Dear Council Majority and Task Force members:
"No bulldoze" clause - a big "win" for the Highlands
Before I show you the Zoning comparison, I must stress that
the apparent "herding" of the Task Force regarding Land Use and Zoning
pales in comparison to the BIG win which the Task Force secured
for the citizens of the Highlands SubArea, to wit, owners do not have
to bulldoze their duplexes before remodeling, they can remodel existing
structures.
We already had the Council Majority's support for no use of eminent domain
and no NON CONFORMING property before the Task Force was convened. The
icing on the cake was most definitely the "no bulldoze clause." And
I think residents and property owners of the Subarea are most appreciative
of this.
The other Task Force "win"
The other "win" which the Task Force secured was the ability to have
a mother-in-law unit under some conditions.
Zoning comparison
I previously sent you my Land Use comparison of the "mayor's vision of
an urban village" and Task Force recommendations. And in this email
I do a Zoning comparison between the "mayor's vision of an urban village"
and the Task Force recommendations.
And why do I bother? Because the proposed high densities require
a proper EIS, not a cursory DNS.
Responsible government
Responsible government should not support high densities possible under
the mayor's plan or the Task Force's plan without a proper EIS. High
densities and lack of EIS was why I submitted the SEPA Appeal on April 24th.
And that is why the citizens have submitted a SEPA Appeal for the
Kennydale Blueberry Bog.
This time around, I'm looking to the Council Majority to vote responsibly
regarding the 2006 Comp Plan Amendments before them, so that we citizens
do not have to spend our own money to defend against unreasonable growth
expectations--be it the Kennydale blueberry bog or the HIghlands Subarea.
Yesterday and today - are densities the same?
Please look at this map from April 2006, which originally surfaced as a
handwrite in March 2006. Does this map look anything like the Task
Force zoning recommendations? The Task Force recommendations are noted
in red:
http://hca-renton.org/_TaskForce/ZONING_042006.jpg
CV at 20-80 du/ac and RM-U at 25-75 du/ac can be 5 stories high, RM-F at
10-20 du/ac can be 3 stories high, maybe more. Imagine the Sub
Area with buildings like this--something like what you see around Madison
and James near "hospital hill." And I contend that "If you zone
it, developers will come."
http://hca-renton.org/_TaskForce/multi-story.jpg
R14 as the implementing zone
R14 as the implementing zone is not something the Task Force recommended
after much study. This was the mayor's plan all along.
My source for comparison
My source of information was Erika Conkling and the links from
this webpage on the City's website:
http://rentonwa.gov/business/default.aspx?id=2768
My conclusion
I can come to no other conclusion, based on the similarity between the
"mayor's vision of an urban village" and Task Force recommendations, that
the mayor's Staff carefully guided the Task Force throughout its deliberations.
As a result, the Task Force Land Use and Zoning recommendations are
essentially a clone of the "mayor's vision for an urban village."
My request
I ask that the Council Majority require an EIS before adopting any land
use and zoning recommendations for the Highlands Subarea. This is the
only reasonable course of action, considering the high densities recommended.
Sincerely,
Inez Somerville Petersen
