Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil 01/26/2004AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING January 26, 2004 Monday,,7:30 p.m. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed R-1 prezoning for the Bales Annexation site consisting of 8.52 acres bounded by SE 128th St., SE 130th St., 156th Ave. SE, and 152nd Ave. SE 4. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 5. AUDIENCE COMMENT (Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting. Each speaker is allowed five minutes. The comment period will be limited to one-half hour. The second audience comment period later on in the agenda is unlimited in duration.) When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to the podium and state your name and address for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME. 6. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further discussion if requested by a Councilmember. a. Approval of Council meeting minutes of January 12, 2004. Council concur. b. Community Services Department submits CAG-02-118, Traffic Management Center; and requests approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of $11,257.08, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of $8,302.33 to Fredhoes Building Construction Co., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. c. Development Services Division recommends approval, with conditions, of the Liberty Ridge Phase 6 Final Plat; 122 single-family lots on 34 acres located on Index Ave. SE, south of NE 3rd/4th St., and east of Edmonds Ave. NE (FP-03-112). Council concur. (See 9. for resolution.) d. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends a public hearing be set on 2/9/2004 to consider the 50% Petition to Annex and R-8 prezoning for the proposed Carlo Annexation; 37 acres located in the vicinity of 136th Ave. SE, NE 3rd St., 138th Ave. SE, and SE 132nd St. Council concur. e. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department submits 10% Notice of Intent petition to annex for the proposed Johnson Annexation, 14.22 acres bounded by 142nd Ave. SE, SE 121st St., and NE 9th St., and recommends that a public meeting be set on 2/9/2004 to consider the petition. Council concur. f. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a contract in the amount of $98,164.92 with W&H Pacific for the North Renton infrastructure improvements. Council concur. g. Utility Systems Division submits CAG-03-067, Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Improvement; and requests approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of $5,827.33, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of $16,729.37 to Blackwater Marine, LLC, contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE). 7. CORRESPONDENCE a. Letter from Patrick Miller, President, AFSCME Local 2170, AFL-CIO, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, 98055, requesting that the topic of contracting out parks maintenance work be placed on the Community Services Committee agenda. b. Facsimile from Dave Petrie, 811 S. 273rd Ct., Des Moines, 98198, regarding the impact of Density Credit Transfers (DCT) on intended residential density zoning, and urging Council to petition King County Council to change or abolish DCT. c. Letter from D. J. Rollins, 9605 143rd Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, asking that Renton's zoning code be modified so that the development patterns within the R-1 urban and community separators are the same as King County's, particularly in regards to clustering and 50% permanent open space tracts. 8. OLD 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; Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Funding Recommendations for Renton Visitors Connection; Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Funding Recommendations for Marketing Campaign b. Planning & Development Committee: 2004 King County Comprehensive Plan Amendments c. Public Safety Committee: Street Racing d. Utilities Committee: East Valley Lift Station Replacement Project Budget 9. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Resolution: Liberty Ridge Phase 6 Final Plat (see 6.c.) Ordinance for second and final reading: Real estate sign code amendments (1st reading 12/15/2003) 10. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.) 11. AUDIENCE COMMENT 12. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA (Preceding Council Meeting) 7th Floor Conferencing Center 5:30 p.m. Emerging Issues; Councilmember Laptop Computer Training • 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 11:00 AM & 9:00 PM, WED. & FRI. AT 9:00 AM & 7:00 PM AND SAT. & SUN. AT 1:00 PM & 9:00 PM RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 26, 2004 Council Chambers Monday, 7:30 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF DON PERSSON, Council President; RANDY CORMAN; TONI NELSON; COUNCILMEMBERS DAN CLAWSON; DENIS LAW; TERRI BRIERE; MARCIE PALMER. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief ATTENDANCE Administrative Officer; ZANETTA FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; NEIL WATTS, Development Services Director; ALEX PIETSCH, Economic Development Administrator; DON ERICKSON, Senior Planner; DEREK TODD, Assistant to the CAO; COMMANDER CHARLES MARSALISI, Police Department. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Annexation: Bales, SE 128th accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Keolker-Wheeler opened the St public hearing to consider the proposed R-1 prezoning for the Bales Annexation 8.52-acre site, generally bounded by SE 128th St. to the north, SE 130th St., if extended, to the south, 156th Ave. SE, if extended, to the east, and the middle of 152nd Ave. SE, to the west. Don Erickson, Senior Planner, stated that this is the first of two public hearings on the prezoning for the proposed Bales Annexation. He reviewed the location and existing conditions of the site, noting the essentially flat topography and lack of environmental constraints. In regards to public services, the site is served by Fire District #25, Issaquah School District, Water District #90, Renton sewer, and it abuts 14 acres of King County designated parklands. Mr. Erickson pointed out that current King County zoning is R-4 (Residential - four dwelling units per gross acre). The site is designated Residential Low Density (RLD) under Renton's Comprehensive Plan, for which the following zones are allowed: RC (Resource Conservation), R-1 (one dwelling unit per net acre), R-4 (four dwelling units per net acre), and R-5 (five dwelling units per net acre). He reported that although voters approved the annexation at the Special Election on September 16, 2003, the proposed R-5 prezoning was defeated. Since R-5 prezoning has been ruled out, staff recommends R-1 prezoning, as the R-4 zoning regulations are currently under development. Upon review of the fiscal impact analysis, Mr. Erickson noted that at full development, assuming a potential of eight single-family homes and a new home value of $300,000, the City will realize a deficit of $462. He concluded that prezoning is required before the site can be brought into the City, and noted that R-1 prezoning is consistent with the RLD land use designation. Mr. Erickson added that property owners within the proposed annexation area can apply for R-5 zoning once it is officially part of the City. January 26, 2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 24 Public comment was invited. Letters were read from George H. Bales, G. Jay Bales, and Robin Bales, PO Box 3015, Renton, 98056, requesting R-6 overlay rezoning for properties they own or manage located within the proposed annexation area at 15221 SE 128th St., and 15217 SE 128th St. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT A PREZONE ORDINANCE WITH R-1 ZONING FOR THE 8.52-ACRE BALES ANNEXATION SITE. CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2004 and beyond. Items noted included: • In 2003, the City's website registered over 1.9 million overall page views in comparison to 1.6 million in 2002, an increase of 15%. • The Rotary Club of Renton contributed $4,000 to the City of Renton Scholarship Program; and the Youth Athletics Program received a $7,200 donation from Land-O-Frost to help support the 2004 youth basketball and T-ball programs. • In 2003, over 4,900 volunteer hours were donated to the Recreation Services Division in youth athletics, teen programming, program instruction, and special populations programs. AUDIENCE COMMENT Philip Ziegler, 504 Whitworth Ave. S., Renton, 98055, expressed his concerns Citizen Comment: Ziegler - regarding property owner Mary Ryan and the construction on her properties Whitworth/Morris Aves S located at 500 Whitworth Ave. S. and at S. 6th St. and Morris Ave. S. He Property Maintenance questioned whether the proper permits were obtained, and displayed Concerns photographs of the potentially unsafe construction conditions and debris. Mr. Ziegler stated that the construction and some of the renters of the properties are disrupting the neighborhood. Additionally, he stated his concern relating to the overpopulation of the neighborhood, and asked if the neighborhood could be rezoned back to single-family. Citizen Comment: Ankney - Walter Ankney, 303 6th Ave. S., Renton, 98055, reported that some renters of Whitworth/Morris Aves S units owned by Mary Ryan in his neighborhood tend to leave trash around the Property Maintenance buildings. He displayed photographs of the trash, explaining that its Concerns accumulation makes it difficult to walk in the alleyways, and also presents a safety hazard. Citizen Comment: Arrowsmith George Arrowsmith, 544 Morris Ave. S., Renton, 98055, noted that three trees - Whitworth/Morris Aves S were removed from the property located at S. 6th St. and Morris Ave. S., and he Property Maintenance questioned the necessity of their removal, and whether permits are needed for Concerns tree removal. He stated that consideration of the aesthetics of the situation needs to be taken into account prior to the granting of tree removal permits. Citizen Comment: Kernie - John Kernie, 432 Smithers Ave. S., Renton, 98055, stated that he purchased Multi -Family Zoning, 2221 multi -family zoned investment property at 2221 NE loth St. with the intent of NE 10th St converting the garage into an apartment. However, according to the zoning January 26, 2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 25 regulations, he cannot build a single dwelling if the structure is not already in place, and has to build a duplex or larger unit. Explaining that he does not have the resources at this time to build a duplex or to extend the roofline from the current home, Mr. Kernie asked for a compromise that allows the single unit now, with his guarantee that he'll increase the number of units in the future. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler stated that City staff will investigate the concerns of all the previous speakers. Citizen Comment: Rollins - D. J. Rollins, 9605 143rd Ave. SE, Renton, 98059, asked that Renton's zoning R-1 Zone Community code be modified so it achieves the same development patterns within the R-1 Separators zone community separators as in King County, which concern clustering and the retention of open space to protect sensitive environmental features. She stated that a disconnect exists between Renton's policies and the actual zoning code, and the code does not fully implement the Countywide Planning Policies in regard to community separators. Due to the City's pending annexations in a community separator, Ms. Rollins urged Council to consider the matter immediately to ensure the resulting annexations abide by Renton's vision for these areas. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler noted that Ms. Rollins also submitted a letter on this topic, which was listed under Correspondence on the agenda. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Cooke - Suzette Cooke, Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce President/CEO, 300 Renton Visitor's Connection Rainier Ave. N., Renton, 98055, stated that the Renton Visitor's Connection, formerly the Renton Lodging Association, connects people to lodging, dining, and entertainment opportunities in the City of Renton. She introduced Janette Blaine with the Silver Cloud Inn, and Kathleen Keator, Business and Visitor Services Director for the Chamber of Commerce. Ms. Cooke announced that the Renton Visitor's Guide will be available next week, and noted that an advertisement regarding Renton that appeared in Horizon Alaska Air magazine generated over 1,500 requests for information. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO OLD BUSINESS, FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT REGARDING THE RENTON VISITOR'S CONNECTION. CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Corman presented a report regarding the Renton EDNSP: Hotel/Motel Tax Visitor's Connection funding. The Committee discussed the recommendations Revenue Allocation to Renton of the Renton Lodging Tax Advisory Committee, and in regard to the request of Visitor's Connection, Chamber the Renton Visitor's Connection (formerly known as the Renton Lodging of Commerce Contract Association), the Committee recommended recognition of the successes of the group's tourism promotional efforts, and funding of the program's fifth full year of operation by allocating $100,000 in hotel/motel tax collections to that end. The Committee further recommended that the Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract with the Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce for year five of the Renton Visitor's Connection tourism promotional effort. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. January 26, 2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 26 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 January 12, 2004. Council concur. January 12, 2004 CAG: 02-118, Traffic Community Services Department submitted CAG-02-118, Traffic Management Management Center, Fredhoes Center; and requested approval of the project, authorization for final pay Building Const Co estimate in the amount of $11,257.08, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of $8,302.33 to Fredhoes Building Construction Co., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. Plat: Liberty Ridge Phase 6, Development Services Division recommended approval, with conditions, of the Index Ave NE, FP-03-112 Liberty Ridge Phase 6 Final Plat; 122 single-family lots on 34 acres located on Index Ave. SE, south of NE 3rd and 4th Streets, and east of Edmonds Ave. NE (FP-03-112). Council concur. (See page 28 for resolution.) Annexation: Carlo, 136th Ave Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department SE & 140th Ave SE recommended a public hearing be set on February 9, 2004, to consider the 50% Petition to Annex and R-8 prezoning for the proposed Carlo Annexation; 37 acres bounded by 136th Ave. SE, NE 3rd St., 138th Ave. SE, and SE 132nd St. to 140th Ave. SE. Council concur. Annexation: Johnson, 142nd Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Ave SE submitted 10% Notice of Intent petition to annex for the proposed Johnson Annexation, 14.22 acres bounded by 142nd Ave. SE, SE 121 st St., and NE 9th St., and recommended that a public meeting be set on February 9, 2004, to consider the petition. Council concur. Transportation: North Renton Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of a contract in the Infrastructure Improvements, amount of $98,164.92 with W&H Pacific for engineering design and survey W&H Pacific services for the North Renton infrastructure improvements. Council concur. CAG: 03-067, Kennydale Utility Systems Division submitted CAG-03-067, Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Lakefront Sewer Improvement, Improvement; and requested approval of the project, authorization for final pay Blackwater Marine estimate in the amount of $5,827.33, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of $16,729.37 to Blackwater Marine, LLC, contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from Patrick Miller, President, AFSCME Local 2170, Citizen Comment: Miller - AFL-CIO, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, 98055, requesting that the topic of Landscape Maintenance contracting out of parks maintenance work be placed on the Community Services Contract Services Committee agenda. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE ADMINISTRATION. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Petrie - Correspondence was read from Dave Petrie, 811 S. 273rd Ct., Des Moines, Density Credit Transfers 98198, regarding the impact of Density Credit Transfers (DCT) on intended residential density zoning. He urged Council to petition King County Council to change or abolish them, pointing out that DCT degrade the residential quality of the involved area. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. January 26, 2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 27 OLD BUSINESS Council President Persson presented a Committee of the Whole report Committee of the Whole regarding Council committee meeting dates and times for 2004. To better Council: Committee Meeting accommodate Councilmember schedules, the Committee of the Whole Dates & Times recommended that the Finance Committee meet on the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 5:30 p.m., the Public Safety Committee meet on the 1st and 3rd Mondays at 5:30 p.m., and the Community Services Committee meet on the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 5:00 p.m. All other 2004 committee meeting dates and times will remain as previously set. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Council: Retreat Report (1/13 Council President Persson summarized the topics discussed at the Council & 1/14/2004) retreat held on January 13 and 14, 2004, which included the following: Council desk manual; Claims for Damages procedures; Council confirmation of department heads; disposition of old Fire Station #12; parks; City as a landlord; Parks Maintenance Facility; downtown development; Pavilion Building; annexations; Highlands area redevelopment; Airport; Renton School District; Boeing property redevelopment; and crime reduction. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Corman presented a report recommending approval Finance: Vouchers of Claim Vouchers 222902 - 223231 and zero wire transfers totaling $3,241,824.08; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 330, 11 wire transfers, and 554 direct deposits totaling $2,099,052.93. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. EDNSP: Hotel/Motel Tax Finance Committee Chair Corman presented a report regarding the Renton Revenue Allocation to Community Marketing Campaign funding. The Committee discussed the Community Stakeholders, recommendation of the Renton Lodging Tax Advisory Committee to allocate Hamilton/Saunderson Contract funds for activities proposed by the Renton Community Marketing Campaign. The Committee concurred with the staff recommendation and asked the City Council to: • Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign contracts with Hamilton/Saunderson Marketing Partnership, marketing consultants, for a sixth year of the Renton Community Marketing Campaign. Partner with other key community stakeholders for a fourth year of the Renton Community Marketing Campaign by allocating $50,000 of hotel/motel tax collections to its use. This allocation will be leveraged with additional financial contributions from the Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning's "business recruitment" budget, and other community agencies, organizations, and businesses. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services: Roxy Councilman Corman requested information pertaining to the storage conditions Theater Sign and costs of storing the Roxy Theater sign. Councilwoman Briere inserted that the Renton Museum would like the sign to be restored; however, it cannot afford to do so without funding assistance. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler stated that the Administration will investigate the matter, and brief Council at the upcoming Council retreat. January 26, 2004 Renton City Council Minutes Utilities Committee Utility: East Valley Lift Station Replacement Project Budget Utilities Committee Chair Clawson presented a report recommending concurrence with the Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommendation that the City Council increase the project budget autho_I ___ the East Valley Lift Station Replacement Project from $747,000 to $947,000. The increased budget authority is to cover construction related issues that have caused the project to go above budget. The additional budget authority would be created through a transfer from the Wastewater Sewer Replacement Account (421.000400.018.5960.0035.045300) as part of the 2004 carry forward ordinance. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Public Safety Committee Public Safety Committee Chair Law presented a report pertaining to the request Police: Street Racing of Dr. Alonzo Plough, Director and Health Officer for Seattle -King County Public Health Department, who asked local jurisdictions to review their existing street racing ordinances. The Committee, in conjunction with the Police Department, reviewed the City of Renton's ordinances and procedures regarding street racing. The Committee concurred in the recommendation of staff to make no changes in the ordinances and procedures at this time.* Councilman Law added that Renton has a zero tolerance policy regarding street racing that is aggressively enforced. Additionally, he noted that penalties for this type of activity are fairly severe, and the Police Department works closely with affected local businesses. *MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning & Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Committee regarding the 2004 King County Comprehensive Plan amendments. The King County: 2004 Committee met on January 8 and 22 to review proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan King County Comprehensive Plan. The Committee concurred with the staff Amendments recommendations and comments presented in a letter dated January 22, and recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor to send a letter to King County Executive Ron Sims outlining these concerns. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution #3682 A resolution was read approving the Liberty Ridge Phase 6 Final Plat; 34 acres Plat: Liberty Ridge Phase 6, located on Index Ave. SE, on the east side of Edmonds Ave. NE and NE 3rd Index Ave NE, FP-03-112 and 4th Streets (FP-03-112). MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance #5062 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 1, Administration and Enforcement; Development Services: Real Chapter 4, Citywide Property Development Standards; and Chapter 11, Estate Sign Code Amendments Definitions; of Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code regarding real estate signs.* Councilwoman Briere noted that some minor changes were made to the ordinance after its first reading on December 15, 2003, due to concerns expressed by the real estate rental housing community. January 26, 2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 29 *MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Councilman Corman commented on the different types of sign technologies. He pointed out that the technology is constantly changing, and the City's sign code needs periodic modification to keep up with the changes. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL MAKE Council: Meeting Cancellation PRESIDENTS' DAY A PERMANENT COUNCIL HOLIDAY. CARRIED. (Permanent), Presidents Day Public Works: Waterline ROW Councilman Persson noted the presence of hanging tree limbs, dumped Clean -Up mattresses, and misplaced ecology blocks on the waterline right-of-way, between Philip Arnold Park and Puget Dr., and requested attention to the matter. Community Services: Philip Councilman Persson requested that the gravel parking area at the entrance area Arnold Park Entry Way to Philip Arnold Park be graded. Grading School District: Community Reporting on Renton School District activities, Councilwoman Nelson stated Helpers that a new group has been formed within Talbot Hill Elementary School's MicroSociety Program called Community Helpers. She explained that the group is learning about the rewards of volunteerism, and undertakes activities such as collecting clothes and money for the Renton Clothes Bank, and making cards for the soldiers serving in Iraq and for Iraqi children. Airport: Advisory Committee Councilwoman Palmer announced that an Airport Advisory Committee meeting Meeting will be held on February 3 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. AUDIENCE COMMENT Diane Paholke, 325 Edmonds Ave. SE, Renton, 98056, stated that she lives in Citizen Comment: Paholke - the Liberty Ridge Subdivision and reported on the ongoing neighborhood safety Edmonds Ave SE/SE 2nd PI concerns regarding vehicles that speed through the intersection of Edmonds Intersection Safety Concerns Ave. SE and SE 2nd Pl. She stated that she addressed Council last year on this matter, and although she was told stop signs could not be posted, the City did post a four-way cross warning sign and used the Speed Monitoring Awareness Radar Trailer. Ms. Paholke pointed out that those speed -reducing efforts only worked for six weeks, and requested that the City investigate other solutions. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THIS ITEM TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Community Services: On another matter, Ms. Paholke praised the Renton Community Center's sports Community Center Sports program, and asked Mayor Keolker-Wheeler to convey her compliments to the Program Recreation Division staff. Transportation: Maple Valley MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER Hwy/SE I Ith St, Traffic MAPLE VALLEY HWY. AND SE 11TH ST. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC Safety Concerns SAFETY ISSUES TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Simpson - Jim Simpson, 109 John St., Apt. 109, Seattle, 98109, announced that the group Citizens for King County Citizens for King County Monorail is holding a public monorail forum at Monorail Meeting Fairwood Library on January 31, at 1:00 p.m. January 26, 2004 Renton City Council Minutes Page 30 Council: Order of Business MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REFER ITS Policy (#800-03) POLICY AND PROCEDURE ENTITLED "ORDER OF BUSINESS, PREPARATION AND READING OF THE MINUTES" (4800-03) TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 9:01 p.m. IG.MJ� 4 L )a&t ri BONNIE L WALTON, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann January 26, 2004 RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR Office of the City Clerk COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 26, 2004 COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON., 2/02 Emerging Issues (Persson) 7:00 p.m. *Council Conference Room* COMMUNITY SERVICES (Nelson) FINANCE (Corman) PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT (Briere) PUBLIC SAFETY (Law) TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) (Palmer) UTILITIES (Clawson) NOTE: Committee of the Whole meetings are held in the Council Chambers. All other committee meetings are held in the Council Conference Room unless otherwise noted. VA BALES ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER R-1 PREZONING January 26, 2004 The subject site is within the City's Potential Annexation Area and is designated as Residential Low Density on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Because the site currently has King County R-4 zoning, it was the City's intent to prezone it R-5, 5 units per net acre. Such zoning would have been applied at the time the site was annexed into the City. A special election was held on September 16, 2003 for residents to approve or reject the annexation, its proposed R-5 prezoning, and whether to assume a proportionate share of the City's outstanding indebtedness. Although residents approved of the annexation and agreed to assume their fair share of the City's outstanding indebtedness, they failed to approve the proposed R-5 prezoning. As a consequence, the City must now consider another zone allowed under the Residential Low Density land use designation for prezoning, since this is required before this annexation can be brought into the City. The RLD land use designation allows four zones: RC — Residential Conservation allowing one unit per ten acres; R-1 allowing one detached unit per net acre•, R-4 allowing four units per net acre; and, R-5 allowing five detached units per net acre. Staff is recommending R-1 prezoning since those voting have already ruled out the R-5 zone and the R-4 regulations are currently under development. The site would accommodate approximately 8 single-family dwelling units under this zoning. It is assumed that once the site is officially within the City the residents within the annexation will file for reclassification to the R-5 zone. A map showing the location of the 8.52-acre annexation site is attached to the backside of this handout. Council Hearing Handout 01-26-04.doc\ bA O W N O Cd w . CD N I+ 0 o tj � CD cr 7d -- o o CL 0 a TT tcnn s�' �. CL � �. cr p O .� =r 0 CD ... =rCD CD CD C ZD CD CD CD 0 CD CD CD 0 CD 0 o C CL CD CD O a �. CD Z' cr 0 nCD �CD aCD CD P N �� • O • O CD ci, El C Ivy t J cr �- o cn CD CD CD N p N o qq W v v Lm- `l in, o CD � CD CD Q•Qn 0 p �� El (D CD O i K;cn„y m l *01 woo ,a W ; V' � r N ' U r U CC3 it Y am. r V CA ' I co x rn CA 3' V) a o �. � O �.b CQ r. Qom. N sd bUC �03 tb 3 C3 c x x x x Of c o O c k � � N d � 0 ibis •3 'a� •� c M O Q O un T3 t, U CJ U •--Q CJ U� U Ub Q U•� U N N N;s.�� Y•`� � a:v� ¢' av c.�rx� E O CCS � �. �p oc + i E U CCS v `� z $=. a3 ct En or > —;300 � Q ct U � Q � O CD CD 0 0 � � �. 0._� V.� Q.. a � W a' .O CD ..5' ,�El O CD ,fit CD n !`r ° (� U4 O cD N CD O tli O CD CD O� '+ n NO CD �n �'� CL p �'�� Sy CD �CD v CD ►�y� CD UP .p a) p V) Cl.CD n- o N Q o �. C in, CD CD .'! W CD �• rr r O cD a. cr CD October 20, 2003 CITY OF RENTCIV Natalie Dohrn 0 C T 2 1 2003 City of Renton Planning Commission C;17Y- RE (EIVED K'S OFFICE 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: R-6 Overlay Dear Natalie: I am the owner of property being annexed by the City of Renton in the very near future. The property is located at 15221 SE 128`h, Renton,legally described.as Tax Lots #65 and #68. I would be very much'in favor of rezoning to an R-6 Overlay. Please consider my request when the council is making its decision on the zoning policy. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, ,George H. Bales p.O• Box 3oi5 Leh+bn, w/+ 7056 ec:. Mayor. Tanner Renton City Council; CITY OF REENTON O C T 2 1 2003 October 20, 2003 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Natalie Dohm City of Renton Planning Commission 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE R-6 Overlay Dear Natalie: I am the owner of property being annexed by the City of Renton in the very near future. The property is located at 15217 SE 128th, Renton, legally described as Tax Lot #94. I would be very much in favor of rezoning to, an R-6 Overlay. Please consider my request when the council is making its decision on the zoning policy. Your attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, G. ay Bal`" s P �0 30is R en+ wft 9 805� cc: Mayor Tanner Renton City Council CITY OF REWON OCT 2 1 2003 October 20, 2003 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Natalie Dohrn City of Renton Planning Commission 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: R-6 Overlay Dear Natalie: I am the land manager for property legally described as Tax Lots #65 & #68 (15221 SE 128`h) that is. being, annexed by the City of Renton in -,the very near future. My employer and I would be very supportive of the area being.zoned as an R-6 overlay. Please consider my request when the council is making a decision .on'the zoning policy. Your attention to this matter would be very much appreciated. Sincerely, Robin Bales P,(7, �x 3D15 ' Bert+dn, w�- 9�oS6 cc:._ Mayor Tanner . Reiitoa City Council,_' . CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: January 26, 2004 TO: Don Persson, Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Administrative Report In addition to our day to -day activities, the following items are worthy of note for this week: GENERAL • Voters in the Renton School District have an opportunity to vote on a funding renewal measure on the February 3ra ballot. The district's Education Maintenance and Operations Replacement Levy provides more than 20 percent of the district's annual operating budget and replaces a current levy that expires this year. Because this is a replacement levy, the measure will not raise tax rates. Funding provided by this levy continues current programs and staffing and is not a new tax. Election Day is February P. Voters that use absentee ballots to vote must postmark and return their ballot by February P. For more information, visit the Renton School District's Web site at http://www.renton.wednet.edu or call Randy Matheson at 425-204-2345. ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL, AND LEGAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT • Renton's Web Team, which includes employees from each department or division, deserves tremendous credit for taking the time to add content and maintain our ever-growing web site - www.ci.renton.wa.us. The efforts of these employees continue to make Renton's website successful, as can be seen through the increase in our statistics. In 2003, the site registered over 1.9 million overall page views in comparison to 1.6 million in 2002, an increase of 15%. In 2002, a citywide public opinion survey noted that 29% of those surveyed found the City's website either somewhat or very useful. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT • Due to Water Treatment Facility construction, the Maplewood Golf Course Driving Range was closed Wednesday, January 21", and Thursday, January 22na, and reopened for business as usual January 23`a • The Rotary Club of Renton has contributed $4,000 to the City of Renton Scholarship Program. Scholarships offer Renton residents of all ages the opportunity to participate in City recreation programs or activities. In 2003, 100 scholarships were awarded thanks to the generosity of service clubs and the Renton community. • In 2003, over 4,900 volunteer hours were donated to the Recreation Services Division in youth athletics, teen programming, program instruction, and special populations programs. Based on the 2003 minimum hourly wage rate of $7.01, this represents a value of $34,349 to the Renton community. • The Youth Athletics program received a $7,200 donation from Land-O-Frost to help support the 2004 youth basketball and T-ball programs. • The Adult Athletics program began the season with a total of 62 volleyball and basketball teams. In just the first week, 31 games of basketball and volleyball were played. Administrative Report January 26, 2004 Page 2 The Special Populations program began classes for S.T.A.R. (Special Theater Arts of Renton). The group will meet every Tuesday for 19 weeks, culminating with an April 30d' performance that is designed to showcase all the learned skills. PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • Two consultants doing projects for the Planning/Building/Public Works Department received Silver Awards for their projects from the American Council of Engineering Companies. W&H Pacific received an award for the Runway, Lighting, and Signing Project, and Reid Middleton received an award for the seismic retrofits they completed for two water tanks located in the Highlands Reservoir and the Rolling Hills Reservoir. • The King County Road Services Division reopened the Elliott Bridge in time for the afternoon commute on Thursday, January. 22°d, well ahead of schedule. POLICE DEPARTMENT • During the week of January 27-February 2, the Police Department will be conducting traffic emphasis in the following areas and, in addition, all school zones during school days: Renton Police Department Traffic Enforcement Emphasis January 27-Februar 2 Date 6:00 a.m. to Noon Noon to 6:00 p.m. All Da Motorcycles/Cars Motorcycles/Cars Radar Trailer January 27, Tuesday 1100 blk, Carr Rd (speed) 200 blk, S 2nd St (speed) 2300 blk, Talbot 1400 blk, Houser Way N (speed) City Hall/Benson Rd (lane change) Rd S January 28, Wednesday Grady Way/Rainier Ave (red light) 3500 blk, Monterey Ave NE (speed) NE 25 /Lynnwood S 2°d St/Rainer Ave (red light) Lake Ave/Grad Way (transit lane) Ave NE January 29, Thursday Rainier Ave N (speed) Maple Valley Hwy (speed) 1300 blk, N 3 St Edmonds Ave SE (speed) Rainier Ave N (speed) January 30, Friday SW Sunset Blvd (turns/speed) NE 10 /Sunset (jaywalking) 1300 blk, N 3 St Lk Wash Blvd (speed) Maple Valle H (speed) February 2, Monday Maple Valley Hwy (speed) 1300 blk, N 3` St (speed) 4300 blk, NE 17 SW Sunset Blvd (turns/speed) Rainier Ave N (speed) St 44P i' VLAv J I tirl -) NAbG p,beg vsvc'JIX-3 Vm 'a 1 a • pg � • ��'° ad Q "SO h.l a s ort 'J-?(3 gof,bygo� = +-Q-7 �--IS N 3C�sd•7 '�D ,-Six -mac Sti J ,-= r (�► 06tL2 o N G w 1 O a<"ta = 1o, $ 69..yo8 14ou s e. r y 05. o • _ / SCE • o sl te, a Y\ X Game e_ 1_o`t - ZaZ l iv/ 0 .wi6e�ei.�i�Cilcd� _ '"_.�_�:. _. .:4:G':iti+ •_�w,' ��:_�.::in=a.,.:.. � � .• C� '•L1'iLl - it V I --Ap hln Q "SO /T/ ; a s r7oj-i li-?(3 Sofa' 6 9 g' of :: t74t,,>Z7 4--Q`7 a IS N ' �o, ��d•7�Of aiTIO H 90 ", -six -mac AFk I • •_•• •.•...•.�•......•, ...-....,::coc:ice �.iSi.: —.:'a�¢i1��la��5i5t*7�ihTsreSAoiet�tiayi,t�`�.�-+•1:ak 1�Yl: •::- 'i-. .��.:�� �GiC�� � _ 4�.�- tiai0:_ _--= ,^TIC_ -•_:�___,2:i::.�.7d-411rt.�a�i++:...:.�;w.a'r�+�.�:._� ..5 Iyyt, ") *%Ab(3 IQL Ta aid rny� ro��vwi a < --, a bJ'�noi o•Q$ .of od Q"SOhl aSnorj •„-?(7 s atl - ,b y 1G ' of v cat v a u i � I S i 1 P yet Iynt -) u10G a rny� // -- � Q"SOhI as710JCJ ,6Vh-b7 y'vi v¢vv yo' 1 yol X9 Z n Ar�.4 u 0 os. QGI o a A },o-1 Q, . ^7vovl)- X vA jo -a 1 a+V✓(✓/ cud Q "SO l71 a s rWjfi •,y?c3 ,90h"67 % r Of = 04t.>v +-Q -7 o .. IS N a6ti td `7� LID ol Mv ' a'SYfO Ps, x3, .c R� J J I 04-a1�, p, a vs�t' X v b i p , os / . pion aid l G Q "Sob/ IDS n1vii 'J-X3 ,90b-6 % f Ql = O7 k-v> 7 4-0-7 Q —•SI �hr N 3Cv td �7� YD u azro y 10 t f4lo J J d y%j '1 v►b(3 ��. � *7'�17�'c�Z�l`S'II • J-X-3 Viol G +Is Q "SO b-I ; a s r0ii Ij-?(3 N �Cet7, YD`Of M ' asro y j, rnylJ i� U a� qO :4'siX5 ��1L Rz .l ............................._.._a'stO'iCr:_sS:.S �' ....'w....'..�4l�a�e:+wC� • �C..:.33•; ,:j K.`i;$ra.:., .: I y`1-0 ub(3 ---:f 71 Qaheq X \,A 10j o.QB� .FFn dcud 1 SUf,' 6 7 S ' O/ = a-qt.>>7 +,* 7 sr �hr N 3Cbtd'7� , fo` n, y rj y O t5 n0 `:1 of X3 Sti J f• 1 4p �1 q yrj -0 Ube ,Ozf ,', vS Q, a v,���' X -a 1 ."10 dcud G Q "Sob./ li-?(3 SOf,-b7 % `vi = a4t JV +107 o azro.10 H n� aG�o�►b��/ J D. J. Rollms 9605 143rd Ave SE Renton, WA 98059-3753 January 14, 2002 Renton City Councilmembers City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 g And Del i velre-d CITY OF RENTON AN 14 2004 RECEIVED CITY CLERICS OFFICE RE: City Code Revision for R-1 (Residential Low Density) Community Separators Dear Councilmembers: eorr6faidmce. /-A- aoo 0 t4 -19 nn N1- I respectfully ask Council to modify the City of Renton's zoning code so that it achieves the same development patterns within R-1 Urban/Community Separators that would be achieved in King County. That is development clustering and the retention of open space to protect the sensitive features. The City of Renton has developed policies that address the unique attributes of Community Separators. I admire Renton's basic approach to Community Separators and their policies which are consistent with King County policies for Urban Separators. Designated Community Separators have been cooperatively identified by Renton and King County which speaks well to the ideals of the City of Renton. In addition the City has many policies and standards already in place that support clustering and encourage retention of open space. However a disconnect exists between Renton's policies and the actual zoning code. The Renton zoning code does not fully implement the Countywide Planning Polices (CPP) in regard to Urban/Community Separators. The CPP state Urban/Community Separators shall "create open space corridors within and between Urban areas which provide environmental, visual, recreational and wildlife benefits..." The CPPs call for preservation of open space and corridors through interconnected systems regionally and within jurisdictions locally. Specifically CCP CC-12 states, " All jurisdictions shall use the full range of regulatory and land preservation tools available to create, maintain and steward the regional open space system which has been cooperatively identified" The two main differences between Renton and the County regarding Urban/Community Separators is that the County requires clustering and leaving 50 % permanent open space tracts. Without these two being a required part of Renton's zoning code the development within these areas could lead to "horse -acre " type platting. Once suburban estates of 1 acre are plated, the opportunity to retain the open space is forever lost. Without open space retention, removal of vegetation could adversely impact the sensitive environmental features that the low density separator was meant to protect. Making the Renton's zoning code similar to King County code does not cause a difference in capacity, just the way the development would happen. The capacity would be the same. This code amendment should be undertaken immediately because of pending annexations in a Community Separator. While I support these annexations into the City of Renton, it is the first time the City has accepted a pre -zoned annexation in the Residential Low Density (R-1). Also the City of Renton has never done an annexation of a designated Community Separator. Both of these firsts need additional zoning code language to ensure the resulting annexations lives up to Renton's vision for these areas and comply with the Countywide Planning Policies for Urban/Community Separators. I ask that the Renton Council send this need for a text code amendment to the Planning and Development Committee for their review and subsequent approval. I ask the code amendment include a provision to require clustering away from sensitive areas or the axis of designated Urban/ Community Separators and permanent retention of open space tracts that includes at least fifty percent of the site. Thank you for your sincere consideration of my request. Sincerely, �At ' D. JIollins Attachment -Policy chapter and verse research supporting Code Text Revision for Community Separators MW«ftovmov1412004 e �ebeeea Lind D.J. Rollins 9605 143rd Ave SE Renton, WA 98059 January 14, 2004 Renton City Councilmembers Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: City Code Text Revisions to R-1 (Residential Low Density) / Community Separators Dear Councilmembers: The City of Renton has done an excellent job of developing the concept of Community Separators. The City of Renton's term for what King County calls a greenbelt/urban separator is a "community separator. " The Comprehensive Plan glossary defines Community Separators as, "Corridors of natural areas or very low density rural development between higher density urban areas. Examples include lands useful for open space, wildlife habitat, recreation trails and connection of critical areas, agricultural uses or lands which have a rural character." The following policies address function and location criteria for community separators. Policy LU-271 of Renton's Comprehensive Plan states: The function of Community Separators should be to: a. reinforce the character of the City's neighborhoods; b. establish boundaries between the City's urban growth area and other areas; c. separate high density urban land uses from areas of low density semi -rural and conservation uses; and, d. protect environmentally sensitive or critical areas. Policy LU-272. Locational criteria should consider the following types of lands for inclusion in Community Separators, a. individual and interconnecting natural features, critical areas, public and private open space and water features; b. Existing and proposed individual and interconnecting parks, boulevards, utility easements, and other rights -of -way, and agricultural areas. c. Areas which provide a logical and easily identifiable physical separation between urban uses For the first time the City of Renton is proposing the annexation of a designated Community Separator. I have reviewed some of the differences between development conditions for urban/community separators in King County versus development in the City of Renton. I feel there is need for some new code regarding certain development aspects of the R-1 / community separator designation. Two main differences are that the County requires residential development to be clustered and to retain at least 501/o permanent open space tracts in R 1 zoning and/or in greenbelt/urban separators. There are however, other differences in the County, such as clustering "away from sensitive areas or axis of designated corridors such as urban separators or wildlife habitat network ...." More closely aligning Renton's development regulations in community separators with King County's R-1 and urban separator regulations might be not only good for Renton's environment but the financial interests of the developers as well as the City. A win -win for all 1 The current situation within Renton's Resource Conservation and R-1 zoning, which does not require clustering and 501/o permanent open space tracts, completely negates the intent and purpose of the low density zoning and greenbelt/urban separators. It is foreseeable that development within these areas, especially the R-1 zoning, could lead to "horse acre" type platting and urban sprawl, the exact opposite of the intent of the State Growth Management Act. Furthermore, wholesale removal of trees and other native vegetation could significantly adversely impact the sensitive environmental features that the low density separator was meant to protect. To its credit the City has many policies and standards already in place that support clustering and encourage leaving as much land available as is possible in environmentally critical areas including Community Separators. Clustering and permanent open space retention make perfect sense in a community separator. By definition it is already recognized as having environmentally sensitive conditions as well as areas that are frequently wildlife corridors and recreational corridors. For example, respectively, the May Creek riparian zone and the May Valley Road Recreational Corridor acknowledged by the City of Renton Council during their meeting of December 18, 1989. One of the original purposes of low density Community Separators was to create visual and natural buffers between neighborhoods and cities. For example, the May Valley community separator is an natural topographical break and greenbelt buffer between the cities of Renton and Newcastle and the rural areas to the east. Clustering and 50% open space enhance this purpose. The City of Renton has long envisioned through a string of parks and resource conservation zoning, "a greenbelt and trail along May Creek from Lake Washington to Cougar Mountain" Regional Wildland Park (Glenn Kost, Renton Greenbelt Prolect Advances with Land Purchase, South County Journal, page A3, January 28, 2000) "This is a 20 year project... (that) ... dates back to the 1970s," Kost was quoted as saying. In addition to the land the city has acquired in the lower reaches of May Creek, the city also has a 10 acre parcel in the May Valley Community Separator. The State of Washington Growth Management Act (GMA) requires the preservation of open spaces within the urban areas. RCW 36.70A.110(2) states: "Each Urban Growth Area shall permit urban densities and shall include greenbelt and open space areas." In response to this GMA requirement King County developed the urban separator concept. KC Countywide Planning Policy LU- 27 states, "Urban separators are low density areas or areas of little development within the Urban Growth Area. Urban separators shall be defined as permanent low density lands which protect adjacent resource lands, Rural Areas, and environmentally sensitive areas and create open space corridors within and between Urban Areas which provide environmental, visual, recreational and wildlife benefits...." Additional CPP's (of which the City of Renton has ratified) call for the preservation of open space land and corridors or greenways through interconnected systems regionally and within jurisdictions locally. And that they should be stewarded to ensure continuing environmental and ecological significance. "On an individual basis, jurisdictions should strive to identify, establish and protect open space lands of local significance that also complement, adjoin or enhance the regional system" (CCP D. Open Space, page 35) The May Valley Community Separator and the Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park is an obvious connection. CPP FW-27, CC-6, CC-7, and CC-11 further address identifying, establishing and protecting open space corridors. Specifically CC-12 states: "All jurisdiction shall use the full range of regulatory and land preservation tools available to create, maintain and steward the regional open space system which has been cooperatively identified." To preserve open spaces within an urban separator, King County codified development clustering and at least 50% permanent open space tracts. Further, King County requires clustering "away from sensitive areas and the axis of designated corridors such as urban separators... and the open space shall be placed in a separate tract that includes at least fifty percent of the site." The language continues that the tracts shall be permanent, etc. KCC21A.14.040 specifies the configuration of open space tracts. The City of Renton's response to the state Growth Management Act and Growth Management Planning Council resolutions for open space was the community separator created through the Comprehensive Plan process. The idea that King County's requirements for clustering and open space retention, especially within the community separator, being implemented by the City of Renton has tremendous merit. In fact, there is a compelling argument for a more prescriptive code in Renton. Not clustering and thereby not preserving open space in low density zoning within the Urban Growth Boundary is the antithesis of the very goals of GMA - to provide for efficient land use, viable urban services and prevent urban sprawl. Without the clustering and 50% permanent open space provisions in low density R 1 zoning the creation of "suburban estates" is almost encouraged. Once one acre suburban estates are plated the opportunity to retain the open space is lost forever. Not only is the open space benefit negated but it is non -efficient land use and urban sprawl. I am sure the City of Renton is interested in providing equal or greater protection than King County of the sensitive features in its Community Separators. A regulation codifying clustering and 50% permanent open space is all it would take. Such code is readily supported by the City of Renton's existing Comprehensive Plan Policies and municipal codes regulating Development Standards, Street Standards and Critical areas. And, as noted above, the City's long term vision for parks, trails and open space. THE CITY OF RENTON'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES SUPPORT CLUSTERING AND PERMANENT OPEN SPACE ARE AS FOLLOWS: ♦ "Residential Rural Objective LU-I. Preserve open space and natural resources and protect environmentally sensitive areas by limiting residential development in critical areas, areas identified as part of a city-wide or regional open space network or agricultural land within the city." ♦ "Policy LU-26. Maximum development densities should range from 1 home per 10 acres to 5 homes per acre in Residential Rural except in areas with significant environmental constraints including but not limited to : steep slopes, erosion hazard, floodplains, and wetlands where density shall not exceed 1 home per acre. ♦ "Policy LU-28. To provide for more efficient development patterns and maximum preservation of open space, residential development may be clustered in Residential Rural Designations." ♦ Policy LU 32. Residential Rural areas may be incorporated into Community Separators. ♦ Policy LU-33. Undeveloped portions of Residential Rural areas may be considered as part of the private open space network. All of these policies attest to Renton's commitment to protect open space within the City. CITY OF RENTON STREET POLICIES AND STANDARDS ALSO SUPPORT ENHANCEMENT OF OPEN SPACE WITHIN COMMUNITY SEPARATORS: ♦ "Policy LU-73 states "Residential streets should be constructed to the narrowest width feasible..." ♦ Street Standards, 4-6-060, Table F2a. Residential projects of 24 units can be as little as "half pavement width" ♦ Street Standards, 4-6-060, Table F2a: "No street lighting required" ♦ Street Standards, 4-6-060, JI and J2: Allowance for private streets ♦ Street Standards, 4-6-060, Gl: Allowance for dead end streets Narrow streets and low or no lighting, and private and dead end streets, not only save the developer money, but also enhance the community separator concept by encouraging minimal impacts to wildlife corridors, sensitive areas, and the urban greenbelt buffer. In the discussion above we have attempted to high -light some of Renton's policies and codes that support this proposed text revision. But we have saved the best and the strongest for last. That is Renton Municipal Code 4-3-050 "Critical Areas Regulations." We are not going to attempt to type the code into this letter, but suffice to say almost all the Critical Areas regulations support a code revision that would require clustering and 50% permanent open space in a community separator. We guess you could say that Seismic Hazards (4-3-050B4e) and Coal Mine Hazards (4-3-050B4t) are not an issue, but who is to know? Certainly the specific regulations for: • Aquifer Protection, (4-3-050A2) • Flood Hazards, (4-3-050A3) • Geological Hazards, (4-3-050A4) (including Steep Slopes, Landslide Hazards and Erosion Hazards) • Habitat Conservation, (4-3-050A5) • Shoreline, Streams and Lakes, (4-3-050A6) • Wetlands, (4-3-050A7) speak volumes to this issue. The new Renton Municipal Code (RMC) could read something like this: "If located within RC, R-1 or community separators, new development shall be clustered away from sensitive areas or the axis of designated corridors such as community separators or the wildlife habitat to the extent possible and the open space shall be placed in a separate permanent tract that includes at least fifty percent of the site." etc., etc. (see King County Title 2IA. 12.030 17a and 17b and Title 2IA. 14.040 C attached.) In summary, now that annexation is actually occurring it is timely to address this issue, otherwise the visual, environmental, wildlife and recreational corridors will be forever lost. I encourage the City of Renton to "... use the full range of regulatory and land preservation tools available to create, maintain and steward the regional open space system which has been cooperatively identified". I ask the City of Renton to enact a code to require development clustering away from sensitive areas or the axis of designated Community Separators and permanent retention of open space tracts that includes at least fifty percent of the site. Thank you. Sincerely, D. J Rollins C:\word\ursepo201/l4/2004 Metropolitan King County Code: 0 Title 21A.12.030 17a. "all subdivisions and short subdivisions in the R-1 zone shall be required to be clustered if the property is located within or contains: (1) a floodplain, (2) a critical aquifer recharge area, (3) a Regionally of Locally Significant Resource Area, (4) existing or planned pubic parks or trails, or connection to such facilities, (5) a Class I or lI stream or wetland, or (6) a steep slope, or (7) a "greenbelt/urban separator" or "wildlife corridor" area designated by the Comprehensive Plan or community plan. 0 17b. The development shall be clustered away from sensitive areas or the axis of designated corridors such as urban separators or the wildlife habitat network to the extent possible and the open space shall be placed in a separate tract that includes at least fifty percent of the site. Open space tracts shall be permanent and shall be dedicated to a homeowner's association or other suitable organization, as determined by the director, and meet the requirements of K.C.C. 21A.14.040. On site sensitive area and buffers, wildlife habitat networks, required habitat and buffers for protected species and designated urban separators shall be placed within the open space tract to the extent possible. Passive recreation (with no development of recreational facilities) and natural -surface pedestrian and equestrian trails are acceptable uses within the open space tract. " 0 Title 21A.14.040 C. In the R-1 zone, open space tracts created by clustering required by K.C.C. 21A 12.030 shall be located and configured to create urban separators and greenbelts required by the Comprehensive Plan, or subarea plans or open space functional plans to connect and protect wildlife habitat corridors designated by the Comprehensive Plan and to connect existing or planned public parks or trails. King County may require open space tracts created under this subsection to be dedicated to an appropriate managing public agency or qualifying private entity such as a nature conservancy. In the absence of such a requirement, open space tracts shall be retained in undivided interest by the residents of the subdivision or short subdivision. A homeowner's association shall be established for maintenance of the open space tract. " APE17-IrnAT-73 BY UIV OaUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE Data ���oo y COMMITTEE REPORT January 26, 2004 Renton Visitor's Connection Funding (Referred January 12, 2004) The Finance Committee met ^a^ +b"'&W- to discuss the recommendations of the Renton Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. In regard to the, request of the I Renton Visitor's Connection, the Committee recommends recognition of the successes of the group's (formerly known as Renton Lodging Association) tourism promotional efforts and funding of the program's' fifth full year of operation by allocating $1003000 in Hotel/Motel Tax collec�tio Alt that end. ct with The Committee further recommends that the Council authorize the MayorAto execute a contra the Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce for Year Five of the Visitor's Connection tourism promotional effort. 1 OlAr CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al #: -71 Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board.. Community Services/Facilities Staff Contact...... Michael Nolan x6608 Subject: Final Pay Estimate Traffic Management Center Fredhoes Building Construction File No. CAG-02-118 Exhibits: Final Pay Estimate (No. 8) Notice of Completion of Public Works Contract Recommended Action: Council concur For Agenda of: January 26, 2004 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information......... Approvals: Legal Dept......... Finance Dept...... Other ............... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... $11,257.08 Transfer/Amendment...... Amount Budgeted....... $200,000.00 Revenue Generated........ Total Project Budget $180,658.74 City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Community Services Department submits CAG-02-118, Traffic Management Center, for final pay estimate and release of retainage. The project started on 11/17/03 and was completed on 1/9/04. The contractor, Fredhoes Building Construction, fulfilled the terms of their contract by constructing a Traffic Management Center on the fifth floor of City Hall. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of $11,257.08, commencement of the 60-day lien period, and release of the retained amount of $8,302.33 to Fredhoes Building Construction, contractor, once all required releases are obtained. 1:1 Rentonnetiagnbill/ bh City of Renton Finance Department PAYMENT TO CONTRACTOR DATE: 1'0: Tracy Schuld, Finance Department FROM: Michael Nolan, Facilities Coordinator CONTRACTOR: Fredhoe's Building Construction Co. PROJECT NAME: Traffic Management Center, City Hall CONTRACT NO.: CAG-02-118 ESTIMATE NO. 8 1. CONTRACTOR EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE $10,844.97 2. SALES TAX @ 8.8% $954.36 3. TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT THIS ESTIMATE $11,799.33 4. EARNINGS PREVIOUSLY PAID CONTRACTOR 5. * EARNINGS DUE CONTRACTOR THIS ESTIMATE 6. SUBTOTAL - CONTRACTOR PAYMENT 7. RETAINAGE ON PREVIOUS EARNINGS 8. ** RETAINAGE ON EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE 9. SUBTOTAL - RETAINAGE W. SALES TAX PREVIOUSLY PAID 11. SALES TAX DUE THIS ESTIMATE 12. SUBTOTAL * (95% x Line 1) ** (RETAINAGE @ 5%) GRAND TOTAL FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTION $147,441.58 $10,302.72 PAYMENT TO CONTRACTOR (LINES 5 AND 11) No. 8 Account 317.012174.016.5950.0012.67.000000 (25402/5354) RETAINED AMOUNT (LINE 8) No. 8 Account 317.012174.016.5950.0012.67.000000 (25402/5354) TOTAL THIS ESTIMATE: $7,760.09 $542.25 $13,657.74 $954.36 CHARTER 116, LAWS OF 1965 I, THE UNDERSIGNED DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT THE MATERIALS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED, THE SERVICES RENDERED OR THE LABOR PERFORMED AS DESCRIBED HEREIN, 1ND THAT THE CLAIM IS A JUST, DUE AND UNPAID OBLIGATION AGAINST THE CITY OF RENTON, AND HAT I AM AUTHORIZ DrTQTHENTIC�z D CERTIFY TO SAID CLAIM. SIGNED: $157,744.30 $8,302.34 $14,612.10 $180,658.74 $11,257.08 $542.25 $11,799.33 • APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT TO OWNER: City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 FROM CONTRACTOR: Fredhoes Building Construction Co. LLC 134281 st PL. W. W 68208 Everett, A CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT Application is made for payment, as shown below, in connection with the Contract. Continuation Sheet Is attached. 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM ........................ $ 155,085.00 PROJECT: TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CENTER VIA ARCHITECT: 2. Net change by Change Orders ..................... $ 10,950.63 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE ........................... $ 165,046.63 4. (Line 1 + or - Line 2) TOTAL COMPL. & STORED TO DATE ......... $ 168,046.63 5. RETAINAGE AT 5%......................................... $ 8,302.33 6. (Based on line 4) TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE.............. $ 167.744.30 7. (Line 4 less Line 5) LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYM $ 147,441.58 (Line a from prior Certificate) 8. SUBTOTAL.....................................................$ 10,302.72 9, (Line 6 less Line 7) Washington State Sates Tax at 8.8% ............ $ 954.36 (Based on line 4) APPLICATION NO.; EIGHT (8) (rev) PERIOD TO: 1/le/2004 PROJECT NO.: A101-1997 City 04enton Distribution to I OWNER ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS Change 6rders approved in previous months by owner $ 9,704.73 $ 3 272.55 C. .s approve this mont $ 2,837.97 $ 2,228.48 $ # $ 538.00 Number Oate Approved 12/15t2003 11 1/16/2004 19 i 1/16/2004 4, 71.1 et changes an a Orclers 1 6W,. The undareigrwd Contractor certifies that to the best of the Ccrmado(e ima isdge, Infor- mation and bs1Wthe Work covered by this Appllcatbn for Payment has been wmpbted In aoccrrtance wroh the Contras! Documents, diet 05 amourds have be" paid by the Cams" for work for which pm*us Certirmsles for Payment ware issued and payment reo" from the Owner, end that ourrant payment shown herein Is now due. CONTRACTOR: FREDHOES BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CO. LLC By. Friday Wekhoe Date:1/19/04 State of: Washinglon, County of: Snohomish 10. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE ............................. $ 11,257.07 Subscribed and sworn to before me (Une 8 plus Line 9) this day of .2004 11. BALANCE TO FINISH, INCLUDING RETAINA $ 8,302.33 Notary Cornm ss(on expires: January 1, 2007 (Line 3 less line 6) ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT AMOUNT CERTIFIED ................................................. (Abch ex#anatlon J1 a urst ce dlflars flvm rrI ep;*sd for.) In accordance with the Contract Dowments, based on on -site observations and the ARCHITECT ` Date: � 0 data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that to B : the best of the Architect's knowledge, Information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work Is in accordance with the Contract This Certiflcate s not ne0o able. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable Cnly Documents, and the Contractor Is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. to the Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. STATf o� State of Washington o¢ Department of Revenue w_ Audit Procedures & Administration ieee �'°yam PO Box 47474 Olympia, Washington 98504-7474 Reg.No.: Date: NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT From: DEPARTMENT USE ONLY City of Renton Assigned To 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055-2132 Date Assigned Notice is hereby given relative to the completion of contract or project described below. Description of Contract Traffic Management Center Contractor's Name Fredhoes Building Construction Phone No. (425) 741-2370 Contractor's Address 13428 1st Place W, Everett, WA 98208 Date Work Commenced November 17, 2003 Date Work Completed January 9, 2004 Date Work Accepted January 26, 2004 Surety or Bonding Co. Cumberland Casualty and Surety Company Agent's Address Mukilteo, WA 98275 Contract Amount: Additions or Reductions: Sales Tax: Total $ $155,086.00 $ $10,960.63 $ 14,612.10 $ 180,658.74 LM Phone No: Amount Disbursed: Amount Retained: Total: $ 172,356.41 $ 8,302.33 $ 180,658.74 (Disbursing Officer) The Disbursing Officer must complete and mail THREE copies of this notice to the Department of Revenue, Olympia, Washington 98504- 7474, immediately after acceptance of the work done under this contract. NO PAYMENTS SHALL BE MADE FROM RETAINED FUND until receipt of Department's certificate, and then only in accordance with said certificate. FORM REV 310020 (12-92) Notice of Compktimdoc CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: Planning/Building /Public Works Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division Staff Contact...... Juliana Fries Subject: LIBERTY RIDGE PHASE 6 FINAL PLAT File No. LUA 03-112FP (LUA 01-123 PP) 34 acres located in Index Ave SE, South of NE 3`d /4" Street; East of Edmonds Ave NE. Exhibits: 1. Resolution and legal description 2. Staff report and recommendation Recommended Action: Council concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Amount Budgeted....... Total Project Budget N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: AI #: For Agenda of: February 2, 2004 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. X Resolution........... . Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information ......... Approvals: Legal Dept......... Finance Dept...... Other ............... Trans fer/Amendment ....... Revenue Generated......... City Share Total Project.. The recommendation for approval of the referenced final plat is submitted for Council action. The plat divides 34 acres into 122 single-family residential lots. The construction of the utilities and street improvements to serve the lots are almost complete at this time. All construction will be approved, accepted or guaranteed as required through the Board of Public Works prior to the recording of the plat. All conditions placed on the preliminary plat by City Council will be met prior to recording of the plat. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Liberty Ridge Phase 6 Final Plat, LUA 03-112FP, with the following condition and adopt the resolution. 1. All plat improvements shall be either constructed or deferred to the satisfaction of the City staff prior to the recording of the plat. 2. All mitigation fees shall be paid prior to the recording of the plat. ►j 91 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, APPROVING FINAL PLAT (LIBERTY RIDGE PHASE 6) (FILE NO. LUA-03-112FP). WHEREAS, a petition for the approval of a final plat for the subdivision of a certain tract of land as hereinafter more particularly described, located within the City of Renton, has been duly approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, after investigation, the Administrator of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department has considered and recommended the approval of the final plat, and the approval is proper and advisable and in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools, schoolgrounds, sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public use and interest will be served by the platting of the subdivision and dedication; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The final plat approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department pertaining to the following described real estate, to wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth 1 RESOLUTION NO. (The property, consisting of approximately 34 acres, is located on Index Avenue SE, on the east side of Edmonds Avenue NE and NE 3`a and 4t' Streets) is hereby approved as such plat, subject to the laws and ordinances of the City of Renton, and subject to the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department dated January 15, 2004. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES.1031:1/19/04:ma day of , 2004. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk day of 92004. Jesse Tanner, Mayor LIBERTY RIDGE PHASE 6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1 (Owned by Liberty Ridge L.L.C. as of November 2003): Lot Y of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LUA-02-053-LLA, as per plat recorded under Recording No. 20020607900001; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. PARCEL 2 (Owned by Liberty Ridge L.L.C. as of November 2003): Lots 2 and 3 of Liberty Ridge Short Plat No. LUA-02-100-SHPL (LND-20- 0323) as recorded under Recording No. 20021119900004, records of King County Washington; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. PARCEL 3 (Owned by the Liberty Ridge Homeowners Association as of November 2003): Tract F of Liberty Ridge Phase 2, as per plat recorded in Volume 207 of Plats, Pages 24 through 30, records of King County, recorded under Recording No. 20020531003233; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. PARCEL 4 (Owned by the Liberty Ridge Homeowners Association as of November 2003): Tract AA of Liberty Ridge Phase 5, as per plat recorded in Volume 213 of Plats, Pages 5 through 14, records of King County, recorded under Recording No. 20030313002713, as corrected under Recording No. 20030320001516; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. LAKE •<o i Z y WASH/NGTON 1 JO NE R,Y D Z w Q z z w O `.1 > Q Z is Q O O !; w NE 4TH STREET �..�� GREENWOOD CEMETERY SITE 'o VICINITY MAP LIBERTY RIDGE PHASE 6 3000 1500 0 3000 SCALE IN FEET PREPARED BY RINGEL AND ASSOCIATES •0 150 0 300 PREPARED BY RINGEL AND ASSOCIATES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION BUILDING/PLANNING/PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF RENTON STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS APPLICANT: LOCATION: SUMMARY OF REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION: David L. Halinen Liberty Ridge Phase 6 Final Plat. File: LUA 03-112FP Index Ave SE, South of NE 3rd/4`h Street; East of Edmonds Avenue NE. Section 16, Twp. 23 N., Rng 5 E. Final Plat for 122 single-family residential lots with water, sanitary sewer, storm, street and street lighting. Approve With Conditions FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record documents in this matter, staff now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, David L. Halinen, filed a request for approval of Phase 6, a 122-lot Final Plat. 2. The yellow file containing all staff reports, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit No. 1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official, issued a Determination on Non -Significance -Mitigated on October 31, 2000 for the subject proposal. 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located on Index Ave SE, East Side on Edmonds NE, NE 3rd/4th Street NE. The new plat is located in Section 16, Twp. 23 N., Rng 5 E. 6. The subject site is a 34-acre parcel. 7. The Preliminary Plat was approved by the City of Renton Council on January 22, 2001. 8. The site is zoned Residential 10 DU/AC (R-10). 9. The Final Plat complies with both the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. CAHard work\Liberty Ridge\Close out Phase 6\Report.doc\cor 10. The Preliminary Plat was subject to a number of conditions as a result of both environmental review and plat review. The applicant complied with the conditions imposed by the ERC: ■ The construction drawings comply with the recommendations made by GeoEngineers, in their geotechnical study. ■ Temporary erosion control measures have been implemented to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division's inspector. ■ Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control measures were submitted to the Public Works inspector. ■ Proper removal of Phase 6 erosion control facilities will be certified prior to the recording of Phase 6 final plat. ■ The Fire Mitigation Fee will be paid prior to recording Phase 6 plat. ■ The Traffic Fee will be paid prior to recording Phase 6 plat. ■ The Parks Mitigation Fee will be paid prior to recording Phase 6 plat. ■ Secondary access for Phase 6 plat is provided. 11. In addition, the applicant has complied with the conditions imposed as a result of Preliminary Plat: ■ Applicant complied with the above ERC conditions. ■ Lots 298 through 302 (under original lot numbering scheme, now lots 369, 370, 374 and 375) were revised so that the numbers served by the private street conforms to the maximum established by the City of Renton street standards. ■ Condition 3 - sidewalk requirements for lots 52, 53, 119, 120 (under original lot numbering scheme, now lots 283, 284, 1, 2 respectively) refer to lots that lie outside of Phase 6. Lots 277, 278, 288, 330, 331 (under original lot numbering scheme, now lots 397, 404, 405, 417, 345, 346) were revised and sidewalk access was included. ■ The already created Liberty Ridge Homeowners Association will have the referenced maintenance responsibilities. A Sixth Amendment to the Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions, Easements and Restrictions of Liberty Ridge declares Phase 6 of Liberty Ridge as members of the Association. ■ Tracts Y and Z w ithin P hase 6 a re N ative G rowth Protection Areas. A note about protection and maintenance of the NGPA is shown on the face of the plat. ■ Phase 6 is the last phase of Liberty Ridge and no stub roads to link to other portions of the site were created. ■ The site is not being left in raw stages. ■ Minor changes proposed to Liberty Ridge entire project were approved by the Fire Department. CONCLUSIONS The Final Plat generally appears to satisfy the conditions imposed by the preliminary plat process and therefore should be approved by the City Council. CAHard work\Liberty Ridge\Close out Phase 6\Report.doc\cor RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should approve the Final Plat with the following conditions: 1. All plat fees shall be paid prior to the recording of the plat. 2. All plat improvements shall be either constructed or deferred to the satisfaction of City staff prior to the recording of the plat. SUBMITTED THIS 151' DAY OF JANUARY, 2004 LIANA FRI DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION cc: Kayren Kittrick LUA-03-112-FP C:\Hard work\Liberty Ridge\Close out Phase 6\Report.doc\cor CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board.. EDNSP Department/Strategic Planning Division Staff Contact...... Don Erickson (X-6581) Subject: Carlo Annexation Public Hearing Exhibits: Issue Paper Recommended Action: Council concur Al #: For Agenda of: January 26, 2004 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution........... . Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information........ . Approvals: Legal Dept......... Finance Dept...... Other ............... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Council accepted a 10 % Notice of Intent petition to initiate annexation of approximately 37- acres located east of 136" Avenue SE and south of NE 3`d Street, if extended, to 138`h Avenue SE, and south of SE 132" Street east to 140' Avenue SE. The proponents have submitted a 50% Petition to Annex that has been certified as sufficient by the King County Department of Assessments and the King County Records, Elections and Licensing Services Division. Under State law, a Public Hearing must be held prior to acceptance of the Petition to Annex. Also, two public hearings are required to consider prezoning for this annexation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council set February 9, 2004 for a public hearing to consider accepting the Carlo Annexation 50% Direct Petition to Annex, R-8 prezoning, and, if accepted, authorizing the Administration to send the Notice of Intent package to the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: January 15, 2004 TO: Don Persson, Council President City Council Members VIA: �w v^� Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator muf Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson (X-6581) SUBJECT: Proposed Carlo Annexation — Acceptance of Direct Petition to Annex ISSUE: Pursuant to state law the Council is now asked whether it wishes to accept the 50% Direct Petition to Annex for the Carlo Annexation and whether prezoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, in this case R-8 zoning, should be applied to the site at the time of annexation. Council is also asked whether the Administration should transmit the Notice of Intent package to the Boundary Review Board. RECOMMENDATION: • On the basis of the following analysis, the Administration recommends that Council accept the 50%Direct Petition to Annex for the Carlo Annexation and authorize the Administration to forward the Notice of Intent package for this annexation to the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: On August 4, 2003 Council accepted the applicant's 10% Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation Petition for the +37-acre Carlo Annexation site and authorized circulation of the new 50% Direct Petition to Annex. The City is now in receipt of a 50% Direct Petition to Annex. Both the King County Department of Assessments and the King County Records, Elections and Licensing Services Division have certified the sufficiency of the signatures on the petition, stating that they represent a majority of the acreage and a majority of the registered voters residing in the proposed annexation. January 16, 2004 Page 2 The "L" shaped Carlo Annexation site is located immediately east of the proposed Tydico Site Annexation, east of 136"' Avenue SE (Bremerton Avenue NE) and south of NE 3rd Street, if extended, to SE 138"' Avenue and then south of SE 132°d Street east to 140'h Avenue SE. This annexation cannot be approved until after the Tydico annexation is completed since to do so would create an island in violation of state law. Location: The proposed 37-acre "L" shaped Carlo Annexation is located between 1361h Avenue SE on the west, 140"' Avenue SE on the east, NE 3`d Street, if extended on the north, and, SE 135t" Street, if extended on the south. It is immediately east of the proposed Tydico Site Annexation. 2. Assessed value: The current assessed value is $3,756,000. Natural features: The site generally slopes north to south at about a 3% slope. (Figure 2, Topography) The northeast corner of the western half of the site retains a portion of a mapped wetland to the northeast. 4. Existing land uses: Existing development includes medium- to large -lot single family and vacant parcels. (Figure 3, Existing Structures) Existin zoning: oning: King County zoning is R-4. R-4 allows up to a base density of four units per gross acre, and up to six units per acre with incentives and transfer of density credits. 6. Proposed zoning: R-8 zoning consistent with the Residential Single Family land use designation shown on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Comprehensive Plan: Renton's Comprehensive Plan designates the subject parcel Residential Single Family (RS). Potential zoning under the RS designation includes R-8, 8 units per net acre, and RMH, Residential Manufactured Housing. Public services: All responding departments and divisions noted that the annexation represents a logical extension of their respective services and systems. Surface Water. There are existing drainage problems including flooding, erosion, water quality and degraded fish habitat exist within the Maplewood Creek sub -basin downstream, south of the annexation site. As a consequence Surface Water is recommending that future development comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual level 2- flow control. Water Utility. The subject area is within Renton's water service area. according to the East King County Coordinated Water System Plan. New development will be required to hook up to Renton's water system and provide necessary watermain extensions for fire protection and domestic water service. Sewers. The annexation site is located within Renton's Sewer Service Area and presents no problems for this utility. Parks. The City has a shortfall of both neighborhood and community parkland in this area. King County owns about 39 acres of parkland, primarily undeveloped, about 3/10's of a mile to the southeast of the proposed annexation. In the past, the County has expressed an interest in conveying these properties to the City, with their annexation. Development of January 16, 2004 Page 3 the parkland would occur at the City's expense. Maintenance costs for new parks are included in the fiscal analysis, below. Fire. The area is currently served by the City under contract with Fire District #25. Upon annexation Renton would continue to provide this service. Public Works Maintenance. Maintenance staff noted that the only organized drainage is roadside ditches. All abutting street right-of-ways are intended to be included in the annexation. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION: Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The annexation policies generally support the proposed annexation. The annexation site is within Renton's Potential Annexation Area and currently subject to development pressure (Policies LU-378 and LU-380). The area is designated for urbanization under both the County's and City's respective Comprehensive Plans, zoning, and subdivision regulations (Policy LU-380). Also, Renton is the logical provider of urban infrastructure and services to the area (Policy LU-383). Policy LU-388 states that in general, the greater the contiguity with the city limits, the more favorable the annexation. The area proposed for annexation is adjacent to the city limits along approximately 25% of its boundaries. After the inclusion of the Tydico Site to the west this would increase to approximately 40%. Proposed boundaries also are generally identifiable in the field (Policy LU-388) and will be more so after the Tydico Site Annexation to the west, comes into the City. 2. Consistency with the Boundary Review Board Objectives: (from RCW 36.93.180) a. Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities; The proposed annexation would cause no disruption to the larger community. b. Use of physical boundaries, including but not limited to bodies of water, highways, and land contours; Except for a small area, boundaries follow physical features. C. Creation and preservation of logical service areas; Not applicable. d. Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries; The boundaries are somewhat irregular but not abnormally irregular. e. Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of incorporations of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated urban areas; Not applicable. f. Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts; Not applicable. g. Adjustment of impractical boundaries; Neither the existing nor the proposed boundaries are impractical. January 16, 2004 Page 4 h. Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to cities or towns of unincorporated areas which are urban in character; and, King County has designated this area for urban development. Protection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county legislative authority. Not applicable. No portions of the proposed Annexation area are rural or designated for long term productive agricultural use in the King County Comprehensive Plan. Fiscal Analysis: Under existing development (18 homes) there would be an estimated annual loss of $2,453 to the City. This probably reflects the relatively low density and lower average value homes on the 37-acre annexation site. With full development an estimated 222 homes would exist with an assessed value of $64,380,000. Because of the smaller lots associated with R-8 zoning the average assessed value used for new homes was $290,000. Even with this lower value, the fiscal analysis indicates a positive cash flow of $5,298 at full development. Parks acquisition and development costs were estimated as a one time cost of $127,877 in excess of the revenues generated by the City's $531 per new household parks mitigation fee. CONCLUSION: The proposed Carlo Annexation is generally consistent with City policies and Boundary Review Board objectives for annexation. No impediments to the provision of City services have been identified for the area. In addition, the fiscal analysis showed a positive cash flow at full development but noted that parks acquisition/development costs attributable to this annexation were $127,877. In conclusion, because this annexation is within the City's PAA and abuts a commercial center (CS zone), even with these costs this annexation appears to be in the best interests and general welfare of the City. Attachments . y► r�� v at► ,� _ �•.. � � ..gyp �■,:� ' � :� r�� MIMI - old tee, .� wr �r%��►���v� L�� ! �'1 am , 'j IN 9N I I WE 11 a, ELI I I OWN U_LLE;3j�j I V o Gb d 4� � P Lj This dowmantFV b o yophk eaenlotkn, rwt guaranteed to eu.vey ocwracy, fntmQeC^7or city only and baaed on tha Dest Fformot'an awi e m of tM dots wwn. This map Ises for display purposonly. 0 400 800 1 : 4800 Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Existing Structure + Alex Pietsch, Administrator G. Del Rosario —Renton City Limits i°NT° 15 August 2003 f 1 Proposed Annexation Area King County Records, Elections and Licensing Services Division PETITION CERTIFICATION THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the petition, submitted October 9, 2003 and November 10, 2003 to the King County Records, Elections and Licensing Services Division, concerning a proposed annexation into the City of Renton of the area known as Carlo, has been examined, the signatures thereon carefully compared with the voter registration records of the King County Elections Section, and as a result of such examination, signatures of a majority of the registered voters of the area were found upon the petition, thus the petition is found to be sufficient under the provisions of the Revised Code of Washington. Dated this Is' day of December 2003. Dean C. Logan, Directo fmI/pet cert.doc King County Department of Assessments King County Administration Bldg. 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 708 Seattle, WA 98104-2384 (206) 296-5195 FAX (206) 296-0595 Email: assessor.info@metroke.gov www.metrokc.gov/assessor/ Scott Noble Assessor ANNEXATION PETITION CERTIFICATION THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the petition submitted October S, 2003 to the King County Department of Assessments by Don Erickson, Senior Planner for the City of Renton, supporting the annexation to Renton of the properties described as the Carlo Annexation, has been examined, the property taxpayers, tax parcel numbers, assessed value, and acreage of properties listed thereon carefully compared with the King County tax roll records, and as a result of such examination, found to be sufficient under the provisions of the New Section of Revised Code of Washington, Section 35.13.002. The Department of Assessments has not verified that the signature on the petition is valid through comparison with any record of actual signatures, nor that the signature was obtained or submitted in an appropriate time frame, and this document does not certify such to be the case. Dated this 16th day of October, 2003 Scott Noble, King County Assessor City of ■ ,anton Current Annexations _____-_=____ Merritt nrrrrxw sxwxsnuxs ___r_r_= F-, •.. .. Ecawrnb Devebpment Neighbor, -Ca d Strategic Plamrg G wrPmam Il Jaivary IOW �` 1 . Yt2i32ati ____-__ _}}g-�=-_� �• .. �� _ _________ _______________-___-_-_ Stonerid e =___-____ _____-_ __________ ____ } , ______=______-__-=____________________=: Hendrickson 1;�I 28.9 ac. 23.1 ac. -_____ ______________ __---_________-_-_ _- =____ __-_ __-_ Johnson ' 15.7 ac. Anderson cf T deco Pik : 9.8 . � Carlo 38.3 ac. ` --J Bales 9.0 ac. :.� Maplewood Mossier - Highlands ;---1 8 . .7 acac 8 . 35�•- �.� . . A- d 3 -00';�- PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF RENTQ;�OF PENTON UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 O C T 0 6 2003 (50% Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation) FECElVED TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 The undersigned (the "Petitioners") are either owners of not less than fifty percent (50%) of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton and registered voters representing fifty percent (50%) of the registered voters residing within the proposed annexation area. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton (the "City") under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. \ The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered "Notice of Intention" to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on . The City Council then determined that it would authorize the circulation of 50% Petition to Annex. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the undersigned petitioners acknowledge that: (1) They are in favor of the proposed annexation; (2) They accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations for the subject property; and (3) They assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded indebtedness, all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WIIEREFORE, the undersigned property owners and registered voters petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation, cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such hearing, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This three page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation PROPERTY OWNERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation REGISTERED VOTERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. Date Signature and Mailing Voter Registr�ti�n Printed. Name Address:: er fe 7(6o3-3qj 41 /34,z5 sE 13/-5� s/- 2. 71� 3 24 136 zs " i31 .s4 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 1 of 2 A-03 -00.)- PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF RENTON UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 Cyr{ OF RENTON (50% Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation) 0 C T 0 6 2003 TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON CITY CLE SF� KFFICE 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 The undersigned (the "Petitioners") are either owners of not less than fifty percent (50%) of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton and registered voters representing fifty percent (50%) of the registered voters residing within the proposed annexation area. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton (the "City") under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered "Notice of Intention" to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on . The City Council then determined that it would authorize the circulation of 50% Petition to Annex. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the undersigned petitioners acknowledge that: (1) They are in favor of the proposed annexation; (2) They accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations for the subject property; and (3) They assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded indebtedness, all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WHEREFORE, the undersigned property owners and registered voters petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation, cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such hearing, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This three page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex - Carlo Annexation PROPERTY OWNERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) and Taxb�e.osct ze PnrOpe.tyre ate SignedSgnatu ed ntrn Mailin rLietgia+elnN AneNO�catf- of Record Of .. Tt :Address I bt, Blac, Plat, Assessar'sNo. or; other) ion A,re� itI 1. 5' if A Mo nr !r. VA -VA K, R4-4 : 1 W A 9 1c.23 05 96 l7 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation REGISTERED VOTERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. Date Si n ture and" Printed es Mailuig Address V00 Re gislr 16t Number. YJI-7j03 � P. o� ��3os'�' -1 6 S $% 2. � 0 )' / °` ,.j 7-o j BU R fro s�6 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 1 of 2 CARLO ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION The southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter, and the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, all in Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the east 30 feet of the south half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the west 42 feet of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 15; LESS that portion lying southerly of the south line of said north half of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15 extended easterly across 140d Ave. S.E., to a point on the west line of Lot 49 of Puget Colony Homes, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 86 of Plats, Page 59, records of King County, Washington; and TOGETHER WITH the portion of street known as 138h Ave. S.E. lying in the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15, said street varying in width from 20 feet to 30 feet and back to 20 feet. HAFile Sys\LND - Land Subdivision & Surveying RecordsV-ND-01 - Legal Descriptions\0065.doc\SF\jw orl ( 'nrin D cm 4-b340 z PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF REN q, OF R nl roN UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 (50% Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation) 0 C T 0 6 2003 TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON CITY RECEIVED LERKS OFFICE 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 The undersigned (the "Petitioners") are either owners of not less than fifty percent (50%) of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton and registered voters representing fifty percent (50%) of the registered voters residing within the proposed annexation area. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton (the "City") under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. \ The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered "Notice of Intention" to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on . The City Council then determined that it would authorize the circulation of 50% Petition to Annex. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the undersigned petitioners acknowledge that: (1) They are in favor of the proposed annexation; (2) They accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations for the subject property; and (3) They assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded indebtedness, all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WHEREFORE, the undersigned property owners and registered voters petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation, cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such hearing, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This three page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation PROPERTY OWNERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) Date Signed Signature and Printed Name of Ownerr, of Record of Property Mailing Address Tax Lot Legal No. Description Bloc, Plat, Assessor's No. or other) Property Size in N eXat- an Area / l 6 3 terto 280�3 SO r>gores Dr`- S'o 15 Z3 b5 961 j 4. 7 (o Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation REGISTERED VOTERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. Date Signature and printed Name Mailing Address Voter Registration Number. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 1 of 2 CARLO ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION The southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter, and the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, all in Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the east 30 feet of the south half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the west 42 feet of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 15; LESS that portion lying southerly of the south line of said north half of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15 extended easterly across 140`h Ave. S.E., to a point on the west line of Lot 49 of Puget Colony Homes, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 86 of Plats, Page 59, records of King County, Washington; and TOGETHER WITH the portion of street known as 1380' Ave. S.E. lying in the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15, said street varying in width from 20 feet to 30 feet and back to 20 feet. HAFile Sys\LND - Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-01 - Legal Descriptions\0065.doc\SF\jw Li ��T"MT"MT cz oq-03-00I— PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF RENTrONOF Ivr�� UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 (50% Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation) O C T 0 6 2003 RECEIVED TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 The undersigned (the "Petitioners") are either owners of not less than fifty percent (50%) of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton and registered voters representing fifty percent (50%) of the registered voters residing within the proposed annexation area. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton (the "City") under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered "Notice of Intention" to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on . The City Council then determined that it would authorize the circulation of 50% Petition to Annex. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the undersigned petitioners acknowledge that: (1) They are in favor of the proposed annexation; (2) They accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations for the subject property; and (3) They assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded indebtedness, all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WHEREFORE, the undersigned property owners and registered voters petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation, cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such heating, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This three page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation PROPERTY OWNERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) Date Signed Signature and Printed Name of Owner of cord of Pr t Mailing Address Tax Lot Legal No. Description Lot, Bloc, Plat; Assessor's No. or other) Property Size in Annexat- ion Area s. Le A9a"':? �X'5 1 �"��,� Z'i O S 90'41+ 152.3c5g 9t15 Z.(04 4 c , .33 a c.. GvV�^^�'t Glfi,k�-(-�,s F GOl�lttl�. CoY►nsV NHS Co �6 ID$4" pvcM6 115z3O�i (tc lleVuc WA `t$b0 � gt5t} 1.$� ac. 157.365 401$ 4. it ac Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation REGISTERED VOTERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. Date Signature and Mailing Voter Registration Printed Name Address Number. 2. 9/r/ f y 9LE 3. R.„?ta, wit ctgo59 K�-d3-o3b -5?1 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 1 of 2 CARLO ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION The southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter, and the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, all in Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the east 30 feet of the south half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the west 42 feet of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 15; LESS that portion lying southerly of the south line of said north half of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15 extended easterly across 14Uh Ave. S.E., to a point on the west line of Lot 49 of Puget Colony Homes, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 86 of Plats, Page 59, records of King County, Washington; and TOGETHER WITH the portion of street known as 138`h Ave. S.E. lying in the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15, said street varying in width from 20 feet to 30 feet and back to 20 feet. HAFile Sys\LND - Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-01 - Legal Descriptions\0065.doc\SMjw on\ I. Cz 4-03.00 ;L PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF REN(TPS$RCNTCv UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 p C i 0 6 2003 (50% Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation) RECEIVED TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 The undersigned (the "Petitioners") are either owners of not less than fifty percent (50%) of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton and registered voters representing fifty percent (50%) of the registered voters residing within the proposed annexation area. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton (the "City") under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered "Notice of Intention" to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on . The City Council then determined that it would authorize the circulation of 50% Petition to Annex. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the undersigned petitioners acknowledge that: (1) They are in favor of the proposed annexation; (2) They accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations for the subject property; and (3) They assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded indebtedness, all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WHEREFORE, the undersigned property owners and registered voters petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation, cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such hearing, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This three page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex - Carlo Annexation PROPERTY OWNERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) S�gnatnre and Tax Lnt Legal No. Proverty See Date Signed Printed Name of Owner, Ma fling Description in A .neYtat= Of Record of Pr ` ert Address _ B��, Pia Assessor's Nu: or (41*0 ion Area. Z. ,V h�G l . 152305 gOtb _,3 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation REGISTERED VOTERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. Signature and Mailing Voter R+eg�strti+nri Date Pr-inted Naame: Address Number: /.� Z,3 z- Id s 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 1 of 2 CARLO ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION The southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter, and the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, all in Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WTTH the east 30 feet of the south half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the west 42 feet of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 15; LESS that portion lying southerly of the south line of said north half of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15 extended easterly across 140t° Ave. S.E., to a point on the west line of Lot 49 of Puget Colony Homes, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 86 of Plats, Page 59, records of King County, Washington; and TOGETHER WITH the portion of street known as 138d' Ave. S.E. lying in the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15, said street varying in width from 20 feet to 30 feet and back to 20 feet. HAFile Sys\LND - Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-01 - Legal Descriptions\0065.doc\SF\jw SOPOSe =igure 3: Existing S Fkll��16 Economic Deve At— Pietceh Ad—i A-03-DDT PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF RENrglQ.* R.TCN UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 OCT 0 6 2003 (50% Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation) RECEIVED TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 The undersigned (the "Petitioners") are either owners of not less than fifty percent (50%) of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton and registered voters representing fifty percent (50%) of the registered voters residing within the proposed annexation area. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton (the "City") under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered "Notice of Intention" to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on . The City Council then determined that it would authorize the circulation of 50% Petition to Annex. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the undersigned petitioners acknowledge that: (1) They are in favor of the proposed annexation; (2) They accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations for the subject property; and (3) They assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded indebtedness, all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WHEREFORE, the undersigned property owners and registered voters petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation, cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such hearing, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This three page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation PROPERTY OWNERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) Signature and; Tax Lot Leggy[ No.._ Property SI& ate Signed r hkd Nime of Owner Milmg DescriPtit�;p �n �.n�ne:tat Of R'CCUrd'of Prooetty Address c, Bloc, Plat, nss�sQr's No: or other) tan Ares 1. `�1i��20o3 62-2-o 52305 col 2.3 gwt�s �e�mn N� AvC; • 5=6. . RHOS 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0. Page 1 of 2 50 % Petition to Annex — Carlo Annexation REGISTERED VOTERS WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Page 1 of 2 CARLO ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION The southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter, and the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, all in Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITU the north half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the east 30 feet of the south half (1/2) of the north half (1/2) of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the north half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15; and TOGETHER WITH the west 42 feet of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 15; LESS that portion lying southerly of the south line of said north half of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15 extended easterly across 140'' Ave. S.E., to a point on the west line of Lot 49 of Puget Colony Homes, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 86 of Plats, Page 59, records of King County, Washington; and TOGETHER WrM the portion of street known as 138`b Ave. S.E. lying in the southeast quarter. of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 15, said street varying in width from 20 feet to 30 feet and back to 20 feet. HAFile Sys\LND - Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-01 - Legal Descriptions\0065.doc\SF\jw opose =igure 3: Existing S Ca-ym:.N Economic Deve Al- F;M-lk Ail-; L CITY OF RENfON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting, Data: EDNSP Dcpart./Neighhorhoods & Dept/Div/Board.. Strategic Planning Division Staff Contact...... Don Erickson (X-6581) Subject: Johnson Annexation 101/c Petition to Commence Annexation Public Meeting Exhibits: Issue Paper Recommended Action: Council concur For Agenda of: January 26, 2004 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information......... Approvals: Legal Dept......... Finance Dept..... Other ............... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Council received a 101/c Notice of Intent petition on December 19, 2004 to annex 14.22 acres east of 142na Avenue SE and north of SE 121" Street, if extended, north to the City boundary at NE 9th Street, if extended. The proponents have submitted a petition with signatures representing 8Y7v of the non -street portion of the annexation. Under state law the City is required to hold a public meeting with the proponents within 60 days of receipt of such petition to consider whether it wants to accept the area as proposed, geographically modify it, or not accept it all. If Council accepts the 10% petition it will typically authorize the circulation of the so-called 50% Direct Petition to Annex. The site is currently designated RS (Residential Single Family) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and would be prezoned R-8 consistent with this designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council set February 9, 2004 for a public meeting to consider the 10% Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation Petition for the Johnson Annexation. X X Rcnumnct/agnbill/ hh CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: STAFF CONTACT: SUBJECT: ISSUE: January 19, 2004 Don Persson, President City Council Members .� Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Alex Pietsch, Administrator k',f Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department Don Erickson (X-6581) Johnson Annexation - 10% Notice of Intent Petition Public Meeting Pursuant to state law, Council is required to meet with the applicants and decide whether it wishes to accept the 10% Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation petition for the Johnson Annexation and, if so, whether it wants to geographically modify its boundaries before authorizing circulation of the 50% Direct Petition to Annex. The Council can also decide not to accept a Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation petition. RECOMMENDATION: On the basis of the following analysis, the Administration recommends that Council accept the 10% Notice of Intent petition for the Johnson Annexation. If the Council concurs with this recommendation, the Administration recommends that Council take the following actions pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120. • Amend the proposed annexation area by including the abutting 142nd Avenue SE right-of- way; • Authorize the circulation of the 50% Petition to Annex for the proposed area; • Require the adoption of City zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and, • Require that property owners assume their proportional share of the City's outstanding indebtedness. Johnson Annexation 10% Notice of Intent Petition January 19, 2004 Page 2 of 5 BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The current rectangular shaped Johnson Annexation was previously proposed as part of the much larger 121-acre Johnson Annexation of 2001, which failed because of insufficient signatures representing 50% of the area's assessed value. Although this latest, much smaller, proposed annexation has reasonable boundaries and complies with most of Boundary Review Board objectives for annexations, it does further a large peninsula and may be the last annexation that can be achieved in this area without creating an "island." Below is additional information relevant to this annexation. Location: With the inclusion of the 1.36 acre abutting 142nd Avenue SE right-of-way, the proposed annexation site would be 15.58-acres. The site is located directly southeast of the intersection of 142nd Avenue SE and NE 9th Street, if extended. It is bordered on the north by the City of Renton and on the east by 144th Avenue SE (Jericho Ave NE), if extended. The southern boundary is SE 121" Street, if extended, and the western boundary is the west side of 142nd Avenue SE. 2. Assessed Value: The assessed value at current development is $2,024,100. At full development this figure is expected to increase to $28,160,000, assuming an average value of $300,000 for newer, small lot, R-8 development. The fiscal analysis indicates a deficit of about ($481) under existing development, increasing to ($714) at full development. This is based upon the City's latest (2004) levy rate of $3.16, rather than $3.19 per $1,000 of assessed value previously used. 3. Natural features: The site generally slopes downward from west to east at about a 5% slope. The City's Sensitive Areas Map shows the headwaters of Honey Creek to the east as well as a wetland associated with this water body. 4. Existing land use: There are seven single-family dwellings on the 14.22 acre portion of the site that does not include the 142nd Avenue SE right-of-way. The larger parcels are relatively underdeveloped and there is one miniscule parcel that is vacant. Existing zoning: King County zoning is R-4, providing a base density of four units per gross acre and increases up to six units per acre for energy efficiency or through the transfer of development credits. 6. Comprehensive Plan: King County's comprehensive plan designates the area Urban Residential 4-12 du/ac. Renton's Comprehensive Plan designates the area Residential Single Family. 7. Public Services: All responding departments and divisions noted that the proposed annexation represents a logical extension of their respective services and systems. Water Utility. Staff notes that the annexation area is within King County Water District No. 90's service area and that prior to new development developers will need to obtain certificates of water availability from that utility. H:\BDNSP\PAA\AnnexationsUohnson\10% Petition Issue Paper.doc Johnson Annexation 10% Notice of Intent Petition January 19, 2004 Page 3 of 5 Surface Water Utility. The portion of the site east of 142°d Avenue SE is in the Honey Creek sub -basin of the Cedar River Basin and flows east. However, most of 142°d Ave SE itself drains south to the Maplewood Creek sub -basin. Honey Creek lies immediately east of the site and an associated wetland of the creek exists at the southeast corner of the site. Because new development can increase surface water runoff leading to increased erosion and flooding downstream, as well as reduced fish habitat, future development should comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual level 2-flow control and Basic Water Quality, or the City standard at the time of development, if equivalent or more restrictive. Sewers. The area is currently on septic but is within Renton's sewer service area. Developers will be responsible for covering the cost of extending sewer to this area. Staff has also recommended the inclusion of the 142°d Avenue SE right-of-way since utilities will probably be extended to the site through this corridor. Transportation. Transportation Systems reports that the portion of 142°d Avenue SE abutting the proposed annexation site does not meet City standards in terms of roadway width and pavement thickness, lighting, and curbs, gutters and sidewalks. As a result, future property owners would be expected to bear the expense of providing these at the time redevelopment occurs. The City of Renton would bear the cost of maintenance and electricity for street lighting. Parks. There is a general deficiency of parks and recreational space in the area. As a result, there is an anticipated one-time pro -rated cost above and beyond the amount collected from mitigation fees that would be used for park acquisition and development. This amount is estimated to be $53,290. Fire. Fire believes that it will be important to have certificates of water availability from District No. 90 since flow rates and water pressure are of some concern. They also note that fire prevention services to this area are currently provided by the City under contract with Fire District No. 25. Police. Police estimates a cost of approximately $70,000 (assumes 240 residents at full development) to serve this area. Public Works Maintenance. Road maintenance is estimated at $3,825 per year initially assuming 3,060 linear feet of roadway. Park maintenance is estimated at $3,576 per year initially. Surface water notes that existing drainage along 142°d Avenue SE is comprised of a grass -lined ditch and 12-inch diameter driveway culverts, many of which are plugged and need to be cleaned out. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ANNEXATION: Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: H:\EDNSP\PAA\Annexations\.lohnson\10% Petition Issue Paper.doc Johnson Annexation 10% Notice of Intent Petition January 19, 2004 Page 4 of 5 The City's adopted annexation policies generally support the proposed annexation. The subject properties are within Renton's Potential Annexation Area (PAA) and are subject to development pressure (Policies LU-378 and LU-390). The area is available for urbanization under the King County Comprehensive Plan, zoning and subdivision regulations (Policy LU- 380). Renton is the logical provider of urban infrastructure and services, with the exception of water, to the area (Policy LU-383). Policy LU-388 states that, in general, the greater the contiguity with the City limits, the more favorable the annexation. Staff notes that only about 20% of the perimeter of this annexation actually abuts the City boundary at this time. Further annexations are either in process or being proposed for much of the area to the east. Consistency with Boundary Review Board Objectives: (from RCW 36.93.180) a. Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities; The proposed annexation would cause no disruption to the larger community. b. Use of physical boundaries, including but not limited to bodies of water, highways, and land contours; The boundaries of this proposed annexation are defined by the existing city limits, a major street, and existing parcel lines. c. Creation and preservation of logical service areas; The proposed boundaries do not change school, water or sewer service boundaries. The City will provide Police and Fire Prevention services when the area comes into the City. According to reviewing departments, the boundaries represent reasonable service areas. d. Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries; The proposed boundaries result in a regular rectangular shaped annexation area. As noted above, the annexation does further an existing peninsula to the west but does not result in an island. e. Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of incorporations of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated urban areas; Not applicable. f. Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts; Not applicable. g. Adjustment of impractical boundaries; Neither the existing nor the proposed boundaries are impractical, since they are considered interim. As a part of Renton's PAA, eventually the whole area is expected to be brought into the City. H:\EDNSP\PAA\Annexations\Johnson\10% Petition Issue Paper.doc Johnson Annexation 10% Notice of Intent Petition January 19, 2004 Page 5 of 5 h. Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to cities or towns of unincorporated areas which are urban in character; and, This area is within Renton's Potential Annexation Area and it is unlikely to incorporated as a city or town. Protection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county legislative authority. Not applicable. No portion of the proposed annexation area is designated rural or designated for long-term productive agricultural and resource use on the King County Comprehensive Plan. CONCLUSION: This proposed annexation is essentially consistent with adopted City annexation policies and Boundary Review Board objectives for annexation. No impediments to the provision of City services to the area have been identified. The fiscal analysis conducted by staff indicates that there will be a minor deficit to the City, at least initially, using the new 2004 levy rates. In addition, there is a prorated one-time cost for future park acquisition and development that exceeds park mitigation fees by an estimated $53,290. Attachments H:\EDNSP\PAA\Annexations\Johnson\10% Petition Issue Paper.doc (D O dtt�o w� N N b F Y o CDe. � R C O y 00 O d D CD i O •D 0 <n 2 r � x m v n 0 LlE�JE� 01 STONERIDGE ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS SHEET FOR JOHNSTON ANNEXATION ................... iev .... ................... ................... Gists:.. . Units Population AV Existing dev. 7 18 $2,024,100 Full dev. 96 240 $28,240,000 Assumptions: 2.5 persons / household $300,000 AV / new unit $220,000 AV /existing unit Existing Full Rate Regular le $6,396 $89,238 3.16 1 Excess_levy $179 $2,503 0.08865 State shared revenues Rate(per cap) Existing Full Liquor tax $3.52 $63.36 $844.80 Liquor Board profits $5.04 $90.72 $1,209.60 Fuel tax - roads $14.46 $260.28 $3,470.40 Fuel tax - arterials $6.47 $116.46 $1,552.80 MVET $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Camper excise $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Criminal justice $0.36 $6.48 $86.40 Total $537.30 $7,164.00 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existing Full Real estate excise* $40.86 $735.48 $9,806.40 Utility tax** $133.20 $932.40 $12,787.20 Fines & forfeits` $18.33 $329.94 $4,399.20 Total $1,997.82 $26,992.80 " Per capita "* Per housing unit - based on $2,220 annual utility billing @ 6% tax rate Per capita Existing Full Contracted Services Alcohol $0.23 $4.09 $54.48 Public Defender $3.13 $56.41 $752.16 Jail $7.19 $129.46 $1,726.08 Subtotal $189.95 $2,532.72 Court/legal/admin. $57.08 $1,027.44 $13,699.20 Parks maintenance` $14.90 $268.20 $3,576.00 Police $282.00 $5,076.00 $67,680.00 Road maintenance`* N/A $500.00 $3,825 Fire*** $1.25 $2,530.13 $35,300.00 Total $9,591.72 $126,612.92 * See Sheet Parks FIA ** See Sheet Roads FIA *** Rate per $1.,000 of assessed valuation (FD#25 contract) '*** $282/service call - .92 calls/MF & .74 calls/SF priiiio;ts Parks acquisition & development (from Sheet Parks FIA): Other one-time costs: Total revenues Existing Full Total ongoing costs Existing $5912 Full `��6�5 Net fiscal impact $53,290.00 $0.00 Total one-time Revised 8-29 per Finance Memo � ` a WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the name that appears on record in the title to the real estate.) A-1, J O#Aismnl 23ps �tf�ltG /Lclyd t d Z-3-5�9257 2. AA. ..t 11/SV11V 5. & ioZ,,30s ii� S� 3. . Joy.Q.J /OZfQo J Kt L r lore SE C S 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10: Page 2 of 2 H:\DMSION.S\P&TS\PLANNING\ANNDC\10% Notice of-Intent.doc\OD 4-03- 60 S NOTICE OF INTENTION TO COMMENCE ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 CITY OF RENTON (Direct Petition Method) DEC 19 2003 10% Petition — Johnson Annexation RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON City Hall, c/o City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way. Renton, WA 98055 The undersigned are the owners of not less than ten percent (10%) in acreage, according to the assessed valuation for general taxation, of property which they desire to annex to the City of Renton. We hereby advise the City Council of the City of Renton that it is our desire to commence annexation proceedings under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 of all or any part of the area described below. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City of Renton. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. The City Council is requested to set a date not later than sixty days after the filing of this request for a public meeting with the undersigned. At such meeting, the City Council will decide whether the City will accept, reject or geographically modify the proposed annexation; 2. The City Council will decide whether to require simultaneous adoption of a proposed zoning regulation, such a proposal having been prepared and filed for the area to be annexed as provided for in RCW 35A.14.330 and 35A.14.340; and, 3. The City Council will decide whether to require the assumption of existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed. This page is the first of a group of pages containing identical text material. It is intended by the signers that such multiple pages of the Notice of Intention be presented and considered as one Notice of Intention. It may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures which cumulatively may be considered as a single Notice of Intention. Page 1 of 2 WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the name that appears on record in the We to the real estate.) 00 /L IZ4 i�P 1. Y03 ,vey�v mot. JOWivsm.J 23ps Qur3/� 2c� I ©Z3�'-s'9257 03 a 3. +� ,,✓A -a cry- �: Jv�yso� G �1; 5 j Troy T ma 4.y saw ,z.ary rNz eve se 5. 6. 7. 8. 10: Page 2 of 2 H:\DNSION.S\P&TS\PLANNING\ANNDC\ 10% Notice of:Intent.doc\OD Jf S WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the name that appears on record in the title to the real estate.) -ZW2d pt�A A14 R• � c✓�-5,�.!M wA. 9 f IOZ3os'9.341 ��5 1. 2. 11-71-a3 �Cirttg�[ y f1, s/EC,/� /sT A. 122�p t42nd Ave SE UDA q 1OS9 3 S 943s r42o 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 H:\DMSION.S\P&TS\PLANNING\ANNDC\ lo% Notice of Intent.doc\OD City of , Benton Current Annexations __ _==--__________ ._- _ Merritt a�� 1�0.11AN(ignRTl •IliNttAP\' ____________ r ' �.. ... . � � cT' IlMrtx _ .. �•. � _ ®^comma Devabmen pl NeighDoihoOds 8 Stretegb nn Pleirg 210.1 Poxm 2t,I.nwrv1001 ____---__ -___ -_:__: _ __ __ ___-___= ____ _____ Sto n e ri d e = ____________ -_=__ __________ __ ___________________=-=_===__ Hendrickson I . 28.9 ac. =__=__------------ = ____________:_ __ -- - Johnson 15.7 ac. Anderson i 19.8 acP Tydico 9.8 ac. .� Carlo _ 38.3 ac. ` Bales 9.0 ac. - I r ►•�' �` ` - - r\j7� Maplewood _ Mossier Highlands - i 35.8 ac. 8.7 ac. - �.� CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL a] #: Submitting Data: Transportation Systems For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. Planning/Building/Public Works January 26, 2004 Agenda Status Staff Contact...... Leslie Lahndt, x-7223 Robert Lochmiller, x-7303 Consent .............. X Public Hearing.. Subject: Correspondence.. North Renton Infrastructure Improvements Ordinance ............. W&H Pacific Consultant Agreement Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Exhibits: Contract Agreement Study Sessions...... Issue Paper Information......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept......... X Council Concur Finance Dept...... Other ............... Risk Management (in process) X Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... $98,164.92 Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... $1,500,000 Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget $1,500,000 City Share Total Project.. $1,500,000 SUMMARY OF ACTION: This contract is for the design and surveying work needed to meet the first goal established by the Development Agreement to have marketable parcel descriptions of the property involved, by the end of February 2004. The design and survey work includes determining location of existing and new right-of-way; locating critical features, base mapping, preparing roadway alignments, preparing sales map and preliminary legal descriptions of parcels. Supplements to this original agreement will be added to: cover the next portion of work; complete 30% design and legally sellable lots by September; and, then ultimately, the final design of each project phase, of which there are expected to be several. The contract is for $98,164.92 to be completed by the end of February from the time of contract execution. The Transportation Systems Division has budgeted $1,500,000 in 2004, for the project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Transportation Division staff recommends Council approve moving forward with the North Renton Infrastructure Improvements Project and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the consultant agreement with W&H Pacific in the amount of $98,164.92. CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: January 26, 2004 TO: Don Persson, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler � FROM: Gregg Zimmermar(rministrator STAFF CONTACT: Robert Lochmiller, x7303 SUBJECT: North Renton Infrastructure Improvements W&H Pacific Consultant Agreement TSSi TF.- Design and surveying work is needed to meet the first goal established by the Boeing/City Development Agreement to have marketable parcel descriptions of the Boeing property involved, by the end of February 2004. The design and survey work includes determining location of existing right-of-way, locating critical features, base mapping, preparing roadway alignments, determining new right-of-way, preparing sales map and preliminary legal descriptions of parcels. A consultant agreement with the City of Renton and W&H Pacific will commence the consultant to perform the required work needed. Supplements to this original agreement will be added to cover the next portions of work. Next will be to complete 30% design and have legally sellable lots by the September deadline, and then ultimately the final design of each project phase, of which there are expected to be several. The contract is for $98,164.92 to be completed by the end of February from the time of contract execution. The Transportation Systems Division has budgeted $1,500,000 in 2004, for the project. RECOMMENDATION: The Transportation staff recommends Council approve moving forward with the North Renton Infrastructure Improvements Project and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the consultant agreement with W&H Pacific in the amount of $98,164.92. January 26, 2004 Page 2 BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The North Renton Infrastructure Improvements is the key project for the redevelopment of Boeing property in the North Renton Site. The partnership between the City of Renton and The Boeing Company for the North Renton Site is one that aspires to draw private interest in an area to be redeveloped from the aerospace company's use to commercial/retail use. A tight deadline has been outlined in the Boeing/City Development Agreement that entails the needed roadway improvements and new stormwater, sewer, and water utilities required to accommodate the shift in land use. Consultant/Address/Telephone Local Agency W&H Pacific Standard Consultant Agreement 3350 Monte Villa Parkway Bothell, WA 98021 Agreement Number 425-951-4860 Federal Aid Number Project Title And Work Description Stage 1 for 30% engineering design and survey services for the North Renton Infrastructure Agreement Type (Choose one) Improvements ❑ Lump Sum Lump Sum Amount $ ® Cost Plus Fixed Fee Overhead Progress Payment Rate 159.36 % DBE Participation Overhead Cost Method ❑ Yes ® No % ❑ Actual Cost WBE Participation ❑ Actual Cost Not To Exceed % ❑ Yes ® No % Federal ID Number or Social Security Number ❑ Fixed Rate % 41-2037885 Fixed Fee $ 12,181.62 Do you require a 1099 for IRS? Completion Date INYes ❑ No December 31, 2004 El Specific Rates Of Pay ❑ Negotiated Hourly Rate Total Amount Authorized $ 98,164.92 ❑ Provisional Hourly Rate Management Reserve Fund $ ❑ Cost Per Unit of Work Maximum Amount Payable $ 98,164.92 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this between the Local Agency of Renton 19th day of January 2004 Washington, hereinafter called the !AGENCY! , and the above organization hereinafter called the !CONSULTANT!. WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires to accomplish the above referenced project, and WHEREAS, the AGENCY does not have sufficient staff to meet the required commitment and therefore deems it advisable and desirable to engage the assistance of a CONSULTANT to provide the necessary services for the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT represents that he/she is in compliance with the Washington State Statutes relating to professional registration, if applicable, and has signified a willingness to furnish Consulting services to the AGENCY, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants and performance contained herein, or attached and incorporated and made a part hereof, the parties hereto agree as follows: DOT Form 140-089 EF Page 1 of 8 Revised 12199 All reports, PS&E materials, and other data, furnished GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK to the CONSULTANT by the AGENCY shall be returned. All designs, drawings, specifications, The work under this AGREEMENT shall consist of documents, and other work products prepared by the the above described work and services as herein CONSULTANT prior to completion or termination of defined and necessary to accomplish the completed this AGREEMENT are instruments of service for this work for this PROJECT. The CONSULTANT shall PROJECT and are property of the AGENCY. Reuse furnish all services, labor and related equipment by the AGENCY or by others acting through or on necessary to conduct and complete the work as behalf of the AGENCY of any such instruments of designated elsewhere in this AGREEMENT. service, not occurring as a part of this PROJECT, shall be without liability or legal exposure to the II CONSULTANT. SCOPE OF WORK IV The Scope of Work and project level of effort for this TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION project is detailed in Exhibit i Bi attached hereto, and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall not begin any work under the terms of this AGREEMENT until authorized in III writing by the AGENCY. All work under this GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENT shall be completed by the date shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT under All aspects of coordination of the work of this completion date. AGREEMENT, with outside agencies, groups or individuals shall receive advance approval by the The established completion time shall not be extended AGENCY. Necessary contacts and meetings with because of any delays attributable to the CONSULT - agencies, groups or individuals shall be coordinated ANT, but may be extended by the AGENCY, in the through the AGENCY. event of a delay attributable to the AGENCY, or because of unavoidable delays caused by an act of The CONSULTANT shall attend coordination, GOD or governmental actions or other conditions progress and presentation meetings with the beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. A prior AGENCY or such Federal, Community, State, City supplemental agreement issued by the AGENCY is or County officials, groups or individuals as may be required to extend the established completion time. requested by the AGENCY. The AGENCY will provide the CONSULTANT sufficient notice prior V to meetings requiring CONSULTANT participation. PAYMENT The minimum number of hours or days notice n required shall be agreed to between the AGENCY The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY and the CONSULTANT and shown in Exhibit i Bf for completed work and services rendered under this attached hereto and made part of this AGREEMENT. AGREEMENT as provided in Exhibit ICI attached The CONSULTANT shall prepare a monthly hereto, and by this reference made part of this progress report, in a form approved by the AGENCY, AGREEMENT. Such payment shall be full compen- that will outline in written and graphical form the sation for work performed or services rendered and various phases and the order of performance of the f or all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and work in sufficient detail so that the progress of the incidentals necessary to complete the work work can easily be evaluated. Goals for Disadvan- specified in Section ll, "Scope of Work". The taged Business Enterprises (DBE) and Women CONSULTANT shall conform with all applicable Owned Business Enterprises (WBE) if required shall portions of 48 CFR 31. be shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT. Page 2 of 8 VI SUBCONTRACTING The AGENCY permits subcontracts for those items of work as shown in Exhibit G to this Agreement. Compensation for this subconsultant work shall be based on the cost factors shown on Exhibit G, at- tached hereto and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The work of the subconsultant shall not exceed its maximum amount payable unless a prior written approval has been issued by the AGENCY. All reimbursable direct labor, overhead, direct non - salary costs and fixed fee costs for the subconsultant shall be substantiated in the same manner as outlined in Section V. All subcontracts exceeding $10,000 in cost shall contain all applicable provisions of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall not subcontract for the performance of any work under this AGREEMENT without prior written permission of the AGENCY. No permission for subcontracting shall create, between the AGENCY and subcontractor, any contract or any other relationship. VII EMPLOYMENT The CONSULTANT warrants that he/she has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consider- ation, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warrant, the AGENCY shall have the right to annul this AGREEMENT without liability, or in its discre- tion, to deduct from the AGREEMENT price or consideration or otherwise recover the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. Any and all employees of the CONSULTANT or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required of the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT, shall be considered employees of the CONSULTANT only and not of the AGENCY, and any and all claims that may or might arise under any Workmenis compensation Act on behalf of said employees or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims made by a third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the CONSULTANTis employees or other persons while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall not engage, on a full or part time basis, or other basis, during the period of the contract, any professional or technical personnel who are, or have been, at any time during the period of the contract, in the employ of the United States Depart- ment of Transportation, the STATE, or the AGENCY, except regularly retired employees, without written consent of the public employer of such person. VIII NONDISCRIMINATION The CONSULTANT agrees not to discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employ- ment or for services because of race, creed, color, national origin, marital status, sex, age or handicap except for a bona fide occupational qualification with regard to, but not limited to the following: employ- ment upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or any recruitment advertising, a layoff or terminations, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, selection for training, rendition of services. The CONSULT- ANT understands and agrees that if it violates this provision, this AGREEMENT may be terminated by the AGENCY and further that the CONSULTANT shall be barred from performing any services for the AGENCY now or in the future unless a showing is made satisfactory to the AGENCY that discrimina- tory practices have terminated and that recurrence of such action is unlikely. During the performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest agrees as follows: A. COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS: The CONSULTANT shall comply with the Regula- tions relative to nondiscrimination in the same manner as in Federal -assisted programs of the Page 3 of 8 Department of Transportation, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from time to time, (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which are herein incorpo- rated by reference and made a part of this AGREEMENT. The consultant shall comply with the American Disabilities Act of 1992, as amended. B. NONDISCRIMINATION: The CONSULTANT, with regard to the work performed by it during the AGREEMENT, shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, creed, color, sex, age, marital status, national origin or handicap except for a bona fide occupational qualification in the selec- tion and retention of subconsultants, including procurements of materials and leases of equip- ment. The CONSULTANT shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the Regulations, including employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix II of the Regulations. C. SOLICITATIONS FOR SUBCONSULTANTS, INCLUDING PROCUREMENTS OF MATERI- ALS AND EQUIPMENT: In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by the CONSULTANT for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subconsultant or supplier shall be notified by the CONSULTANT of the CONSULTANTis obligations under this AGREEMENT and the Regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, creed, color, sex, age, marital status, national origin and handicap. D. INFORMATION AND REPORTS: The CONSULTANT shall provide all information and reports required by the Regulations, or directives issued pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the AGENCY to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Regulations or directives. Where any information required of the CONSULTANT is in the exclu- sive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information the CONSULTANT shall so certify to the AGENCY, or the United States Department of Transportation as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. E. SANCTIONS FOR NONCOMPLIANCE: In the event of the CONSULTANTis noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall impose such sanctions as it or the Federal Highway Administration may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to: 1. Withholding of payments to the CONSULT- ANT under the AGREEMENT until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or 2. Cancellation, termination or suspension of the AGREEMENT, in whole or in part. F. INCORPORATION OF PROVISIONS: The CONSULTANT shall include the provisions of paragraphs (A) through (G) in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. The CON- SULTANT shall take such action with respect to any subconsultant or procurement as the AGENCY or the Federal Highway Administra- tion may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompli- ance; provided, however, that, in the event a CONSULTANT becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subconsultant or supplier as a result of such direction, the CON- ULTANT may request the AGENCY to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the AGENCY, and in addition, the CONSULTANT may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. G. UNFAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES: The CONSULTANT shall comply with RCW 49.60.180. Page 4 of 8 IX TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT The right is reserved by the AGENCY to terminate this AGREEMENT at any time upon ten days written notice to the CONSULTANT. In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated by the AGENCY other than for default on the part of the CONSULTANT, a final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT as shown in Exhibit F for the type of AGREEMENT used. No payment shall be made for any work completed after ten days following receipt by the CONSULT- ANT of the Notice to terminate. If the accumulated payment made to the CONSULTANT prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount that would be due computed as set forth herein above, then no final payment shall be due and the CONSULTANT shall immediately reimburse the AGENCY for any excess paid. If the services of the CONSULTANT are terminated by the AGENCY for default on the part of the CON- SULTANT, the above formula for payment shall not apply. In such an event, the amount to be paid shall be determined by the AGENCY with consideration given to the actual costs incurred by the CONSULT- ANT in performing the work to the date of termination, the amount of work originally required which was satisfactorily completed to date of termina- tion, whether that work is in a form or a type which is usable to the AGENCY at the time of termination; the cost to the AGENCY of employing another firm to complete the work required and the time which maybe required to do so, and other factors which affect the value to the AGENCY of the work per- formed at the time of termination. Under no circumstances shall payment made under this subsec- tion exceed the amount which would have been made using the formula set forth in the previous paragraph. If it is determined for any reason that the CONSULT- ANT was not in default or that the CONSULTANTis failure to perform is without it or itis employeeis fault or negligence, the termination shall be deemed to be a termination for the convenience of the AGENCY in accordance with the provision of this AGREEMENT. In the event of the death of any member, partner or officer of the CONSULTANT or any of its supervi- sory personnel assigned to the project, or, dissolution of the partnership, termination of the corporation, or disaffiliation of the principally involved employee, the surviving members of the CONSULTANT hereby agree to complete the work under the terms of this AGREEMENT, if requested to do so by the AGENCY. The subsection shall not be a bar to renegotiation of the AGREEMENT between the surviving members of the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY, if the AGENCY so chooses. In the event of the death of any of the parties listed in the previous paragraph, should the surviving members of the CONSULTANT, with the AGENCYis concur- rence, desire to terminate this AGREEMENT, payment shall be made as set forth in the second paragraph of this section. Payment for any part of the work by the AGENCY shall not constitute a waiver by the AGENCY of any remedies of any type it may have against the CON- SULTANT for any breach of this AGREEMENT by the CONSULTANT, or for failure of the CONSULT- ANT to perform work required of it by the AGENCY. Forbearance of any rights under the AGREEMENT will not constitute waiver of entitle- ment to exercise those rights with respect to any future act or omission by the CONSULTANT. X CHANGES OF WORK The CONSULTANT shall make such changes and revisions in the complete work of this AGREEMENT as necessary to correct errors appearing therein, when required to do so by the AGENCY, without additional compensation thereof. Should the AGENCY find it desirable for its own purposes to have previously satisfactorily completed work or parts thereof changed or revised, the CONSULTANT shall make such revisions as directed by the AGENCY. This work shall be considered as Extra Work and will be paid for as herein provided under Section XIV. Page 5 of 8 XI that nothing herein shall require a CONSULTANT to DISPUTES indemnify the AGENCY and the STATE against and hold harmless the AGENCY and the STATE from Any dispute concerning questions of fact in connec- tion with the work not disposed of by AGREEMENT between the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY shall be referred for determination to the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer, whose decision in the matter shall be final and binding on the parties of this AGREEMENT, provided however, that if an action is brought challenging the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineeris decision, that decision shall be subject to de novo judicial review. XII VENUE, APPLICABLE LAW AND PERSONAL JURISDICTION In the event that either party deems it necessary to institute legal action or proceedings to enforce any right or obligation under this AGREEMENT, the parties hereto agree that any such action shall be initiated in the Superior court of the State of Washing- ton, situated in the county the AGENCY is located in. The parties hereto agree that all questions shall be resolved by application of Washington law and that the parties to such action shall have the right of appeal from such decisions of the Superior court in accor- dance with the laws of the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT hereby consents to the personal jurisdiction of the Superior court of the State of Washington, situated in the county in which the AGENCY is located in. XIII LEGAL RELATIONS AND INSURANCE The CONSULTANT shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws and ordinances applicable to the work to be done under this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and construed in accord with the laws of Washington. The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold the AGENCY and the STATE, and their officers and employees harmless from and shall process and defend at its own expense all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the CONSULTANTis negligence or breach of any of its obligations under this AGREEMENT; provided claims, demands or suits based solely upon the conduct of the AGENCY and the STATE, their agents, officers and employees and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the CONSULTANTis agents or employees and (b) the AGENCY and the STATE, their agents, officers and employees, this indemnity provision with respect to (1) claims or suits based upon such negligence, (2) the costs to the AGENCY and the STATE of defending such claims and suits, etc. shall be valid and enforce- able only to the extent of the CONSULTANTis negligence or the negligence of the CONSULTANTis agents or employees. The CONSULTANTis relation to the AGENCY shall be at all times as an independent contractor. The CONSULTANT specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by the CONSULTANTis own employees against the AGENCY and, solely for the purpose of this indemnification and defense, the CONSULTANT specifically waives any immunity under the state industrial insurance law, Title 51 RCW. The CONSULTANT recognizes that this waiver was specifically entered into pursuant to the provisions of RCW 4.24.115 and was the subject of mutual negotiation. Unless otherwise specified in the AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall be responsible for administration of construction contracts, if any, on the project. Subject to the processing of an acceptable, supplemental agreement, the CONSULTANT shall provide on -call assistance to the AGENCY during contract adminis- tration. By providing such assistance, the CONSULTANT shall assume no responsibility for: proper construction techniques, job site safety, or any construction contractoris failure to perform its work in accordance with the contract documents. The CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep in force during the terms of the AGREEMENT, or as other- wise required, the following insurance with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to RCW 48. Page 6 of 8 Insurance Coverage A. Workeris compensation and employeris liability insurance as required by the STATE. B. General commercial liability insurance in an amount not less than a single limit of one million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury, including death and property damage per occurrence. Excepting the Workeris Compensation insurance and any professional liability insurance secured by the CONSULTANT, the AGENCY will be named on all certificates of insurance as an additional insured. The CONSULTANT shall furnish the AGENCY with verification of insurance and endorsements required by this AGREEMENT. The AGENCY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time. All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within 14 days of the execution of this AGREEMENT to the AGENCY. No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty (30) days prior notice to the AGENCY. The CONSULTANTis professional liability to the AGENCY shall be limited to the amount payable under this AGREEMENT or one million dollars, whichever is the greater unless modified by Exhibit H. In no case shall the CONSULTANTis professional liability to third parties be limited in any way. The AGENCY will pay no progress payments under Section V until the CONSULTANT has fully complied with this section. This remedy is not exclu- sive; and the AGENCY and the STATE may take such other action as is available to them under other provisions of this AGREEMENT, or otherwise in law. XIV EXTRA WORK A. The AGENCY may at any time, by written order, make changes within the general scope of the AGREEMENT in the services to be performed. B. If any such change causes an increase or decrease in the estimated cost of, or the time required for, performance of any part of the work under this AGREEMENT, whether or not changed by the order, or otherwise affects any other terms and conditions of the AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall make an equitable adjustment in the (1) maximum amount payable; (2) delivery or completion schedule, or both; and (3) other affected terms and shall modify the AGREE- MENT accordingly. C. The CONSULTANT must submit its Irequest for equitable adjustment] (hereafter referred to as claim) under this clause within 30 days from the date of receipt of the written order. However, if the AGENCY decides that the facts justify it, the AGENCY may receive and act upon a claim submitted before final payment of the AGREEMENT. D. Failure to agree to any adjustment shall be a dispute under the Disputes clause. However nothing in this clause shall excuse the CON- SULTANT from proceeding with the AGREEMENT as changed. E. Notwithstanding the terms and condition of paragraphs (a) and (b) above, the maximum amount payable for this AGREEMENT, shall not be increased or considered to be increased except by specific written supplement to this AGREEMENT. XV ENDORSEMENT OF PLANS The CONSULTANT shall place his endorsement on all plans, estimates or any other engineering data furnished by him. Page 7 of 8 XVI FEDERAL AND STATE REVIEW The Federal Highway Administration and the Washington State Department of Transportation shall have the right to participate in the review or examination of the work in progress. XVI I CERTIFICATION OF THE CONSULTANT AND THE AGENCY Attached hereto as Exhibit !A-1 i, are the Certifications of the Consultant and the Agency, Exhibit iA-2i Certification regarding debarment, suspension and other responsibility matters - primary covered transactions, Exhibit iA-3i Certification regarding the restrictions of the use of Federal funds for lobbying, and Exhibit iA-41 Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data. Exhibits iA-31 and !A-4i are only required in Agreements over $100,000. XVIII COMPLETE AGREEMENT This document and referenced attachments contains all covenants, stipulations and provisions agreed upon by the parties. No agent, or representative of either party has authority to make, and the parties shall not be bound by or be liable for, any statement, represen- tation, promise or agreement not set forth herein. No changes, amendments, or modifications of the terms hereof shall be valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties as an amendment to this AGREEMENT. XIX EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE This AGREEMENT may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original having identical legal effect. The CONSULTANT does hereby ratify and adopt all statements, representations, warranties, covenants, and agreements contained in the proposal, and the supporting materials submitted by the CONSULT- ANT, and does hereby accept the AGREEMENT and agrees to all of the terms and conditions thereof. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the day and year first above written. By By Consultant Mark Van Wormer Agency Page 8 of 8 Exhibit A-1 Certification Of Consultant I hereby certify that I am Principal representative of the firm of W&H Pacific 3350 Monte Villa Parkway Bothell, WA 98021 firm I here represent has: Project No. Local Agency Renton and duly authorized whose address is and that neither I nor the above (a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) to solicit or secure this contract. (b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or to retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the contract. (c) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) any fee, contribution donation or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with procuring or carrying out the contract; except as here expressly stated (if any): I further certify that the firm I hereby represent is authorized to do business in the State of Washington and that the firm is in full compliance with the requirements of the board of Professional Registration. I acknowledge that this certificate is to be available to the State Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, in connection with this contract involving participation of Federal aid funds and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. 6/16/2004 Date Signature Certification of Agency Official I hereby certify that I am the AGENCY Official of the Local Agency of Renton Washington and that the above consulting firm or their representative has not been required, directly or indirectly as an express or implied condition in connection with obtaining or carrying out this contract to: (a) Employ or retain, or agree to employ or retain, any firm or person, or (b) Pay or agree to pay to any firm, person or organization, any fee, contribution, donation or consideration of any kind, except as here expressly stated (if any). I acknowledged that this certificate is to be available to the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, in connection with this contract involving participation of Federal aid highway funds and it subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. Date Signature Exhibit A-2 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters -Primary Covered Transactions 1. The prospective primary participant certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that it and its principals: (a) Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any federal department or agency; (b) Have not within a three-year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission or fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (federal, state, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of federal or state antitrust statues or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; (c) Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (federal, state, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph Lb. of this certification; and (d) Have not within a three-year period preceding this application/proposal had one or more public transactions (federal, state, or local) terminated for cause or default. 2. Where the prospective primary participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. Consultant (Firm): W&H Pacific (Date) (Signature) President or Authorized Official of Consultant Exhibit A-3 Certification Regarding The Restrictions of The use of Federal Funds for Lobbying The prospective participant certifies, by signing and submitting this bid or proposal, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. 2. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with this federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. The prospective participant also agrees by submitting his or her bid or proposal that he or she shall require that the language of this certification be included in all lower tier subcontracts which exceed $100,000 and that all such subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. Consultant (Firm): W&H Pacific (Date) (Signature) President or Authorized Official of Consultant Exhibit A-4 Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data This is to verify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the cost or pricing data (as defined in section 15.401 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and required under FAR subsection 15.4034) submitted, either actually or by specific identification in writing, to the contracting officer or to the contracting officer's representative in support of North Renton Infrastructure Improvements * are accurate, complete, and current as of June 15, 2004 **. This certification includes the cost or pricing data supporting any advance agreements and forward pricing rate agreements between the offeror and the Government that are part of the proposal. Firm W&H Pacific Name Mark Van Wormer Title Date of Execution*** * Identify the proposal, quotation, request for price adjustment, or other submission involved, giving the appropriate identifying number (e.g., RFP No.). ** Insert the day, month, and year when price negotiations were concluded and price agreement was reached. *** Insert the day, month, and year of signing, which should be as close as practicable to the date when the price negotiations were concluded and the contract price was agreed to. Exhibit B-1 Scope of Work City of Renton The work to be accomplished under this agreement will be to provide engineering design and survey services for Stage I of the 30% Design for the North Renton Infrastructure Improvements needed for the Boeing Redevelopment to have Markable Lots determined by the end of February 2004. Detail Scope follows: Task 001— Project Administration The CONSULTANT will provide project management and administration, liaison with the CITY, develop and maintain a detailed project task percent complete schedule, prepare monthly narrative progress reports, manage subconsultants, schedule and manage staff. All work submitted to the CITY will be reviewed for accuracy and completeness. The CONSULTANT will attend project related meetings, provide information for CITY staff coordination meetings, respond to public concerns through communication with CITY staff, and prepare exhibits for CITY use. The CONSULTANT will attend up to ten (10) project coordination meetings with the CITY staff to review schedule, budget, status of designs, and plan review comments. The CONSULTANT will prepare meeting notes and distribute to participants. The CONSULTANT will coordinate with subconsultants regarding contracting procedures, will prepare and execute contracts with individual subconsultants, and will address contract related issues with the subconsultants as they arise during the project. Task 100 — Stage I Markable Lots Task 101— Data Collection The CONSULTANT will collect existing data pertinent to the project that is available from Boeing and CITY, other agencies, franchise utilities, and appropriate sources. The data will include survey control data, right-of-way information, legal descriptions, topographic surveys, traffic volume data, existing utility locations, planned utility locations, proposed private development plans, environmental and planning documents, and previous reports and documents pertaining to the project. The Consultant's key project personnel will visit the project site and familiarize themselves with the site conditions and the data that is collected for the project. Ground - level photographs will be obtained during the site visits for design references. Boeing and CITY will be responsible for obtaining and maintaining right -of -entry permits for the CONSULTANT to enter properties adjacent to the project. W &H Pacific, Inc. City of Renton — North Renton Infrastructure Improvements C:Documents and SettingsklochmilleALocal SettingsZempWorth Renton Infrastructure Improvements Tasks Phase 1 .doe 1 Exhibit B-1 Scope of Work City of Renton Task 102 — Surveying The CONSULTANT will review and check records of surveys and mapping in the project vicinity, provided by Boeing and CITY, and collected from WSDOT. This information will be used to establish horizontal and vertical controls for the project site. The CONSULTANT will conduct a field survey to locate property corners, roadway monuments. The topographic survey will also locate critical elements in key areas needed for Phase 1 design. These areas include: • BNSF railroad spur • Power Substation near the Boeing store • Intersection of Garden Ave and N Park Drive • Intersection of 8'h Street and N Park Ave • Intersection of 6`h Street and N Park Ave • Intersection of 6a' Street and Logan Ave • Intersection of Garden Ave and 8th Street • Intersection of Logan Ave and e Street • Intersection of Logan Ave and 3rd Street A base map will be developed at a scale of one inch equals twenty feet (1"=20') from the field survey information. Base mapping will reference existing monumentation and be defined on the plans. A sales map will be developed for the Area A and B lots by incorporating the right-of- way information needed for the preliminary proposed road improvements. This map will show dimensions and locations of the parcel/right-of-way lines. Preliminary metes and bounds legal descriptions will be prepared for the four lots of Areas A and B. Task 103 — Design The CONSULTANT will review and summarize the specific design criteria that will be used to design the new roadway. The CONSULTANT will develop preliminary plan and profile alignments of the new roads that will service Area A and B lots. The CONSULTANT will evaluate roadway sections with the designed alignments to establish right-of-way requirements. The CONSULTANT will prepare a brief design memorandum that will define the locations of all Roadways to include intersection locations with design criteria used. The Preliminary Plan will consist of typical roadway sections and roadway plans/profiles. The scale of the plan sheets will be one inch equals twenty feet (1"=20'). The plan will W&A Pacific, Inc. City of Renton — North Renton Infrastructure Improvements C3Documents and Settingsklochmiller\Local Settings\Temp\North Renton Infrastructure Improvements Tasks Phase I .doc 4 Exhibit B-1 Scope of Work City of Renton be prepared using AutoCAD 2000 Software. The CONSULTANT will address review comments and resubmit sales map. Task 200 — Stage 2 Preliminary Design (30%) Scope and Budget to be determined. A supplemental agreement will be executed for this work W &H Pacific, Inc. City of Renton — North Renton Infrastructure Improvements C:Vocuments and Settings\rlochmiller\t ocal Settings\Temp\North Renton Infrastructure Improvements Tasks Phase I .doc 3 Consultant Agreement Labor Hours and Cost Estimate City of Renton and W&H Pacific North Renton Infrastructure Improvements Stage 1 Exhibit D-1 LABOR: Task/ Sheet # Task(Scope of Services Project Principal 46.50 Project Manager 44.00 Senior Eng/Sury 41.50 Engineer 35.50 Technician 27.00 Survey Crew 50.00 Clerical 20.00 Total Hours Labor Cost 001 Project Administration 001.1 Subcontracting 2 6 16 24 677.00 001.2 A/ C 32 16 24 72 3,188.00 001.3 Coordination Meetings 16 32 16 20 84 3,216.00 001A Correspondence, Monthly reports and Invoicing 6 8 14 424.00 100 Stage li Develop Markable Lots 101 Data Collection 16 16 24 12 68 2,460.00 102 Surveying 102.1 Establish Survey Control /Title Reports 1 1 6 6 1 24 2 39 1695.00 1022 Boundary and To o Survey /Features /Ri ht of Way 4 20 16 72 4 116 5,118.00 102.3 Base Mapping 2 4 32 2 40 1,158.00 102.4 Prepare Sales Map 2 4 24 2 32 942.00 102.5 Legal Descriions 2 16 1 18 752.00 103 Desi n 103.3 Establish design criteria 8 12 2 22 818.00 103.4 DevelopRoadwayPlan and Profile 8 32 96 16 152 4,880.00 103.5 Evaluate Sections and Determine Right -of -Way 6 24 60 16 106 3,536.00 103.6 Engineering Design Memo 2 8 2 12 412.00 104 Address review comments 2 8 32 16 58 2,036.00 200 Stage 2: Preliminary Design 309e 201 Geotechnical Investigation Report 0 0.00 202 Survey 0.00 202.1 Topographic Survey 0 0.00 202.2 Review Short Plat Certificates 0 0.00 202.3 Base Mapping 0 0.00 203 Short Plat &Right -of -Way Plan 0 0.00 204 Legal Description /Easements 0 0.00 204.1 Record LegalDocunents - by others 0 0.00 205 'Roadvmy Design 205.1 Roadway Plan & Profile 0 0.00 2052 'cal Sections 0 0.00 205.3 Roadwa Details 0 0.00 206 Channelization and Signing 0 0.00 207 Signals 3 new and 1 Modifide 0 0.00 208 Illumination 0 0.00 209 Demolition Plan 0 0.00 210 Temporary Sediment and Erosion Control plan and details 0 0.00 211 Construction Phasing Plan 0 0.00 212 Address Comments 0 0.00 213 Utilities Design 213.1 Storm 0 0.00 213.2 Water 0 0.00 213.3 Sewer 0 0.00 213.4 Private 01 0.00 214 Address Comments 0 0.00 Labor Subtotal 50 113 106 108 2661 1441 70 857 31,312.00 Overhead 159.36%��M Fixed Fee 15.00%TOTAL LABOR EXPENSES: Cost Expenses Item Quantity Unit per Unit Cost Mileage 500 Mile 0.375 187.50 Plotter 100 Plot 3 300.00 Technology Charge 857 Hour 5 4,285.00 Potholing 0 1 20,000 0.00 TOTAL EXPENSES q ,772,50 SUBCONSULTANTS: Subcontract Subcon. Amount Markup Cost Barryman & Henegar $0.00 0.00 Klinefelder $0.00 0.00 KDD $0.00 0.00 TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS 0.00 CONTINGENCY: Total - Labor 93,392.42 Total - Expenses 4,772.50 Total - Subconsultants 0.00 Total - Contingencies 0.00 TOTAL - 98 64.92 a...v.,..,.. ro:.:.azaa,...r.....� CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: January 26, 2004 TO: Don Persson, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler FROM: Gregg ZimmermaiVministrator STAFF CONTACT: Robert Lochmiller, x7303 SUBJECT: North Renton Infrastructure Improvements W&H Pacific Consultant Agreement ISSUE: Design and surveying work is needed to meet the first goal established by the Boeing/City Development Agreement to have marketable parcel descriptions of the Boeing property involved, by the end of February 2004. The design and survey work includes determining location of existing right-of-way, locating critical features, base mapping, preparing roadway alignments, determining new right-of-way, preparing sales map and preliminary legal descriptions of parcels. A consultant agreement with the City of Renton and W&H Pacific will commence the consultant to perform the required work needed. Supplements to this original agreement will be added to cover the next portions of work. Next will be to complete 30% design and have legally sellable lots by the September deadline, and then ultimately the final design of each project phase, of which there are expected to be several. The contract is for $98,164.92 to be completed by the end of February from the time of contract execution. The Transportation Systems Division has budgeted $1,500,000 in 2004, for the project. RECOMMENDATION: The Transportation staff recommends Council approve moving forward with the North Renton Infrastructure Improvements Project and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the consultant agreement with W&H Pacific in the amount of $98,164.92. January 26, 2004 Page 2 BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The North Renton Infrastructure Improvements is the key project for the redevelopment of Boeing property in the North Renton Site. The partnership between the City of Renton and The Boeing Company for the North Renton Site is one that aspires to draw private interest in an area to be redeveloped from the aerospace company's use to commercial/retail use. A tight deadline has been outlined in the Boeing/City Development Agreement that entails the needed roadway improvements and new stormwater, sewer, and water utilities required to accommodate the shift in land use. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI #: i Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works Dept/Div/Board.. Utility Systems/Wastewater Utility Staff Contact...... John Hobson (x7279) Subject: CAG-03-067 Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Improvement Contractor: Blackwater Marine, LLC Exhibits: Issue Paper Final Pay Estimate Notice of Completion of Public Works Contract Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required.. Amount Budgeted....... Total Project Budget $5,827.33 (final pay est.) $6,000.00 (Wastewater Utility) $500,000 (Wastewater) For Agenda of: January 26, 2004 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information......... Approvals: Legal Dept......... Finance Dept..... Other ............... Transfer/Amendment....... Revenue Generated......... City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The project was awarded on June 9, 2003. Construction was started on August 26, 2003 and was completed on November 15, 2003. The original contract amount was $326,160.64 and the final contract amount is $364,031.20. There are sufficient funds to cover the additional costs in the Wastewater Utility CIP account number 421.000400.018.5960.0035.65.045190. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Utility Systems Division of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends that the project be accepted, the final pay estimate be approved and the retainage bond in the amount of $16,729.37 be released after 60 days, subject to the receipt of all required authorizations. 91 /0 CADocuments and Settings�rnpetersenTocal SettingsUemp�Agnbil_Final.doc\JDHtp CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: January 7, 2004 TO: Don Persson, President Members of Renton City Council VIA: .%t'� Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler FROM: Gregg Zimmerman, fdministrator Planning/Building/Public Works Department STAFF CONTACT: John Hobson, x7279 SUBJECT: Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Improvements Project: Extra Costs ISSUE: The Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Improvement Project was awarded to Blackwater Marine, LLC at a bid price of $326,160.64. The engineer's estimate was $286,800.00. The final contract cost is $364,031.20, an increase of $37,870.56. This issue paper will provide an explanation for the additional expenditures and demonstrate that sufficient funds exist to cover the additional costs. RECOMMENDATION: • The Utility Systems Division of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends that the project be accepted, the final pay estimate be approved, and the retainage in the amount of $16,729.37 be released after 60 days, subject to the receipt of all required authorizations. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The City of Renton currently owns and operates an existing 8" diameter sanitary sewer main located in Lake Washington between Gene Coulon Park and the Barbee Mill property. The purpose of the Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Improvement Project was to install 3 manholes over the existing sewer line in the lake to increase the number of access points for the purpose of cleaning. The following factors contributed to the increased cost for this project: • While removing a portion of the existing sewer main for the installation of the second manhole, the main settled into the lake bottom and separated at a downstream joint. Although pipe restraints were installed upstream and downstream of this location, the lake's bottom wasn't as firm as originally anticipated. This resulted in additional installation time for this manhole. Additional cleaning equipment and vehicles, including a dedicated vacuum truck, were required to handle the cleaning process. January 8, 2004 Page 2 Additional cleaning hours were also required to clean portions of the sewer main that have not been cleaned since the installation of the original sewer main in 1971. The contract was purposely set up to pay for cleaning on an hourly basis due to the uncertainty of the time commitment required to clean the sewer main. The transfer of an additional $100,000 from other Wastewater Utility accounts to this project was approved by the City Council on August 4, 2003. Approximately $40,000 of this will be carried forward into 2004 to provide sufficient funding to close out the construction contract and consultant contract. The total project cost is estimated at $498,723, which includes construction, engineering, inspection and City staff time. Funding for the project comes from the following budget line items: Account Number Amount Wastewater Utility 421.000400.018.5960.0035.65.045190 $500,000 * Original 2003 budget of $400, 000 plus $100, 000 transfer on Aug. 4, 2003. CONCLUSION: The project installed 3 new manholes over the existing Lake Washington sewer main, which provide additional access points for cleaning this underwater sewer main. Also, portions of the line were cleaned that have not been cleaned since the sewer's original installation in 1971. Additionally, this project allowed the Wastewater Utility to inspect portions of the existing sewer main to determine its remaining life. HAFile Sys\WWP - WasteWater\WWP-27-3062 Kennydale Lake Line Rehab\lssue-final.do3JDHtp TO: FINANCE DIRECTOR FROM: PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATOR "ONTRACTOR: Blackwater Marine, LLC )NTRACT NO. CAG-03-067 ESTIMATE NO. 7 & FINAL PROJECT: Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Improvements 1. CONTRACTOR EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE $5,356.00 2. SALES TAX @ 8.80% $471.33 3. TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT THIS ESTIMATE $5,827.33 4. EARNINGS PREVIOUSLY PAID CONTRACTOR $312,769.93 5. ` EARNINGS DUE CONTRACTOR THIS ESTIMATE $5,088.20 6. SUBTOTAL - CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 7. RETAINAGE ON PREVIOUS EARNINGS $16,461.57 8. " RETAINAGE ON EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE $267.80 9. SUBTOTAL - RETAINAGE 10. SALES TAX PREVIOUSLY PAID $28,972.37 11. SALES TAX DUE THIS ESTIMATE $471.33 12. SUBTOTAL - SALES TAX " (95% x LINE 1) (RETAINAGE: 59/.) GRAND TOTAL: FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTION: PAYMENT TO CONTRACTOR (Lines 5 and 11): ACCOUNT # 421.000400.018.5960.0035.65.045190/45190/5460 RETAINED AMOUNT (Line 8): ACCOUNT # 421.000400.018.5960.0035.65.045190/45190/5460 CHARTER 116, LAWS OF 1965 CITY OF RENTON CERTIFICATION I, THE UNDERSIGNED DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY -OF / PERJURY, THAT THE MATERIALS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED, THE/ SERVICES RENDERED OR THE LABOR PERFORMED AS DE 16RIBED HEREIN, AND THAT THE CLAIM IS A JUST, DUE AND UNP ID OBLIGATION AGAINST THE CITY OF RENTON, AND T T AUTHORIZED TO AUTHENTICATE AND CERTIFY T CLAIM Signed: TO °" A It',A- $317,858.13 $16,729.37 $29,443.70 $364,031.20 $5,559.53 # 7 & $5,559.53 $267.80 # 7 & $267.80 TOTAL THIS ESTIMATE: $5,827.33 Printed On: 12/22/2003 City of Renton Public Works Department Page 1 Printed On: 12122/2003 City of Renton Public Works Department Page 1 Iroject: Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Improvements rector: Blackwater Marine, LLC Item Description No. 001. Mobilization, Demobilization and Cleanup 002. Site 1 Precast Concrete Manhole 003. Site 2 Precast Concrete Manhole 004. Site 3 Precast Concrete Manhole 005. Sewer Cleaning 006. Barge Access for Sewer Cleaning 007. CCTV Inspection 008. Barge Access for CCTV Inspection 009. Flush Main Repair 010. Spawning Gravel 011. As -Constructed 012. Disposal of Sed. 8 Debris 13. Repair Separated Sewer Line 014. Contaminated Dive 015. Vaccuum Truck 016. Multiple Vehicle Cleaning Supervisor Subtotal Schedule A 8.8% Sales Tax TT Total Pay Estimate 7 8 Final Unit Est. Unit Quantity Price Lump Sum 1 $76,980.00 Lump Sum 1 $50,000.00 Lump Sum 1 $50,000.00 Lump Sum 1 $50,000.00 Hour 40 $200.00 Day 5 $1,000.00 Hour 24 $200.00 Day 3 $1,000.00 Each 4 $3,000.00 Sq. Foot 900 $30.00 Lump Sum 1 $4,000.00 Ton 90 $100.00 Lump Sum 1 $10,751.50 Lump Sum 1 $5,700.00 Day 6 $1,000.00 Hour 94 $100.00 Contract Number: CAG-03-067 Closing Date: 12/16/2003 Previous Previous This This Total Total Quantity Amount Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 1.00 $76.980.00 $0.00 1.00 $76,980.00 1.00 $50,000.00 $0.00 1.00 $50,000.00 1.00 $50,000.00 $0.00 1.00 $50,000.00 1.00 $50,000,00 $0.00 1.00 $50,000.00 112.00 $22,400.00 $0.00 112.00 $22,400.00 5.00 $5,000.00 3.00 $3,000.00 8.00 $8,000.00 O.t70 $0.00 3.50 $700.00 3.50 $700.00 0.00 $0.00 0.50 $500.00 0.50 $500.00 4.00 $12,000.00 $0.00 4.00 $12,000.00 900.00 $27,000.00 $0.00 900.00 $27,000.00 1.00 $4,000.00 $0.00 1,00 $4.000.00 0.00 $0.00 11 56 $1.156.00 11.56 $1,156.00 1.00 $10,751.50 $0.00 1.00 $10,751.50 1.00 $5,700.00 $0.00 1.00 $5,700.00 6.00 $6,000.00 $0.00 6.00 $6,000.00 94.00 $9,400.00 $0.00 94.00 $9,400.00 $329,231.50 $5,356.00 $334,587.50 $28,972.37 $471.33 $29,443.70 $358,203.87 $5,827.33 $364,031.20 J� N`2 \/Pip 1, 'J� State of Washington Department of Revenue n Audit Procedures & Administration PO Box 47474 Olympia, Washington 98504-7474 Reg.No.:UBI 602 107 807 Date: NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT From: DEPARTMENT USE ONLY City of Renton Assigned To 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Date Assigned Notice is hereby given relative to the completion of contract or project described below. Description of Contract Kennydale Lakefront Sewer Improvement Contractor's Name Blackwater Marine, LLC Telephone No. (425) 828-6434 Contractor's Address 12019 76` Place NE, Kirkland, WA 98034 Date Work Commenced August 26, 2003 Date Work Completed November 15, 2003 Date Work Accepted January 19, 2004 Surety or Bonding Co. Bush, Cotton & Scott Agent's Address P.O. Box 3018, Bothell, WA 98041-3018 Contract Amount: Additions or Reductions: Sales Tax: Total $299,780.00 $34,807.50 $29,443.70 $364,031.20 Phone No: Amount Disbursed: $347,301.83 Amount Retained: $16,729.37 Total: $364,031.20 (Disbursing Officer) The Disbursing Officer must complete and mail THREE copies of this notice to the Department of Revenue, Olympia, Washington 98504- 7474, immediately after acceptance of the work done under this contract. NO PAYMENTS SHALL BE MADE FROM RETAINED FUND until receipt of Department's certificate, and then only in accordance with said certificate. FORM REV 31 0020 (12-92) H: Waste.wtr/W WP-27-3062/notcmplt.doc/JDH CdV'Yes rjohc�evtc� RENTON, WASHINGTON CITY EMPLOYEES AFSCME Local 2170, AFL-CIO 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 January 12, 2004 Toni Nelson, Chairperson Renton Community Services Committee 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Nelson, RECEIVED JAN 1 0 ZUU4 REWNCITMOUNCIL CITY OF RENTON JAN 1 6 2004 RECEIVED CITY CLEWS OFINCE Local 2170 would like to request to be placed on the Community Services Committee Agenda at your next meeting. We would like to discuss the contracting out of parks maintenance work that was previously conducted by F.M.C. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Patrick Miller, President Local 2170 cc: Rob Sprague, Council 2 01-16-2004 02:17AM FROM PETRIE TO 4254307300 P.01 CITY OF RENTON Correspondence To: Mayor and City Council City of Renton 1055 So. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 u e`i N 16 L 004 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 14 January, 2004 RE: Impact of Density Credit Transfers (DCT) on Intended Residential Density Zoning 1 am a land developer; currently working a 38-lot plat (Liberty Gardens) located immediately SW of Liberty High School. The development is in compliance with KC R-4 zoning, and your Planning Commissions intent for outlying residential areas of Renton and possible annexations. I have a Sewer Availability letter from Dave Christensen in Renton's Utility Systems Division. As you know, there are at least four developers a quarter -mile northwest of my plat that are using the DCT to densify beyond that specified by the R-4 zoning. They have urged me to do the same, hoping for a domino -effect with the Hearing Examiners. I have resisted, partly because the five -acre Dickenson Plat immediately to my'north contains five 28,000 sq. ft. lots; the homes immediately to my south are at 18,000 sq.ft. Lot sizes of 3500-5000 sq.ft. Under R-6 zoning would be incompatible with the KC Rule 120, dealing with adjacency commonality. From a purely aesthetic point -of -view, it seems to me that the DCT undermines the intent of planners who target a maximum density in order to achieve an ambience for home owners who desire larger homes with associated lawn and garden. The economic ease with whigh gevelopers can thus degrade the intent planners should be of concern: developers can buy unbuildaple 'junk' lots at less than $10K, and then convert to improved lots elsewhere for -� $100K. My view is that lot value is roughly proportional to size, because of the general rule that the finished lot is worth one-third the sale value of the completed home. But other developers aim toward the cheaper lots, simply because more buyers can meet the down -payment and mortgage requirements on family income. This is serious issue, having permanent long-term impact on quality -of -life. provision. The KC Council has the power to make such a change. Costs claimed by the developers who have proceeded down this path are a pittance compared to the long-term degradation in residential quality of the involved areas. Time is important, due to the imminence of the aforementioned plat approvals. Feel free to comment or advise, either by phone or e-mail. Dave Petrie 811 So. 273rd Ct. Des Moines, WA 98198 253-946-6619 davepetrie@comcast.net TOTAL P.01 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLEW COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT Date January 26, 2004 2004 Council Committee Meeting Dates and Times To better accommodate Councilmember schedules, the Committee of the Whole recommends that the Finance Committee meet on the 2nd and 41h Mondays at 5:30 pm, the Public Safety Committee meet on the lst and 3rd Mondays at 5:30 pm, and the Community Services Committee meet on the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 5:00 pm. All other 2004 Committee meeting dates and times will remain as previously set. FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT January 26, 2004 Qr7T1'OVlmD By Cabe COUNCIL Date 144 - -Do y ; APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS The Finance Committee approves for payment on January 26, 2004, claim vouchers 222902-223231 and 0 wire transfer, totaling $3,241,824.08 , and 554 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 330, and 11 wire transfers, totaling $2,099,052.93 . APPROVED BY � ( iTV COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE Date 00V COMMITTEE REPORT January 26, 2004 Renton Community Marketing Campaign Funding I (Referred January 12, 2004) The Finance Committee met e> is-dat&to,discuss the Renton Lodging Tax Advisory Committee recommendation to allocate funds for activities p4r{po ed by the Renton Community Marketing Campaign. The Finance Committee concurs with thegecommendations and asks the City Council to: • and &4y ClerK ,Hamilton/Saunderson, marketing consultants, for a Authorize the MayorAto sign contracts with sixth year of the Renton Community Marketing Campaign; Partner with other key community stakeholders for a: fourth year of the Renton Community Marketing Campaign by allocating. $50,600 of Hotel/Motel Tax: collections to its use. This allocation will be leveraged with additional financial contributions from the Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning's "business recruitment" budget and other community agencies, organizatioris "and businesses; atid- Denis Law, vice t;nair 00, Toni Nelson, Member cc: Alex Pietsch Victoria Runkle Derek Todd Julie Brewer UTILITIES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT January 26, 2004 East Valley Lift Station Replacement Request for Additional Budget Authority (Referred January 12, 2004) A7PRCs VED DY QTV COUNCIL Date l - The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence with the Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommendation that the CityCoancil increase the project budget authority for the East Valley Lift Station Replacement Project from $747 000 to $947,000. The increased budget authority is to cover construction, related issues that have caused the East Valley Lift Station Replacement project to go above budget. The additi6n4 budget authority would be created through a transfer from the. , Wastewater, Sewer Replacement Account (421.000400.018.5960.0035.045300) as part�ofthe 2004 Carryforward Ordinance. r )aOX6 LO- ?04 Marcie Palmer, Member CC.' Lys Hornsby PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT January 26, 2004 A77 PROVED BY CETY COUNCIL Date 0 The Public Safety Committee, in conjunction with the Police Department, reviewed the City of Renton's ordinances and procedures regarding street racing. The Committee concurs in staff s recommendation to make no changes in the ordinance and procedures at this time. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Date- COMMITTEE REPORT January 26, 2004 King County Comprehensive Plan 2004 Amendments (Referred 11/04/02 cc: Rebecca Lind Alex Pietsch PLANNING, AND DEVELOPMENT COMMTTTEM Rev 01/04 bh DRAFT January 22, 2004 The Honorable Ron Sims King County Executive King County Executive Office 516 P Avenue #400 Seattle, WA 98104-3272 SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON PROPOSED KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Dear Executive Sims: As Mayor of the City of Renton, I am writing to express our comments on both proposed amendments and existing policies in the King County Comprehensive Plan. Renton's overall concern is that while the amendments shift annexation policy to emphasize transferring service in unincorporated urban areas to cities, the Plan does not propose any substantive changes in the land use policies to recognize cities' comprehensive land use plans and implementing zoning. The relaxation of level of service standards proposed in the Transportation Element of the County plan will result in an easier development review process in many parts of the County currently "red lined" for transportation concurrency. The resulting impacts of these policies, to the extent they are implemented in the PAA, are in direct conflict with the expressed views of your office and the findings of your own Budget and Advisory Task Force. Not only will you be stimulating growth in the urban unincorporated areas — an area which the County admittedly cannot afford to serve — you will also be promoting development that, at least in Renton's case, is incompatible with the very cities that the County hopes will one day provide services through annexation. Clearly this situation will exacerbate an already difficult annexation equation. We recognize the commitment King County has made to implementing growth targets in the unincorporated urban area, and we acknowledge the role that the Rural Area policies play in channeling growth into the Urban Area. Renton, as you are aware, also takes the Growth Management challenge seriously and over the last few years we have been fortunate to have a strong and active housing market that supports our housing objectives. As a result, we have an excellent record in terms of meeting our growth target, attracting investment in our Urban Center, and exploring innovative housing types. The City Council has supported these objectives by zoning aggressively to allow growth, particularly in the Urban Center. We are confident that given maintained health in the housing market, we will easily exceed our future growth targets. Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 As Renton not only has the largest PAA of any city in the County and also has the largest housing target within its PAA, we are directly effected by King County policies. We feel that any discussion of future services to this area must also include a discussion of the land use pattern and form of development to be serviced. It is therefore critical that greater consideration of local comprehensive plans and a more collaborative planning process between King County and the cities be established in the King County Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendments to the Plan unfortunately de-emphasize collaboration and partnerships. This policy framework will make realization of King County's proposed annexation program more difficult. The attached technical recommendations include comments on proposed annexation, land use, parks, housing and transportation policies. We would be happy to meet with you or designated staff to discuss adjustments that we feel must be made in the proposed policies. We are confident that these requested changes will not alter the overall goal of achieving growth targets within the Renton portion of the PAA. Sincerely, Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Mayor, City of Renton cc: Renton City Council Jay Covington CAO, Renton Alex Pietsch EDNSP, Renton Dennis Culp, Community Services, Renton Gregg Zimmerman PBPW, Renton Stephanie Warden DDES. King County Karen Wolf DDES King County Mke Thomas DDES King County Alan Johnson HCD King County Michael Hubner SCA Paul Krauss Auburn (I:JT staff for GMPQ C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\2004Coml .doc\p Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments DRAFT January 22, 2004 City of Renton Technical Comments King County Comprehensive Plan January 22, 2004 The City of Renton requests consideration of the following comments. Chapter Two_- Section I, Urban Land Use Section A, Urban Communities The City requests that the text throughout this section be modified to clarify that the land use and development policies in the King County Comprehensive Plan apply to the unincorporated portion of the urban growth area. Policy U-101 This policy is more appropriate in the Countywide Planning Policies if it is intended to describe development within the entire Urban Area. If the policy is retained in the King County Plan, it is requested that the language be amended to add "unincorporated portion of the Urban Growth Area". The narrative occurring between policies U-104 and U-105 (p. 2-3) talks about growth in urban centers and the role of cities. The new proposed paragraph dealing with health issues seems misplaced and does not follow logically. Is this paragraph about the unincorporated area? Perhaps it should be re -phrased as a statement on County support for growth in Urban Centers. Policy U-112 It is requested that the reference to urban communities be limited to urban communities in the unincorporated area and that the second sentence be amended to delete the second phrase. Refining the targets is a function of the Growth Management Planning Council. Suggested amendment: "King County shall use population and employment targets to implement the Comprehensive Plan in unincorporated urban communities. The targets allocated to subareas of unincorporated King County will be monitored. Table "Household Growth Targets by Sub -region" Inclusion of this table is useful and is an improvement over the older version presented by Unincorporated Planning Area. The text beginning on page 2-5 however is confusing. It is not clear how the targets in the table reflect annexations and incorporation as all references to acres annexed are deleted. The addition of the line "The table further provides guidance for transfer of portions of growth targets into cities when annexation takes place in the future" is not implemented by any references on the table occurring on page 2-6. It is requested that the Table "Adopted 22 year Household Growth Targets King County and Its Cities, 2001-2022" be deleted. This table resulted from study documentation during the GMPC target update process. Targets for all jurisdictions belong in the Countywide Planning Policies. If the Table remains in the document, at a minimum, Columns A, B, and the untitled Annexation column should be deleted. C AW INDO WS\TEMP\2004Com 1.doc\p Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 Column A, 1990 household data, is now just historical. Column B, "Original 1992-2012 Growth Target" is confusing, as these targets are now superceded by the targets in Column D. During the target review, 1992-2012 targets were abandoned. Retention of this column for future use will be confusing to users who might try to reconcile the differences between the numbers without any of the background information. The unlabeled column, annexation history of cities from 1994 to 1998, is not useful information for understanding future growth targets in the unincorporated area. Column E, "PAA Household Target", presented by city, is useful. It is recommended that this data be incorporated into the preceding table with the cities listed under each sub -area of the county. Section B. Residential Land Use U-113 Insert the word "unincorporated" to clarify that this policy pertains to new residential development in the unincorporated portion of the Urban Growth Area (UGA). The policy stated in U-113 is very broad. If it were to apply to the entire UGA, it could potentially conflict with urban center policies. The facilities costs of residential development within redeveloping centers with inadequate infrastructure may be more costly than development in other portions of the UGA, but still provide benefits to the region. The last sentence in the policy is not relevant to cities as they have their own policies pertaining to housing type. Requested Language: U-113 New residential development in the unincorporated Urban Growth Area should occur where facilities and services can be provided at the lowest public cost and in a timely fashion. The unincorporated Urban Growth Area should have a variety of housing types and prices, including mobile home parks, multifamily development, townhouses and small -lot single family development_ U-114 This policy is subject to broad interpretation. What density does King County want in the unincorporated portion of the UGB, and how does that relate to targets and city Comprehensive Plans? Does this policy guide new development only, or does it call for an average of new and existing development? If this policy is calling for an average density of seven to eight dwelling units per acre in the entire Urban Growth Area, then the density in the unincorporated portion of the UGA would need to be much higher. New data is available through the Buildable Lands analysis that can be used to determine what density is needed to implement King County's targets. It should be possible to refine this policy into something more meaningful. This policy is particularly important for cities that have large PAAs with sizable targets. If King County is interested in future annexation of these areas then it would be very useful to have a clear and mutually agreed upon policy in place that will guide development of these areas prior to annexation. U-115 No Comment U-116 Request insertion of the phrase "unincorporated urban growth area" in the first line of the policy. U-118 No Comment C AW INDO WS\TEMP\2004Com 1.doc\p Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 U-119 No Comment U-120 This policy was drafted in 2002 as a compromise with cities seeking greater acknowledgement of local comprehensive plans in rezone processes. At that time, section "e" was created to provide a threshold density at which local plans could be considered. Renton requests that this policy be amended to delete the reference to eight dwelling units per acre. This threshold is unworkable in two respects. First, some jurisdictions use "gross" and some "net" density. This difference was not considered at the time the policy was developed. The threshold does not create a consistent standard for all jurisdictions. In addition, continuing to allow rezones that are up to 8-dwelling units per acre may exacerbate inconsistencies between King County and local land use plans at a time when King County is promoting widespread annexation within the PAAs. Annexation will be more difficult to achieve in areas where the land use patterns, zoning and comprehensive plans are inconsistent between jurisdictions. In addition, the 8-dwelling units per acre standard references Policy U-114, which is itself unclear. Requested Language: e. The proposal is consistent with the adopted city comprehensive plan for the Potential Annexation Area where the rezone is located_ per. If the city is not planning for urban densities and efficient land use patterns consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies, then this paragraph shall not apply. U-121 No Comment U-122 The density transfer programs and density incentive programs currently can be used to avoid re -zoning of property. These programs are another implementation technique that will widen the gap between city and County land use patterns and contribute to creation of a land use pattern that is difficult to annex. Renton requests that the text of Policy U-122 be amended to add the phrase "when the proposal is consistent with the adopted city comprehensive plan for the Potential Annexation Area where the density transfer or density incentive program is located." Renton requests deletion of the proposed language "or will help promote physical activity by providing trail linkages and connections to service" as a criterion to approve density increases. This language would allow bypassing the existing criteria requiring rezones to address traffic, sewer, water, parks or open space deficiencies. The existing criteria are intended to define fundamental levels of service. Provision of trail linkages and connections to services, while important, is an amenity that should be considered as part of project review. The additional criteria undermine the intent of the original language. Requested Language: U-122 King County supports increases in urban residential density through a re -zone or a proposal to increase density through the density transfer or density incentive programs when the proposal is consistent with the adopted city comprehensive plan for the Potential Annexation Area where the density transfer or density incentive prozram is located, and when the proposal will help resolve traffic, sewer, water, parks or open space deficiencies in the immediate neighborhood. U-123 No Comment CAW INDO WS\TEMP\2004Com1.doc\p Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 U-124 Renton does not agree with policies and implementing zoning that allows development exceeding maximum zoning density when those bonuses increase the density above levels allowed in the local comprehensive plan. Increasing density in the PAA above levels allowed in the local plan should not be authorized when local services are expected to be provided by the cities. This comment also applies to policies U-125 through U-128. U-129 Request addition of the phrase "unincorporated urban area" Requested language: U-129 King County encourages innovative, quality infill development and redevelopment in existing un�orated _urban areas. U-130 Renton opposes this policy and the implementing zoning that allows provision of duplexes, townhomes, and apartments in R-4, R-6 and R- 8 zones within Renton's Potential Annexation Areas. Renton's equivalent zones at these densities do not allow these unit types. Renton has strong multi -family policies that support Centers and protect existing single family areas. The allowance of attached units on portions of sites up to 18-dwelling units per net acre, results in de -facto multi -family zoning. This allowance undermines our efforts to achieve mixed use and multi -family housing in our Urban Center. While we do allow significant infill development on small lot single family, we do not support provision of attached units within the PAA outside of Centers. This particular policy and its implementing zoning creates a major inconsistency between Renton and King County land use policies that will be a significant stumbling block for future the pre -annexation agreement proposed in U-205 (Annexation Policies). Recommended Language: Single family detached homes, townhomes, duplexes and apartments shall be allowed in all urban residential zones provided that: a. The is consistent with the adopted city comprehensive plan for the Potential Annexation Area where attached units are -proposed. a.b_Apartments shall not be allowed in the R-I zone unless fifty percent or more of the site is in environmentally constrained; and 1}c^Apartments in R-I R-4, R-6 and R-8 shall not be developed at densities in excess of4-8 maximum density ut per acre in the net buildable area or each zone. U-131 through U-137 No Comment U-138 Request amendment of the policy to clarify that it pertains to development in the unincorporated Urban Growth Area. U-139 No Comment C AW IN DO W S\TEM P\2004 Com l . doc\p Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 U-140 Request that when development is located within a Potential Annexation Area, fee payment for local level park and outdoor recreation needs may be collected by King County and passed through to the local agency providing the service. Requested Language U-140: Recreation space based on the size of the developments shall be provided on site, except that in -a cities .Potential Annexation Area with an adopted Park and Recreation Plan. united eases, fee payments for local level park and outdoor recreation needs may be accepted by King County on behalf of the local aQenc - roviding local park and recreation service.. C. Commercial Land Use No Comments D. Urban Planned Development and Fully Contained Communities E. Urban Separators and the Four to One Program No Comments Chapter Two, Section II. Potential Annexation Areas U-201 Comment provided in Renton's preliminary comment letter of Jan 14, 2004 (attached). U-202 No Comment U-203 No Comment U-204 Comment provided in letter of Jan. 14, 2004. U-205 This policy revises language pertaining to joint service agreements and proposes a pre - annexation agreement. The City is requesting retention of language authorizing service agreements to provide consistent land use policies and public improvement standards. If the County hopes to realize a full transition of services from the County to the cities in PAAs, it is critical that any agreements include coordination of land use policies. Agreements will need to address land use, service standards, and financial partnerships. The city opposes inclusion of the statement that County Sheriff employees would be transferred concomitantly with annexation. The revisions to this policy present a significant change in policy wherein interlocal agreements addressing land use and public improvement standards become plans for transition to city services. This change is inconsistent with Countywide Planning Policy LU-33, which stipulates that "Subsequent to establishing a potential annexation area, infill lands within the potential annexation area which are not adjacent or which are not practical to annex shall be developed pursuant to interlocal agreements between the County and the affected city. The interlocal agreement shall establish the type of development allowed in the potential annexation area and standards for that development so that the area is developed in a manner consistent with its future annexation potential. The interlocal agreement shall specify at a minimum the applicable zoning, development standards, impact mitigation, and future annexation within the potential annexation area. C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\2004Com1.doc\p Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 U-206 The meaning of this policy is shifted. The original policy describes a collaboration between city and County to address level of service standards and cost. The new policy is a statement that the County and cities fundamentally provide different levels of services and afford different levels of capital investment. The proposed policy also states that King County may elect to contribute toward the cost of capital improvements and services. Renton opposes elimination of a collaborative approach to level of service and capital investment, and supports retention of the existing language. We also disagree with the elimination of the policy in paragraph "J": `Identifying the major service deficiencies within priority areas and establishing a schedule for resolving them, consistent with the Community Action Strategies. We note that the Community Action strategies are also deleted and that there is no policy direction proposed to phase or prioritize investment in infrastructure in the unincorporated Urban Growth Area except as provided in U-205 (a). U-205 (a) only provides that a pre -annexation agreement may address establishing a financing partnership between the County , city and other service providers to address needed infrastructure. If the proposed pre -annexation agreements become the mechanism for resolution of these complex issues, cities need more input into the scope and intent statements. The list proposed in Policy U-205 does little to address city interests in the PAAs. U-207 Renton opposed both the old and new versions of this policy. The old policy language provides that cities should pay all of the incremental cost of service above what the County would provide. We agree that this policy should be deleted as it is inconsistent with the Policy U-206. However, the new language is also inappropriate. The issues addressed in the policy are in the jurisdiction of the Boundary Review Board. Chapter Two Section IV. Housing It is requested that clarification be provided throughout this section so that it is clear that the King County policy pertains only to the unincorporated Urban Growth Area. It is requested that language "Within the unincorporated Urban Growth Area" be added to Policy U-401, U-402, U- 404, U404a, U-4O5, U-406, U4O7, U-4O8, U-409, U-41O, U-418, U419, and U42O. The Countywide Planning Polices assign the responsibility for implementation of policies in Section VI Affordable Housing to "each jurisdiction." For example AH-1 states in paragraph 2 as follows: " within the Urban Growth Area, each jurisdiction shall demonstrate its ability to accommodate sufficient, affordable housing for all economic segments of the population. Local actions may include zoning land for development of sufficient densities, revising development standards and permitting procedures as needed to encourage affordable housing, review codes for redundancies and inconsistencies, and providing opportunities for a range of housing types, such as accessory dwelling units, manufactured homes, group homes and foster care facilities, apartments, townhouses and attached single family housing. " Policy AH-1, AH-2, AH-3, AH-5 include similar language referencing "all jurisdictions. " CPP AH-4 assigns a technical assistance role to the GMPC or its successor, not to King County. AH -5 assigns a reporting role on housing development to King County, but no role in insuring capacity. CAW INDOWS\TEMP\2004Com] .doc\p Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 Policy U-402 It is inappropriate for King County to be planning for provision of affordable housing within the City of Renton. Renton has its own housing targets established through the Countywide Planning Policies. The percentage distribution of housing targets by income group are different for the City than for King County. The low-income target for Renton is 20% of new construction rather than 24%. It is requested that this policy be amended to clarify that King County is planning for housing for the unincorporated portion of the Urban Growth Area. Policy U-404 It is recommended that this policy be amended to delete reference to cities. King County is not responsible for ensuring that sufficient land capable of being developed for multifamily housing, small lot single —family homes and townhouses, manufactured housing, and accessory dwelling units exists within the City of Renton. This is a local responsibility. The Countywide Planning Policies do not grant King County an oversight role in the arena of insuring adequate land capacity. Policy U-405a This proposed new policy should be amended. Delete the phrase "and shall encourage all jurisdictions within King County to adopt provisions to allow accessory dwelling units in their communities. " Requested policy language Policy 405a, "King County shall provide opportunities for attached and detached accessory dwelling units in unincorporated urban residential areas." Chanter Five - Parks. Recreation and Open Suace The amended narrative to this portion of the plan states that the County will provide local rural services while the cities are the appropriate provider of local urban service. However, the reality is that as long as King County continues to process development permits in the unincorporated portion of the urban area, a growing population will need park services. Even if the pre - annexation agreement process is agreed to by cities, a significant phasing strategy will be needed and it may be some time before service level, funding, or reverse contracting is put in place. Deletion of existing Policy P-132 is not prudent The portions of Policy P-132 that address transfer of local parks, trails and other open spaces to cities are carried over into new Policy 128, but the language referencing providing for local service is deleted. Some recognition of a continuing role for King County is required as long as population growth continues in the unincorporated urban area and no service agreements are in place. The plan does not abandon the County's role in land use and transportation planning in a corresponding way. Policy P-132 In the unincorporated Urban Area, King County shall work in partnership with other jurisdictions and organizations to plan and provide local open spaces, trails, active parks, pools and facilities and recreation services. Upon the annexation or incorporation of an unincorporated urban area, King County shall work with that jurisdiction or other appropriate provider to assume responsibility of local parks, trails and open space to ensure continued services to the community. It is requested that the existing language of P-132 be retained and that proposed P-128 be eliminated. If King County is no longer going to provide for local park services in the urban area, then the County development code should be amended to eliminate the requirement for parks mitigation for local services. Alternately, provisions should be included that allow local parks mitigation fees to be transferred to the local agencies providing the service. C:\W1NDOWS\TEMP\2004Com1.doc\p Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 Renton opposes inclusion of Policy P- 129. This policy calls for cities to share in the operational and maintenance cost of parks in unincorporated areas in which a substantial portion of the users are from incorporated areas. Policy P-129 "King County should work with cities to share operational and maintenance costs of parks and other open spaces in unincorporated areas in which a substantial portion of the users are from incorporated areas ". The resolution of issues surrounding funding for park services is part of the larger issue of the urban subsidy and funding for regional services. The policy that cities will contribute to the operation of the County park system is premature in the absence of agreements on the larger issue. Chanter Six - Transportation On page 6-2 the narrative states that King County will complete the roadway network, add sidewalks, bike lanes and transit facilities as appropriate and maintain the transportation infrastructure to allow denser development to occur. Policy T-101 provides that King County will establish policy for the unincorporated area road system. This statement is inconsistent with the annexation policy changes proposed in the narrative to the annexation chapter (page 2-23 paragraph 2), and U-205 whereby transition of service provision to cities is anticipated. At a minimum, Policy T-101 should be amended to reference a collaborative policy planning process between cities and County for areas covered by pre -annexation agreements. Policy T-102 States that King County should identify improvements and strategies needed to carry out the land use vision and meet the level of service requirements for transportation. This policy is inconsistent with changes in the annexation chapter. Policy U-205 reduces County responsibility for identification of improvements. Policy T-204 If the service delivery proposal presented in the annexation policies is adopted, then Policy T-204 should be amended to reference a collaborative approach recognizing city plans and policies within Potential Annexation Areas. The policy states that the Transportation system improvement should implement the Urban Land Use Chapter. This statement should be amended to recognize the land use plans of jurisdictions that will ultimately provide service. Recommended Language: T-204 The transportation system in the unincorporated Urban Growth Area should be consistent with urban development policies, and growth targets. System improvements should implement the Urban Land Use Chapter or the Comprehensive Plan of a city upon execution of a pre - annexation agreement or interlocal agreement. ement. hnprovements should and -be prioritized according to the capital and services strategies in the Six -Year Transit Development Plan and the goals, strategies, and actions in the Roads Strategic Plan or the equivalent plan adopted by a municipality. T-208 Level of Service Standards, page 6-10 CAW INDOWS\TEMP\2004Coml .doc\p 10 Comment Letter on Proposed King County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments January 22, 2004 The proposed amendments reduce the level of service standards for the urban area to a blanket "E." This action will have the effect of facilitating more immediate implementation of policies in the Urban Land Use chapter because it will be easier for developments to meet transportation concurrency requirements. A number of areas within Renton Potential Annexation Areas are currently failing adopted concurrency standards. The City is concerned that upon reduction of the level of service standards, a significant amount of development will vest in King County prior to annexation. If the proposals in the Potential Annexation Areas chapter are implemented, then Renton will be expected to provide service to the vested land use whether or not it conforms to Renton's Comprehensive Plan. It is therefore particularly important that the County Urban Land Use policies be amended to allow meaningful coordination of city and County land use policies and implementation actions. It is requested that Policy T-208 be amended to clarify that the level of service standard proposed in for the unincorporated Urban Area only. Requested Language: T-208 The level of service (LOS) standard for the unincorporated Urban Area and designated Rural Towns shall be "E." The LOS standard for the Rural Area shall be `B." These standards shall be used in concurrency testing. CAW rNDO WS\TEMP\2004Com1.doc\p III CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. SIV Fa A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, APPROVING FINAL PLAT (LIBERTY RIDGE PHASE 6) (FILE NO. LUA-03-112FP). WHEREAS, a petition for the approval of a final plat for the subdivision of a certain tract of land as hereinafter more particularly described, located within the City of Renton, has been duly approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, after investigation, the Administrator of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department has considered and recommended the approval of the final plat, and the approval is proper and advisable and in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools, schoolgrounds, sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public use and interest will be served by the platting of the subdivision and dedication; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The final plat approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department pertaining to the following described real estate, to wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth 1 RESOLUTION NO. (The property, consisting of approximately 34 acres, is located on Index Avenue SE, on the east side of Edmonds Avenue NE and NE 3`a and 4`h Streets) is hereby approved as such plat, subject to the laws and ordinances of the City of Renton, and subject to the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department dated January 15, 2004. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2004. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES.1031:1/19/04:ma Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk day of Jesse Tanner, Mayor 2004. 0? LIBERTY RIDGE PHASE 6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1 (Owned by Liberty Ridge L.L.C. as of November 2003): Lot Y of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LUA-02-053-LLA, as per plat recorded under Recording No. 20020607900001; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. PARCEL 2 (Owned by Liberty Ridge L.L.C. as of November 2003): Lots 2 and 3 of Liberty Ridge Short Plat No. LUA-02-100-SHPL (LND-20- 0323) as recorded under Recording No. 20021119900004, records of King County Washington; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. PARCEL 3 (Owned by the Liberty Ridge Homeowners Association as of November 2003): Tract F of Liberty Ridge Phase 2, as per plat recorded in Volume 207 of Plats, Pages 24 through 30, records of King County, recorded under Recording No. 20020531003233; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. PARCEL 4 (Owned by the Liberty Ridge Homeowners Association as of November 2003): Tract AA of Liberty Ridge Phase 5, as per plat recorded in Volume 213 of Plats, Pages 5 through 14, records of King County, recorded under Recording No. 20030313002713, as corrected under Recording No. 20030320001516; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. •� N LAKE `p WASHINGTON :f JO _..:� NE p �v Z 0 Cl Z i•. o w !�� NE 4TH STREET ��'•,. NE 3R� GREENWOOD CEMETERY SITE VICINITY MAP LIBERTY RIDGE PHASE 6 3000 1500 0 3000 SCALE IN FEET PREPARED BY RINGEL AND ASSOCIATES sty 5`^' TPhOr e2 PREPARED BY RINGEL AND ASSOCIATES is reg dir) 12//s/;903 Rely - See paj?S 6,gOW11l® CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. so 6 a AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT; CHAPTER 4, CITY-WIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; AND CHAPTER 11, DEFINITIONS; OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" REGARDING REAL ESTATE SIGNS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. 4-1-140.M.3 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 amended to read as follows: 3. TEMPORARY AND Fee Amount PORTABLE SIGNS: Real Estate Directional Signs, $50.00 per sign, permit valid pursuant to RMC 4-4-100J2 for a twelve (12) month period Grand Opening Event Signs, $25.00 per site, per opening pursuant to RMC 44- 1 OOJ6d(l ) Event Signs, pursuant to $15.00 per type of sign RMC 4-4-100J6d(2) and (3) identified in RMC 4-4- IOOJ6b, perpromotion A -Frame Signs, pursuant to $100.00 for the first sign and RMC 4-4-100J5 $50.00 for each additional sign, for a 12-month period Commercial Property Real $50 per sign, permit valid for Estate Banner a 12-month period Decorative Flags $50 per entrance, permit valid until fla s removed 1 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION II. Section 4-4-100.B.6.o of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: o. Real Estate Signs: Open House signs as described in Subsection J.2.B.i and Free Standing real estate signs as described in Subjection J.2.0 SECTION III. A new Section 4-4-100.B.6.h, of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby added, to read as follows, with the remaining subsections re -lettered accordingly: h. Garage Sale Signs: See RMC 4-4-100.13 SECTION IV. Sections 4-4-100.C.9 and C.10, of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby amended to read as follows: 9. Signs on Public Right -of -Way: Signs on public right-of-way other than temporary and portable signs allowed by subsection J, of this Section; and subsections B.6.b, City Sponsored Signs; B.6.c, City Sponsored or Co -Sponsored Signs and Displays; B.6.n, Public Service Signs; B.6.p, Safety Information Signs; and I, Signs on Public Right -of -Way, of this Section. 10. Off -Premises Signs: Except temporary and portable signs allowed by subsection J of this Section; City sponsored signs and public service signs per subsections B.6.b, City 2 ORDINANCE NO. Sponsored Signs; B.6.c, City Sponsored or Co -Sponsored Signs and Displays; and B.6.n, Public Service Signs, of this Section. SECTION V. A new Section, 4-4-100.C.16, of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby added, to read as follows: 16. Real Estate Signs: a. Any off -premise real estate sign, except open house and real estate directional signs. b. In no case, shall any real estate sign be less than four (4) square feet, except for open house signs. C. Any off -premise real estate sign located at the same intersection corner, or location as an approved Public Service Sign or Public Art. roadway. d. Any real estate sign closer than four (4) feet to the edge of a public e. Any real estate sign placed in a manner as to constitute a public safety hazard as determined by the Development Services Division. SECTION VI. Section 4-4-100.E.4.a. of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: a. Churches, Apartments and Subdivisions: Churches, apartment buildings, subdivision developments and similar occupancies located in residential and mixed -use zones may have two 3 ORDINANCE NO. (2) on -premises identifying signs of not over thirty-two (32) square feet in area on one face. The signs may be illuminated but not animated, shall be for location identification only and shall display no copy, symbol or device other than that in keeping with the development. Freestanding signs shall be not higher than six feet (6') above any established grade and shall be no closer than ten feet (10') to any street right-of-way or five feet (5') to any side property line. i. Decorative Flags: Apartment buildings, residential subdivision developments and similar occupancies located in residential and mixed -use zones may also display decorative flags in accordance with the following requirements: (a) Permit Requirements: Permit Required. (b) Sign Type: A lightweight fabric or similar material, supported by a vertical or horizontal staff. (c) Allowed Uses: Multi -family residential complexes and subdivisions of 10 or more units or lots. (d) Maximum Size: Each flag shall not exceed twenty-five (25) square feet. (e) Maximum Height: Flags, including the supports, shall not exceed the height limitations for the zone in which it is located. (f) Sign/Pole Location: Only permissible when located within one hundred (100) feet of the entrance to a subdivision or a multi -family development. The sign/pole shall be located on the development premises and shall be setback a minimum of one -foot from the property line for each foot in height. SECTION VII. Sections 4-4-100.E.4.c and d of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled n ORDINANCE NO. "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby deleted and the remaining subsections re -lettered accordingly. SECTION VIII. Section 4-4-100.12 and 3 of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby amended to read as follows: 2. Real Estate Signs: a. Prohibited Real Estate Signs: i. See RMC 4-4-100.C.16 ii. No balloons or other attention -attracting devices may be attached to real estate signs. b. Off -Premise Real Estate Signs: i. Open House Signs (a) Permit Requirements: No permit required. (b) Maximum Display Period: In no case shall an open house sign be displayed prior to dawn or after dusk. A seller or their representative shall be present at the property for sale, rent or lease, while the open house sign is being displayed. (c) Allowed Use: For directing potential customers to the site of real estate that is for sale, rent, or lease. (d) Allowable Sign Type: A non -illuminated portable sign comprised of hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter "A." The sign text must include the words "open," "for sale," "for rent," or "for lease." 5 ORDINANCE NO. each face of the sign. (e) Maximum Size: 32 inches wide by 36 inches high per (f) Sign Location: Signs may be placed no closer than 4 feet to the edge of a public roadway, provided that they do not obstruct the vision or pathway of vehicular or pedestrian traffic and that they are not located on trees, foliage, utility poles, regulatory signs, directional signs, or informational signs. (g) Maximum Number: Four- Six (46) off -premises signs per property for sale, rent or lease. grade. (h) Maximum Height: Shall not exceed 10 feet from finished ii. Real Estate Directional Signs (Outside of the City Center Sign Regulation Boundary as depicted in RMC 44-100.H.3): months. (a) Permit Requirements: Permit required. (b) Maximum Display Period: Maximum of twelve (12) (c) Allowed Use: The freestanding real estate sign shall only be allowed during the original rental, lease up or sale of a development located within the corporate limits of the City of Renton containing 10 or more dwelling units, until 100% of the dwelling units have been rented, leased or sold once; and thereafter, only if 75% or less of the total number of dwelling units in the development are rented, leased or sold. The Development Services Division may also approve these signs for use by multi -family complexes that have completed major renovation in excess of 50% of appraised structure value of at least ten (10) rental units located within the corporate limits of Renton. G'i ORDINANCE NO. freestanding sign. (d) Allowable Sign Type: Any non -illuminated type of (e) Maximum Size: Twelve (12) square feet on one face. (f) Sign Location: Must be within two (2) miles (driving distance on a public roadway) of the premises it advertises. Signs may be placed no closer than four (4) feet to the edge of a public roadway, provided that they do not obstruct the vision or pathway of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. If the installation of the sign causes damages to utilities and/or landscaping, the permit holder shall be responsible for all repairs and/or restoration within 30 days of notification by the City. (g) Maximum Number Per Intersection: A maximum of two (2) real estate directional signs shall be allowed at any one intersection and only one sign per development shall be allowed at each intersection. (h) Minimum Spacing Between Intersections: Real estate directional signs shall be placed no closer than five hundred (500) feet to any other real estate directional sign and no closer than 100 feet to an intersection. finished grade. (i) Maximum Height: Shall not exceed ten (10) feet from iii. Real Estate Directional Signs (Within the City Center Sign Regulation Boundary as depicted in RMC 4-4-100H3): months. (a) Permit Requirements: Permit required. (b) Maximum Display Period: Maximum of twelve (12) 7 ORDINANCE NO. (c) Allowed Use: The freestanding real estate sign shall only be allowed during the original rental, lease up or sale of a development located within the corporate limits of the City of Renton containing 10 or more dwelling units until 100% of the dwelling units have been rented, leased or sold once; and thereafter, only if 75% or less of the total number of dwelling units in the development are rented, leased or sold. The Development Services Division may also approve these signs for use by multi -family developments that have completed major renovation in excess of 50% of appraised structure value of at least ten (10) rental units located within the corporate limits of Renton. sign and A -frame signs. (d) Allowable Sign Type: Any non -illuminated freestanding (e) Maximum Size: thirty-two inches wide by thirty-six inches tall (32 inches by 36 inches) per face. (f) Sign Location: Must be within two (2) miles (driving distance on a public roadway) of the premises it advertises. Signs may be placed no closer than four (4) feet to the edge of a public roadway, provided that they do not obstruct the vision or pathway of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. If the installation of the sign causes damages to utilities and/or landscaping, the permit holder shall be responsible for all repairs and/or restoration within 30 days of notification by the City. (g) Maximum Number Per Intersection: A maximum of two (2) real estate directional signs shall be allowed at any one intersection and only one sign per development shall be allowed at each intersection. ORDINANCE NO. (h) Minimum Spacing Between Intersections: Real estate directional signs shall be placed no closer than one -hundred (100) feet to any other real estate directional sign and fifty (50) feet from an intersection. finished grade. (i) Maximum Height: Shall not exceed ten (10) feet from C. On Premises Real Estate Signs i. Freestanding Real Estate Sign (a) Permit Requirements: No permit required. Maximum Display Period: For the period of time the property is for sale, rent or lease. For multi -family complexes of five (5) or more dwelling units and on a lot greater than 35,000 square feet, tea 32 square foot or six (6)square foot freestanding real estate sign shall e*ly-be allowed during the original rental, lease up or sale of the development until 100% of the dwelling units have been rented, leased or sold once; and thereafter, only if 75% or less of the total number of dwelling units in the development are rented, leased or sold. A six (6)square foot sign is permitted at all times regardless of vacancy status, number of units, or lot size, unless a 32 square foot sign is being utilized. (b)LcIAllowed Use: For real estate that is for sale, rent or lease. (e)LdIAllowable Sign Type: A non -illuminated freestanding sign indicating that the property, which the sign is located on is for sale, rent or lease. (d)LelMaximum Size: 1. For lots thirty-five thousand (35,000) square feet or less in area: Six (6) square feet in area per face; or X ORDINANCE NO. 2. For lots greater than thirty-five (35,000) square feet in area: Thirty-two (32) square feet in area per face. However, a six (6) square foot sign cannot be used concurrently with a 32 square foot sign. (eXASign Location: These signs must be located on the premise that is for sale, rent or lease. These signs may be placed no closer than four (4) feet to the edge of a public roadway, provided that they do not obstruct the vision or pathway of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. finished grade. months. (PAylMaximum Number: One (1) sign per street frontage. (g)LhIMaximum Height: Shall not exceed ten (10) feet from ii. Commercial Real Estate Banner Signs: (a) Permit Requirements: Permit required. (b) Maximum Display Period: Maximum of twelve (12) (c) Allowed Use: For sale rent, or lease of commercial property. Real Estate Banners shall not be utilized by residential development. (d) Allowable Sign Type: A sign of any shape made of lightweight fabric or similar material. The sign must indicate "For Sale, Rent, or Lease." (e) Maximum Size: Fifty (50) square feet. (f) Sign Location: Only permissible when mounted to a building that is for sale, rent, or lease. (g) Maximum Number: One (1) per street frontage. 3. Garage Sale Signs: 10 ORDINANCE NO. a. Permit Requirements: No permit required. b. Maximum Display Period: Maximum of twenty-four (24) hours prior to the start of the sale and a maximum of twenty-four (24) hours after the sale is completed. sign. 36" inches). C. Allowed Uses: For directing potential customers to the garage sale site. d. Allowable Sign Type: A non -illuminated freestanding sign or an A -frame e. Maximum Size: Thirty-two inches wide by thirty-six inches tall (32" x f. Sign Location: Signs may be placed no closer than four (4) feet to the edge of a public roadway, provided that they do not obstruct the vision or pathway of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. The signs shall not be attached to utility poles, traffic controlling devises or any other public structure. g. Maximum Height: Shall not exceed ten (10) feet from finished grade. SECTION IX. Section 4-4-100.16.a, of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: a. Applicability: Commercial, industrial, residential, public, and quasi -public uses and mixed -use developments (commercial combined with multi -family residential) may display event signage in compliance with the following regulations. These regulations apply to use of signs for grand opening events or for periodic special events. This subsection does not apply to those signs and displays exempt per RMC 4-4-100.B.6, Exemptions from Permit Requirements. 11 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION X. A new Section, 4-4-100.U, of Chapter 4, City -Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby added, to read as follows: U. Violations of this Chapter and Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be in accord with Chapter 1-3-2 RMC. SECTION XI. Section 4-11-190, Definitions S, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: SIGN, REAL ESTATE: A sign advertising and/or directing individuals to the sale, rent or lease of property. A. Commercial Real Estate Banner Sign: A sign of any shape made of lightweight fabric or similar material that is mounted to a building by any means, and indicating that the property is for sale, rent, or lease. National flags, state or municipal flags, holiday flags, or the official flag of any institution or business shall not be considered banners. B. Decorative Real Estate Flag: A portion of lightweight fabric or similar material, supported by a vertical or horizontal staff, intended to flutter in the wind, and is used to attract attention to any type of residential development for sale, rent, or lease. National flags, state or municipal flags, holiday flags, or the official flag of any institution or business shall not be considered banners. 12 ORDINANCE NO. C. Freestanding Real Estate Signs: Any type of non -illuminated freestanding sign, indicating that the property on which it is located, is for sale, rent, or lease. This sign type includes yardarm or ground signs. D. Open House Sign: A non -illuminated type of portable sign comprised of hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter "A," no larger than 32 inches wide by 36 inches high per each sign face. The sign text for an Open House Sign contains the phrase: "open" or "for sale" or "for rent" or "for lease." E. Real Estate Directional Sign: Any non -illuminated type of freestanding sign that provides direction to property(ies) for sale, rent, or lease. Within the City Center Sign Regulation Boundaries (as shown in RMC 4-4-100.H.3) real estate directional signs may also include portable signs comprised of hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter «A„ SECTION XII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and 30 days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk day of Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 2004. 2003. 13 ORDINANCE NO. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1086:12/2/03:ma 14