The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReport 1Raymond & Mildred 15279 Maple Drive Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 254-8319 (party of record) PARTIES OF RECORD RES LOW DENSITY TEXT AMEND LUA06-125, ECF Breeden Alice Zehnder 15245 Pine Drive Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 430-2451 (party of record) Leslie C. Clark/ Scott M. Missall Short Cressman & Burgess, PLLC 999 Third Avenue ste: #3000 Seattle, WA 98104-4088 tel: (206) 682-3333 (party of record) Updated: 10/18/06 (Page 1 of 1) STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a bi-weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English Ianguage continuously as a bi-weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on July 11, 2007, The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $491.40. Linda M. Mills Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter gtttl l l t 1till Subscribed and sworn to me this 13th day of July, 2p�'�;� E LC)IV °i,� ? - ,\��y+EXAik �r IM Cantelon Notary Public for the State of Washington, ResidUW.' tp P. 0. Number: 0 ! CITY OF RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 2007 UPDATES TO THE RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CONCURRENT REZONING Notice is hereby given that the Renton Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing on Wednesday, July 25, 2007, and on Wednesday, August 1, 2007, at 6:00 p.m. at the Renton City Hall, City Council Chambers, Floor Seven, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 9805.5. The purpose of the Public Hearing is to consider the potential amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, concurrent rezoning or potential zoning of the properties described below, and potential amendments to the text of the Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Rezoning to be discussed an Wednesday, July 25, 2007 at 7AO pm. #2007-M4K LUA 06.164: City of Renton Review of land within the proposed Pierson Hill Connnrunities annexation boundary for Hand Use Element amendments and concurrent prezoning consistent with Renton's adopted land use classifications and policies. Properties are located within the Sons Creek portion of the Renton Potential Annexation Area. Current land use designations in this area are Residential Single Family (RS), Residential Medium Density (RMD), Residential Low Density (RLD), Residential Multi -Family (RMF), and Commercial Corridor (CC). The proposal would amend the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and concurrently pre -zone properties within this area to include: RS land use with R-8 prezoning, RMD land use with R-10, R-14, and Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) prezoning, RLD land use with R•4 and R-1 prezoning, RMF land use with Residential Multi -family (RMF) prezoning, Commercial NeigbborhoW (CN) land use with Commercial Neighborhood (CN) prezoning, and CC land use with Commercial Arterial (CA) and Commercial Office (CO) prezoning- Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Reliioning to be discussed on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at C-00 p.m. #2006-M-1, LUA 06-160: Alan Kunovsky 326 Park Avenue Land Use Element map amendment to change the land use designation of .89 acres from Residential Medium Density (RMD) with R-10 zoning to Commercial Neighborhood (CN) with concurrent Commercial Neighborhood I CN) zoning. The original application was for a 5,000 sq. ft, property at 326 Park Avenue, and was expanded to include properties at 385 Park Ave. N., 330 ParkAve. N., 329 Park Ave N., and 323 Park Ave. N- and two vacant parcels- one on the east side of Park Ave- N, the other on the west side of Park Ave N. Zoning text amendments have also been proposed that would limit business parking to the side or rear of the lot in the CN zone and also to allow joint use and off -site parking options for required parking citywide. #2007-M-02 LUA 06-061. O'Farrell Properties, LLC 188 and 196 Hardie Avenue SW Land. Use Element map amendment to change the designation of 1.17 acres of property from Residential Medium Density (nlD) with R-10 zoning to Corridor Commercial (CC) with concurrent Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. The original application included 188 Hardie Ave SW and was expanded to include 150 Hardie Ave. SW, III SW ► iictoria,176 Hardie Ave SW, and 180 Hardie Ave SW The application has also been expanded to include the property at 196 Hardie which is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA) but designated for RMD land. use. This proposed amendment would correct this mistake and properly place this parcel in CC land use designation. The application also includes a zoning text amendment to expand the Rainier Business District Overlay. The original application requested extension of the Overlay to the properties at 188 Hardie Ave., 196 Hardie Ave.,161 Rainier Ave S, and 175 Rainier Ave S. In the expanded proposal, the Overlay would include these properties and others, expanding the Overlay by 18.06 acres - This acreage expands the Overlay north to Airport Way, bounded by Lake Avenue S- on the east, and on the west by Hardie Avenue until it reaches SW Victoria Street. Only commercially zoned properties on Victoria Street are included in the Overlay. Zoning text amendment also includes modification of the allowed residential density and standards in the Rainer Business District Overlay District to allow up to 60 dwelling units per acre in mixed use commercialhvi3idential buildings. #2007-M-M LUA 06.166. City of Renton Land Use Element map amendment to change the designation of 284 acres within Renton's Potential Annexation Area known as the Maple Valley Highway Corridor. This area includes parcels fronting on Maple Valley Highway (SR 169), and open space and sensitive areas contiguous to established residential developments and extends from the existing city limits to the Urban Growth Boundary. The change in land use is from Residential IA-Av Density (111,D) to the following land use designations: RLD land use with Resource Conservation (RC) and R-4 prezoning; Residential Single T'amily (RS) with R-8 prezoning; and Residential Medium Density (RMD) land use with R-14 and Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) prezoning. Prezoning designations would become effective upon annexation. #20W-M-05, LUA 06-167: QIP and Virtu Properties Sunset Blvd. Land Use Element map amendment to consider designation of 8.71 acres of property from Employment Area - Industrial (EA-1) with Industrial - Heavy (I-H) zoning and.91 acres of property -/lout Residential Multi - Family (RMF) land use with Residential Multi -Family (RMF) zoning to Residential Medium Density (RMD) with R40 zoning. Parcels are located south of the Sunset View Apartments on Sunset Blvd, near the western edge of the City and north of the S.140th unimproved right-of-way and the BNSF rail road. There will also be consideration of the designation of these parmis for lower intensity residential development, such as Residential Single Family (RS) land use designation with R-8 zoning, or Residential Low Density (RLD) with R-4 zoning. #2007-M-07, LUA M18Cx 10625 138th Ave. SE, 10703 138th Ave. SE, 13645 SE 107th Pi, and 10733 138th Ave. SE. City of Renton Land Use Element map amendment from Single Family Residential (RS) to Corridor Commercial (CC) Land Use with concurrent Commercial Arterial (CA) prewning for four parcels fronting Duvall Avenue NE total ing 1,01 acres: 10625138th Ave. SE, 10703 138th Ave. SE,13646 SE 107th Pl, and 10733 138th Ave. SE. Parcels are currently in unincorporated King County and prezoning would become effective upon future annexation. #2007-T-01, LUA 06-163: City of Renton Bi-annual update ofCapital Facilities Element and amendment of the Transportation Element to incorporate and update the level of service information and capital facility Project lists, amend text and tahles summarizing ga owth, and to update turd correct descriptive narrative. #2006-T-05, LUA 06-125: City of Kenton Text Amendment to update the land Use Element to allow Residential Manufactured Hoare zoning to be an implementing zone with the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation. All interested parties are invited to the Planning Commission Public Hearings on Wednesday, July 25, 2007, and/or Wednesday, August 1, 2007, at 6:00 p.m. to express their opinion - Written comments may also he submitted prior to the Public Hearing to City of Renton, Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning,1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Ray Giometti, Chair Renton Planning Commission Bonnie I.. Walton City Clerk Published in the Renton Reporter July 11, 2007. #863729 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Jody L. Barton, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a bi-weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a bi-weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on February 10, 2007. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $100_80. $arton Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter Subscribed and sworn to me this 12a' day of February, 2007 3 Y� B D Cantelon ✓/ ' Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Kent, VYaangton P. O. Number: NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING REIN" 1'ON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Councit Chambers on the ,eventh floor of Renton City Hall. 10,55 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on February 20. 2007 .at 9:00 AM to consider tlic following potitian,: Mobile Horne Park Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments- SEPA Appeal LUA-9 06-126, ECF Location: Citywide. Description: The City of Menton Environmental Review Committee (ERC;) issued a Determination of Non -Significance for the proposed amendments to the Residential Low Denb�ity land use policies that would allow Residential. Manufactured Home (RMH) zoning to implement the Residential Law Density (RID) land use designation. In addition to the propovcd Comprehensive Plan text MlWfld 1110,11 US, concur],ent text. amendment to Title 1V of the Rentan Municipal Code are proposed. The ERC's Determination hay heen appealed and will be reviewed during this hearing_ All interested persons are invited to he present at the Public Hearing to express their opinions. Questions should be directed to the Hearing Examiner at 425-430-6515. Published in the Menton Reporter February 10, 2007. #862861 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Jody L. Barton, being first duty sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the King County Journal a dailynewspaper,which newspaper is a le al newspaper of general gg NOTICE H PUBLIC HEARING 13ENTOT�T xEARINr FY',111INER circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date RENTON,WASHINGTON of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language A Public Hearing will he held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington- The King Councit Chambers on the seventh County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the floor of Renton City Halt, I055 South Superior Court of the State of Washington for Kin County- Grady Way,Renton, Washington, on December 12, 006 at 9:0AM to The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the consider the fallowin„ petition,: King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly Mobil( lHonu� Park Text Amendments Appeal distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Location: Cit,S�;idc. Descriptiow Appeal w the Hearing Examiner regardim, amendments io the Public Notice Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the was published on December 2, 2006. RI.D land use designation. Includes concurrent text amend- full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum g g g p mentsThe All interested persons are invited to rested .le rs of $81.55. be present at the Public Hearing to express their opinions. (questions should be directed to the Hearing Examiner at 425-430-6515. Published in the King County Journal od anon December 2, 2006. #862324 L gal Advertising Representative, King County Journal Subscribed and sworn to me this 4'h day of December, 2006. % B D Cantelon Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Kent, Washington PO Number: LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC 999 TH I RD AVENUE, SUITE 3000 DAVIDI- BRESKIN BETHPRIEVEGORDIE ANDREW W. MARON JENNIFER L. SANSCRAINTE LFSLIEC.CLARK DANIELF.JOHNSON SEATTLE,WASHINGTON98104.4088 SCOTT M. MISSALL ROBERTA.STEWART* MICHAEL J. CRISERA CLAUDIA K[LBREATH SHANE A. MOLONEY JOHN D. SULLIVAN JOHN A CROSETTO RUSSELL S. KING FAX: (.206) 340-8856 JAMES A. OLIVER JOHN E WALLACE PAUL J. DAYTON ROBERTS. KLEIN RICHARD A. DU BEY DAVID R. KOOPMANS (206) 682-3333 CHRISTINE A. POTHERING PAUL R. WILLETT JESSE D. RODMAN LISA A. WOLFARD TATYANA A. GIDIRIMSKI JANET KIM LIN www.scblaw.com MICHELLE UI.iCK ROSENTHAL * OF COUNSEL February 1, 2007 F-° Fred Kaufman' Hearing Examiner City of Renton AIR NG EGAMJNFR 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Eichler SEPA Appeal (CPA 2006-T-5, LUA-06-125, ECF); Notice of Withdrawal of Appeal Dear Mr. Kaufman: As you know, I represent Robert Eichler, the owner of the Wonderland Estates Mobile Home Park. The purpose of this letter is to advise you that Mr. Eichler is withdrawing the above -noted appeal. This appeal concerns City of Renton Comprehensive Plan text amendment 2006- T-5, which would allow Renton's mobile home park overlay regulations to be applied in Renton's low density residential zone district. This appeal was filed because it was uncertain at that time as to whether Renton would proceed with a then -pending annexation involving Mr. Eichler's property. That pending annexation was, in our opinion, unlawful under the Supreme Court's decision in Interlake Sporting Association v. Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County, 158 Wn.2d 545, 146 P.3d 904 (2006). The Renton City Attorney has recently clarified that, in light of the Interlake Sporting Association case, Renton will not be pursuing annexation of Mr. Eichler's property (at least, not without first seeking and obtaining a new annexation petition directly including Wonderland Estates). Given this current situation, Mr. Eichler now has only limited interest in Renton's Comprehensive Plan amendment 2006-T-5. In addition, it would be a disservice to Renton to continue on with this appeal under these circumstances. Mr. Eichler is therefore withdrawing the above -noted appeal and asks that you issue an order dismissing the appeal. 604178.11016419.00006 Fred Kaufman February 1, 2007 Page 2 Please let me know if this letter is not sufficient to serve as adequate notice of the request to withdraw the appeal and cancel the hearing scheduled for February 20, 2007. In the meantime, thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC el�N�-O-n-'�� Scott M. Missall SMM:lfs cc: Robert Eichler, Wonderland Estate Mobile Home Park Ann Nielsen, Assistant Renton City Attorney Leslie Clark, Esq. 604178.11016419,00006 LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC Q"QTHIRTi AVU�(E GT'ITE 1c0c ,I .-\TTI.F,'.� ��IliTl ril-i ;ti Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 CU&S Ili Il[Ito l 1il 111 III I d 111111111 Ili 1 C 111111111€11 F i 1 Ili 111:6111 Y CITX 3F KENTON Y, "'-"'R ..0 Kathy Keolker, Mayor 4, 2006 Scott M. Missal] Short Cressman & Burgess PLLC 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3000 Seattle, WA 981044088 Re: Eichler Appeal of Mobile 11ome Park Text Amendments CPA 2006-T-5, LUA-06-125, ECF Hearing Examiner Fred J. Kaufman Dear Mr. Missall: 0601, The request for continuance of the appeal hearing in the above matter has been rescheduled for Tuesday, February 2007 at 9:00 a.m.. The hearing will take place in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. The address is 1055 S Grady Way in Renton. If this office can provide any further assistance, please address those continents in writing. Sincerely, Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton FKJnt cc: Larry Warren, City Attorney Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Neil Watts, Development Services Rebecca Lind, Economic Development Raymond & Mildred Breeden Alice Zehnder 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6515 This paper contains 50% recycked material, 30%post consumer RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE 11/28/2006 09:16 FAX 206 340 8856 SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS Q001 LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC 999 THIfiD AVENUE, SUITE 3000 SEATTLE, WASH1NGTON 96104-4068 FAX: (206) 340-8856 (ZC)6) 682-3333 C1ielat/Matter Number: 16419/00006 Date: From: Scott M- Missall Time: 1w Sender- Linda Sutton PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGES TO - RECIPIENT COMPANY PHONE NO. FAX NO_ Fred Kaufman 425-430-651.5 425-430-6523 RE: Eichler Appeal (Mobile Home Park Test Amendments; CPA 2006-T-5, LUA-06-125, ECF); Request for Continuance TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING TIRS PAGE: 3 Message: See attached letter. Original Mailed: Yes PLEASE CALL IMMEDIATELY IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES NOTE: THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE JS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUALS) NAMED ABOVE. ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRfOUTION OR COPYING, EXCEPT BY THE PERSON ABOVE NAMED, IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS FAX IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US ]BY TELEPRONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL VIA, TI•IE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU 59961 9.1/016419.00006 11/28/2000 09:16 FAX 206 340 8856 SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESSZ 002 LAW OFFICES SNORT CRESSM.AN & BURGESS PLLC 999 THIRD AVENUE S[3I"F'E 3000 JOHN r.AHLEPS TAVANAA. a11MUMM SC)�M- M1 ALL s(x7P X MIlow DAVmEERFRUN RETHPRIEVECOP0M SEATTLH, WASHINGTON 96104A088 SHANEA-MOLONFf ROgp.11TA.M WAICr• TRSLMCCLAM wwrrM.HU TCEfDAT.UKMOORR jOHND.5ULUVAN BRIM N-=MN DANIEL F. XMNL;CN FAY: (206) 3408856 JOHNEWAUACF PAM R CRrsS WN. jR. CLAUDIA KQnREA114 jAMBS A. OLI VER PAUL 6L %'Ul r MIC:tiIAMj.CA1% A RUSCE[LS.UNG (206) 682.3333 CHRMMN£A.POTHEP24G3 LISAA.WOUARD jOBN E. CR05'EM DAVU) R. K00PkiAN5 jBM D. RODMAN * OF CIOUNSS PAULI.'DAYTON jAMUXIMUN wVJ'W.sC aw-cO1T1 I�iQLL3LU. ti'ROWNTdAL RDCHA=A. DU Bff ANDREW W. MARON jFNNMRL SAWS ATNTE November 27, 2006 VIA FIRST CLASS AND FAX (425-430-6523) Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Eichler Appeal (Mobile Home Park Text Amendments; CPA 2006 T-5, LUA-06-125, ECF); Requestfor Continuance Dear Mr. Kaufman: On Wednesday, November 22, 2006 1 received your November 20, 2006 letter scheduling the hearing in this matter for Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. I sent an email to Mar. Eichler on the 22" d, but I was not able to speak directly with him until Monday at 11.00 about the hearing. Due to Mr. Eichler's recent medical issues (described below), we are respectfully requesting a continuance of the hearing until late January (approximately 40-50 days from the scheduled hearing date). Mr. Eichler underwent heart bypass surgery this past fall, The week before Thanksgiving Mr. Eichler's chest became seriously infected and he was hospitalized for four days (November 20'b through November 2P). The infection was controlled, and Mr. Eichler is now recuperating from the hospitalization. Mr. Eichler's assistance in preparing and presenting this appeal is important to him and to my ability to properly represent hiErL Given Mr. Eichler's current medical condition, he is unable to devote his full time and attention to this matter. We do not want to unreasonably delay the resolution of this appeal, but we see no harm in a short continuance to late January. I have not had the opportunity to talk with the City Attorney about this, but I see no prejudice to the City if the case is put off for that reason. 599588.11016419.00006 11/28/2006 09:17 FAX 206 340 8856 SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS �1003 Fred Kaufman November 27, 2006 Page 2 Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Examiner continue the appeal hearing in this matter until late January, 2007. This will enable Mr. Eichler to recover from his medical condition and be available to assist me in the preparation of the appeal. Your consideration of this request i5 greatly appreciated. Please contact me if you have questions or desire more information. Shicerely, SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC Scott M. Missall SMM.Ifs cc: Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Mr. Robert Eichler 599588.1/016419.000U6 LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC 999 THIRD AV EN UE, SUITE 30W JOHN P. AHLERS TATYANA A. GIDIRIMSKI SCM M. MISSALL SCOTT R. SLEIGHT DAVIDEBRESKIN BETH PRIEVE GORDIE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-4088 SHANEA.MOLONEY ROBERTA.STEWART* LFSLIE C. CLARK BRETT M. HILL KENDALL H. MOOR£ JOHN D. SULLIVAN BRUCEA. COHEN DANIFLF. JOHNSON FAX: (206) 340.8856 CHRISTINA GERRISH NELSON JOHN F. WALLACE PAUL R. CRESSMAN, JR, CIAUDIAKILBREATH JAMES A, OLIVER PAULR.WILLETT MICHAEL1.CRISERA RUSSELL S. KING (206) 682.3333 CHRISTINEA.POTNERING* LISA A. WOLFARD JOHN B. CROSETTO DAVIT? R. KOOPMANS JESSE D. RODMAN * OF COUNSEL PAUL J. DAYTON JANFT KIM LIN www.scb[aw.com MICHELLE UL1CK ROSENTHAL RICHARD A. DU BEY ANDREW W. MARON JENNIFER L. SANSCRAINTE November 27, 2006 VIA FIRST CLASS AND FAX (425-430-6523) Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Eichler Appeal (Mobile Horne Park Text Amendments; CPA 2006--T-5, LUA-06-125, ECF); Request for Continuance Dear Mr. Kaufman: On Wednesday, November 22, 2006 I received your November 20, 2006 letter scheduling the hearing in this matter for Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. I sent an email to Mr. Eichler on the 22`td, but I was not able to speak directly with him until Monday at 11:00 about the hearing. Due to Mr. Eichler's recent medical issues (described below), we are respectfully requesting a continuance of the hearing until late January (approximately 40-50 days from the scheduled hearing date). Mr. Eichler underwent heart bypass surgery this past fall. The week before Thanksgiving Mr. Eichler's chest became seriously infected and he was hospitalized for four days (November 20th through November 23r8). The infection was controlled, and Mr. Eichler is now recuperating from the hospitalization. Mr. Eichler's assistance in preparing and presenting this appeal is important to him and to my ability to properly represent him. Given Mr. Eichler's current medical condition, he is unable to devote his full time and attention to this matter. We do not want to unreasonably delay the resolution of this appeal, but we see no harm in a short continuance to late January. I have not had the opportunity to talk with the City Attorney about this, but I see no prejudice to the City if the case is put off for that reason. 599588.1 /016419.00006 Fred Kaufman November 27, 2006 Page 2 Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Examiner continue the appeal hearing in this matter until late January, 2007. This will enable Mr. Eichler to recover from his medical condition and be available to assist me in the preparation of the appeal. Your consideration of this request is greatly appreciated. Please contact me if you have questions or desire more information. Sincerely, SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC Scott M. Missall SMM:Ifs cc: Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Mr. Robert Eichler 599588.1 /016419.00006 ........................... Fred Kaufman - Mobile Home Park Cont Page 1 From: "Ann Nielsen" <asnielsen@seanet.com> To: <fkaufman@ci.renton.wa.us>, <smissall@scblaw.com> Date: 11/30/2006 4:33:07 PM Subject: Mobile Home Park Cont Mr. Examiner, My understanding is that you will be continuing the Eichler/Mobile Home Park Appeal which is currently scheduled for Dec 12, 2006 to a date in January_ While the continuance itself is not an issue, procedurally, the notice of hearing has gone to publication for the Dec 12, 2006 hearing. Therefore, the Hearing may need to be "opened and continued" (a simple ministerial matter) on Dec. 12. Please advise whether you will require the parties to be present for the Dec. 12th hearing date. Thank you, Ann Nielsen CC: "'Nancy Thompson'" <Nthompson@ci.renton.wa.us>, "'Jennifer Henning <Jhenning@ci.renton.wa.us>, "'Ann Nielsen"' <asnielsen@seanet.com> Fred Kaufman - Re: Mobile Home Park C Page 1 From: Fred Kaufman To: Ann Nielsen; smissall@scblaw.com Subject: Re: Mobile Home Park Cont All correspondence with this office regarding pending land use applications must be part of the public record. Your email and this response will be placed in the official file. Please refrain from replying to this email as that would generate another series of printouts and replies. The parties will not be required to attend the hearing. >>> "Ann Nielsen" <asnielsen@seanet.com> 11 /30/06 4:32 PM >>> Mr. Examiner, My understanding is that you will be continuing the Eichler/Mobile Home Park Appeal which is currently scheduled for Dec 12, 2006 to a date in January. While the continuance itself is not an issue, procedurally, the notice of hearing has gone to publication for the Dec 12, 2006 hearing. Therefore, the Hearing may need to be "opened and continued" (a simple ministerial matter) on Dec. 12. Please advise whether you will require the parties to be present for the Dec. 12th hearing date. Thank you, Ann Nielsen CC: Jennifer Henning; Nancy Thompson + ru + ,�" Kathy Keolker, Mayor 20, 2006 Scott M. Missal] Leslie C. Clark Short Cressman & Burgess, PLLC 999 Third Avenue, Ste. 3000 Seattle, WA 98104 CITY _)F RENTON Hearing Examiner Fred J. Kaufman Re: Robert Eichler's Appeal of Determination of Non -Significance for Mobile Home Park Text Amendments, CPA 2006-T-5, LUA-06-125, ECF Dear Mr. Missal and Ms. Clark: The appeal hearing in the above matter has been scheduled for Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. The hearing will take place in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. The address is 1055 S Grady Way in Renton. If this office can provide any further assistance, please address those comments in writing. Sincerely, Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton FK/nt cc: Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Neil Watts, Development Services Rebecca Lind, Economic Development Raymond & Mildred Breeden Alice Zehnder 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6515 RENTQN AHEAD OF THE CURVE W/ rx trnnar.mar .� Kathy Keolker, Mayor ),' . 20, 2006 Scott M. Missal] Leslie C. Clark Short Cressman & Burgess, PLLC 999 Third Avenue, Ste. 3000 Seattle, WA 98104 CITN _)F RENTON Hearing Examiner Fred J. Kaufman Re: Robert Eichler's Appeal of Determination of Non -Significance for Mobile Home Park Text Amendments, CPA 2006-T-5, LUA-06-125, ECF Dear Mr. Missal and Ms. Clark: The appeal hearing in the above matter has been scheduled for Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. The hearing will take place in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. The address is 1055 S Grady Way in Renton. If this office can provide any further assistance, please address those continents in writing. Sincerely, Freed Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton FK/nt cc: Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Neil Watts, Development Services Rebecca Lind, Economic Development Raymond & Mildred Breeden Alice Zehnder 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6515 Mtrn IimF RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE Nancy Thompson - POR 06-125.doc Page 1 Raymond & Mildred 15279 Maple Drive Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 254-8319 (party of record) Parties of Record RES LOW DENSITY TEXT LUA06-125, ECF Breeden Alice Zehnder 15245 Pine Drive Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 430-2451 (party of record) AMEND Leslie C. Clark/ Scott M. Missall Short Cressman & Burgess, PLLC 999 Third Avenue ste: #3000 Seattle, WA 98104-4088 tel: (206) 682-3333 (party of record) Updated: 10/18/06 (Page 1 of 1) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 CITY OF RENTON Nov 1 3 2006 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Hand ZWi'dete,19,63-,o Y'a AM LgAT/ &Vr/c/ BEFORE THE CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER Robert M. Eichler, l Appellant, I Renton File No. LUA06-125, ECF V. City of Renton, Department of Economic NOTICE OF APPEAL Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning, Respondent. I. NOTICE OF APPEAL Appellant Robert M. Eichler ("Appellant"), owner of property located at 14645 SE Renton -Maple Valley Road (APN 232305-9020), through his counsel Short Cressman & Burgess, PLLC, hereby appeals the City of Renton's Determination of Nonsignificance for the Mobile Home Park Text Amendments, CPA 2006-T-5 (Renton File No. LUA06-125, ECF) (the "SEPA Determination"). A copy of the SEPA Determination is attached as Exhibit A. LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC 999 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3000 NOTICE OF APPEAL SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-4088 T: (206) 682-3333 (Renton File No. LUA06-125, ECF) - 1 F; (206)34MS56 598599.1/016419.00005 _ Ft' t CIG ' k, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 II. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF ISSUES In accordance with RMC 4-8-110(C), Appellant identifies the following substantial errors in fact or law in the SEPA Determination: (1) The City failed to characterize and analyze the action as a project action even though the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments specifically target the Appellant's property, effectively converting the nonproject action into a project action. (2) The City failed to address the impacts of probable density increases, including but not limited to impacts on traffic, utilities, public services, and critical areas. (3) The City failed to acknowledge that the Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) zoning is incompatible with the purpose of the Residential Low Density (RLD) land use category. (4) The City failed to fully and adequately complete the mandatory environmental checklist. (5) The City took action to facilitate an illegal annexation of the Appellanfs property. Interlake Sporting Assn v. Boundary Review Bd., No. 78578-3, 2006 Wn. LEXIS 972 {Nov. 9, 2006). III. APPEAL FEE Pursuant to RMC 4-8-110(C)(4) and RMC 4-1-170(A), the $75.00 appeal fee is enclosed with this Notice of Appeal. NOTICE OF APPEAL (Renton File No. LUA06-125, ECF) - 2 598599.1 /016419.00005 LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC 999 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3000 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-4088 T: (206) 682-3333 F: (206) 340-8856 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 IV. NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPELLANT Robert M. Eichler c/o Short Cressman & Burgess, PLLC 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3000 Seattle, Washington 98104 DATED this 13t' day of November, 2006. SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC By C Scott M. Missall, WSBA No. 14465 Leslie C. Clark, WSBA No. 36164 Attorneys for Appellant NOTICE OF APPEAL (Renton File No. LUA06-125, ECF) - 3 598599.11016419.00005 LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC 999 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3000 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-4088 T: (206) 682-3333 F: (206) 340-8856 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that on this day she caused to be served in the manner noted below, a copy of the document to which this certificate is attached, on the following: Office of the Hearing Examiner Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner Cityy of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 [ ] via U.S. Mail [XI via messenger [ ] via air courier [ ] via facsimile Rebecca Lind City of Renton Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 [ ] via U.S. Mail [XI via messenger [ ] via air courier [ ] via facsimile DATED this 13t' day of November, 2006. Wilma Allan NOTICE OF APPEAL (Renton File No. LUA06-125, ECF) - 4 598599.1 /016419.00005 LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC 999 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3000 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-4088 T: (206) 682-3333 F: (206) 340-8856 Y o CITY oar �RENToTN ♦ + Ptanningf uildi :tblicWo&. Department *� Kathy Kealker, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator October 26, 2006 D City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way SHORE CR AN% & BURGtiSS P11 J Renton, WA 98055 SUBJECT: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments LUA-06-125, ECF This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review --Committee (ERG)and is-,to.lihfoiyou-that they have completed their. review of, the environmental impacts of the above -referenced project. The Committee, on October 23, 2006, decided that your project will. be issued a Determination of Non- Signifcance. The City of Fenton ERC has determined that it does not have. a probabte significant ;adverse impart on the environment. An Environmental. Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made by the ERtunder the. authority of Section*", Renton M'unicipat Code, after review of a. cornpi�eted environmental checklist and other information, 'on file with the Wad agency. This information is available to the public on request. Appeals of the environmental determ1hation must 1* flted I.0' Writlog on or -tie#ore' 5;00 PM --on November 13, 20Q6, Appeals must'be filed in writing ttrgetti±er with the required ,$75 00 2lirplication fee with: Hearing: Examiner,. City of Benton; 1055 South Grady:'1Nay..,:Rettton,. WA 98055...-Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Roston Municipal Code, Section. 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process rt4ay be obtained from the Renton City ClerVs Office, (425) 430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing: datp.will be set and all parties notified.. If you have any questions or desire' clarification of the above, pleasd-cat] me at (425) 43fl=6 7t3. For the Environmental Review Committee, l Erika Conkling Associate Planner, cc: Raymond & Mildred Breeden, Alice Zehnder, Leslie Clark, Scsott Missall f Parties of Record 1.055 Soath'Cmdy Way - Renton, Washington 98055-RE N T 0-.N' - AHEAD OF THE cURFE IbkpaWwntgkis50%recycledn m cW, 30%vosfcwwmw City of Renton STAFF Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and REPORT Strategic Planning ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERG MEETING DATE October 23, 2006 Project Name Mobile Home Park Text Amendments (CPA 2006-T-5) Applicant City of Renton 1717e Number LUA06-125, ECF Project Manager Rebecca Lind Project Description Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. Project Location Applicable Citywide Exist. Bldg. Area gsf NIA Proposed New Bldg. Area gsf NIA Site Area NIA Total Building Area gsf NIA SITE MAP Applicable Citywide B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: - DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE X I Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. DETERMINATION OF NON . SIGNIFICANCE . Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. Project Location Map ERC Rqw doc ,-My,y JLcamm runvar Lfcparunwu Wmmiuee 3&W agwrt Mobile Home Pw* Text Amwrdmests LUA-06-125, ECF REPORTAND DEMON OF OCTOBER 23, 2 Page 2 of 3 C. MITIGATION MEASURES None required for this non -project action. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following non -project environmental review addresses only those Impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 9. Increased Density in the Residential Low Density (RLD) Land Use Designation. Impacts: The proposed change does allow RMH (Residential Manufactured Home) zoning in the RLD Land Use Designation. The proposed policy change specifically limits the application of the RMH zoning to existing mobile home parks in a RLD land use designation. The policy does not allow the RMH zoning to be put in place anywhere in the RLD land use designation. There are only three properties with manufactured home parks in the City of Renton and it's Potential. Annexation Area that are within the RLD land use designation_. Those parK,s include Fir. Grove.. -at 1441 SE Renton- Issaquah Road, Wonderland Estates at 14645 SE Renton -Maple Valley Road, and Emerald Crest and 15400 SE 15e Place. Any impacts associated with these land uses are existing and would not be affected by the proposed change. E. COMMENTS OF REWEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental / Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been Incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. _IL_ Copies of all Review Comments are contained In the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 PM, November 13, 2006. Appeals must be tiled in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton- City. Clerk's-Offics.,:(42b.} 0-4510.. ERC Reportdoc AMENDMENT 2006--T-5 - LAND USE ELEMENT UPDATE, RESIDENTIAL POLICIES DESCRIPTION: Policy text amendments are proposed to provide a density exception and mapping policy for existing manufactured home parks in the City's lowest density residential designation, Residential Low Density (RLD). This is a citywide amendment but the change in policy would apply primarily in the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) specifically in the Maplewood Addition Annexation. Policy direction is already established for the manufactured home parks within the existing city limits. ISSUE SUNIIVIARY: 1. Should the City support preservation of the manufactured home parks in the Maple Valley Highway Corridor? 2. Should the City evaluate land use in the entire corridor as part of this process? RECOMMENDATION SLTAUgARY: Approve a text amendment to the Low Density Residential designation to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning to be applied to the two existing manufactured home parks in the Maplewood Annexation immediately. Also, consider a larger land use analysis and Comprehensive Plan Amendment in the 2007 work program for the remaining land uses in the Maple Valley Corridor focusing on consideration of Residential Medium Density. ANALYSIS: In June, the State Boundary Review Board expanded the Maplewood Addition annexation to 340 acres along the SR 169 valley floor. At that time, future Renton residents at the Wonderland Mobile Home Park (l 13 units), requested that the Cifi Coumil guoport mention of the affordable housing at this location. A second manufactured home park, Condo Mobile Home Park (95 units), is located farther to the east within the annexation area. The Valley View Mobile Home Park (50 units) was not included within the annexation boundary, but remains within the PAA. The Wonderland Mobile Home Park is an older facility with a mix of singlewide and doublewide units. Most of those units are not movable and many do not meet current certification and code requirements (percentage not known at this time). It is developed on an internal private access loop road with private yards and lot areas. Residents have the opportunity to maintain small yards and have off street parking with either one or two (tandem) spaces available in the side yard. There is approximately a ten percent vacancy rate including both empty units and empty lots. The park includes a community room and outdoor community lawn area. Tenants are interested in purchasing the park. The park is currently HAWNSAComp PLanlAi =dn=ts12006VA6 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policieff-5 RLD RMH Issue Paper.doc affordable housing and is restricted to occupants age 55 and older. The park currently has King County R-12 zoning and is developed at 10.2 dwelling units per gross acre (du/gross acre). The Condo Mobile Home Park (name not confirmed) is new and has a lower density of approximately 4.1 du/gross acre, although it also has King County R-12 zoning. In this park, residents have the opportunity to purchase a condominium ownership. The park is developed on a similar private internal road system with private lots. Amendment 2006-T-5 would change the Comprehensive Plan text to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) zoning to be an implementing zone •within the Low Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation. This amendment would allow the City Council to consider Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone within the Low Density Residential designation for existing affordable mobile home parks. An expanded analysis of land use in this corridor still needs to be done to determine the best fit between City and County land use designations. Analysis of future capacity and visioning for eventual build -out along this corridor needs to occur once annexation is realized. The proposed text amendment started as a response to residents' request to address the future of the manufactured home park within this annexation area. However, as staff began to review land use in the corridor in greater detail, the larger issue of other land use in this corridor and the consistency between Renton and King County comprehensive planning and zoning emerged as significant. The issue of potential commercial use at the former Aqua Barn site is already being reviewed as part of another 2006 Comprehensive .Plan amendment (2006-M- 07). The City participated in rezoning discussions of that site in 1998 when King County reviewed the rezoning application and is on record as supporting a commercial designation at a portion of that site. However, land use in the remainder of the corridor is largely unstudied. To do a thorough analysis and involve property owners and residents, staff will need more time than available now to research and review the issues in this corridor. Manufactured Home Park Issue Retention of the manufactured housing in this corridor could be accomplished in three optional ways: _ • A map amendment to Single Family Residential: The Single Family designation would allow the RMH zoning. The density of the existing park is now at 10.2 du/gross acre under County regulations. The park would be 10.8 dwelling units per net acre (du/net acre) under City regulations. The park would be non -conforming for density. • A map amendment to Residential Medium Density: The Residential Medium Density designation allows up to 14 du/net acre with a bonus to 18 du/net acre in a wide range of housing types including attached and detached units. Implementing zones include R-14, R 10, and RMH. • A text amendment to the RLD designation allowing the RMH zoning: The proposed amendment would add language allowing additional density for existing manufactured home parks, and specifying that Residential Manufactured Home Park is an implementing zone in this designation. Land Use in the Remainder of the Corridor The development patterns in this corridor approved under the County land use system do not translate readily into the Renton land use classifications. Significant differences include the following items: The King County Plan allows a wider range of uses and more density than the Renton Plan. • The County zoning system uses gross density raihers than net density: Wh11e'in the Renton system critical areas and roads are deducted from the net developable area and no density credit is allowed for these areas, the County system does allow density credit and clustered development patterns up to 18 du/net acre on the developable portion of a site. • The Renton system specifies use types and differentiates between single-family and multi -family use, whereas the County system allows all residential use types in one zone and only differentiates by density. While the gross density of lands in the corridor is close to the density called for in the Low Density Single Family designation, the net density of development, and the use types are quite different. • Condominium structures and apartments would be non -conforming. • Overall density would be non -conforming. The Renton designation that is the most consistent with existing development is Residential Medium Density. The Medium Density designation would allow all of the existing use types along the corridor as conforming uses. The Low Density Residential designation would only allow the single-family detached uses and the manufactured home park uses (with the proposed amendments). The recent development within this corridor including condominium, apartment, park, and higher single-family uses would be non -conforming under the Low Density Residential designation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed text amendment would resolve the issue of how to preserve the manufactured home park on a short term basis, without changing the existing Low Density Residential comprehensive plan designation. The Comprehensive Plan text amendment meets required finding #1 Title IV 4-9-020 "the request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan" by supporting the vision of a transition between Waal and urban uses, and by supporting affordable housing. The existing manufactured home parks in Renton's PAA are located at the edge of the city in portions of the PAA with lower land costs. These areas abut the Rural Designation and in all cases where the City has designated Low Density Residential land use, the areas provide a transition to the rural area. This condition is present along the Maple Valley Highway where the Rural Designation is adjacent to the roadway, and it is also at the "Henderson" property now developed with a manufactured home park along the Sunset Highway adjacent to 148" St. The Residential Low Density policies provide for a transition of uses and densities to the rural area. Manufactured home parks are generally denser than other uses in the Low Density Residential because they are very small living units occurring in a private park configuration. However, they are also a smaller, non -suburban land use that, does provide a type of transition to the rural area. Although they have density- like multi -family uses, they really are not comparable to multi -family living environments. The units are typical of the older affordable single-family housing often found in these areas. Individual manufactured homes located on acreage are also frequently located in rural areas. These parks do comply with the Objective LU-DD of the Residential Low Density policies in that they provide for a range of lifestyles adjacent to both urban and rural development in areas providing a transition to the rural designations. The lifestyle in this case in a compact community providing affordable housing to individuals who want a small single family detached type of unit in a location adjacent to open space and rural forms of development. Objective LU-DD: Provide for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas of the City and Potential Annexation Area constrained by extensive natural features, proving urban separators, andlor providing a transition to rural Designations within King County. The proposed amendment to the purpose statement of the Residential Low Density would acknowledge the role these existing parks have in making a transition to the rural area. "Lands developed with existing manufactured home parks that provide a transition to adjacent Rural Areas andlor are adjacent to critical areas but were established uses in King County prior to annexation may be considered for Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning. " The proposed policy amendment to LU-134 is intended to exempt these parks from the low - density limit. Policy LU-134a A density exception to the 4 dwelling unit per acre maximum is allowed for pre-existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation. Upon cessation of the manufactured home park use, these properties should be considered for Residential 4 zoning. The Housing Element also provides policy guidance for low-income housing and for manufactured home parks (the underlined text shown below highlights relevant sections of these policies). The existing parks within the PAA are viable low-income housing for existing residents. If protected through zoning, these units can be maintained and as a result, long term housing opportunities will be expanded (Objective H-E). The parks provide a form of ownership (H-29), and a form of single-family housing. Due to limitations on expansion or redevelopment of parks protected by zoning, preservation of these parks will implement preservation and long-term affordability goals (H-28, H-29, H-33). The location of these parks adjacent to the rural area meets policies for dispersion (H-29). Low Income Housing Policies Objective HE.- Increase housing opportunitiesAor low and very low-income Renton residents and provide a fair share of low-income housing in the future. Policy H-28. Establish the following sub -targets for affordability to households earning 50 percent or less of county median income, to be counted toward the 20 percent target: 1. Ten percent of new housing units constructed in the City. 2. A number equal to five percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that are g venlong-term affordability. 3. A number equal to five percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that are purchased by low-income households through home -buyer assistance programs. Policy H-29. Support proposals for low-income housing for households earning less than 60 percent of area median income based on the following cHteria: 1. 2LEpersion o law -income housin throughout the City. 2. Convenient access to transit for low-income households. 3. A range of unit types includingfamily housing. 4. Ownership housing when possible. S. Lon -term a orda ill . Policy H-33. Encou= preservation, maintenance, and improvements to existing subsidized housing and to market -rate housing that is Fordable to low and moderate -income households Objective H-H: Continue to allow manufactured home darks and manufactured home subdivisions on land that is speci caA zoned for these uses. Poti y H-45 Maintain exrsttng manufactured housing developments that meet the fallowing criteria: eria: 1. The develo ment pm4des market rate housft alternatives or moderate and low- income households. 2. The housft is maintained and certi ed as built to the International Building Cade and Federal Department ofHousft and Urban Develo meat standards. 3. iFikte i9lanake includes edestrian amenities landsca in and a community acili . ZONING CONCURRENCY: Consideration of Residential. Mobile Home Park zoning within the Low Density Residential Designation will occur as a separate zoning action upon annexation, or as a separate rezoning. However, as this proposed amendment is a new policy, none of the sites to be considered will have been considered for this form of zoning prior to an area -wide land use analysis. This situation will facilitate the required finding for rezoning under Title IV 4-9-190. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: This amendment does not change land use capacity. CONCLUSION: Amending the Comprehensive Plan text to expand the City's ability to protect existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation supports a number of adopted policies and objectives of the City. The larger issue of land use in the Maple Valley corridor needs further review and discussion and should be deferred to the 2007 Comprehensive Plan annual review cycle. At that time, the longer term vision for this newly annexed portion of the city can be considered. In the short term, the proposed policy change will allow the City to consider zoning for the existing parks that will allow their continued maintenance and operation. e*MyQa'CITY 4F RENTON City Clerk Division (0'. 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 425-430-6510 ❑C�ash El Copy Fee U- heck No. [appeal Fee Description: Funds Received From: Name a r ,�/ r Address q9 ! �s1�1 City/Zip Y Receipt N - 0688 Date ❑ Notary Service El Amount $ City Staff Signature STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Jody L. Barton, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Jr'O`1TiCE OF ENl?1RC)l`hIIJNTAt, DETERMINATION King County Journal REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general The kasital Review Com- mittee has issued a Determination of circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date Non -Significance for the following of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language prgiect under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King Mobile Home Park Text County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Amendments Superior Court of the State of Washington for Kin County. I t: FCC Location: Citywide. Arnen& the The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Residential Low Density land King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly use policies to allow Rasidelitial distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed .Manulacture Home +RNIH} and <III implementing zone in tlx: notice, a HLD land use d ,signation. Includes concurrent text amend- nl pn t.3 to Title A" Public Notice Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on November 13, was published on October 30 2006. writs Appeals must be fled in writing together with the required 875.00 application fee with: Hearing The foil amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum Examiner, City of Renton, 1ti55 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. of $98.&5. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-:1 ill.l3. Additional infor- mation regarding the appeal process may 6e obtained from the Renton Citv Jo n Clerk's Office, 425) 430-6510. Advertising Representative, Kin County Journal - g $ P g tY PublLe 3 , the King 9aunty .Iaurrral October O,er 30, 2006. #881995 Subscribed and sworn to me this 30th day of October, 2006. B..r_'D' Cantelon Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Kent; Washington PO Number: ON,' r1a. jLre)tj .4 Mal ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Mobile Home Park Text Amen dments PROJECT NUMBER: LUA06.125, ECF LDCATION: Ctywide DESCRIPTION: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufaoturs Home IRMHI and an Implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to The Iv. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the envlvanmental determination must be filed to writing on or before, 6:Og I'M on November 13, 2M. Appeals must be fled In writing together with the required $76.00 applioatan fee wifb: Hearing Examiner, City of Boston, 1056 South Grody Way, Renton, WA 99055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Rernlim Munkipal Code Section 4d-110.B. Additional InfomratVon regarding the appeal process may bm obtained from the Renton City ClefWa Oltse, {/251 /30-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION CERTIFICATION I, �u�i?! Sub�� , hereby certify that -� copies of the above do 4 W%IIII!I1t� were posted by me in conspicuous places or near the described grope_ h DATE: �0. _ t;s•;�• �� ' SIGNED: s r A'I'I'FST. Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residiriZZi1 ,%r��y A080 = o Lk on the 3 t day of(r..kU L" NOTARY PUBLIC SI A ��` ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments PROJECT NUMBER: LUA06-125, ECF LOCATION: Citywide DESCRIPTION: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title TV. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 6:00 PM on November 13, 2006. Appeals must be fled in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.8. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION ♦ T,,,o(\ Kathy Keolker, Mayor October 26, 2006 City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 SUBJECT: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments LUA-06-125, ECF CIT116OF RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to inform you that they have completed their review of the environmental impacts of the above -referenced project. The Committee, on October 23, 2006, decided that your project will be issued a Determination of Non - Significance. The City of Renton ERC has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made by the ERC under the authority of Section 4-6-6, Renton Municipal Code, after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information, on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on November 13, 2006. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at (425) 430-6578. For the Environmental Review Committee, Erika Conkling Associate Planner cc: Raymond & Mildred Breeden, Alice Zehnder, Leslie Clark, Scott Missall 1 Parties of Record 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 This paper oortainsSO recy6f0dmaterial, 3D past consumer RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE Kathy Keolker, Mayor October 26, 2006 Washington State . Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: Environmental Determinations CIT1*aF RENTON Planning/Building/PublieWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator Transmitted herewith are copies of the Environmental Determinations for the following projects reviewed by the ,Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on October 23, 2006: DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE PROJECT NAME: Chee CPA and Rezone (CPA 2006-M-01) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA05-151, R, ECF PROJECT NAME: Sprinbrook Office (CPA 2006-M-04) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA05-158, R, ECF PROJECT NAME: Ke.nnydale Blueberry Farm (CPA 2006-M-02) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA05-159, R, ECF PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT {NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT;NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT t4AME: PROJECT NUMBER: Rivera and City Initiated Zoning Map Amendment (CPA 2006-M-03) LUA05-163, R, ECF Puget Colony Rezone (CPA 2006-M-05) LUA06-120, R, ECF Highlands R-10 Zoning Text Amendments LUA06-121, ECF Upper Kennydale Rezone (CPA 2006-M-08) LUA06-122, R, ECF Transportation CIP CPA (CPA 2006-T-4) LUA06-123, ECF Land Use and Community Design Element CPA (CPA 2006-T-3) LUA06-124, ECF Mobile Home Park Text Amendments (CPA 2006-T-5) LUA06-125, ECF Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 PM on November 13, 2006. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.13. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. j RENTON 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 t �1� AHEAD OF THE CURVE j Ate/ This paper contains 50 %reryried material, 30%u post consumer CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE APPLICATION NUMBER: LUA06-125, ECF APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT NAME: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments (CPA-2006-T-5) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV, LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Citywide LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section This Determination of Non -Significance is issued under WAG 197-11-340. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on November 13, 2006. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: October 30, 2006 DATE OF DECISION: October 23, 2006 SIGNATURES: Date avid Danie , ire Chief Date Fire Department J i Date` Alex Pietsch, Administrator Date EDNSP I STAFF REPORT City of Renton Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE October 23, 2006 Project Name Mobile Home Park Text Amendments (CPA 2006-T-5) Applicant City of Renton File Number LUA06-125, ECF Project Manager Rebecca Lind Project Description Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Horne (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. Project Location Exist. Bldg. Area gsf Site Area SITE MAP Applicable Citywide B. RECOMMENDATION Applicable Citywide N/A N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area gsf NIA Total Building Area gsf NIA Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: DETERMINATION OF DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE NON- SIGNIFICANCE- MITIGATED. X I Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. Project Location Map IIssue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. ERC Reportdoc City of Renton EDNSP Department ironmental Review Committee StgffReport Mobile Home Park Text Amendments LUA-06-I25, ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 Page 1 of 3 C. MITIGATION MEASURES None required for this non -project action. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following non project environmental review addresses only those impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. ?. Increased Density in the Residential Low Density (RLD) Land Use Designation. Impacts: The proposed change does allow RMH (Residential Manufactured Home) zoning in the RLD Land Use Designation. The proposed policy change specifically limits the application of the RMH zoning to existing mobile home parks in a RLD land use designation. The policy does not allow the RMH zoning to be put in place anywhere in the RLD land use designation. There are only three properties with manufactured home parks in the City of Renton and it's Potential Annexation Area that are within the RLD land use designation. Those parks include Fir Grove at 1441 SE Renton- Issaquah Road, Wonderland Estates at 14645 SE Renton -Maple Valley Road, and Emerald Crest and 15400 SE 15e Place. Any impacts associated with these land uses are existing and would not be affected by the proposed change. E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental / Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. X Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, November'13, 2006. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $76.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. ERc Report.doc AMENDMENT 2006-T-5 -- LAND USE ELEMENT UPDATE, RESIDENTIAL POLICIES DESCRIPTION: Policy text amendments are proposed to provide a density exception and mapping policy for existing manufactured home parks in the City's lowest density residential designation, Residential Low Density (RLD). This is a citywide amendment but the change in policy would apply primarily in the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) specifically in the Maplewood Addition Annexation. Policy direction is already established for the manufactured home parks within the existing city limits. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Should the City support preservation of the manufactured home parks in the Maple Valley Highway Corridor? 2. Should the City evaluate land use in the entire corridor as part of this process? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Approve a text amendment to the Low Density Residential designation to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning to be applied to the two existing manufactured home parks in the Maplewood Annexation immediately. Also, consider a larger land use analysis and Comprehensive Plan Amendment in the 2007 work program for the remaining land uses in the Maple Valley Corridor focusing on consideration of Residential Medium Density. ANALYSIS: In June, the State Boundary Review Board expanded the Maplewood Addition annexation to 340 acres along the SR 169 valley floor, At that time, future Renton residents at the Wonderland Mobile Home Park (113 units), requested that the City Council support retention of the affordable housing at this location. A second manufactured home park, Condo Mobile Home Park (95 units), is located farther to the east within the annexation area. The Valley View Mobile Home Park (50 units) was not included within the annexation boundary, but remains within the PAA. The Wonderland Mobile Home Park is an older facility with a mix of singlewide and doublewide units. Most of those units are not movable and many do not meet current certification and code requirements (percentage not known at this time). It is developed on an internal private access loop road with private yards and lot areas. Residents have the opportunity to maintain small yards and have off street parking with either one or two (tandem) spaces available in the side yard. There is approximately a ten percent vacancy rate including both empty units and empty lots. The park includes a community room and outdoor community lawn area. Tenants are interested in purchasing the park. The park is currently H:IEDNSP\Comp P1an\Amendments\200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policieff-5 RLD AMH Issue Paper.doc affordable housing and is restricted to occupants age 55 and older. The park currently has King County R-12 zoning and is developed at 10.2 dwelling units per gross acre (du/gross acre). The Condo Mobile Home Park (name not confirmed) is new and has a lower density of approximately 4.1 du/gross acre, although it also has King County R-12 zoning. In this park, residents have the opportunity to purchase a condominium ownership. The park is developed on a similar private internal road system with private lots. Amendment 2006-T-5 would change the Comprehensive Plan text to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) zoning to be an implementing zone within the Low Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation. This amendment would allow the City Council to consider Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone within the Low Density Residential designation for existing affordable mobile home parks. An expanded analysis of land use in this corridor still needs to be done to determine the best fit between City and County land use designations. Analysis of future capacity and visioning for eventual build -out along this corridor needs to occur once annexation is realized. The proposed text amendment started as a response to residents' request to address the future of the manufactured home park within this annexation area. However, as staff began to review land use in the corridor in greater detail, the larger issue of other land use in this corridor and the consistency between Renton and King County comprehensive planning and zoning emerged as significant. The issue of potential commercial use at the former Aqua Barn site is already being reviewed as part of another 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendment (2006-M- 07). The City participated in rezoning discussions of that site in 1998 when King County reviewed the rezoning application and is on record as supporting a commercial designation at a portion of that site. However, land use in the remainder of the corridor is largely unstudied. To do a thorough analysis and involve property owners and residents, staff will need more time than available now to research and review the issues in this corridor. Manufactured Home Park Issue Retention of the manufactured housing in this corridor could be accomplished in three optional ways: A map amendment to Single Family Residential: The Single Family designation would allow the RMH zoning. The density of the existing park is now at 10.2 du/gross acre under County regulations. The park would be 10.8 dwelling units per net acre (du/net acre) under City regulations. The park would be non -conforming for density. • A map amendment to Residential Medium Density: The Residential Medium Density designation allows up to 14 du/net acre with a bonus to 18 du/net acre in a wide range of housing types including attached and detached units. Implementing zones include R-14, R-10, and RMH. • A text amendment to the RLD designation allowing the RMH zoning: The proposed amendment would add language allowing additional density for existing manufactured home parks, and specifying that Residential Manufactured Home Park is an implementing zone in this designation. Land Use in the Remainder of the Corridor The development patterns in this corridor approved under the County land use system do not translate readily into the Renton land use classifications. Significant differences include the following items: • The King County Plan allows a wider range of uses and more density than the Renton Plan. • The County zoning system uses gross density rather than net density. While in the Renton system critical areas and roads are deducted from the net developable area and no density credit is allowed for these areas, the County system does allow density credit and clustered development patterns up to 18 du/net acre on the developable portion of a site. • The Renton system specifies use types and differentiates between single-family and multi -family use, whereas the County system allows all residential use types in one zone and only differentiates by density. While the gross density of lands in the corridor is close to the density called for in the Low Density Single Family designation, the net density of development, and the use types are quite different. • Condominium structures and apartments would be non -conforming. « Overall density would be non -conforming. The Renton designation that is the most consistent with existing development is Residential Medium Density. The Medium Density designation would allow all of the existing use types along the corridor as conforming uses. The Low Density Residential designation would only allow the single-family detached uses and the manufactured home park uses (with the proposed amendments). The recent development within this corridor including condominium, apartment, park, and higher single-family uses would be non -conforming under the Low Density Residential designation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed text amendment would resolve the issue of how to preserve the manufactured home park on a short term basis, without changing the existing Low Density Residential comprehensive plan designation. The Comprehensive Plan text amendment meets required finding 41 Title IV 4-9-020 "the request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan" by supporting the vision of a transition between rural and urban uses, and by supporting affordable housing. The existing manufactured home parks in Renton's PAA are located at the edge of the city in portions of the PAA with lower land costs. These areas abut the Rural Designation and in all cases where the City has designated Low Density Residential land use, the areas provide a transition to the rural area. This condition is present along the Maple Valley Highway where the Rural Designation is adjacent to the roadway, and it is also at the "Henderson" property now developed with a manufactured home park along the Sunset Highway adjacent to 148`h St. The Residential Low Density policies provide for a transition of uses and densities to the rural area. Manufactured home parks are generally denser than other uses in the Low Density Residential because they are very small living units occurring in a private park configuration. However, they are also a smaller, non -suburban land use that does provide a type of transition to the rural area. Although they have density like multi -family uses, they really are not comparable to multi -family living environments. The units are typical of the older affordable single-family housing often found in these areas. Individual manufactured homes located on acreage are also frequently located in rural areas. These parks do comply with the Objective LU-DD of the Residential Low Density policies in that they provide for a range of lifestyles adjacent to both urban and rural development in areas providing a transition to the rural designations. The lifestyle in this case in a compact community providing affordable housing to individuals who want a small single family detached type of unit in a location adjacent to open space and rural forms of development. Objective LU-DD: Provide for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas of the City and Potential Annexation Area constrained by extensive natural features, proving urban separators, and/or providing a transition to rural Designations within King County. The proposed amendment to the purpose statement of the Residential Low Density would acknowledge the role these existing parks have in making a transition to the rural area. "Lands developed with existing manufactured home parks that provide a transition to adjacent Rural Areas and/or are adjacent to critical areas but were established uses in King County prior to annexation may be considered for Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning. The proposed policy amendment to LU-134 is intended to exempt these parks from the low - density limit. Policy LU-134a A density exception to the 4 dwelling unit per acre maximum is allowed for pre-existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation. Upon cessation of the manufactured home park use, these properties should be considered for Residential 4 zoning. The Housing Element also provides policy guidance for low-income housing and for manufactured home parks (the underlined text shown below highlights relevant sections of these policies). The existing parks within the PAA are viable low-income housing for existing residents. If protected through zoning, these units can be maintained and as a result, long term housing opportunities will be expanded (Objective H-E). The parks provide a form of ownership (H-29), and a form of single-family housing. Due to limitations on expansion or redevelopment of parks protected by zoning, preservation of these parks will implement preservation and long-term affordability goals (H-28, H-29, H-33). The location of these parks adjacent to the rural area meets policies for dispersion (H-29). Low Income Housing Policies Objective HE. Increase housing o ortunities for low and very low-income Renton residents and provide a fair share of low-income housing in the future. Policy H-28. Establish the following sub -targets for affordability to households earning 50 percent or less of county median income, to be counted toward the 20 percent target: 1. Ten percent of new housing units constructed in the City. 2. A number equal to five percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that are given long-term afforda&Lity. 3. A number equal to five percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that are purchased by low-income households through home -buyer assistance programs. Policy H29. Support proposals for low-income housing for households earning less than 60 percent of area median income based on the following criteria: 1. Dispersion o low-income housin throughout the City. 2. Convenient access to transit for low-income households. 3. A range of unit types including family housing. 4. Ownership housing when possible. 5. Long-term affordability. Policy H-33. Encoura a preservation, maintenance and improvements to existing subsidized housing and to market -rate housing that is affordable to low and moderate -income households Objective H-H. Continue to allow manufactured home parks and manufactured home subdivisions on land that is weeffically zoned for these uses. Poli H-45. Maintain existing manufactured housing developments that meet the following criteria: 1. The development provides market rate housing alternatives or moderate and low- income households. 2. The housing is maintained and certified as Built to the International Building Code and Federal Department o Housing and Urban Development standards. 3. Site planning includes pedestrian amenities, landscaping, and a communityfacilit. ZONING CONCURRENCY: Consideration of Residential Mobile Home Park zoning within the Low Density Residential Designation will occur as a separate zoning action upon annexation, or as a separate rezoning. However, as this proposed amendment is a new policy, none of the sites to be considered will have been considered for this form of zoning prior to an area -wide land use analysis. This situation will facilitate the required finding for rezoning under Title IV 4-9-190. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: This amendment does not change land use capacity. CONCLUSION: Amending the Comprehensive Plan text to expand the City's ability to protect existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation supports a number of adopted policies and objectives of the City. The larger issue of land use in the Maple Valley corridor needs further review and discussion and should be deferred to the 2007 Comprehensive Plan annual review cycle. At that time, the longer term vision for this newly annexed portion of the city can be considered. In the short term, the proposed policy change will allow the City to consider zoning for the existing parks that will allow their continued maintenance and operation. Cif . tenton Department of Planning / Building / , c Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:A ; Me COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 16, 2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA06-125, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBE APPLICANT: City of Renton - EDNSP PROJECT MANAGER: ka Conklin PROJECT TITLE: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments PLAN REVIEW: Ka ren SITE AREA: NIA BUILDING AREA (gross): NIA LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: 77659 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housin Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Hisforic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or 10 -«-� Date .. LAW OFFICES SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC 999 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3000 JOHNP.AHLERS TATYANAA.GIDIRIMSKI SCOTT M. MISSALL MICHELLE ULICK ROSENTHAL DAVID E. BRESKIN BETH PRIEVE GORDIE SEA [TLE, ` ASHINGTON 98104-4088 S14ANF A. MOLONE'Y JENNIFER L. SANSCRAINTE LESLIE C. CLARK BRETT M. HILL KENDALL H. MOORE SCOTT R SLEIGHT BRUCE A. COHEN DANIEL F. JOHNSON FAX: (206) 340-8856 KENNETH L. MYER ROBERT A. STEWART PAUL R. CRESSMAN,JR. CLAUDIA KILBREA'IH CHRISTINA GERRISH NELSON JOHN D. SULLIVAN MICHAELJ.CRISEKA RUSSELLS. KING (206) 682-3333 JAMES A. OLIVER PAULR.WILLEI'I' 1OHN B. CROSE'ITO DAVID R. KOOPMANS CHRISTINEA. POTHERING k LISAA. WOLFARD PAUL]. DAY ION JAN'EI KIM LPN V4'1&'�'4' SCEl �1aw. COm JESSE D. RODMAN RICHARD A. DU BEY ANDREW W. MARON • ALEX J. ROSE * OF COUNSEL October 16, 2006C6,' 1 Via Electronic Mail, U.S. Mail, and Fcicsimile to (425-130-7300) NEIGI R) R . Rebecca Lind Planning Manager, EDNSP City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Re: LUA06-125, ECF; SEf ,4 Comments Regarding Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2006-T-5 Dear Ms. Lind: We represent the property owner of Wonderland Estates, a 12-acre mobile home park recently added to the proposed Maplewood Addition Annexation area. Wonderland Estates lies south of SR 169, is addressed as 14645 SE Renton -Maple Valley Road, and bears assessor's parcel number 232305-9020. This letter provides our State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") comments on proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2006-T-5 (Land Use Number LUA06-125, ECF) (the "Action"). The Action is a propo is:d "text amendment to the Low Density Residential designation that will allow Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) zoning to be an implementing zone in the Low Density Residential Land Use designation." SEPA checklist at 2. SEpA Co::rrnents When conducting SEPA review on a nonproject action, the City should consider all probable impacts of future development allowed by the action. See, e.g., WAC 197-11-442 (requiring EIS review for nonproject actions likely to result in significant adverse environmental impacts). Here, the City's invocation of the Optional DNS process indicates that the City has not evaluated the probable adverse impacts of the Action. 1. The City Has Not Considered The Impacts Arising From The Proposed RMH Implementing Zone. The Action would allow the City to impose a Residential Manufactured Home Park ("RMH") zone as one of the implementing zones within the Residential Low Density ("RLD") 596277. I l016419. 00005 No. LUA06-125, ECF — SEPA Comments October 16, 2006 Page 2 land use designation. However, the SEPA checklist specifically states the City's intention to immediately impose such zoning on the property owned by Wonderland Estates. SEPA checklist at 2. Thus, the Action is specifically targeting the Wonderland property and effectively converts the Action into a project action. See WAC 197-11-704(2)(a)(1). Project actions require full SEPA analysis, not the truncated review outlined in the SEPA checklist. See, e.g., King County v. Washington State Boundary Review Bd. for King County, 122 Wn.2d 648, 662-63, 860 P.2d 1024 (1993).' Currently, the RLD designation permits only Resource Conservation, Residential 1, and Residential 4 zoning classifications. RMC 4-2-010(D). All of these zones have a maximum density significantly lower than the 10 dwelling unit acre density of the RMH zone.2 RMC 4-1- l 10C. The SEPA checklist does not acknowledge the likely impacts on traffic, utilities, public services, and critical areas of the increased density allowed by the RMH zone. The purpose of SEPA analysis is to enable governmental decisions to be made with full knowledge of the effects of such decisions. Alpine Lakes Protection Society v. Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources, 102 Wn. App. 1, 15-16, 979 P.2d 929 (1999) ("One of SEPA's purposes is to provide consideration of environmental factors at the earliest possible stage to allow decisions to be based on complete disclosure of environmental consequences.") (citations omitted). It is therefore imperative that the City address the density and other issues identified above before issuing a SEPA threshold determination. ' "A second line of SEPA cases has engaged in a broader analysis of the probability that land -use changes will follow the proposed action, ever) if development is not the direct and immediate result of the government action. See Bellevue, 90 Wash.2d at 868, 586 P.2d 470; Murden Cove Preserv. Ass'n v. Kitsap Cy., 41 Wash.App. 515, 525-27, 704 11.2d 1242 (1985); Juanita Bay vly Comm y Assn v Kirkland, 9 Wash.App. 59, 72, 510 P.2d 1 140, review denied, 83 Wash.2d 1002 (1973); see also Cheney v. Mountlake Terrace, 87 Wash.2d 338, 344, 552 P.2d 184 (1976) (applying a similar approach to reviewing the appropriate scope of an EIS). Under these cases, the fact that a proposed action will not cause an immediate land -use change or t1.at there is no specific proposal for development does not vitiate the need for an EIS. Instead, an EIS is required if, based on the totality of the circumstances, future development is probable following the action and if that development will have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. Applying this analysis, courts have required an environmental assessment for proposed annexations to cities, Bellevue, reversed a decision not to prepare an EIS for grading land which could lead to an industrial park development, Juanita Bay, and allowed a rezone without an EIS, Murden Cove. "This latter, more fact -sensitive approach, represented by the Bellevue decision, is more consistent with the language and purposes of SEPA than is the categorical approach. RCW 43.21C.031 mandates that an EIS should be prepared when significant adverse impacts on the environment are "probable", not when they are "inevitable". The absence of specific development plans should not be conclusive of whether an adverse environmental impact is likely." 2 The Resource Conservation zone allows 1 dui 10 acres; the Residential 1 zone allows 1 du/acre; and the Residential 4 zone allows 4 du/acre. RMC 4-2-110A. 596277.1 /016419 00005 No. LUA06-125, ECF — SEPA Comments October 16, 2006 Page 3 A new SEPA checklist will be required in order to do so because the current checklist largely ignores all of the potential "on the ground" impacts? See Nagalani Bros., Inc. v. Skagit County Bd. of Commissioners, 108 Wn.2d 477, 739 P.2d 696 (1987) (lead agency cannot make an environmental decision unless it is supported by the record). 2. The Purposes Of The RLD Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Are Contrary To The Existing Wonderland Development. The application of the RLD land use designation is defined in the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element, at 26 (Purpose statement of the RLD designation) as follows: [L]and appropriate for a range of loiv intensity residential and employment where land is either constrained by sensitive areas or where the City has the opportunity to add larger -lot housing stock, at urban densities of 4-du/net acre, to its inventory. (Emphasis added). The Wonderland Estates mobile home park has been developed at an existing density of approximately 10 dwelling units per acre. The homes in the park are located on small plots. The Wonderland park is neither a "low intensity" residential use, nor does it consist of "larger -lot housing stock." By ignoring these facts, imposing a lower zone designation than is reflected by current use, and then by seeking to apply the RMH zone to artificially boost the density, the City compounds these errors. In essence, the City is gerrymandering its land use and zoning designations in a manner wholly at odds with the environmental reasons for lower density zone district. The City's SEPA decision fails to acknowledge, let alone address, these issues. The RMH zone is already (and more properly) permitted in the higher density land use designations of Residential Single Family and Residential Medium Density. The City provides no explanation or justification for inappropriately extending the RMH to the low intensity RLD designation. The Action would contravene the purpose of the RLD land use designation. The City must acknowledge this and then examine the possible adverse environmental impacts of the Action to be in compliance with SEPA. The SEPA Checklist Provides Insufficient Information. In addition to the fundamental problems discussed above, the SEPA checklist fails to disclose the full environmental impacts of the proposed Action. The SEPA checklist acknowledges that the City has targeted two properties for rezoning. Despite this acknowledgment, the City has failed to disclose the likely environmental impacts of the Action on those two properties, or indeed on any of the other properties designated RLD. ' Much of the information sought via the SEPA checklist is left unanswered, with "not applicable" responses. 5 96277,1/016419,00005 No. LUA06-125, ECF — SEPA Comments October 16, 2006 Page 4 The City must revise the SEPA checklist to disclose all anticipated impacts from the proposed Action. If information necessary to evaluate adverse impacts is currently unknown, the City should take the time to investigate that or make the necessary disclosure. WAC 197-11- 080. Until it has analyzed the environmental impacts arising from the proposed Action, the City should not issue a SEPA threshold determination — it will simply be creating a flawed decisional process that will not achieve SEPA's aim of fully -informed governmental decision making. Conclusion The City has neither identified nor considered the environmental impacts likely to result from the proposed Comprehensive Plan aincridrnent. Moreover, the proposed Action is inherently contrary to and inconsistent with the existing RLD land use designation. Finally, the SEPA checklist contains little or no information about these impacts, leaving the City with no ability to meet SEPA's mandates or make any meaningful evaluation of the real environmental impacts of the proposed Action. We urge the City to table the proposed Action until it resolves these issues, and appreciate the City's consideration of these comments. Please provide us with all notices of any further decisions, comment periods, and/or hearings regarding this action. If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact us. Sincerely, SHORT CRESSMAN & BURGESS PLLC Scott M. Missall Leslie C. Clark cc; Wonderland Estates 596277.1 /016419.00005 City o, rxenton Department of Planning / Building /Pub.,� Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: i �- COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 16, 2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA06-125, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 2, 2006 APPLICANT: Ci of Renton - EDNSP PROJECT MANAGER: Erika Conklin PROJECT TITLE: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments PLAN REVIEW: Ka ren Kittdck SITE AREA: N/A BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A 1A F Vr I.- I, f ,, EEIVED OCT 0 LOCATION: Citywide, WORK ORDER NO: 77659 "!VISION SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shorelrne Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources t1 ) Y e B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS K)o-v-Z C. CODE RELA TED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major impacts More Information Necessary —Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Hisladc/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Sig to of Director or Autho zed Representative Date City or menton Department of Planning/Building/Puy..,, Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: OCTORR 7116, W0 APPLICATION NO: LUAO&125, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOI41ER 2, APPLICANT: Ci of Renton - EDNSP PROJECT MANAGER: Erika Conkli 9' PROJECT TITLE: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments PLAN REVIEW: Ka ren Kittri SITE AREA: NIA BUILDING AREA (gross): NIA I LOCATION: Citywide WORK ORDER NO: 77659-- SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Stweline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources S. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS t14 Aid C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Ale Element of the Environment Probable Minor impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historlaculturai Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,00 Feet We have revie4 this applicatio 'th particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and ava dentified areas of probable impact or areas whe�addTonal informatio 1 needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature1, Di ector or Authorized Repre ntative Date City or xenton Department of Planning / Building / Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:5f_l�,s COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 16, 2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA06-125, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 2, 2006 APPLICANT: City of Renton - EDNSP PROJECT MANAGER: Erika Conklin PROJECT TITLE: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments PLAN REVIEW: Ka ren Kittrick SITE AREA: N/A BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: 77659 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Hostoric/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 1,4,6� Gue ,2r1 fo /92,!r"o, C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas wtpre additional infornAion is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City o...enton Department of Planning I Building I Pu—.- Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 16, 2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA06-125, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 2, 2006 APPLICANT: City of Renton - EDNSP PROJECT MANAGER: Erika Conklin PROJECT TITLE: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments PLAN REVIEW. Ka ren Kittrick ' SITE AREA: NIA BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A OCT 0 LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: 77659 V�,,,, nlh, _ r%,,,,, —, SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS 1\1614fc- Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics LighblGlare, Recreation Utilities Trans anon Public Services Histonc/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas whe additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. zd 5i ature of hector uthorized Representativ Date City a _ _enton Department of Planning / Building / Pu_ - Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: i COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 16, 2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA06-125, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 2, 2006 ++ 7' Or HL,y, , APPLICANT: City of Renton - EDNSP PROJECT MANAGER: Erika Conklin V E D PROJECT TITLE: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments PLAN REVIEW: Ka ren Kittrick L D 2 go SITE AREA: N/A BUILDING AREA (gross): NIA LOCATION: Citywide WORK ORDER NO: 77659 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor impacts Probable Major Impacts More information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants LandlSh"fine Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS riOAA� C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS 0 Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Ma/or impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Histork, Cullural Preservation Airport Environment 10, 000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional,informatioq is needed to properly assess this proposal. of Director or Authorized Representative Date NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DATE: 0c11ober2,2006 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA06-125, FCF APPLICATION NAME: Mobile Home Park CPA f CPA 20011 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home IRMH) and an irnit n ptemeng zone in the RLD land use designation, includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. PROJECT LOCATION: Applicable Citywide OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE Of As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that Signii'icant environmental impacts are ,likely to result from the proosed pzoning Therefore. as permitted under the RCW 43.210 110. the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a Single comment period. There will be no ing comment period followthe issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non -Significance (DNS), A 14-day appeal period wtll follow the issuance of the ONS PERMIT APPUCATION DATE' September 22. 2006 ParrrrltsfRevlew Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Comprehensive Plan Amendment Zoning Text Amendment Other Permits which may be required: NIA Requested Studio: NIA Local where application may be reviewed: P1anningfBuJdi0glPablic Works Division, Davelopmem Servlcn Department, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 46055 PUBLIC NEARING: A public hearing on this issue was held before the Planning Commission On September 20 2006 CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Land Use: The subject site is consistent Comprehensive Plan, as well as relevant land use panties adopted in November 2004. Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Propoasd Project: E:rvironmenta Checklist prepared September 22, 2006 Dwslopmeml Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: This non -project action will be subject to the Clty's SEPA Ordinance and Development Regulations and other applicable Codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The analysis of the proposal does not reveal any adverse environmental impacts requiring milli above and beyond existing code provisions, However, mitigation may be necessary and may be imposed at the lime of a site specific develooment pmposal on the subject site. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rebecca Lind. Planning Manager, Economic Devetopmenl Neighborhoods and Strategic Plarniog Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 500 PM on October 16, 2006. If you have questions about ;his proposal, or wish to be made a parry of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automaticalty became a party or record and will be mil of aqv decision on this pmyecl CONTACT PERSON: REBECCA LIND 1425E430.6688 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATIpN If you would like to mcehre further information on the environmental review of this proposed .project, complete this farm and return to, City of Renton. Development Piianning, 1555 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 08055. You must return this form to retina Nit"M Mformatfor, regarding the environmental determinatfOrr fo -thla project. File NoJNarrife; LUA 06-125. ECF 1 MOBILE HOME PARK CPA 2006-11`-05 NAME: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO., NOA eG-125 CERTIFICATION I, r:f 7 Stkiiti , hereby certify that _; copies of the above document were posted by me in conspicuous places or nearby the described propertywkjk l SIGNED: ATTEST; Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington s , on thei� day of CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 2nd day of October, 2006, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance document, NOA, Environmental Checklist, & PMT's documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached Surrounding Property Owners See Attached (Signature of STATE OF WASHINGTON } " } SS COUNTY OF KING } I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for t,l�its�� purposes mentioned in the instrument.4y� Dated: C)- ti R-- o Notary l5ublic in and the Sate o? WSe ingtan-CJ �s w Notary (Print): tf1, ��i . ; 1- a k ct- y �'',�� e p o- My appointment expires: ct - k �/� F '+'+++�ti*�"`'0��~` Project Name: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments Project Number: LUA06-125, ECF template - affidavit of service by mailing AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept of Ecology' WDFW - Stewart Reinbold " Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section c/o Department of Ecology Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 3190 160`h Ave SE 39015 —172nd Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Bellevue, WA 98008 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office ` Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program' Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers " KC Wastewater Treatment Division " Office of Archaeology & Historic Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation' Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Jamey Taylor " Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv, City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72Rd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01 W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. ' Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template - affidavit of service by mailing l Inez Petersen Brad Nicholson Robert Eichler 3306 Lake Washington Blvd #3 2811 Dayton Ave NE 3455 Hunts Pt Rd Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98004 Pamela Wood Raymond Breeden LaVonne Kahnell REMAX 15279 Maple Dr 15275 Maple Dr 3660 116th Ave NE Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98058 Bellevue, WA 98004 Iola Puckett Alice Zehnder Carol Pyka 15270 Pine Drive 15245 Pine Drive 15291 Oak Drive Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98058 Judy Anderson Leslie Clark & Scott Missal Annie & Learon Farnsworth 15258 Maple Drive Short Cressman & Burgess 15263 Maple Dr Renton, WA 98058 999 3rd Ave, Ste 3000 Renton, WA 98058 Seattle, WA 98104 Betty Remore Robert Cave Richard Redfern 15277 Birch 1813 NE 24th St 2000 NE 20th St Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Armando Zorbin Bill Pohl Judith White 2400 NE 10th PI 2310 Monterey Ave NE 201 Union Ave SE #59 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98059 Joye Stranrent Timothy Charnley Jane Nation 15268 Maple Dr 14140 SE 171st Way #E204 25113 265th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98058 Ravensdale, WA 98051 Virginia Serwold Karol Gabrielson Don Charnley 15275 Oak Dr 2001 NE 20th St 15291 Maple Dr Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DATE: October 2, 2006 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA06-125, ECF APPLICATION NAME: Mobile Home Park CPA I CPA 2006-T-5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amends the Residential Low Density land use policies to allow Residential Manufacture Home (RMH) and an implementing zone in the RLD land use designation. Includes concurrent text amendments to Title IV. PROJECT LOCATION: Applicable Citywide OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed zoning. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110. the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non -Significance (DNS). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: PermitafReview Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: September 22, 2006 Environmental (SEPA) Review, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment NIA N/A Plan ningiBuIIdingiPublic Works Divislon, Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 A public hearing on this issue was held before the Planning Commission on September 20, 2006. The subject site is consistent Comprehensive Plan, as well as relevant land use policies adopted in November 2004. Environmental Checklist prepared September 22, 2006 This non -project action will be subject to the City's SEPA Ordinance and Development Regulations and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The analysis of the proposal does not reveal any adverse environmental impacts requiring mitigation above and beyond existing code provisions. However, mitigation may be necessary and may be imposed at the time of a site specific development proposal on the subject site. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager, Economic Development Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on October 16, 2006. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: REBECCA LIND (425) 430-6588 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION If you would like to receive furthef information on the environmental review of this proposed, project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. You must return this form to receive future Information regarding the environmental determination for this project File No./Name: LUA 06-126, ECF I MOBILE HOME PARK CPA 2006-T-05 NAME: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: NOA 06-125 CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM Date: October 2, 2006 To: File From: Development Services Subject: Mobile Home Park Text Amendments l_UA06-125, ECF The Development Planning Section of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on October 23, 2006. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Acceptance Memo 06-126 1215 City of Renton °�yC;n"'FREp�NNrNG OF RENrON LAND USE PERMIT SEP 1 6200 MASTER APPLICATIONREcElft PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: ADDRESS: CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: Rebecca Lind COMPANY (if applicable): EDNSP Department ADDRESS: 1055 S. Grady Way CITY: Renton ZIP: 98055 TELEPHONE NUMBER 425-430-6588 CONTACT PERSON NAME: Angie Mathias COMPANY (if applicable): City of Renton ADDRESS: 1055 S Grady Way CITY: Renton ZIP: 98055 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: 425.430.6576 PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: 2006 City Initiated Residential tow Density zoning Text Amendment (T 05). PROJECT/ADDRESS (S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: Citywide, but primarily in the Potential Annexation area, specifically the Maplewood Addition Annexation. KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER (S).- n/a EXISTING LAND USE (S): n/a PROPOSED LAND USE (S): n!a EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION:): n/a PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): n/a EXISTING ZONING: n/a PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): n/a SITE AREA (in square feet): n/a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING THREE LOTS OR MORE if applicable): n/a PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): n/a. NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): n/a NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): n/a Q:web/pw/devserv/formslplanning/masterapp.doc M25/06 x v F )JECT INFORMATION (con jed NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): n/a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable). n1a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): rt/a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): We SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): n/a NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): rVa NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): n/a PROJECT VALUE: n/a IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): n/a ❑ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE ❑ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. ❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ❑ SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES sq. ft. ❑ WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included SITUATE IN THE OF SECTION _,TOWNSHIP , RANGE , IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) Rebecca Lind , declare that I am (please check one) _ the current owner of the property involved in this application or X the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/herltheir free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Rebecca Lind (Signature of Owner/Representative) A"00%op My appointment expires: (Signature of OwnerlRepresentative) Q:web/pw/devserv/forms/planning/masterapp.doe 09/25/06 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISIO WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS This requirement may be waived by: � � I 1, Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: {p r 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section DATE: EtO>VTF 4. Development Planning Section T)0F REN"olrlqNING SEP 2 6 2006 RECEIVEn Q:1WEBIPWIDEVSERV\Forms%Planninglwaiverofsubmittalregs_9-06.xls 09/06 VELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREnnENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME 7�!`' , 2. Public Works Plan Review Section r' 3. Building Section DATE: 7� e- o6 4. Development Planning Section Q:%WEBIPIMDEVSERVIFon'nsTianninglwaiverofsubmittalregs_9-06.xls 09/06 Project Narrative: Policy text amendments to the City's lowest density residential designation, Residential Low Density (RLD) are proposed to add the Residential Mobile Home Park (RMH) zone as an implementing zone in the Residential Low Density Land Use designation. This is a citywide amendment, but the change in policy would apply primarily to the Potential Annexation Area (PAA), specifically in the Maplewood Addition Annexation. Amending the Comprehensive Plan text to allow the RMH zone expands the City's ability to protect existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation. A concurrent zoning text amendment to Title IV 4- 2-010D is required to list the Residential Mobile Home Park as an implementing zone in the Residential Low Density Designation. Within the Maplewood annexation boundary are two mobile home parks, the Wonderland Mobile Home Park and the Condo Mobile Home Park. The recommended text amendments reflect a request made by residents of the Wonderland Mobile Home Park to Renton City Council to support the affordable housing at their location. The City expanded the scope of the text amendment to be effective citywide. 01, ��n' og Nr p�aNNr Oiy IVG EP B 14DB REC&V,&D DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Renton Development Services Division OFVt<LOpF 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 C17Yoh R LMN1NG Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: SEP 2 6 2006 The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all go errnn��fi�YEA to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identifies impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For non -project actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. H:IEDNSP1Comp PlanlAmendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH PolicieslCity Initiated SEPA Checklist Form RNIH.doc09/22/06 A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Residential Low Density Zoning Text Amendments 2. Name of applicant: City of Renton, EDNSP Department Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager, 425-430-6588 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton WA 98055 4. Date checklist prepared: September 22, 2006 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): nla 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. A larger land use analysis and Comprehensive Plan amendment is expected to occur in 2007 focusing in the Maple Valley corridor with consideration of Residential Medium Density. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Planning Commission Recommendation, City Council Action 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. A text amendment to the Low Density Residential designation that will allow Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) zoning to be an implementing zone in the Low Density Residential Land Use designation. The RMH zoning could eventually be applied to mobile home parks upon annexation. These are two existing manufactured home parks, namely the Wonderland Mobile Home Park that contains 113 units and the Condo Mobile Home Park that contains 95 units located in the Potential Annexation Area that are part of the Maplewood Addition Annexation. The rezoning of these areas is not part of this present action. H:IEDNSP1Comp P1anlAmendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policies\City Initiated 2 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?)? Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Not Applicable Non -Project Action d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. f. Not Applicable Non -Project Action f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not Applicable Non -Project Action h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action H:IEDNSMomp P1anlAmendments1200612006 Text Amen dments12006-T-05 RMH PolicieslCity Initiated 3 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. Are there any off -site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. Portions of the area included in amendment #8, the Maplewood Addition, are in the flood plain. Portions of the areas in Amendment #1 Refinement of Residential Low Density are located in the flood plain 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Not Applicable Non -Project Action H:IEDNSPIComp Plan\Amendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policies\City Initiated 4 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: x_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other x_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs x grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation Plants are present on lands included in the proposed map amendment however this is not a site specific proposal and no development is being evaluated b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not Applicable Non -Project Action d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action H:IEDNSPIComp P1an\Amendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH PoiicieslCity Initiated 5 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Citywide but map and text amendments are non -project actions Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other X Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other X Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Not Applicable Non -Project Action Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not Applicable Non -Project Action Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action H:IEDNSPIComp PlanlAmendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policies\City Initiated 6 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc b. Noise 9) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Not Applicable Non -Project Action 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. Describe any structures on the site. Not Applicable Non -Project Action d. Will any structures be demolished? if so, what? Not Applicable Non -Project Action e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Not Applicable Non -Project Action f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Not Applicable Non -Project Action g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not Applicable Non -Project Action h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Not Applicable Non -Project Action i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not Applicable Non -Project Action H:IEDNSP\Comp P1an\Amendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH PolicieslCity Initiated 7 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not Applicable Non -Project Action k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not Applicable Non -Project Action H:\EDNSP\Comp P1an\Amendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policies\City Initiated 8 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not Applicable Non -Project Action 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not Applicable Non -Project Action d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? H:IEDNSMomp P1anlAmendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH PolicieslCity Initiated 9 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc Not Applicable Non -Project Action e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action g. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? Not Applicable Non -Project Action g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not Applicable Non -Project Action is. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not Applicable Non -Project Action 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Not Applicable Non -Project Action b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Not Applicable Non -Project Action C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non -significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: A&W4 U/O/ Name Printed: & [M 4 1; Date: je g (' H:IEDNSP1Comp PlanlAmendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH PolicicslCity Initiated 10 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheets should only be used for actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs. You do not need to fill out these sheets for project actions. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposed amendments are not expected to increase emissions or result in land uses that release toxic substances or result in noise. The proposed amendments do not significantly change land capacity or land uses allowed in any land use designations. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Not Applicable as the proposals will not change existing land use in the area, the text changes amend the Zoning so that existing land uses conform. The proposed text changes would be unlikely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life. However, at a project specific level- future projects approved under any of these changes would be subject to environmental review. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Not Applicable as the proposals will not significantly change land capacity of land uses allowed in any land use designation. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? Not applicable, the proposed changes would be unlikely to affect environmentally sensitive areas or those designated for governmental protection. However, at a project specific level future projects approved under any of these changes would be subject to environmental review. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: H:IEDNSP1Comp P1an\Amendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policies\City Initiated 11 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Not applicable. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Not applicable, however as specific projects are proposed all would be subject to environmental review. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. None Amendments are anticipated to improve consistency and coordination with other policies and laws protecting the environment. SIGNATURE Undersigned, the state, and I that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non -significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Name Printed: ed &-v U fix Date: '7-2 -7_-04 ENVCHLST.DOC REVISED 8lM8 H:IEDNSPIComp P1anlAmendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policies\City Initiated 12 SEPA Checklist Form RMH.doc D. ZONES IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: rm_ f _ .I, niDI Tlnn;r�-.�..4;..r... ...le ..�:..... 1.. b'Ev�40P C/7-�O8�p S �E aG FP RIP^ 1h71 Y4 11ML LJWl l"L1V11D C114 1111 14i11411L111 U L.GLLa UU GV11Gb. "► Comprehensive Plan Desi nation Implementing Zones Residential Low Density (RLD) Resource Conservation (RC) Residential — 1 DU/AC (R-1) I Residential — 4 DU/AC (R-4) Residential Manufactured Home Residential Single Family (RS) Residential — 8 DU/AC (R-8) Residential Manufactured Home (RMH) Residential Medium Density (RMD) Residential — 10 DU/AC (R-10) Residential Manufactured Home (RMH) Residential —14 DU/AC (R-14) Residential Multi -Family (RM) Residential Multi -Family (RM-V, RM-I, RM-F Urban Center Downtown (UC-D) Center Downtown (CD) Residential Multi -Family (RM-U) Residential Multi -Family Traditional (RM- T Urban Center North (UC-N) Urban Center —North 1 (UC-N 1) Urban Center — North 2 UC-N2 Commercial/Office/Residential COR Commercial/Office/Residential COR Center Village (CV) Residential —10 DU/AC (R-10) Residential Multi -Family (RM-F) Center Village C Commercial Corridor (CC) Commercial Arterial (CA) Commercial Office (CO) Light Industrial IL Employment Area Industrial (EAI) Light Industrial (IL) Medium Industrial (IM) Heav Industrial IH Employment Area Valley (EAV) Commercial Arterial (CA) Commercial Office (CO) Light Industrial (IL) Medium Industrial (IM) Heavy Industrial (IH) Resource Conservation (RC) Commercial Neighborhood C Nei Commercial boyhood C V= F. Residential Manufactured Home Park Zone (RMH): The Residential Manufactured Home Park Zone (RMH) is established to promote development that is single family in character and developed to offer a choice in land tenancy. Standards provide for safe and high -quality manufactured home neighborhoods. It is intended to implement the Low Density, Single Family, and Medium Density Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. The RMH Zone is intended to protect established 2 v� F. Residential Manufactured Home Park Zone (RMH): The Residential Manufactured Home Park Zone (RMH) is established to promote development that is single family in character and developed to offer a choice in land tenancy. Standards provide for safe and high -quality manufactured home neighborhoods. It is intended to implement the Low Density, Single Family, and Medium Density Land Use Comprehensive Plan designation. The RMH Zone is intended to protect established manufactured home parks and to expand the variety of affordable housing types available within the City. Interpretation of uses and project review in this zone shall be based on the purpose statement, objectives and policy direction established in the Residential Low Density land use designation, O iective LU-DD through LU-EE, Policies LU-133 throu LU-146, Residential Single Family land use designation, Objective LU-FF, Policies LU-147 through LU-156, or the Residential Medium Density land use designation. Objective LU-GG through LU-II, Policies LU-157 through LU-181 and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. w AMENDMENT 2006-T-5 -- LAND USE ELEMEN'I*EV�f�'�aNNr RESIDENTIAL POLICIES °� RENT6N DESCRIPTION: SEP z & 2006 R'ECEIvgD Policy text amendments are proposed to provide a density exception and mapping policy or existing manufactured home parks in the City's lowest density residential designation, Residential Low Density (RLD). This is a citywide amendment but the change in policy would apply primarily in the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) specifically in the Maplewood Addition Annexation. Policy direction is already established for the manufactured home parks within the existing city limits. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Should the City support preservation of the manufactured home parks in the Maple Valley Highway Corridor? 2. Should the City evaluate land use in the entire corridor as part of this process? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Approve a text amendment to the Low Density Residential designation to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning to be applied to the two existing manufactured home parks in the Maplewood Annexation immediately. Also, consider a larger land use analysis and Comprehensive Plan Amendment in the 2007 work program for the remaining land uses in the Maple Valley Corridor focusing on consideration of Residential Medium Density. I.1a". AIN=1 In June, the State Boundary Review Board expanded the Maplewood Addition annexation to 340 acres along the SR 169 valley floor. At that time, future Renton residents at the Wonderland Mobile Home Park (113 units), requested that the City Council support retention of the affordable housing at this location. A second manufactured home park, Condo Mobile Home Park (95 units), is located farther to the east within the annexation area. The Valley View Mobile Home Park (50 units) was not included within the annexation boundary, but remains within the PAA. The Wonderland Mobile Home Park is an older facility with a mix of singlewide and doublewide units. Most of those units are not movable and many do not meet current certification and code requirements (percentage not known at this time). It is developed on an internal private access loop road with private yards and lot areas. Residents have the opportunity to maintain small yards and have off street parking with either one or two (tandem) spaces available in the side yard. There is approximately a ten percent vacancy rate including both empty units and empty lots. The park includes a community room and outdoor community lawn area. Tenants are interested in purchasing the park. The park is currently HAEDNSMomp PIan1Amendments1200612006 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Poiicics\T-5 RLD RMH Issue Paper.doc A affordable housing and is restricted to occupants age 55 and older. The park currently has King County R-12 zoning and is developed at 10.2 dwelling units per gross acre (du/gross acre). The Condo Mobile Horne Park (name not confirmed) is new and has a lower density of approximately 4.1 du/gross acre, although it also has King County R-12 zoning. In this park, residents have the opportunity to purchase a condominium ownership. The park is developed on a similar private internal road system with private lots. Amendment 2006-T-5 would change the Comprehensive Plan text to allow Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) zoning to be an implementing zone within the Low Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation. This amendment would allow the City Council to consider Manufactured Home Park zoning as an implementing zone within the Low Density Residential designation for existing affordable mobile home parks. An expanded analysis of land use in this corridor still needs to be done to determine the best fit between City and County land use designations. Analysis of future capacity and visioning for eventual build -out along this corridor needs to occur once annexation is realized. The proposed text amendment started as a response to residents' request to address the future of the manufactured home park within this annexation area. However, as staff began to review land use in the corridor in greater detail, the larger issue of other Iand use in this corridor and the consistency between Renton and King County comprehensive planning and zoning emerged as significant. The issue of potential commercial use at the former Aqua Barn site is already being reviewed as part of another 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendment (2006-M- 07). The City participated in rezoning discussions of that site in 1998 when King County reviewed the rezoning application and is on record as supporting a commercial designation at a portion of that site. However, land use in the remainder of the corridor is largely unstudied. To do a thorough analysis and involve property owners and residents, staff will need more time than available now to research and review the issues in this corridor. Manufactured Home Park Issue Retention of the manufactured housing in this corridor could be accomplished in three optional ways: • A map amendment to Single Family Residential: The Single Family designation would allow the RMH zoning. The density of the existing park is now at 10.2 du/gross acre under County regulations. The park would be 10.8 dwelling units per net acre (du/net acre) under City regulations. The park would be non -conforming for density. • A map amendment to Residential Medium Density: The Residential Medium Density designation allows up to 14 du/net acre with a bonus to 18 du/net acre in a wide range of housing types including attached and detached units. Implementing zones include R-14, R-10, and RMH. 1. • A text amendment to the RLD designation allowing the RMH zoning: The proposed amendment would add language allowing additional density for existing manufactured home parks, and specifying that Residential Manufactured Home Park is an implementing zone in this designation. Land Use in the Remainder of the Corridor The development patterns in this corridor approved under the County land use system do not translate readily into the Renton land use classifications. Significant differences include the following items: • The King County Plan allows a wider range of uses and more density than the Renton Plan. • The County zoning system uses gross density rather than net density. While in the Renton system critical areas and roads are deducted from the net developable area and no density credit is allowed for these areas, the County system does allow density credit and clustered development patterns up to 18 du/net acre on the developable portion of a site. • The Renton system specifies use types and differentiates between single-family and multi -family use, whereas the County system allows all residential use types in one zone and only differentiates by density. While the gross density of lands in the corridor is close to the density called for in the Low Density Single Family designation, the net density of development, and the use types are quite different. • Condominium structures and apartments would be non -conforming. • Overall density would be non -conforming. The Renton designation that is the most consistent with existing development is Residential Medium Density. The Medium Density designation would allow all of the existing use types along the corridor as conforming uses. The Low Density Residential designation would only allow the single-family detached uses and the manufactured home park uses (with the proposed amendments). The recent development within this corridor including condominium, apartment, park, and higher single-family uses would be non -conforming under the Low Density Residential designation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed text amendment would resolve the issue of how to preserve the manufactured home park on a short term basis, without changing the existing Low Density Residential comprehensive plan designation. The Comprehensive Plan text amendment meets required finding #1 Title 1V 4-9-020 "the request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan" by supporting the vision of a transition between rural and urban uses, and by supporting affordable housing. The existing manufactured home parks in Renton's PAA are located at the edge of the city in portions of the PAA with lower land costs. These areas abut the Rural Designation and in all cases where the City has designated Low Density Residential land use, the areas provide a transition to the rural area. This condition is present along the Maple Valley Highway where the Rural Designation is adjacent to the roadway, and it is also at the "Henderson" property now developed with a manufactured home park along the Sunset Highway adjacent to 148a' St. The Residential Low Density policies provide for a transition of uses and densities to the rural area. Manufactured home parks are generally denser than other uses in the Low Density Residential because they are very small living units occurring in a private park configuration. However, they are also a smaller, non -suburban land use that does provide a type of transition to the rural area. Although they have density like multi -family uses, they really are not comparable to multi -family living environments. The units are typical of the older affordable single-family housing often found in these areas. Individual manufactured homes located on acreage are also frequently located in rural areas. These parks do comply with the Objective LU-DD of the Residential Low Density policies in that they provide for a range of lifestyles adjacent to both urban and rural development in areas providing a transition to the rural designations. The lifestyle in this case in a compact community providing affordable housing to individuals who want a small single family detached type of unit in a location adjacent to open space and rural forms of development. Objective LU-DD: Provide for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas of the City and Potential Annexation Area constrained by extensive natural features, proving urban separators, and/or providing a transition to rural Designations within King County. The proposed amendment to the purpose statement of the Residential Low Density would acknowledge the role these existing parks have in making a transition to the rural area. "Lands developed with existing manufactured home parks that provide a transition to adjacent Rural Areas and/or are adjacent to critical areas but were established uses in King County prior to annexation may be considered for Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning. „ The proposed policy amendment to LU-134 is intended to exempt these parks from the low - density limit. Policy LU-134a A density exception to the 4 dwelling unit per acre maximum is allowed for pre-existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation. Upon cessation of the manufactured home park use, these properties should be considered for Residential 4 zoning. The Housing Element also provides policy guidance for low-income housing and for manufactured home parks (the underlined text shown below highlights relevant sections of these policies). The existing parks within the PAA are viable low-income housing for existing residents. If protected through zoning, these units can be maintained and as a result, long term housing opportunities will be expanded (Objective H-E). The parks provide a form of ownership (H-29), and a form of single-family housing. Due to limitations on expansion or redevelopment of parks protected by zoning, preservation of these parks will implement preservation and long-term affordability goals (H-28, H-29, H-33). The location of these parks adjacent to the rural area meets policies for dispersion (H-29). Low Income Housing Policies Objective HE.- Increase housing opportunities for low and very low-income Renton residents and provide a fair share of law -income housing in the future. Policy H-28. Establish the following sub -targets for affordability to households earning 50 percent or less of county median income, to be counted toward the 20 percent target: 1. Ten percent of new housing units constructed in the City. 2. A number equal to five percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that aregiven long-term a ordabili . 3. A number equal to five percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that are purchased by low-income households through home -buyer assistance programs. Policy H-29. Support proposals for low-income housing for households earning less than 60 percent of area median income based on the following criteria: L Dispersion_o{low-income housing throughout the City. 2. Convenient access to transit far low-income households. 3. A range of unit types including family housing. 4. Ownership housing when possible. 5. Long-term affordability. Policy H-33. Encourage preservation, maintenance, and improvements to existing subsidized housing and to market -rate housing that is affordable to low and moderate -income households Ob'ective H-H. Continue to allow manufactured home parks and manufactured home subdivisions on land that is specifically zoned for these uses. Policy H-45. Maintain existinz manu actured housing develo ments that meet the followin criteria: I. The development provides market rate housing alternatives for moderate and low- income households. 2. The housin is maintained and certi ied as built to the International Building Code and Federal Department ofHousing and Urban Deveo ment standards. 3. Site planning includes pedestrian amenities, landscaping, and a community facility. ZONING CONCURRENCY: Consideration of Residential Mobile Home Park zoning within the Low Density Residential Designation will occur as a separate zoning action upon annexation, or as a separate rezoning. However, as this proposed amendment is a new policy, none of the sites to be considered will have been considered for this form of zoning prior to an area -wide land use analysis. This situation will facilitate the required finding for rezoning under Title IV 4-9-190. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: This amendment does not change land use capacity. CONCLUSION: Amending the Comprehensive Plan text to expand the City's ability to protect existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Density designation supports a number of adopted policies and objectives of the City. The larger issue of land use in the Maple Valley corridor needs further review and discussion and should be deferred to the 2007 Comprehensive Plan annual review cycle. At that time, the longer term vision for this newly annexed portion of the city can be considered. In the short term, the proposed policy change will allow the City to consider zoning for the existing parks that will allow their continued maintenance and operation. Adopted 11 iOl LANE ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A LAND USE ELEMENT VIII. RESIDENTIAL POLICIES Goal: Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: a) Contribute to a strong sense of community and neighborhood identity; b) Are walkable places where people can shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; c) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; d) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; e) Are varied or unique in character; f) Support "grid" and "flexible grid" street and pathway patterns where appropriate; g) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; h) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and i) Provide a sense of home. Discussion: The purpose of the Residential policies is to provide a Citywide residential growth strategy. The Residential policies address the location of housing development, housing densities, non-residential uses allowed in residential areas, site design, and housing types in neighborhoods. (See Public Facilities Section for policies on schools, churches, and other facilities in residential areas. See Housing Element for policies relating to housing types and neighborhoods and the Community Design Element for policies guiding quality design.) Objective LU-BB: Manage and plan for high, quality residential growth in Renton and the Potential Annexation Area that: 1) Supports transit by providing urban densities, 2) Promotes efficient land utilization, and 3) Creates stable neighborhoods incorporating built amenities and natural features. Policy LU-123. Pursue multiple strategies for residential growth including: 1) Development of new neighborhoods on larger land tracts on the hills and plateaus surrounding downtown; H:\EDNSP\Cmp PJa&Amendments\20&2QQ6 Text Amendments12006-T-05 RMH Policies\RMH ExcRpfion In RLD Att A.d I Adopted 1 POW04 ALL US ;MENT ATTACHMENT A 2) Infill development on vacant and underutilized parcels in Renton's established neighborhoods; 3) Multi -family development located in Renton's Urban Center; 4) Infill in existing multi -family areas; and 5) Mixed -use projects and multi -family development in Commercial/Office/Residential and Commercial Corridors Land Use designations. Policy LU-124. Promote the timely and logical progression of residential development. Priority for higher density development should be given to development of land with infrastructure capacity and land located closer to the City's Urban Center. Policy LU-125. Encourage a city-wide mix of housing types including. 1) Large -lot single family; 2) Small -lot single family; 3) Small-scale and large-scale rental and condominium multi -family housing; and 4) Residential/commercial mixed -use development. Objective LU-CC: Maintain the goal of a fifty-fifty ratio of single family to multi- family housing outside of the Urban Center. Policy LU-126. A maximum of fifty percent (500%) of future residential land capacity should occur in multi -family housing in parts of the City and PAA located outside of the Urban Center. Policy LU-127. Infrastructure impacts of the goal of 50/50 ratio of single-family to multi -family outside the Urban Center should be evaluated as part of the City's Capital Improvements program. Policy LU-128. Multi -family unit types are encouraged as part of mixed -use developments in the Urban Center, Center Village, Commercial/Office/Residential, and the Commercial Corridor Land Use designations. Policy LU-129. Small -lot, single-family infill developments and plats should be supported as alternatives to multi -family development to both increase the City's supply of single-family detached housing and provide homeownership opportunities. Policy LU-130. Adopt urban density of at least four (4) dwelling units per net acre for residential uses except in areas with identified and documented sensitive areas and/or areas identified as urban separators. Policy LU-131. Encourage larger lot single-family development in areas providing a transition to the Urban Growth Boundary and King County Rural Designation. The City should discourage more intensive platting patterns in these areas. Policy LU-132. Discourage creation of socio-economic enclaves, especially where lower income units would be segregated within a development. Add; LAN] ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Policies in this section are intended to guide development on land appropriate for a range of low intensity residential and employment where land is either constrained by sensitive areas or where the City has the opportunity to add larger -lot housing stock, at urban densities of 4-du/net acre, to its inventory. Lands that are not appropriate for urban levels of development are designated either Resource Conservation or Residential Low Density Zoning. Lands that either do not have significant sensitive areas, or can be adequately protected by the critical areas ordinance, are zoned Residential 4. Lands developed with existing manufactured home parks that provide a transition to adjacent Rural Areas and/or are adjacent to critical areas but were established uses in King County. prior to annexation may be considered for Residential Manufactured Home Park zoning. - Objective LU-DD: Provide for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas of the City and Potential Annexation Area constrained by extensive natural features, providing urban separators, and/or providing a transition to Rural Designations within King County. Policy LU-133. Identify and map areas of the City where environmentally sensitive areas such as 100-year floodplains, floodways, and hazardous landslide and erosion areas are extensive and the application of critical areas regulations alone is insufficient to guide future development. Policy LU-134. Base development densities should range from 1 home per 10 acres (Resource Conservation) to 1 home per acre (Residential 1) on Residential Low Density (RLD) designated land with significant environmental constraints, including but not limited to: steep slopes, erosion hazard, floodplains, and wetlands or where the area is in a designated Urban Separator. Density should be a maximum of 4-du/net acre (Residential 4) on portions of the Residential Low Density land where these constraints are not extensive and urban densities are appropriate except as provided in Policy LU- 134a. Policy LU-„1„34a . A density exception to the 4 dwelling; unit per acre maximum is allowed forpre-existing manufactured home parks within the Residential Low Densit desi ation. Upon cessation of the manufactured home park use these properties should be considered for Residential 4 zoaiin Policy LU-135. For the purpose of mapping four dwelling units per net acre (4-du/ac) zoned areas as contrasted with lower density Residential 1 (R-1) and Resource Conservation (RC) areas, the prevalence of significant environmental constraints should be interpreted to mean: Adepted 1 W /44LAND USE. MENT ATTACHMENT A 1) Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area; 2) Developable areas are separated from one another by pervasive critical areas or occur on isolated portions of the site and access limitations exist; 3) The location of the sensitive area results in a non-contiguous development pattern; 4) The area is a designated urban separator; or 5) Application of the Critical Areas Ordinance setbacks/buffers and/or net density definition would create a situation where the allowed density could not be accommodated on the remaining net developable area without modifications or variances to other standards. Implementation of this policy should be phased in within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-136. Rural activities, such as agricultural and animal husbandry, should be allowed. Policy LU-137. Warehousing, outdoor storage, equipment yards, and industrial uses should not be allowed. Where such uses exist as non -conforming uses, measures should be taken to negotiate the transition of these uses as residential redevelopment occurs. Policy LU-135. To provide for more efficient development patterns and maximum preservation of open space, residential development may be clustered and/or lot sizes reduced within allowed density levels in Residential Low Density designations. Implementation of this policy should be phased in within two years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-139. Minimize impacts of animal and crop -raising on adjacent residential uses and critical areas such as wetlands, streams, and rivers. Policy LU-140. Control scale and density of accessory buildings and barns to maintain compatibility with other residential uses. Policy LU-141. Residential Low Density areas may be incorporated into Urban Separators. Policy LU-142. Undeveloped portions of Residential Low Density areas may be considered for designation of trail easements or other public benefits through agreements with private parties. Objective LU-EE: Designate Residential 4 du/acre zoning in those portions of the RLD designation appropriate for urban levels of development by providing suitable environments for suburban and/or estate style, single-family residential dwellings. Policy LU-143. Within the Residential 4 du/acre zoned area allow a maximum density of 4 units per net acre to encourage larger lot development and increase the supply of upper income housing consistent with the City's Housing Element. Adopted"M LANE&ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A Policy LU-144. Ensure quality development by supporting site plans and plats that incorporate quality building and landscaping standards. Policy LU-145. Interpret development standards to support projects with higher quality housing by requiring: 1) A variety of compatible housing styles making up block fronts; 2) Additional architectural features such as pitched roofs, roof overhangs, and/or decorative cornices, fenestration and trim; and 3) Building modulation and use of durable exterior materials such as wood, masonry, stucco, or brick. Policy LU-146. Interpret development standards to support provision of landscape features as well as innovative site planning. Criteria should include: 1) Attractive residential streetscapes with landscaped front yards that are visible from the street; 2) Landscaping, preferably with drought- resistant evergreen plant materials; 3) Large caliper street trees; 4) Irrigated landscape planting strips; 5) Low -impact development using landscaped buffers, open spaces, and other pervious surfaces; and 6) Significant native tree and vegetation retention and/or replacement. Z"h.i�.,,"� �. a e c gip• - °8' 'Frr 61 - i 11 i� -ZZ� �� .,?,. - ,i■ ■ _y+- '�� `! � 'a Y�..- r��.r�. IiC+r,,�- i s,,;, �t•f711ug1�) �43i � � � :: n rii7li� �# 'E� '� r �.,,.. c.fR �'O � r.r.,;'• , + '� �� .. 7 i if�Yl1 �CF Jf� - + �IIIIIII .k 1i� !r-,., 4-�ri ��;`. • �'-. F'�1`�,:_ M J M i' ' � .'Y -6 Y'� •'9�C S- IL � �_. � t �b ;�ri+ w 4. � ra a !' w�s +e r' fKA, �� "'� ,y+g fff t •5ra, - - •�, �'iS JAB sr - g�f r q• K 1 +} • o`M � - � , yw� it • L . �. �4••-v .► ' d '.'.� 'Jw � ., � p"' M -fir .a. r r . 1 rerl _ mar.., � - 1a ,�_ � � M vv`'E - '++ a � - _ ark - u w. a w•-!� � •� J' �' ' -.,a yr �i y'sil �' ♦ a s S wy* !�•.. i,P.� » + a is r ► m r■ �J 1.,��iC�•, .,srb' �;.. zs. b 'Wy; •, 'y r44t"LP w' wKy- e i 'Giv •a * d • 7- _ 'rlA.^.: i 'e r� . �a + „-.,.ram •Q •yet. - 4 ry e -��,■� •J .r r 1` •,j� ,�� ,,,"� r..q 7. ar, ;1 +:wf .�„rR'; Ate,^," H.�•.il'gY aV ;► Y. j. r w� �' �'p �..r^�1 .'��E ti Y ♦ r i C A " `�' > r "• lit a+ i T , Y i 'Y �'G�z.�� s .� ? ..�,. �V..�t �. ,wr r. 1iR 4' :�4' .r,'• #,®® Ili>1 .�, . r -�"_� Y _ r -_, a� ° a..el 4� + '.. r''. k i c s ill: s' -- � h I.u, , 1 s r �i---r4i►'�' � ��. .. y, *'Sk 4 .. � It�xLi?raJi ; c : � v �'�^ _. iaL`��, ".�` � �• . *�ililr�lkz t. a �.�•r *y '� ��-�° ° IdAr �r ��1. ,��♦r�.y_ " !� � l - •aii J:s.: iiy. `�L.„•• - �r =ir- - .+w . �, w� pi � ` � •�� •� ar. y �6 , � r . �+`Xk'.AY •It r� �+9 Ly_ '� F�,� ' �� .s ;'�3 a�lr'�,.•{ ' �rv, �a, , :.'� k � ��. •a „r , ,�, r ?,*fie � •fe ►+1� .lxr?`!`�r, r ,•.�I �„ '.i ��n- 4'4'•i t'•] k''4 +., Yli` i . :: iI Q'� •.=tom �♦ ^Y ♦ a "fib'-;�"i'- .p, r F'f C.rr yJ � f�,i � � -i � r �� F `.. '. s- -. ,� Mr:R� '� y,.. rf a ■a: ��'�lrtfY� �` { r�, a'l�,. Q►,. 4�jw . �' , Ea � 9 � �� F�l�� e;, �." zr_�i '-�„-.:...'• �L�f ''.�c�y� ,�.i•. S ��,dr• - � gP '$'� � � p%::?Y � �,�.,a ♦M cs ,awl- fv �t ` �. �`r'i- --*, ..a: 1 R �r'= ,� �(r. ji a. au. fi-. •Ip►+" '� ► a 6r:L _ e "+R' @ is Rr t' . t..- fir' ;s �'' '" • J nth ` .R — t. No mmm � 1 Jr+a,i,.. '- � A�♦ i ,.per .+.. r A'7:: S',�la7a+Yrl ?l Yt, ♦' .. I',�kr�� °{Jr - `� '' - _q'�+• �f Y � L •�' � } ;,J�.'r� l a�$4�.�C�,�4 11� .RF , .. '.R • '' �' t f "r t. - • ��' � ' .. ar,�'j✓�yf�al�■lf �"� Pr - .4: . ,' # f+.. 3A --_ kR ►5J); e � � r,..♦aA ai 1 C J ,9 ._ �C�ie;�' � - y � " ', { k ' .�.• ' l♦rz yY z'a { Jr. #aYel. � y, �, , t ;r � _,iJulS��e2�y�` `� M;. r.. 9 � �l - �,�ya .t � +� � �, l� 4 ':l�� «_ y, Qxl. 'm Lq � l -:?A r7 i4r■ T - i•��r � �?�;-` ..r: r 4_. - _+r.6 �y L y - ": ',r' sia d •y "IiP�Jr �: �`j?+a --.. « el r� r s 1a h w � ., ? '�,- `Li:♦Ia �!. �. fra Llr +�..a, _ Japa1C �,.� �. Res ,� ^�# ,9,� s � ",ay.■l.,`a. d '�#,�IR':r��g �� s �'_ �r�q ��' � �4� z�ri�� f�" l�l„V J`'= ,�'r, rr��JT� • ' w� �WP' a7A u - - �� * - ♦ b d. rr _r +.�,.•� - -... Jy • ' S z -h a ... ' i"w� ri ., ♦b, + .; �+ aK �•a la �' ,-r,z - . .r ;��, :ate- ,a . - k+S��-7�-� •' r - :y a ` ay f�.!' _. y + .. R -Y T ,r � I,r ate L..11 r .. ,,... � � yl�►��'1T x}- I. � 4} r � '� a .:.:'♦ ?' t-A./'. •.''-!Z% .. �P y +' w� _ i �,i1.%# > -r� Oi. -�7Aa i,�.�� Y? 1N? e-. ¢.� �" x� � :a �.� a ,..,:� _ '. F1 �..�a -• R :fi'�. ali...� • tiB•-^•+��.� .�yv -�•.�� ra � � .. d..l� f.' �i raJ '.`� _� � - j � • ' a � - ¢ ., , s�rL �"��,�,' �� L �+! �� i � � _ e''W' �R'.4r, � �� 13;y'� ae • : "'♦ w. ' :ia' ��i i}:V�JIr • �l YL� wrt J c ar L' •.f a' r la a.l.�� ar,.o: 1 CF:i aW a.wy .i i. .� y•j * i Yak '+v■1/ J • h �E� • y,y au• jeJJ rAry�- `y[�V `�`- i �,w.-v# :6+?9 ��4a99Ju"`..+•w* .'' ��r 'o# r a.�,9�i..�eJl��°,�lsyaw�a� .i~.:J - "I �;�.11 i 2 .-�.� ,��j i 3. ..i. - l ..> .,�,r T/.. n.w .,�- 4 .. �. :. .. f._ .. ..�� Sl su.,—:. w� a �..1 ;•' r� . :. ._..:�Il vmJ AL 1 0 &ILXI