Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil 06/09/2008 a AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL III *REVISED* REGULAR MEETING June 9, 2008 Monday, 7 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPEALS: a. Committee of the Whole Report re: T-Mobile Monopole Conditional Use Permit b. Planning & Development Committee Reports re: RTC Short Plat & Blueberry Haven Short Plat INABILITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE TESTIMONY ON APPEALS DURING THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING State law requires that the City establish a process to handle appeals from application of environmental and developmental rules and regulations. The Renton City Council, feeling it was best for the elected representatives to handle the appeals rather than require citizens to go to court, has retained appellate jurisdiction to itself. The courts have held that the City Council,while sitting as an appellate body, is acting as a quasi-judicial body and must obey rules of procedure of a court more than that of a political body. • By City Code, and by State law,the City Council may not consider new evidence in this appeal. The parties to the appeal have had an opportunity to address their arguments to a Committee of the City Council at a meeting previously held. Because of the court requirements prohibiting the City Council from considering new evidence, and because all parties have had an opportunity to address their concerns to a Council Committee, the City Council may not consider oral or written testimony at the City Council meeting. The Council understands that this is frustrating to citizens and is outside the normal process of open discourse provided to citizenry during the audience comment portion of the City Council meeting. However,this burden of not allowing the Council to be addressed concerning pending appeals is outweighed by the quick, easy, inexpensive and local appeal process provided by the Renton City Council. 4. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 5. AUDIENCE COMMENT (Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting. Each speaker is allowed five minutes. The comment period will be limited to one-half hour. The second audience comment period later on in the agenda is unlimited in duration.) When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to the podium and state your name and city of residence for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME. 6. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further discussion if requested by a Councilmember. a. Approval of Council meeting minutes of 6/2/2008. Council concur. • b. City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/22/2008 for CAG-08-059, Thomas Teasdale Park Playfield and Irrigation Improvements; two bids; engineer's estimate $249,988; and submits staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder, Spiritridge Construction, Inc., in the amount of$264,664.30. Refer to Finance Committee for discussion of funding. (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) . r c. Community and Economic Development Department recommends adoption of a resolution ratifying the 2007 Buildable Lands amendment to the Growth Management Planning Council's Countywide Planning Policies. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. • d. Community and Economic Development Department submits proposed 2008 Comprehensive Plan amendments (three map amendments and two text amendments). Refer to Planning and Development Committee and Planning Commission. e. Community and Economic Development Department recommends approval to modify the designated residential targeted areas for the multi-family housing property tax exemption; implement the provisions of House Bill 1910; incorporate affordable housing; and modify project eligibility and fees. Refer to Planning and Development Committee; set public hearing on 6/23/2008. (See 8.a. for resolution setting the public hearing.) f. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a construction agreement in the amount of$170,240 with Puget Sound Energy for underground utility conversion as part of the Duvall Ave. NE Widening/Coal Creek Parkway SE Reconstruction project. City's net cost is $114,920. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked with an asterisk(*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if further review is necessary. a. Finance Committee: Vouchers, Community Center Readerboard Project Bid Award; Maintenance Custodian Position Budget Amendment*; Firemen's Pension Fund Budget Amendment* b. Utilities Committee: City Code Amendment re: Sewer Service Outside City Limits*; White Fence Ranch Special Assessment District 8. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Resolution: 1111 a. Setting public hearing on 6/23/2008 for multi-family housing property tax exemption modifications (see 6.e.) Ordinances for first reading: a. 2008 Budget amendment re: Firemen's Pension Fund (see 7.a.) b. 2008 Budget amendment re: Maintenance Custodian Position (see 7.a.) c. Sewer service outside Renton city limits (see 7.b.) Ordinances for second and final reading: * a. 2008 amendments to zoning classifications of properties (1st reading 6/2/2008) b. 2008 Budget amendment re: Burnett Linear Park Phase II project (1st reading 6/2/2008) c. 2008 Budget amendment re: Clean Sweep program(1st reading 6/2/2008) d. 2008 Budget amendment re: Principal Financial & Administrative Analyst (1st reading 6/2/2008) e. Assisted living facilities regulations (1st reading 6/2/2008) 9. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.) 10. AUDIENCE COMMENT 11. ADJOURNMENT • (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA • (Preceding Council Meeting) Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Solid Waste Program Update Briefing • Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk • CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 AND ARE RE-CABLECAST TUES.&THURS.AT 1 1 AM&9 PM,WED.&FRI.AT 9 AM&7 PM AND SAT.&SUN.AT 1 PM&9 PM • RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting June 9, 2008 Council Chambers Monday, 7 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall • CALL TO ORDER Mayor Denis Law called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and invited Evan Bradley with Boy Scout Troop 725 to lead the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. Haydon Truitt introduced the troop and thanked Council for the opportunity to attend the meeting. ROLL CALL OF MARCIE PALMER, Council President; DON PERSSON; KING PARKER; COUNCILMEMBERS TERRI BRIERE; RICH ZWICKER; GREG TAYLOR; RANDY CORMAN. CITY STAFF IN DENIS LAW, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative Officer; ATTENDANCE MARK BARBER,Assistant City Attorney; MICHELE NEUMANN, Deputy City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Public Works Administrator;ALEX PIETSCH, Community and Economic Development Administrator; PREETI SHRIDHAR, Communications Director; PETER HAHN, Deputy Public Works Administrator-Transportation; DEPUTY CHIEF ROBERT VAN HORNE, Fire Department;DEPUTY CHIEF TIM TROXEL,Police Department. APPEALS Council President Palmer presented a Committee of the Whole report regarding Committee of the Whole the T-Mobile Monopole Conditional Use Permit appeal. The appeal was Appeal: Monopole Conditional referred to the Committee of the Whole to determine the issue of jurisdiction to Use Permit, T-Mobile, CU-07- hear this appeal, and, if necessary,the substantive issues of the appeal. 065 Subsequently,T-Mobile filed a brief raising the issue of the applicability of Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act to this application and appeal. The Committee of the Whole recommended that the City Council take the following action: 1. Find that the Council does not have the authority to consider alleged violations of Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act as the Council's jurisdiction is derived from an appeal from the Hearing Examiner and neither the Hearing Examiner nor the City Council has the authority to consider the validity of provisions of the City Code under the Telecommunications Act. 2. Deny the City's motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The Committee feels that the issue of jurisdiction should have been raised earlier,before the Hearing Examiner, and in the interest of fairness to T- Mobile, the Council should hear and rule upon the merits of this appeal. 3. Affirm the decision of the Hearing Examiner as the appellant T-Mobile has failed to meet its burden to establish that the Hearing Examiner's decision was based upon a substantive error of fact or law. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL REMOVE THE T-MOBILE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPEAL REFERRAL FROM THE PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Planning& Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Parker presented a report Committee regarding the RTC Short Plat Appeal. The Committee heard the matter on Appeal: RTC Short Plat, 6/5/2008. Pursuant to City Code 4-8-110F, the Committee's decision and Voght, SHP-07-088 recommendation is limited to the record,which consists of,but is not limited to June 9,2008 Renton City Council Minutes Page 189 the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and the submissions by the parties. The subject property is located on 630 Monroe Ave. NE consisting of a three- lot subdivision in the R-8 zone. The short plat proposal called for Lots 1 and 2 to be 6,769 square feet(gross) and Lot 3 to be 6,348 square feet. This plat was encumbered with a King County restrictive covenant, which called for a minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 square feet. The applicable City Code provision requires 5,000 square feet net density. The hearing concerned the dispute over the interpretation of this covenant as to whether the 6,000 square feet minimum lot size requirement was one of net or gross density. On 2/18/2008 the Hearing Examiner issued his decision affirming the decision of the Administrative Director to interpret the covenant as requiring 6,000 square feet gross. Appellant Voght appealed this decision. On 4/21/2008,the Renton City Council approved the release of this restrictive covenant. This action effectively renders any application containing this covenant will be processed without the restriction contained therein, and solely based on the existing zoning and development criteria for that particular parcel. On 4/24/2008, Chair Parker sent a letter to appellant Voght explaining that based on this recent action by the City Council regarding the covenant,the basis of his appeal was effectively moot. Accordingly, Chair Parker advised that he was inclined to cancel the appeal hearing unless the appellant could articulate a basis to still hold the hearing. The appellant did not wish to acquiesce and therefore, the hearing was opened on the scheduled date. On the date of the hearing, the appellant presented his case. Having considered the comments made by the appellant, and taken into consideration the files therein and actions taken regarding this covenant,this Committee made the following recommendations to the City Council: That the City Council finds that having previously approved to release this King County restrictive covenant by its action of 4/21/2008, this appeal of RTC Short Plat is rendered moot, and therefore,the appellant's appeal should be dismissed. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning&Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Parker presented a report Committee regarding the Blueberry Haven Short Plat appeal. The Committee heard the Appeal: Blueberry Haven matter on 6/5/2008. Pursuant to City Code 4-8-110F, the Committee's decision Short Plat, Gordley, SHP-07- and recommendation is limited to the record, which consists of,but is not 131 limited to the Hearing Examiner's report,the notice of appeal, and the submissions by the parties. The subject property is located in the upper Kennydale neighborhood at 2010 Jones Ave. NE, and consists of a 37,714 square foot(.86 acre) lot located between Jones Ave. NE and NE 20th St. The property along NE 20th St. is located across from the Blueberry Farm. City staff approved applicant Richard and Lauralee Gordley's short plat request to subdivide this parcel into two lots, with Lot A proposed at 17,930 square feet and Lot B proposed at 19,784 square feet. As part of their application,the Gordley's submitted a Critical Areas Study,which identified a 9,601 square foot Category 3 wetland on the site. Although there is also a"stream"on the site, the City waived a supplemental stream study because there had been several prior studies in the surrounding areas that satisfied the City as to its Class 4 designation. Based on these studies, June 9,2008 Renton City Council Minutes Page 190 the Water Class Map and the Streams and Lakes Map set out in City Code,City staff deemed the property to contain a Category 3 wetland and Class 4 streams, and applied the appropriate buffers associated with those levels. Appellant Sue Rider,who resides in the neighborhood, filed a timely appeal and the matter was held before the Hearing Examiner. There was no independent study submitted by the appellants,but the appellant did present testimony from Larry Fisher of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and numerous neighbors who all indicated that they believed the stream running along the subject site was perennial, rather than intermittent. The Gordleys testified that the stream was manmade,was not able to sustain any life forms, and was intermittent. On 3/27/2008, the Hearing Examiner issued his decision finding that City staff erred in waiving the requisite stream study and in not undertaking an independent wetland assessment. Accordingly,the Hearing Examiner reversed the approval of the Blueberry Haven Short Plat. A timely appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision was filed by the Gordleys. This Committee, after hearing the presentations by City staff,the Gordleys and Ms. Rider, and having considered the record, finds that the Hearing Examiner made a substantial error of law and fact and recommended reversal of the Hearing Examiner's decision. For these reasons,the Committee made the following recommendations to the City Council: • That the City Council finds that the Hearing Examiner made a substantial error of fact in finding that City staff did not follow the applicable City Codes by waiving the stream study and not requiring an independent wetland analysis; and a substantial error of law in that he found City staff's decision to be clearly erroneous and arbitrary and capricious. • Accordingly, the decision of the Hearing Examiner should be reversed, thereby reinstating the approval of the Blueberry Haven Short Plat, subject to the conditions set forth in the Approval Report and Decision dated 12/10/2007, the applicable mitigation measures set forth in the Environmental Review Committee Report dated 12/3/2007, and any other related City staff provisions. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* Discussion ensued regarding the stream running along the subject site. Citing a conflict of interest, Councilmembers Corman and Palmer recused themselves from the meeting. Time: 7:18 p.m. Discussion continued regarding the stream, the studies and maps, and the Hearing Examiner's decision. *MOTION CARRIED. Councilmembers Corman and Palmer returned to the meeting. Time: 7:23 p.m. ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2008 and beyond. Items noted included: * The Renton Fire and Emergency Services Department will be conducting a live fire drill June 17 to June 19. The residential structure to be used for the ti k June 9,2008 Renton City Council Minutes Page 191 drill, located at 4518 Talbot Rd. S. was donated by the John C. Radovich Development Company. Annexation: New Life- Aqua Mayor Law welcomed approximately 2,200 new residents who joined the City Barn,Maple Valley Hwy as a result of the New Life - Aqua Barn annexation. He noted that the City's population is now just under 80,000. Streets: Duvall Ave NE Noting that Duvall Ave. NE was closed on June 5 for construction,Mayor Law Closure, Road Improvements acknowledged the impact the temporary full closure will have on residents and Project motorists. He thanked staff for their work with residents to mitigate the impacts. Reporting on the closure, Deputy Public Works Administrator-Transportation Hahn noted that the City,responding to concerned citizens,has and will place additional directional and informational signs. He stressed that staff will continuously monitor the situation and follow-up on citizen concerns. Mr. Hahn also reported the contractor's proposal to work occasional Saturdays to reduce the amount of time the road will be closed. He indicated that the contractor will refrain from activities prior to 8 a.m. on Saturdays that create additional noise. Mayor Law assured that citizen complaints will be addressed. Council discussion ensued regarding the contractor working on Saturdays,the local access signage, and the importance of updating the City's website. AUDIENCE COMMENT Howard McOmber(Renton) announced a Highlands Community Association Citizen Comment: McOmber- emergency preparedness event on June 12 at the Highlands Neighborhood Emergency Preparedness Center, and asked for volunteers to help assemble the kits that are being handed Event out to senior citizens and disabled residents. Citizen Comment: Gitchel - Chuck Gitchel(Renton)questioned who is responsible for removing excessive Pavement Paint Markings spray painted pavement markings left by T-Mobile utility locaters at Anacortes Removal, SE 3rd P1 Ave. SE and SE 3rd Pl. Public Works Administrator Zimmerman said the matter will be investigated. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 6/02/2008. Council concur. 6/02/2008 CAG: 08-059, Thomas City Clerk reported bid opening on 5/22/2008 for CAG-08-059, Thomas Teasdale Park Playfield & Teasdale Park Playfield and Irrigation Improvements; two bids; engineer's Irrigation Improvements, estimate $249,988; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to Spiritridge Construction the low bidder, Spiritridge Construction, Inc., in the amount of$264,664.30. Refer to Finance Committee for discussion of funding. CED: 2007 Countywide Community and Economic Development Department recommended adoption of Planning Policies Amendments a resolution ratifying the 2007 Buildable Lands amendment to the Growth Management Planning Council's Countywide Planning Policies. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Comprehensive Plan: 2008 Community and Economic Development Department submitted proposed 2008 Amendments Comprehensive Plan amendments (three map amendments and two text amendments). Refer to Planning and Development Committee and Planning Commission. CED: Multi-Family Housing Community and Economic Development Department recommended approval to Property Tax Exemption modify the designated residential targeted areas for the multi-family housing Modifications property tax exemption; implement the provisions of House Bill 1910; June 9,2008 Renton City Council Minutes Page 192 incorporate affordable housing; and modify project eligibility and fees. Refer to Planning and Development Committee; set public hearing on 6/23/2008. (See page 193 for resolution setting public hearing.) Transportation: Duvall Ave Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of a construction NE Reconstruction Utility agreement in the amount of$170,240 with Puget Sound Energy for Conversion, Puget Sound underground utility conversion as part of the Duvall Ave.NE Widening/Coal Energy Creek Parkway SE Reconstruction project. City's net cost is $114,920. Refer to Transportation(Aviation) Committee. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval of Finance Committee Claim Vouchers 272313 - 273225 and four wire transfers totaling Finance: Vouchers $8,716,772.98; and approval of 309 Payroll Vouchers,two wire transfers, and 1558 direct deposits totaling$5,441,755.70. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. CAG: 08-072, Community Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval to Center Readerboard, award the contract for the replacement of the electronic readerboard in Cedar Daktronics River Park to the sole bidder Daktronics,Inc. The contract amount is $115,546.54 and funds are available in Fund 316. The Committee further recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the contract.* Councilmember Persson reported that this state-of-the-art replacement readerboard has a ten-year warranty and will use less energy. *MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Budget: 2008 Amendment, Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending Maintenance Custodian concurrence in the staff recommendation to amend the 2008 Budget by $66,541. Position The Finance Committee additionally recommended concurrence with the staff recommendation to approve a full-time Maintenance Custodian position related to the additional maintenance requirements of Fire District#40, and $15,000 designated for associated landscaping expenses. Funds from the revenue account of 000.000000.000.3380.0022.00.000001 to be dispersed to the following accounts: $ 1,000 001.000000.020.5760.0010.48.000000 $14,000 001.000000.020.5760.0010.48.000003 $51,541 001.000000.020.5180.0010.10.000000 The Committee further requested that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 193 for ordinance.) Budget: 2008 Amendment, Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending Firemen's Pension Fund concurrence with the staff recommendation to amend the 2008 Budget by $75,000 to meet the Firemen's Pension Fund obligation for 2008. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 193 for ordinance.) June 9,2008 Renton City Council Minutes Page 193 Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chair Zwicker presented a report recommending Utility: Sewer Service concurrence with the staff recommendation to amend City Code, Section 4-6- Connection Outside City 040C, to limit connections outside Renton's city limits and exclude connection Limits, City Code Amend for properties desiring to develop through'further subdivision of their land. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY ZWICKER, SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* Responding to an inquiry from Councilmember Parker, Councilmember Briere stated that only single-family residences,not developments, located outside the City limits can hook up to City's sewer system. *MOTION CARRIED. (See later this page for ordinance.) SAD: White Fence Ranch Utilities Committee Chair Zwicker presented a report recommending Sanitary Sewer concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the preliminary White Fence Ranch Sanitary Sewer Extension Special Assessment District. The Committee further recommended staff to proceed with the establishment of the final Special Assessment District upon completion of the construction of the White Fence Ranch Sanitary Sewer Extension project. MOVED BY ZWICKER, SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3950 A resolution was read setting a public hearing date on 6/23/2008 to consider the modifications to the multi-family housing property CED: Multi-Family Housing proposed tax exemption. Property Tax Exemption MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE Modifications RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the : Council meeting of 6/16/2008 for second and final reading: Budget: 2008 Amendment, An ordinance was read amending the 2008 Budget by transferring funds from Firemen's Pension Fund the 2007 Year-End Fund Balance to the Firemen's Pension Fund in the amount of$75,000, for the purpose of meeting pension obligations. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 6/16/2008. CARRIED. Budget: 2008 Amendment, An ordinance was read amending the 2008 Budget by allocating contract Maintenance Custodian payments from Fire District#40 in the amount of$66,541 to Fund 001 Position Community Services Fund; authorizing the addition of a Maintenance Custodian Position; adding the position to the 2008 Budget index of positions; and authorizing appropriation authority to support contracted landscaping costs and hire maintenance staff. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 6/16/2008. CARRIED. Utility: Sewer Service An ordinance was read amending Chapter 6, Street and Utility Standards,of Connection Outside City Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code by revising policies by which Limits, City Code Amend the City allows connection to its sanitary sewer system by property owners outside of the current City limits. MOVED BY ZWICKER, SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 6/16/2008. CARRIED. 1 June 9,2008 Renton City Council Minutes Page 194 The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance#5384 An ordinance was read amending the 2008 Budget to appropriate and transfer Budget: 2008 Amendment, from Fund 502 to Fund 317 for Burnett Linear Park Phase II project expenses in Burnett Linear Park Phase II the total amount of$60,000. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY Project BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5385 An ordinance was read amending the 2008 Budget by appropriating$95,000 Budget: 2008 Amendment, from the 2008 Solid Waste Utility Fund(403) for the 2008 Solid Waste Clean Clean Sweep Program Sweep account. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5386 An ordinance was read amending the 2008 Budget by increasing the General Budget: 2008 Amendment, fund budget for Public Works Administration(Fund 000/015)by$14,823 in Principal Financial & order to increase the authorization of the Public Works Principal Financial and Administrative Analyst, Administrative Analyst position from .75 FTE to 1.0 FTE and decrease the Maintenance Shops Secretary Street Fund Budget(Fund 003/019)by $16,920 in order to reduce the authorization of a Maintenance Shops Secretary I position from 1.0 FTE to .50 FTE. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5387 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 2, Zoning Districts -Uses and Planning: Development Standards; Chapter 4, Citywide Property Development Standards; Chapter 9, Regulations (Title IV) Docket, Permits - Specific; and Chapter 11, Definitions; of Title IV (Development Assisted Living Regulations) of City Code to amend the regulations regarding assisted living and to delete the duplicative use tables for each zone in Section 4-2-070. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Responding to Councilmember Corman's inquiry about the running horses Community Services: sculpture at Burnett Linear Park, Councilmember Persson remarked that the Burnett Linear Park Sculpture sculpture is being cleaned and repainted at Renton Technical College and will be returned to the park when completed. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time:, 8:05 p.m. ' , Michele Neumann, Deputy City Clerk Recorder: Jason Seth June 9, 2008 RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR Office of the City Clerk COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 9, 2008 COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON., 6/16 Library Master Plan (Palmer) 4:45 p.m. *7th Floor Conferencing Center* COMMUNITY SERVICES MON., 6/16 Knickerbocker Appointment to Advisory (Briere) 4:30 p.m. Commission on Diversity FINANCE (Persson) PLANNING &DEVELOPMENT THURS., 6/12 Ratification of Buildable Lands (Parker) 2:00 p.m. Amendment to Countywide Planning Policies; Removal of Restrictive Covenants on Althoff Property; Mobile Food Vendors Zoning Code Amendments 2007 Title IV Docket; Helipads Zoning Code Amendments 2007 Title IV Docket PUBLIC SAFETY MON., 6/16 CANCELLED (Taylor) TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) THURS., 6/12 Duvall Ave. Widening Underground (Palmer) 4:00 p.m. Utility Agreement with Puget Sound Energy; Duvall Ave. Project(briefing only); Shattuck Ave. BNSF Crossing Issues (briefing only); 1-405 Agreements Between Renton & WSDOT (briefing only); Local & Regional Transportation Issues UTILITIES (Zwicker) NOTE: Committee of the Whole meetings are held in the Council Chambers unless otherwise noted. All other committee meetings are held in the Council Conference Room unless otherwise noted. APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL Date 6//f2°o g COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT June 9,:2008. T-Mobile Conditional Use Permit Appeal File LUA-07,065,CU=A,ECF ` (Referred April 7, 2008); , This appeal was referred_by'the Planning&:Development Committee to the Committee'of the Whole to determine the issue of jurisdiction to hear this appeal and;if necessary,the , substantive issues of the appeal. Subsequently, T=Mobile filed a brief raising the.issue of the applicability of§253 of the Telecommunications Act to this application and appeal: The Committee of the Whole recommends'that the City Council take the following action : 1Find that the Council does.nota-hn• � b ve;the;autllority to consider alleged violations of§253ofthe Telecommumcatioris Act the Council's jurisdiction is:derided from an appeal.fromthe:Hearing_Examiner and neither.the Hearing Examiner nor the'City Council has the authority to tyrof consider the validi f. .provisions of.the City Code under the Telecommunications Act. 2: Deny the City's Motion-tobismiss this appeal-for lack of jutiSdicticiri,: .The Committee-feels,that the issue ofjurisdiction should have been raised earlier, before the Hearing Examiner,,and;imtl e:interest,of fairness T=Mobile,the Council should-hear and rule upon`theYinerits of this.appeal 3: Affirm the decision of the Nearing:Finer as the Appellant T-Mobile has - failed.to meet its burden.to establish that the Hearing:Examiner's'decision was based upon a substantive error,of fact:or law.. Marcie Palmer, ouncilPresident .aivg Piehcit M e wa.f frcd APPROVED BY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT = Date /q/ ate June 9, 2008 • RTC SHORT PLAT APPEAL File LUA 07-088, SHPL-A , (Referred March 17, 2008) _ . The Planning-and Development Committee("Committee")heard this appeal-on.June 5, - 2008. Pursuant to RMC 4-8-110F, the Committee's decision-and recommendation is limited to the record, which consists of, but is not limited to the Hearing Examiner's Report,the Notice of Appeal and the Submissions by the Parties. The subject property is located on 630 Monroe Avenue,NE, Renton, WA, consistingof a three-lot subdivision in the R-8 zone. The short plat.proposal called for lots 1 and 2 to be - .6,769 sq. ft(gross) and lot 3 to be 6,348 sq: ft. This plat was encumbered,with a King. County restrictive covenant,which called for a minimum'lot::size requirement of 6,000 sq : ft. The applicable city code provision requires 5000 •sq:.ft' net density: The hearing concerned the dispute over the,interpretation of this covenant as to whether the 6000 sq. ft..minimum lot size requirement:was one,of net;,or gross density. :;Or February 18, 2008, the Hearing Examiner issued his`decision affirming.the decision of the Administrative Director to interpret theeovenant as.requiring.6000:sq: ft gross Appellant Voght : .-appealed this decision: On April 21, 2008,the Renton=City Council approved the-release'of this restrictive - covenant. This action effectively renders any applicationcontaining this;covenant will be processed without the'restrictiori.contained therein;and solely based.on the existing zoning and development criteria for that,particular:parcel:--:' ' On April 24,2008, Chair King Parker sent a letter to Appellant Voght explaining that'. based on this recent.action by the City Council regarding the covenant,the basisof his appeal was"effectively moot: Accordingly, Chair Parket.advised thathe was inclined to cancel the appeal hearing unless Appellant could articulate a basis:to still hold the hearing. Appellant did not-wish to acquiesce and therefo e the hearing was opened on - • the scheduled date. On the date of the hearing,Appellant presented his case. Having considered thecomments made by Appellant, and taken into consideration the files therein and actions taken regarding this covenant,this Committee`makes,the following recommendations to the City Council:. RTC Appeal June 9,2008 • Page 2 That the City Council find that having previously approved to release this King County restrictive covenant by its action.of April 21, 2008,,this appeal of RTC Short Plat, LUA 07-088, SHPL-A is rendered moot, and therefore, Appellant's appeal should be dismissed. KING PARKER,Chair • wirer /4111P -off RICH.ZWICKER, Vice Chair ; GRE AYLOR,Member � ` , ...: • - cc: Alex Pietsch Neil Watts. ge d kbut-r la ll J f i ft{ t n.9 APPROVED BY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT 4.1q1p-aog, Date June 9, 200.8 BLUEBERRY HAVEN SHORT PLAT APPEAL - File LUA 07-131, SHPL-A, ECF (Referred April 28, 2008) The Planning and Development Committee ("Committee")heard this appeal on June 5, 2008. Pursuant to RMC 4-8-110F,the Committee's decision and recommendation is limited to the record, which consists of,but is not limited to the Hearing Examiner's Report,the Notice of Appeal and the Submissions by the Parties. ' ,The subject property is located in the upper Kennydale neighborhood at 210 Jones _ Avenue NE,Renton, WA and consists of a 37, 714 square feet(.86 acre) lot located between Jones Avenue NE and NE 20th Street. .,The property along on the NE 20th$t is • located across from the Blueberry Farm The City of Renton staff approved Applicant Richard and Lauralee Gordley("Gordleys")short plat request to subdivide this parcel into two lots,with Lot A proposed at 17,-930 square feet and Lot B proposed at 19,784 sq. feet. As part of their application, the Gordleys subriiitted'a.Critical Areas Study ("CAS")which identified a 9, 601 sq. categorY,3 wetlandonthe site. Although there is also a"stream" on the site, the City waived:astippleniental streanystudy because there had been several prior studies in the surrounding areas which satisfied the City as to,its ; Class 4 designation. Based on these studies, the City staff Water Class Map and the Streams and Lakes Map set out in RMC 4=3-050Q,-the City staff deemed the property to: contain Category 3 wetland and Class 4 streams and applied the appropriate buffers associated with those levels. . , Appellant Sue Rider("Rider"),'Who resides in the neighborhood, filed a timely appeal and the matter was held before the Hearing Examiner There wasno independent study' „ _ submitted by the Appellants, but Appellant:did present testimony of Larry Fisher of Fish & Wildlife, and numerous neighbors who all indicated that they believed the stream running along the subject site was perennial, rather than intermittent: The Gordleys testified that the stream was manmade, was not able to sustain any lifefOrms, and was • intermittent. On March 27, 2008,the Hearing Examiner issued his decision finding that the City staff erred in waiving the requisite stream study and in not undertaking an independent wetland assessment. Accordingly, the Hearing Examiner reversed the approval of the , ' • Blueberry Haven short plat. A timely appeal of the Healing Examiner's'decision was filed by the Gordleys. This Committee, after hearing the presentations by City Staff,the Gordleys and Ms. • - Rider and having considered the record below,finds that the Hearing Examiner made a Blueberry Haven Appeal Page 2 substantial error of law and fact and recommends reversal of the Hearing Examiner's decision. For these reasons, the Committee makes the following recommendations to the City Council: That the City Council finds that the Hearing Examiner made a substantial error of fact in finding that the City Staff did not follow the applicable city codes by waiving the stream study and not requiring an independent-wetland analysis; and'a substantial error of law in that he found the City Staffs decision to be clearly erroneous and arbitrary and capricious. - Accordingly, the decision of the Hearing Examiner"should be reversed, thereby reinstating theapproval of the Blueberry Haven short plat, subject toOle conditions set forth in the Approval Report,and Decision dated December 10, 2007,the applicable mitigation measures set forth.in the Environmental Review Committee Report dated --- _ 2007, and any other,related City Staff provisions. . • KING PARKER, Chair RICH ZWICKER,Vi.-.Chair + • GREG T OR,Member ,;. .. . nthF. cc: Alex Pietsch • Jennifer.Henning Lawrence J.Warren ,. Fred Kaufman Net �1JAf1S . `‹ Y O� ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL, AND �% ca + LEGAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT •�'tO� MEMORANDUM DATE: June 9, 2008 TO: Marcie Palmer, Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Denis Law, Mayor Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Administrative Report In addition to our day-to-day activities, the following is worthy of note for this week: • The Renton Fire and Emergency Services Department will be conducting training exercises that will include actual live-fire drills for firefighters. This training will occur over the course of three days beginning on June 17 and concluding on June 19, from approximately 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. each day. The residential structure to be used for this drill is located at 4518 Talbot Road South and was donated by John C. Radovich Development Company. Every effort is being made to reduce any concerns or disruptions to neighboring residents. Permission has been granted for this exercise by Puget Sound Clean Air Agency, which monitors such trainings and requires extra precautions to minimize the impact on the environment. r f CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al#: (7, b, ` Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS/City Clerk June 9, 2008 Staff Contact Bonnie Walton Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Bid opening on May 22, 2008, for CAG-08-059, Correspondence.. Thomas Teasdale Park Playfield and Irrigation Ordinance Improvements Project Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Staff Recommendation Study Sessions Bid Tabulation Sheet (two bids) Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept Refer to Finance Committee Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: ii Expenditure Required... $264,664.30 Transfer/Amendment $40,000.00 Amount Budgeted $241,754.00 Revenue Generated Total Project Budget $297,000.00 City Share Total Project SUMMARY OF ACTION: Engineer's Estimate: $249,988.00 In accordance with Council procedure, bids submitted at the subject bid opening met the following criteria: There was more than one bid, and there were no irregularities. The low bid submitted by Spiritridge Construction, Inc. in the amount of$264,664.30 (including alternate#2), however, was above the amount budgeted for the project. Therefore, staff recommends referral of the bid to the Finance Committee for discussion of funding. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept the low bid submitted by Spiritridge Construction, Inc. in the amount of$264,664.30. III • � o C)ti�� COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT ♦1 ,. �\. .- : M: EM, .0 ,R A N : D. ,U ;.M IVT DATE: 4x,140,,g003.2QQB -. ., . ; = , . . , ,,i TO: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk FROM: ,, , . ;,Terry H;igashiyama,.Community Services Admir istratorr STAFF CONTACT: Todd Black, Capital Project Coordinator(x-6571) '. ' SUBJECT:;-,- : , = ;: :;ThgmaO'easdale Park Irrigation+Improvements. . ; Thomas Teasdale Park Irrigation I Orli vehent Project;liid opening was held©n May 22,2008 at 2:30 p.m.Two (2)bids were submitted. The architect's cost estimate was projected as follows: • $209,247.00 for the base bid(new irrigation system and a supplemental storm drainage system), _ • $22,470.00 for Additive Alternate No. 1 (minor field grading), • $18,271.00 for Additive Alternate No. 2 (new infield mix for better drainage). • The low bid received for the project was$225,396.85 for the base bid, $33,589.44 for Additive Alternate No. 1, and$39,267.45 for Additive Alternate No. 2. All bid numbers include WSST, and were submitted by Spiritridge Construction, Inc. Our staff has reviewed the low bid for completeness,inclusion of all required forms, acknowledgement of addenda,mathematical correctness of the bid, and reference checks. All of the paper work is in order. Staff proposes to accept the base bid and Additive Alternate No. 2, for a total cost of $264,664.30. The budget established for Teasdale Park irrigation and drainage improvements is $297,000.00.To date, $17,600.00 was spent for a site survey, $546.00 for the consultant advertisement and call for bids,and$37,100.00 for design,leaving$241,754.00 remaining for construction improvements. Staff proposes transferring the$40,000.00 from the 2008 Parks Major Maintenance (316.000000.020.5940.0076.63.000000),originally designated for court repairs at Teasdale and Ron Regis Parks, for a balance of$281,754.00 for construction of the base bid and Additive Alternate No. 2. The court repair work that was originally scheduled for Teasdale Park would interfere with the park improvements described in the above bid. In addition,park improvementsplanned for Ron Regis Park in 2009 would likely impact the court area originally proposed for repair in 2008. • h:1tblack\m-z\teasdalepark\contract\council\teasdale-councilconcurmemo.'doc - -- Bonnie Walton,City Clerk Subject: Thomas Teasdale Park Irrigation Improvements • June 4,2008 Page 2 of 2 Fundingfor the Teasdale Park Irrigation ImprovementP J ro'ect will be under account - number: 316.000000.020.5940.0076.61.000000 Capital Improvement Program,Major Maintenance. There were three(3) attendees at the pre-bid meeting representing independent endent contractors. The Parks Division recommends that this item be referred to the Finance Committee. If you have any questions,please contact Todd Black at x-6571. • h:\tblack\m-z\teasdale park\contract\council\teasdale-councilconcnrmemo.doe CITY OF RENTON BID TABULATION SHEET •ROJECT: Thomas Teasdale Park Playfield and Irrigation Improvements;CAG-08-059 DATE: May 22,2008 FORMS BIDDER Bid Triple Bid Bond Form Addendum Construct Co. X X X Base $264,441.87 1621 Pease Avenue Alternate#1 $69,985.67 Sumner,WA 983090 Alternate#2 $73,107.83 Cy Morse Spiritridge Construction,Inc. X X X Base $225,396.85 16220 SE 19th Pl Alternate#1 $33,589.44 Bellevue,WA 98008 Alternate#2 $39,267.45 Randy Cowan • ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE $249,988.00 •EGEND: Forms:Triple Form:Non-Collusion Affidavit,Anti-Trust Claims,Minimum Wage CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL f,� 1 6 1 AI#: , GQ1 •Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board. CED/Planning June 9, 2008 Staff Contact Rebecca Lind (ext. 6588) Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing. Ratification of 2007 Buildable Lands Amendment to Correspondence. the Countywide Planning Policies Ordinance... Resolution.... Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Attachments: Information Renton Data from the Buildable Lands Report Buildable Lands Executive Summary County Ordinance and GMPC Motion 07-3 Resolution Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to the Planning and Development Committee Legal Dept X Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact:ii None Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Ratification of the amendment to the Countywide Planning Policies recognizing the 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report and its findings is before the City for review. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Consider a resolution ratifying the 2007 Buildable Lands Amendment to the Countywide Planning Policies. IIII C:\DOCUME-1\BWalton\LOCALS-1\Temp\2008Amends AGENDA BILLv2.doc 1111kf0( O DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ;, • • • Nr.vo� MEMORANDUM DATE: May 30, 2008 TO: Marcie Palmer, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: ie„, Denis Law,Mayor FROM: U Alex Pietsch, Administrator r"" ` STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind, Long Range Planning Manager(ext. 6588) SUBJECT: Ratification of 2007 Amendment to the Countywide Planning Policies Recognizing the 2007 Buildable Lands Report ISSUE: Should the City Council ratify the Buildable Lands amendment to the Countywide 111 Planning Policies (CPPs) as proposed by the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC)? RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution ratifying the amendment to adopt the 2007 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) as an appendix to the CPPs and to recognize the BLR as meeting the countywide and city reporting requirements of RCW 36.70A.215. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The action before the City Council is the ratification of the 2007 King County BLR and its findings. The GMPC approved this amendment in October 2007, and the Metropolitan King County Council adopted and ratified it on behalf of unincorporated King County on April 14, 2008. Ratification Process To become effective, amendments must be ratified by at least 30 percent of the city and county governments representing 70 percent of the population of King County. Jurisdictions opposing the amendments are required to deny the ratification by July 11, 2008. If the City of Renton opposes the amendments, it is likely that they would still receive the necessary support from other jurisdictions to achieve ratification. Failure to act is deemed the equivalent of ratification. • H:\EDNSP\Regional Issues\GMPC\CPPs\2008 Ratification Issue Paperv2.doc Marcie Palmer,Council President May 30,2008 Page 2 of 3 Buildable Lands Report • A 1997 amendment to the Growth Management Act(GMA)requires that six counties in Washington and the cities in each of those counties conduct an evaluation of the land that is within their jurisdiction. The object of the evaluation is twofold: first,to determine the amount of land that is suitable for urban development and second, to determine the ability of each jurisdiction to accommodate expected growth. Each city and King County, representing the unincorporated area, evaluates land capacity data using a standard methodology and data is combined to produce the Buildable Lands Report. The first report was completed in 2002; the second in 2007. The process us,ed to complete the evaluation begins by examining the previous five years of building activity to determine the densities and commercial floor area ratios (FARs) achieved in each zone of the City. These densities and FARs are used for the assumptions regarding future densities and amount of commercial development for each zone. For example, in the R-8 zone the City's achieved density was 6.64 dwelling units per acre over the previous five year period. This average density was used to calculate the future capacity of the R-8 zone. The methodology also considers vacant and re- developable land, critical areas, rights-of-way,public purposes, and a market factor to establish the land supply available for development. The net land area available and the density/FAR assumptions are multiplied to forecast future capacity. Neither the GMPC nor the county and cities moved to adopt the previous Buildable • Lands Report in 2002. That report was treated as a technical document. The decision by GMPC to take formal legislative action upon completion of the 2007 report resulted from a 2004 decision of the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board. The Seattle-King County Association of Realtors filed a petition to appeal the 2002 Buildable Lands Report before the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, and while the 2002 BLR was upheld as adequate, the Hearings Board decision affirmed that the BLR is an appealable "action" under GMA. The Board stated that while legislative action to adopt the BLR is not a requirement of RCW 36.70A.215, absent such action, the 60-day appeal period does not apply and the BLR may be challenged at any time. Further, the Board strongly recommended legislative action on future BLRs as a means of limiting appeal exposure to the mandated 60 days. Subsequent to the Board decision, the Washington State Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development (CTED) sent an advisory letter to counties and cities with a similar recommendation. The BLR Executive Summary and data pertaining to the City of Renton are shown in Attachments 1 and 2. The Report found that: • Housing growth is on track with 22-year targets, • There is a trend toward higher densities over the five year period, • Despite commercial-industrial construction, there is net loss of jobs due to the recession of 2001-2004, and • There is sufficient land capacity for residential, commercial, and industrial • growth. h:\ednsp\regional issues\gmpc\cpps\2008 ratification issue paperv2.doc Marcie Palmer,Council President May 30,2008 Page 3 of 3 The City of Renton data is consistent with these findings. The table indicates the targets, the number of dwelling units that have been built since 2001 and the number of new jobs that have been accommodated, and the remaining target. Despite job growth in Renton, the loss of Boeing jobs between 2001 and 2005 resulted in an overall reduction in total employment in the City. The final column shows the capacity for housing and employment as determined through the Buildable Lands methodology. Net Taret 2001 Growth Remagnin Capacity Surplus g Target 2001-2005 2006 2006 Capacity Housing 6,198 3,386 2,812 12,715 9,330 4,870 Boeing Employment 27,597 reduction. 27,597 29,552 1,955 8,500 Job gains: 3,630 The detailed summary of City of Renton data published in the 2007 BLR is presented in Attachment 1. CONCLUSION: Legislative action ratifying this amendment makes it clear that the City is recognizing its own data and evaluation as complete under RCW 36.70A. Ratification also strengthens the case that action has been taken consistent with the Growth Management Hearings Board's recommendation at both the county and city levels. • h:\ednsp\regional issues\gmpc\cpps\2008 ratification issue paperv2.doc 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report CITY OF RENTON VII- 138 Residential Development: Total Capacity and Growth Target Capacity(2006) vs Household Growth Target(2006-2022) Overall housing capacity for 2006 in the City of Renton including potential Capacity(units) development on vacant and redevelopable lands and major projects in the Single-Family Zones 1,691 pipeline totaled 12,715 units.These units could accommodate an estimated Single-Family Capacity in Pipeline 406 12,142 households, 9,330 more than necessary to attain the household Accessory Dwelling Units 0 growth target of 2,812 for the remainder of the planning period (2006-2022). Multifamily Zones 2,242 Multifamily Capacity in Pipeline 142 Mixed-Use Zones 6,690 Mixed-Use Capacity in Pipeline 1,536 Total Capacity(units) 12,715 Total Capacity(households) 12,142 Remaining Household Target(2006-2022) 2,812 Surplus/Deficit Capacity 9,330 NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Development Activity: 1996-2000 vs 2001-2005 Commercial 1996-2000 2001-2005 From 2001 to 2005,the City of Renton issued permits for nearly a half- Net Land Area (acres) 91.8 47.7 million sq.ft. of new commercial development on 48 net acres of Floor Area (s.f.) 1,215,762 468,058 developable land. The city also issued permits for over one million sq.ft. of Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.30 0.23 new buildings on 84 acres of developable land in industrial zones. Industrial Compared with the previous five-years, 2001-2005 saw a decrease in the Net Land Area(acres) 135.4 84.4 amount and intensity of commercial and industrial development. During this Floor Area (s.f.) 2,261,467 1,038,685 same period, Boeing reduced its employment in Renton by over 8,500 jobs. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.38 0.28 Job gains elsewhere partially compensated for that decline, yielding an Employment Change vs Job Growth Target estimated overall net loss of 4,870 jobs citywide. It is assumed that full job Covered Employment in 2000(est.) 55,572 recovery can be accommodated within existing buildings on developed Covered Employment in 2006 (est.) 50,702 parcels. Renton's 2001-2022 growth target of 27,597 additional jobs beyond Net New Jobs (2000-2006) (4,870) year 2000 employment levels is unchanged for the remainder of the Job Growth Target(2001-2022) 27,597 planning period (2006-2022). Remaining Target(2006-2022) 27,597 Commercial and Industrial Development Activity: 2001-2005 Gross Critical ROWS Public Net Net Floor Area Achieved Zoning Area Areas (acres) Purpose Area Area (sq.ft.) FAR (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (sq.ft.) Commercial (incl. Mixed-Use) 50.5 2.8 0.0 0.0 47.7 2,076,425 468,058 0.23 Industrial 93.1 4.5 0.0 4.3 84.4 3,674,824 1,038,685 0.28 Non-Residential Total 143.6 7.3 0.0 4.3 132.0 5,751,249 1,506,743 0.26 • • Sc . • • • H Non-Residential Land Supply(2006) In 2006, the City of Renton had 234 gross Gross Critical ROWs Public Market Net acres of vacant land zoned for commercial, Area Areas (yo) Purpose Factor Area industrial, and mixed uses.After deductions for (acres) (acres) (%) (%) (acres) critical areas, public uses, and market factors, Vacant Land 124 acres of land suitable for development Commercial Zones 20.7 2.0 0% 0% 10% 16.8 remained with capacity for 6,723 jobs under Mixed-Use Zones 109.8 39.6 0%-5% 0%-1% 10% 63.1 current zoning. The city also contained 341 Industrial Zones 103.6 54.0 0% 1% 10% 44.1 gross acres of redevelopable land, 251 net Vacant Total 234.1 95.7 n/a n/a n/a 124.1 acres of which was developable with capacity Redevelopable Land for 10,748 jobs. Capacity for an additional Commercial Zones 45.0 7.2 0% 0% 15% 32.1 12,080 jobs was identified in significant Mixed-Use Zones 188.1 26.9 0% 0% 15% 137.0 commercial projects in the development Industrial Zones 108.3 10.8 0% 1% 15% 82.0 pipeline. Overall, more than 95% of Renton's Redevelopable Total 341.3 44.9 n/a n/a n/a 251.1 job capacity was located in commercial and mixed-use zones. Overall, 77% of the city's employment capacity was on redevelopable land. Overall capacity in Renton was for 29,552 Employment Capacity(2006) jobs, 1,955 more than necessary to attain the Net Land Assumed Existing Floor Area Floor job growth target of 27,597 for the remainder of Area Future Floor Area Capacity Area/ Job the planning period (2006-2022). (s.f.) FAR (s.f.) (s.f.) Employee Capacity (s.f.) Vacant Land Commercial Zones 733,507 0.38 n/a 278,733 250 1,115 Employment Capacity(2006) vs Mixed-Use Zones 2,749,091 0.15-1.86 n/a 1,346,635 250-400 4,918 Job Growth Target(2006-2022) Industrial Zones 1,923,133 0.17-0.37 n/a 483,054 700 690 Capacity(jobs) Vacant Total 5,405,730 n/a n/a 2,108,421 n/a 6,723 Commercial Zones 2,194 Mixed-Use Zones 13,971 Redevelopable Land Industrial Zones 1,307 Commercial Zones 1,399,213 0.38 261,834 269,867 250 1,079 Job Capacity in Pipeline 12,080 Mixed-Use Zones 5,967,327 0.15-1.86 1,429,317 2,504,632 250-400 9,052 Total Job Capacity 29,552 Industrial Zones 3,572,597 0.17-0.22 256,057 431,586 700 617 Remaining Job Target(2006-2022) 27,597 Redevelopable Total 10,939,137 n/a 1,947,207 3,206,084 n/a 10,748 Surplus/Deficit Capacity 1,955 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report CITY OF RENTON VII-139 • I. Executive Summary Overview of the Buildable Lands Requirement In 1997, the Washington State legislature adopted the Buildable Lands amendment to the Growth Management Act(GMA), RCW 36.70A.215. The amendment requires six Washington counties including King County, together with their cities, to prepare a review and evaluation report every five years. The 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report contains data on 5 years of development activity (2001-2005) along with an updated analysis of land supply and capacity(2006)to accommodate Household and Job Growth Targets. Findings are reported for the Urban Growth Area (UGA) as a whole, each of 4 urban subareas, and each city. Based on the results of the Buildable Lands evaluation, "reasonable measures" may be required at the countywide or city level to ensure sufficient capacity for planned growth. The GMA requires designation of Urban Growth Areas to"include areas and densities sufficient to permit urban growth that is projected to occur in the county for the succeeding 20-year period" (see RCW.36.70A.110).The Buildable Lands evaluation represents a mid-course check that this important GMA requirement is being met in King County. The focus of the evaluation therefore is on the designated Urban areas of King County and growth targets for those areas as established in the Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). This 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report(BLR) is the second five-year evaluation prepared by the county and its cities in response to the Buildable Lands amendment. The first evaluation report • was submitted to the State in September 2002. While the 2007 BLR complements and extends the information in the earlier report, it stands alone as its own evaluation. For more detail on the Buildable Lands requirement, see Chapter II. Countywide Collaboration Buildable Lands implementation within King County is a collaborative effort of all 40 jurisdictions. It consists primarily of coordination among relatively independent local efforts, achieved through: • Technical assistance and project coordination provided by Suburban Cities Association (SCA) staff in partnership with King County • Technical guidelines for local data collection and analysis • Use of standardized worksheets and templates to collect and analyze data • Technical staff forums to coordinate Buildable Lands data collection among jurisdictions • Collaboration of staff from King County, SCA, and the cities of Seattle and Bellevue on countywide methodologies, overall review and evaluation framework, and contents of the report • Oversight and guidance from the Growth Management Planning Council, a formal body of elected officials representing King County and its cities Such coordination ensured that the 2007 Buildable Lands analysis was carried out in a broadly consistent and comparable manner throughout King County, while allowing for limited local variations to account for differing land use and market characteristics, data resources, and local land • use policies. 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report I- 1 • Methodology The 2007 Buildable Lands Report incorporates the results of several technical elements, including the following: • Analysis of subdivision plat and building permit data for the years 2001-2005 • Analysis of parcel and critical areas data using geographic information systems (GIS) to estimate the acres of vacant and redevelopable land within zoning designations as of early 2006 • Conversion of the land supply data to units of capacity(housing units,jobs), based on analysis assumptions for land dedications, market availability, densities, and other factors • Evaluation of the sufficiency of the capacity for housing and jobs to accommodate growth needs for the remainder of the planning period (2006-2022). Figure 1.1, below, illustrates the relationship among these technical elements within the entire data collection, analysis, and evaluation process. For more detailed documentation of the methodology used in preparing this report, see Chapter III and technical appendices. Figure 1.1: Elements of Buildable Lands Analysis and Evaluation Land Supply Inventory Annual Development Activity January 2006 2001-2005 Vacant and redevelopable parcels Net densities achieved— DUs per acre ROWs and public facilities Floor Area Ratios Market factor Net acres/sq.ft. of land l Growth Targets Remaining 2006-2022 Development Capacity Analysis CPP targets for households and jobs January 2006 (2001-2022) Housing units Net residential and job growth Jobs (2000-2005/6) Evaluation Is capacity sufficient to accommodate targets for households and jobs for the ♦— remainder of the planning period? Overall, the technical framework for the 2007 Buildable Lands Report is consistent with that used in the 2002 report. Limited revisions and updates were made to analysis assumptions, including densities, public land needs, critical areas, market factors, and other factors. Changes to the methodology were informed by a review of the 2002 BLR methodology, analysis of emerging data trends, discussions with local staff, and meetings with stakeholder groups to seek input on methodology and the scope of the evaluation. 411 I-2 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report Major Findings of the 2007 Buildable Lands Report • Analysis of data on growth and development activity for the 5-year review period (2001-2005) produced the following major findings: • Housing growth on track with targets. King County jurisdictions added over 49,000 net new housing units within the UGA. Approximately half of the new housing was single family, half multifamily. Overall housing growth—within each subarea and within the UGA as a whole—is slightly ahead of pace to reach 2001-2022 Household Growth Targets within the planning period. • Trend toward higher residential densities. Single-family and multifamily residential densities permitted from 2001-2005 were higher than densities observed in development during the previous 5-year review period. UGA-wide, single-family development achieved 6.2 units per net acre in plats. Multifamily permits achieved 38 units per net acre. Net densities were calculated based on actual measurement of critical areas, rights-of-way and public uses in residential developments. • Mixed indicators of non-residentialrowth. Data for the countyas a whole show a net loss of g approximately 25,000 jobs between 2000 and 2006, due to the recession of 2001-2004. Permitting of new commercial and industrial development, however, continued to occur throughout Urban King County, with permits issued for about 18 million sq. ft. of space in commercial zones and 10 million sq. ft. of space in industrial zones UGA-wide. Analysis of data on land supply and development capacity, estimated as of early 2006, produced the following major findings: • Residential land capacity. The UGA contains approximately 22,000 net acres of land suitable for residential development to accommodate growth during the planning period. Based on • current plans and regulations, achieved densities, and other factors, the UGA has capacity for about 84,000 single-family homes and about 205,000 multifamily units. Half of the UGA's residential capacity is in mixed-use zones. • Sufficient capacity for household targets. Overall, the UGA capacity of 289,000 additional housing units can accommodate an estimated 277,000 households, more than twice the number needed for the 106,000 households of remaining growth target over the remainder of the planning period. Capacity sufficient to accommodate household targets exists within each planning subarea and within each jurisdiction as well. • Commercial and industrial land capacity.The UGA contains more than 6,000 net acres of land suitable for non-residential development to accommodate job growth during the planning period. Based on current plans and regulations, actual densities, and other factors, the UGA has capacity for about 400,000 additional jobs in commercial and mixed-use zones and 123,000 jobs in industrial zones. • Sufficient capacity for job targets. Overall, the UGA capacity for approximately 527,000 additional jobs is double what is needed to accommodate the growth target of approximately 267,000 jobs for the remainder of the planning period. Capacity sufficient to accommodate job targets exists within each planning subarea and within nearly all individual jurisdictions. Chapters IV, V and VI of this report contain detailed countywide and subarea findings in all of these areas. Chapter VII, the heart of the report, provides detailed information about each jurisdiction in Urban King County. • 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report I-3 KING COUNTY 1200 King County Courthouse 516 Third Avenue Seattle,WA 98104 King County Signature Report April 14, 2008 Ordinance 16056 Proposed No. 2008-0074.2 Sponsors Gossett 1 AN ORDINANCE ratifying for unincorporated King 2 County an action by the Growth Management Planning 3 Council to adopt the 2007 Buildable Lands Report; and 4 amending Ordinance 10450, Section 3, as amended, and 5 K.C.C. 20.10.030 and Ordinance 10450, Section 4, as 6 amended, and K.C.C. 20.10.040. • 8 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY: 9 SECTION 1. Findings: The council makes the following findings: 10 A. The Growth Management Act("GMA")requires King County and its cities to 11 implement a review and evaluation program, commonly referred to as "Buildable Lands" 12 and requires completion of an evaluation report every five years. The first King County 13 Buildable Lands Report ("BLR") was submitted to the state in 2002. 14 B. RCW 36.70A.215 establishes the required elements of that program to 15 include: 16 1. Annual data on land development; and • o Ordinance 16056 17 2. Periodic analyses to identify "land suitable for development" for anticipated 18 residential, commercial, and industrial uses. • 19 C. Based on the findings of the five-year evaluation, a county or city may be 20 required to take remedial actions (i.e. reasonable measures) to ensure sufficient capacity 21 for growth needs and to address inconsistencies between actual development and adopted 22 policies and regulations. 23 D. The 2007 BLR contained data on: 24 1. Building permits and subdivision plats for the years 2001-2005; 25 2. Land supply and capacity as of 2006; and 26 3. Comparisons with growth targets established by the Growth Management 27 Planning Council (GMPC) in 2002 for the planning period 2001-2022. 28 E. The major findings of the 2007 BLR include the following: • 29 1. Housing growth has been on track with twenty-two-year growth targets; 30 2. Densities achieved in new housing have increased compared to the previous 31 five years; 32 - 3. Commercial-industrial construction has continued despite the recession of 33 2001-2004; and 34 4. King County's Urban Growth Area, and each of four subareas of the county, 35 has sufficient land capacity to accommodate the residential and employment growth 36 forecasted by 2022. 37 F_ While the GMA requires King County and its cities to implement a review and 38 evaluation program, as noted above, neither the GMA nor the Countywide Planning • 2 ' Ordinance 16056 39 . Policies ("CPPs") establishes a requirement or a process for adoption of the BLR as an 00 amendment to the CPPs. 41 G. In August 2002, the King County BLR was submitted to the state prior to the 42 statutory deadline of September 1 for "completion" of the five-year evaluation. However, 1 43 in December, 2004, the Seattle-King County Association of Realtors filed a petition with 44 the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board("the board") to appeal the 45 2002 BLR. 46 H. King County argued that the appeal of the BLR was untimely, falling outside 47 the sixty-day appeal period for GMA actions. The board ruled that theappeal was in fact 48 timely, since no legislative action had been taken to "adopt"the BLR that would have 49 defined a start and ending point for a sixty-day appeal period. 50 I. The board went on to state . . . to establish a timeframe for appeals to the �1 Board, the completion of the BLR should be acknowledged through legislative action and g g 52 the adoption of a resolution or ordinance finding that the review and evaluation has 53 occurred and noting its major findings." 54 J. As a response to the board decision, GMPC staff recommended the GMPC 55 consider legislative action to: 56 1. Establish a clear appeal period for the BLR; and 57 2. Emphasize the recognition and authority of the 2007 BLR as the technical 58 basis for subsequent countywide policy decisions as well as local decisions that are 59 consistent with the countywide policy direction. 60 K. As a coordinated countywide GMA document, the BLR falls within the 61 purview of GMPC. FW1 Step 5(b) establishes the review and evaluation program III 3 Ordinance 16056 62 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.215, but does not specify a procedure for formal adoption. The • 63 CPPs do set forth a process whereby GMPC takes formal action on CPPs through: 64 1. A motion to recommend a CPP amendment for adoption by the King County 65 Council; and 66 2. Ratification by at least thirty percent of the cities containing at least seventy 67 percent of the population. 68 L. While the BLR is not a policy action, following an equivalent track for 69 countywide action on the BLR appears to be the best vehicle for formalizing the 70 "adoption" of the report through legislative action that represents the endorsement of both 71 the county and cities. 72 M. The GMPC met on December 12, 2007 and voted to recommend to the King 73 County Council, a motion (GMPC Motion 07-3) to adopt the 2007 Buildable Lands 74 Report. • 75 SECTION 2. Ordinance 10450, Section 3, as amended, and K.C.C. 20.10.030 are 76 each hereby amended to read as follows: 77 A. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 Countywide Planning 78 Policies attached to Ordinance 11446 are hereby approved and adopted. 79 B. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 80 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 12027. 81 C. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 82 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 12421. 83 D. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 84 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 and 2 to Ordinance 13260. • 4 Ordinance 16056 85 E. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 through 4 to Ordinance 13415. 87 F. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 88 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 through 3 to Ordinance 13858. 89 G. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 —Countywide Planning 90 Policies are amended, as shown.by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14390. 91 H. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012—Countywide Planning 92 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14391. 93 I. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012— Countywide Planning 94 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14392. 95 J. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 96 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14652. K. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 98 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 through 3 to Ordinance 14653. 99 L. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 100 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14654. 101 M. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 102 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14655. 103 N. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning 104 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 and 2•to Ordinance 14656. 105 O. The Phase II amendments to the King County 2012 —Countywide Planning 106 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 14844. 107 P. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning • 5 Ordinance 16056 108 Policies are amended as shown by Attachments A, B and C to Ordinance 15121. • 109 Q. The Phase H Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 110 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 15122. 111 R. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning 112 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 15123. 113 S. Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 114 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments A and B to Ordinance 15426. 115 T. Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning 116 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments A, B and C to Ordinance 15709. 117 U. Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning 118 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments A to this ordinance: 119 SECTION 3. Ordinance 10450, Section 4, as amended, and K.C.C. 20.10.040 are • 120 each hereby amended to read as follows: 121 A. Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance 10450 for the purposes 122 specified are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County. 123 B. The amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance 124 10840 are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County. 125 C. The amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance 126 11061 are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County. 127 D. The Phase II amendments to the King County 2012 Countywide Planning 128 Policies adopted by Ordinance 11446 are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of 129 unincorporated King County. • • 6 Ordinance 16056 130 E. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 10 1 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 12027 are hereby ratified on behalf of the 132 population of unincorporated King County. 133 F. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as 134 shown by Attachment l to Ordinance 12421, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 135 population of unincorporated King County. 136 G. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 137 shown by Attachments 1 and 2 to Ordinance 13260, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 138 population of unincorporated King County. 139 H. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 140 shown by Attachment 1 through 4 to Ordinance 13415, are hereby ratified on behalf of 141 the population of unincorporated King County. 411/2 I. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide PlanningPolicies,c , as 143 shown by Attachments 1 through 3 to Ordinance 13858, are hereby ratified on behalf of 144 the population of unincorporated King County. 145 J. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 146 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14390, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 147 population of unincorporated King County. 148 K. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 149 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14391, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 150 population of unincorporated King County. 7 Ordinance 16056 151 L. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 152 shown by 111 Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14392, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 153 population of unincorporated King County. 154 M. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 155 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14652, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 156 population of unincorporated King County. 157 N. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 158 shown by Attachments 1 through 3 to Ordinance 14653, are hereby ratified on behalf of 159 the population of unincorporated King County. 160 O. The amendments to the King County2012 - Countywide Planning yw Policies, as 161 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14654, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 162 population of unincorporated King County. • 163 P. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 164 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14655, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 165 population of unincorporated King County. 166 Q. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 167 shown by Attachments 1 and 2 to Ordinance 14656, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 168 population of unincorporated King County. 169 R. The amendments to the King County 2012—Countywide Planning Policies, as 170 shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 14844, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 171 population of unincorporated King County. • 8 Ordinance 16056 172 S. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as shown by Attachments A, B and C to Ordinance 15121, are hereby ratified on behalf of 174 the population of unincorporated King County. 175 T. The amendments*to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 176 shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 15122, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 177 population of unincorporated King County. 178 U. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 179 shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 15123, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 180 population of unincorporated King County. 181 V. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning Policies, as 182 shown by Attachments A and B to Ordinance 15426, are hereby ratified on behalf of the 183 population of unincorporated King County. W. The amendments to the King County 2012 - Countywide Planning g P ohcies, 185 as shown by Attachments A, B and C to Ordinance 15709, are hereby ratified on behalf 186 of the population of unincorporated King County. 187 X. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as • 9 Ordinance 16056 3 188 shown by Attachment A to this ordinance, are hereby ratified on behalf of the population III 189 of unincorporated King County. • _, 190 Ordinance 16056 was introduced on 3/10/2008 and passed by the Metropolitan King County Council on 4/14/2008, by the following vote: Yes: 5 -Ms. Patterson, Mr. Constantine, Mr. Ferguson, Mr. Gossett and Mr. Phillips No: 4 - Mr. Dunn, Ms. Lambert, Mr. von Reichbauer and Ms. Hague Excused: 0 KING COUNTY COUNCIL KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON lib Juli atterson,Chair ATTEST: cy,t4A„tfrvivikfro In/ III Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council APPROVED this 2day of NV-t l---- ,2008. Ron Sims,County Executive -7 b Cc, Attachments A. Motion No.07-3 ___'� 7 � 77 - 1-17 c fel w 10 1 6 0 5 6 ATTACHMENT A Dated 3-18-08 October 3,2007 Sponsored By: Executive Committee icf 1 MOTION NO. 07-3 2 - A MOTION by the Growth Management Planning Council of ICing 3 County recognizing the 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report 4 and its findings 5 6 WHEREAS,in accordance with RCW 36.70A.215,King County and its cities are required 7 to implement a review and evaluation program,commonly referred to as the Buildable 8 Lands program,and 9 10 WHEREAS FW-1 Step 5(b)of the Countywide Planning Policies requires a review and 11 evaluation program consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A.215,and • 12 13 WHEREAS,in accordance with RCW 36.70A.215,the review and evaluation program 14 shall encompass annual collection of data on urban and rural land use and development, 15 critical areas,and capital facilities to the extent necessary to determine the quantity and 16 type of land suitable for development,both for residential and employment-based 17 activities,and 18 19 WHEREAS,in accordance with RCW 36.70A.215,the review and evaluation must 1) 20 determine whether there is sufficient land suitable for development to accommodate 21 population projections for the county by the state Office of Financial Management and • 22 subsequent allocations to cities pursuant to RCW 36.70A.110,2)determine the actual 23 density of housing and the actual density of land consumed for commercial and industrial 24 uses,3)based on the actual density of development,determine the amount of land needed 25 for residential,commercial,and industrial uses for the remainder of the 20-year planning 26 - period,and • 27 28 WHEREAS,in accordance with RCW 36.70A.215,King County and its cities are required 29 to complete an updated evaluation report every five years with the next report due by • 30 September 2007,and 31 32 WHEREAS,King County and its cities have completed this review and evaluation and 33 have published its findings in the 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report, 34 35 WHEREAS,the findings of the review and evaluation include the following: 36 - Housing growth has been on track with 22-year household growth targets; 37 - Densities achieved in new housing have increased,compared to the previous five 38 years; 39 - Commercial and industrial construction has continued,despite the recession of 40 2001 —2004; DRAFT 9114107 — 1 — 16056 411 1 6 0 5 6 - Kin County's tys Urban Growth Area,and each of its four urban subareas,has 2 sufficient capacity to accommodate the residential and employment growth 3 forecasted by 2022, 4 • l 5 THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY 6 HEREBY MOVES AS FOLLOWS: 7 8 1. The attached 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report is recognized as 9 final and complete in responding to the evaluation requirements of RCW 10 36.70A.215,and its findings are recognized as the basis for any future t I measures that the county or cities may need to adopt in order to comply 12 with this section. 13 14 2. This motion shall be attached to the Countywide Planning Policies as an 15 appendix for future reference. 16 17 3. The attached 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report is recommended to 18 the Metropolitan King County Council and the Cities of King County for 19 adoption of a motion recognizing the completion of the Report and noting 20 its major conclusions. 21 22 ADOPTED by the Growth Management Planning Council of King County on October 3, 23 2007 in open session and signed by the chair of the GMPC. • 24 25 26 27 28 .I29 30 WO) 31 Ron ' air, •wth Management Planning Council 32 Attachment: 33 1. 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report 34 35 36 37 • DRAFT 4/14/07 - 2 - • CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON • RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, RATIFYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES TO ADOPT THE 2007 BUILDABLE LANDS REPORT WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A. 210 mandates the development and adoption of Countywide Planning Policies for King County, and WHEREAS, King County, the City of Seattle, the City of Bellevue, and the Suburban Cities of King County have met jointly as the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC)to develop and recommend Countywide Planning Policies; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton has ratified the Countywide Planning Policies and subsequent amendments, and • WHEREAS, Countywide Planning Policy FW-1 Step 9 provides for an amendment process to change the Planning Policies as may be necessary from time to time, and WHEREAS, On April 14, 2008, the Metropolitan King County Council adopted Ordinance 16056 ratifying the proposed amendment to the King County Countywide Planning Policies which recognizes the 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report and its findings, and WHEREAS,the City of Renton has completed a review and evaluation of Buildable Lands consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A.215, and WHEREAS, the findings of the review and evaluation for the City of Renton have been published in the 2007 King County Buildable Lands Report, and • RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the findings of the 2007 Buildable Lands Report indicate that the • City of Renton has sufficient capacity,based on actual densities achieved during the most recent 5-year review period, to accommodate household and job growth targeted for the remainder of the current 20-year planning period. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The Findings of King County Ordinance 16056 pertinent to the 2007 Buildable Lands Report are adopted by reference. SECTION III. Motion 07-03 of the Growth Management Planning Council of King County is hereby ratified, and SECTION IV. With this ratification, the 2007 King County Buildable Lands 1111 Report is recognized as complete in meeting the countywide and city reporting requirements of RCW 36.70A.215 and its findings are recognized as the basis for any future measures that the City of Renton may need to adopt in order to comply with this section." PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2008 Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2008 • 2 RESOLUTION NO. • Denis Law,Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney • • 3 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL /, AI#: lei r d• 1 . • Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. CED/Planning June 9, 2008 Staff Contact Rebecca Lind, ext. 6588 Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Concurrent Correspondence.. Rezones Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to the Planning and Development Committee and Legal Dept the Planning Commission Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment iiiAmount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project SUMMARY OF ACTION: The City received one private Comprehensive Plan Amendment request and four City initiated requests, totaling three map amendments and two text amendments for the 2008 review cycle. #2008-M-01: John Top of Craft Architects,representing Puget Western Land Use Map amendment request involving two parcels with a combined 2.8 acres on Lake Washington Blvd near Gene Coulon Memorial Park. The existing Comprehensive Plan designation of the southern parcel is Employment Area—Industrial(EAI) and is zoned Industrial—Heavy(IH). The existing Comprehensive Plan designation of the northern parcel is Commercial Neighborhood (CN) and is zoned Commercial Neighborhood(CN). The Comprehensive Plan amendment request is for both properties to be re-designated as Urban Center—North(UC-N)with Urban Center—North 2 (UC-N2) zoning. #2008-M-02/2008 T-01: City of Renton Map and text amendment that will merge the regulations in the Commercial Arterial Zone Business Overlays into a single set of standards and add the Benson and Bronson Corridors to the Overlay Map. Existing Business District Overlays to be reviewed include: NE Sunset Blvd,NE 4th Corridor, Rainier Ave Corridor, and Puget Corridor. The Puget Corridor currently exists in RMC Title IV but not in the Comprehensive Plan. This conflict will be reviewed and resolved. At the request of the Planning •Commission,the Benson Hill Communities Cascade Center will also be evaluated for inclusion in the Business District Overlay. 2005CPAagendabillbh ► I Iii #2008-M-03: City of Renton Map Amendment to correct an error in land use designation for three parcels in the Benson Hill Communities,Parcel#142370094104, 17619 118th Ave SE (property owner Geoff Bell), and Parcels •#142370092207 and#142700931,both addressed as 16710 116th Ave SE.(property owners Teresa K and Tran Nhut T Nugyen). There properties were erroneously mapped as R-8 instead of Commercial Arterial. #2008-T-02: City of Renton This project will encompass review, re-writing, and editing of existing Comprehensive Plan text including"Goal", "Objective", and"Policy" statements and accompanying narrative in Purpose statements or other explanatory passages as well as development of new amendments needed to address policy issues that are not adequately covered or are needed to address the adopted City Mission and Business Plan goals. All Elements of the Comprehensive Plan will be included in format revisions. Several Elements will be evaluated for content revisions including: Introduction, Vision, Capital Facilities, Community Design, Economic Development, Environment, Housing, Land Use,Utilities, and Glossary. The Parks,Utilities, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements will be amended for annual updates incorporating changes in the Capital Improvements Plan as needed. Revision to Commute Trip Reduction Policies will also be considered. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Amendments to the Planning and Development Committee and the Planning Commission. • • 2005CPAagendabillbh y DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & �� ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ♦ � ® • ��N�o� MEMORANDUM DATE: June 2, 2008 TO: Marcie Palmer, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Denis Law, Mayor FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator NiVil STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind, Long Range Planning Manager(ext. 6588) SUBJECT: 2008 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Concurrent Rezones ISSUE: Should the City Council initiate the 2008 annual Comprehensive Plan amendment review process? • RECOMMENDATION: Refer the amendments listed below to the Planning and Development Committee and the Planning Commission. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The Growth Management Act limits processing of Comprehensive Plan amendments to an annual review cycle. The Renton Municipal Code requires Planning Commission review of these amendments and requires a Commission recommendation to the City Council. The public review process will begin at the Planning Commission upon referral of these amendments. Requested amendments are summarized in the attached materials. Staff recommendations are not yet prepared and will be made in more detail to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission had one briefing on the proposed map amendment work program and recommends analysis of the Benson Hill Communities Cascade Center to be included in the review. CPA# Location Applicant Description 2008- Lake Washington John Top of Craft Land Use Map amendment request involving M-01 Blvd Architects, two parcels with a combined 2.8 acres on representing Puget Lake Washington Blvd near Gene Coulon Western Memorial Park. The existing Comprehensive Plan designation of the southern parcel is Employment Area- • Industrial (EAI) and is zoned Industrial— H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2008\2008 Admin\Referral Issue Paper.doc Marcie Palmer,Council President May 30,2008 Page 2 of 3 Heavy(IH). The existing Comprehensive IP Plan designation of the northern parcel is Commercial Neighborhood(CN) and is zoned Commercial Neighborhood(CN). The Comprehensive Plan amendment request is for both properties to be re-designated as Urban Center—North(UC-N)with Urban Center—North 2 (UC-N2)zoning. 2008- Commercial Arterial City of Renton Map and text amendment that will merge the M- Zone Business regulations in the Commercial Arterial Zone 021T- District Overlay Business Overlays into a single set of 01 standards and add the Benson and Bronson Citywide in seven locations. Corridors to the Overlay Map. Existing Business District Overlays to be reviewed include: NE Sunset Blvd,NE 4th Corridor, Rainier Ave Corridor, and Puget Corridor. The Puget Corridor currently exists in RMC Title IV but not in the Comprehensive Plan. This conflict will be reviewed and resolved. At the request of the Planning Commission, the Benson Hill Communities Cascade Center will also be evaluated for inclusion in • the Business District Overlay. 2008- Three parcels in the City of Renton Housekeeping Map Amendment to correct M-03 Benson Hill an error in land use designation. Communities Properties were erroneously mapped as R-8 Parcel instead of Commercial Arterial during the #42370094104, 2007 Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. This amendment was requested by 17619 118th Ave SE property owner Geoff Bell at 17619 188th Parcels Ave SE who has a long standing business on #142370092207 and the site. The recommendation is that this #142700931,both amendment be City initiated as it is addressed as housekeeping in nature and resulted from a 16710 116th Ave mistake reading the King County zoning map. 2008- Citywide City of Renton All Elements Comprehensive Plan Format T-01 and Text Amendment This project will encompass review, re- writing, and editing of existing Comprehensive Plan text including"Goal", "Objective", and"Policy"statements and • accompanying narrative in Purpose h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2008\2008 admin\referral issue paper.doc • Marcie Palmer,Council President May 30,2008 Page 3 of 3 • statements or other explanatory passages as well as development of new amendments needed to address policy issues that are not adequately covered or are needed to address the adopted City Mission and Business Plan goals. All Elements of the Comprehensive Plan will be included in format revisions. Several Elements will be evaluated for content revisions including: Introduction, Vision, Capital Facilities, Community Design, Economic Development, Environment, Housing, Land Use,Utilities, and Glossary. The Parks,Utilities, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements will be amended for annual updates incorporating changes in the Capital Improvements Plan as needed. Revision to Commute Trip Reduction Policies will also be considered. • CONCLUSION: The proposed schedule for review of these applications is for the Planning Commission review to occur from June to December 2008. cc: Jay Covington h:\ednsp\comp plan\amendments\2008\2008 admin\referral issue paper.doc Application 2008-M-1 Lake Washington Blvd. % 0 , ,i, ,, ii. iiiii _ E___ Z / . ., v. 4q _ _ , .,,,,.. . /:.., „,, ,,.. NE16th-St ‘Itoli i. , I r. . cz \NM s W o 1 -� . 1111 Y C ,,',1'''.. ' 1 "i ° =1— eJ Vol , , OA i I \\\7\. . ......" •o.•....•o...❖. .: v'O4 Beach AcRd •:•:::•:::•3:❖:3:•:::, hVi .:::::::::::::::.'" A 1111 *IRS %.:.:44,...%.:.:44,...%.:.:44,...gip. y T oN. d IlipVA * A O tit d IPrew ° 2 '%C. N 11111 si. 111 11 1' orn CPA 2008 M:01 111° ti�Y Department of Community Vicinity Map • • &Economic Development Legend ��Ntp2 L7_J city Limits May 15,2008 Alex Pietsch,Administrator I I Renton Parcels o 100 200 400 Adriana Johnson,Planning Technician :kV,gm 2008 m:01 Feet Pr oliced by City of Renton(o)2008,the City cif 1:5000 DIY Renton all lights reserved.No warranties of any son, ncluding but rice limned to accuracy fitness o' ^ter::hantabnly.accompany,his product File Name 0 tEDWRS,IS.,pm,G' +plan aimnlm:rt rvdsspte'*.'..':__nKH_� ner.mJ . • ro t__ 6o0 raphic Locatiohs V4-0 /r' «� �, Bronson. Way N ,iiita 1 kit,, t N Commercial Arterial \, '1 �al NE Sunset Business co Area \,,,,. __ „,„, a .3: ” .----\ District QsJ-1� i " ""1,7 ._h y ( s k'` 'if "'"a iii .,,,Z743,-,.,.._.e1 ;r°i fly r NI Rainier Avenue 1 -^ r-a 1---4--".-01_ .- " -' ... ' € .':44 $ .4, . ; .: ...._.._.1w , Business o District \,.,`;a; ; !,; r ^,,ii.} ! a. , '3, 4,:j:, :e, yy i `e ... `, f I/as {' .tl'—^t t 1�i+� - f i'. IY4...... _ k11 y- j K U..„: 4th �, a __ it s? ,- ,,•______-:=:---,!,41„ ,,,,,,, _ t 5, �� ,..k" NE 4 Business , s� 3____='a."* ,1?`r`, hr L., .,.w I � , ** 1—= :ms44 =11•1_ .. �. . ' -1 District - ! r Puget Drive : ° .;.¢ �: '3" / 9 . Business District : #�,if_ ` '. . a, fr i -4 h—. r ._ '''4 bflet! 7.:1;:ir'', Vi"tk^i,‘, , 41.. ,,. ,r - . 1 ., - 9 .i� t,� ;�}., .F e a f'�-4-..u�A4''„ 4.�.i ,'„rt, .r+" ti, ,., . i s El ._ Benson.:Hill ::% i �. I 'F3'�'b' }F`r .. ..u."�y'f,i3 "�'r� '�.. i..�^� _ -�.. _- 1 .. ,� , � ., .. r,--1.- „,;5 � � Commercial Arterial. Sr k ,„ ..., ,, ' 0--.1.,..i,-„,,,-.1 ,V ,,,, Nlib .n.. ....7�',,, a`-.L 4 - i l 1 4P !'4 '^'T!` w. 8� .J7. W s.}2C�'�aC> -4-, � M C �I Area Application 2008-M-3 Corrections to Land Use Map for Property at 11626 and 16710116th Ave SE 111 Newberry Realty, Inc. May 15, 2008 Rebecca Lind Planning Manger City of Renton Dear Rebecca Lind, This letter is a follow up to our conversation last week concerning the recent rezone by Renton of my property located at 11626 SE 168th St. Renton, WA. 98058 Assessor's Parcel No. 1423700941. On this parcel is my office Newberry Realty Renton. The building itself is nearly fifty years old and has been zoned OSO Office Building by King County for nearly as long. As we discussed, the recent annexation and resulting zoning change to residential has resulted in a significant hardship on my part. • Given this hardship, I'm formally requesting a restoration to the previous zoning of office or commercial. Since there is a pending refinance on the property and a contract with a telecommunication company for equipment installation (both projects on hold due to the nonconforming use) any assistance you are able to offer in expediting a change would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, . / Geoff Bell 116265.E 168th ?Zenton, 7Y.L 98058 Office:4252825402 faX 425 .282.1404 • www.newderryrealty.com , • ,, • Renton • -- Renton City Limits �� ", `. ���� � .•" (,�^ �- � f � � ��gra '� � Parcels F . + "` xi rr € Ji}( i. Y •:,..-`1,...' , ` �s 3y . s , p s': ,.. Vit... 4'- a �s�„-....tom: ' ' .: - _ a 1 i ;t " r 4' .1 o jt. Ii- t SEARCH RESULTS: • ^'° x ``o-' Account Information . ,-. li 1 1 / { Account Number:142370094104 ' t d.. ,k r" Parcel No:1423700941 _ � • ,, s i ;' - y`:, 1 ' , • Tax Payer: _ yy1w �"" °� p .4 rr' BELL GEOFF44 t A' k < y + )' r `� 17619 118TH AVE SE k q" ,a."�il" b . RENTON WA98058 m `i ' ''t r . Assessment and Tax Information Y " •`: Levy Code:4250 .' °z' /..' , Tax Status:TAXABLE �°" �ta Roll Yr:2008 ,„. k xr - ' h ,, New Cnstr.NO c � R' "�� ' �j 3 t r{ " Ir C a • Land Val:$71,800.00 x :tome k �� � K � z x Impvs Val:$153,500.00 r o ', f4-4 r o-$ � s...., $ fin, Parcel Information ' , " y;. '+, Address: 11626 SE 168TH ST t- 4_V- } ��� 1. ` t. Plat Name:CASCADE HILLS NO.05 . k• • Plat Lot:93,94&95 'moms .� ?" »< _ �� � w j.Y , , Plat Block:13293 +,. -';r � �,, " 41 ' �: C S/T/R:28/23/5 `�' • ._�} Qtr Section:NW Prop Type:Commercial � , ' �r ro ,W�,,.., it tel, Jurisdiction:KING COUNTY ,:"r�, �• r , .... -*• ,�5 s" x +" ��� ', Present Use:OFFICE BUILDING a , ;°' .,„ " 'mat •� _ t � ,... Ex _ � �.� '/ Zoning:0 t 7.41-;',,N4-"") 44511 -- ;', - 4 f b Lot Acres:0.21 r, 4 91 *" ' � u Lot S F:8978 4,.."d .. w t i w a• � {�i1 4. '. WtrFrtSF:0 t 5< + • A ,y i 41t " y : z � ��z� !k +s "Ri - a� '�'��'�� �- rix x��*b .� ,! "� - . „,-,A, . .i.,-,,.,..-- K�• ? 7 ' -- �v k_' ". 4 5 .of x ;x '' �- E 4 s u @ »' Q g ,. .• Y , at 1 t� xe 444 # hcF f (4 i t x 4. N SCALE 1 : 1,239 1-i 100 0 100 200 300 FEET 1/ 7 . mL Cid ,_- iCC�. �-e0 l - •-- T aye �b et /Z�a- /�lo1- SE /b� h17 ,A 7 1 4/. / - k ltt ://rentonnet.or /Ma Guide/map?Ile s/Parcel.mwf Tuesday,Aril 08 2008 12:02 AM P 9 P P Renton • ;i k ~� • -- Renton Cit Limits � . ,, ' v �-� ,�h City -.'"". .-- .,t y '? -y- t i Si " k `.� Parcels - ��• � 4 � x ¢ �""` 'R. _ ° �It E Y 'r�b i .E�4� d,.F-- i _ 8$ '.ire ' J • �.-� i " , . t'I ,�t , �� A-;• �, • - l� ,4‘0.44 i_ fi i i. ;', fit $#t; sr _ - .7., • • "�`t!t R • k 1 _jt '1 3r„ Y -' ,,.,- ',,,,t....,1:,:„.„,--,„. .t'-' ,. 7 `L` '4�r o a'- ,^'`� ' • SEARCH RESULTS: '. r.4, x . a r ,:::..,,i,-it r> Account Information :,11,4','' , i: `' . •. X•• . i Vit' a` , Account Number: 142370093106 — '-1 ': Parcel No: 1423700931 , ,- '..„4 ,.,:....:\l',,'''' # a y x +� r r Tax Payer: � � } r. • t NGUYEN TERESA K+TRAN NHUT T ;' " , ,,i y<:- 'f41,-::,',A,, 16710116TH AVE SE#16720 - _ ��-- G ' a;� Ip .0"rt - , 1 RENTON WA98058 'itj -�. ` :°. f s�` ' '' 4 ' Assessment and Tax Information ;""v:11 ,�s ' x �" ea ,- t • Lev Code:4250 � '� ' ' y -' i Tax Status:TAXABLE �� � 17 :��; `, Roll Yr:2008 ' f• 3 `�� sl �'' f % - y ` f New Cnstr:NO k'�� x !t`� r t .°.� ' F `, #s Land Val:$58,500.00 r a� M a im vs Val:$369,400.00 -i � f sl ..*lL ,, , �e fi.•', � a" ` ' }' Parcel Information ' 5'`E i • '� a 1-r.:. - 4.r'b1 '` J Address: 16720 116TH AVE SE f �* ' � x ; ' Plat Name:CASCADE HILLS NO.05 '% .:1,1-,..,.:1_,,,1_,1,..1 ' 3, ; t\tA'•;'' a ' ..‘„ _ ` Plat Lot:93 _ p. � � :. fi e ;1,,F4.1,,, , ..:i .,"... Plat Block: * f r S/T/R:28/23/5 ` ` � 4 �? "wz zrfi - �i fs i "" ai aU- t. 5 a ti Qtr Section:NW a " '�. i `' .. ...."'�G. w a, t Prop Type:Commercial • t r , t s ti Jurisdiction:KING COUNTY t E � ` "`� _ r f r Present Use:OFFICE BUILDING Y r Zoning:0 = ' �,_ .. „ t # Lot Acres:0.17 , " ' � 4 ,',- -a : 4.....,,,..7.7,- r.'. + '•------,71-;:7,:•,4'.. ,.t fi 7.,Y Lot SF.7320 ‘L''''+'''''''' ''-7-- f �. is -.+,•, a �� ' � , Wtr Frt SF:0 ' '', 1,-4.0.; - ,, ,�.!tiff. .�t y�F,"rJ�'� r ,,�... rx�3 S �t-,,,,--,---4,, 'ur"y''.�a i ,' 11T::"...1':inr,: ''' ", r C,Af. .1;',41, ;e:s4,---., - 4.:.„, ','..:;,,,-4.:.;-..„4,, :‘,1;',4-71, i,,; �. LSF :' c, • s"._,. ge 3 '�.,� a ; N SCALE 1 : 993 N H h �� 1 50 0 50 100 150 FEET • ittp://rentonnet.org/MapGuide/maps/Parcel.mwf Wednesday,April 09, 2008 8:06 PM Renton • _. . „,..w.,v,i --- Renton City Limits + - ' , Parcels -1 tr e:.q ,�y`M Y . i i A.i - � „Z arik A.V 14...:+:i174 f•# 4 _ �t,'� y t t , " 7 i,:4„1.',.. { t.7 { : : "� 4' ks4')� �1 T,, ', ., r ,r sic . $ - i= I c fl '' r�`- e az. + ` r ix *[` r r - �w d .c a t �3r” �� rsi��t�" �€ ' t SEARCH RESULTS: €;, i t e _ �. kk;:-. , Account Information • � �" • 3 ( '€t- k` 9 P,r, .* .. k'�:` ,. ' '�'f ,""� , i. 44 «..wQ. Account Number: 142370092207 ....4,,:...= =J � -`.1 �� ,�k���� �� r � s � "� Parcel No: 1423700922 , �, • s - -. � a { rri ,,+&s.:4' ....pc ' t...1 ' Tax Payer. .� NGUYEN TERESA K+TRAN NHUT T �,: 4 ; '--..;,,j,..4,.,•,'--;,•4,,,,,i u" �- '" 44 s ty,o7 ' � -.. # ' 16710 116TH AVE SE#16720 : ,' r J� ".1,, , w�a ' RENTON WA98058 .''� ter ` ' a1 n-e Assessment and Tax Information �� � , Levy Code:4250 ' t '- -1:',, r p��'-, x - Tax Status:TAXABLE r a ! 10¢."' w" ; `.. 0" ! Y, "^ \ Roll Yr:2008 ', New Cnstr:NO1/4 4. �. wtz ,�y . Land Val:$57,800.00 r t t ;` a =x��` • Impvs Val:$238,400.00 '4'4,-',Z .z ;;,,�, + 4,-,:ki.f,',-, --; Parcel information '"` - a o' k ` '''.4..,:\ ' r t,,'*E: �' ,1« ' Address: 16710 116TH AVE SE `'�1 "� �. t �` ` - �, Plat Name:CASCADE HILLS NO.05 � _ Plat Lot:92&93 �;_ 3 i �. � ''''Ir r. { Plat Block: t a ` r. S/T/R:28/23/5 ' s .-, , Qtr Sction:NW Prop Type:Commercial 4. • ay: H C . `' Jurisdiction:KING COUNTY .. - -1.,'-- . Present Use:OFFICE BUILDING �, , , P '1. y .+� 3 _, : s Zoning:O � Lot Acres:0.17 r �8:,.,ti "" `, r. w r Lot SF:7230 ��� �' � 4,...„-i, �,,,,'����,� "s �'�„ .itti �� �a:�"• ��� �- �� rE �� �c,.�,�- Wtr Frt SF:0 .: k • * a` ;� 4 4 i , ,. . ... .. ....„ ,, r. .W.....,._ -:: �.. ...- fur #;'�,AL� �.: ,y4 -~-'�''f „,-„,-.4......,*,,,:,, ¢- R� ;. aity�l + ;. . Mrs+ ,...,,..,:, ray, }"'' ,- ”' ' !: *�" ,,r =a-,7-1,;;:-,,,',,,' ..., r ,+ * t r � - ": { �n"n � rc4 ���1�7 .tom' a - z.- , � -` �:..- e� siw.:c.�.„,... f 'fi ticw. 9 � .e * :1- 3'M... .+# .rew w.." G: N SCALE 1 : 987 I"i i"i �i I I I 50 0 50 100 150 FEET ill ittp://rentonnet.org/MapGuide/maps/Parcel.mwf Wednesday,April 09, 2008 8:05 PM t CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: 6 p ear "'Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 6/9/2008 Dept/Div/Board.. CED Staff Contact Mark Santos-Johnson Agenda Status Ext. 6584 Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. X Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Correspondence.. Program—Designated Residential Targeted Areas Ordinance X Modifications and Text Amendments Resolution X Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Ordinance Information Resolution Recommended Action: Approvals: 1) Refer to the Planning and Development Committee. Legal Dept 2) Adopt a resolution to set a public hearing on June 23, Finance Dept 2008, for the proposed modifications to the Multi- Other Family Housing Property Tax Exemption. • Fiscal Impact: 4; Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment N/A Amount Budgeted N/A Revenue Generated N/A Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total ProjectN/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: The City has used the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption since 2003 to encourage increased residential opportunities within designated urban centers that lack sufficient, desirable, and convenient residential housing. To date, the City has approved seven multi-family housing projects with a total of 1,602 housing units in all three designated residential targeted areas, including three projects Downtown (310 housing units), three projects in South Lake Washington(1,075 housing units), and one project in the Highlands (217 housing units). Based on the City's administration of the Exemption, staff recommends removing South Lake Washington as a residential targeted area and modifying the Highlands residential targeted area to conform to zoning and Comprehensive Plan changes adopted by the City Council last year. Staff also recommends amending the Exemption to implement the provisions of House Bill 1910, incorporate affordable housing, and modify project eligibility and fees. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (1) Adopt a resolution to set a public hearing on June 23, 2008, for the proposed modifications to the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption; (2)Approve the modifications to the designated residential targeted areas for eligible projects for the Exemption; and(3) Adopt an ordinance to amend the Exemption (RMC 4-1-220)by: (a)modifying the designated residential targeted areas; (b) implementing the provisions of House Bill 1910, (c) incorporating affordable housing, and (d)modifying project eligibility and fees. III DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC ��y DEVELOPMENT 111 �` MEMOR A N D UM DATE: May 29, 2008 TO: Council President Marcie Palmer Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Denis Law, Mayor FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator owe STAFF CONTACT: Mark Santos-Johnson, Senior Economic Development Specialist- ext. 6584 SUBJECT: Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Modifications and Amendments • ISSUE: Should the City(a) modify the designated "residential targeted areas" for eligible projects for the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption (Exemption)provided for in RMC 4-1-220 and(b) amend the Exemption to implement the provisions of House Bill 1910, incorporate affordable housing, and modify project eligibility and fees? RECOMMENDATION: (1)Adopt a resolution to set a public hearing on June 23, 2008, for the proposed modifications to the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption; (2) Approve the modifications to the designated residential targeted areas for the Exemption; and (3)Adopt an ordinance to amend the Exemption(RMC 4-1-220)by: (a)modifying the designated residential targeted areas; (b) implementing the provisions of House Bill 1910, (c) incorporating affordable housing, and (d)modifying project eligibility and fees. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: Overview of Current Exemption Program • As authorized by Chapter 84.14 RCW, the City Council established a property tax exemption incentive in 2003 (codified in RMC 4-1-220 as subsequently amended)to encourage multi-family housing development in the following three designated residential targeted areas: May 29,2008 Page 2 • • Highlands: Within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in one of the following: the Center Village (CV)zone, the Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) zone, or the Residential 10 Dwelling Units/Acre (R-10) zone; • Downtown: In the Center Downtown (CD) zone, Residential Multi-Family Urban Center (RM-U) zone, or Residential Multi-Family Traditional (RM-T) zone; and • South Lake Washington: In the Urban Center North District 1 (UC-N1) zone or properties within the Urban Center North District 2 (UC-N2) zone that were designated as eligible for exemption by Council Ordinance 5151 and developed with a residential multi-family project vested to the requirements of the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone. (Please see Attachment 1 for a map of the current designated residential targeted areas for the Exemption.) In addition to being located in one of the designated residential targeted areas noted above, eligible multi-family housing projects must, for example, be newly constructed and have a minimum of 30 attached dwelling units if located in the CD zone, the South Lake Washington targeted area, or within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in the Center Village (CV) zone. Eligible projects must currently have a minimum of ten attached dwelling units if located in one of the other zones noted above. • As outlined in Chapter 84.14 RCW and originally codified in RMC 4-1-220, the provision allows the value of qualified new housing construction to be exempt from ad valorem property taxation for ten successive years after completion of the project. However, the exemption does not include the value of the land, existing improvements or non-housing-related improvements (e.g., commercial space). The multi-family property tax exemption is in addition to any other tax credits, grants or incentives provided by law for the multi-family housing. (See changes below for the duration of the property tax exemption for future projects.) As noted above, the Exemption applies to all levels of the ad valorem property tax, including the local jurisdiction, county, state, and all local taxing districts. For projects in Renton,this amounts to a total of$9.77752 per$1,000 of assessed value for 2008. The value of the property tax exemption will of course be determined by the nature, quality, and cost of the multi-family housing(e.g., size, type,parking, and amenities). For example, the estimated property tax exemption for the 154-unit Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre completed in 2007 is approximately$113,592 per year, or $1,135,924 over 10 years (based on the 2007 post-construction assessed values and the 2007 property tax rate). This equates to a potential property tax savings of approximately$738 per year per housing unit($7,376 per housing unit for the 10-year period) for the project. The City of Renton's portion of the above estimated potential property tax savings would equal approximately$29,946 per year($299,457 for the ten-year period) for the 154-unit multi-family housing project(based on the 2007 assessed value and property tax rates). The City will receive $4,616 per year in property taxes for the project's land (based on the 2007 assessed value and • property tax rates), but the City will not receive property tax revenue for the residential improvements until after the 10-year property tax exemption period ends. H:\EDNSP\Council\Issue Papers-Agenda Bills-Ctte Reports\2008\Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Modifications\IssuePaper- MFHPTE Modifications 5-29-08.doc May 29, 2008 • Page 3 (Please see Attachment 2 for the projected Exemption for the Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre, plus a breakdown of the local ad valorem property tax rate and how the tax rates apply to the various taxing entities.) Exemption Projects Approved to Date As noted in Figure 1 below, the City has approved seven multi-family housing projects to date with a total of 1,602 housing units, including 1,552 rental apartments and 50 for-sale condominiums. The projects are located in all three designated residential targeted areas, including three Downtown (310 housing units), three in South Lake Washington (1,075 housing units), and one in the Highlands (217 housing units). The projects range in size from 50 housing units to 440 housing units with an average of 229 housing units per project. Figure 1 - Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption—Approved Project Applications Number of Designated Application Housing Residential Type of Approval Project Name Units Targeted Area Housing Date Project Status Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre 154 Downtown Rental 5/13/2005 Completed 2007 Parkside at 95 Burnett 106 Downtown Rental 5/13/2005 Completed 2007 The Bristol II at Southport 195 South Lake WA Rental 2/28/2006 Under construction Chateau de Ville 50 Downtown For Sale 6/13/2006 Under construction The Reserve 440 South Lake WA Rental 1/26/2007 Under construction The Sanctuary 440 South Lake WA Rental 1/26/2007 Under construction Harrington Square 217 Highlands Rental 9/27/2007 Under construction Total 1,602 RECOMMENDATION ANALYSIS: Proposed Modifications to the Designated Residential Targeted Areas The Department of Community and Economic Development(CED)proposes the following changes to the designated residential targeted areas for the Exemption: 1) Remove South Lake Washington as a designated residential targeted area. As initially adopted by the Washington State Legislature in 1995 as Chapter 84.14 RCW, the primary purpose of the Exemption is to encourage increased residential opportunities within designated urban centers that lack sufficient, desirable, and convenient residential housing. Since the Exemption has now been used by three projects in the South Lake Washington designated residential targeted area with a total of 1,075 housing units (67% of all Exemption housing units approved to date), CED believes that with the completion of the three projects the South Lake Washington area no longer qualifies as an area that lacks sufficient, desirable, and convenient • residential housing opportunities. Consequently, CED recommends removing South Lake Washington as a designated residential targeted area. H:\EDNSP\Council\Issue Papers-Agenda Bills-Ctte Reports\2008\Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Modifications\IssuePaper- MFHPTE Modifications 5-29-08.doc May 29, 2008 Page 4 • 2) Modify the Highlands designated residential targeted area to change the"R-10"zone to the "R- 14"zone and revise the designated residential targeted areas map to reflect the expanded Center Village (CV) Comprehensive Plan designation. As part of the Highlands Comprehensive Plan and zoning review completed in 2007, the City Council changed the Residential 10 Dwelling Units/Acre (R-10)zone to the Residential 14 Dwelling Units/Acre (R-14) zone and expanded the Center Village (CV) Comprehensive Plan designation to include additional R-14 zoned property on the north and Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoned property on the south. Since the original Highlands designated residential targeted area included the entire CV Comprehensive Plan designation area, CED recommends changing the current references to the "R-10"zone to the "R-14"zone and revising the designated residential targeted areas map to reflect the expanded Center Village (CV) Comprehensive Plan designation area for the Highlands. As required by RCW 84.14.040, CED is requesting that the Council adopt a resolution to set a public hearing on June 23, 2008,to modify the existing designated residential targeted areas for the Exemption as noted above. (Please see Attachment 3 for a map of the proposed modified designated residential targeted areas for the Exemption.) Proposed Modifications to Implement House Bill 1910 and Incorporate Affordable Housing The City has used the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption("Exemption") incentive • since 2003 to help stimulate new residential construction in the City's designated residential targeted areas: Downtown Renton, South Lake Washington, and the Highlands. As provided for originally in Chapter 84.14 RCW, the provision allows the value of qualified new housing construction to be exempt from ad valorem property taxation for ten successive years after completion of the project. In 2007, the Washington State Legislature passed the Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1910 amending Chapter 84.14 RCW which limited the property tax exemption for future eligible projects to either eight years or 12 years, the longer term being available if the project provides at least 20% of the units as affordable rental or for-sale housing. The City has not had any prior affordability requirements related to the Exemption incentive. However, to allow potential developers to access the longer 12-year exemption and to use the exemption to help create more affordable housing, CED staff recommends revising the program to allow a 12-year property tax exemption for projects where the owner agrees to rent or sell at least 20% of the multi-family housing units as affordable housing to low and moderate income households. If the owner elects not to provide the affordable housing, the property tax exemption would be limited to eight years (as opposed to the current ten years) for future eligible Exemption projects. House Bill 1910 includes maximum household median income percentages for the affordable housing units,but allows local jurisdictions to adopt lower household median income percentages to respond to the community's affordable housing needs. In order to help respond to the affordable housing needs in Renton, CED proposes to establish the affordability targets noted below for • eligible projects to qualify for the 12-year property tax exemption. H:\EDNSP\Council\Issue Papers-Agenda Bills-Ctte Reports\2008\Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption ModificationsUssuePaper- MFHPTE Modifications 5-29-08.doc May 29,2008 • Page 5 For your reference,the current estimated maximum monthly housing expenses (including rent and tenant-paid utilities for the rental apartment units and the mortgage payment,property taxes, mortgage insurance, and homeowner's dues/insurance for for-sale units) are listed in parenthesis below for each unit size and applicable affordability levels. The maximum monthly housing expenses will change each year as King County's median household income changes. (Please refer to Attachment 4 for a Breakdown of Household Median Incomes and Maximum Monthly Housing Costs by Household Median Income and Unit Size.) • For rental projects, at least 20% of the units in the project must be affordable to low income households at 80%or less of median income. The current estimated maximum monthly housing expenses (including rent and tenant-paid utilities) follow: studio apartments ($1,140); one-bedroom apartments ($1,220); two-bedroom apartments ($1,466); and three- bedroom apartments ($1,692). • For ownership projects, at least 20%of the units in the project must be affordable to moderate income households at 120% or less of median income. The current estimated maximum monthly housing expenses follow: studio units ($1,709); one-bedroom units ($1,831); two-bedroom units ($2,198); and three-bedroom units ($2,539). By way of comparison, the current apartment and townhouse rents (excluding tenant-paid utilities) • at the 95 Burnett are $950 for studios, $1,085 - $1,250 for one-bedroom units, $1,465 - $1,580 for two-bedroom units, and $1,695 - $1,705 for three-bedroom units. As part of the City's efforts to incorporate affordable housing into the Exemption, CED proposes to establish the designated residential targeted areas as targeted areas for low-income housing serving households at or below eighty percent(80%) of the median income. As noted in Attachment 5, CED has also included definitions in subsection RMC 4-1-220(B) for"Affordable Housing," Household,""Low income Household,""Median Income," and"Moderate income household" for Exemption projects as part of the changes to incorporate affordable housing in to the Exemption. CED also House Bill 1910 also includes new annual reporting requirements for Exemption project owners and local jurisdictions. CED submitted the first such report to the State of Washington Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) in January 2008. In order to administer the affordable housing element of the Exemption and to comply with the additional reporting requirements included in House Bill 1910, CED has also included proposed modifications for the Exemption application material in subsection RMC 4-1-220(E), the final certificate material in subsection RMC 4-1-220(J), and the annual certification material in subsection RMC 4-1-220(K) . 0 1 For illustration purposes,the estimated maximum monthly housing expense figures are based one person for the studio units and 1.5 persons per bedroom for the one,two,or three-bedroom units. The actual maximum monthly housing expense figures will be based on the actual number of people in each household. 1 H:\EDNSP\Council\issue Papers-Agenda Bills-Ctte Reports\2008\Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Modifcations\IssuePaper- MFHPTE Modifications 5-29-08.doc May 29,2008 Page 6 • Proposed Modifications to Project Eligibility and Fees Based on the City's administration of the Exemption program since 2003, CED also recommends the following text modifications related to project eligibility and fees for the Exemption: 1) Increase the minimum number of housing units for eligible projects in the Residential Multi- Family Urban Center(RM-U)zone from ten to 30 units In 2007 the City Council amended RMC 4-1-210 in part to increase the minimum number of housing units to 30 units for new multi-family housing projects in the RM-U to be eligible for the Waived Fees for for-sale housing in downtown Renton. To conform to the eligibility provisions for the Waived Fees, CED proposes to modify subsection 4-1-220(D)(2) to increase the minimum number of housing units for eligible projects in the RM-U zone from ten to 30 housing units— similar to eligible projects in the CD or CV zones. 2) Remove the Special Design Regulations now integrated into the Development Regulations for all eligible zones As adopted earlier,RMC 4-1-220 included special design regulations for projects located in the following areas that did not have specific design regulations included elsewhere in the City's Development Regulations: the CV Comprehensive Plan designation or within the Urban Center • North District 2 (UC-N2) and vested to the requirements of the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone. As part of the Highlands Comprehensive Plan and zoning review completed in 2007, the City Council adopted design regulations for the area included in the Highlands designated residential targeted area. As part of the current proposed changes, the UC-N2 area referenced above will be eliminated as part of the removal of the South Lake Washington designated residential targeted area. Consequently, CED recommends that the Special Design Regulations included in subsection 4-1-220(D)(3)be removed. 3) Increase project fees for the Exemption Based on the City's administration of the Exemption since 2003 and the additional reporting requirements included in House Bill 1910 as referenced above, CED recommends increasing the fees as reflected in the following chart: Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption—Current& Proposed Fees Fee Description Current Fee Proposed Fee Initial Application $500 $1,000 Amendment of Contract $250 $500 Extension of Conditional Certificate $250 $250 (Same) • Final Certificate Application $250 $1,000 H:\EDNSP\Council\Issue Papers-Agenda Bills-Ctte Reports\2008\Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Modifications\IssuePaper- MFHPTE Modifications 5-29-08.doc May 29,2008 • Page 7 4) Add a definition of"mixed-use" for Exemption projects to further refine Project eligibility Eligible Exemption projects in the CD zone or within the CV Comprehensive Plan designation and in the CV zone (plus projects in the RM-U zone if the proposed modifications to project eligibility above are approved)must be located in a new mixed-use development, unless otherwise waived by the CED Administrator. The City's Development Regulations (RMC 4-11-130) includes the following mixed-use definition: "Mixed Use: A building or site with two (2) or more different uses such as residential, office, manufacturing,retail,public or entertainment." To clarify the desired mixed-uses for Exemption projects, CED recommends adding the following definition to subsection RMC 4-1-220(B): For the purposes of RMC 4-1-220, "Mixed-use means a multi-family housing residential project with at least one(1) other non-residential use in one (1) or more multi-family housing buildings in the project, such as retail, office, entertainment, schools, conference centers or a use approved in writing by the (CED) Administrator. The purpose of the mixed-use requirement is to implement the intent of the land use district, maximize the efficient use of land, support transit use, and encourage the development of well-balanced, attractive, convenient, and vibrant urban residential neighborhoods. The additional use excludes any accessory functions related to the residential use. Unless otherwise modified or waived in • writing by the (CED) Administrator, the non-residential mixed-use shall occupy at a minimum the ground floor along the street frontage with a depth of at least thirty feet (30') for any building in the project." (Please refer to Attachment 5 for a complete redline version of the proposed text amendments for RMC 4-1-220. Please note that only the text that is marked by an underline or strikethrough is different from the current code.) CONCLUSION: The City has used the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption since 2003 to encourage increased residential opportunities within designated urban centers that lack sufficient, desirable, and convenient residential housing. To date, the City has approved seven multi-family housing projects with a total of 1,602 housing units in all three designated residential targeted areas, including three projects Downtown(310 housing units), three projects in South Lake Washington (1,075 housing units), and one project in the Highlands (217 housing units). Based on the City's administration of the Exemption, CED recommends removing South Lake Washington as a residential targeted area and modifying the Highlands residential targeted area to conform to zoning and Comprehensive Plan changes adopted by the City Council last year. CED also recommends amending the Exemption to implement the provisions of House Bill 1910, incorporate affordable housing, and modify project eligibility and fees. • In order to make the proposed changes outlined above, the City must hold a public hearing to consider the modifications to the designated residential targeted area for eligible projects, approve H:\EDNSP\Council\Issue Papers-Agenda Bills-Ctte Reports\2008\Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Modifications\IssuePaper- MFHPTE Modifications 5-29-08.doc May 29, 2008 Page 8 • the modified designated residential targeted areas, and adopt an ordinance that modifies RMC 4-1- 220 to reflect the modifications noted in Attachment 5. Attachments: 1) Current Residential Targeted Areas for Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption map 2) Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre—Projected Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption 3) Proposed Changes to the Residential Targeted Areas for Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption map 4) Breakdown of Household Median Incomes and Maximum Monthly Housing Costs by Household Median Income and Unit Size 5) Redline Version of Proposed Modifications to RMC 4-1-220 6) Draft Ordinance cc: Jay Covington,CAO Bonnie Walton,City Clerk Linda Parks,Interim FIS Administrator Terry Higashiyama,Community Services Administrator Gregg Zimmerman,PW Administrator Suzanne Dale Estey,Economic Development Director Neil Watts,Development Services Director Rebecca Lind, Strategic Planning Manager Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Karen Bergsvik,Human Services Manager • 4111 H:\EDNSP\Council\Issue Papers-Agenda Bills-Cite Reports\2008\Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Modifications\IssuePaper- MFHPTE Modifications 5-29-08.doc Attachment 1 Ili� w- INNEEN III �' .■-" t •1 i�l�If�■i�:firES3:� � :n_, South Lake Washington _ t* -:In■■■■■:■*.■■� ■Ingle E;, � ,,,. gr. ■w■■a ■E1■ ' ■ Laww iE . i`�3 -ii_-- — — -- -- — -- -- - m■.p■i E■. ■rte; ■s. g■■ 4 ; ';s :� ,•'f — ■ M■■A rd ■■1_11 ■ fi■&A■ ffs 17 if-1 4 r T �k ■ ._111.1■iJ ea�■�.� ■■A■�I ■ k ES, - -94k4 ••• ia )�1■rill■O ■�:r■-" !. : h . 'G7 s ww -�"_'.1 f\� ■L�;1!111!! �`°',goo � g � � �x' F tA � 6rm. Iulit i 'a_e 7:t'-,,,, r �i,■ ; �■RP fi t , ;14 3 f3} � li g Adirl,�- I�j I it - 4-� Y `"t a ten , 900 _ �/� t � �v i: IIN011al 3r ° ka "9 R II■ ■t 11 w Aad' � i�� anal � ��A s��,`�.Elf ■■ m. www■I 41...ii, t -F6' IN B il kurmil biliVe4'. ,-!i-t-TP,/,-;,AV-i.El,110 '' ''''';1.::2';::1;1':'::::7";'!";'7 f. r ..� ■■ucrlruurs��p!1111/84/11iifl Iig■, �j:f w111111���arl.iiiil�ii L m:413111;11t-I" ;*t li;ri:11E1�.a ill ��a: -e■ ■._a . �IiI . I11 � 1.7 z �.� s,. ,:,. - �, , \ :110;1;114:Iiiniliiit �, Yj'°ri t � ��;ill' l ��� ►�♦1Fi'1d':;-,,,, , ,. ,, , ,_ tie_luf , :.-': 11 Io11 1I�� 1 �`11� ■11 ■c: \ cam}■ice.-,::,:::40 11amo lw IIIJ A$ �<� ��1 �. ■ ���� 111:111!1„ , ,,,.. NI 1,1L � �;A�;<I�- '' I� 111'JL' ��� 11r. : �1�1` :i tL4<:�4'�■, � ■ 11. YJi�N 6th St. 1I ��i���'I 114����'1�5��4�■1■1 ■ i r;; iiilu�l rii ■ Irills•I •1 ST :- \IIII���\IIID �.1 �.*��'■� iI% � .■. 'Ire, -> . s \■ I' a—� 1!��:41, �\ .� ��.111111 1111►� ,� \ S♦ �t I E—I`M d i_ St �. ��� �uY Y717■■■ii � ■-CPJ Gt�J,� oto ,,,or ■■'�I ri ■ts��q �4411V A.412 _._\ =mom ilki In I •W ` .0�� liti:► tina it:► r =.=� '� ■! I</4th St. m Iona 0� � ■�111�nn1Tia mm„, NE NE 4th St. /%EE WM_ _�7BIN=NMum iE_ NE SIF ■t1111 . \..Airport Way Ir t I■■■1111 � .®#1e , J � 4:1:: �ll.� •_ - WI, ma Ft :1111' J- %i Ig =I� u. 1►■ I i"1411r411111 . tmv'ilius . # ri.::ii.I 1 _,.... s '4* q s i'�a ;!` q ?itv , \��# ii U 1i1,4 1.0_��,l. ., 4,,,,.. 141,'N:M 11:iir ptsv: �CN121YIGi117 '1 • � � ��,� t� � Y � I Illi:ill!'�.- � 44%4'G��•'r,�.p�GI !11111 < .i-', }t *op,,��11 ow IIS,� • � ..,1,<i��-- .... E�,. p 111ly� ,..',7:,!tea _Al pm "'al'' Po ��� .a=11`,,pllla��fl��� { i. ,,, n in E_moi \ l �,�� impig kr.... 4tib P] £ N ni J ��sgip ��U115d16111E1'111111Uj\ ii 1.-- ' ��_ ♦l SII 1 ri =r; ' , :: Ium riP , ” /� a:Er.=Ilia\4 tiii.�fl.� 11111 , •sidential Targeted Areas for Multi-Family Housing S' Property Tax Exemption p�,vY 0.c Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning + Alex Pietsch,Administrator G.Del Rosario `L'N.rO$ 26 January 2006 Attachment 2 Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre Projected Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Based on 2007 Post-Construction Assessed Values April 9, 2008 Project Information Project Name Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre Street Address 104 Burnett Avenue S Owner Merrill Gardens @ Renton Centre, LLC (Note: Number of housing units reduced during construction from Number of Housing Units 154 155 to 154) 2007 Post-Construction Assessed Value (from King County Assessor's Office online records) Land SF 80,025 Current Assessed Value for Land (2007) $1,600,500 Current Assessed Value for Land per SF $20.00 Current Assessed Value for Improvements $10,383,400 Current Assessed Value for Improvements per $67,425 Housing Unit • • • • • • • Breakdown of 2007 Property Tax for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre (without exemption) Based on 2007 post-construction assessed values and 2007 Property 2007 property tax rate Tax Rate per 2007 Property 2007 Property Tax Total 2007 $1,000 of Tax for for Property Tax Assessed 2007 Property Residential Retail/Commercial (Land & Value Tax for Land Improvements Improvements Improvements) City of Renton—General Levy $2,82148 $4,516 $29,297 N/A $33,813 City of Renton—Special Levy 0.06252 $100 $649 N/A $749 Total City of Renton property tax $2.88400 $4,616 $29,946 N/A $34,562 King County 1.28956 $2,064 $13,390 N/A $15,454 Port of Seattle 0.23158 $371 $2,405 N/A $2,775 Hospital District#1 0.55652 $891 $5,779 N/A $6,669 Renton School District#403 3.44659 $5,516 $35,787 N/A $41,304 State of Washington School Fund 2.32535 $3,722 $24,145 N/A $27,867 Emergency Medical Service 0.20621 $330 $2,141 N/A $2,471 Sub-total other property tax $8.05581 $12,893 $83,647 N/A $96,540 Total Property Tax $10.93981 $17,509 $113,592 N/A $131,102 Estimated Annual Property Tax HousingUnit 114 $738 N/A $851 P Y per ...,,,_.�p�.>.-,Nw:^�.'ms+w.�src••w�,erm��nra..�-sn+.w.x�e-.�- .. ..ww.n• �.m-::i.��.,�.. .�, np.PF yaA`vC�Y'HT" Projected.M1 lti-Fam'ii ;Housin PPro a Tax"Exem tion for�-Merrill'�GardensTat Renton!Cenr r ''- Based=on_20.07, _ost-construction'assessed values and 2007 property tax°rater but subject to change in tEie',,, � ; p future based,on new tax rates and/or changes in the projects assessed valuer : -:::':::::::4' -. , . , '-',1,'':',','''.„ ,',,':'';''""':,"'''',.'," ry ,A ^1 Annual Estimated Property Tax Savings:for Residential improvements' ' ' $113, 92.',m,v y:r._ :::::4: 1111:1,91,0„:„:, :,4 r 14t ,, ::::::,,,,T,-,,,, ;'. = _T-en Ye-.iar'Esrutimaat';e�rad=P:Lsrlsa a Ta x Sav i-n sor.Residential m-provements _ $1,+t 1.,35 924',;,p,...:,,:r,,;ppi.>h:F tn. �� : 4!%. ,1;r _ n r.Estimated�Pro e. Tax�Savn s. erHousin 'Unifi _ _ 7 376. ` Annual Estimated PropertyTax-Savin sper Housin Y Unit $73� ' " v r City_of Renton Portion:of,Annual Estimated PropertyTax SavingsforYResidentiali rw"„0.,,,,,,,,,,,, 2,9;94,6°$ !: 4,,,„6,„,„, ,- Improvements ,..., I, ' =e:i.LYd.�:�'-�!: : •. ,,.. _ } Y,N... ♦r � ., ,.... .,. a.+k%�:n..tl�•' .- Ci :of Renton'Port�on:of.Ten Year:Estimated PropertyTax'$avin s=for-�Residential,�.r $299;45T - , wF;;;.!:;,:';,,`, };:;'' �- - ' g - - ,t Improvements��... _ . ,. ,,, ' _ ",+`: ".p€?f'Thr'�°?.(�=1�.r..tr.tn:friClr:u.: �rt ;v ..- .t. _ ;14444,7 -.z(=" I:r�lil!k�i'i:��:;:, �s3�3�i±-�' - � - .',,:r r=I F gd'�t!.” ei - ;r°JIJu. . k�a'r.,,: �":�n, w. -� _. . - .; ,r„” 1";945': -�, �P,::. �ytgy,(?.•. it , _.in'''',''4.---_`i i''': ... ,•r.., ,,r,:•,, Ci of Renton_Portion of Ten.Year Estimated P;ro _e Tax Savin s` erNHousing p.,.ni,;'; 'tea ; ',, , r, ty _ . � property . ., 9 P ,��. 9,� -�� , v y+-1 :, .. ,„.;,-.45 ' , , - t:2 ry7:7:"„i=2,744,4,:::,7:dt 1^ Y'7t4.N1'; ;,7,,fiJ9k,s $,r 1 r'''''!7'' _ Imo" c 41,111UI� �*rr''. =;.k City-cif RentonaPortion of Annual_Estimated.Property_,Tax Savings,peryHouing Units ?':� $194 ,,,ll ri ,, .. .. ......; - - - . __ .PIF.:' '4 'b..- 4.'' "447444-4,441444-4; 44“,:4-44,:,... c - .44„4,44,,,,,71,4,,,..,,,,,,,„,—,,:4.44„„74,p74444r. , .. �n �t::,r..,.,,�,:we,".:ra'� �FSr.�'�' a�:.:;.,,.s•`-_� ._ �'-�......t.G�",,:.::I.'::usaaa«w Attachment 3 nrrt4 N 47,-.:.r..., w,Wag baillm0. eon �- ir � ���t�i�'��`' � spa r �►l� 'S "r. Qt Vi riy a'. _SUI= P !1 ; aua __ } _ill, rtid .. Mira fi'~'. ' :i - - - : Inv , raa; n. ii b 4.1 . t,.\ \\,... , .( .,.atit_DC. ,--- ift.t 4.. ,„/ i/t,11, 1 -111'a .13 4— .,.......,,,-. ... ..„. .. . .,..,.,.. t_{,,„„ ra� i t 1 Ve �.kl' R:� ea�trtr b vi j''*� 24 iiIl i \rr' \ 4-_--'ia IYNIH:�"` a Mina, ,►iWulHtfOti ^� �� i ��� 1i ,5 �' .� ! Tai rye }. { I/ ;/ •�\t f rr+ ' fir` _ ... I . is !Ilia. '''-' —1 az N' .Fir- 17 e S i it G1 '� ; '' r ..---11/4!",•%11106,,,„,1,;,..„ �! �1SS'C VE4 11000r, .� . / \ 4 -list 1-1: . -tom j . t ° a ;47,r*,.,< ', 'rte. \ .1:1 /, 'A/1�j�J • t' 11- :LairL- disarm �- 't / r _ _ I/' �i' e�:Sf'r' '`/: -i� z�- r OIWIHtt1L�iIil i ..\ 111111. !f a gg Lira f% : .\i c.` _ ® ufl:rr't t- i -1 • )-�-'---.'IT," , t. FlAil 4i - .i %%i 2I iii/\I\ /. y '3� r,l■ I 935iz� —7ii1'ir r'L. `T IT-,, ,Y/ : ` 'fPP. 6 UJ!J! I4U .... J _- - --p. 44:'4.(4);i' -----1-- --71‹.------=1, \• I@ - —i i -.1 —. � " &i ti / f j e i � ' r. '''• • 'tilk'' ' ' '''"citi=51';`-i, -i -ter 'rye A ..,r< ,L,',• :; ' °„,,,,,,,E--1. .,.: :,t :: d Ik ;,, ''''-i.,„'7,,t,1- '1, cf, og rt Iltdt tnrloiN 4ntrra /.5 414114 ,/',':; -,ir- tll � - •c—t-.'`� - .c ). .. • ATF;;,? -I�- • e'°.. .1--'1.___....-'-----',:\ / ' J 111111.111 e1tit; = i!!nr - `y. '�'-. t h,.�'7 ,,<• ill I 4. R + 'Bfi - - �” ' ` _ ���:\;_. m ift ( a fir ' Q '. - �``�. , =H-1 _, „ (: ::,____:_,'\-,., ' ,., , ......- ,... .-- „Alms i ,...,, •... ..„4.,,,,..... . .4,, , ,1 ,. ,____---, ,...... ,..., ------„\\ -- , ,,, , .„ . ... , ,.„ , ., . , , .. _,... ........ at.. p "C--..':',)-%',X " . , Proposed Changes to the Residential Targeted Areas for Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption �Y Department of Community Legend III 0 0' &Economic Development �,jCityLimits •®. Alex Pietsch,Administrator i I Renton Parcels 'S� Adriana Johnson,Planning Technician Downtown March 31,2008 N Ci (=Highlands0 500 1,000 2,000 Produced by City of Renton(c)2008,the City of Highlands expanded area Feet Renton all reels reserved.No warranties of any sort, 120,000 including but not limited to accuracy.fitness or Mq S.Lake Washington deleted area merchantability,accompany this product File Name H.\EDNSP\GIS_projects\economic_development\ malb_family_tax_exemption\mods\proposed_changes_resldenhal_MF_tax_exemptlon mod • Attachment 4 Breakdown of Household Median Incomes and Maximum Monthly Housing Costs by Household Median Income and Unit Size King County 2008 Median Income: $81,400 Household Income based on Percentage of Median Income and Household Size % of Median Income 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People _6 People 7 People 8 People 100% $57,000 $65,100 $73,300 $81,400 $87,900 $94,400 $100,900 $107,400 90% $51,300 $58,590 $65,970 $73,260 $79,110 $84,960 $90,810 $96,660 80% $43,050 $49,200 $55,350 $61,500 $66,400 $71,350 $76,250 $81,200 60% $34,200 $39,060 $43,980 $48,840 $52,740 $56,640 $60,540 $64,440 50% $28,500 $32,550 $36,650 $40,700 $43,950 $47,200 $50,450 $53,700 45% $25,650 $29,295 $32,985 $36,630 $39,555 $42,480 $45,405 $48,330 40% $22,800 $26,040 $29,320 $32,560 $35,160 $37,760 $40,360 $42,960 35% $19,950 $22,785 $25,655 $28,490 $30,765 $33,040 $35,315 $37,590 30% $17,100 $19,500 $21,950 $24,400 $26,350 $28,300 $30,250 $32,200 Maximum Monthly Housing Cost based on Percentage of Median Income • and Unit Size (Includes rent and tenant-paid utilities for apartment units and mortgage payment, property taxes, mortgage insurance, and homeowner's dues/insurance for for-sale units) %of Median 1 2 3 4 5 Income Studio Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom 100%% $1,424 $1,526 $1,832 $2,116 $2,360 $2,602 90% $1,282 $1,373 $1,649 $1,904 $2,124 $2,342 80% $1,140 $1,220 $1,466 $1,692 $1,888 $2,082 60% $855 $915 $1,099 $1,269 $1,416 $1,562 50% $712 $763 $916 $1,058 $1,180 $1,301 45% $641 $686 $824 $952 $1,062 $1,171 40% $570 $610 $733 $846 $944 $1,041 35% $498 $534 $641 $740 $826 $911 30% $427 $457 $548 $634 $707 $780 Note: For illustration purposes, the estimated maximum monthly housing expense figures are based one person for the studio units and 1.5 persons per bedroom for the one, two, and three-bedroom units. The actual maximum monthly housing expense figures will be based on the actual number of people in each household. Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and Washington State Housing Finance Commission (2008) • Attachment 5 • REDLINE VERSION OF PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO RMC 4-1-220— PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING IN RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREAS May 29,2008 4-1-220 PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING IN RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREAS: A. PURPOSE: As provided for in chapter 84.14 RCW, the purpose of this Section is to provide limited, eight (8). ten (10), or twelve (12) year exemptions from ad valorem property taxation for qualified new multi-family housing located in designated residential targeted areas. B. DEFINITIONS: In construing the provisions of this Section, the following definitions shall be applied: 1. "Administrator" means the Administrator of the Renton Department of Community and Economic Development, -.e- e e 'see .. -: — - 'e.- Planning Department, or any other City office, department or agency that shall succeed to its functions with respect to this Section, or his or her authorized designee. 2. "Affordable housin•" means residential housin• that is rented b a low income household whose monthly housing costs, including rent and utilities other than telephone. do not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the household's monthly income. For the purposes of housing intended for owner occupancy, "affordable housing" means residential housin• that is within the means of and purchased by low or moderate income households. 3. "Household" means a sin•le •erson famil or unrelated •ersons livin• together. 4. "Low income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is at or below eighty •ercent (80% of the median income, as further defined in subsection C)(1)(b)(ii)(a) below. 5. "Median income" means the median family income adjusted for family size for King County, as reported by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In the event that HUD no loner 1 publishes median income figures for King County, the City may use or • determine such other method as it may choose to determine the King County median income, adjusted for household size. 6. "Mixed-use" means a multi-family housing residential project with at least one (1) other non-residential use in one (1) or more multi-family housing buildings in the project, such as retail, office, entertainment, schools, conference centers or a use approved in writing by the (CED) Administrator. The purpose of the mixed-use requirement is to implement the intent of the land use district, maximize the efficient use of land, support transit use, and encourage the development of well-balanced, attractive, convenient, and vibrant urban residential neighborhoods. The additional use excludes any accessory functions related to the residential use. Unless otherwise modified or waived in writing by the Administrator, the non-residential mixed-use shall occupy at a minimum the ground floor along the street frontage with a depth of at least thirty feet (30') for any building in the project. 7. "Moderate income household" means a single person, family. or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is at or below one hundred twenty percent (120%) of the median income, as further defined in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii)(b) below. • 8. "Multi-family housing" means one or more new buildings designed for permanent residential occupancy, each with four (4) or more dwelling units. 93. "Permanent residential occupancy" means multi-family housing that provides either owner occupancy or rental accommodation on a nontransient basis. This definition includes rental accommodation that is leased for a period of at least one (1) month but excludes, for example, hotels and motels that predominantly offer rental accommodation on a daily or weekly basis. C. TAX EXEMPTION: 1. Duration of Exemption: The value of improvements qualifying under RMC 4-1-220D is exempt from ad valorem property taxation as follows:fer ten (10) successive years beginning January 1st of the year immediately exemption. (a) For properties for which applications are submitted before July 22, 2007, the value is exempt for ten (10) successive years beginning January 1 of the year immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the final certificate of tax exemption: and • (b) For properties for which applications are submitted on or after July 22, 2007, the value is exempt: 2 (i) For eight (8) successive years beginning January 1st of the year immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the final certificate of tax exemption: or (ii) For twelve (12) successive years beginning January 1st of the year immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the final certificate of tax exemption. if the property otherwise qualifies for the exemption and the applicant/owner rents or sells at least twenty percent (20%) of the multi-family housing units as affordable housing to low and moderate income households as further defined in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii)(a) and (C)(1)(b)(ii)(b) below. (a) For rental projects at least twenty percent (20%) of the multi- family housing units in the project must be rented throughout the duration of the twelve (12)-year exemption period as affordable housing to low income households at eighty percent (80%) or less of median income. (b) For ownership projects, at least twenty percent (20%) of the multi-family housing units in the project must be sold as affordable housing to low or moderate income households at one hundred twenty (120%) or less of median income. • (c) The owner may use any combination of studio, one (1)- bedroom, two (2)-bedroom, and/or three (3)-bedroom units to comply with the minimum twenty percent (20%) requirement in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii)(a) and (C)(1)(b)(ii)(b) above. (d) If, in calculating the minimum twenty percent (20%) of the multi- family housing units in the project for affordable housing in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii), the number contains a fraction, then the minimum number of multi-family housing units for affordable housing shall be rounded up to the next whole number. (e) When the project includes more than one building with multi- family housing units, all of the affordable housing units required in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii) may not be located in the same building. 2. Limits on Exemption: The exemption does not apply to the value of land or to the value of nonhousing-related improvements not qualifying under RMC 4-1-220D, nor does the exemption apply to increases in assessed valuation of land and nonqualifying improvements. This Section also does not apply to increases in assessed valuation made by the county assessor on nonqualifying portions of building and value of land, nor to increases41111 made by lawful order of a county board of equalization, the Department of 3 • Revenue, or a county, to a class of property throughout the county or specific area of the county to achieve the uniformity of assessment or appraisal required by law. D. PROJECT ELIGIBILITY: To qualify for exemption from property taxation under this Section, the project must satisfy all of the following requirements: 1. Location: The property must be located in one of the designated "residential targeted areas" listed below in subsection (D)(1)(a) or; (D)(1)(b) or (D)(1)(c) of this Section which are targeted for low-income housing serving households at or below eighty percent (80%) of the median income. If a part of any legal lot is within a residential targeted area, then the entire lot shall be deemed to lie within the residential targeted area. a. Highlands: Within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in one of the following: the Center Village (CV) zone, the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zone, or the Residential 14 .0 Dwelling Units/Acre (R-144-0) zone; or b. Downtown: In the Center Downtown (CD) zone, Residential Multi- Family Urban Center (RM-U) zone, or Residential Multi-Family • Traditional (RM-T) zone. N1) zone or properties within the Urban Center North District 2 (UC N2) zone that were designated as eligible for exemption by Council vested to the requirements of the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone. 2. Size and Structure: a. If the project is located in the ' - _ • • '. - ' - .. • _ • • - (RM U) zone or Residential Multi-Family Traditional (RM-T) zone or within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in either the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zone or the Residential 141-0 Dwelling Units/Acre (R-144-0) zone, the project must (i) consist of a minimum total of ten (10) new dwelling units of multi-family housing, and (ii) be located within a new residential structure(s) or a new mixed-use development as allowed by the RMC for the specific zone. At least fifty percent (50%) percent of the space within the project shall be intended for permanent residential occupancy. b. If the project is located in the Residential Multi-Family Urban Center • (RM-U) zone, the Center Downtown (CD) zone, Urban Center North 4 zone and the project proposed is vested to Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone requirements, or is within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in the Center Village (CV) zone, the project must (i) consist of a minimum total of thirty (30) new dwelling units of multi-family housing and (ii) be located in a new mixed-use development, unless otherwise waived by the Administrator. If the Administrator waives the mixed-use development requirement, the multi-family housing must be located in a new residential structure(s). At least fifty percent (50%) percent of the space within the project shall be intended for permanent residential occupancy. -• - -- •_ •e • " -e. . *e • e • e•-. --- • • - _ . - . e - (UC N2) and Vested to the Requirements of the Commercial Offico Residential 3 (COR 3) Zone: a. If the project is located in the Center Village (CV) zone or 3 (COR 3) zone, the project must also comply with the design standards and guidelines in RMC 4 3 100 for District 'C', even though the project is not located in the Urban Center North Adl -istr-ateF b. If the project is located in the Residential 10 Dwelling Units/Acre {R 10) zone within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan • e.. • ' •: - • . '•' . . •• .. _ (RM T) zone, unless otherwise waived by the Administrator. If the project is located in the Center Village Residential Bonus District : _ • -: • X 1 1 I es., . ..- - . -a . - • • - provisions therein. 34. Exception for Existing Residential Structure: In the case of an existing occupied residential structure that is proposed for demolition and redevelopment as new multi-family housing, the project must provide as a minimum number of dwelling units in the new multi-family housing project, the greater of: a. Replace the existing number of dwelling units and, unless the existing residential rental structure was vacant for twelve (12) months or more prior to demolition, provide for a minimum of four • 5 (4) additional dwelling units in the new multi-family housing project; • or b. Provide the number of dwelling units otherwise required in subsection (D)(2) of this section. 45. Completion Deadline: The project must be completed within three (3) years from the date of approval of the contract by the City Council as provided in RMC 4-1-220F2 or by any extended deadline granted by the Administrator as provided in RMC 4-1-2201. (Ord. 5151, 8-1-2005; Amd. Ord. 5192, 1-23-2006) E. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: 1. Form: The owner of property applying for exemption under this Section shall submit an application to the Administrator on a form established by the Administrator. The owner shall verify the correctness of the information contained in the application by his/her signature and affirmation made under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington. The application shall contain such information as the Administrator may deem necessary or useful, which at a minimum shall include: a. A completed City application form, including information setting forth • the grounds for tax exemption and whether the owner elects to rent or sell at least twenty percent (20%) of the multi-family housing units as affordable housing to low and moderate income households to qualify for the twelve (12)-year exemption defined in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii) above; b. A brief written description of the project, and schematic site and floor plans of the multi-family dwelling units and the structure(s) in which they are proposed to be located; c. Floor and site plans of the proposed project, which plans may be revised by the owner provided such revisions are made and presented to the Administrator prior to the City's final action on the exemption application; d. A statement from the owner acknowledging the potential tax liability when the property ceases to be eligible for exemption under this Section. 2. Fee: At the time of initial application under this Section, the owner shall pay to the City an initial application fee of five-hundred-one thousand dollars • ($1.000.00500.00). 6 3. Deadline: The application shall be submitted prior to the issuance of the • building permit for the project. The Administrator shall approve or deny an exemption application within ninety (90) days of receipt of a complete application. F. APPLICATION APPROVAL: 1. Approval: The Administrator may approve an application if he or she finds that: a. The owner has complied with all of the requirements of this Section, including but not limited to the project eligibility requirements contained in RMC 4-1-220D and the application requirements contained in RMC 4- 1-220E; and b. The proposed project is or will be, at the time of completion, in conformance with all approved plans, and all applicable requirements of the Renton Municipal Code or other applicable requirements or regulations in effect at the time the application is approved. 2. Contract Required: If the application is approved, the owner shall enter into a contract with the City, approved by the City Council, regarding the terms and conditions of the project under this Section. 3. Issuance of Conditional Certificate: Following Council approval of the 111 contract, the Administrator shall issue a conditional certificate of acceptance of tax exemption. The conditional certificate shall expire three (3) years from the date of Council approval of the contract unless an extension is granted as provided in RMC 4-1-2201. G. APPLICATION DENIAL: 1. Denial: The Administrator shall deny an application if the criteria in RMC 4-1-220F1 are not met. The Administrator shall state in writing the reasons for the denial and send notice of denial to the owner's last known address within ten (10) days of the denial. 2. Appeal: An owner may appeal a denial of a tax exemption application to the City Council by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of notice of the denial. The appeal before the City Council shall be based upon the record before the Administrator, and the Administrator's decision will be upheld unless the owner can show that there is no substantial evidence on the record to support the Administrator's decision. The City Council's decision on appeal is final. H. AMENDMENT OF CONTRACT: • 7 • An owner may request an amendment(s) to the contract by submitting a request in writing to the Administrator, together with a fee of five hundred two-hued fifty-dollars ($500.00250.00), at any time within three (3) years of the date of the approval of the contract as provided for in RMC 4-1-220G2. The date for expiration of the conditional certificate shall not be extended by contract amendment unless all the conditions for extension set forth in RMC 4-1-2201 are met. I. EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE: 1. Application: The conditional certificate may be extended by the Administrator for a period not to exceed twenty four (24) consecutive months. The owner shall submit a written request stating the grounds for the extension together with a fee of two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00). 2. Approval: The Administrator may grant an extension if the Administrator finds that: a. The anticipated failure to complete construction within the required time period is due to circumstances beyond the control of the owner; b. The owner has been acting, and could reasonably be expected to continue to act, in good faith and with due diligence; and c. All the conditions of the original contract between the owner and the City will be satisfied upon completion of the project. 3. Denial —Appeal: If an extension is denied, the Administrator shall state in writing the reason for denial and shall send notice to the owner's last known address within ten (10) calendar days of the denial. An owner may appeal the denial of an extension to the Hearing Examiner by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within fourteen (14) calendar days after issuance of the notice of the denial. The appeal before the Hearing Examiner shall follow the provisions of RMC 4-8-110E. The owner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision to the King County Superior Court according to the procedures contained in RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598, as provided in RCW 84.14.090(6), within thirty (30) days of notification by the City to the owner of the decision. J. FINAL CERTIFICATE: 1. Application: Upon completion of the construction as provided in the contract between the owner and the City, and upon issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy, or a permanent certificate of occupancy if no temporary certificate is issued, the owner may request a final certificate of tax exemption. The owner shall pay a fee of one thousand hundred--fifty dollars ($1,000.00500.00250.00) and file with the Administrator 8 such information as the Administrator may deem necessary or useful to • evaluate eligibility for the final certificate, which shall at a minimum include: a. A statement of expenditures made with respect to each multi-family housing unit and the total expenditures made with respect to the entire property; b. A description of the completed work and a statement of qualification for the exemption; and c. The total monthly rent or total sale amount of each multi-family housing unit rented or sold to date: d. The income of each renter household to date at the time of initial occupancy and the income of each initial purchaser of owner-occupied multi-family housing units to date at the time of purchase: e. If applicable, a statement that the project meets the affordable housing requirements in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii) above, along with the number, type, and specific multi-family housing units rented or sold to date, as applicable, to meet the affordable housing requirements: f. Any additional information requested by the City pursuant to meeting any reporting requirements under RCW 84.14: and • g. A statement that the work was completed within the required three (3) year period or any approved extension. 2. Determination: Within thirty (30) days of receipt of all materials required for a final certificate, the Administrator shall determine whether the completed work is consistent with the contract between the City and owner, whether all or a portion of the completed work is qualified for exemption under this Section and, if so, which specific improvements satisfy the requirements of this Section. 3. Filing with County Assessor: For projects that comply with the requirements of RMC 4-1-220J1, the City shall file a final certificate of tax exemption with the county assessor within ten (10) days of the expiration of the thirty (30) day period provided in the prior subsection. 4. Recording: The Administrator is authorized to cause to be recorded, at the owner's expense, in the real property records of the King County Department of Records and Elections, the contract with the City required under RMC 4-1-220F2, as amended under RMC 4-1-220H, if applicable, and/or such other document(s) as will identify such terms and conditions of eligibility for exemption under this Section as the Administrator deems appropriate for recording. • 9 • 5. Denial: The Administrator shall notify the owner in writing that the City will not file a final certificate if: (a) the Administrator determines that the project was not completed within the required three (3) year period or any approved extension, or was not completed in accordance with the contract between the owner and the City and the requirements of this Section, or the owner's property is otherwise not qualified for the limited exemption under this Section; or (b) the owner and Administrator cannot come to an agreement on the allocation of the value of the improvements allocated to the exempt portion of the project. 6. Appeal: The owner may appeal the Administrator's decision to the Hearing Examiner by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within fourteen (14) calendar days after issuance of the notice of the denial. The appeal before the Hearing Examiner shall follow the provisions for appeal contained in RMC 4-8-110E. The owner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision to the King County Superior Court according to the procedures contained in RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598, as provided in RCW 84.14.090(6), within thirty (30) days of notification by the City to the owner of the decision. K. ANNUAL CERTIFICATION AND REPORT: Within thirty (30) days after the first anniversary of the date the City filed-issued 111 the final certificate of tax exemption and each year thereafter;for a period of ten (10) years the duration of the tax exemption period, the property owner shall file an annual report certification with the Administrator, Failure to submit the annual reportoectifteation may result in cancellation of the tax exemption. The certification shall contain such information as required by RCW 84.14 and as the Administrator may deem necessary or useful, and shall at a minimum include the following information: 1. A statement of occupancy and vacancy of the multi-family dwelling units during the previoustwelve months ending with the anniversary date; 2. A certification that the property has not changed use and, if applicable, that the property has been in compliance with the affordable housina requirements as described in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii) above since the date of filing-of-the City issued the final certificate of tax exemption, and that the project continues to be in compliance with the contract with the City and the requirements of this Section; and 3. A description of any improvements or changes to the property made after the filing-of-City issued the final certificate of tax exemption; or most recent • 10 4. The total monthly rent of each multi-family housing unit rented or the total • sale amount of each multi-family housing unit sold to an initial purchaser during the twelve months ending with the anniversary date; 5. The income of each renter household at the time of initial occupancy and the income of each initial purchaser of owner-occupied multi-family housing units at the time of purchase during the twelve months ending with the anniversary date; 6. If applicable, a breakdown of the number. type. and specific multi-family housing units rented or sold during the twelve months ending with the anniversary date, as applicable, to meet the affordable housing requirements in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii) above; and 7. Any additional information requested by the City pursuant to meeting any reporting requirements under RCW 84.14. L. CANCELLATION OF TAX EXEMPTION: 1. Cancellation: If at any time the Administrator determines that: (a) the property no longer complies with the terms of the contract or with the requirements of this Section; (b) the use of the property is changed or will be changed to a use that is other than residential; (c) the project violates applicable zoning requirements, land use regulations or building code requirements; or (d) the property for any reason no longer qualifies for the tax exemption, the tax exemption shall be canceled and additional taxes, interest and penalties imposed pursuant to State law. Upon determining that a tax exemption shall be canceled, the Administrator shall notify the property owner by certified mail, return receipt requested. 2. Appeal: The property owner may appeal the determination by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk, within thirty (30) days after issuance of the decision by the Administrator, specifying the factual and legal basis for the appeal. The appeal before the Hearing Examiner shall follow the procedures set forth in RMC 4-8-110E. At the appeal hearing, all affected parties may be heard and all competent evidence received. The Hearing Examiner shall affirm, modify, or repeal the decision to cancel the exemption based on the evidence received. The Hearing Examiner shall give substantial weight to the Administrator's decision to cancel the exemption, and the burden of proof and the burden of overcoming the weight accorded to the Administrator's decision shall be upon the appellant. An aggrieved party may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision to the King County Superior Court in accordance with the procedures in RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598, as provided in RCW 84.14.110(2), within thirty (30) days • after issuance of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. 11 3. Change of Use: If the owner intends to convert the multi-family housing • to another use, the owner must notify the Administrator and the County assessor within sixty (60) days of the change in use. Upon such change in use, the tax exemption shall be canceled and additional taxes, interest and penalties imposed pursuant to State law. M. SUNSET OF EXEMPTION FOR APPLICATIONS FOR CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATES: The City shall not accept new applications for conditional certificates as provided in RMC 4-1-220E after December 31, 2009, unless extended by City Council action. Incomplete applications for conditional certificates as of December 31, 2009, shall be returned to owners. Notwithstanding the above, the City shall process (1) pending complete applications for a conditional certificate as of December 31, 2009, and (2) applications for an extension of the conditional certificate and/or a final certificate received after December 31, 2009, as provided in this Section under RMC 4-1-220D through 4-1-220J. RMC 4-1-220C and 4-1-220J through 4-1-220L shall continue to apply to all properties that have been or are issued a final certificate of tax exemption under this Section until expiration, termination or cancellation of the tax exemption. (Ord. 5061, 12-22- 2003; Ord. 5249, 12-11-2006) • 12 Attachment 6 • CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 4-1-220, PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING IN RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREAS, OF CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY MODIFYING THE DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREAS, IMPLEMENTING THE PROVISIONS OF HOUSE BILL 1910, INCORPORATING AFFORDABLE HOUSING,AND MODIFYING PROJECT ELIGIBILITY AND FEES. WHEREAS, on December 22, 2003, the Renton City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5061 (codified in RMC 4-1-220)to establish a limited property tax exemption to encourage multi-family housing development in designated residential targeted areas; and WHEREAS,the provisions of Section 4-1-220, Property Tax Exemption for Multi- • Family Housing in Residential Targeted Areas,have been useful in helping to encourage increased residential opportunities and stimulate new construction of multi-family housing in residential targeted areas; and WHEREAS,the Renton City Council desires to modify the residential targeted areas for future multi-family housing projects eligible for the property tax exemption; WHEREAS,the State Legislature passed House Bill 1910 in 2007 amending Chapter 84.14 RCW relating to the multi-family housing property tax exemption; and WHEREAS, the Renton City Council desires to amend RMC 4-220 to implement the changes from House Bill 1910 and revise the project eligibility and fees; and WHEREAS, the Renton City Council desires to incorporate affordable housing into the property tax exemption program and establish the designated residential targeted areas as areas • 1 ORDINANCE NO. targeted for low-income housing serving households at or below eighty percent(80%) of the • median income; WHEREAS, on June 23, 2008,the Renton City Council conducted a public hearing and considered all testimony; NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 4-1-220., Property Tax Exemption for Multi-Family Housing in Residential Targeted Areas, of Chapter 1,Administration and Enforcement, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby entirely amended to read as follows: A. PURPOSE: As provided for in chapter 84.14 RCW, the purpose of this Section is to provide limited, eight • (8), ten(10), or twelve (12)year exemptions from ad valorem property taxation for qualified new multi-family housing located in designated residential targeted areas. B. DEFINITIONS: In construing the provisions of this Section, the following definitions shall be applied: 1. "Administrator"means the Administrator of the Renton Department of Community and Economic Development, or any other City office, department or agency that shall succeed to its functions with respect to this Section, or his or her authorized designee. 2. "Affordable housing" means residential housing that is rented by a low income household whose monthly housing costs, including rent and utilities other than telephone, do not exceed thirty percent(30%) of the household's monthly income. For the purposes of 1111 2 ORDINANCE NO. housing intended for owner occupancy, "affordable housing" means residential housing that • is within the means of and purchased by low or moderate income households. 3. "Household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together. 4. "Low income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is at or below eighty percent(80%) of the median income, as further defined in subsection(C)(1)(b)(ii)(a)below. 5. "Median income"means the median family income adjusted for family size for King County, as reported by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In the event that HUD no longer publishes median income figures for King County, the City may use or determine such other method as it may choose to determine the King County median income, adjusted for household size. 6. "Mixed-use"means a multi-family housing residential project with at least one (1) other • non-residential use in one (1) or more multi-family housing buildings in the project, such as retail, office, entertainment, schools, conference centers or a use approved in writing by the (CED) Administrator. The purpose of the mixed-use requirement is to implement the intent of the land use district,maximize the efficient use of land, support transit use, and encourage the development of well-balanced, attractive, convenient, and vibrant urban residential neighborhoods. The additional use excludes any accessory functions related to the residential use. Unless otherwise modified or waived in writing by the Administrator, the non-residential mixed-use shall occupy at a minimum the ground floor along the street frontage with a depth of at least thirty feet (30') for any building in the project. • 3 ORDINANCE NO. 7. "Moderate income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living • together whose income is at or below one hundred twentypercent (120%) of the adjusted median income, as further defined in subsection(C)(1)(b)(ii)(b)below. 8. "Multi-family housing"means one or more new buildings designed for permanent residential occupancy, each with four(4) or more dwelling units. 9. "Permanent residential occupancy"means multi-family housing that provides either owner occupancy or rental accommodation on a nontransient basis. This definition includes rental accommodation that is leased for a period of at least one (1)month but excludes, for example, hotels and motels that predominantly offer rental accommodation on a daily or weekly basis. C. TAX EXEMPTION: 1. Duration of Exemption: The value of improvements qualifying under RMC 4-1-220D is • exempt from ad valorem property taxation as follows: (a) For properties for which applications are submitted before July 22, 2007, the value is exempt for ten(10) successive years beginning January 1 of the year immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the final certificate of tax exemption; and (b)For properties for which applications are submitted on or after July 22, 2007, the value is exempt: (i) For eight (8) successive years beginning January 1st of the year immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the final certificate of tax exemption; or (ii)For twelve (12) successive years beginning January 1st of the year immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the final certificate of tax exemption, if the property otherwise qualifies for the exemption and the applicant/owner rents or sells at • 4 ORDINANCE NO. least twenty percent(20%) of the multi-family housing units as affordable housing to • low and moderate income households as further defined in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii)(a) and (C)(1)(b)(ii)(b)below. (a) For rental projects, at least twenty percent(20%) of the multi-family housing units in the project must be rented throughout the duration of the twelve (12)-year exemption period as affordable housing to low income households at eighty percent (80%) or less of median income. (b)For ownership projects, at least twenty percent (20%) of the multi-family housing units in the project must be sold as affordable housing to low or moderate income households at one hundred twenty percent (120%) or less of median income. (c) The owner may use any combination of studio, one (1)-bedroom, two (2)-bedroom, and/or three (3)-bedroom units to comply with the minimum twenty percent(20%) • requirement in subsection(C)(1)(b)(ii)(a) and (C)(1)(b)(ii)(b) above. (d) If, in calculating the minimum twenty percent(20%) of the multi-family housing units in the project for affordable housing in subsection(C)(1)(b)(ii), the number contains a fraction, then the minimum number of multi-family housing units for affordable housing shall be rounded up to the next whole number. (e) When the project includes more than one building with multi-family housing units, all of the affordable housing units required in subsection(C)(1)(b)(ii)may not be located in the same building. 2. Limits on Exemption: The exemption does not apply to the value of land or to the value of nonhousing-related improvements not qualifying under RMC 4-1-220D, nor does the exemption apply to increases in assessed valuation of land and nonqualifying 111 5 ORDINANCE NO. improvements. This Section also does not apply to increases in assessed valuation made by 1111 the countyassessor on nonqualifying of buildingand value of land,nor to increases portions made by lawful order of a county board of equalization, the Department of Revenue, or a county, to a class of property throughout the county or specific area of the county to achieve the uniformity of assessment or appraisal required by law. D. PROJECT ELIGIBILITY: To qualify for exemption from property taxation under this Section, the project must satisfy all of the following requirements: 1. Location: The property must be located in one of the designated "residential targeted areas" listed below in subsection(D)(1)(a) or(D)(1)(b) of this Section which are targeted for low-income housing serving households at or below eighty percent (80%) of the median income. If a part of any legal lot is within a residential targeted area, then the entire lot • shall be deemed to lie within the residential targeted area. a. Highlands: Within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in one of the following: the Center Village (CV) zone, the Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) zone, or the Residential 14 Dwelling Units/Acre (R-14) zone; or b. Downtown: In the Center Downtown (CD) zone,Residential Multi-Family Urban Center(RM-U) zone, or Residential Multi-Family Traditional (RM-T) zone. 2. Size and Structure: a. If the project is located in the Residential Multi-Family Traditional (RM-T) zone or within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in either the Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) zone or the Residential 14 Dwelling Units/Acre (R- 14) zone, the project must(i) consist of a minimum total of ten(10) new dwelling units • 6 ORDINANCE NO. of multi-family housing, and(ii)be located within a new residential structure(s) or a • new mixed-use development as allowed by the RMC for the specific zone. At least fifty percent(50%) of the space within the project shall be intended for permanent residential occupancy. b. If the project is located in the Residential Multi-Family Urban Center(RM-U) zone, the Center Downtown (CD)zone or is within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in the Center Village(CV)zone, the project must(i) consist of a minimum total of thirty(30)new dwelling units of multi-family housing and(ii)be located in a new mixed-use development,unless otherwise waived by the Administrator. If the Administrator waives the mixed-use development requirement, the multi-family housing must be located in a new residential structure(s). At least fifty percent (50%) of the space within the project shall be intended for permanent • residential occupancy. 3. Exception for Existing Residential Structure: In the case of an existing occupied residential structure that is proposed for demolition and redevelopment as new multi- family housing, the project must provide as a minimum number of dwelling units in the new multi-family housing project, the greater of: a. Replace the existing number of dwelling units and, unless the existing residential rental structure was vacant for twelve (12)months or more prior to demolition,provide for a minimum of four(4) additional dwelling units in the new multi-family housing project; or b. Provide the number of dwelling units otherwise required in subsection(D)(2) of this section. • 7 ORDINANCE NO. 1 4. Completion Deadline: The project must be completed within three (3)years from III of approval of the contract bythe CityCouncil as provided in RMC 4-1-220F2 the date pp or by any extended deadline granted by the Administrator as provided in RMC 4-1- 2201. (Ord. 5151, 8-1-2005; Amd. Ord. 5192, 1-23-2006) E. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: 1. Form: The owner of property applying for exemption under this Section shall submit an application to the Administrator on a form established by the Administrator. The owner shall verify the correctness of the information contained in the application by his/her signature and affirmation made under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington. The application shall contain such information as the Administrator may deem necessary or useful,which at a minimum shall include: a. A completed City application form, including information setting forth the grounds II for tax exemption and whether the owner elects to rent or sell at least twenty percent (20%) of the multi-family housing units as affordable housing to low and moderate income households to qualify for the twelve (12)-year exemption defined in subsection (C)(1)(b)(ii) above; b. A brief written description of the project, and schematic site and floor plans of the multi-family dwelling units and the structure(s)in which they are proposed to be located; c. Floor and site plans of the proposed project,which plans may be revised by the owner provided such revisions are made and presented to the Administrator prior to the final action on the exemption application; City's p • 8 ORDINANCE NO. d. A statement from the owner acknowledging the potential tax liability when the • property ceases to be eligible for exemption under this Section. 2. Fee: At the time of initial application under this Section, the owner shall pay to the City an initial application fee of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). 3. Deadline: The application shall be submitted prior to the issuance of the building permit for the project. The Administrator shall approve or deny an exemption application within ninety(90) days of receipt of a complete application. F. APPLICATION APPROVAL: 1. Approval: The Administrator may approve an application if he or she finds that: a. The owner has complied with all of the requirements of this Section, including but not limited to the project eligibility requirements contained in RMC 4-1-220D and the application requirements contained in RMC 4-1-220E; and b. The proposed project is or will be, at the time of completion, in conformance with all approved plans, and all applicable requirements of the Renton Municipal Code or other applicable requirements or regulations in effect at the time the application is approved. 2. Contract Required: If the application is approved, the owner shall enter into a contract with the City, approved by the City Council,regarding the terms and conditions of the project under this Section. 3. Issuance of Conditional Certificate: Following Council approval of the contract,the Administrator shall issue a conditional certificate of acceptance of tax exemption. The conditional certificate shall expire three (3) years from the date of Council approval of the contract unless an extension is granted as provided in RMC 4-1-220I. • 9 ORDINANCE NO. • G. APPLICATION DENIAL: 1. Denial: The Administrator shall deny an application if the criteria in RMC 4-1-220F1 are not met. The Administrator shall state in writing the reasons for the denial and send notice of denial to the owner's last known address within ten(10) days of the denial. 2. Appeal: An owner may appeal a denial of a tax exemption application to the City Council by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within thirty(30) calendar days of receipt of notice of the denial. The appeal before the City Council shall be based upon the record before the Administrator, and the Administrator's decision will be upheld unless the owner can show that there is no substantial evidence on the record to support the Administrator's decision. The City Council's decision on appeal is final. H. AMENDMENT OF CONTRACT: An owner may request an amendment(s) to the contract by submitting a request in writing to the • Administrator, together with a fee of five hundred dollars ($500.00), at anytime within three 3 g ( ) years of the date of the approval of the contract as provided for in RMC 4-1-220G2. The date for expiration of the conditional certificate shall not be extended by contract amendment unless all the conditions for extension set forth in RMC 4-1-220I are met. I. EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE: 1. Application: The conditional certificate may be extended by the Administrator for a period not to exceed twenty four(24) consecutive months. The owner shall submit a written request stating the grounds for the extension together with a fee of two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00). 2. Approval: The Administrator may grant an extension if the Administrator finds that: • 10 ORDINANCE NO. a. The anticipated failure to complete construction within the required time period is • due to circumstances beyond the control of the owner; b. The owner has been acting, and could reasonably be expected to continue to act, in good faith and with due diligence; and c. All the conditions of the original contract between the owner and the City will be satisfied upon completion of the project. 3. Denial—Appeal: If an extension is denied,the Administrator shall state in writing the reason for denial and shall send notice to the owner's last known address within ten(10) calendar days of the denial. An owner may appeal the denial of an extension to the Hearing Examiner by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within fourteen(14) calendar days after issuance of the notice of the denial. The appeal before the Hearing Examiner shall follow the provisions of RMC 4-8-110E. The owner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's • decision to the King County Superior Court according to the procedures contained in RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598, as provided in RCW 84.14.090(6),within thirty(30) days of notification by the City to the owner of the decision. J. FINAL CERTIFICATE: 1. Application: Upon completion of the construction as provided in the contract between the owner and the City, and upon issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy, or a permanent certificate of occupancy if no temporary certificate is issued, the owner may request a final certificate of tax exemption. The owner shall pay a fee of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and file with the Administrator such information as the Administrator may deem necessary or useful to evaluate eligibility for the final certificate, which shall at a minimum include: • I1 ORDINANCE NO. a. A statement of expenditures made with respect to each multi-family housing unit 110 and the total expenditures made with respect to the entire property; Y; b. A description of the completed work and a statement of qualification for the exemption; c. The total monthly rent or total sale amount of each multi-family housing unit rented or sold to date; d. The income of each renter household to date at the time of initial occupancy and the income of each initial purchaser of owner-occupied multi-family housing units to date at the time of purchase; e. If applicable, a statement that the project meets the affordable housing requirements in subsection(C)(1)(b)(ii) above, along with the number, type, and specific multi- family housing units rented or sold to date, as applicable, to meet the affordable • housing requirements; f. Any additional information requested by the City pursuant to meeting any reporting requirements under RCW 84.14; and . g. A statement that the work was completed within the required three (3) year period or any approved extension. 2. Determination: Within thirty(30) days of receipt of all materials required for a final certificate, the Administrator shall determine whether the completed work is consistent with the contract between the City and owner,whether all or a portion of the completed work is qualified for exemption under this Section and, if so, which specific improvements satisfy the requirements of this Section. Ili 12 ORDINANCE NO. 3. Filing with County Assessor: For projects that comply with the requirements of RMC 4- • 1-220J1, the City shall file a final certificate of tax exemption with the county assessor within ten(10) days of the expiration of the thirty(30) day period provided in the prior subsection. 4. Recording: The Administrator is authorized to cause to be recorded, at the owner's expense, in the real property records of the King County Department of Records and Elections, the contract with the City required under RMC 4-1-220F2, as amended under RMC 4-1-220H, if applicable, and/or such other document(s) as will identify such terms and conditions of eligibility for exemption under this Section as the Administrator deems appropriate for recording. 5. Denial: The Administrator shall notify the owner in writing that the City will not file a final certificate if: (a)the Administrator determines that the project was not completed • within the required three (3) year period or any approved extension, or was not completed in accordance with the contract between the owner and the City and the requirements of this Section, or the owner's property is otherwise not qualified for the limited exemption under this Section; or(b) the owner and Administrator cannot come to an agreement on the allocation of the value of the improvements allocated to the exempt portion of the project. 6. Appeal: The owner may appeal the Administrator's decision to the Hearing Examiner by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within fourteen (14) calendar days after issuance of the notice of the denial. The appeal before the Hearing Examiner shall follow the provisions for appeal contained in RMC 4-8-110E. The owner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision to the King County Superior Court according to the procedures • 13 ORDINANCE NO. contained in RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598, as provided in RCW 84.14.090(6),within • thirty(30)days of notification by the City to the owner of the decision. K. ANNUAL CERTIFICATION AND REPORT: Within thirty(30) days after the first anniversary of the date the City issued the final certificate of tax exemption and each year thereafter for the duration of the tax exemption period,the property owner shall file an annual report with the Administrator. Failure to submit the annual report may result in cancellation of the tax exemption. The certification shall contain such information as required by RCW 84.14 and as the Administrator may deem necessary or useful, and shall at a minimum include the following information: 1. A statement of occupancy and vacancy of the multi-family dwelling units during the twelve months ending with the anniversary date; 2. A certification that the property has not changed use and, if applicable, that the property • has been in compliance with the affordable housingrequirements as described in subsection p (C)(1)(b)(ii) above since the date the City issued the final certificate of tax exemption and that the project continues to be in compliance with the contract with the City and the requirements of this Section; 3. A description of any improvements or changes to the property made after the City issued the final certificate of tax exemption ; 4. The total monthly rent of each multi-family housing unit rented or the total sale amount of each multi-family housing unit sold to an initial purchaser during the twelve months ending with the anniversary date; • 14 ORDINANCE NO. 5. The income of each renter household at the time of initial occupancy and the income of • each initial purchaser of owner-occupied multi-family housing units at the time of purchase during the twelve months ending with the anniversary date; 6. If applicable, a breakdown of the number, type, and specific multi-family housing units rented or sold during the twelve months ending with the anniversary date, as applicable, to meet the affordable housing requirements in subsection(C)(1)(b)(ii) above; and 7. Any additional information requested by the City pursuant to meeting any reporting requirements under RCW 84.14. L. CANCELLATION OF TAX EXEMPTION: 1. Cancellation: If at any time the Administrator determines that: (a)the property no longer complies with the terms of the contract or with the requirements of this Section; (b) the use of the property is changed or will be changed to a use that is other than residential; (c) the • project violates applicable zoning requirements, land use regulations or building code requirements; or(d)the property for any reason no longer qualifies for the tax exemption, the tax exemption shall be canceled and additional taxes, interest and penalties imposed pursuant to State law. Upon determining that a tax exemption shall be canceled, the Administrator shall notify the property owner by certified mail,return receipt requested. 2. Appeal: The property owner may appeal the determination by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk, within thirty(30) days after issuance of the decision by the Administrator, specifying the factual and legal basis for the appeal. The appeal before the Hearing Examiner shall follow the procedures set forth in RMC 4-8-110E. At the appeal hearing, all affected parties may be heard and all competent evidence received. The Hearing Examiner shall affirm,modify, or repeal the decision to cancel the exemption based on the • 15 ORDINANCE NO. • evidence received. The Hearing Examiner shall give substantial weight to the Administrator's decision to cancel the exemption, and the burden of proof and the burden of overcoming the weight accorded to the Administrator's decision shall be upon the appellant. An aggrieved party may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision to the King County Superior Court in accordance with the procedures in RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598, as provided in RCW 84.14.110(2), within thirty(30) days after issuance of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. 3. Change of Use: If the owner intends to convert the multi-family housing to another use, the owner must notify the Administrator and the County assessor within sixty(60) days of the change in use. Upon such change in use, the tax exemption shall be canceled and additional taxes, interest and penalties imposed pursuant to State law. M. SUNSET OF EXEMPTION FOR APPLICATIONS FOR CONDITIONAL • CERTIFICATES: The City shall not accept new applications for conditional certificates as provided in RMC 4-1- 220E after December 31, 2009, unless extended by City Council action. Incomplete applications for conditional certificates as of December 31, 2009, shall be returned to owners. Notwithstanding the above, the City shall process (1)pending complete applications for a conditional certificate as of December 31, 2009, and(2) applications for an extension of the conditional certificate and/or a final certificate received after December 31, 2009, as provided in this Section under RMC 4-1-220D through 4-1-220J. RMC 4-1-220C and 4-1-220J through 4-1- 220L shall continue to apply to all properties that have been or are issued a final certificate of tax exemption under this Section until expiration, termination or cancellation of the tax exemption. (Ord. 5061, 12-22-2003; Ord. 5249, 12-11-2006) 1111 16 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and • five(5) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2008. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2008. Denis Law, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: • • 17 CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON 1111 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION. WHEREAS, the City is required by RCW 84.14.040 to hold a public hearing when designating a residential targeted area associated with the multi-family housing property tax exemption; and WHEREAS, the City seeks to afford interested parties the opportunity to be heard regarding other proposed modifications to the multi-family housing property tax exemption. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, 11111 WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That June 23, 2008, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. at the City Council chambers at City Hall, Renton, King County, Washington is hereby fixed as the date, time, and place for a public hearing to consider the proposed modifications to the multi-family housing property tax exemption. SECTION II. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of the time and date of this hearing. • PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2008. • Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2008. Denis Law, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES. [number]:[date]:ma ID 0 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL • AI u: 6310'r® Submitting Data: Public Works For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. Transportation Systems Division June 9, 2008 Staff Contact James Wilhoit, Design Project Agenda Status Manager, x7319 Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Duvall Avenue NE Widening Project/Coal Creek Correspondence.. Parkway SE Reconstruction—Underground Utility Ordinance Conversion Construction Agreement with Puget Sound Resolution Energy, Inc. (PSE) Old Business Exhibits: New Business X Issue Paper Study Sessions Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Contract Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept • X Refer to Transportation/Aviation Committee Finance Dept Risk Management Fiscal Impact: T12123/f009/0018/00(revenue to T12123/1004/2017/3118) Expenditure Required.. $ 170,240 Transfer/Amendment $ -0- Amount Budgeted $ 170,240 Revenue Generated $ 55,320 Total Project Budget $ 8,269,435 (2002-2009) City Share Total Project $ 8,269,435 SUMMARY OF ACTION: Puget Sound Energy (PSE) and the City will share the cost of undergrounding PSE's power lines within the limits of this project in accordance with Schedule 74 Tariff G. The City will pay $170,240 of PSE's construction costs and PSE will pay $55,320 of the City's construction costs under the terms of this agreement, resulting in a net cost to the City of$114,920. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the proposed construction agreement with PSE, in the amount of$170,240, to provide undergrounding utility conversions. • H:\Division.s\TRANSPOR.TAT\DESIGN.ENG\j wi lhoi t\duvall\utilities\ugroundutil\Duvalugab.doc c. �% ® • PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ' o� MEMORANDUM DATE: June 9, 2008 TO: Marcie Palmer, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Denis Law, Mayor FROM: Gregg Zimmerman,aninistrator STAFF CONTACT: James Wilhoit, Transportation Design Project Manager(x7319) SUBJECT: Duvall Avenue NE Widening/Coal Creek Parkway SE Reconstruction—Underground Utility Conversion Construction Agreement with Puget Sound Energy,Inc. (PSE) ISSUE: Should the Mayor and City Clerk execute the proposed construction agreement with PSE in the • amount of$170,240,to provide underground utility conversions? RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the proposed construction agreement with PSE in the amount of$170,240,to provide underground utility conversion. BACKGROUND: The Renton Municipal Code Title IV Development Regulations Chapter 6 Street and Utility Standards 4-6-090 Utility Lines—underground installation requires that overhead facilities be relocated underground. On May 31, 2005 the City entered into a design agreement with PSE, under the terms of PSE's Schedule 74 Tariff G, for preparation of plans for the undergrounding of power for the Duvall Avenue Widening project within the Renton city limits. Per those terms,the cost for this design was to be shared 60/40% (PSE/City), with the City's share of the cost to be $20,400 (40%of the total cost of$51,000). On June 6, 2006 the City entered into a design agreement with PSE for preparation of plans for the undergrounding of power for the project within the limits of King County (Coal Creek Parkway). Per these terms the • cost for this design was to be shared 60/40%(PSE/City), with the City's share of the cost to be $8,440 (40% of the total cost of$21,100). Marcie Palmer,Council President Members of the Renton City Council Page 2 of 2 June 9,2008 • On August 2,2006 PSE completed its design for the conversions,most of which was incorporated into the City's design for the Duvall Avenue Widening/Coal Creek Parkway SE Reconstruction contract(CAG 08-001). This construction contract was advertised for bid on January 15,2008, and bids were opened February 26, 2008. The contract was awarded to Northwest Cascade, Inc. on March 17, 2008 (agreement executed April 17, 2008). The county's portion of the project was annexed into the City of Renton shortly thereafter. Cost allocations for this work between the City and PSE have been determined to be: City's share of PSE Construction costs (40% share of$425,600) $170,240 PSE's share of City Construction costs(60% share of$92,200) — 55,320 Net Cost to City of Reimbursable Costs $114,920 The Transportation Systems Division recommends executing the proposed construction agreement with PSE for$170,240,to provide undergrounding utility conversions. cc: Peter Hahn,Deputy Public Works Administrator—Transportation Bob Hanson,Transportation Design Supervisor • James Wilhoit,Transportation Design Project Manager File • H:\Divisions\TRANSPOR.TATOESIGN.ENG\jwilhoit\duvall\utilities\ugroundutil\Duvalugconvissuebhapprove.doc • • SCHEDULE 74 UNDERGROUND CONVERSION Project Construction Agreement Project Name: Renton—Duvall Avenue Schedule 74 Conversion Project Phase II Project Number: 101025171 THIS Agreement, dated as of this 01 day of April, 2008, is made by and between Puget Sound Energy, and the CITY OF RENTON, a Municipal Corporation (the"Government Entity"), and PUGET SOUND ENERGY, Inc., a Washington Corporation (the"Company"). RECITALS A. The Company is a public service company engaged in the sale and distribution of electric energy, and pursuant to its franchise or other rights from the Government Entity, currently locates its electric distribution facilities within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Government Entity. B. The Government Entity has determined that it is necessary to replace the existing overhead electric distribution system within the area specified in the Project Plan (as defined below) (the "Conversion Area")with a comparable underground electric distribution system, all as more specifically described in the Project Plan (the"Conversion Project"). C. The Government Entity and the Company have previously entered into a Project Design Agreement dated as of 6/6/2006 (the "Design Agreement"), pursuant to which the parties completed • certain engineering design, cost assessment, operating rights planning and other preliminary work relating to the Conversion Project and, in connection with that effort, developed the Project Plan. D. The Government Entity and the Company wish to execute this written contract in accordance with Schedule 74 of the Company's Electric Tariff G ("Schedule 74") to govern the completion of the Conversion Project, which both parties intend shall qualify as an underground conversion under the terms of Schedule 74. AGREEMENT The Government Entity and the Company therefore agree as follows: 1. Definitions. (a) Unless specifically defined otherwise herein, all terms defined in Schedule 74 shall have the same meanings when used in this Agreement, including, without limitation, the following: i) Cost of Conversion; ii) Public Thoroughfare; iii) Temporary Service; iv) Trenching and Restoration; v) Underground Distribution System; and vi) Underground Service Lines. (b) "Company-Initiated Upgrade" shall mean any feature of the Underground Distribution System which is required by the Company and is not reasonably required to make the Underground Distribution System comparable to the overhead distribution system being replaced. For • purposes of the foregoing, a"comparable" system shall include, unless the Parties otherwise agree, the number of empty ducts (not to exceed two (2), typically having a diameter of 6"or less) • Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 1 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 of such diameter and number as may be specified and agreed upon in the Project Plan necessary • to replicate the load-carrying capacity(system amperage class) of the overhead system being replaced. (c) "Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs" shall mean the Company's good faith estimate of the Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs, as specified in the Project Plan and as changed and adjusted from time to time in accordance with Section 6, below. (d) "Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs" shall mean the Company's good faith estimate of the Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs, as specified in the Project Plan and as changed and adjusted from time to time in accordance with Section 6, below. (e) "Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs"shall mean the Company's good faith estimate of the Reimbursable Upgrade Costs, as specified in the Project Plan and as changed and adjusted from time to time in accordance with Section 6, below. (f) "Estimated Shared Company Costs" shall mean the Company's good faith estimate of the Shared Company Costs, as specified in the Project Plan and as changed and adjusted from time to time in accordance with Section 6, below. (g) "Estimated Shared Government Costs"shall mean the Government Entity's good faith estimate of the Shared Government Costs, as specified in the Project Plan and as changed and adjusted from time to time in accordance with Section 6, below. (h) "Government-Requested Upgrade" shall mean any feature of the Underground Distribution System which is requested by the Government Entity and is not reasonably required to make the Underground Distribution System comparable to the overhead distribution system being replaced. • For purposes of the foregoing, any empty ducts installed at the request of the Government Entity shall be a Government-Requested Upgrade. (i) "Party" shall mean either the Company, the Government Entity, or both. 0) "Private Property Conversion" shall mean that portion, if any, of the Conversion Project for which the existing overhead electric distribution system is located, as of the date determined in accordance with Schedule 74, (i)outside of the Public Thoroughfare, or(ii) pursuant to rights not derived from a franchise previously granted by the Government Entity or pursuant to rights not otherwise previously granted by the Government Entity. (k) "Project Plan" shall mean the project plan developed by the Parties under the Design Agreement and attached hereto as Exhibit A, as the same may be changed and amended from time to time in accordance with Section 6, below. The Project Plan includes, among other things, (i)a detailed description of the Work that is required to be performed by each Party and any third party, (ii)the applicable requirements and specifications for the Work, (iii) a description of the Operating Rights that are required to be obtained by each Party for the Conversion Project(and the requirements and specifications with respect thereto), (iv) an itemization and summary of the Estimated Shared Company Costs, Estimated Shared Government Costs, Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs (if any), Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs (if any) and Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs(if any), and (v)the Work Schedule. (I) "Operating Rights" shall mean sufficient space and legal rights for the construction, operation, repair, and maintenance of the Underground Distribution System. (m) "Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs"shall mean (i)all Costs of Conversion, if any, incurred by the Company which are attributable to a Private Property Conversion, less (ii) the distribution pole replacement costs (if any) that would be avoided by the Company on account of such Private Property Conversion, as determined consistent with the applicable Company distribution facilities Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 2 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 • replacement program, plus (iii)just compensation as provided by law for the Company's interests in real property on which such existing overhead distribution system was located prior to conversion; provided that the portion of the Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs attributable to the Costs of Conversion under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph shall not exceed the Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs without the prior written authorization of the Government Entity. (n) "Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs" shall mean all costs incurred by the Company which are attributable to (i) any facilities installed as part of the Conversion Project to provide Temporary Service, as provided for in Schedule 74, and (ii)the removal of any facilities installed to provide Temporary Service(less salvage value of removed equipment); provided that the Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs shall not exceed the Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs without the prior written authorization of the Government Entity. (o) "Reimbursable Upgrade Costs" shall mean all Costs of Conversion incurred by the Company which are attributable to any Government-Requested Upgrade; provided that the Reimbursable Upgrade Costs shall not exceed the Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs without the prior written authorization of the Government Entity. (p) "Shared Company Costs" shall mean all Costs of Conversion (other than Reimbursable Upgrade Costs, Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs and Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs) incurred by the Company in connection with the Conversion Project; provided, however, that the Shared Company Costs shall not exceed the Estimated Shared Company Costs without the prior written authorization of the Government Entity. For the avoidance of doubt, the"Shared Company Costs" shall, as and to the extent specified in the Design Agreement, include the actual, reasonable costs to the Company for the"Design Work" performed by the Company under the Design Agreement. 1111 (q) "Shared Government Costs" shall mean all Costs of Conversion incurred by the Government Entity in connection with (i) any duct and vault installation Work which the Parties have specified in the Project Plan is to be performed by the Government Entity as part of the Government Work, and (ii) the acquisition of any Operating Rights which the Parties have, by mutual agreement, specified in the Project Plan are to be obtained by the Government Entity for the Conversion Project, but only to the extent attributable to that portion of such Operating Rights which is necessary to accommodate the facilities of the Company; provided, however, that the Shared Government Costs shall not exceed the Estimated Shared Government Costs without the prior written authorization of the Company. (r) "Total Shared Costs" shall mean the sum of the Shared Company Costs and the Shared Government Costs. For the avoidance of doubt, the Total Shared Costs shall not include, without limitation, (i)costs to the Government Entity for Trenching and Restoration, or(ii) costs associated with any joint use of trenches by other utilities as permitted under Section 3(b). (s) "Work"shall mean all work to be performed in connection with the Conversion Project, as more specifically described in the Project Plan, including, without limitation, the Company Work(as defined in Section 2(a), below) and the Government Work(as defined in Section 3(a), below). (t) "Work Schedule" shall mean the schedule specified in the Project Plan which sets forth the milestones for completing the Work, as the same may be changed and amended from time to time in accordance with Section 6, below. 2. Obligations of the Company. (a) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Company shall do the following as 111 specified in, and in accordance with the design and construction specifications and other 9 p ter requirements set forth in, the Project Plan (the"Company Work"): Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 3 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 i) furnish and install an Underground Distribution System within the Conversion Area • (excluding any duct and vault installation or other Work which the Parties have specified in the Project Plan is to be performed by the Government Entity); ii) provide a Company inspector on-site at the times specified in the Work Schedule to inspect the performance of any duct and vault installation Work which the Parties have specified in the Project Plan is to be performed by the Government Entity; and iii) upon connection of those persons or entities to be served by the Underground Distribution System and removal of facilities of any other utilities that are connected to the poles of the overhead system, remove the existing overhead system (including associated wires and Company-owned poles)of 15,000 volts or less within the Conversion Area except for Temporary Services. (b) Upon request of the Government Entity, the Company shall provide periodic reports of the progress of the Company Work identifying (i)the Company Work completed to date, (ii) the Company Work yet to be completed, and (iii) an estimate regarding whether the Conversion Project is on target with respect to the Estimated Shared Company Costs, the Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs (if any), the Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs (if any), the Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs (if any) and the Work Schedule. (c) Except as otherwise provided in the Company's Electric Tariff G, the Company shall own, operate and maintain all electrical facilities installed pursuant to this Agreement including, but not limited to, the Underground Distribution System and Underground Service Lines. (d) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Company shall perform all Company Work in accordance with the Project Plan, the Work Schedule and this Agreement. 3. Obligations of the Government Entity. (a) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Government Entity shall do the • following as specified in, and in accordance with the design and construction specifications and other requirements set forth in, the Project Plan (the"Government Work"): i) provide the Trenching and Restoration; ii) perform the surveying for alignment and grades for ducts and vaults; and iii) perform any duct and vault installation and other Work which the Parties have specified in the Project Plan is to be performed by the Government Entity. (b) Other utilities may be permitted by the Government Entity to use the trenches provided by the Government Entity for the installation of their facilities so long as such facilities or the installation thereof do not interfere (as determined pursuant to the Company's electrical standards)with the Underground Distribution System or the installation or maintenance thereof. Any such use of the trenches by other utilities shall be done subject to and in accordance with the joint trench design specifications and installation drawings set forth or otherwise identified in the Project Plan, and the Government Entity shall be responsible for the coordination of the design and installation of the facilities of the other utilities to ensure compliance with such specifications and drawings. (c) Upon request of the Company, the Government Entity shall provide periodic reports of the progress of the Government Work identifying (i)the Government Work completed to date, (ii)the Government Work yet to be completed, and (iii) an estimate regarding whether the Conversion Project is on target with respect to the Estimated Shared Government Costs and the Work Schedule. (d) The Government Entity shall be responsible for coordinating all work to be performed in connection with the street improvement program within the Conversion Area. Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 4 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 • (e) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Government Entity shall perform all Government Work in accordance with the Project Plan, the Work Schedule and this Agreement. 4. Work Schedule. (a) The Government Entity and the Company have agreed upon the Work Schedule as set forth in the Project Plan. Changes to the Work Schedule shall be made only in accordance with Section 6, below. (b) Promptly following the execution of this Agreement, and upon completion by the Government Entity of any necessary preliminary work, the Government Entity shall hold a pre-construction meeting involving all participants in the Conversion Project to review project design, coordination requirements, work sequencing and related pre-mobilization requirements. Following the pre- construction meeting, the Government Entity shall give the Company written notice to proceed with the Work at least ten (10) business days prior to the commencement date specified in the Work Schedule. (c) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, each Party shall perform the Work assigned to it under this Agreement in accordance with the Work Schedule. So long as the Company performs the Company Work in accordance with the Work Schedule, the Company shall not be liable to the Government Entity (or its agents, servants, employees, contractors, subcontractors, or representatives)for any claims, actions, damages, or liability asserted or arising out of delays in the Work Schedule. 5. Location of Facilities. All facilities of the Company installed within the Conversion Area pursuant to this Agreement shall be • located, and all related Operating Rights shall be obtained, in the manner set forth in the applicable provisions of Schedule 74, as specified by the Parties in the Project Plan. 6. Changes. (a) Either Party may, at any time, by written notice thereof to the other Party, request changes in the Work within the general scope of this Agreement(a"Request for Change"), including, but not limited to: (i) changes in, substitutions for, additions to or deletions of any Work; (ii)changes in the specifications, drawings and other requirements in the Project Plan, (iii) changes in the Work Schedule, and (iv) changes in the location, alignment, dimensions or design of items included in the Work. No Request for Change shall be effective and binding upon the Parties unless signed by an authorized representative of each Party. - (b) If any change included in an approved Request for Change would cause a change in the cost of, or the time required for, the performance of any part of the Work, an equitable adjustment shall be made in the Estimated Shared Company Costs, the Estimated Shared Government Costs, the Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs (if any), the Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs(if any), the Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs (if any) and/or the Work Schedule to reflect such change. The Parties shall negotiate in good faith with the objective of agreeing in writing on a mutually acceptable equitable adjustment. If the Parties are unable to agree upon the terms of the equitable adjustment, either Party may submit the matter for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution provisions in Section 10, below. (c) The Work Schedule, the Estimated Shared Company Costs, the Estimated Shared Government Costs, the Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs, the Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs and/or the Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs shall be further equitably adjusted from time to time to reflect any change in the costs or time required to perform • the Work to the extent such change is caused by: (i) any Force Majeure Event under Section 11, below, (ii) the discovery of any condition within the Conversion Area which affects the scope, cost, Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 5 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 schedule or other aspect of the Work and was not known by or disclosed to the affected Party • prior to the date of this Agreement, or(iii)any change or inaccuracy in any assumptions regarding the scope, cost, schedule or other aspect of the Work which are expressly identified by the Parties in the Project Plan. Upon the request of either Party, the Parties will negotiate in good faith with the objective of agreeing in writing on a mutually acceptable equitable adjustment. If, at any time thereafter, the Parties are unable to agree upon the terms of the equitable adjustment, either Party may submit the matter for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution provisions in Section 10, below. (d) Notwithstanding any dispute or delay in reaching agreement or arriving at a mutually acceptable equitable adjustment, each Party shall, if requested by the other Party, proceed with the Work in accordance with any approved Request for Change. Any request to proceed hereunder must be accompanied by a written statement setting forth the requesting Party's reasons for rejecting the proposed equitable adjustment of the other Party. 7. Compensation and Payment. (a) Subject to and in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement(including, without limitation, the payment procedures set forth in this Section 7), payment in connection with the Conversion Project and this Agreement shall be as follows: i) The Total Shared Costs shall be allocated to the Parties in the following percentages: (A)sixty percent(60%)to the Company, and (B)forty percent(40%)to the Government Entity. ii) The Government Entity shall pay one hundred percent(100%) of all Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs, if any. iii) The Government Entity shall pay one hundred percent(100%) of all Reimbursable Upgrade Costs, if any. • iv) The Government Entity shall pay one hundred percent(100%) of all Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs, if any. v) The Government Entity shall pay one hundred percent(100%) of the costs it incurs to perform that portion of the Government Work specified in Section 3(a)(i) and (ii) (i.e., Trenching and Restoration and surveying). vi) The Company shall pay one hundred percent(100%) of the costs it incurs to design, provide and construct any Company-Initiated Upgrade. vii) The Company shall pay one hundred percent(100%)of the costs it incurs to obtain Operating Rights outside the Public Thoroughfare. • (b) Based on the allocation of responsibilities set forth in Section 7(a), above, the Parties shall determine the net amount payable by the Government Entity or the Company, as applicable, to the other Party under this Agreement(the"Net Amount"). The Net Amount shall be determined by using the amount of the Total Shared Costs allocated to the Government Entity under Section 7(a)(i), and adjusting such amount as follows: i) Subtracting (as a credit to the Government,Entity)the amount of the Shared Government Costs. ii) Adding (as a credit to the Company)the amount of all Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs, Reimbursable Upgrade Costs and Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs. iii) Subtracting (as a credit to the Government Entity) any payments previously made to the Company by the Government Entity under the Design Agreement which, under the terms of the Design Agreement, are to be credited to the Government Entity under this Agreement. The Net Amount, as so calculated, (A)will be an amount payable to the Company if it is a positive • number, and (B) shall be an amount payable to the Government Entity if it is a negative number. Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 6 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 S (c) Within sixty(60) business days of completion of the Conversion Project, the Government Entity shall provide the Company with an itemization of the Shared Government Costs (the"Government Itemization"), together with such documentation and information as the Company may reasonably request to verify the Government Itemization. The Government Itemization shall, at a minimum, break down the Shared Government Costs by the following categories, as applicable: (i) property and related costs incurred and/or paid by the Government Entity, including any costs of obtaining Operating Rights, and (ii) construction costs incurred and/or paid by the Government Entity, including and listing separately inspection, labor, materials and equipment, overhead and all costs charged by any agent, contractor or subcontractor of the Government Entity. (d) Within thirty(30) business days after the Company's receipt of the Government Itemization and requested documentation and information, the Company shall provide the Government Entity a written statement(the"Company Statement")showing (i) an itemization of the Shared Company Costs, (ii) the Parties' relative share of the Total Shared Costs based on the Company's itemization of the Shared Company Costs and the Government Entity's itemization of the Shared Government Costs set forth in the Government Itemization, (iii) any Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs, (iv) any Reimbursable Upgrade Costs, (v) any Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs, (vi) any credits to the Government Entity for payments previously made to the Company by the Government Entity under the Design Agreement which, under the terms of the Design Agreement, are to be credited to the Government Entity under this Agreement, and (vii)the Net Amount, as determined in accordance with Section 7(b), above, together with such documentation and information as the Government Entity may reasonably request to verify the - Company Statement. The itemization of the Shared Company Costs included in the Company Statement shall, at a minimum, break down the Shared Company Costs by the following categories, as applicable: (i) design and engineering costs, and (ii) construction costs, including and listing separately inspection, labor, materials and equipment, overhead and all costs charged 11111 by any agent, contractor or subcontractor of the Company. (e) Within thirty(30) business days after the Government Entity's receipt of the Company Statement and requested documentation and information, the Net Amount shall be paid by the owing Party to the other Party, as specified in the Company Statement. 8. Indemnification. (a) The Government Entity releases and shall defend, indemnify and hold the Company harmless from all claims, losses, harm, liabilities, damages, costs-and expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys'fees)caused by or arising out of any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of the Government Entity in its performance under this Agreement. During the performance of such activities the Government Entity's employees or contractors shall at all times remain employees or contractors, respectively, of the Government Entity. (b) The Company releases and shall defend, indemnify and hold the Government Entity harmless from all claims, losses, harm, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys'fees)caused by or arising out of any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of the Company in its performance under this Agreement. During the performance of such activities the Company's employees or contractors shall at all times remain employees or contractors, respectively, of the Company. (c) Solely for purposes of enforcing the indemnification obligations of a Party under this Section 8, each Party expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial Insurance Act, and agrees that the obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless provided for in this Section 8 extends to any such claim brought against the indemnified Party by or on behalf of any employee of the indemnifying Party. The foregoing waiver shall not in any way • preclude the indemnifying Party from raising such immunity as a defense against any claim brought against the indemnifying Party by any of its employees. Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 7 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 9. Conversion of Service to Customers within Conversion Area. • (a) Upon commencement of the Work, the Government Entity shall notify all persons and entities within the Conversion Area that service lines to such customers must be converted from overhead to underground service within the applicable statutory period following written notice from the Government Entity that service from underground facilities are available in accordance with RCW 35.96.050. Upon the request of any customer, other than a single family residential customer, within the Conversion Area, the Company shall remove the overhead system and-connect such - persons' and entities' Underground Service Lines to the Underground Distribution System. (b) The Parties acknowledge that single family residences within the Conversion Area must(i) provide a service trench and conduit, in accordance with the Company's specifications, from the underground meter base to the point of service provided during the conversion, and (ii) pay for the secondary service conductors as defined in Schedule 85 of the Company's Electric Tariff G. The Government Entity shall exercise its authority to order disconnection and removal of overhead facilities with respect to owners failing to convert service lines from overhead to underground within the timelines provided in RCW 35.96.050. 10. Dispute Resolution. (a) Any dispute, disagreement or claim arising out of or concerning this Agreement must first be presented to and considered by the Parties. A Party who wishes dispute resolution shall notify the other Party in writing as to the nature of the dispute. Each Party shall appoint a representative who shall be responsible for representing the Party's interests. The representatives shall exercise good faith efforts to resolve the dispute. Any dispute that is not resolved within ten (10) business days of the date the disagreement was first raised by written notice shall be referred by the Parties' representatives in writing to the senior management of the Parties for resolution. In the • event the senior management are unable to resolve the dispute within twenty(20) business days (or such other period as the Parties may agree upon), each Party may pursue resolution of the dispute through other legal means consistent with the terms of this Agreement. All negotiations pursuant to these procedures for the resolution of disputes shall be confidential and shall be treated as compromise and settlement negotiations for purposes of the state and federal rules of evidence. (b) Any claim or dispute arising hereunder which relates to any Request for Change or any equitable adjustment under Section 6, above, or the compensation payable by or to either Party under Section 7, above, and which is not resolved by senior management within the time permitted under Section 10(a), above, shall be resolved by arbitration in Seattle, Washington, under the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect. The decision(s) of the arbitrator(s) shall be final, conclusive and binding upon the Parties. All other disputes shall be resolved by litigation in any court or governmental agency, as applicable, having jurisdiction over the Parties and the dispute. (c) In connection with any arbitration under this Section 10, costs of the arbitrator(s), hearing rooms and other common costs shall be divided equally among the Parties. Each Party shall bear the cost and expense of preparing and presenting its own case (including, but not limited to, its own attorneys' fees); provided, that; in any arbitration, the arbitrator(s) may require, as part of his or her decision, reimbursement of all or a portion of the prevailing Party's costs and expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees) by the other Party.. (d) Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties in writing, the Parties shall continue to perform their respective obligations under this Agreement during the pendency of any dispute., • Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 8 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 • 11. Uncontrollable Forces. In the event that either Party is prevented or delayed in the performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement by reason beyond its reasonable control (a "Force Majeure Event"), then that Party's performance shall be excused during the Force Majeure Event. Force Majeure Events shall include, without limitation, war; civil disturbance; flood, earthquake or other Act of God; storm, earthquake or other condition which necessitates the mobilization of the personnel of a Party or its contractors to restore utility service to customers; laws, regulations, rules or orders of any governmental agency; sabotage; strikes or similar labor disputes involving personnel of a Party, its contractors or a third party; or any failure or delay in the performance by the other Party, or a third party who is not an employee, agent or contractor of the Party claiming a Force Majeure Event, in connection with the Work or this Agreement. Upon removal or termination of the Force Majeure Event, the Party claiming a Force Majeure Event shall promptly perform the affected obligations in an orderly and expedited manner under this Agreement or procure a substitute for such obligation. The Parties shall use all commercially reasonable efforts to eliminate or minimize any delay caused by a Force Majeure Event. 12. Insurance. (a) PSE shall, and shall require each of its contractors to, secure and maintain in force throughout the duration of the Conversion Project(or, if sooner, until termination of this Agreement) comprehensive general liability insurances, with a minimum coverage of$1,000,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate for personal injury; and $1,000,000 per occurrence/ aggregate for property damages, and professional liability insurance in the amount of$1,000,000. (b) The Government Entity shall ensure that each of its contractors performing any Government Work secures and maintains in force throughout the duration of the Conversion Project(or, if sooner, until termination of this Agreement) insurance policies having the same coverage, amounts and • limits as specified Section 12(a), above. (c) In lieu of the insurance requirements set forth in Section 12(a), above, the Company may self- insure against such risks in such amounts as are consistent with good utility practice. Upon the Government Entity's request, the Company shall provide the Government Entity with reasonable written evidence that the Company is maintaining such self-insurance. 13. Other. (a) Agreement Subject To Tariff. This Agreement is subject to the General Rules and Provisions set forth in Tariff Schedule 80 of the Company's electrical Tariff G and to Schedule 74 of such Tariff as approved by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission and in effect as of the date of this Agreement. (b) Termination. The Government Entity reserves the right to terminate the Conversion Project and this Agreement upon written notice to the Company. In the event that the Government Entity terminates the Conversion Project and this Agreement, the Government Entity shall reimburse the Company for all costs reasonably incurred by the Company in connection with the Work performed prior to the effective date of termination. In such event, the costs reimbursable to the Company(i) shall not be reduced by any Shared Government Costs or other costs incurred by the Government Entity, and (ii) shall be paid within thirty(30) days after the receipt of the Company's invoice therefor. Sections 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13 shall survive any termination of the Conversion Project and/or this Agreement. (c) Facilities Greater Than 15,000 Volts. Nothing in this Agreement shall in any way affect the rights or obligations of the Company under any previous agreements pertaining to the existing or future facilities of greater than 15,000 Volts within the Conversion Area. 11111 Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 9 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 • (d) Compliance With Law. The Parties shall, in performing the Work under this Agreement, comply • with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations. (e) No Discrimination. The Company, with regard to the Work performed by the Company under this Agreement, shall comply with all applicable laws relating to discrimination on the basis race, color, national origin, religion, creed, age, sex, or the presence of any physical or sensory handicap in the selection and retention of employees or procurement of materials or supplies. (f) Independent Contractor. The Company and the Government Entity agree that the Company is an independent contractor with respect to the Work and this Agreement. The Company is acting to preserve and protect its facilities and is not acting for the Government Entity in performing the Work. Nothing in this Agreement shall be considered to create the relationship of employer and employee between the Parties. Neither the Company nor any employee of the Company shall be entitled to any benefits accorded employees of the Government Entity by virtue of the Work or this Agreement. The Government Entity shall not be responsible for withholding or otherwise deducting federal income tax or social security or contributing to the State Industrial Insurance Program, or otherwise assuming the duties of an employer with respect to the Company, or any employee of the Company. (g) Nonwaiver of Rights or Remedies. No failure or delay of either Party to insist upon or enforce strict performance by the other Party of any provision of this Agreement or to exercise any other right under this Agreement, and no course of dealing or performance with respect thereto, shall, except to the extent provided in this Agreement, be construed as a waiver or, or choice of, or relinquishment of any right under any provision of this Agreement or any right at law or equity not otherwise provided for herein. The express waiver by either Party of any right or remedy under this Agreement or at law or equity in a particular instance or circumstance shall not constitute a waiver thereof in any other instance or circumstance. (h) No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no third-party beneficiaries of this Agreement. Nothing • contained in this Agreement is intended to confer any right or interest on anyone other than the Parties, their respective successors, assigns and legal representatives. (i) Governmental Authority. This Agreement is subject to the rules, regulations, orders and other requirements, now or hereafter in effect, of all governmental regulatory authorities and courts having jurisdiction over this Agreement, the Parties or either of them. All laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, orders and other requirements, now or hereafter in effect, of governmental regulatory authorities and courts that are required to be incorporated into agreements of this character are by this reference incorporated in this Agreement. (j) No Partnership. This Agreement shall not be interpreted or construed to create an association, - joint venture or partnership between the Parties or to impose any partnership obligations or liability upon either Party. Further, neither Party shall have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement or undertaking for or on behalf of, to act as or be an agent or representative of, or to otherwise bind the other Party. (k) Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement or the application of any such provision shall be held invalid as to either Party or any circumstance by any court having jurisdiction, such provision shall remain in force and effect to the maximum extent provided by law, and all other provisions of this Agreement and their application shall not be affected thereby but shall remain in force and effect unless a court or arbitrator holds they are not severable from the invalid provisions. • Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 10 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 • (I) Notice. Any notice under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be faxed (with a copy followed by mail or hand delivery), delivered in person, or mailed, properly addressed and stamped with the required postage, to the intended recipient as follows: If to the Government Entity: City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Attn: James Wilhoit Fax: 425-430-7376 If to the Company: Puget Sound Energy, Inc. PO Box 97034 EST-11W Bellevue, WA 98009-9734 Attn: Cody Olson Fax: 425-462-3351 Any Party may change its address specified in this Section 13(1) by giving the other Party notice of such change in accordance with this Section 13(I). (m)Applicable Law. This Agreement shall in all respects be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington (without reference to rules governing conflict of laws), except to the extent such laws may be preempted by the laws of the United States of America. (n) Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement ent of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and all other agreements and understandings of the Parties, whether • written or oral, with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement are hereby superseded in their entireties; provided, however, that except as expressly set forth in this Agreement, nothing herein is intended to or shall alter, amend or supersede the Design Agreement and the same shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms. (o) Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective successors, assigns, purchasers, and transferees of the Parties, including but not limited to, any entity to which the rights or obligations of a Party are assigned, delegated, or transferred in any corporate reorganization, change of organization, or purchase or transfer of assets by or to another corporation, partnership, association, or other business organization or division thereof. Government Entity: Company: PUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC. BY BY ITS ITS Date Signed Date Signed Approved as to form: • Construction Agreement, Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 11 Renton-Duvall Ave Conversion Project- 101025171 PSE PUGET SOUND ENERGY • Exhibit "A" Project Plan Schedule 74 Underground Conversion City of Renton — Duvall Ave NE PSE Project Number: 101025171 April 1st, 2008 Pursuant to Puget Sound Energy("PSE") Rate Schedule 74 and as described in this Project Plan, PSE will convert its existing overhead electrical distribution system of 15,000 volts or less to an equivalent Underground Distribution System. This Project Plan describes work to be performed by PSE and the City of Renton(the"City") for the conversion of certain PSE electrical distribution system facilities as described herein(the "Conversion Project"). Construction of this Conversion Project is contingent upon and shall not commence prior to both written acceptance of this Project Plan and written execution of a Schedule 74 Construction Agreement by the City and PSE. This Project Plan includes and consists of: • Detailed description of the Construction Work to be performed • Applicable requirements, drawings and specifications for the work (attached) 110 • Operating Rights to be obtained for the Conversion Project (attached) • Construction Work Schedule • Construction Costs Estimate Summary (attached) Revisions to this Project Plan must be mutually approved by the City and PSE. Scope of Work This Conversion Project will replace PSE's existing overhead electrical distribution system with an Underground Distribution System within the following area(the"Conversion Area"): Along Duvall Avenue NE (N 138th Avenue SE) between SE 107 Place and SE 95th Way(future north city limits).. The Conversion Project is approximately 5250 feet in length, including laterals and road crossings. The Conversion Project includes modification or replacement of all existing services lines within the Conversion Area to connect to the Underground Distribution System and removal of PSE's existing overhead electric distribution facilities (including PSE distribution poles and pole mounted street lights) from the Conversion Area. There are no Company Initiated Upgrades, Government Entity Requested Upgrades or Temporary Service elements included in the Conversion Project Scope of Work. In conjunction with the Conversion Project, PSE will remove its existing street lighting system within the Conversion Area. Provision of a new street lighting system within the Conversion City of[INScitynameERT INSptoject taineER T Underground Conversion Page 1 1NSorder#ER'T Area under terms of applicable PSE Tariff Schedules will be addressed on a separate work order • and work sketch. Additional costs will apply and will be quoted separately. Responsibilities of Parties City Responsibilities a) Provide written notice to customers within the Conversion Area in advance of Conversion - - Project Construction Work start. The notice will include contact information for both the City and PSE,the expected Conversion Project schedule, anticipation of service interruptions and work required to be performed by customers. b) Coordinate other utility conversion, removal and relocation from PSE's poles. c) Provide all surveying for equipment placement, locations, and establish all grade elevations for the Underground Distribution System within the Conversion Area. d) Provide all necessary excavation, bedding, backfill, off-site disposal, site restoration and coordination for installation of the Underground Distribution System. This includes trenching,backfill, and restoration for cut-over and transfer of existing underground system and service lines from the existing overhead distribution system to the new Underground Distribution System. e) Coordinate private property trenching, excavation and restoration activity with private property owners affected by this Conversion Project. • f) Provide flagging and traffic control as required for all work performed by the City. g) Install and proof all ducts and vaults for the Underground Distribution System (excluding work in ducts or vaults containing energized cables or equipment—see PSE Responsibilities) in accordance with PSE standards and specifications using ducts and vaults provided by PSE. "Proofing" as used herein is defined as verification using a mandrel that the duct and vault system is free and clear of damage, installed to the proper grade and at the proper location and contains a pulling line. h) Provide PSE at least ten(10)business days notice prior to the start of trenching activity to allow for delivery of PSE materials to the job site and scheduling of PSE's on-site Inspector. Provide at least two (2)business days notice for scheduled delivery of vaults from the manufacturer. i) Provide secure staging and storage area(s) for duct and vault materials provided by PSE. The City shall be responsible for the security and condition of these materials until they are installed and accepted by PSE or returned to PSE's custody. j) Provide labor and equipment for the off-loading of PSE duct and vault materials delivered to the job site. e . k) Promptly following notice from PSE that the Underground Distribution System has been energized, provide notice to customers within the Conversion Area informing them of their • obligation and responsibility to convert their overhead service lines to underground service lines as provided by state law or to modify existing underground service lines for connection City of[INScitynameERT INSproje,otnameErtf Underground Conversion Page 2 INSorder#ERT to the Underground Distribution System. Affected service lines are listed in the Service Lines section of this Project Plan. 1) Facilitate weekly (or as otherwise agreed by the City and PSE) construction coordination meetings to include all relevant parties participating in the conversion including PSE and it's contractor(s),the City and it's contractor(s), and other utilities. m) Provide any necessary operating rights for the installation of PSE's facilities in accordance with PSE's Schedule 74 Section 3 and as mutually agreed by the PSE and the City. Operating rights are further addressed in the Operating Rights section of this Project Plan. n) Modify, reroute or replace service lines to City owned facilities to connect to the Underground Distribution System. o) Following notification from PSE that Construction Work is complete,provide to PSE any Shared Government Costs as provided for in the Construction Agreement. Puget Sound Energy Responsibilities a) Provide all duct and vault materials, cables, electrical equipment and components necessary for installation of the Underground Distribution System. b) Following notice from the City, deliver or cause to be delivered all duct and vault materials to the designated staging/storage area(s). Acknowledge delivered quantities and condition of duct and vault materials by signing shipping manifests. c) Following notice from the City, provide inspection services needed for overseeing the proper • installation of ducts and vaults by the City. d) Accept delivery of the completed duct and vault system once the new system has been proofed (as described above)by the City. PSE will provide a mandrel to the City to be used in proofing of the duct and vault system. e) Provide PSE electrical workers to complete duct installation and proofing when such work is performed at or in any energized vault containing energized cables or equipment. f) Install (except for ducts and vaults installed by the City) and energize the Underground Distribution System. Provide written notice to the City when the Underground Distribution System is energized. g) Perform cut-over and transfer of existing Underground Distribution System and existing underground service lines from the overhead distribution system to the new Underground Distribution System where applicable (see City Responsibility item"d" concerning trenching responsibility). PSE will notify the City for excavation and the affected customers at least two (2)business days prior to installation, transfer, and connection of underground service lines. Affected service lines are listed in the Service Lines section of this Project Plan. h) Install and connect replacement underground service lines to single family residences and connect replacement non-residential underground service lines provided by customers within the Conversion Area pursuant to PSE Tariff Schedule 85. Affected service lines are listed in the Service Lines section of this Project Plan. 111 City of[INSeity►iameERT INSprojectnaineERT Underground Conversion Page 3 INSorder#ERT i) Remove the existing overhead electric distribution system including, conductors, equipment, down guys, anchors and poles after all service lines to customers within the Conversion Area are connected to the Underground Distribution System and all other utilities have been removed from PSE's poles. Holes left following removal of poles will be filled with crushed rock and compacted in accordance with applicable City standards or specifications. j) Provide flagging and traffic control as required for all work performed by PSE (except as may otherwise be reasonably provided by the City during installation of ducts and vaults in conjunction with City performed trenching, excavation, back-fill and restoration). k) Attend weekly (or as otherwise agreed by the City and PSE) construction coordination meetings facilitated by the City and its contractor. Operatinji Rights The Underground Distribution System will be located within Public Thoroughfare except as described in the Operating Rights Attachment. The Construction Work will not be released by PSE for construction until i) all operating rights necessary for the installation of PSE's facilities have been obtained and have been verified by PSE, or ii)the City otherwise signs an agreement releasing PSE from any and all financial obligations associated with the location or relocation of PSE facilities resulting from commencement of construction prior to acquisition of all identified necessary operating rights. Construction Work Schedule The work will be performed in accordance with the following Work Schedule, unless this schedule is revised by mutual agreement of the City and PSE or circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the City and/or PSE preclude such performance. Installation of ducts and vaults: Anticipated start on or about May 15th with anticipated completion on our about July 25th, 2008. (approximately 60 days) Installation and energization of the Underground Distribution System: Anticipated start on or about July 28th, with anticipated completion on or about August 25th, 2008. (approximately 30 days) Removal of overhead facilities: Anticipated start on our about September 25th, 2008. Work Schedule Restrictions: None identified. Construction Cost Estimate i City of[INScitynameERT IN SpTojectitameEkT Underground Conversion Page 4 INSorder#ERT The estimated costs to perform the Construction Work and the allocation of costs between the parties are presented in the attached Construction Costs Estimate Summary. These estimated • costs are valid for ninety (90) days from the date shown on the attached Construction Costs Estimate Summary. If this Project Plan and a Schedule 74 Construction Agreement are not fully executed within ninety (90) days from this date, the estimated costs shall be subject to revision. Project Assumptions The project design, construction plans and cost estimates are based on and reflect the following assumptions. Construction conditions that are not consistent with these assumptions may result in a request for change or an equitable adjustment to project compensation under Section 6 of the Construction Agreement. Cost Assumptions 1. The Construction Work will be performed in accordance with the Construction Work Schedule. 2. PSE's Project Manager will accept or reject (with written justification)the duct and vault installation work performed by the City within five (5) business days notice of completion from the City. In the event PSE rejects any of the ducts or vaults (with reasonable written justification), the City will perform the necessary remedial work. The City will then re- notify PSE and PSE shall have five (5)business days to accept or reject the remedial work. 3. All PSE cables can be pulled through the ducts and vaults system to be used for the Conversion Project utilizing normal cable pulling techniques. 4. A City Street Use permit is the only permit necessary for PSE to perform its work for this Conversion Project and will be issued within two (2) weeks of PSE submitting a complete permit application(including any supporting documentation reasonably required by the City). There will be no charge for the permit or inspection fees. 5. The daily productivity rate for PSE duct and vault installation is based on the City's contractor opening a minimum of 100 feet of trench per working day. The daily productivity rate is used to calculate the number of days a PSE provided inspector will be required. During construction,the Inspector will be scheduled in full day increments and in one continuous effort. Changes to a continuous schedule are required a minimum of two days in advance. 6. Traffic control provided by PSE assumes the use of two flaggers, basic signage and simple • channelization. 7. Work to be performed by PSE does not include installation and/or removal of Temporary Service facilities at the request of others during construction. 8. All cut-over and transfer work will be completed during regular working hours. 9. Installation of protective bollards may be necessary at some locations and may not be included in the project design. In the event unplanned bollards are required, the associated installation cost will be a shared cost. • City of[INScitynameERT INSirojectnameERT Underground Conversion Page 5 INSorder1irRT 10. Where noted on the plans, existing ducts, either empty or currently used, are to be utilized for • new cables. The Construction Costs Estimate assumes that such ducts are in place and available for use to pull in new cables using the same equipment and effort as newly installed ducts. Schedule 1. There will be a total of two (2) PSE crew mobilizations as follows: i) one mobilization of an underground line crew for installation of underground conductors and equipment; and ii)one mobilization of an overhead line crew for removal of the existing overhead facilities. Once mobilized PSE crews will have continuous productive work until all PSE Construction Work is complete. 2. All PSE Construction Work will be performed during regular working hours from 7AM to 5PM excluding holidays. In the event that lane closures are necessary for performance of work, PSE shall be limited to working between the hours of 7AM to 5PM; 3. Work requiring scheduled interruption of electric service (cut-overs and transfers) will be performed during the working hours specified in Schedule Assumption#2 above, and will be scheduled with at least two (2) business days notice. PSE will notify customers of scheduled service interruptions. Additional Considerations 1111 Service Lines Service lines within the Conversion Area must be replaced or modified to provide underground service from the Underground Distribution System as described in the attached Service Lines Replacement& Modification Requirements List. PSE Tariff Schedule 85 will apply to performance of this work. Cut-overs and Transfers PSE customers within the Conversion Area will experience interruption of electric service during performance of the Construction Work when transferring system and customer loads from the overhead distribution system to the Underground Distribution System. PSE will notify customers at least two (2) business days in advance of expected service interruptions. Customers may request that cut-over and transfer work affecting their service be performed outside the regular working hours listed above subject to the customer's written agreement to reimburse PSE for the additional cost (at overtime rates)to perform such work outside the regular working hours. New Service Connection of new or increased load for City facilities (such as new traffic signals) under terms • of PSE Tariff Schedule 85 will be addressed on a separate work order and work sketch. Additional costs may apply and will be quoted separately. City of[INScitynameERT INSprojectnameERT Underground Conversion Page 6 INSorderllERT PSE Design & Construction Standards • This Conversion Project has been designed and will be constructed in accordance with PSE design and construction standards in effect as of the date of this Project Plan. PSE standards applicable to Construction Work to be performed by the City have been provided to the City in PSE's "Electric Distribution Trench/Duct/Vault Construction Standards, 2005". All relevant PSE standard described above are attached to this Project Plan by this reference. Temporary Support (Holding) of PSE Poles Whenever any pole(s) are required to be temporarily supported due to excavation in proximity to such poles, the City will coordinate with PSE to provide such support. The need to temporarily support such poles shall be determined by PSE, and if required, such support shall be provided by PSE. As used herein, "temporary support"means supporting one or more poles for a continuous working period of ten hours or less. Acceptance of Project Plan The City and PSE mutually agree to and accept this Project Plan as of the date indicated below: For the City: For PSE: • By: By: Its: Its: Date: Date: • City of[NScitynameERT INSprojectnameERT Underground Conversion Page 7 INSorder#ERT • . . .,.. , . • .[. i. .....,.. . .. .. 4 .,,,imie,. (,!PSE:;;:: PUT SOUND ENERGY Date: 6/14/2007 Project Title: Renton-Duvall Avenue Underground Conversion-Additional Scope Project Description: Convert OH to UG for approximately 1300 feet along 138th Avenue SE from SE 100th Street to SE 95th Way Rate Schedule: 74 Project Manager/Phone#: Steve Schleer 253-606-2569 Project Engineer 1 Phone#: Steve Schleer 253-606-2689 Municipal Liaison Mgr/Phone#: Cody Olson 425-462-3351 Project#: 101025171 Revision#: #2 Revision Date: 3/28/2008 Construction Costs Estimate Summary 1,2 100%Government Entity Reimbursable Costs Prior Total 100%GE Private Gov Req Temporary Conv/Reloc Reimbursable 100%PSE Construction Shared Costs3 Conversion Upgrade Services Within 5 Years Costs Costs Costs Totals° Estimate EstimateEstimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate I Estimate _ Company Labor $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Matenals $ 151,200 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 151,200 Equipment $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - inspection $ 47,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 47,100 Service Provider Outside Services $ 170,200 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 170,200 Operating Rights $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Overhead $ 57,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 57,100 — Government Entity Labor $ 92,200 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 92,200 Operating Rights $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ Construction Costs Totals°I$ 517,800 I$ - $ - $ - $ - $ -I$ -j$ 517,800 Projected allocation of Estimated Construction Costs at Completion of Construction Work Company $ 310,700 I$ -I$ 310,700 Government Entity $ 207,100 $ $ 207,100 Notes: Estimate prepared In accordance with Sections 6&11 of Schedule 74 Design Agreement and Section 7 of Schedule 74 Construction Agreement. 2 All amounts shown in this estimate are rounded up to the next$100 °Shared Costs are allocated 40%to the Government Entity and 60%to the Company if the Conversion Prosect is completed ° Total Costs excludes Government Entity costs of trenching,restoration,and surveying Construction Estimate Printed 5/15/2008 8:27 AM PSE , PUGET SOUND ENERGY . Date: 6/14/200744/1 Project Title: Renton-Duvall Avenue Underground Conversion-Additional Scope i 0 7 Project Description: Convert OH to UG for approximately/400 feet along 138th Avenue SE from SE oto SE 95th Way Rate Schedule: 74 Project Manager!Phone#: Steve Schleer 253-606-2569 4._,,;.<;:1, ^1 Project Engineer/Phone#: Steve Schleer 253-606-2669 _ Municipal Liaison Mgr/Phone#: Cody Olson 425-462-3351 i Project#: 101025171 Revision#:#2 ' Revision Date: 3/28/2008 Construction Costs Estimate Summary 1.2c t T Y 100%Government Entity Reimbursable Costs 21W .Ot11 194,4 1 s Prior Total 100%GE •544i26 .5 filIkE Private Gov Req Temporary Conv/Reloc Reimbursable 100%PSE Construction Cnsa l Shared Costs3 Conversion Upgrade Services _Within 5 Years Costs Costs Costs Totals° 4.O'/u '�+' 0 Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Company Labor $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ , Q- :Za Materials $ 151,200 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 71,200 60.4&O ! �T Equipment $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ / - .�a 26 0 Inspection $ 47,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ ; 47,1.00 t X18` Yd ., Service Provider Outside Services $ 170,200 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 170,200 \ 6.)8)Li&0 `O2,t Z(, / Operating Rights $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ) al 4;269/ Overhead $ 57,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ \57,100/ Z2, Government Entity .. --.....„-- Labor .`�Labor $ 92,200/$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 92,200 36, e6 b '5-5,35+ Operating Rights $ \:.- - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - __ Construction Costs Totals4I$ 517,800 1$ - $ - $ - $ , - $ - $ -I$ 517/800 2_0)7 i 3 )0,- 694- �U�'t�ln-rip� RU�tila T Projected allocation of Estimated Construction Costs at Completion of Construction Work • Company $ 310,700 $ - $ 310,700• Government Entity $ 207,100 $ - $ 207,100 Notes: ' Estimate prepared In accordance with.Sections 6&11 of Schedule 74 Design Agreement and Section 7 of Schedule 74 Construction Agreement. 2 All amounts shown in this estimate are rounded up to the next$100 °Shared Costs are allocated 40%to the Government Entity and 60%to the Company if the Conversion Prosect is completed Total Costs excludes Government Entity costs of trenching,restoration,and surveying ,' Construction Estimate Printed 5/15/2008 8:27 AM 0 III ; ,, APPROVED BY .CITY COUNCIL- '- ` - FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT.` R da - , . _ _ Date � . . - . . June 9;2008 . . APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS _ ` - The tinances Committee apprgves.;for payment on,June 9, 2008;. claim vouchers 2723'13 - 273.225 ' '.and 4.wire transfers,,totaling $8,716,772:9$;.and 1558'direct deposits, 309 payroll.vouchers, and'. ` ' 2 wire•transfers,-totaling$5,441,255.70.:' ' . - ..,/,./ , 7 , _ - ., . ..., . . • '' DomPersson, Chair --- _ , - rn -Chair ; King.Parker Member . . • APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL Date (?':71� oo� . FINANCE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT June 9,2008 Renton Community Center Readerboard Replacement Project Bid Award (June 2, 2008) The Finance Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to award the - contract, for thereplacement of the electronic readerboard in Cedar River Park to the sole bidder Daktronics, Inc. The contract amount is $115,546..54 and funds are available in.Fund 3-16. The Committee further recommends that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized tosign • the contract. 7 'Hfr::::>21 , CjYC Don Persson,Chair , Terri..Bi-iere, i7514,hair King arker, •ember C:, Terry Higashiyama,Administrator-Community Services Linda Parks,Acting Administrator Finance/IS. 'Pe-kr APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, Date e/q� °8 FINANCE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT = June 9,2008 '2008 Budget Amendment, Full-Time Facilities Maintenance Custodian Hire and Additional Landscaping-Maintenance Expenditure (June 2, 2008) The Finance Committee recommends concurrence with the staff recommendation to amend the 2008 Budget by$66,541.: The Finance Committee additionally recommends concurrence • with the staff recommendation to approve a full-time Maintenance Custodian position related to the additional:maintenance requirements:of Fire District#40, and $1{;000 designated for - • 15 000 ' .associated landscaping expenses. Funds=from:the revenue account: of j 000.0000.00.000:3380,0022..00• .000001 dispersed;to the following accounts: $ 1,000 001.000000:020:5760.0010.48.000000 • $114,000 001.000000:020:5760.0010.48.000003 $51,541 001:000000:020:5180.0010.10.000000 • The:Committee further requests,the ordinance'regarding this matter be presented for, first reading. • Dori Persson, Chair ,- , Terri B + � hair: King Parker, Member • C: Terry Higashiyama;Administrator Community Services Linda Parks,Interim Administrator Finance/IS Petr gevivie r APPROVED BY FINANCE COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT Date b/9/HP-s • June 9,2008 2008 BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR FIREMEN'S_ PENSION FUND 611 ' Referred June 2, 2008 The Committee concurs with the staff recommendation to amend the 200.8 budget by $75;000 to meet the Firemen's Pension Fundobligation for` 2008. . The Committee recommends the related ordinance be placed on the Council agenda for first reading. Don Persson; Chair erri : . ;t f" Chair King Parker, Member _ cc: Linda Parks,Interim FIS Administrator' , - Nancy Violante,Financial Services Manager • - 30u 4asuvtay , : iivianc� = ;w~ APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL Date '‘,/q/91)()5.. UTILITIES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT June 9,2008. City Code for Sewer Service Outside City.Limits' (May 12, 2008) The Utilities Committee'recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to amend City , Code, Section 4-6-040C, `to limit connections outside Renton's city .limits and exclude connection for properties desirin g to develop:through,further subdivisionof their land. r,. -' The committee further recommends that the ordinance;regarding this matter be presented for, first reading: 4111110,1 ' Rich ZW-ie er, Chair • Greg Taylor,Vice.Chair ' Terri Briere,Me bel cc: Lys Hornsby,Utility Systems Director • ,I. • " APPROVED BY , ` CITY COUNCIL , , . • - Date &ITi -Qde -UTILITIES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT _ June 9 2008 • Establishment of the White Fence Ranch Sanitary Sewer'Extension . Special Assessment.District (May 19;2008). • . .. The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff rbcommendation.to approve,the. preliminary White Fence Ranch Sanitary Sewer Extension Special Assessment":District. .. . ' The Committee further recommends:`staff to proceed with the:establishment of the final - --Special Assessment District_upon completion'ofthe construction of the White Fence Ranch, - Sanitary Sewer Extension project. = , , " Rich:.Zwicker; hair. Graylor;Vice Chair ' Brier:;Member - . cc: ` -Lys.Hornsby,Utility Systems Director - - - ' bave Christensen;Wastewater Utility Engineering Supervisor ,. ^ - . , John Hobson,"Wastewater Utility Engineer - • W:\WWP-27-3432 White Fence Ranch"\SAD\WFR-SAD-UtilCorri.doc UHtp ' ,