4-6-070 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENTS:

A. AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE:

This Chapter is enacted pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act, chapter 36.70A, at RCW 36.70A.070. It is the purpose of this Chapter to ensure Renton transportation level of service standards are achieved concurrently with development, or within a reasonable time after development occupancy and use. (Ord. 4708, 3-2-1998)

B. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN THIS SECTION:

1. Concurrency or Concurrent with Development: Transportation improvements or strategies are in place at the time of building permit issuance, or a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six (6) years of building permit issuance.

2. Department: The Public Works Department. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009)

3. Development Activity Permit Application: For the purposes of transportation concurrency regulations, any construction, building expansion, or change in use which creates additional demand upon or need for transportation facilities and which requires a development permit from the City of Renton.

4. Development Permit: Written permission from the appropriate City decision maker authorizing the division of a parcel of land, the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation or enlargement of any structure, or any use or extension of the use of the land.

5. Financial Commitment: Includes revenue designated in the most currently adopted Transportation Improvement Program for transportation facilities or strategies through the six (6) year period with reasonable assurance that such funds will be timely put to such ends, unanticipated revenue from Federal or State grants for which the City has received notice of approval, and/or revenue that is assured by an applicant in a form approved by the City in a voluntary agreement.

6. Finding of Concurrency: A written finding that is part of the applicable development permit issued by the City indicating that a development activity permit application has successfully passed the Renton transportation concurrency test. The finding of concurrency is made by the decision maker with the authority to approve the development permit.

7. Level of Service (LOS): A measure of the quality and efficiency of facilities and systems. The Renton transportation LOS is adopted in the Renton Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element. The transportation LOS standard establishes an index value which must be met or exceeded in future years. The LOS index value is determined by the weighted sum of the p.m. peak travel distances from the City, averaged in all directions, in thirty (30) minutes for SOV, HOV, and transit modes. The current index value is forty nine (49). More in depth discussion of the Citywide LOS policy may be found in the Transportation Element.

8. Transportation Concurrency Test: Technical review of a development activity permit application by the Department to determine if the transportation system has adequate or unused or uncommitted capacity, or will have adequate capacity, to accommodate trips generated by the proposed development, without causing the level of service standards to decline below the adopted standards, at the time of development or within six (6) years. (Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012)

C. APPLICABILITY AND EXEMPTIONS:

1. Applicability: A concurrency test shall be conducted for all development activity applications, as defined in subsection B3 of this Section, excluding exemptions.

2. Exemptions: The following applications are exempt from the concurrency test:

a. Applications categorically exempt from SEPA review under RMC 4-9-070, Environmental Review Procedures.

i. The concurrency test shall not be conducted for projects that are subject to SEPA review due to their location within an environmentally sensitive area, but which would otherwise be exempt from SEPA review.

ii. The concurrency test exemption shall not apply to short plats.

b. Any project that is a component of a development which was granted a finding of concurrency that has not expired.

c. Development vested prior to April 6, 1998.

d. Projects granted a finding of concurrency where the development activity is conducted by a person or entity other than the original applicant, if the project is limited to the uses, intensities, and vehicle trip generation rates for which the finding of concurrency was originally made.

D. CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS:

1. Test Required: A concurrency test shall be conducted by the Department for each nonexempt development activity. The concurrency test shall determine consistency with the adopted Citywide Level of Service Index and Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, according to rules and procedures established by the Department. The Department shall issue an initial concurrency test result describing the outcome of the concurrency test.

2. Written Finding Required: Prior to approval of any nonexempt development activity permit application, a written finding of concurrency shall be made by the City as part of the development permit approval. The finding of concurrency shall be made by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development permits required for a development activity. A written finding of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land uses, densities, intensities, and development project described in the application and development permit.

3. Failure of Test: If no reconsideration is requested, or if upon reconsideration a project fails the concurrency test, the project application shall be denied by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development activity permit application.

E. TRANSFERABILITY OF WRITTEN FINDING OF CONCURRENCY:

1. A written finding of concurrency is not transferable to other land, but may be transferred to new owners or lessees of the original land.

2. Revisions to an approved development that may create additional impacts on transportation facilities will be required to undergo an additional concurrency test. A new finding of concurrency is required from the decision maker with the authority to approve the revised project in order to permit the revised development activity.

3. Revisions to an approved development that reduce the intensity or density or vehicle trip generation rates of the project, resulting in less impacts to transportation facilities than originally approved, will be required to undergo an additional concurrency test in order to properly account for unused capacity. Unless the revised development requires newly issued development permit approvals, the previous finding of concurrency remains in effect, and a new finding of concurrency is not required for the less intense or dense proposal.

F. EXPIRATION OF WRITTEN FINDING OF CONCURRENCY:

A finding of concurrency shall expire if the accompanying development permit expires or is revoked. A finding of concurrency may be extended according to the same terms and conditions as the accompanying development permit. If the development permit is granted an extension, the finding of concurrency shall be extended simultaneously for the same period. If the accompanying development permit does not expire, the finding of concurrency shall be valid for a period of three (3) years from the date the written finding was made.

G. RECONSIDERATION OF CONCURRENCY TEST:

1. Notification Required: Prior to a final recommendation or decision to deny a development activity permit application due to failure of the concurrency test, the Department shall notify the project applicant in writing of the initial concurrency test results.

2. Reconsideration Authorized: The Department shall allow an applicant of a development activity that has failed an initial concurrency test to request an administrative reconsideration of the concurrency test results or prepare a modified project submission.

3. Timing: Requests for reconsideration shall be made in writing within ten (10) calendar days of the Department’s written notification. Requests for reconsideration shall be directed to the Department Administrator, and be filed with the Development Services Division counter no later than 5:00 p.m. of the tenth day.

4. Options to Achieve Concurrency: The Department shall allow an applicant to submit alternative data, provide a traffic mitigation plan, or reduce the size of the project in order to achieve concurrency.

5. One Hundred Twenty (120) Day Time Limit Suspended: Upon receipt of a request for reconsideration, the one hundred twenty (120) day permit review time limit established in RMC 4-8-080E, Permit Classification Time Frames, shall be suspended temporarily until the decision date to allow an applicant to prepare any supplemental information, and to allow Department review of the request for reconsideration and data submitted.

H. APPEAL OF PROJECT APPLICATION DENIAL:

1. A project applicant may appeal the denial of a development activity based upon failure of a concurrency test. The appeal shall be based upon one or both of the following grounds:

a. Technical error; or

b. The applicant submitted alternative data or a traffic mitigation plan that was rejected by the City.

2. If the development activity requires a Type I, II, or III permit as defined in chapter 4-8 RMC, the decision to deny a finding of concurrency may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner for an open record appeal. The decision of the Hearing Examiner may be appealed to the City Council for a closed record appeal.

3. If the development activity requires a Type V or VI permit as defined in chapter 4-8 RMC, the decision to deny a finding of concurrency may be appealed to the City Council for a closed record appeal, or the Shoreline Hearings Board, as appropriate.

4. If the development activity requires a Type IV, VII, VIII, IX or X permit as defined in chapter 4-8 RMC, the decision to deny a finding of concurrency may be appealed to Superior Court.

I. CONCURRENCY INQUIRY:

1. An applicant may inquire whether or not there is sufficient capacity available to accommodate a development without submitting a development application.

2. Available capacity cannot be reserved based on a preliminary inquiry.

3. A written finding of concurrency will only be issued in conjunction with a development activity permit application. (Ord. 4708, 3-2-1998)