIX-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
theCapital Improvement Program in such a fashion
We are cheduling review and approval of p p g I
that Ithe Council's final priorities and adoption can occur prior to a 1983 fiscal year budget
preparation. For each capital improvement project proposed to be included, complete
detached forms and return them to the Policy Development Department by Friday, May 21,
1982. phis will provide ample time for review and prioritization by the Mayor's office in time for
Committee of the Whole consideration in the middle of June.
The project description forms have been slightly revised from previous years formats:
DEPARTMENT: A department and division (where appropriate) should be identified along
I ith the departmental priority for the project.
ROJECT TITLE: Self explanatory.
ROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project description should briefly identify the 'crucial
lements of the project with particular emphasis on the land necessary to be acquired,
tructures proposed and any capital equipment expenditures involved.-
STIMATED COSTS: Cost estimates for land, structures, capital equipment and
estimated annual operation and maintenance costs should be in 1982 dollars' unless
otherwise noted on the form.
; ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M COSTS: Should reflect.the necessary salary (plus 40% for
benefits) and service costs. 1
FINANCING OPTIONS: Identify both local and anticipated grant financing which may be
available.
BACKGROUND/POTENTIAL SITE: Self explanatory.
•
1
410
1983-19 9 SIX-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
APRIL 2 , 1982
PAGE TWO
FACTOR SUPPORTING PROJECT: Those factors of population, Council policy, or other
issues which support the project should be listed in priority order. If the number of
factors supporting the project exceed 5, list those additional factors on a sepaate
attachment for review by this department and the Mayor's office. Where appropriate,
these additional factors may be included in the final work sheets.
LTERNATIVES TO THIS PROJECT: Other project options which substantially meet one
o more of the criteria for the proposed project should be listed. Both the total capital
c st and anticipated annual O&M cost should be listed for each alternative.I �
For those departments with property or similar assets, please forward a memo indicatin9 the
general nature of these assets to the Policy Development Department by May 7, 1982, so that
an appropriate format for these assets can be prepared and circulated.
If you have any questions with regards to the CIP review process, or completion of the forms,
please crtact the Policy Development Department at your earliest convenience.
cc: :arbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor
ichael Parness, Administrative Assistant
FINAL PRIORITY #
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION #
FIRE-SUPPRESSION
DEPARTMENT: DEPARTMENT PRIORITY # 3
•
PROJECT TITLE: CONSTRUCT STATION #14 - KENNYDALE AVE.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 3-apparatus
ppa (pumper, aid car, ladder truck) Station #14
should be constructed in conjunction with relocation
of Station #12 (Highlands) to maximize coverage and
minimize response times.
ESTIMATED COSTS: LAND $ 100,000
STRUCTURES $ 550,000
•
CAPITAL EQUIPMENT $ 80,000
TOTAL $ 730,000
ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M $ 460,000
FINANCING 1) General Funds
OPTIONS:
2) Councilmanic Bonds
3) G.O. Bonds
4)
BACKGROUND: This area of the City is developing at an accelerated rate,
both commercially and residentially. The proposed Quendall
complex will include three to thirty story structures and
will require ladder responses. Our response time to this
area now is in the six to eight minute range. We must be
able to reach this area within a four minute time span. The
Master Plan recommended this facility and a Planning Department
study done in 1972 also recommended a station in this area.
POTENTIAL SITE: Preferably the station location should be in the vicinity
of N.E. 30th and Highway 405. The area is zoned for business.
FACTORS 1) 3500 existing residents would be served.
SUPPORTING
PROJECT: (Who 2) 2000 new residents are anticipated in Quendal Project.
or what programs
are served? Why 3) Response reduced from 6-8 minutes to 4 minutes.
this project?)
4) Aid response reduced from 6 minutes to 3 minutes.
5) 72 responses were made to the area in 1981.
COST: CAPITAL O&M
ALTERNATIVES 1) 2 bay station - no aid' vehicle (supports $ 650,000I $ 400,000
TO THIS PROJECT: 1,2,4)
(indicate which 2) 2 bay station - no ladder truck (supports $ 340,000, $ 310,000
supportingl,factors 1,3,4)
can . e met.) 3) 2 bay station - pumper only initially $ 250,000 $ 217,000
(supports 1,3)
4) Interim leased space in Quendall Phase I - $ 80,000 $ 217,000
pumper only (supports 1,3)
5) $ $
I I