AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION 6:00 PM - Wednesday, July 18, 2018 Council Chambers, 7th Floor, City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED 4. AUDIENCE COMMENT Those wishing to address the Planning Commission must complete a "Request to Speak" form located next to the agendas at the back of the room and return it to the Recording Secretary. Speakers will be called upon by the Chair. Each speaker is allowed three (3) minutes. 5. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS 6. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 7. DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (TITLE IV) AMENDMENTS DOCKET #13, GROUP B DELIBERATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS a) #D-147: Variance Procedures b) #D-148: Short Plat/Formal Plat Streamline Process 8. DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (TITLE IV) AMENDMENTS DOCKET #13, GROUP C BRIEFING a) #D-149: Mobile Food Vendors b) #D-150: Townhouse Review 9. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS 10. ADJOURNMENT Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request. For more information please visit planningcommission.rentonwa.gov Page 1 of 14
Page 2 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. a) CITY OF RENTON Community and Economic Development Department #D-149 Mobile Food Vendors Staff: Angelea Weihs Date: July 16, 2018 Applicant or Requestor: Staff General Description: The proposed ordinance amends Title 4 regarding mobile food vehicles and mobile vending carts (collectively referred to as food trucks). Staff proposes the following amendments to: Allow mobile food vehicles and carts as outright permitted uses (with conditions as shown below) on private property within the IL, IM, IH, CA, CV, and CD Zones, without the requirement of a Tier 1 Temporary Use Permit. Permit mobile food vehicles and carts within the CN, CO, COR, and UC Zones with a Tier 1 Temporary Use Permit. Retain the requirement for mobile food vendors to obtain a Tier 2 Temporary Use Permit to operate in a residential zone. Allow mobile food vehicles and carts with the public right-of-way, in the Downtown Business District, with a ROW Use Permit. Revise the definition of mobile food vending to clarify that the definition does not include drive-thru components. The draft ordinance does not substantially change the intent of the current regulations, rather staff seeks to provide clarity and ease in the day-to-day administration of the food truck regulations. The operational requirements in the current code remain largely unchanged. The discussion below includes more detail regarding changes proposed. Current Code Requirements: Existing Regulations for Mobile Food Vendors are included in the following sections of the Renton Municipal Code: RMC 4-2-060R and RMC 4-2-080.10; Zoning Use Table and Conditions Associated with the Zoning Use Table (These sections regulate temporary uses overall) RMC 4-5-070; International Fire Code and Fire Prevention Regulations RMC 4-9-240; Temporary Use Permits RMC 4-11-130; Definitions M Currently, mobile food vendors require approval of either a Tier 1 or Tier 2 Temporary Use Permit prior to operation. The type of Temporary Use Permit is determined by the zoning of h:\ced\planning\title iv\docket\d-149 mobile food vendors\d-149 staff report.docx Page 1 of 5 Page 3 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. a) the proposed location for the mobile food vendor. Both Tier 1 and Tier 2 Temporary Use Permits are valid for up to one year from the effective date of the permit. An applicant can request (in writing) that a permit be valid beyond one year and for up to five (5) years at time of application or prior to permit expiration. A Tier 1 Temporary Use Permit (TUP) is required for mobile food vendors within the IL, IM, IH, CA, CV, and CD zones. The standard turnaround time for a Tier 1 TUP is two weeks from receipt of application to issuance of permit. The submittal requirements for a Tier 1 TUP include: Master Application Form (required to be signed by the property owner and notarized) Description of the proposed use Site Plan Seattle and King County Health Department approval Abatement Agreement Form. Tier 2 Temporary Use Permit is required for mobile food vendors outside of the IL, IM, IH, CA, CV, and CD zones. The typical turnaround time for a Tier 2 TUP is six weeks from receipt of application to issuance of permit. The Tier 2 TUP requires a notice of application and a two week public comment period. The submittal requirements for a Tier 2 TUP include: Pre-Application Meeting Summary Waiver Form Master Application Form Project Narrative Environmental Checklist Abatement Agreement Form Construction Mitigation Description Neighborhood Detail Map Site Plan Architectural Elevations Floor Plans Tree Retention/land Clearing Plan Tree Retention Worksheet Arborist Report Wetland Assessment Standard Stream/Lake Study Flood Hazard Data Habitat Data Report Geotechnical Report Utilities Plan Drainage Control Plan Drainage Report Assessment of Current Code: Customer Service and Staff Time Unlike other land use permit applications, such as subdivisions, modifications, and variances, Temporary Use Permit applications for mobile food vendors do not typically require development/construction. Applicants are typically small business owners, rather than the developers or consultants that typically apply for other land use permits. The lack of permit process familiarity typically results in city staff completing the application for the applicant, including creating site plans, drafting project descriptions/narratives, and completing master application forms. In addition, many TUP applicants for mobile food trucks use English as a second language. As a result, the TUP process and terminology can be overwhelming to non-native speaking customers, and it can add further complexity and time to the staff intake process. In addition to the staff time necessary to assist #D-149 Page 2 of 5 July 16, 2018 Page 4 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. a) the public, the processing of the Temporary Use Permit (Both Tier 1 and Tier 2) can take a considerable amount of staff time and cost to the City. Most of the staff time necessary for TUP processing is related to data entry, supervisory review, acquiring management signature, and mailing. Existing Safety Measures Currently, safety measures are already in place to ensure that all mobile food vendors operate in a manner that is not detrimental for the public health, safety, and welfare, outside of the Temporary Use Permit process. The Renton Regional Fire Authority requires an operational permit in order for vendors to operate a mobile food facility. The fire regulations for mobile food facilities, per RMC 4-5-070, include specific requirements for kitchen hoods, fire extinguishers, liquefied petroleum gas containment and storage, and location for the mobile food facility in relation to nearby structures. In addition to fire regulations, The Seattle & King County Health Department requires that mobile food vendors submit plans for review and approval prior to opening and operating the mobile food unit. A copy of the King County Health Certificate, or a copy of the King County Health Certificate Application with a copy of the receipt, is required with the City of Renton business license application. The mobile food vendor is required to obtain and maintain a business license while operating in Renton. In addition to Renton Fire Authority approval, King County Health Department approval, and City of Renton Business Licensing approval, a mobile food vendor would also need approval of a ROW Use permit to be located in the public right-of-way. With all the existing measures in place to ensure public health and safety, eliminating the requirement for a Temporary Use Permit for mobile food vendors in the IL, IM, IH, CA, CV, and CD zones will help simplify the process for the applicants, eliminate superfluous permitting, and save staff time and cost to the City. Conditions of Approval and Code Enforcement Typically the same conditions of approval are applied at each Tier 1 Temporary Use Permit issuance. The typical conditions of approval require that: the vendor obtain a City of Renton business license prior to operation; that all requirements of the Seattle King County Public Health Department be met prior to operation; that the site occupied by the mobile vendor be restored to the original condition upon removal of the vending unit; and that the mobile food vendor remove the unit from the permitted location between 12:00 a.m. (midnight) and 5:00 a.m. on a daily basis. The goal of the TUP process was designed to result in better compliance with the code. The Temporary Use Permit process does not automatically result in vendor compliance without the often necessary intervention from Code Enforcement. For example, several code case violations have been issued over the years for mobile food vendors that were not complying with the requirement to remove the unit from the site between the hours of midnight to 5:00 a.m. In these cases, this requirement was listed as a condition of approval for the Temporary Use Permit. The Code Enforcement process, in addition to Planner/applicant verbal communication, has been more effective at encouraging compliance with code regulations, rather than the TUP process itself. In fact, eliminating the requirement for a Temporary Use Permit within the IL, IM, IH, CA, CV, and CD zones will allow Code Enforcement to effectively review and process violations without the added step of verifying the status of a valid TUP. #D-149 Page 3 of 5 July 16, 2018 Page 5 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. a) Tier 2 TUP and Public Notice Requirements As stated above, unlike Tier 1 applications, Tier 2 Temporary Use Permits require a notice of application and a two week public comment period. The public notice provides neighbors within 300 feet of the property the opportunity to voice their concerns, which would be taken into consideration with the administrative decision. This can be especially important in the residential zones, where mobile food vendors may conflict more with the permitted uses of the zone and community character. However, unlike the residential zones, which benefit from public notice and the public comment period required by the Tier 2 TUP, the CN, CO, COR, and UC Zones do not specifically benefit from these public notice requirements. Currently, mobile food vendors require a Tier 2 TUP to operate in the CN, CO, COR, and UC Zones; however, these zones encourage small scale retail or mixed use development, therefore, the temporary and small scale nature of mobile food vendors would not be in conflict with the uses and character of these zones. A Tier 1 Temporary Use Permit, which requires no public notice and fewer submittal requirements, would be more appropriate for these zones. Proposed Amendments to Code Staff proposes the following amendments to RMC: Allow mobile food vehicles and carts as outright permitted uses, with conditions, on private property within the IL, IM, IH, CA, CV, and CD Zones, without the requirement of a Tier 1 Temporary Use Permit. The conditions of approval may include the following: o The mobile food vendors shall keep the Renton Fire Authority permit approval and King County Health Department approval on the mobile vending facility at all times, and copies of these approvals shall be made available to the City upon the City s request. o The site occupied by the mobile vendor shall be restored to the original condition upon removal of the vending unit o The mobile food vendor shall remove the unit from the permitted location between 12:00 a.m. (midnight) and 5:00 a.m. on a daily basis. o The mobile food vendor shall maintain a distance of 50 feet from any lot zoned residential. o The mobile food vendor shall not obstruct any drive aisles or ingress/egress within the site. Permit mobile food vehicles and carts within the CN, CO, COR, and UC zones with a Tier 1 Temporary Use Permit, rather than the current requirement of a Tier 2 Temporary User Permit. Mobile food vendors would still need a Tier 2 Temporary Use Permit to operate in a residential zone. Allow mobile food vehicles and carts within the public right-of-way in the Downtown Business District, without the requirement for a temporary use permit. A ROW Use Permit would still be required. Revise the definition of mobile food vending to clarify that the definition does not include drive-thru components. #D-149 Page 4 of 5 July 16, 2018 Page 6 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. a) Staff Recommendation Amend Renton Municipal Code as described to allow mobile food vendors in the proposed zones and subject to the standards proposed. Impact Analysis Effect on rate of growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the Plan It is anticipated that eliminating the requirement for a Temporary Use Permit in the IL, IM, IH, CA, CV, and CD will encourage mobile food vendor growth, particularly in the CA and CD Zones. Currently, most TUP vendor applications are in the CA zone. Allowing mobile food vendors within the public ROW in the Downtown Business District will likely encourage more mobile food vendor activity, which may result in more pedestrian activity. It is not anticipated that the proposed changes will have a negative impact on the rate of growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the Plan. Effect on the City s capacity to provide adequate public facilities There will likely be no effect on the City s capacity to provide adequate public facilities. Effect on the rate of population and employment growth There will likely be no effect on the rate of population and employment growth. Whether Plan objectives are being met as specified or remain valid and desirable Objectives of the Plan remain valid and desirable. Effect on general land values or housing costs There will likely be no effect on general land values or housing costs. Whether capital improvements or expenditures are being made or completed as expected N/A Consistency with GMA, the Plan, and Countywide Planning Policies The proposed revisions are consistent with the GMA, the Plan, and the Countywide Planning Policies. Effect on other considerations N/A #D-149 Page 5 of 5 July 16, 2018 Page 7 of 14
Page 8 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. b) CITY OF RENTON Community and Economic Development Department #D-150 Townhouse Review Staff: Paul Hintz Date: July 16, 2018 Applicant or Requestor: Staff General Description: This Docket Item reviews townhouse development with regard to where it is currently allowed, what standards should apply, and whether amendments to Title IV are recommended. Currently, townhouses are defined as being a form of multifamily housing and are allowed in the following zones: Residential-10 (R-10), Residential-14 (R-14), and Residential Multifamily (RMF); as well as the Commercial Neighborhood (CN), Center Village (CV), Commercial Arterial (CA), Center Downtown (CD), Commercial/Office/Residential (COR), and the Urban Center (UC) Zone where not located in the Benson, Cedar River, Talbot, or Valley Community Planning Areas. To better frame the question of where townhouses should be permitted, this staff report examines residential zones (R-1 through RMF) separately from commercial (CA, CD, CN) or commercially-oriented zones (CV, COR, and UC). Background: Residential Zones: To consider whether or not townhouses should be permitted in residential zones less dense than the R-10 zone (R-1 through R-8), staff looked specifically at the R-8 zone to inform a recommendation. Generally, only detached single-family houses (SFHs) are permitted in the R-8 zone. If anything other than a SFH (e.g., a duplex or attached townhouses) were to be allowed in the R-8 zone, not only would there be no justification to change the zone s bulk standards (e.g., setbacks, lot coverage, density, etc.), there would be good reason to not change bulk standards in order to ensure compatibility with the built environment of the R-8 zone (i.e., detached single family houses). Staff applied the R-8 standards to a lot that could either be subdivided into two lots and developed as SFHs or potentially developed as a duplex (i.e., two attached townhouse units). Because the R-8 bulk standards were intended to only apply to SFHs, when two dwellings share a common wall instead of being located on separate lots with two side yard setbacks (each 5 ) separating the units, the maximum allowed lot coverage is quickly exceeded; in order to not exceed lot coverage, greater setbacks would be needed and even then there would be little to no allowance left for driveways or detached structures (e.g., sheds). Staff then considered why a developer or property owner, given the apparent disadvantage explained above, might want to propose a duplex rather than two SFHs, which would likely sell for a higher price than two units with a common wall. One purpose might be for living arrangements where the residents are unrelated by blood or marriage and operate as a household under management from a provider (e.g., adult family homes or group homes), in which case management might prefer a duplex. h:\ced\planning\title iv\docket\docket group 13\d-150 townhouse review\d-150 townhouse review staff rpt..docx Page 9 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. b) Another reason for building a duplex (if they were allowed in the R-8) would be for the creation of rental housing due to the construction cost savings realized by having a common wall. Because allowing duplexes in the R-8 would likely create compatibility issues with respect to existing single-family housing, there would be difficulty applying the R-8 bulk standards without facing clear disadvantages, and duplexes would likely be desired by a small segment of property owners, staff does not recommend allowing duplexes or townhouses in the R-8 or other less dense residential zones. However, staff does recommend changes to the RMF zone to better facilitate townhouse development. Staff recommends requiring townhouse development in the RMF zone to be subdivided in order to provide more home-ownership opportunities as opposed to the creation of condos, and to ensure the creation of vehicular and pedestrian access to greater and more appropriate standards than general parking lot standards. Staff also recommends a density increase from 20 dwelling units per acre to 30 based on the reasoning that townhouses provide entry-level home ownership opportunities that are needed in the both the City and region, and requiring townhouse development to be designed to the R-14 design standards, which are more appropriate than the apartment-oriented design standards of the RMF zone. Commercial & Commercially-Oriented Zones: The question of whether or not townhouses should continue to be allowed in the City s commercial zones (with the exception of the CO zone that has standards precluding townhouse development) was addressed by considering two questions: (1) are townhouses compatible with the intended uses, building forms, and the purpose of each commercial zone?; and (2) considering the purpose of most commercial zones is to primarily provide opportunities for new, relocating, or expanding businesses, as well as retail, services, entertainment, etc. for the community, do existing standards result in meaningful commercial space or is too much commercial land being developed with a significantly high ratio of residential to commercial square footage? (1) Are townhouses compatible with the intended uses, building forms, and the purpose of each commercial zone? Commercial Neighborhood Zone: The CN zone is the smallest and least intensive of the City s commercial zones, providing small-scale convenience retail/commercial areas offering incidental retail and service needs for the surrounding area. Because these zones are usually nodes within single-family neighborhoods, staff believes townhouses with ground floor commercial are appropriate for the zone. Center Village Zone: The CV zone is exclusive to a small area generally located along NE Sunset Boulevard and intended to provide suitable environments for district-scaled retail and commercial development serving more than one neighborhood, but not providing City-wide services. Historically, commercial development has only been required along NE Sunset Blvd east of Harrington Ave. NE., thereby allowing standalone residential elsewhere. Given the area surrounding the CV zone is mostly comprised of single-family neighborhoods, townhouses seem appropriate when not abutting Sunset Blvd. in order to provide density to support local businesses and create a transition from residential mixed use development to single-family neighborhoods. #D-150 Page 2 of 6 July 16, 2018 Page 10 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. b) Center Downtown Zone: The purpose of the CD zone is to provide a mixed-use urban commercial center serving a regional market as well as high-density residential development, and because of this staff believes townhouse development, even with ground floor commercial, will result in underutilization of CD zoned land. However, staff proposes an exception for affordable housing projects wherein 100% of the units will be affordable to households earning <60% of the Area Median Income. The Commercial-Office-Residential Zone: The COR zone is intended to provide for a mix of intensive office, hotel, convention center, and residential activity in a high-quality, master-planned development that is integrated with the natural environment. There are only two areas of COR zoned land in the City and both are within the Shoreline Master Program jurisdiction, which greatly reduces allowed height (35 within 200 of water). Townhouses in the COR zone are a practical way to meet the density envisioned and an appropriate building form given the shoreline height restriction. Commercial Arterial Zone: The CA zone provides for a wide variety of retail sales, services, and other commercial activities along high-volume traffic corridors where residential uses may be integrated into the zone through mixed-use buildings. The CA zone is the most common and widely applied commercial zone. Where CA zoned property abuts major roadways the vision of mixed use buildings with ground floor commercial and pedestrian amenities remains desirable, however, many CA zoned properties are large, which makes it difficult to have viable commercial space where it s not visible from the public realm; additionally, some of the large CA zoned lots abut single family residential zones. Staff believes that if residential mixed use developments provide a mixed use building with a minimum density along the public right-of-way, developed pursuant to proposed new mixed-use standards discussed later in this report, then townhouses would be appropriate in the rear if the land buts a single family residential zone. Urban Center Zone: Considering that the UC zone was established to provide an area for pedestrian-oriented urban mixed-use development, and the overall mix and intensity of uses is intended to create an urban rather than suburban character, staff concluded that townhouses are not an appropriate form of residential development for the zone. (2) Considering the purpose of most commercial zones is to primarily provide opportunities for new, relocating, or expanding businesses, as well as retail, services, entertainment, etc. for the community, do existing standards result in meaningful commercial space or is too much commercial land being developed with a significantly high ratio of residential to commercial square footage? Mixed use development standards vary among zones, but for the CA, UC and CN zone, ground floor commercial space is required along any street frontage at a depth of 30 and a minimum floor-toceiling height of 15. In the CV zone, ground floor commercial at a minimum of 75% of the frontage of the building is required along NE Sunset Boulevard east of Harrington Avenue NE. None of these standards result in meaningful, useful or viable commercial space, especially for lots with significant depth because the standards aren t relative to lot size or building square footage. In order to realize the type of mixed use development envisioned, staff proposes the changes and standards shown on the following pages: #D-150 Page 3 of 6 July 16, 2018 Page 11 of 14
AGENDA ITEM #8. b) SUBJECT EXISTING STANDARD PROPOSED STANDARD Garden style apartments Prohibited in CV Prohibited in all commercial zones, except CN Townhouses Permitted in any zone where attached dwellings are permitted (except the CO) Prohibited in the UC, CO, & CA except where CA zoned property abuts a residential zone in the Highlands, Kennydale, or East Plateau Community Planning Areas and at least one mixed building is constructed along the street frontage with a minimum of two residential stories above commercial. Where allowed, townhouse development in any commercial zone shall adhere to R- 14 design standards. CA Min. Density Currently 10 du/ac 20 du/ac Master Site Plan When Required Ground floor commercial in CD Mixed Use Standard for CV zoned parcels abutting NE Sunset Boulevard east of Harrington Avenue NE Mixed Use Standard: CA, UC & CN Where ground floor commercial is required for CA, UC & CN Mixed Use Standards: CO Height increases based on new ground floor ceiling height (refer to next page) UC and COR zoned parcels Required within the Downtown Business District Ground floor commercial development at a minimum of 75% of the frontage of the building Commercial space shall be provided on the ground floor at 30' in depth along any street frontage. Minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 15' Where within ¼ mile of mass transit: 1. 8 stories min. 2. Structured parking required. 3. Commercial space at 30' in depth along any street frontage. 4. Min. 15 floor-to-ceiling height. 5. Min. two commercial uses: retail sales, on-site services, eating and drinking establishments, and similar uses. CN: 35 CA: 60 CV: 60 UC: 6 or 10 stories CD: 95 CO: 250 COR: 10 stories or 125 UC and COR zoned parcels, and CA zoned parcels >2.5 acres or greater where residential mixed use development is proposed Required everywhere in the CD unless the project is for affordable housing (100% units affordable for rent/purchase for households earning <60% AMI) Next page Next page Where within ¼ mile of mass transit: 1. 8 stories min. 2. Structured parking required. 3. Next page CN: 40 CA: 70 CV: 70 UC: no change CD: 100 CO: 255 COR: 10 stories or 130 #D-150 Page 4 of 6 July 16, 2018 Page 12 of 14
Restriction (EXISTING) Restriction (EXISTING) Restriction (NEW) Timing of Development (NEW) Ground Floor Residential Where Allowed (NEW) Commercial Area Calculation (NEW) CD CA CV CN COR CO UC Residential use(s) are not allowed within one thousand feet (1,000') of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. Mixed-use residential development is not permitted in the Benson, Cedar River, Talbot, or Valley Community Planning Areas. Garden style apartments are prohibited, except the CN zone. Dwelling units shall only be developed concurrent with or subsequent to the development and construction of the nonresidential components of the building. Where dwelling units are not required to be within a mixed use building, any standalone residential buildings cannot be permitted or occupied prior to the (permitting and/or occupancy of) the commercial component. Dwelling units shall not be located on the ground floor along any street frontage, except: (1) in the CD zone for projects that provide 100% of the units to households earning <60% AMI; (2) in the CV zone along any street other than NE Sunset Blvd. east of Harrington Avenue NE; (3) in the UC zone along non-pedestrian-oriented streets; and (4) in the CA zone where CA zoned property abuts a residential zone in the Highlands, Kennydale, or East Plateau Community Planning Areas and at least one mixed building is constructed along the street frontage(s) with a minimum of two residential stories above commercial. Except for the CN zone, commercial square footage equivalent to at least 50% of the parcel s land area shall be designed and constructed pursuant to the standards of this table; in the CN zone the ground floor shall be commercial. Page 13 of 14 Commercial Uses - Allowed (NEW) Commercial Space Standards Commercial uses in residential mixed-use developments are limited to retail sales, on-site services, eating and drinking establishments, taverns, daycares, preschools, indoor recreational facilities, pet daycares, craft distilleries / small wineries / micro-breweries with tasting rooms and similar uses as determined by the Administrator. Uses normal and incidental to the building including, but not limited to, interior entrance areas, elevators, waiting/lobby areas, mechanical rooms, mail areas, garbage/recycling/compost storage areas, vehicle parking areas, and areas/facilities developed for the exclusive use of the building s residents are not considered commercial uses; the façade necessary for interior entrances, lobbies, and areas/facilities developed for the exclusive use of the building s residents is limited to 25% of the overall façade along any street frontage where ground floor commercial is required. Commercial space is required along any street frontage and shall have: 1. A minimum average depth of 30, no less than 20 at any given point; 2. On the ground floor, a minimum floor-to-finished-ceiling height of 20 ft.; 3. ADA compliant bathrooms (common facilities are acceptable); 4. A central plumbing drain line; and 5. A restaurant-ready space one unit required to have a grease trap and a ventilation shaft for a commercial kitchen hood/exhaust. #D-150 Page 5 of 6 July 16, 2018 AGENDA ITEM #8. b)
AGENDA ITEM #8. b) Staff Recommendation: Amend Renton Municipal Code as described. Impact Analysis Effect on rate of growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the Plan Proposed changes will likely better align development code with the Comp. Plan s vision. Effect on the City s capacity to provide adequate public facilities There will likely be little to no effect. Effect on the rate of population and employment growth There will likely be little to no effect. Whether Plan objectives are being met as specified or remain valid and desirable No change Effect on general land values or housing costs These changes might have an effect on commercial land values due to the increased commercial square footage required. Whether capital improvements or expenditures are being made or completed as expected No change Consistency with GMA and Countywide Planning Policies The proposed changes are consistent with the GMA and Countywide Planning Policies. Effect on critical areas and natural resource lands No effect #D-150 Page 6 of 6 July 16, 2018 Page 14 of 14