The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA75-830BEGlphslllska OF FILE FILE TITLE TIUCROFLIMED r. f IItug:J7'. .11.‘ .... . %.....4 'S , d SYj, 7—4 R. --2 513....,, .."1:-., ,'. 3; R •3 4i7 C I. L. • w r' 1'. ,ry E• ..o a 1z 1,—. *I". iii16, . In•' . jrig 1 1+ _ W •. 4•µ +-• •k•' JS4 f Ifi_ ''a04r a.J.• P it_ 1 °^ r t. InE OTM Pam.• 1= .! t VNt • ` I! . _ • i.e 4 ki , 1 i, tl ~r••y .. 4• 1••'Q n ' 1 •• , I. '{' Z( '' fin ti y Jt 4 f- ' 17 ra a. T'+ w M'. r 1e ' s-.,.f. 1 WI 1 .4. 37 d s CHPIST'" / 1 itzHXGHLANDSCHURCTTFJZit.,agb SITE APPROVAL I.,.a r a''!s' 33 32 1-"i._..t .ii a-1 N. I i'i I 1i . ."1 -J 1. I a 1 ld$1. 1.. 1, :r 1•1• 1.1.1,1 . C"`V 04 -r 0._ 11 1 Ju O:1 ,fie 9 1 0e1. W . II G-7eeIrv,E 7 ST. i ;-r iy/ fir- . ,... 4 tll.,r• ' 'mot T 4 ' — ( f 1r1 1'1•' Sr. i t, • is. J `/ a. w.•,_ g : . n ` Ef 711 0. • F r r" t. , --{ ice__.,_-. W.Y1i 1 w g N l •... r.l ew.1 IS I A ei J I"l,l l 1 1 3 „ - . s1 ip . 5 •,-..- ' '`..,'• 'at' a't.,.., .. 1!,;11 •:. ' 11•1.1.1.1.t.111 S R- 1! GSM./ . miggi 1, ' n.) Via .1.' 1 1: a ti I 1 t•••'\ t J.` P I a I p. i a. 2 L1 ' •. ,• : -T B_z t_-e p J. 1 ice_W 1 1 Mb B.-I . --Jr L-I lA F Csi' Am SITE APPROVAL HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST ; Site approval to construct a Church in a GS- 1 zone ; property located on the N. E. corner if N . E . 10th Ave . and Monroe Ave. N. E. Appl . No . SA-830-75 APPLICANT HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST TOTAL AREA 3 . 2 acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS N . E . 10th Street XIS-1 ING ZONING GS- 1 EXISTING USE Undeveloped Property PROPOSED USE Church Site COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Single-family residential district COMMENTS 1 tipF R 4 J U mmiR ,. OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY • RENTON,WASHINGTON 0 Op POST OFFICE BOX 826 100 2nd AVENUE BUILDING • RENTON,WASHINGTON 08088 288-8878 AO GERARD M.SHELLAN,CITY ATTORNEY LAWRENCE J.WARREN, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY 4lFOSEPit October 22 , 1975 Mrs. Delores Mead City Clerk Renton City Hall Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Appeal of Planning Commission Decision Regarding Highlands Church of Christ Dear Del : At the Council meeting last Monday, ' expressed an oral opinion regarding the cross appeals then being heard by the City Council and the legal standards that would apply. This included a requirement that proper evidence would be needed to support an overruling of the Planning Commission' s decision and denial of the applicant' s petition to build a church within the residential area in question. I mentioned at that time that I remembered a State of Washington Supreme Court case decided twenty to thirty years ago which seemed to control these particular issues. I have now located the case and I am enclosing herewith a copy of the majority opinion in : The State of Washington, on the Relation of Wenatchee Congregation of Jehovah' s Witnesses , Appellant , v. The City of Wenatchee, et al. , Respondents. 50 Wn 2d, 378 (June 6 , 1957) You will note that the facts of said case are quite similar to the one before the Council. A denial of such application must be based on valid or substantial evidence with a showing that the granting of the permit would be detrimental to the health, safety, moral or the general welfare of the community. It cannot be an arbitrary and capricious decision which is not grounded on factual data. ft I would therefore request that you circulate the enclosed opinion among the members of the City Council and also forward a copy thereof to the Planning Department for its study. If we can be of any further assistance to you in this matter, please let us know. We remain er truly yours , Ge . d M. Shel an GMS :bjm Enc. cc : All Councilmen r - si i i • 1 rill!!1,11, --1,A,i-4,-, -,,,__,,,, , , t , it STATE EX REL.WEN.ETC.v. WENATCHEE. [50 Wit t1D[s tiara 1 7J STATE EX REL. WEN.ETC,v. WENA'fCI EE. 379 i 378 i• i3 k,i g Wtule lls judgment for that of the board or interfere with its deter- have already stated that the evidence was COIL ypinatlon of the matter unless such decision is arbitrary and un- r t i therefore, considering the case on the merits ither its reasonable and constitutes an abuse of discretion.i s F i j trial court nor this court can decide the i es as a malt t i ,ut. The ultimate burden of proof relative to alleged arbitrary F of law. Pearsall v. Paltas, 48 Wn. (2•291 P. (2d) 41t. sod capricious zoning action rests upon zoning authorities and not i 1 i upon a property owner who is seeking a permit. k i f! Respondent's assignments of erro are without merit. 1) >3aue. The denial by a city board of a permit to build a church in n r 1 The trial court's order gra rig the new trial is reversedtrr residential district where such building is permissive, will be held v` :, 1 l ` with instructions that ju• : ent be entered on the erdkt p be arbitrary and unreasonable, where the reasons for the denial r ewe, first, that the proposed use would be within a zoned and sub- i , 1 of the jury. It is so •• ered. 1 l p ; NanUally developed area, and second, that traffic congestion would f a 3s SCHVVELLEl'BA , DONWORTH, OTT, and FOSTER, . trout and woule be detrimental to public safety; both reasons being it ei4 i t ±4.z tmtanable. I •,9,i , concur. 1 - ' Orr and DON WORTH,JJ.,dissent. jil.l [ t,. 111 4gll J, y 11, 1957. Petition for rehearing denied. Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Chelan f;'. l l c i osnty,No. 18926, Adams, J., entered October 26, 1955, upon j` } j li 1i l dtngs In favor of the defendants, in an action in mandamus i r i [ f s No. 33589. En Banc. June 6, 1957.] cotnpel a city to issue a special use or zoning permit, tried jai;'i 1 i n the Relation o f Wenatcih4 b t e court. Reversed. d 1' s [ i` THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, 0 Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, Appellant, v. LRnoell D.•Sperline (Hayden C. Covington, of counsel), 1' 1t" 1 1 F i ''+ et al. Respondents.' ON appellant. THE CITY OF WENATCHEE p k,, I i 4 James Arneil, for respondents. c' ' Z' 1] MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS—CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS are oL l'csnt+ y ZONING ORDINANCES—VALIDITY. Zoning ordinances are constitu 1 ,, [ < 1 1llLLY, J.—The Wenatchee Congregation of Jehovah's r n lit in principle as a valid exercise of the police power.tt fsfri.I•;! l`ses is appealing from the refusal of the trial court t i.l 2] SAME—POLICE POWER—ZONING ORDINANCES—PARTICULAf t CHURCHES. Generally,zoning ordinances which wholly auk tx`andamus the board of adjustment and the city engineer churches in residential districts have been held to be unc• er* to rtsaue a special use or zoning permit for the building of j'l tional.tl*ttrrh •in a zoned residential R-1 district of the i n+ 3] SAME. Under ordinances which permissively allow the estsL city i' s ment of churches in specified zones,the weight of authority h Ito*# t etlatCllC@. denial of a permit must be based on substantial evidence sbovir 4 actlan III of ordinance No. 1117 zones the city into (a) i: , , <`--f that granting the permit would be detrimental to the health. + tl#=at iidential •districts, R-1 and R-2; (b) a commercial dis- morals, or the general welfare of the community. F, 4 s"+ct.C-1' and (c) an industrial district, I-1. i 4] SAME—POLICE RAT VEPOWER-- ZONING In reviewing avdecisionitof a t t ..t tton 1V of the zoning ordinance, as amended, provides; 1 s i^ { ADMINISTRATIVE i7 An R-1, Residential District no building shall be used f ` ` k } 'yboarddenyingapermittobuildachurchinaresidenUrldi i8 y- 34 where such building is permissive, the trial court acted w • ' building shall hereafter be erected or structurally 5 f_the case de sots•1 4 1 i +„., r awl, unless otherwise provided in this ordinance, except 1.,Y of review for error of law and could not try p appeal from a judgment upholding the denlol f tug or more of the following uses: 1 `" 5] SAME. bOnoard w at city board of a permit to build a church in a residcnUsl ally t r 1 where such a building is permissive,the supreme court m+Y ' 3, Public schools, parochial schools and churches i i pi. sue` Reported in 312 P. (2d) 195. Ltd by the Planning Commission." (Italics ours.) ' i ' I i 1`. is 2] See 138 A. L. R. 1287; 58 Am. Jur. 1010. fr 1 ., t , s i; 1 , . h i i t c 380 STATE EX REL.WEN.ETC.V. WENATCHEE. [50 Wn.(ldi 19571 STATE EX P.EL. WEN. ETC.V. WENATCHEE. 381 y 41.III Section V of the zoning ordinance specifically provides f Ilowed to allow churches only where the will be located t ` i that churches may be established in the R-2 district. There adjacent to, or proximate to, intersecting major arterials f Y 1 . is no prohibition of churches in the C-1 or I-i districts. as to cause the least possible interference with future or R i `i established residential neighborhoods." h; The appellant is an unincorporated religious congrega• tion. Its presiding minister, Rev. Selmer Johnson, acting in Thereafter, the appellant: instituted the mandamus pro-2 1 p feedings in the superior court for Chelan county, seeking l (t §the capacity of trustee, entered into a contract for the ut• il ;` chase of land located in an R-1 zone of the city of Wenatchee.so compel respondents to issue the special property use per- 1 i I An application for a special property use permit to build aiL After,a hearing,and argument, the trial judge made 1 _ a church was filed with the city engineer. He referred the ' ' *d entered so-called findings of fact,which could be more s fr' 44 matter to the city board of adjustment. Under § XXII of accurately described as conclusions of law, reading, in part,I t i ' i, tr;, the zoning ordinance, the board has original jurisdiction to id follows: y,t` consider applications for special property uses in R-1 dia• That denial of a special property use permit to Relator s : ! i ;t ` tricts. This section also sets forth the standards and rutcs for erection of a Kingdom Hall on Ninth Street between I I' °f p Melton and Rin old Streets in the City of Wenatchee byEunderwhichtheboardoperatesasfollows: the Ord of Adjustmentstment of the City of Wenatchee was not 1 . Ili f'' 1 T 1 `S 7—BOARD'S FINDINGS: In making its findings the Board arbitrary'and capricious; was not in derogation of the right 1'i iggt1shallinvestigatetheappellant's request in relation to the 4 freedom of religion; and did not deny to Relator equal j . i 1i provisions of this ordinance; the present land utilization ptatcclion under the law." I p 'i 1 pattern and density of building within the neighborhood 1 1 '? area of the appellant's land; conditions existing or predating 1] It is well established that zoning ordinances are con- lordinance concerningtopography, traffic, automobile tlatutlonal in principle as a valid exercise of thepolicepower. 14' 'ii this i f; 11 parking, and utilities; and such other information as it [Li) Skrite ex rel. Miller v. Cain, 40 Wn. (2d) 216, 242 P. (2d) 505; I} a IRA J ' ' ' f set forth in official maps, development plans, reports, and fl4 e ofEuclid, Ohio, v. Ambler RealtyCo., j11relli:1! I II 1 t fl 272 U. S. 365, 1 findings of the Planning Commission. r''l1 L Ed, 303, 47 S. Ct. 114, 54 A.L.R. 1016. In some, if not The board of adjustment held two hearings on appellant's Wit, zoning ordinances, churches are ex ressl classifieds "'expressly 1 , ,I r El application to locate a church on the property in the R•I At first residential districts. See State ex rel. Seattle Title I 11 `l! i district. Interested persons living in the area attended the Co. v. Roberge, 144 Wash. 74, 256 Pac. 781, 278 U. S. tg,49 S.Ct; 50, 73 L. Ed. 210, 86 A.L.R. 654. For additional 1 ,i; 1 i 1 1 .t f hearings and voiced their objections to the building of a I I fill i1 church at the proposed location. In addition to hearing Ar+d xxt.rations of this general practice, see cases cited in State 1, i 1 x r : ' i .I considering the testimony of the parties at the hearings, tilt At rel. Roman Catholic Bishop of Reno v. Hill, 59 Nev. 231, E 1111, t 3 members of the boardpersonally inspected the proposed P. (2d) 217. 4 i , i x tatbuildingsite. After examination of the maps, records, and 2] Asn Generally, zoning ordinances which wholly exclude I I, ,ii i it; 1 other documents in the matter, the board denied the appe4• ches in residential districts have been held to be uncon- yl ` ft a . lant's application for a special property usepermit on flatttlonal. Apparently, such R';. t;! i l`;pp p p p Y provisions have not survived girt review for the generally-stated reason that an absolutefollowingannouncedgrounds: g y_ 1 f 4 !1 1 i K 1:`d 1. That the proposed use is within a zoned and tit x hsbilion bears no substantial relation to the public health 1II ,# 4 t1 stantially developed residential area, y, morals, or general welfare of the community. North r, ! tt{ l‘, 11 f i fs I1 ' 2. That the proposed use would cause an undue amc 3 t Unitarian Soc. v. Village of Plandome 200 Misc. 524 1 it j 14:-'of traffic through a primarily residential district, 0)X I'$ 2d 1i I. 1 f r'a f- 3. That the Board of Adjustment recommends tlt Et! 803; Board of Zoning Appeals of Decatur v. i1I , , .a is desirable policy and that such policy has been generallt. .kr Ind. Co, of Jehovah s Witnesses, 233 Ind. 83, 117 s ^ ; H111141/11111M 382 STATE EX REL.WEN.ETC.V.WENATCHEE. [50 Wn.(74) June 1957j ` STATE EX REL.WEN.ETC. V. WENATCHEE.383 xp .4; i N.E. (2d) 115; Young Israel Organization of Cleveland tv. ue of the community. Congregation Committee, North i 1111,( Dworkin Court of Appeals of Ohio (1956), 133 N.E. (2d) Fort Worth Congregation,Jehovah'sWitnessesv. CityCoun- 174; Congregation Committee, North Fort Worth Congre.t£l,supra.q lii gation, Jehovah's Witnesses v. City Council, etc., Court of 4-6] Before discussing the reasons advanced by the I "" t it I; , Civil Appeals of Texas, 287 S.W. (2d) 700; State ex rel.board of adjustment in support of its decision, it may be i (; Synod of Ohio, etc. v. Joseph, 139 Ohio St. 229, 39 N.E. (2d) well to mention that, in reviewing the decision of the board, 140 515, 138 A.L.R. 1274; State ex rel. Roman Catholic Bishop of the trial court acted as a court of review for error of law i ( ° Tit!! ' 2 Yokel Zoning Law and Practice rand could not try the case de novo. Likewise, upon this I0IRenov. Hill, supra; y ri i 1953) 110, § 222; 58 Am. Jur. 1011, § 125. appeal, we are governed by the oftstated rule that, regard- a i;' • , However, in Corporation of Presiding Bishop, etc., v. City ks of how this court might have decided the question before 1 t of Porterville, 90 Cal. App. (2d) 656, 203 P. (2d) 823, the the board, we are not warranted in substituting our judg- F ' t ff j, ;! j California court expressed a view contrary to the prevailing runt for that of the board or interfering in its determination i 11 ,1 weight of authority. The essence of the reasoning of the fat the matter, unless the decision under review is arbitrary J 1 i , 4 lilt' California court seems to be that zoning legislation which and unreasonable and constitutes an abuse of discretion. 3 1 t '', prospectively treats all religious groups alike, i.e., prohibit& It should also be noted that the ultimate burden of proof t ,' Y t I j prospectively all churches in certain zones, if otherwise relative to alleged arbitrary and capricious zoning action 1 i, ' i'; reasonable, may be a valid and a proper nondiscriminatory. rests upon zoning authorities and not upon a property'owner F y till t f „i,. power. This viewpoint who is seeking a permit. In State ex ref 1 i nonarbitrary exercise of state police pow p Synod o f Ohio, etc., 1 r s ` rejects the reasoning of the weight of authority that churches c,.Joseph, 139 Ohio St. 229, 39 N.E. (2d) 515, the Ohio court 1 ; 1 °? L'' maybe excluded, or zoned out of particular areas, only on raid:I. I ik. i a; the basis of traffic or other hazards substantially related to In determining whether respondents' administrative acts iti1 i ' public health or safety. The viewpoint of the weight ofd policies may be upheld, it should be observed that the t ttal resum tion of the validity of the acts of public boards Ili i' I authority may be an extreme one. It ignores the basic p p t r. premise of modern dayzoninglegislation which emphasises officials, does not apply to acts involving the forfeituregAnIndividualsrightsorthedeprivinghimofthefree the best and most reasonable land utilization possible, can• use of his property: 22 Corpus Juris, 141; Deaver v. Napier, I.' community. per 119 Minn., 219, 166 N.W., 187; Christ v. Fent, 16 Okla., 375, 1 ' ?;'1 I'sidering the best interests of the entire It l '' mits any church group, absent the factor of traffic hazards; P., 1074. Applying this exception to a case like the one it • ' it substantially related to public health and safety, to acquire 1 n, wal re pubne oaofficials seearuusee of h sni ro oerdtna he l h ' t f church, irrespective of other factors Y p p p Y t o ry , f rzg_ land and to establish a p first court of Maryland has held that the board of zon- w which may be of significant public interest, and normallyap peals has the burden of showing reasons sufficient sI , i a , r considered and emphasized in present day community i pp rt its authority in refusing a building permit. Apple- i i.; 0 v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 156 Md., 40, i t ; land use planning programs.ilF. l•i,i A., 666." f Ob. 3] In any event, the Wenatchee ordinance is not oae 1 f ordinance.A y 1 1 l E of absolute prohibition. It is a permissive o ow, as to the reasons advanced by the board in the case I rt to such ordinances, the weight of authority is to the effort td bar In support of its decision. The application was denied,i 'rl' l a , i i that a denial of a permit must be based on valid or substtr+' tr on the basis that the proposed use would be within tial evidence showing that granting the permit would bt zoned and substantially developed area. The effect of f' afet morals, or the general vrei holdin this ob'ect' i Y detrimental to the health, s y, g objection as a valid reason for the board's 384 STATE EX REL.WEN.ETC.V.WENATCHEE. [50 Wnn.(24)111M 1937] STATE EX REL. WEN.ETC.v. WENATCHEE. 385 r 4t r j i. 1 action would be to force the appellant into undeveloped _tfrct that there was more parking space there than was R o`' , f',,, i i sections of the city, since it may be likely that appellant tually required." E` 1 a. a. .. any The record is not clear as to the width of Ninth street. 11wouldbemetwithasimilarobjectioninotherwell. re r . developed residential district of the city. Similar objections Suffice it to say, however, that it is fifty to sixty feet wide, t.,have been expressly repudiated as a ground for refusingwith an improved surface of from twenty-two to thirty feet. RAN to permit the erection of a church in a residential district. Apparently, no systematic traffic check, and certainly no j 'i , , State ex rel. Synod o f Ohio, etc. v. Joseph, supra; O'Brien it 6Cetlrate or detailed traffic survey of the area was made by 1 a Chicago, 347 Ill. App. 45, 105 N.E. (2d) 917; 1 Rathkapl, therespondents. There is no evidence in the record (a) as I 6, ; I t a 1t •. The Law of Zoning and Planning 259; 2 Yokely, Zoning p the occurrence, time, duration or extent of any periods 1 i' : I Law and Practice, supra. d heavy tra(c in the area, and (b) no evidence that the r y A- ' 4't if , a,i, The board's other reasons for denying the requested per mitt:. of any such periods of heavy traffic would overlap or i Q f 'mit emphasize the possibility of the creation of parking and t otrlcide with the time of any regular church activities. 4pTheminutesoftheboarddoindicatethatasubstan ' i traffic problems. This finding or ground stated by the board teal R 1 ! is expressed in terms of possibilities not probabilities a slumber of property owners in the area in question filed a i ' actualities. It certainlyis not a specific findingor conclusion ltion,appeared at hearings before the board or rotested 1 I' p p 4 It' , ; pinst issuance of a ermit to a ellant. The minutes ofR i r;!; that traffic congestion will result which will be detrime»tat p pp tgboardshowthatintheetitionsandatthehearings r t x. : -fii. SI ', to the health and safety of the community. p property owners stated that issuance of the ermit would I ,1 Itit . ` ' 1 of this, the action of the zoning p a Technically, in the absencea+hwlt in traffic congestion and would adversely affect the I^I(:r11 ,' iI ',1 , # ,authorities was arbitrar and ca ricious. But the aboutyp swclential nature of the area. i ' 1 , i , - t; ,. I mentioned interpretation of the board's conclusion or grout>d Ott the basis of the latter roof ill i, I p .,. .f , } A. / t},•'1° ? appear to be too technical, or merely quib its route p such as it is, the respon- a '1 ' . of decision may pp contend that the location of a 1 appellant's church at the r f ! 3. fi is tiling relative to terminology. So for the purpose.of atgu• proposed site would materially contribute to severe traffic us assume that the board specifically concluded 1 . 1 yment, let p Y ingestion, particularly since Ninth street is already g-3 °` 1 t , ! that traffic congestion would result and would be detri;alle 5yburdenedwithaheavyflowoftrafficfromthenearby 3t; mental to public safety. The question then would be whet klr college and also from the familyresidences located fil+; 4 d"pP I: the vicinity. We do not think there was substantial evi- 4:x; there is substantial evidence in the record to support the e before the board to support this contention.administrative determination. The record shows that I. pellant congregation consists of approximately eighty mesz i {pp Y g Y A rnntention comparable to the latter-mentioned one of I; ; bers. The Reverend Johnson, the presidingminister, stAt 1dentsintheinstantcasewasanalyzedanddisposedi,y fthatwhenthemembershiptotaledonehundredoronehunt4bytheIndianacourtinthecaseofBoardofZoningAp- V f.r- dred fifty persons, another church would be constructed I b r't1 of Decatur v. Decatur Ind. Co, ofJehovah's Witnesses, testimony regarding emu, as follows:p'a different location. His re ardin parking s fi was as follows:• 1t is no doubt true that automobile traffic often chokes p- F2Q. Was there any testimony taken or information pt streets and endangers both the general and the travel- t f: tvidedastothelackofparkingspace. A. No, all the e+ ; k puhlie. However it is rarely, if ver, that eo le enter- firu _ deuce showed there was plenty. Q. In other words,or leaving a church cause or contribute to traffic acci- t 'a resent to 4r;1, It would seem reasonable to assume that if re ula- f jonlyevidencewhichtheyhadwaswhatyoup0 g yA. Yes. Q. and that was to what effect. A. It was to Pt wn sZd ry •in the interest of the safety, convenience t r fliiii11% ,. : . . ... ., STATE EX REL.WEN:ETC.v.WENATCHEE. [50 Wm(i11 F 1037j SPATE EX REL. WEN. ETC.v. WENATCHEE. s 386 387 i Ill6`' property owner has a vested right tos and welfare of the general public, that should be rebulatc«S P P Y g use his property which has a direct effect upon such general welfare. Thu d the terms of the zoning ordinance applicable thereto. 4' generally bytraffic police, signs aro3 Swale rel. Hardy v. Superior Court, 1 p Wash. 244 284Icanbe, and is, done ge Y other reasonable regulations imposed alike upon all pcty Ps1c 93pp • building or use permit must issue as a matter of t g• , sons using the streets in the vicinity of churches, without htTiie ,cs mpliance with the ordinance. 9 Am. Jur. 203, 1 undue interference with the right of worship and truer c etion permissible in zoning matters is that I t. aifilch is exe cased in adopting the zone classifications with assembly:" At terms,sta o ards, and requirements pertinent thereto all Florida etc. v. Tampa, 48 So. (3dt which must be by general ordinance applicable to all I i iInStateexrel. Tampa, s alike. T' - acts of administerin a zon' i 78,the Florida court stated: g ing ordinance not o back t• the questions of policy and discretion I {t use such congestion as to create a traffic heiwd ldch were settled.:t the time of the adoption of the etion 4 z = i The contention that people congregating for reltgiottt 4 ti r J purposes ca has very little in substance to support it. Religious servion west m si t corm, authorities are properly concerned i' are normally for brief periods two or three days in lltis q liance with the ordinance, not with traffic is lightest—early wisdom. To subject 'individuals to questions of polic f r 11 ! week and this at hours whenY f T. o ' .'j' the morning, early in the evening and at 10:00 and 11:0 ts+wdministrative matters would be unconstitutional. Art. I, i : ;!i on Sundays. Many churches are like this one, in residentt4 12.of the constitution of t •e state of Washington, provides: 1 I j ¢ ti i ' areas, where traffic is not heavy and where there arc Ao law shall be passed ;ranting to any citizen, class of z I streets and other facilities for parking. The church to: 4.1.1tteni, or corporation other han municipal, privileges or 1 1 here is a small church which is shown to have amp tcnunities which upon the sa 4 e terms shall not equally i t 1 k volved parkingspace for all ordinary purposes. g to all citizens, or corpora ens. lid off-street rj w We are convinced that, on the basis of the mct Scction IV of the.zoning ordinan.:.:inii.d7negstsihonallpbroevuidseesci:, I t'E,i t , ;, E for In anR-1, Residential District nostherefusaloftheboardofadjustmentandSl`R i 1. i1beforeus, a no building shall hereafter be re•ted or structurally 11 , 2j11zf}:j•,, _ city engineer to issue the special useor zoning permit unless otherwise provided inthis ordinance, except by appellant was not in furtheranceof thehealth, oneormoreofthefollowinguse 4 Q : unit TheactloammisI ,1 . II,I, Public schools, parochial schools and urches i f ap- morals or general welfare of the co Y the board was arbitrary and unreasonable. ed by the Planning Commission." (Italic ine.) J ; , l" { .t, p give effect to the italicized phrase would ender the 1 I , it {1F,'The judgment should be reversed and the writ of tt'uas.' shams 7. ,•'< damus relative to the special use or zoning permit c fiance unconstitutional, since no proper legisla•'ve stan- i . € , be issued. are supplied for the guidance of the planni •; com- I it ,, '. It is so ordered.a ,, q give a statute such an interpret. ion i 1 Ii' ¢ r p HILL, C. J., SCIIWELLEN$ACH, ROSELLINI, and F0571'J ui'a Q are re wired to 4tll make it constitutional when it is possible to do o, j 'i s concur. i be done in the instant case byconsidering the italicize. t r A While the vale"g L. MALLERY, J. (concurring specially)—While as being surplusage. the of contro+ "n ersubject inofzoningordinancesisnologreuirements. terpretation of the statute entitles appellant to r p.,.,_ when they conform to constitutional q istrativa r alter sought. I.. cannot confer legislative powers upon adman fi g)—The majority have determined that t `I ficers without prescribing adequate legislative 48a i lion of the board wasr,; arbitrary and unreasonable," i 4- . In State ex rel. Ogden v. Bellevue, 45 Wn• (2d) Me that, hence, a writ of s mandamus d 2d) 899, we said: s should be granted l 4 IF D RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting December 15 , 1975 Municipal Building Monday , 8: 00 P . M . Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Avery Garrett, presiding, led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL OF CHARLES DELAURENTI , Council President; GEORGE J. PERRY, RICHARD M. COUNCIL STREDICKE, EARL CLYMER, KENNETH D. BRUCE AND WILLIAM J. GRANT. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY BRUCE, ABSENT COUNCILMAN HENRY M. SCHELLERT, BE EXCUSED. CARRIED. PRESS IN Mary Wilbert Smith, Editor, Greater Renton News; Jack Wilkins , ATTENDANCE Seattle P. I. Reporter; Eric Pryne, News Editor, Renton Record Chronicle. CITY OFFICIALS AVERY GARRETT, Mayor; GWEN MARSHALL, Finance Director; DEL MEAD, IN ATTENDANCE City Clerk; LARRY WARREN, Assistant City Attorney; SHARON GREEN, Personnel Director; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Dir. ; JIM BOURASA, Police Representative; GORDON ERICKSEN, Planning Director; ROBERT HUGHES, Legislative Aide; VERN CHURCH, Purchasing Agent; VIC TeGANTV00RT, Street Supt.; ED TORKELSON, EDP Director; RICHARD GEISSLER, Asst. Fire Chief; G. M. SHELLAN, City Attorney. COUNCIL MINUTES Councilman Stredicke requested correction of Council Minutes of 12/1 Page 3, Paragraph 3, Line 3, change "no" to "new. " MOVED BY DELAURENTI , SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CORRECT MINUTES OF 1?/1 AS REQUESTED AND ADOPT MINUTES OF DECEMBER 1 AND 2, 1975 AS CORRECTED. CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL APPROVE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 1975 AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted, pub- L.I .D. 296 Sewers lished and mailed, Mayor Garrett opened the Hearing to consider Kennydale Area construction and installation of a sanitary sewer and appertunances Kennydale in and near the Kennydale area (east of Edmonds Ave. N.E. , west of Interceptor FAI 405, north of N. E. 12th St. and south of N.E. 28th St. ) . Previous hearing on the environmental impact statement had been held 11/10/75. L. I .D. TERMINATED Letter from Public Works Director Gonnason noted that as of 5:00 p.m. December 15, the percentage of those property owners protesting Large Audience their assessments is 63. 67% of the total estimated cost which is in Attendance 1 ,188,668. 18. Public Works Director Gonnason announced that Council is prohibited by law from proceeding with the local improvement dis- trict if protests are in excess of 60% unless health problem exists and so certified by the Health Department or unless protests are withdrawn. As none of the protests were withdrawn, a planned presenta- tion of the project was dropped. MOVED BY STREDICKF. SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND TERMINATE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 296. CARRIED. Audience Comment Richard Jackson, Attorney representing some of home owners in the Kennydale area, inquired whether building moratorium was still in effect. Public Works Director Gonnason recalled the moratorium had been approved with his recommendation of June 11 , to remain in effect until the L. I .D. was created and satisfactory health conditions existed. That the City entered into agreement with Metro and Water District 107 for the installation and construction of May Creek Trunk, which gave the opportunity to include sewer trunks to serve Kennydale, Honeydew and future extensions as the project was 90% funded by E.P.A. and D.O. E. and 10% by Metro. Gonnason noted the interceptor and trunk projects could proceed with the City picking up the 10%. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY DELAURENTI , THAT THE BUILDING MORATORIUM IMPOSED IN THE KENNYDALE AREA BE LIFTED. CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL DECLARE FIVE MINUTE RECESS. CARRIED. Council reces- sed at 8:25 p.m. and reconvened at 8:45 p.m. Roll Call : All six of the seven Councilmen were present as previously shown. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and Highlands Church published according to law, Mayor Garrett opened the public hearing of Christ continued from 11/17/75 on Church of Christ building location (Monroe Ave. N. E. and N.E. 10th St. ) and Appeal of Planning Commission regard- ing Restrictive Covenant requirements. 11RentonCityCounit 12/15/75 Page • PUBLIC HEARING Continued Highlands Churc David Dobson of Dobson, Houser and Dobson, represented Highlands of Christ Church of Christ and objected to the restriction of 150 ft. setback on Monroe Ave. N.E. noting Planning Commission had done extensive study and established 60 ft. setback. Mr. Dobson expressed the reasoning that government should impose conditions upon private property only as it affects public health, safety, morals and general welfare; and also called for Appearance of Fairness Doctrine. Mr. Dobson noted two meetings between the Community Services Committee and members of the community and Church noting no compromise reached, that the alter- nate plan No. 12 acceptable to committee and neighbors, was not accept- able to the Church. Discussion ensued wherein Councilman Perry strongly indicated that he felt the Church had accepted the alternate plan No. 12 which requires the 150 ft. setback with building planned for center of property. Eddie Craig, 25601 S.E. 184th St. , explained the position of the Church, that the plan No. 12 was not their choice, but required by committee and neighbors as a compromise; that the Church has sought information on selling or subdividing the property. Mrs. George Gist, 1025 Monroe Ave. N.E. , represented neighborhood and asked denial of building permit because: property value down, storm sewers inadequate, additional traffic problems, five churches in three blocks , financial adequacy questioned, desire for single family neighborhood. Mrs. Pat Porter, 1021 Olympia Ave. N.E. , made inquiries. Mrs. Helen Crutchfield, 1013 Monroe Ave. N.E. , reported storm sewers inadequate because of cutting of trees , building should be placed in center of property and felt church was isolating rather than contributing to a neighborhood. Al Noble, 1005 Monroe N. E. , opposed building of church, doubted creditability of some church members & felt too many churches. 0. Dickensin, 3414 llth P1 .N.E., favored building of church noting right of religous freedom. Ed Healy, 3617 N.E. 10th, opposed building of church. Ed Craig requested copy of packet of informational material submitted by Mrs. Gist. Community Services Committee Chairman Clymer noted the committee was charged to negotiate between proposed builders of church and neighbors to work out acceptable compromise; noting com- mittee felt compromise was worked out until received letter from Dobson, Houser & Dobson objecting to compromise on behalf of property owners. Hand Written otion MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY BRUCE, HEARING BE CLOSED. CARRIED. Submitted by MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY GRANT, THAT THE HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST Councilman Pe ry BE DENIED A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE N.E. CORNER OF 10TH AVE. N.E. AND MONROE AVE. N.E. , FILE NO. SP-830-75. UNDER ZONING CODE R-1 , REFERENCE CHAPTER 4-706 ITEM 3, A DETERMINATION MUST BE FOUND THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE ADJACENT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND THE ENJOYMENT THEREOF, IT IS DETRIMENTAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: (1 ) APPRAISALS FOR PROPERTY Permit to SHOW A DECREASE IN PROPERTY VALUE OF $6,000. REFERENCE APPRAISALS Construct Ch rch SUBMITTED BY MRS. GIST. (2) EXISTING STORM SEWERS ON MONROE AND 10TH Denied AVENUE ARE INADEQUATE TO HANDLE EXISTING RUN OFF, PRESENT SEWER LINE IS 10" AND SHOULD BE 21 INCHES. REFERENCE: DRAINAGE REPORT DATED 10/27/75 AND DESIGN ENGINEERS TOM TOUMA TESTIMONY AT COUNCIL'S FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. (3) INCREASED TRAFFIC IN AN ALREADY CONGESTED AREA, REFERENCE: (a) MEMO FROM DAVE HAMLIN,TRAFFIC ENGINEER, TO WARREN C. GONNASON DATED 11/13/75. (b) TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT DATED 9/15/75 AS A RESULT OF COMMENTS AT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD 7/23/75 AND REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE 7/28/75. (4) INABIL- ITY OR UNWILLINGNESS OF APPLICANT TO PROVIDE PROOF OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO BUILD AN ACCEPTABLE STRUCTURE COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGH- BORHOOD AND PROJECTED CHURCH GROWTH. (5) FIVE CHURCHES WITHIN A THREE BLOCK AREA (THIS WOULD BE SIXTH) BEARS NO DEMONSTRATED RELATIONSHIP TO THE NEED OF THE GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD. (6) THE AREA IS SHOWN BOTH ON THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AND THE ZONING MAP AS SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, WITH AN ADDITIONAL CHURCH IT WOULD LOSE ITS RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER. THE COUNCIL HAS FOUND THROUGH PAST ACTION THAT THIS SPECI- FIC PROPERTY WAS TO BE DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. Council- man Clymer opposed Motion. Following discussion, MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Council recessed at 10:03 p.m. and Roll was called upon RECESS reconvening with all Councilmen present as previously shown. Ren' on City Council 12/15/75 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING - Continued Highlands Church David Dobson of Dobson, Houser and Dobson, represented Highlands of Christ Church of Christ and objected to the restriction of 150 ft. setback on Monroe Ave. N.E. noting Planning Commission had done extensive study and established 60 ft. setback. Mr. Dobson expressed the reasoning that government should impose conditions upon private property only as it affects public health, safety, morals and general welfare; and also called for Appearance of Fairness Doctrine. Mr. Dobson noted two meetings between the Community Services Committee and members of the community and Church noting no compromise reached, that the alter- nate plan No. 12 acceptable to committee and neighbors, was not accept- able to the Church. Discussion ensued wherein Councilman Perry strongly indicated that he felt the Church had accepted the alternate plan No. 12 which requires the 150 ft. setback with building planned for center of property. Eddie Craig, 25601 S.E. 184th St. , explained the position of the Church, that the plan No. 12 was not their choice, but required by committee and neighbors as a compromise; that the Church has sought information on selling or subdividing the property. Mrs. - George Gist, 1025 Monroe Ave. N.E. , represented neighborhood and asked denial of building permit because: property value down, storm sewers inadequate, additional traffic problems, five churches in three blocks , financial adequacy questioned, desire for single family neighborhood. Mrs. Pat Porter, 1021 Olympia Ave. N.E. , made inquiries. Mrs. Helen Crutchfield, 1013 Monroe Ave. N.E. , reported storm sewers inadequate because of cutting of trees, building should be placed in center of property and felt church was isolating rather than contributing to a neighborhood. Al Noble, 1005 Monroe N.E. , opposed building of church, doubted creditability of some church members & felt too many churches. 0. Dickensin, 3414 llth PI .N.E., favored building of church noting right of religous freedom. Ed Healy, 3617 N.E. 10th, opposed building of church. Ed Craig requested copy of packet of informational material submitted by Mrs. Gist. Community Services Committee Chairman Clymer noted the committee was charged to negotiate between proposed builders of church and neighbors to work out acceptable compromise; noting com- mittee felt compromise was worked out until received letter from Dobson, Houser & Dobson objecting to compromise on behalf of property owners. Hand Written Motio MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY BRUCE, HEARING BE CLOSED. CARRIED. Submitted by MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY GRANT, THAT THE HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST Councilman Perry BE DENIED A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE N.E. CORNER OF 10TH AVE. N. E. AND MONROE AVE. N.E. , FILE NO. SP-830-75. UNDER ZONING CODE R-1 , REFERENCE CHAPTER 4-706 ITEM 3, A DETERMINATION MUST BE FOUND THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE ADJACENT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND THE ENJOYMENT THEREOF, IT IS DETRIMENTAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: (1 ) APPRAISALS FOR PROPERTY ermit to SHOW A DECREASE IN PROPERTY VALUE OF $6,000. REFERENCE APPRAISALS Construct Church SUBMITTED BY MRS. GIST. (2) EXISTING STORM SEWERS ON MONROE AND 10TH Denied AVENUE ARE INADEQUATE TO HANDLE EXISTING RUN OFF, PRESENT SEWER LINE IS 10" AND SHOULD BE 21 INCHES. REFERENCE: DRAINAGE REPORT DATED 10/27/75 AND DESIGN ENGINEERS TOM TOUMA TESTIMONY AT COUNCIL'S FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. (3) INCREASED TRAFFIC IN AN ALREADY CONGESTED AREA, REFERENCE: (a) MEMO FROM DAVE HAMLIN,TRAFFIC ENGINEER, TO WARREN C. GONNASON DATED 11/13/75. (b) TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT DATED 9/15/75 AS A RESULT OF COMMENTS AT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD 7/23/75 AND REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE 7/28/75. (4) INABIL- ITY OR UNWILLINGNESS OF APPLICANT TO PROVIDE PROOF OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO BUILD AN ACCEPTABLE STRUCTURE COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGH- BORHOOD AND PROJECTED CHURCH GROWTH. (5) FIVE CHURCHES WITHIN A THREE BLOCK AREA (THIS WOULD BE SIXTH) BEARS NO DEMONSTRATED RELATIONSHIP TO THE NEED OF THE GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD. (6) THE AREA IS SHOWN BOTH ON THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AND THE ZONING MAP AS SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, WITH AN ADDITIONAL CHURCH IT WOULD LOSE ITS RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER. THE COUNCIL HAS FOUND THROUGH PAST ACTION THAT THIS SPECI- FIC PROPERTY WAS TO BE DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. Council- man Clymer opposed Motion. Following discussion, MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Council recessed at 10:03 p.m. and Roll was called upon RECESS reconvening with all Councilmen present as previously shown. RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting December 1 , 1975 Municipal Building Monday , 8: 10 P . M . Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Avery Garrett, presiding, led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL OF CHARLES DELAURENTI , Council President; GEORGE J. PERRY, RICHARD M. COUNCIL STREDICKE, EARL CLYMER, KENNETH D. BRUCE AND WILLIAM J. GRANT. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY BRUCE, ABSENT COUNCILMAN HENRY M. SCHELLERT, BE EXCUSED. CARRIED. PRESS IN Mary Wilbert Smith, Editor, Greater Renton News; Jack Wilkins , ATTENDANCE Seattle P. I. Reporter; Eric Pryne, News Editor, Renton Record Chronicle. CITY OFFICIA S AVERY GARRETT, Mayor; GWEN MARSHALL, Finance Director; DEL MEAD, IN ATTENDANC City Clerk; LARRY WARREN, Assistant City Attorney; SHARON GREEN, Personnel Director; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Dir. ; JIM BOURASA, Police Representative; GORDON ERICKSEN, Planning Director; ROBERT HUGHES, Legislative Aide; VERN CHURCH, Purchasing Agent; VIC TeGANTVOORT, Street Supt.; ED TORKELSON, EDP Director; RICHARD GEISSLER, Asst. Fire Chief; G. M. SHELLAN, City Attorney. COUNCIL MIN TES Councilman Stredicke requested correction of Council Minutes of 12/1 Page 3, Paragraph 3, Line 3, change "no" to "new. " MOVED BY DELAURENTI , SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CORRECT MINUTES OF 1? " AS REQUESTED AND ADOPT MINUTES OF DECEMBER 1 AND 2, 1975 AS CORRECTED. CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL APPROVE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 1975 AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. PUBLIC HEAR NG This being the date set and proper notices having been posted, pub- L.I .D. 296 .ewers lished and mailed, Mayor Garrett opened the Hearing to consider Kennydale A ea construction and installation of a sanitary sewer and appertunances Kennydale in and near the Kennydale area (east of Edmonds Ave. N. E. , west of Intercepto FAI 405, north of N. E. 12th St. and south of N. E. 28th St. ) . Previous hearing on the environmental impact statement had been held 11/10/75. L. I .D. TER INATED Letter from Public Works Director Gonnason noted that as of 5:00 p.m. December 15, the percentage of those property owners protesting Large Audience their assessments is 63. 67% of the total estimated cost which is in Attend.nce 1 ,188,668. 18. Public Works Director Gonnason announced that Council is prohibited by law from proceeding with the local improvement dis- trict if protests are in excess of 60% unless health problem exists and so certified by the Health Department or unless protests are withdrawn. As none of the protests were withdrawn, a planned presenta- tion of the project was dropped. MOVED BY STREDICKF. SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND TERMINATE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 296. CARRIED. Audience Comment Richard Jackson, Attorney representing some of home owners in the Kennydale area, inquired whether building moratorium was still in effect. Public Works Director Gonnason recalled the moratorium had been approved with his recommendation of June 11 , to remain in effect until the L. I .D. was created and satisfactory health conditions existed. That the City entered into agreement with Metro and Water District 107 for the installation and construction of May Creek Trunk, which gave the opportunity to include sewer trunks to serve Kennydale, Honeydew and future extensions as the project was 90% funded by E.P.A. and D.O. E. and 10% by Metro. Gonnason noted the interceptor and trunk projects could proceed with the City picking up the 10%. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY DELAURENTI , THAT THE BUILDING MORATORIUM IMPOSED IN THE KENNYDALE AREA BE LIFTED. CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL DECLARE FIVE MINUTE RECESS. CARRIED. Council reces- sed at 8:25 p.m. and reconvened at 8:45 p.m. Roll Call : All six of the seven Councilmen were present as previously shown. PUBLIC HvRING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and Highlands Church published according to law, Mayor Garrett opened the public hearing of Christ continued from 11/17/75 on Church of Christ building location (Monroe Ave. N. E. and N.E. 10th St. ) and Appeal of Planning Commission regard- ing Restrictive Covenant requirements. CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 15th day of December 19 75 , at 8 : 00 P .M. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building , Renton , Washington as the time and place for a public hearing to consider the following : Continued hearing on Church of Christ building location (Monroe Ave. N. E. & N. E. 10th St. ) and Appeal of Planning Commission decision Restrictive Covenant requirements. (Continued from 11-17-75) Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval , disapproval or opinions on same . CITY OF RENTON Delores A. Mead , City Clerk Date of Publication Nov 21, 1975 Renton Planning Commission Meeting June 11 , 1975 Page Eleven 7///7 SITE APPROVALS: E. AIRPORT SPECIALTIES ; Appl . No . SA-829-75 ; site approval for Aircraft Hangars in a P- 1 zone and Cedar River Waterwaj; property located in the Renton Municipal Airport adjacent to the Cedar River. The undeveloped approximate two acre site located pri - marily in the Cedar River Waterway and partially in a P- 1 zone was noted by the Assistant Planner. The opinion of the City Attorney is being sought with regard to appro- priate zoning and controls in that area. The proposal is for construction of two hangar facilities . The request also falls under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Manage- . ment Act . A brief discussion followed , and Commissioner Scholes requested that the matter of a vested right to a public right-of-way be referred to the City Attorney. Commis- sioner Teegarden suggested review by the Council Airport Committee , and Commissioner Wik inquired if the private company had agreements to lease the space . 4;' F. HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST ; Appl . No . SA-830-75 ; Site Approval to construct a church in a GS- 1 zone ; prop- erty located on the N. E . corner of N . E. 10th Ave . and Monroe Ave. N . E. The proposal to construct a church on an approximate three acre site in a single family residential district was des- cribed by Mr . Smith . It was noted that there were other church facilities to the north and east. Natural character- istics of the site were discussed , and it was stated by the Assistant Planner that the church plans to preserve as many of the evergreens as possible . The plot plan , including parking , structures and circulation was described . Planned access from N . E. 10th was discussed in view of no improvements on the street . It was agreed that the staff would explore the possibility of access off Monroe in view of the above . Further discussion ensued with regard to this type of development in a single family residential area , possible height restrictions , and topographical conditions . G. ALASKA FISH FERTILIZER CO. ; Ap0 . No . SA-831-75 ; Site Approval for a warehouse addition in an M-P zone ; property located at 865 Lind Ave . S. W. The approximate one acre site located in Earlington Indus- trial Park north of N. E . 10th on Lind Avenue was described by the Assistant Planner . It was noted that there is an existing warehouse/office facility on the property and that a new addition for additional warehouse. space is proposed in an area that would eliminate the 20 foot rear yard set- back requirement of the M-P zone . Mr. Smith advised of previous Planning Commission approval of the facility with restrictive covenants for parking . The previous ownership included another warehouse , but a change of ownership is involved with the resulting request . Mr. Smith noted that the applicant had requested a vari - ance to construct the addition to the Renton Board of Adjust- ment but that the item had been continued for further study and also referred to the Planning Commission . Mr. Smith noted proposed installation of 16 parking stalls along the south side of the building . He advised that the matter of whether or not this is a legal use was being studied by the Assistant City Attorney at this time. CITY OF RENTON APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT ECEIV 4> SUN 4 ls7 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY G 4- 37 G File No . SP- f',3d - 75" Fee d Date Rec'd C_y_73- Receipt No.y8- APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6 : 1 . Name Highlands church of Christ Phone 226-1016 Address P.O. Box 2433 Renton WA 98055 2. Property location N.E. corner of N.E. 10th Ave. and Monroe Ave. N.E. 3. Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) Mapes First Addition, lots 6, 7, 8, 9 , and 10 together with the W i of N z of NW a of SW1 of NE a less West 30 teet and south 30 feet for road and the vacated street (Newport Ave NE) adjacent. 4 . Number of acres or sq. ft. 3. 2 acres Present zoning (jS—/ 5 . What do you propose to develop on this property? To place a church building and parking per requirements cif th.e _cit .nd to serve the surrounding area in a spiritual way. We would like to he of service to the residents in the area by providing a playfield sometime in the future. The following information shall be submitted with this application: Scale A. Site and access plan (include setbacks , existing structures , easements , and other factors limiting development) 1" = 10 ' or 20 ' B. Parking , landscaping and screening plan . . 1" = 10 ' C. Vicinity map (include land use and zoning on adjacent parcels)1" = 200 ' - 800 ' D. Building height and area (existing and proposed) E . A special permit required by the Renton Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance shall submit the information listed in Section 4-2307. 5 in addition to the above . 7. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION : Date approved is V6 Date denied Date appealed Appeal action Remarks /9/a/,,e,e w/rPS/ri'e/.'ae, Lyo eiT rfs . Planning Dept . 2-73 revised 1/74 AFFIDAVIT I Highlands church of Christ being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this _2 day of .T ct NE 19 7S Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at RFa,W/U" r-- t X. agi)..44, Secr'v-Treat NaMe of Notary ublic)Signature of Owner) V3s - /v/ -" la/acc Z ' P .O. Box 2433 Address) Address) RRntop WA City) State) 226-1016 Telephone) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me , and has been found horough and complete in every particular and to conform to the r (elf aR€4 ulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the ,4iW suQ " PPlication . Date Received oir, 19 By: 2.4.1t...—• %.-•oto iv 9 NiNG DEQ Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 of RENT CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON aECF IE O2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WORKSHEET V 4 1915IIIN FOR OFFICE USE ONLY : Application No . Negative Dec . G D Date Received e 7,6- • EIS INSTRUCTIONS : The purpose of this information is to assist the vari - ous departments of the City to determine whether an environmental impact statement will be required before approving and issuing a per- mit for a proposed project . Single family residential uses in non sensitive areas are exempt from this requirement as established by Washington Administrative Code 173-34 . In addition to the following information , please submit a vicinity map recommend scale : 1" representing 200 ' to 800 ' ) and a site map ( rec- ommended scale : 1" representing 10 ' to 40 ' ) . APPLICANT TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REQUIRED IN ITEMS 1 THROUGH 30 BELOW : 1 . Name of applicant Highlands church of Christ 2 . Mailing address P.O. Box 2433 Renton, WA 98055 Telephone226-1n16 3. Applicant is : x Owner ClLessee I JContract purchaser I !Other ( specify ) 4 . Name and address of owner , if other than applicant : Same as above Telephone 5 . General location of proposed project ( give street address if any or nearest street and intersection N.E. corner at the intersection of N.E . 10th Ave_ and Monroe Ave. N.E. 2 - 6 . Legal description ( if lengthy , attach as separate sheet ) Mapes First Addition, lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 together with West one-half of North one-half of Northwest one-quarter of Southwest one-quarter of Northeast one-quarter less West 30 feet and South 30 feet for road and the vacated street Newport Ave N.E. ) adjacent. 7 . Area 3. 2 acres Dimensionsapprox. 302. 5 ' x 463 ' 8. Intended use of property or project ( include details : number of units , volume , etc . ) : We wish to build a church building with a seating capacity of approximatly 188 people with ten classrooms including the auditorium. It would have 4086 square feet of space. This structure would be one unit in the shape of an I with sufficient parking directly to the east of the main entrance. On the eastern most section of the property, we wish to clear for a neighborhood park or playfield in the future. 9 . Generally describe the property and existing improvements : This land is basically divided into two sections for our and your considerations . The west half of the land is heavily wooded with an old house foundation and many large evergreen trees . The east half of the land,once plotted for homes,has grown back up with small brush, stickers, berry bushes, and some trees and this section is where we wish to- place parking and a future playfield. 10 . Total construction cost or fair market value of proposed project including additional developments contemplated : construction cost is estimated at 24 , 000 (we plan to furnish all labor ourselves) and we estimate the fair market value for this structure to be $60, 000 . Future expansion costs are not known at the tirri 11 . Construction dates (month and year) for which permit is requested : Begin July 1975 End June 1976 3 - 12 . List any other permits for this project from state , federal , or other local governmental agencies for which you have applied or will apply, including the name of the issuing agency, whether the permit has been applied for , and if so , the date of the applica- tion , whether the application was approved or denied and the date of same , and the number of the application or permit : No permits applied for and not known at this time. Date Agency Permit Type Submitted* Number Status** Leave bl ;.r,k if not submitted . Approved , denied or pending . 13 . Has an Envi -onmental Impact Statement or an Environmental Assess- ment been prepared for the proposed project? yes Ino If "yes " submit copy with this environmental impact worksheet . 14. Are there similar projects , both public and private , existing or planned in the immediate area : lx lyes I ' no don ' t know If "yes" explain . There are several (approx. five ) other churches within a three block radius of the property and many more within the Highlands residential area. 15 . Is the proposed project located in or adjacent to an area or structure having unique or exceptional historic , cultural , or other values considered important by some sectors of the popu - lation? yes I xino If "yes " explain . 16 . Is the proposed project located in an area that may be considered sensitive and is subject to erosion , landslides , floods , etc . ? lyes Lxlno If "yes " explain . ti 4 - 17 . Is the proposed project located in an area that has a number of large trees or other natural landscaped areas , waterways , marshes or wildlife? lx lyes I no If "yes" explain . There are many large evergreens on the west half of the property and small second growth trees and bushes on the east half of the property. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF PROPOSED PROJECT : In the following questions summarize what the applicant feels will be the environmental impact , both beneficial and adverse , of the proposed project . Consideration should be given to both the human and natural environmental as well as physical , social , and aesthetic aspect . For projects which ay.?, part of a more extensive plan , consider the implications of the entire plan and not just the project now being proposed . 18. Land Use : Will the project have a significant effect on land use in the surrounding area? l yes IjJno Explain : There are several churches in the area and this area will basically be residential for us to serve. We can not think how this structure could have a significant effect on the land use in the community at this time. 19 . Project Design and Appearance : 'Will the project design , appear- ance , landscaping , etc . , assure the maximum protection for the natural environment? EXlyes Lino Explain : At this time as few trees as necessary for the present structure will be cut down and any future buildings are being considered so as to effect as few trees as necessary. We chose to purchase and build on this property because of its location and beauty and therfore we wish to leave it as natural as possible. 20 . Ground Contours : Does the proposed project have an effect on the existing ground contours of the project location? yes rilno . Is the project likely to cause erosion or sedimentation? p yes X no? If "yes" to either , explain . 5 21 . Air Quality: Will construction of the project and use of the completed project have a substantial effect on the existing air quality? (Consider the effect of any gas , chemicals , smoke , dust , particulate matter , and odors ) ? t (yes 1no If "yes " explain . 22 . Water Quality : Will construction of the project and use of the completed project be likely to. have an effect on the existing water quality of the area? (Consider the adequacy of drainage and runoff and the likely endpoint of any liquids draining from the project. )ayes [ no . Is there a good possibility that this project will requir an expansion of local water and/or sewer facilities?1 [yes L[no If "yes " to either , explain . 23 . Noise : Will construction of the project or use of the completed project significantly affect the existing noise levels of the area? e yes ( xlno . Will the project be affected by airports , freeways , railroads or other sources of noise? yes [jjno If "yes" to either , explain . 24. Population Density : Will a noticeable population change result from this project? ( Consider the present density per acre in the surrounding community to the proposed density of the project and including daytime density . ) r iyes a]no . Will the pro- ject cause periodic or temporary f`Tuctuations in population due to tourism , employment , shopping , schools , etc . l [yes ono . If "yes " to either , explain . 6 - 25 . Effect on Population : Will the proposed action directly or in- directly cause the relocation of a sizeable number of persons or the division or disruption of existing community patterns of liv Ying • es r11 no If "yes" explain . 26 . Schools and Parks : Will the proposed project have an effect on schools and oarks in the area? r 'yes 5PIno If "yes " explain . 27 . Transportation : Will construction of the project or use of the completed project have a significant impact on transportation in the area? -- f ( yes IX Ino Explain : There should not be any noticable changes to traffic in the area because we are there to serve the people in the neighborhood and we are not a large congregation at this time. The main intersection should not see significant increases in traffic when we grow because we will be the residents within the surrounding area. 28. Public Use : Will the project be available for use by all sectorso6thepublic? 7-1 yes lXlno Explain : The building only be used by members of the congregation for any and all church related activities throughout the week. 29 . Other impacts : Identify any other beneficial or adverse environ- mental impacts which may result from the construction or comple- tion of the proposed project . None that we know of at this time or can forsee in the future. 7 - 30 . VIEWS OF LOCAL GROUPS : Have you made your plans known to interested community roupsorneighborsinthevicinityoftheproject? plyes Jno If "yes" what are their reactions? If "no" do you intend to cc.ntact these people?( e yes Jno Other churches in the area know of our intentions and we have met with and talked with several neighbors and they have expressed their views on the use of the land. The general consensus of all would be happy to see the land cleared and beautified because kids now use it for building fox holes, tree camps, and other types of activities in amongst the thickets and trees. Also the neighbors would miss being able to throw the lawn clippings and some trash on to the land but we feel they shouldn ' t being doing this in the first place. CERTIFICATION BY OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE The Owner/Representative identified in Item No . 1 or 4 above hereby certifies that the information furnished in this Environmental Work- sheet is true and accurate to the best of their knowledge . Pytilittil.Seer ` S/-7. Signatureitle Date 8 - TO BE FILLED IN BY CITY DEPARTMENTS REVIEW :Y OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Com ents : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Contents : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 9 - REVIEW Sr OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : r//c( Comments : Signature of Rector or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department: Comments : OF RECTO U 4 19 5 ~ t z A rr c" q\ING O/ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 9 - REVIEW aT OTHER CITY DEpARTMENTS : Department : UCD Comments : A:CL-4 ') ;SIC 11.7?6 2 i ignatur- $ Director or Authorized Representative Date REV::EW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS :, t Department: V ti b icS Comments : NC./ t5/-/tt`C Letraj_ ZiJ(\a ss- Signature of Director or or ed Representative a e 10 - ACTION BY RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL A. Staff review determined that project : v Has no significant environmental impact and application should be processed without further consideration of environmental effects . May have significant environmental impact and a complete environmental assessment should be prepared by applicant prior to further action on request for permit. B . Reasons for above conclusion : s N C L / c, i 1 yr/ a t I • AFjoe_0 V A L l v t l_ L. Lick; rl v E 1 . t, V4ti Caw 14 A -8-3o - 7T- L4,401-,-- a . ZgnaurResponsibl Official or Authorized Representative Date : 61—_.Form: EIS-1 Planning Department October 15 , 1973 t., j t't ' •} -,4 r"- ' 1` ' • - -° ' FAA' M' Jam',{'. I ° j I .._ . 1 !A•-i fig 4 i• s j ,1`-• I !•'f -...} { ( P et a, .{ y a:•`•. y<.,,' Ir, L{Y. ,{ I•r'- 1\ 1 i i , 4. Y SL^si} Z, , 11I i aer..e.r.er..,..r T `- i , 1: j' : :1:\tr't'1 I I r-.._ - J •.-.L- i' IFL1 _ I- s a: ZZ8 Z'C Z._ 1I c4NHT r-` • _ rr1 a. z -.: f Irl I rW 1r to I p CN;1pl L J• i 'T-a•a 1e ys 1 ,I{- .- J Ir_ 1 i UUf 4 w t i. a* Lc F " .7 l. r a t. t• / 1 \ i.1 r , 1 ti` , j 7 1 t+ ,/ 7/ I ;_.„,...._,I,, .I Q iI IW- I i_. _ - __ 1-' 47 u t I I f 2 1 '- •-_1? e to \a i --- • -1 t . b lQ i 12 •„ j w• , i-• •t y t- z a 1: ( r/1"—•---kji—...J' V- t — f 1- ,• 2 s 1+- r 1_ Ls y-i'• ( . s•u r ............ r . - W Mt•i r' , fie,, / N Z(S '•. e'.' 4 I a 1,, •LL E •` . I', `1 !t,,, • NE •(r-.... r '1..{. ,"•-" 4t)/ ' q, •' 1.:.,. , .. fLtfl TT1_` IL-._.s ' ,1 - ,T j•'.I 1 a /, e. r r t ._ ft 1. A4.(r l I' i.-Li I - '+••• \/ h "`4 r '• NE I r y is•:.- '1. 9-'•- t- rt rl re } Y. t-"'a Ie i '••t i'/)'L' J. ,pf '• w , M•.,. I \ u( r/3/ , 3'+,'''). ,• , 11) L, • 4l _'tl. i , ,N T L rT T•. Tom. 1.• Tt,,°. 1• ___`.i._ r.L( -' 1 37 l(: I 7Cd• T ti le TT ., r • .,s_.J .. .'. I- j '1; J ` l b : a ' • .• ,,' i rft- 4 11 , 1'1 I Ir +a!inu 1 Jo 'yO I r •E•3i„{jjo t' IE• Ln'-' i-i # 1 1 111•; ( i. 1 1}...6,', S 4_, I1. i•___.......ri 4 f• Ri t1, 11 +„ 1, 1. 1 J• i. 32 ; N ' ' 1 JJ. 0 tl. II'_ '1 ItIL' •I t' rrJ rJ't, F) o 17 . • 1,l•1- /1• n i jJi 1' Zl j .• ; 3 I C. i r,- .•N.'r . • ]'i:.:'.y. n;::., 1 .,,.ns i 1... J •7 ;• t l..f`••!"f, #., v b,•y• Jf, ' , a` I r , ' r,• I 'i:• „ • .,\ Z.. r/\/•• K ARKt l '_jT-t ,'i!, . :r• I I I1V • I z r - 1 .', w • •\`• ( • \ . I 1 5 t 1 . . - I 1:— 'LI•I.n- "t,.'1 i 4 HONE DEVV I.L.. $`-,- '-f•'-', r. • T.:f • I+IGF•i AND I' - •r !-.. ,J. e•" r "'.. IIf"---." •'• ,.(a l.f l,7 r ` 5 y( E_E . SC OOI. r,,. ... •-'f C!7r-• i' EL Ere,.4y •. . 3•t' I r-• .i I r 1.1 r3i, M LiJ r a '_ frt•- -T -{. 1', .E .. cl-,ry r,''I II 11 OL i r .. ' .(T ..• 1 -\ •a .« y I ' I r 11)-(ILL I I rw.w w'• J J-sr FI Y- fl.71 `. ,- 14 T '} C wi 14•,1- ti3 ITPj+Fe1 T J N 7T??lam lT•,° i, • 1 1 .:_'ll_ _r•••l'._ 1• 11• i' c•• rt% L 9 {..... _. •, a}. .r iJ-rt' '• r• i 11411 FliT.i\• - 1,-:--t,.(:17-;;Nt;--_ 4c;'‘''''' '''-M7-11'•`.P-- ji 1 1 fi 1 yE' Y i'2.''1 `',/; '., 1 \ I • I . 6 •I ;•^ ./ / 19 L ! 1 r I' 1 1 1 i I • , , Y 1 0 „_% s., 0 q ‘,; _rc-).....______c- h J K `y ,`,, 1 1 r 0 iN I I 1 g 2 8 g --;---* --- e' 1 ili".4 g A .. ,, ....1 -• 7, vo ' a Rtvtx7E_ __._ e6.,„., tar L5111 a Statutory Warranty Deed q_`,,. ICORIORAT[FORMI SO THE GRANTOR ST. ANDREW'S LODGE NO. 35 r and A.M. , a non profit organization - --- for and in,.n.ideration of Forty Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Five dollars In hard paid,conveys and warrants to HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST, a Washington corporation the following described real estate,situated in the County of King State of Washington: West half of the north half of the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter s:.of the northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in King County, Washington; EXCEPT the south 30 feet for road conveyed to City of Renton by deed recorded under Auditor's File No. 4677834; and EXCEPT the east J0 feet included in the Plat of Mapes First Addition, according 01)to the plat recorded in Volume 60 of Plats, page 7, in King County, Washington, and EXCEPT the west 30 feet lying within Monroe Avenue N.E. ; ALSO Lots 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, Mapes First Addition, according to the plat xecorded in Volume 60 of Plats, page 7 in King County, Washington. Subject to restrictions, reservations and exceptions of record,/and balance of 1973 real estate taxes. E22z977. 1 1 di IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caued this Z iris y:cnt to be executed by its proper officer and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed this O day u. 1973 ST. ANDREW'S LODGE NO. '$5 F, .6 i'..M. a--no profit organ .1tiytn aSte t ! .Wk11'x 1:, , l 1fF OF N.IWINI:f1iN, f 1/110110 s t „-r.•.. a King 1 J4ne s t In this O .t i.. . 4=14, ! .,litNot.iry 1'ubl!t .n .in.! I.r the M.itr ,f 11., !i.•.: • . to me moon to be tie M..t test: Ra6101M041)d St. Andrew's Lodyt No. s', r . 1,e ..,rl.a.vri..n ,bit - •e., ,1.r vurAry a.: .11.11 .t.e.1 i . ,i 411: ilcck%.,b #111''\ '! 1 P . yr' `... 7• a ss CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 2883 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON , WASHINGTON, VACATING A PORTION OF NEWPORT AVENUE NORTHEAST , A PUBLIC STREET , AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREINBELOW WHEREAS a proper petition for vacating a portion of Newport Avenue Northeast , Renton , Washington , was duly filed with the City Clerk on or about August 5 , 1974 , and said petition having been signed by owners representing 100% of the total frontage upon the portion of said street to be vacated; and WHEREAS the City Council by Resolution No. 1930 passed and approved on August 19 , 1974 , and after due investigation, did fix and determine the 23rd day of September, 1974 at the hour of 8 : 00 P.M. in the City Council chambers of the City of Renton to be the time and place for a public;.1earingthereon , and the City Clerk having given due notice of such hearing in the manner provided by law , and all persons having been heard appearing in favor or in opposition thereto ; and WHEREAS the Department of Public Works and the Planning Department of the City having duly considered said petition for said vacation, and having found same to be in the public interest and for the public benefit , and no injury or damage to any person or properties will result from such vacation ; NOW THEREFORE , THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I : The following portion of street , to-wit : All that portion of Newport Avenue N.E. (known as M" Place N. ) , having a width of 60 feet , being the West 60 feet of Mapes 1st Addition as recorded in Volume 60 of Plats , page 7 , Records of King County , Washington , lying South of the North Line of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 9 , Twp. 23 N. , Rg. 5 E. , W.M. and Northerly of the Northerly right of way margin of N.E. 10th Street extended also known as Newport Avenue Northeast) Renton, all situate in the County of King , State of Washington BE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY VACATED ,..subject, however , to that certain DEDICATION OF EASEMENT" dated June 30 , 1974 and recorded in the King 1- 4 County Auditor' s office under file No. 7410090357 • SECTION II : The City hereby waives any payment or fee pursuant to R.C.W. 35 . 79 . 030 . SECTION III : This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage , approval and five days after its publication. A certified copy of this ordinance shall be filed with the and Office of Records and Elections , King County ,/ as otherwise provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 21st day of October 1974 4/444.1.4 0Q- Delores A. Mead , ity Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 21st day of October , 1974 . 4 Avery Grrett , ayor Appro/ed as toorr},, Gerard M. Shellan , City Attorney Date of Publication: 10-25-74 2— 4 i 6 DEDICATION OF EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE made this ` 6 day of June, 1974 , by the HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST acting by and through its officers and directors, namely, ROBERT LYNN SPECK, HOWARD L. GARNER, and E. T. CRAIG, hereinafter referred to as "Grantors" t7 raj W I T N E S S E T H• : a'- CD That the said Grantors for themselves , their heirs, suc- CD v cessors and assigns do by these presents grant, bargain, sell, convey, and dedicate an easement for the purposes of ingress and egress and to install and maintain utilities over and under the following described real properties situate in King County, Washing- ton: The North 20 feet of each of the following described real properties : Parcel 1 : West half of the North half of the NWa of the SW4 of the NE4 of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5, E. , W.M. , in King County, Washington. Parcel 2 : Lot 10 , Mape's 1st Addition according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 60 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. Parcel 3: The vacated portion of "M" Place North, lying directly between Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 legally described above. The Grantors for themselves, their heirs, successors, and assigns and for all future owners of the real property herein- after described which is to be benfited by the easement described herein, waive all right to protest any future city road improve- meat district or other action by the city to provide public right- cf-way over the real property subject to the easement described above. The easement granted and dedicated herein is for the bene- fit of the following described real property and the future owners thereof: West 328 feet of the East 358 feet of the South 5 acres of the W'-; of the NW 4 of the NE4 of Section 9 , Township 23 N. , Range 5 E. , W.M. , in King County, Washington. This easement shall be binding upon the Grantors herein, 1. 4 f their heirs, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantors have hereunto set ram- their hands and seals the day and year first above written. 1 D. HI(,eIpik F CHRIST CD Rep'6rt yhn peck J., -I 4. 1) r---0-4,-0 eiL?a and L. Gar/tener E. T. Craig STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss COUNTY OF KING On this day personally appeared before me ROBERT LYNN SPECK, HOWARD L. GARNER and E. T. CRAIG, officers and directors of the HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST, acting for and on its behalf, and acknowledged to that they are authorized to sign this instrument for and on behalf of said HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST, and said instrument is the free and voluntary act and deed of said CHURCH, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed this o day of June, 1974 . i r' - NOTARY1PUBLIC in and 'for the `{State of Washington, residing atst,on, &s 2. 41.-......h.........4..... 1.1.... . 4.. t 4 4______ N W 9- 2 3 r3- a...•....a.. AVG.. 1.1.e 14 t J' 1 Or I 'I. W 4 ID r-nor i. f• a. It IIso1 1 i 0 2' i t k--.1... . v.• I 1:1 1 4 1 I C0 t 1 C0 1 0 i4‘ar... it 6 Its t I 0) 1 _71.t.1, it i _,0 • 4 A 1 . ._... \Ils.r--- J 1- 1:. It - 0 0 L. • 3.1..-32.1 ..4 4. /1-)- o2 . IN/.C..., I I.J.%---I i•s z- : 1.•+% I I ' 1 itivr.PLACE N . 6,,I. 1 Gr•r• • r •.. !.1 1/17,4 1 1 N 6 --: KS".%./4.0 0 i• ..7.,1#61 :‘ 1 1. 4i I 0 1 0 J 0 I •-,)-.I ("tr. 45 •11'13 ‘4 C.. ,-., ,..:‘, AO-. 4 Iri 4 I i I lel ,'to. fly/ :11; Ul ,..• ..A. .... Oa r--' 4 ki ,.°,1 r.:: 4,5 #•.. r--. t i'• so, A... t • • -# el CI p!, 1.„k 3 , r4.....1 -11 3 a) a 0 ,. ..— , • , -, :.., 0 -3-s 4.Cr•S ' ; •,. 1 1 la I to i t -r.i- 9 , 4- 4.,":5/...f6 7 1 i 0 LY M P I A 3 li AV E . N. E . 31.4''-. r 4.) 0.-1....i..-Y-i... :•-•.r- 3 at; 47 9 th S T. 3 r). _ 1 , I : ...T.-. , .. lt.i• 7 /1., i 4... 45 ....,1 Y .:.. 111 2'5 04-05... Z .4 S4 , Ili' 41 • 1/1 01 1 f . A j A... . c:1 E R T 1' t..•1, c.r. o A r• . t; t P4 . it rLil s eie. ....-..- _-_, ' ....:-.P.0 41-.... r ri • ---- — 4, .4°:., '-',..ik.,. ,, . k 0 ,, N., , ,...7 :. ,*7 . 4 t I c,....?7 , I - '''',....... PR 9 v. r• . MI .1. ks." , 4 164° Vi. 't. ' I 1 k4 41 / I i/ Af 6 e i i0,11 ' 1 0se ... I. • 101th017 ,• PI .) I‘." V4P.1 t, • s:r tk w r.,,,, , _ 44,i,,,.„ ,s1,... -• i.k //,,15\ 2,-• r. - T.-6L. 7 1,1 k:I t,.• I . . 1 _ Y.' a c (... 3 1 r II '1 s. • 4. (.' ;„' , p / E.' 13C E4vA ....›,S, 0, . C, NI ---. 4, /....._ f....;,:k_.:. y-.., • . • If 4?- it . 4..,Z t 1.../ ....i 4 h.. 0 T. N E.....4 •,---.", I C::- Z 1.6 -4 1.4; f 1 I -----4-.• . 4); ittit.1, c I i BE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY VACATED1-subject, however, to that certain DEDICATION OF EASEMENT" dated June 30 , 1974 and recorded in the King 1- ROUTE SCHEDULE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE ROUTED 6,11 Z i5 I'LLASL REVIEW THIS APPLICATION FOR; REZONE MAJOR PLAT L APPROVAL ,CHI J r C,c5j SHORT PLAT SPECIAL PERMIT CI r WAIVER SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT OR EXEMPTION AND RETURN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE, BEFORE jr ` G1-rSSIGNATURE OP INi1TL1I. DEI'AARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL DATE BUILDING L TRAFFIC ENG. X 6-2s-7s 4011011100---- 49,ptp.,eives,t, k.e(44 6, 26. FIRE 1, HEALTH 2(Z_—Gfulls4 I:I.1'IEhLI:'S CUM'1LNTS OR APPROVAL CONDITIONS: cok at et 04044 for. 4 .1 CL a- / 0- At s ^ w su. 5erv,CC ehlals (loct Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. a):. •..;:p ,:r1nn01.nt,being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that 'is the Ci r f el-r". of THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a tri-weekly newspaper. That NOTICE OFsaidnewspaperisalegalnewspaperanditisnowandhasbeenforRENTONPLANNINGmorethansixmonthspriortothedateofpublicationreferredto, COMMISSION printed and published in the English language continually as a tri- RENTON,WASHINGTON weekly newspaper in Renton, King County, Washington, and it is now A public hearing will be held byandduringallofsaidtimewasprintedinanofficemaintainedatthetheRentonPlanningCommissionat aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the Renton its regular meeting in the Council Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of Chambers, City Hall, Rentoh, the Superior Court of the County in which it is published, to-wit, King Washington, on July 23, 1975 at County, 8:00 p.m.to consider the following petitions: Washington.That the annexed is a c aJllc to QItCl.1.REZONE FROM GTOB-1+fie No.R-821-75;Property located on east side of Union Ave.N.E. approximately 400 feet south of N.E.4th St. 2.REZONE FROM G TO R-3, as it was published in regular issues (and file No. R-827-75; property not in supplement form of said newspaper)once each issue for a period d on east side Union Ave. N.E. approximately 500 feet south of N.E.4th St. of consecutive issues, commencing on the 3.SITE APPROVAL FOR CON- STRUCTION OF AIRCRAFT HANGARS IN P-1 ZONE AND 1..;. day of . -1,, r 19 75., and ending the CEDAR RIVER WATERWAY, file No. SA-829-75; property day of 19 both dates IocatedIn the Renton Municipal between Southwest 21s inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its Airport adjacent to the Cedar and Southwest 23rd St. subscribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee SI 7.WAIVER N OFF-SITE AI 4.SITT EE APPROVAL TO CON- PROVEMETS IN R-2 ZC 'd STRUCT A CHURCH IN A GS- file No. W-833-75;,prof2 ..1 ' 1 ZONE, file No. SA-830-75; located on Union Ave.N.E •charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of$ which property located on the N.E. tween N.E. 15th St. •has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words corner of N.E. 10th Ave. and • Glencoe Subdivision. for the first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each Monroe Ave.N.E. All interested persons to said subsequent insertion. 5.SITE APPROVAL FOR Lions are invited to be present a WAREHOUSE ADDITION IN Planning Commission meetinc j AN M-P ZONE, file No. SA- July 23, 1975, at 8:00 p.mp -,1-t.. ,-r,r 44 :.1xt.: 831.75;property located at 865 express their opinions. chic f etc* / Lind Ave.S.W. LARRY,GIBBON,SECRET, 6.SPECIAL PERMIT TO FILL RENTON PLANN AND GRADE IN M-P ZONE; COMMISS 14 file No. SP-834-75; property Published in the Renton Rec located on East Valley Freeway Chronicle July 13, 1975.R335CSubscribedandsworntobeforemethisdayof t 19 cti.„:„...___1(7,-,,,, Notary Pu i in and for the State of Washington, re i ng at Renton,King County. 0 Passed by the Legislature, 1955, known as Senate Bill 281, effective PEC C "v 1uilc 9th,1955. YY O Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, Ulf( Z adopted by the newspapers of the State. fl 23 n r 9' L y' G DEPAR I L C Chr' S- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION RENTON , WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION AT ITS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON , ON JULY 23 1975 , AT 8 : 00 P . M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . REZONE FROM G TO B- 1 , file No . R-821-75 ; property located on east side of Union Ave . N . E . approximately 400 feet south of N . E . 4th St . 2 . REZONE FROM G TO R-3 , file No . R-827-75 ; property located on east side of Union Ave . N . E . approximately 500 feet south of N . E . 4th St . 3 . SITE APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AIRCRAFT HANGARS IN P- 1 ZONE AND CEDAR RIVER WATERWAY , file No . SA-829-75 ; property located in the Renton Municipal Airport adjacent to the Cedar River . 4 . SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AT CHURCH IN A GS- 1 ZONE , file No . SA-830-75 ; property located on the N . E . corner of N . E . 10th Ave . and Monroe Ave . N . E . 5 . SITE APPROVAL FOR WAREHOUSE ADDITION IN AN M-P ZONE , file No . SA-831-75 ; property located at 865 Lind Ave . S . W . 6 . SPECIAL PERMIT TO FILL AND GRADE IN M-P ZONE ; file No . SP-834-75 ; property located on East Valley Freeway between Southwest 21st St . and Southwest 23rd St . 7 . WAIVER OF OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS IN R-2 ZONE , file No . W-833-75 ; property located on Union Ave . N . E . between N . E . 15th St . and Glencoe Subdivision . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON JULY 23 , 1975 AT 3 : 00 P . M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS . LARRY GIBSON , SECRETARY PUBLISHED July 13 , 1975 RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION I , WILLIAM C . TURNER HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me , a Notary Public , SIGNED • fre./7-te..7-\•: he 10th day of July 197r . 1GaC- ,Lzz S-ci i 1 Affidavit of Publication v. i ol. y j, Zi2S2 STATE OF WASHINGTON 2COUNTYOFKINGss. 1) RTM being first duly sworn on i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING EXPRESS THEIR OPRIR ONSBsRENTONPLANNING SECRETCOMMISSIONoath, deposes and says that is the of RENTON,WASHINGTON RENTON PLANN THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a tri-weekly newspaper. That COMMISS said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE Published in the Renton Rec , more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, HELD BY THE RENTON PLAN- Chronicle June 15, 1975.R330 printed and published in the English language continually as a tri- NING COMMISSION AT ITS REG- • weekly newspaper in Renton, King County, Washington, and it is now ULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the Renton RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of JUNE 25, 1975, AT 8:00 P.M. TO the Superior Court of the County in which it is published, to-wit, King CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING County, PETITIONS: Lannitt. COI^rii3..ior: - PRE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, RY PLATFOR Washington.That the annexed is a P8fileNo. PP-824-75; property located on north side of N.38th a 2'1 tN- r'F S 1'E:•• . . ' '011 — E tC• St. between Lake Washington Blvd.N.and Park Ave.N. 2.REZONE FROM G TO B-1,file as it was published in regular issues (and No. R-821.75; property located g on east side of Union Ave.N.E. not in supplement form of said newspaper)once each issue for a period approximately 400 feet south of N.E.4th St. of consecutive issues, commencingthe ; REZONE FROM G TO R-3, on fifile No. R-827-75; property located on east side of Union i r Ave.N.E.approximately500feet day of 19 and ending the south of N.E.4th St. 4. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR t EXISTING GRAVEL AND SAND day of 19 both dates EXCAVATING OPERATION IN inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its 7 S-1 ZONE, file No. SP-752-74; subscribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee • property located at 2930 S.E.5th St. ed for the foregoing 5.SITE APPROVAL FOR CON- charged g g publication is the sum of$which STRUCTION OF AIRCRAFT has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words HANGARS IN P-1 ZONE AND for the first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each CEDAR RIVER WATERWAY, subsequent insertion. file No. SA-829-75; property 4• located in the Renton Municipal s, Airport adjacent to the Cedar River. f 6. SITE APPROVAL TO CON- C'' is f cif :"''STRUCT A CHURCH IN A GS-1 ZONE. file No. SA-830-75; property located on the N.E. t ner of N.E. 10th Ave. and nroe Ave.N.E. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of • 7. SITE APPROVAL FOR WAREHOUSE ADDITION IN AN Li JriE 19 (:M-P ZONE,file No.SA-831-75. property located at 865 Lind Ave. S.W. T C(, t. t L..-(.i:._ ` r-vys--"1. 4' 8. WAIVER OF OFF-SITE IM- PROVEMENTS -7200 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, ZONE, o. WIN 26-75: resding at Renton,King County. file No. W s e5f property located on east side of Jones Ave. N.E. approximately 500 feet north of N.E.24th St. Passed by the Legislature, 1955, known as Senate Bill 281, effective ALL INTERESTED PERSONS June 9th,1955. TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PLAN- WeA ern Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, •NING COMMISSION MEETING ON adopted by the newspapers of the State.UNE 45. 1975 at 8.00 P.M. TO 7-1--r 11.7 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION RENTON , WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION AT ITS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON , ON JUNE. 1.5 19 75 , AT 8 : 00 P . M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION , file No . PP-824-75 ; property located on north side of N . 38th St . between Lake Washington Blvd . N . and Park Ave . N . 2 . REZONE FROM G TO B- 1 , file No . R-821-75 ; property located on east side of Union Ave . N . E . approximately 400 feet south of N . E . 4th St . 3 . REZONE FROM G TO R-3 , file No . R-827-75 ; property located on east side of Union Ave . N . E . approximately 500 feet south of N . E . 4th St . 4 . SPECIAL PERMIT FOR EXISTING GRAVEL AND SAND EXCAVATING OPERATION IN S- 1 ZONE , file No . SP-752-74 ; property located at 2930 S . E . 5th St . 5 . SITE APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AIRCRAFT HANGARS IN P- 1 ZONE AND CEDAR RIVER WATERWAY , file No . SA-829-75 ; property located in the Renton Municipal Airport adjacent to the Cedar River . 6 . SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH IN A GS- 1 ZONE , file No . SA-830-75 ; property located on the N . E . corner of N . E . 10th Ave . and Monroe Ave . N . E . 7 . SITE APPROVAL FOR WAREHOUSE ADDITION IN AN M-P ZONE , file No . SA-831-75 ; property located at 865 Lind Ave . S . W . ' 8 . WAIVER OF OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTSIN G-7200 ZONE , file No . W-826-75 ; property located on east side of Jones Ave . N . E . approximately 500 feet north of N . E . 24th St . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON JUNE 25 , 1975 AT F : 00 P . M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS . LARRY GIBSON , SECRETARY PUBLISHED June 15 , 1975 RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION I , William C . Turner , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me , a Notary Public , SIGNED/!monthe12thdayofJune 1975_. 7222 - PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RENT O N PLANNING COMMISSION A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON JUNE 25 . 1975 - 8 P . M . TO CONSIDER THE ITEM DESCRIBED BELOW: SITE APPROVAL HIGHLAN__DS CHURCH OF CHRIST ; Site a royal to construct a Church in mmm7 ' l, .a_ 0S- 1 zone ; property located on t e N. E. yf N . .—iOth Ave: and Monroe Ave . N. E. Appl . No . SA-830-75 4 •14 1 i i" ..1 :LI • illookol'4ijai, tiTus***'•• mno,..;, , iv 11! I " tr,R-2 411- ii • •-•-•-•1._........1 I 4, 111.),,:i '1 R„.7.3,., 81 r 4 1 kt..2)14." -,'. ? m.' 40 • I ''r: ..1..., 01‘• lil .:'.f," ! .,'1-. ;,'. I,i,t3, ,A,.."17.rli '.._ -L.. ,. , lam I • 7. v .. ..::,,,..,..#...,!..,» 1 ,4”.-, 4:1-: ' "" ' ''•4•-- 1 12. .0-.1‘ I ••. / 4,?'' /. „ ,,,, 1 . : A..a 1,4,1..j , r.... A;I , 1 . '• 'il . . •e"1 ..' c 55 Er . ,C. r 4 ...: f , ' .i', !n. 7.-- .• •‘r. ', 4, ' 4 44.!.‘. '. 4 '"4: I 4.''.... 4 37 HIGHLANDS CHURC I OF CHI'' IST .-i•' i° SITE APPROVAL i.J Yjj..jj R~ I - ` r `` I ..I7 7 /, 1/ :1 . . 1..!1 ', 1 y, , G .: t 1. - ' 1 . e . 1."'•' Lip',.._-,!:'•:I. ',?;.7 Iit,:i. .-*/i I '.I .. 4^'f2 • '/ :, - 4. '.4:. .,.ti.•r,F,•0•.. '.M1r • ,I .!I -. 41 . ,., a: ''" , l I i i I i. I,, I: kr..).,.t1. '•'"-1 e G':I y'• i S ,n 1 I . 1 1 • t h-, 11•. • i ; . L : ' tot L. 1.•I• •,,5 1;.._. ,5, 1.1. , • +!. ' I !• •.r., y, . r r.`wM . .}'1 1! •If I ; I.AI ?. y_-.• i i •I•T4'}ir•,771 1:• V 1 1: 1 ! r. i r 4" 60R-I THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND AND TO EXPRESS OPINIONS OR SUBMIT COMMENTS IN WRITING . IF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS DESIRED, CONTACT : CITY OF RENTON - PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 235-2550 MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 200 MILL AVE. S . RENTON, WA. 98055 MEMORANDUM TO Clerk ' s Files DATE 9/ 17/75 FROM Planning Department SUBJECT Proposed Restrictive Covenants The attached copy of Restrictive Covenants are preliminary only at this time and have not been consummated , inasmuch as they have yet to be reviewed by the Church body . DRELIMINARY SUBJECT TO REVISION DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WHEREAS, the Highlands Church of Christ , a Washington Corporation , is the owner of the following real property in the City of Renton , County of King , State of Washington , described as follows : west half of the north half of the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 9 , Township 23 North , Range 5 East , W . M. , in King County, Washington ; EXCEPT the south 30 feet for road conveyed to City of Renton by deed recorded under Auditor ' s File No . 4677834 ; and EXCEPT the east 30 feet included in the Plat of Mapes First Addition , according to the plat recorded in Volume 60 of Plats , page 7 , in King County , Washington , and EXCEPT the west 30 feet lying within Monroe Avenue N . E . ; ALSO Lots 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 and 10 , Mapes First Addition , accord- ing to the plat recorded in Volume 60 of Plats , page 7 in King County , Washington , together with vacated street described below: all that portion of Newport Avenue N . E . ( known as M" Place N . ) , having a width of 60 feet , being the west 60 feet of Mapes 1st Addition as recorded in Volume 60 of Plats , page 7 , Records of King County , Washington , lying south of the north line of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 9 , Twp . 23 N . , Rg 5 E . , W. M. and northerly of the northerly right of way margin of N . E. 10th Street extended (also known as Newport Avenue Northeast ) Renton , all situate in the County of King , State of Washington . WHEREAS, the owner of said described property desires to impose restrictions and covenants running with the land as to use , present and future , of the above des- cribed real property . NOW, THEREFORE, the aforesaid owner hereby establishes , grants , and imposes restrictions and covenants running with the land hereinabove described with respect to the use by the undersigned , their successors , heirs , and assigns , as follows : NATURAL AND LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS The first fifty ( 50 ) feet adjacent to all property lines shall be maintained in its existing natural vegetation and incorporated with additional trees , shrubs , and groundcover as necessary to provide an effective screen and retain the natural character of the site . SETBACKS No structure or building shall be permitted or located within sixty ( 60 ) feet of the west and south property lines and within fifty ( 50 ) feet of the north and east property lines . 2 - SUBDIVISION AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT The properties as described shall be considered as one tract and shall not be further subdivided or sold for residential purposes other than one possible future Church-owned parsonage . All future site development shall be subject to approval of the Renton Planning Commission . DURATION These covenants shall run with the land and expire on December 31 , 2025 . These covenants shall remain in full force and effect , unless otherwise changed or amended by all parties in writing , with the approval of the City Council of the City of Renton . Any violation of breach of these restrictive covenants may be enforced by proper legal procedures in the Superior Court of King County by either the City of Renton or any property owners adjoining property who are adversely affected by such breach . Robert L . Speck James G. Hallingshad Chairman Vice-Chairman Lester Porter Secretary-Treasurer STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING On this day of _ 1975 , before me personally appeared and 1 the persons who executed the within and foregoing instrument , and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said persons for the uses and purposes therein mentioned . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written . Notary Public in and for the State of Washington , residing at J THE CITY OF RENTON n 8 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 013 AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT Opp c 235 - 2550 gT4-0 SEPT' MEMORANDUM September 15, 1975 TO : Tom Touma , Office Engineer ATTN : Arlene Haight FROM: Michael L . Smith , Asst. Planner RE : PROPOSED RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS - HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST ; property located on N. E . corner of N . E . 10th and Monroe Ave. N . E . Will you please review the legal description of the Highlands Church of Christ property for accuracy prior to our consummating these cove- nants . Please note the property includes a street vacation , as described in Ordinance No . 2883 , copy attached . Thank you . Attachment MLS : wr ti 17 c THE CITY OF RENTON n MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 p AVERYGARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT oq 0 235 - 2550 TFO SEPIt September 11 , 1975 Robert L . Speck , Chairman James G . Hallingshad , Vice-Chairman Lester Porter, Secretary-Treasurer Officers for the Highlands Church of Christ P . 0. Box 2433 Renton , WA. 98055 RE : HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION , FILE NO . SA-830-75 Gentlemen : The Renton Planning Commission at its September 10 , 1975 , meeting approved Stage I of the above application subject to the following conditions : 1 . Filing of revised restrictive covenants running with the land. (Copy of revised cove- nants is attached . ) 2 . Staff approval of final revised plans com- patible with the proposed setbacks and natural areas defined in the restrictive covenants , including the location and layout of the park- ing areas . 3. Final staff approval of detailed landscape plans for the entire scope of Stage I develop- ment . 4 . Provision of a bond or certified check in the amount of 150% of the cost of landscaping installation and a three year maintenance period. 5 . Ingress-egress to the development shall be limited to N . E . 10th Street. Highlands Church of Christ September 11 , 1975 Page Two 6 . Parking areas shall be dispersed as much as possible through proper site plan design . 7 . Earth-tone colors that blend with the sur- rounding natural area shall be utilized on the building . It was felt that this approval will allow the Church to build Stage I of its development , retain most of the natural character of the site , provide for additional screening and landscaping , where necessary , and suffi - ciently protect all adjacent properties from possible adverse impacts of the development. Once the abovementioned items have been accomplished , a building permit can be approved by this Department. If you have any further questions , please contact this Department. Ver truly ours Michael L . Smith Assistant Planner Attachments cc : Building Division MLS : wr I2j. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION • RENTON, WASHINGTON c-) MUNICIPALBUILDING • RENTON. WASHINGTON 98055 • 235-2550o> oQcp SEPS tlO( Z' September 10, 1975 TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Special Studies Committee , Larry Gibson , Chairman ; Bylund Wik , Logan Garrison RE : COMMITTEE REPORT , HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION , FILE SA-830-75 The Special Studies Committee met on August 18 , 1975 , August 25 , 1975 , and September 8, 1975 , to discuss the Highlands Church of Christ Site Plan proposal . After detailed study of possible alternative site plan configurations , the Committee recommends approval of Stage I of the application only subject to the following : 1 . Filing of restrictive covenants that contain : a ) A fifty foot buffer area around the entire site to be left in its natural state or supplemented by additional landscaping where necessary according to an approved landscape plan . b) Sixty (60) foot building setbacks along the west and south property lines and fifty 50 ) foot building setbacks along the north and east property lines . c ) No further subdivision of the property . 2 . Submittal of final revised plans compatible with the proposed setbacks and natural area . 3 . Final staff approval of detailed landscape plans for the entire scope of the Stage I development . 4. Provision of a bond in the amount of 150% of the cost of installation and a three-year maintenance period . Memo to Planning Commission Members September 10 , 1975 Page Two 5 . Ingress-egressto the development shall be limited to N . E . 10th St . 6 . Parking areas shall be dispersed as much as possible through proper site plan design . It is felt that such approval will allow the Church to build Stage I of their development, retain most of the natural screening and character of the site , provide for additional screening and landscaping where necessary , and sufficiently protect all adjacent properties from possible adverse impacts of the development . LG : MLS :wr dj1 RFPETITIONTOTHERENTONPLANNINGCOMMISSION `, 10FOF nfeF/p, f" a SEp y s SUBJECT: HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST 9 19I SITE PLANNED AT MONROE AVE. 2 N.E. AND 10TH STREET NG CEP Mt WE, the undersigned, are homeowners in the neigh- borhood of the above-mentioned site. We are in protest of having the said church constructed on this site for the following reasons: 1) We feel it is a definite infringement on our right to maintain a residential community. With five churches already located within a two (2) block radius of the proposed site, another church would be a burden to the environment towards which we have worked. 2) We are very sure that this additional church would cause us traffic problems in addition to those which already exist as a result of the current church population. 3) An additional large building for public use will only prove to further complicate an already severe drainage problem in the immediate vicinity. This complica- tion will arise as a result of additional masses of blacktop. 4) With only a few congregational members living in the immediate community, the church cannot be termed to be community supported. We feel that the church could better serve its congregation by locating elsewhere. FURTHERMORE , we ask that the commission deny the approval of this application for a special permit to build the Church of Christ on the above mentioned site based on the above-mentioned reasons . We feel that the community would best be served and maintained only by the addition of residential homes. In the event th tt e Commission should decide against our wishes, the acceptable site plan would be one which would require the church to be located at the center of the lot, and further require that large trees be left standing on all three street sides of the lot as it now exists ,for the purpose of blocking the public view of the building. We would also request that a time limit be imposed on finished construction of a short duration and further require the building appearance to blend in with the community at large . Respectively Submitted: f [7-2-e 'L ZG 7 1. i/` J 5i:Xt--?•< _" \ Ae _ NAME ADDRESS ter.re !/ e 1043 C 7 41)-e>14.10/ 4- A . Petition to the Renton Planning Commission Page 2 ie07 7e: 71-ft'id io,?sc "y2,eAo-e a-o-c ,aX- aec..) cl(77eit-14..... 5-- s- ff /•x,g n,&P 9 - i--71'2 -/-e. (264(. fz; ,-/A4:-.K4742- c --) /) .y/) -) ../)) ,e-, ci?4, _ — „--, , ...-/YI e:7( 64--?m . i Tr6 7 hf-6,4t-ie-e N, -) Fc-ci ma Ala' 3/4'1A, -•_.) 111ta,1_, .17'q c4.}-L-t71-1 I-- UJ, Teti-- Avg-- Ai ti 1-1,./.:.- • Y.- 044 /..,-,::74,a* --.."22.-1 A,42..rt.e.--4: iiy-, -,5-- -://4:„.10.e.- (el:_ , 7'(:' • 1 1 71).,:. 7e•---z4 e v 3 L- 71 a '77C: L:. j 67?(,. .-hez).t.t. f,W 1()t.: ig1:II l't4k(7-(4‘ 7c .7/ ,,,,9n arg e r7 r c 7/4.1./ 1 -1' Z.-z.7 / 7-P&,w4-e,-( ,7.-(%0-C /1/ /_Z_- September 7, 1975 Mr. Art Scholes, Chairman Renton Planning Commission Renton Municipal Bldg. Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Sir; Please read this letter at the commission meeting of September 10, 1975 so that it may become part of public record associated with the special permit application of the Highlands Church of Christ. It has been brought to our attention that a petition to the commission has been circulated anti signed by our neighbors in favor of our site plan for the property on the Northeast corner of Monroe Ave. N.E. and N.E. 10th Ave. We appreciate their efforts on our behalf and hope. that we can be good neighbors and be of service to them in the future. A question has been raised about our building placement for which we would like to formally respond to at this time. A commissioner has suggested that a central location would utilize the entire property and there by insure the neighborhood against future houses being built on the site. While the westerly placement is our desire and would allow the eastern portion to be subdivided by the congre- gation in the future, we wish to assure our neighbors and the commission that there is no intent to ever subdivide the property in any manner for residental use other than for a parsonage as proposed. It is planned that the church will keep the property as an integral piece of land with all expansions on the property being church related. Furthermore, the property is to be utilized completely for church related activities and again is not the intent of this congregation to ever subdivide any portion for resale forsingle family residential use. We did agree in principle to sell a lot on the Northwest corner of the property to one of our church members who is planning to retire in a few years. The agreement was to the effect that the church would have first option to buy the land and building at the developed costs if the lot was ever resold. This had three advantages for the church: 1) since the offer was greater than the market value of the land, the monies realized from the sale would have contributed substancially to building program, 2) with the retirement of the members we would have someone to help maintain the buildings and grounds with relatively large amounts of the individuals time being available for this purpose, and 3) the property would ultimately return to the church. Since the proposed lot sale has caused some confusion, the proposed buyer has graciously withdrawn his offer to buy and the officers of the church have accepted the withdrawal. pF RFC RECEIVEDlV 2 SEP 9 1975 A. ti.. l • t Page 2 Mr. Art Scholes, Chairman It has been noted that the location preferred by the church for Phase I and Phase II buildings leaves much of the property undeveloped. This has been purposely done to allow the present generation of church members and the neighbors of the church a large recreation area, and to allow future generations of church members the option of planned expansion on the property beyond thatshowninPhaseII. In conclusion, it can be stated that subdividing the property for resale for single family residences is not anticipated and is not the desire of this congre- gation to do so in the future. In fact, we would like to place a restrictive covenant on the property to further assure the neighbors and the commission that this property will remain intact for church related activities. This process is now being investigated and we pray that we can begin construction soon. Thank you Mr. Chairman for this opportunity to clarify the church's plan for the property and answer the questions being asked by the staff and commission. Sincerel , y1"` ' 7.„,,,,i , e Officers for the Highlands Church of Christ 0 F RF c; fIttgeb )6 7 SEp 9 Z. a Chvrck 4 J THE CITY OF RENTON n o8~i MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 01) co AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT O 235 2550 fD SEPIE O MEMORANDUM August 28, 1975 TO : Files FROM : Michael L . Smith , Assistant Planner RE : Planning Commission Special Studies Committee Meeting of August 28 , 1975 PRESENT : Logan Garrison Bylund Wik Michael Smith , Planning Department DISCUSSION : 1 . Highlands Church of Christ No information had been received . 2 . Scarsella Brothers , Inc . Reviewed and discussed the EIS and alternative courses of action regarding the Special Permit . Staff presented its action on the Shoreline PErmit which consisted of partial approval with conditions . The Committee indicated that they would consider recommending this course of action to the Commission . They discussed the need to set a public hearing date on the matter and agreed to recommend to the Commission at its September 10 , 1975 , meeting that the hearing date be set for September 24 , 1975 . 3 . Glacier Park Draft EIS The Committee had not completed individual reviews of the EIS , but did discuss some of the issues briefly . It was felt that a seperate meeting was needed to completely review the EIS and possible Commission action on the Special Permit Application . MLS : rh l-l110\C v110vc L)E' l THE CITY OF RENTON n 5~ i MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH 98055 pA AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT o44rfDSEP Q 235 2550 MEMORANDUM August 19 , 1975 TO : Files FROM: Michael L . Smith Assistant Planner RE : Planning Commission Special Studies Committee Meeting of August 18 , 1975 ATTENDANCE : Larry Gibson , Chairman Bylund Wik , Member Logan Garrison , Member Michael Smith , Planning Department DISCUSSION : 1 . Highlands Church of Christ Staff reviewed status to date , and informed Committee of a letter sent to the Church representatives by the staff as per the Committee request , explaining the need for further study of alternate site plans , owner- ship information of entire property , and clarification of plans for construction of a single family residence on the subject site . The Committee felt that a compromise site plan layout is needed to adequately reduce the impacts to all adjacent properties . The Committee indicated the need to study this additional information prior to the Septem- ber 10 , 1975 , meeting at which time the Committee was to report its findings to the Commission . 2 . Scarsella Brothers , Inc . We discussed the EIS and some of the alternatives avail - able to the Commission in terms of filling the property and site plan development of the property . The applicant has to this date only applied to the Commission for a Special Permit to fill and grade . We also discussed some of the comments from other agencies regarding the proposal , 1 Memo to the Files August 19 , 1975 Page Two and the possibility of granting a partial permit until other mitigation areas in the Valley are more definitely established . We discussed the Shoreline Permit and the possible alternatives the staff is exploring with respect to it. It was indicated that action would be taken on the Shoreline Permit very soon and that the Committee would be informed of this decision . 3 . Glacier Park EIS The Committee discussed briefly the Glacier Park Draft EIS which had been previously distributed to them for their review. 4 . NEXT MEETING DATE A meeting was set for Monday , August 25 , 1975 , to further review the above items . MLS : rh F v ti, THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0 235 - 2550 Areb SEP'Tt August 15 , 1975 Mr . Lester Porter P . O . Box 2433 Renton , Washington 98055 RE : Highlands Church of Christ Site Approval Application #SA-830-75 Dear Mr . Porter : Pursuant to our discussion on August 11 , 1975 , the following items need to be provided as soon as possible for future Plan- ning Commission review : 1 . Additional alternative site plan development schemes which may include schemes showing larger building setbacks from Monroe Avenue N . E . and from N . E . 10th Street . This also includes parkin° lot, circulation , landscaping , and tree saving_ elements of the plan . 2 . If your church intends to sell a portion of the church site for the construction of a single family residence , these plans need to be incorp- orated into the site approval application for the Planning Commission review . 3 . We also request ownership information for the entire site . The Special Studies Committee of the Planning Commission would appreciate this information as soon as possible so that they may have adequate time for study and recommendation prior to the September 10 , 1975 , Planning Commission meeting when , as previously announced they will report to the Commission . 4 Mr . Lester Porter August 15 , 1975 Page Two The Committee will be happy to meet with you as soon as you are able to present the requested information . If you have any further questions , please contact this Department . Very truly yours , Gordon Y . Ericksen Planning Director Le/ c William C . T rner Planning Technician WCT : rh k55 Chch Cic F0 Uti THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT O C 235 - 2550 T4'D SEP- - August 7 , 1975 MEMORANDUM TO : Files FROM : Gordon Y . Ericksen Planning Director RE : Planning Commission Special Studies Committee Work Meeting - August 6 , 1975 - 7 :00 P .M. PRESENT : Larry Gibson , Chairman Anthone Mola Bylund Wik Clark Teegarden Logan Garrison STAFF : OTHER : Gordon Y . Ericksen , Mrs . Crutchfield Planning Director Mrs . Gist Mr . Gist SUBJECT : Highlands Church of Christ , located at N . E . 10th Street and Monroe Avenue N . E . DISCUSSION : Status Report given by Gordon Y . Ericksen . Alternate plans reviewed . Purpose to bring Chairman Gibson up to date) . The question of proposed house construction was discussed . Ownership question was raised by Mr . Gist , regarding the house for Porter ' s father-in-law. Memo to the Files August 7 , 1975 Page Two CONCLUSION: The Committee requested the staff to pursue alternate development plans with church representatives (and along lines of staff proposal ) . Check out ownership question and the house issue . cc : Michael L . Smith William C . Turner GYE : rh PLANNING DEPARTMENT • RENTON,WASHINGTON Of MUNICIPAL BUILDING • RENTON.WASHINGTON 98055 • 235-2550 0 "IR co- yq- 4TfbSEP1 MEMORANDUM August 6 , 1975 TO : Special Studies Committee of Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department RE : Status Highlands Church of Christ Site Approval 1) We have received comment from the City Attorney with regard to taking action on the subject re- quest prior to the designated time of September 10 , 1975 . It was his determination that the Com- mission should proceed as previously stated at the last Public Hearing on the subject ( i . e . Committee report and recommendation at the Sept- ember 10 , 1975 , Planning Commission meeting as publicly amnounced) . 2) The vacation of Newport Avenue N . E . was previously granted by the City Council on October 21 , 1974 , and waived any payment or fee attached to such vacation . No other special conditions were at- tached . 3) A man by the name of Sibley has told this Depart- ment that he intends to build a house at the north west corner of the property on 70 x 120 feet of the Church site . This has never been presented' by the Church on previous plans . Mr. Sibley indicated that when he no longer is able to live in the house he is 65 years old) it will become the parsonage . Such plans would require site approval , or short subdivision depending on whether the Church would retain ownership of the house and lot. Memo to the Special Studies Committee of Planning Commission August 6 , 1975 Page Two 4) The 20 foot easement along the north property line was filed with King County on June 30 , 1974 . The easement runs with the land and is for access and utilities . According to the easement the Church cannot protest any future LID for street improvements . M.S : rh of te4, r- PLANNING DEPARTMENT • RENTON,WASHINGTON IT) MUNICIPAL BUILDING • RENTON,WASHINGTON 98055 • 235-2550 0 40- Ao'' rtDSE 01' MEMORANDUM July 31 , 1975 TO : Files FROM : Michael L . Smith Assistant Planner RE : Highlands Church of Christ Site Approval SA-830-75 I talked today with the City Attorney and explained the Planning Commission action on the subject pro- posal . He said that if the Commission announced publicly that the Committee would report back on September 12 , and there was a certain amount of pub- lic concern involved , they should stick to their original decision . However, if we can reach all of the concerned people , and they can attend an earlier meeting ( i . e . August 6 , 1975 ) it might be possible to take action at that meeting . He did have serious reservations , however. MLS : rh cc : Planning Commissioners 8r,\c 13 c ' \ C v\sue S)ke r Renton Planning Commission Meeting July 23 , 1975 Page Four Discussion followed regarding the possibility of limitingthesizeofthestructuretofacilitatecirculation . The Chairman also called for a report from the Environmental Development Committee . Committee Chairman Mola noted that they had met with the Aviation Committee on July 16th to discuss the issues involved and the role of the Planning Commission . ACTION: MOVED BY ROSS, SECONDED BY WIK, THAT THE PLANNING COMMIS- SION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED SITE APPROVAL BY AIRPORT SPECIALTIES TO THE COUNCIL AVIATION COMMITTEE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1 . THAT THE 10 ' LEASE SETBACK AREA SHALL BE MAIN- TAINED IN ITS NATURAL STATE. 2 . THAT THE LEASE AREA BE PLANTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXHIBIT "A" OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. 3 . THAT THE SHUBBERY DESIGNAT ED BE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR APPROVAL. MOTION CARRIED, TEEGARDEN DISSENTING . Commissioner Teegarden commented that regarding the rea- son for his dissent , noting that he could understand the City ' s desire for income , he felt the site was too limited for the planned construction . He stated that he did not vote against the proposal in view of the landscaping agree- ment . D , HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST ; Appl . No . SA-830-75 ; Site Approval to construct a church in a GS- 1 zone ; property located on the N . E . corner of N . E . 10th Ave . and Monroe Ave . N . E . Noting that the item had been continued from the June pub- lic hearing , Acting Secretary Mola introduced the site approval application . A briefing was requested of the staff by Chairman Scholes . The Planning Director located the three acre site in the Highlands area situated on the N . E . corner of N . E . 10th Street and Monroe Ave . N . E . on the vicinity map . He cited adjacent zoning , primarily residential , and noted other existing churches in the vicinity . He noted that the request had been the subject of considerable study by both the staff and the Commission , including a field trip to Mountlake Terrace to visit a similarly designed church . n addition , a meeting was held by the Environmental Development Committee with church representatives and neighbors on July 16th . The proposed site plan has also been studied by interested City departments , and input received from Traffic Engineering related to traffic con- ditions and the Public Works Department with regard to utilities and drainage , which was reviewed by the Planning Director . the traffic situation on Monroe was discussed extensively by Mr . Ericksen , who advised that the present capacity of Monroe was adequate for the average number of vehicles per day and that while the arterial was a candidate for improvement on the City ' s Six Year Street Program , funds for that purpose were lacking . He stated that certaiii Renton Planning Commission Meeting July 23 , 1975 Page Three Federal Aviation Administration requirements , also that the proposal had been extensively reviewed by the staff and that the Environmental Development Committee had met with the City Council Aviation Committee . Revised landscape plans were described by the Planning Director , who stated that the staff recommends approval . He noted the presence in the audience of Airport Director Bennett , who was avail - able to answer any questions from the Commission . Commissioner Teegarden requested that the staff review , with special emphasis on provisions for landscaping , the staff report . Michael Smith , Assistant Planner , outlined the areas planned for landscaping--the. ten foot lease line setback from the top of the River bank and an additional ten feet adjacent to the leased property , for a total of twenty feet of landscaping--and itemized the low profile landscaping of natural materials planned for the area so that it would not conflict with airport activities . Mr . Smith contrasted current landscape plans with the original proposal . It was noted by the Planning Director that these revised plans had been reviewed by the lease-holder and the Airport Director and had received their concur- rence . Discussion followed with regard to possible relocation of the structure , but it was noted that a tower located to the north of the site could prevent its considera- tion . The Planning Director pointed out that areas north of the leased area could be used for tie-down purposes , however . The Assistant Planner confirmed , in response to Commissioner Ross , that unless the applicant were to change the shape of the proposed planting , no further site review would be required for the development of Phase II . There was further discussion relative to proposed development along the Cedar River , and it was noted by Mr. Ericksen that a trail system was planned along both sides to the Boeing Bridge but only along the east side to th'e mouth of the River for safety rea- sons . He stated that it was the intent of the Aviation Committee to discourage casual use by people on the west side within the airport boundaries . In response to questioning from Commissioner Scholes with regard to F . A. A . approval , the Planning Director stated that the proposal had been reviewed and approved by that agency . Comment was invited from the Airport Director . Del Bennett , Airport Director , stated that he had met with the applicant who has agreed to the recommenda- tions of the Planning Department and is anxious to proceed with his development . He noted the presence of Aviation Committee Chairman Dick Stredicke in the audience . Questions were invited of the airport representatives , but none were offered . Chairman Scholes then called for comment from the audience , but none were received . It was noted that the Commission had been requested to make an advisory recommendation to the Council Aviation Committee . IT WAS THEN MOVED BY WIK, SECONDED BY ROSS , THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE AIRPORT SPE- CIALTIES SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION BE CLOSED . MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY . Renton Planning Commission Meeting July 23 , 1975 Page Five improvements on N . E . 10th from Monroe Ave . N . E . to Redmond are presently under way by the Public Works Department . The Planning Director noted that the Traffic Engineer is of the opinion that there should be no particular access problem in accordance with the plan , although wider driveways were suggested . Traffic Engineer Hamlin felt the impact of the pro- posed facility would be limited due to its major use on Sundays . The Planning Director described provisions for utilities , drainage , and sewers and noted that the Public Works Department indicates they are adequate to provide these services to the development . Mr . Ericksen noted that a revised site plan , land- scape plan and floor plan have also been considered for the facility. Slides , blow-up maps , and site plans of the site and vicinity were viewed . Photographs of signifi - cant development in the area were reviewed . A detailed description of proposed elevations was provided by the Planning Director , who noted that the maximum height of the future structure was 21 ' . Photographs of the natural vegetation , including the heavily treed western area , were shown ; and the possibilities of screening due to density of the site were discussed . Existing improvements in the area were noted . In addition , slides of the Church of Christ located in Mountlake Terrace , which is located in a residential area , were viewed . Responding to the Chairman ' s inquiries regarding the relative size of that facility in contrast to the proposed structure , Mr . Ericksen indicated that it would be considerably smaller . Possible alternative locations of Phase I of the proposal and parking were reviewed , in view of some of the objections expressed by neighbors and what the site could accommodate . It was noted that Phase I of the development would allow a seat- ing capacity of 188 and Phase II an additional 304 , for a total of approximately 500 . Phase I was noted as the only item under consideration for approval . Further discussion ensued , and Commissioner Mola stated that it was at the request of the Environ- mental Development Committee that the Church was asked to place stakes where the present proposed building would be situated and to consider alter- nate locations . The Planning Director reviewed the responsibility of the Commission in this case and stated that it was the staff ' s opinion that the proposal repre- sented an acceptable use , not detrimental to the adjacent surroundings , under certain conditions . However , relocation of the structure , parking and parsonage were to be studied further . In response to Commissioner Ross regarding the time of day the pictures had been taken , Mr . Ericksen stated the slides were taken mid afternoon , and the staff visited the site twice in the evening and noted activity of a minor nature at the Lutheran Renton Planning Commission Meeting July 23 , 1975 Page Six 1 and Seventh Day Adventist Churches in the vicinity . Fur- thur discussion followed , with Commissioner Ross describing heavy traffic congestion in the area on Sundays . Commis- sioner Teegarden mentioned that he had visited the neigh- borhood on the previous Sunday between twelve noon and 1 : 00 p . m . and noted no activity at the church to the west , traffic congestion at the Lutheran Church, but that he felt in general the traffic was not too heavy . He stated pro- visions for parking were his concern and believed the subject required additional study . Possible screening south of N . E . 10th was also to be considered , should the structure be relocated . he Chairman opened the discussion to the audience . ddie Craig , 25609 S . E . 184th St . , Maple Valley , one of he members of the Church , noting that he was speaking or the Church that evening , stated that one of their embers lives on Olympia Ave . N . E . and has talked to eighbors on the east and south and observed that hose neighbors were not opposed to the proposal except if it were on the east side of the site ; therefore , the church tried to stay out of that area and preferred the plan as originally designed . He indicated they were trying to save a maximum number of trees but that they did not want the parking lot to be under them due to sap , etc . He noted that the slides viewed indicated that the structure would not be too visible . With regard to the tlraffic problem , Mr. Craig stated that it was their opinion that as much traffic would be generated by the location of houses on the site . It is their feeling that traffic is less of a problem on Sunday than during the week . He said they were willing to work with the staff to come up with a better solution . He noted that most objections Here presented from residents living west of Monroe and that many of the people moved in after the other churches were already built . Mrs . R . W . Chrutchfield , 1013 Monroe Ave . , speaking for ithe Gests , who were unable to attend that evening , stated that their main objection was due to traffic problems . She said that placing the structure more centrally on the property would be less objectionable to her . She noted that the Lutheran Church is growing and becoming more active and that should another church let out at the same hour , the traffic situation could become a major problem . In reply to Commissioner Ross ' inquiry regard- ing the impact of traffic due to weekday church activi - ties , Mr . Chrutchfield stated that they noticed more activity from the Lutheran Church . At one time the Seventh Day Adventist Church had a preschool activity , land there were Bible classes at the Lutheran Church during the week . Dale E . Taylor , 4232 N . E . 10th , stated that the Seventh IDay Adventist Church does not have preschool activity at this time . i A . E . Noble , 1005 Monroe St . N . E . inquired where the street was that had been vacated on the property , and its location was noted by the Planning Director . In addition , a tier of five single family lots were vacated . Mr . Noble asked if relocating the structure to the vacated street area would iinvolve Council consideration . Mr . Ericksen indicated that 1 Renton Planning Commission Meeting July 23 , 1975 Page Seven the street was vacated for church purposes and to basically consolidate the site but that the matter would be looked into . Mr . Noble also noted his con- cern regarding the congestion created from traffic due to the location of so many churches in the vicinity and stated that most of them are on a summer schedule and are now letting out around 11 : 00 a . m. Mr . Noble stated his desire to have the complete church development concluded as soon as possible and suggested a possible time limitation for its completion . Les Porter , 1021 Olympia Ave . N . E . , member of the Church , responded that it was the Church ' s pref- erance that access to the parking lot be from N . E . 10th rather than Monroe . He also cited the small size of the congregation and noted its difficulties in developing a big building program at present . He stated that it was customary in most churches to build in stages and that they would have to return for Planning Commission review for each one . He said that since the congregation is small , the impact from a traffic standpoint would also be small . He indicated their interest in continuing to work with the Planning Department . Steve Sherrill , 1003 Olympia , noted that they have a large deck overlooking the property and they would prefer the structures as originally planned . He stated that he would prefer a church on the site rather than houses and said it was his feeling that the traffic problem is not that great on Sundays from his personal observation . George Rogers , 1025 Olympia Ave . , noting that he lives directly behind the Lutheran Church , noted the mutual use of parking facilities with the Seventh Day Adventist Church , since it meets on Saturdays . He stated that the Seventh Day Adventist Church was built in two stages and the Lutheran in one . Mrs . Roxy Sherrill , 1003 Olympia Ave . N . E . , indicated that she would prefer the plan as originally proposed . Mr . Craig commented that with relation to the park- ing problem on Monroe , that their proposal to place the entrance to their property in the middle of the site would ease the parking situation on that street . Mrs . Chrutchfield spoke in support of access from N . E . 10th . The Chairman responded that proposed plans for Phase I indicate access off of 10th . He stated that with regard to the future Phase II , the staff had requested additional access to 10th and perhaps to Monroe . Mr . Craig described financing plans for the develop- ment and their proposal to accomplish the develop- ment . He stated that their goal is to move into the structure by July 1 , 1976 . Noting no further discussion from the audience , fur- ther comment from the staff was invited by the Chair- man . Rent n Planning Commission Meet ng July 23 , 1975 Page Eight Commissioner Wik stated that it was his conclusion from from the public input that the majority are in favor of the proposal as originally presented . Commissioner Ross spoke in opposition to the placement of a church on the site , since it is his opinion that the ses of church buildings have changed considerably since he ordinance was drafted allowing their location in esidential areas . He noted access to church activities rimarily by automobile and use during most of the days f the week . He stated that he felt it would violate he character of the neighborhood to introduce any more hurches than are now in existence . He suggested that the ordinance be amended to allow church construction in commercially zoned area only . Mrs . Sherrill noted that churches in residential areas provide healthful activities for children and other groups . Mrs . Chrutchfield , noting the growth of the Highlands Community Church , cited traffic problems created by its almost daily use . She agreed that such use was necessary in order for a church to become effective in the community but stated that she believed a neighbor- hood could handle only so much of that kind of impact . It was suggested to the audience by the Chairman , who stated that it was a matter of identifying their desires to the Council , that the people concerned relative to traffic problems created should petition that body with regard to street improvement in their area . Commissioner Garrison offered that it was his opinion that the basic problem was that enough parking be pro- vided for this church . IT WAS THEN MOVED BY ROSS , SECONDED BY WALKER , THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED . Speaking on the question , Commissioner Teegarden indicated his concern that ample opportunity for consideration had not been given to the possible relocation of the structure nd parking by both the Commission and the audience . He lso stated his belief that denying location of the church I n a residential area would not be fair to this congrega- tion and also indicated he would like to see more study before the hearing is closed . In response to Commissioner Teegarden , the Planning Director stated that concepts regarding the location of churches are changing . He cited churches that were being located near shopping centers due to multiple uses . However , he noted that this site is on an arterial , has good access , sufficient parking area available , and is generally centrally located so that all parts of the site can be developed properly . He stated it was the staff ' s opinion that the site proposal is not a detri - mental use , but there were some problems that needed to be worked out . Commissioner Mola also spoke in opposition to closing the hearing , stating that after visiting the site three times , his Committee had requested that a proposal to relocate the building to allow for more protection for all neighbors be considered . Renton Planning Commission Meeting July 23 , 1975 Page Nine Commissioner Ross , noting earlier denial of the site for an R-3 zone classification , stated that he did not feel he was discriminating against the Church , as it was his feeling that the proposal would be detrimental to the surrounding properties and would aggravate an existing problem. ON THE QUESTION, A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS REQUESTED WITH THE FOLLOWING RESULTS: GARRISON - NO MOLA NO ROSS AYE TEEGARDEN - NO WIK AYE WALKER AYE IN VIEW OF THE TIE VOTE, CHAIRMAN SCHOLES VOTED "NO" AND THE MOTION FAILED. IT WAS THEN ACTION: MOVED BY TEEGARDEN, SECONDED BY MOLA, TO REFER THE ITEM TO THE STAFF AND SPECIAL STUDIES COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER STUDY WITH THE APPLICANT AND TO CONTINUE THE MATTER TO THE SEPTEMBER 24TH MEETING . Further discussion followed , with Commissioner Wik suggesting that he felt sufficient information had been submitted for an immediate vote or that a spe- cial session should be held in order to reduce the delay to the applicant . He suggested a meeting on the item on August 6th with the staff , committee and church members and report to the Committee-of- the-Whole on August 16th . ACTION: MOVED BY WIK, SECONDED BY GARRISON, THAT THE MOTION BE AMENDED TO CALL FOR A SPECIAL COMMITTEE-OF-WHOLE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THIS ITEM ONLY ON AUGUST 13th . Discussion ensued regarding the need to use the August recess as an opportunity to work on items in committee that the Commission had been unable to resolve during their regular sessions . The matter of sufficient input for a decision at this time was also again men- tioned . ON THE QUESTION OF THE AMENDMENT TO REFER THE MATTER TO A SPECIAL HEARING ON AUGUST 13, MOTION FAILED. ON THE ORIGINAL QUESTION TO REFER THE ITEM TO THE STAFF AND SPECIAL STUDIES COMMITTEE FOR STUDY AND REPORT BACK ON SEPTEMBER 24 , A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS REQUESTED WITH THE FOLLOWING RESULTS: GARRISON - NO MOLA AYE ROSS NO TEEGARDEN - AYE WIK NO WALKER NO MOTION FAILED. IT WAS THEN MOVED BY ROSS , SECONDED BY WIK, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING . Rent n Planning Commission Meet ng July 23 , 1975 Page Ten A re ess was declared by the Chairman at 11 : 10 p . m. The meet- ing as resumed at 11 : 20 p . m. with all members noted above as bein present . The hairman announced that he does not plan as a general pol - icy to limit public input on any item before the Commission and that should the meeting appear to be lengthy , he would identify those items which would be continued until the fol - lowing week . He requested that the Alaska Fish Fertilizer Company site approval application , Robert C . Jackson waiver of off-site improvements application , Joe Agostino request for special permit , and Honeydew III Estates preliminary plat application be continued until 8 : 00 p . m. on July 30th in the Council Chambers . ON THE QUESTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO THE HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST SITE APPROVAL, A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS REQUESTED WITH THE FOLLOWING RESULTS: GARRISON - AYE MOLA NO ROSS AYE TEEGARDEN NO WIK AYE WALKER AYE OTION CARRIED. CTION: OVED BY ROSS, SECONDED BY WALKER, THAT THE REQUEST FOR ITE APPROVAL BY THE HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST BE i'ENIED BECAUSE ALLOWING ANOTHER CHURCH IN THE NEIGHBOR- OOD WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE ENJOYMENT OF THE SUR- OUNDING COMMUNITY. liscussion ensued with Commissioner Teegarden speaking gainst the motion , noting that only two people had poken in opposition to the proposal on the basis of the traffic situation . He cited a greater number of neighbors who spoke in favor of the plan . Wik also indicated that he felt the neighborhood was generally n favor of the proposal as originally presented , Commissioner Walker stated her intention to vote for denial , mainly because there are too many churches n the vicinity already and that the area needs to keep its residential character. She also indicated her support for placement of churches in commercial zones . Commissioner Mola spoke in support of the pro- posal , stating that it was his opinion that it would enhance the area more than approximately fifteen homes that might be built on the site , and he noted that they , too , would create a traffic problem. ON THE QUESTION, MOTION FAILED. ACTION: MOVED BY TEEGARDEN, SECONDED BY MOLA , THAT THE ITEM BE REFERRED TO THE SPECIAL STUDIES COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER STUDY WITH THE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT TO REPORT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE-OF-THE--WHOLE AT THE SEPTEMBER 10TH MEET- ING . Ross spoke against the motion , noting that he felt suf- ficient study had been given to the problem and that consideration be given to placing a time period for com- pletion of the structure . Renton Planning Commission Meeting July 23 , 1975 Page Eleven ON THE QUESTION, A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS REQUESTED WITH THE FOLLOWING RESULTS: GARRISON - NO MOLA AYE ROSS NO TEEGARDEN - AYE WIK NO WALKER AYE IN VIEW OF THE TIE VOTE, THE CHAIRMAN VOTED "AYE" AND THE MOTION CARRIED. The Chairman advised the audience that the item would again be considered on September 10th . The Planning Director requested that a committee meeting be estab- lished , but it was noted that Chairman Gibson was not in attendance . Mr . Ericksen said that in the mean- time , the staff would work with the applicant and review alternative plans . Commissioner Mola requested that Mrs . Gest be notified of any meetings scheduled with regard to this issue . It was noted that the public hearing is closed but that input could be made to the staff and committee for study . Mr . Porter expressed his concern regarding considera- tion by the public of an alternate design . Mr . Sherrill stated that six of the neighbors on Olympia that look down on the property are in favor of the present proposal and would so indicate in the form of a petition . The Planning Director indicated that the staff would be happy to present any written infor- mation received to the Commission . E. ALASKA FISH FERTLIZER CO . ; Appl . No . SA-831-75 ; Site Approval for a warehouse addition in an M-P zone ; property located at 865 Lind Ave . S .W . Noting that Mr . St . Germain would not be available for the continued public hearing scheduled for July 30th to consider the site approval application this evening , a staff presentation was invited by Chairman Scholes . The Planning Director described the proposal to con- struct a new addition in an M-P zone within the set- back area between two warehouses , shifting of the parking to the south , and provision for additional landscaping . He referred the Commission to the staff report , which indicated that the Environmental Develop- ment Committee had reviewed the item at its July 15th meeting . The Planning staff had met extensively with the applicant in order to clarify the application , cir- cumstances and alternatives . Legal implications were reviewed with the City Attorney . It was noted that the City Attorney has indicated that due to the unique circumstances , a variance is required from the Board of Adjustment. Renton' Planning Commission Meeting July 23 , 1975 Page Twelve The revised plan was reviewed by Assistant Planner Smith , including proposals for additional landscaping , a new park- ing area , and agreement with proposed restrictive covenants , which include provisions for perpetual easement for access from Keenan Pipe Company property to the parking area . Discussion ensued with particular reference to the need to obtain a variance from the Board of Adjustment from the side yard requirements of the Zoning Ordinance in the M-P zdne in accordance with the City Attorney ' s recommendations due to legal technicalities . The roll of the Planning Commission in determining the appropriateness of the land use , landscaping , and restrictive covenants was reviewed . Commissioner Mola , Chairman of the Environmental Develop- ment Committee , advised that his Committee had visited the site and reviewed the situation and recommended ap- proval of the request . Mr. Ericksen stated that the applicant is asking for approval subject to staff appro- val of the site plan and final approval of the landscaping plan . Chairman Scholes invited comment from the applicant . Mr. St . Germain thanked the Commission for allowing con- sideration of his application this evening . He described his plans for implementation of landscaping and indicated his willingness to post a bond . He also discussed his efforts to obtain access to his 20 feet of property on a perpetuity basis . Mr. St . Germain requested approval based on his ability to obtain this permission from the owner of the Keenan Pipe building . In reply to Commissioner Teegarden regarding any response from the people who own the building to the north , Mr . St. Germain reminded the Commission that he owns the 20 feet between them and stated that it is his intention to construct his own wall due to the original fracture of that structure . He stated that he would leave the deter- miination of the distance between his wall and that build- ing up to the City and indicated that his architect had recommended a foot or even six inches would be appropri - ate with some kind of covering of the division to complete the general appearance of the buildings . IT WAS THEN MOVED BY ROSS , SECONDED BY MOLA , THAT THE PUB- LIC HEARING OF THE ALASKA FISH FERTLIZER SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION BE CLOSED . MOTION CARRIED . ACTION: MOVED BY ROSS, SECONDED BY MOLA , THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION OF THE ALASKA FISH FERTILIZER COMPANY SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: 1 . RETAINING A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR SIMILARLY QUALIFIED LANDSCAPE PERSON TO WORK WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO DEVELOP A SATISFACTORY LANDSCAPE PLAN. 2 . ENHANCEMENT OF EXISTING PLANTER AREAS ALONG LIND AVE. S. W. ADJACENT TO THE ALASKA FISH FERTILIZER, KEENAN PIPE, AND NORTHWEST CUP BUILDINGS. 3 . ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE AREAS ADJACENT TO THE ALASKA FISH FERTILIZER BUILDING. (MINIMUM 10 FEET IN WIDTH ALONG THE FRONT AND 5 FEET ALONG THE NORTH WALL) Ti \C. t `'t11 1 h k h' SChurc0 - C c o c\ c-\Nro \c c- So\ A 2)5 , Acn5 Too •man'yôhurches • Renton Planning Commiss ion weighs how man is enoughYg Can a neighborhood have too many Highlands Church of Christ is a small "It's kind of a new thought to me," agreed with him in rejecting Ross'churches? congregation, with about 40 Commissioner Clark Teegarden motion to deny permission. Only the _i Renton Planning Commissioner members. countered. "The idea of no more newest commissioner, Joan Walker,Norm Ross thinks so. But he wasn't There are plenty of churches in the churches—I don't think that's being voted with Ross. k ----1 Hermabletoconvincemanyofhisfellowneighborhood. Next door there's a fair. Still, the commission wasn't ready OscommissionersatapublichearingLutheranChurch. Seventh Day "If we deny, it seems to me that's to approve the plans for the new AA 01101Wednesdaynight. Adventists have a buildin across the discrimination."tr 1 Ross wanted to denythe Highlands church yet. It referred the issue togstreet. The Reorganized Church of Church members and neighbors committee for report 4NgpotbackSept. 10.giChurchofChristpermissiontobuildJesusChristofLatter-day Saints and also objected to Noble's and Ross' But,before movingw' ISO"ionalotatthecornerofNortheastl0ththeHighlandsCommunityChurchcomplaints. on,the commis 4¢Street and Monroe Avenue Northeast are just a few blocks away. sion heard Planning Director Gordon .0;F 5'a55Idon't have any problems with Y. Ericksen. At.5.8909A, .7Vjustafewblocksfromhisown "All you have to do is try to go down traffic in that area,"said Les Porter,home.10th on a Sunday morning," com The concept of a church belonging Another church would violate the 1021 Olympia NE, a church member, in a residential neighborhood is , ,plained A.E. Noble, 1005 Monroe. " becoming less and less true,"he said.residential character of that "Boeing's (traffic) is a We re a small congregation — I g picnic corn- don't see how our 10 cars are going to "This is a pretty old concept. This sign at Northeast loth andneighborhood," he said. pared with that traffic." But the commission rejected his Ross agreed. aggravate the situation."Monroe Northeast advertises thegI'm involved in a church that's future of the lot—a future that was inDenyingthisapplicationwouldbe • looking for a place to build up in the doubt for several hours Wednesday motion, 4-2. Churches have changed,"he said. Under city law, the commission "Now they're operating all through an injustice to the church,'' m Fairwood area — and we're looking night as two Renton planning co -must approve site plans for churches the week, instead of just on Sunday Teegarden added. seriously at the area right around the missioners argued the churchproposedinresidentialzones. The mornings." A majority of the commission shopping center." shouldn't locate on the site. 44 LAN NO. 2 submitted 23- 5 o S i S 0 Petition pi) ( to the 1?, Renton City Planning Commission ie)(`' 1 ject: Site plans of Highlands Church of Christ for the property on the Northeast corner of Northeast 10th Ave. and Monroe Ave. Northeast We, the undersigned and neighbors to the property on the NE corner of NE 10th Ave. and Monroe Ave. NE, have viewed the proposed site plans for the property of Highlands Church of Christ. Knowing that the ccrmission has found the property to be suitable for use by a church, we urge the commission to accept the site plans proposed by the church for the following reasons, 1. as proposed, stage one will have sufficient natural screening on all sides, 2. they pL.pose to leave every possible tree in stage one and no trees are to be cut during stage two development, 3. a delay, proposed by conan_issioner Teegarden of six weeks, will have an adverse affect on the timetable for which this property might be developed- possibly greater than the six weeks, and 4. the plan proposed by the planning department -- central location on the property -- will not make best use of the property and the natural, already existing screening for said building plans. Furthermore, we urge the commission to reconsider their plans of delay and vote yes on the proposed plans so that -: . ,,ngregation may proceed with development and improve the comnnuiity and - f this property. NAME ApuEss 1. ji3O-77-<-,, k /24,714-- 0.).1' (217-7-yreet-/1/ - 2. `J 4-6 d/y 3. ``fit l 4l.ic, i,it.„2,; G p 9y. .Gar.-o)i- E. 4. a Do '3 c)LYw PiA AUE. /V,E . r, 5. N . Pc72 j , l O dl/ of_ Y to P u4- 4-v - /JE . Q0,644-W6.13, O p,n_ A v,. NE, 7. 71: 1, 441 9/2 C y7o G c )7. 8. .a.,...4i. .11 4.1 ZSV` . P.. . 34.0 N c 1O-"' - r . s. et. . ) 1 • Pit it::( i 'I- 4 10. ,z.„,\ 1.)\a„yj..)cr,..., , 3t ? Iv it N/ y StFr za envZ c`/' g•/48318y a oz 6T 8T • I-Cbro. ""Ctc:::\ v\-Ccj'' r e!/ 4fli •9T 7 p' .,2 r7/ _7 N ' E'rry-Iv/1-a j 7)-7. ,,e, v-, ry•• ST N _J°ce 1 iW v't L440 -tit moo/ .• -/ 1sts ET ate ZT SS32IQQd ZN Renton Planning Commission Meeting July 30 , 1975 ( Continuation July 23 , 1975 , public hearing ) Page Two Discussion was concluded at approximately 9 : 35 p . m. isabeth Rivil , Sec etary Arthur D. Scholes , Chairman RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING MEETING JULY 30, 1975 CONTINUATION OF JULY 23, 1975, PUBLIC HEARING) MINUTES COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Gibson , Anthone Mola , Arthur Scholes , Joan Walker . COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Logan Garrison , Elisabeth RiviTy , Ross , Teegarden , Wik . CITY STAFF ESENT: Gordon Ericksen , Planning Director ; MichaelSmith , Assistant Planner; Willis Roberts , Recording Secretary . Chairman Scholes , noting the lack of a quorum and indicating the possibility of the late arrival of Commissioner Ross , who was delayed due to an emergency business commitment , announced that the Commission would consider the administra- tive items in the interim. REFERRAL, ITEM A general review of referral items from the City Council to the Planning Commission , Planning Commission referrals to their committees , and Planning Commission referrals to the City Council followed . Current status , possible re- assignment in view of the recently formed Land Use , Zoning , and Special Studies Committees and their relationship to the forthcoming revision of the Zoning Ordinance were discussed . Priority for consideration by both the staff and the Commission was considered . It was decided to con- clude the study and assignment of these items when a quorum was present . Noting at approximately 9 : 00 p . m. , that Commissioner Ross was apparently unable to attend , the Chairman advised that items on the agenda for Public Hearing would be continued to August 6 , 1975 at 8 : 00 p . m. in the Council Chambers . Chair- man Scholes requested that the record indicate that applicants Robert Jackson and James Dalpay were in the audience . 4 Commissioner Gibson , Chairman of the Special Studies Com- mittee , announced a meeting to be held at 7 : 00 p . m. , August 6th , to consider items assigned for their review . Mr . Les Porter , Jr. , of the Highlands Church of Christ was noted as present , and the possibility of considering their proposal that evening was discussed . It was indicated that the public hearing regarding this application had been closed at the July 23rd session and the item continued until the September 10th meeting . Commissioner Gibson requested that Commissioners Mola and Teegarden , who had studied the Church situation extensively , be invited to participate in the Committee ' s review. Chairman Scholes called a Committee-of-the-Whole meeting for August 13th at 7 : 30 p . m. to discuss the letter from C . A. U . S . E . (Committee Against Unnecessary Sacrifice of the Environment) with regard to study of the Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the northeast end of the City and operating policies of the Planning Commission . Environmental Development Committee July 23 , 1975 Page Three It was mentioned that alternative single family development may cause more visual and traffic impacts than the proposed development . However , the committee and staff indicated they would ask that the traffic engineer comment on these questions and the six year street program for the area . He was then informed of the possible allowable uses in each zone . It was pointed out that some of the possibilities he anticipated may be allowed in an R-2 zone . ACTION The committee voted to recommend R-2 zoning for this site , feeling that the R- 3 zoning was not appropriate for the area at this time . ITEM 3 - HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST Site Approval #SA-830-75 Mr. Ericksen gave a brief overview of the proposal , and commented on the field trip conducted to the church in Montlake Terrace developed by the applicant . Mr. Teegarden made a brief statement concerning his impressions as a result of the field trip . He indicated that with some controls established he would not be opposed to the development . Mr. Pribble then presented the revised plans requested by staff and the committee . These included: 1 . revised site plan 2 . landscape plan 3 . grading plan 4 . floor plan Mr . Ericksen also stated that there were alternatives to the development plan that would reduce certain impacts which include additional setbacks and screening , control of access , and choice of colors for the pro- posed structures . Mrs . Gist felt that there were enough churches in the area . Mr. Noble stated that he didn ' t necessarily object to the proposed project , but did complain about traffic problems in the area . Wanted to make sure the neighbors were considered in the site planning of the project . Environmental Development Committee July, 23, 19.7;5, Page Four Scholes said that the concerned neighbors should approach the City Council about the general traffic problems in the area . ACTION A field trip was established for Tuesday July 22 , 1975 at 7 : 00 to more specifically review the site and existing conditions . The applicant was asked to stake the corner of the proposed builidng . The item was then continued until the pre-meeting established for July 23 , 1975 at 7 : 30 p .m. in the third floor conference room. ITEM 4 ALASKA FISH FERTILIZER CO . Site Plan #831-75 Mr . Ericksen gave a brief overview of the applica- tion and the problems related to it . ACTION The committee continued this item until their July 23, 1975 7 : 30 p . m. meeting but indicated they would be favorable if; 1 . a suitable landscape plan is developed for the site and adjacent properties . 2 . restrictive covenants are established for the - proposed parking area at the south end of the existing building . 3 . A perpetual easement is granted by the adjacent property owner for access to this parking area . 4. suitable screening is provided for dumpster and any other outdoor storage . 5 . the proper variances are granted by the Board of Adjustment . cc : Environmental Community Committee Members MLS : kh STAFF REPORT JIILY 23 , 1975 APPLICATION : SITE APPROVAL APPLICANT : HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST LOCATION : The property is located on the northeast cor- ner of N . E . 10th Street and Monroe Avenue N . E . ZONING : GS- 1 APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE : SECTION 4-722 ; 4-729 REQUEST : Applicant requests to construct a church in a GS- 1 zone . COMMENTS : 1 . Revised site , landscape , and floor plans were presented to the Environmental Development Committee and the surround- ing neighbors at the July 16 , 1975 , meeting . 2 . The proposed building and the parking lot appear to be located on the site in such a manner as to remove as few trees as possible . 3 . The parking plan as shown may need further refinement in terms of arrange- ment of spaces , landscaping and ingress/ egress . This could be further refined at the staff level . 4. The proposed landscaping does not screen the parking area adequately and needs incorporation of additional landscape materials . 5 . A pedestrian path along Monroe Ave . N . E . and N . E . 10th St. needs to be provided with the agreement that curbs , gutters and sidewalks will be installed when an L . I . D. is formed in the area . 6 . Monroe Ave . N . E . is on the Six Year Street Program and maintenance is being accomplished along N . E . 10th St . 7 . The building exterior colors should be earth tones in order that the building will be compatible with the surrounding vegetation on the site . 8 . The sewer system is adequate for the area . The water main along N . E . 10th should be upgraded . STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS : Recommend approval of Phase I building and parking only subject to the following condi - tions : a . Landscape plan to be modified and approved by Planning Department including but not limited to additional screening around parking lot and building ) . I STAFF REPORT JULY 23, 1975 HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST (Continued ) : b . Retention of the natural vegetation on the site as much as possible . Removal of vegetation other than that for approved building and parking areas shall be by Planning Department approval only . c . Parking layout to be approved by Planning Department . d. Earth tone colors to be used on the church building exterior subject to Planning Department approval ( pref- erably an olive green or earth tone brown shade ) . e . Shift building site additional 10 feet to the east for additional screen- ing and retention of natural vegeta- tion . f . Provision of a bond in the amount of 150% of the installation and a three- year maintenance period for land- scaping . 40 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: July 18, 1975 TO: Bill Turner, Planning Technician FROM: Dave Hamlin, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Church of Christ Site Approval - NE 10th Street and Monroe Ave. NE This memo is in response to your inquiry of July 17 in which you asked several questions concerning traffic and access features in the vicinity of NE 10th Street and Monroe Ave. NE. 1. Traffic Counts Monroe Ave. NE north of NE 4th Street - 3,303 vehicles per day Monroe Ave. NE south of NE 12th Street - 1,212 vehicles per day NE 10th Street west of Monroe Ave. NE - 2,758 vehicles per day All of these counts were made in 1974. We have not made a count on NE 10th Street east of Monroe Ave. NE, but I would assume that the volume on that street would fall within the range of 500 - 1,000 vehicles per day. We can arrange to count the street if you feel it is necessary. 2. Possibility of Signalization It is very improbable that a signal would ever be required at the intersection of NE 10th Street and Monroe Ave. NE. Monroe Ave. NE is classified as a collector arterial from NE 4th Street to NE 12th Street, and NE 10th Street is classified as a collector arterial from Sunset Blvd. to Monroe Ave. NE and is a local access street east of Monroe Ave. NE. The classification of collector arterial is our lowest category of arterial street, and it would be an extremely rare case where we would signal an intersection of two collector arterials. Traffic signals are installed on the basis of warrants which specify minimum traffic volumes, pedestrian conditions, accidents, and other such features which may imply need fqr traffic control. I have not done a warrant study for the subject intersection, but I know from experience that it would not even begin to approach any of the warrants. Furthermore, I would judge from the local conditions that volumes on the streets will never increase to the point where a signal would be justified. J M Bill Turner Page 2 July 18, 1975 3. Street Improvements The City has shown Monroe Ave. NE as a candidate for reconstruc- tion on the Six-Year Street Program for a number of years. We do not have specific funding for such a project, and it may actually be many years before any substantial funds may become available. If and when Monroe Ave. NE is improved, it will probably be constructed to a thirty-six foot roadway with curbs, sidewalks, lighting, and landscaping. This type of roadway would provide about the same type of service as the present roadway. We are planning to do certain maintenance and overlay work on NE 10th Street from Monroe Ave. NE to Redmond Ave. NE this year. This work will not change the character of the roadway. 4. Access to the Proposed Church Site There should be no particular problems concerning access to the parking areas as shown on the plan. The driveways should probably be somewhat wider (15' - 18') to facilitate easier entry, but they are adequately located with respect to the intersection of Monroe Ave. NE and NE 10th Street. The fact that the major usage of the site will be on Sunday will lessen the impact considerably. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. DIH:ad OV THE CITY OF RENTON 2 e MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 O ch AVERYGARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT p4 Q 235 - 2550D, flATEOSEIAt July 17 , 1975 MEMORANDUM TO : David Hamlin , Traffic Engineer FROM : William C . Turner , Planning Technician SUBJECT : Highlands Church of Grist Site. Approval Application At the Planning Commission sub- committee meeting of July 16 , 1975 , several questions were raised concerning potential traffic problems on Monroe Avenue N . E. and N . E . 10th Street which are as follows : 1 . What are the most recent traffic counts on Monroe Avenue N . E. and N . E. 10th in the vicinity of the church site? 2 . What are the possibilities of signalizing the intersection at Monroe Avenue N . E. and N . E. 10th Street? 3 . What street improvements are anti- cipated. for either Monroe Avenue N . E . or N . E . 10th Street for the near future? Is either street on the six (6) year street improvement program? 4. Are there any other problems that you can foresee concerning access to the site etc? We would appreciate your response as quickly as possible. W C T : k h C Renton Plannioy Commission 3hUirCh Meeting July 9 , 1975 Page Three ACTION: MOVED BY SCHOLES, SECONDED BY TEEGARDEN, THAT THE ITEM BE CONTINUED AND REFERRED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOP- MENT COMMITTEE TO ACT WITH THE COUNCIL AVIATION COMMIT- TEE TO RESOLVE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS AND REPORT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION BY JULY 23, 1975. MOTION CAR- RIED. It was requested by Commissioner Scholes that the Plan- ning Director contact the Council Aviation Committee regarding the Commission ' s action and desires regarding a meeting . 3. OLD BUSINESS : REZONES : A. GARY MORITZ ; Appl . No . R-821-75 ; Rezone from G to B- 1 ; property located on the E . side of Union Ave . N . E . approximately 400 feet south of N . E . 4th St . B. DENNIS R. OSTER ; Appl . No . R-827-75 ; Rezone from G to R-3 ; property located on the east side of Union Ave . N . E . approximately 500 feet south of N . E . 4th St . SITE APPROVALS : C. HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST ; Appl . No . SA-830-75 ; Site Approval to construct a church in a GS- 1 zone ; property located on the N . E . corner of N . E . 10th Ave . and Monroe Ave . N . E . D. ALASKA FISH FERTILIZER CO. ; Appl . No . SA-831-75 ; Site Approval for a warehouse addition in an M-P zone ; property located at 865 Lind Ave . S . W . It was noted that the above items will be heard at the public hearing on July 23rd . The Planning Director advised that input regarding all of the above items would be presented to the Environmental Development Committee for review . Commissioner Teegarden advised the Commission regard- ing the field trip to the Mountlake Terrace Church of Christ , attended by church representatives , the Planning Director , and himself. 4 . NEW BUSINESS : SPECIAL PERMIT: A. JOE AGOSTINO ; Appl . No . SP-834-75 ; Special Permit to fill and grade in M-P zone ; property located on East Valley Highway between Southwest 21st St. and South- west 23rd St. A staff presentation was requested by the Chairman . The Planning Director pointed out the two acre site situ- ated adjacent to the East Valley Highway , which was recently rezoned to M-P , on the vicinity map . It is proposed to fill the 350 ' x 335 ' site to a depth of 52' to 6 ' . A contractor ' s yard , office and warehouse is planned as the future use . 1 Re ton Planning Commission Me : ting July 9 , 1975 Pase Four The Chairman invited comments and questions from the Commis- sion . Discussion centered around provisions for a street on the southern boundary. The Planning Director noted street right-of-way and waterline easements between the property line and the paved area , the access road to Olympic , and that Olympic Pipe Line Company also has two lines located there . Further discussion ensued with regard to the location of the proposed P-9 Channel , its proposed width , and its relation to the private road . WAIVER OF OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS : B. ROBERT C . JACKSON ; Appl . No . W-833-75 ; Applicant requests Waiver of Off-site Improvements for a Short Plat ; prop- erty located on Union Ave . N. E . between N . E . 15th St . and Glencoe Subdivision . The Planning Director referred the Commission to recent rezoning of the 1 . 27 acre site located in the Highlands to R-2 and noted that the applicant is proposing a short sub- division of the property into three parcels and requesting a Waiver of Off-site Improvements . He stated that the improvements would be required on Union Ave . N . E . and that the request would be reviewed by the Public Works Depart- ment . No questions were offered by Commission members . 5 • ADMINISTRATIVE : A. FIELD TRIP It was decided not to have a field trip in view of the Commission ' s familiarity with the sites in connection with recent rezone requests . The Planning Director noted that should Commissioner Garrison be interested in visiting the sites , in view of his recent appoint- ment, the staff would be available at his request . A recess was declared at 9 : 40 p . m . The meeting was resumed at 9 : 50 p . m . with all members noted above in attendance . B. PROPOSED BULK REGULATIONS WITH DEFINITIONS The Planning Director presented for Planning Commission consideration the revised draft " B" of the proposed bulk regulations with definitions . It was noted that the proposed revision incorporated both the input from the Planning Commission and the City Attorney that evolved during the previous work meetings on this sub- ject. Noting the Court ' s deadline requiring the City to establish definitive , written standards and guidelines regulating the issuance of a special permit pursuant to Subsection 4-713( b ) of the Zoning Ordinance , the Planning Director requested Commission concurrence in the revised draft in order that it might be pre- sented to the City Council at their meeting of July 14 . Gary Kruger , Associate Planner, noted that " Revision A" of the proposed document had been reviewed with the City Attorney and that his suggestions had been incorporated into " Revision B" also . i : eerc S iv-et/vs a-v +cet 4 VLF' 117 / d,- v w0 1 it L cricre4.-s- AL/ I Tom` nk w y it c1+•., we 'd S4- t S s h S1Qd42,0( Sit v11l.e ik ,,p gr oatati o 'f-,4u ea41- 7•J 4ice--_ 3vb 1 A 4 ameiR i THEE CITY OF RENTON n MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO RENTON, WASH. 98055 pQ o AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 04 235 - 2550 4t1-D SEP1 July 8 , 1975 Mr. Les Porter 1021 Olympia Ave. N. E. Renton , WA. 98055 RE : Highlands Church of Christ Site Approval Application #SA-830-75 Dear Mr. Porter : Pursuant to your July 3 , 1975 , field trip with Gordon Ericksen , Planning Director , and Clark Teegarden , Planning Commissioner , and our July 8 , 1975 , telephone conversation , there are several items that need to be submitted and clar- ified to the Planning Commission prior to completion of the review process . Additional plans that are needed to clar- ify the application include : 1 . A master plan of the site including proposed and long range development concepts, future parking , and access . Specific use areas should be defined. 2 . A detailed landscape plan indicating the ex- isting larger trees on the site to remain and those to be removed , together with details of additional landscaping to be incorporated throughout the site (combination trees , shrubs , and groundcover) . Show the total site on these plans . 3. A floor plan of the proposed building(s ) . 4. Alternative site plan arrangements . Mr . Les Porter July 8 , 1975 Page Two It is our understanding that you will attempt to have this information available to the Environmental Development Committee for its review at the scheduled July 16 , 1975 , committee meeting . If you have any questions or wish to meet with us regarding the plans , please contact this Department. Ve truly OU J5 Michael L . Smith Assistant Planner MLS : rh Renton Planning Commission 1 MeetingJune 25 , 1975 4 1 Page Thirteen 1 F, HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST ; Appl . No . SA-830-75 ; Site Approval to construct a church in a GS- 1 zone ; property located on the N . E . corner of N . E 10th St . and Monroe Ave . N. E . The Assistant Planning Director described the proposal by Highlands Church of Christ to construct a church on a GS- 1 zoned , three acre site , on the corner of N . E . 10th Street and Monroe Avenue N. E . and noted the property on the vicinity map . The site is 303 feet along Monroe and 463 feet along N . E . 10th . He cited primarily resi - dential development in the area and the location of several other churches in the vicinity . Mr . Magstadt noted that the site is densely wooded with mature Douglas fir trees on the westerly side of the property . The plot plan and elevation plans were reviewed , and it was noted that the proposal is for development of the first phase of the church and parking facilities . Mr. Magstadt stated that it had been recommended by the staff that access be provided from Monroe Ave . N . E . rather than N. E . 10th St . but that the applicant pre- ferred to discuss this matter with the Commission . The Chairman invited comment from a representative of the Church . Les Porter , 1021 Olympia Ave . N . E . , Renton , secretary- treasurer for the Church , noted that his home is imme- diately adjacent to the property . He stated that when the property was purchased , there was a proposed street , Newport Ave . N . E . , planned for the area . The Church applied for a street vacation from the City Council in the fall of 1974 , which was granted . He said there is an easement on the north side of the property so that the owners will not be landlocked . It was decided to place the church in such a position so as to be able to save as many trees as possible . Parking has also been planned with preservation of the trees in mind . He said it was their desire that access be provided from N . E . 10th in order to avoid conflict with traffic from the Lutheran Church in the vicinity and to assist in preservation of the trees . He stated that in the future they will want access from Monroe . It is planned to eventually clear the property on the east and to pro- vide for further parking and a children ' s play area . Mr. Porter stated that neighbors in the vicinity had been contacted and had indicated that they would like to see the property developed for that use . Chairman Ross invited questions from the Commission . Commissioner Teegarden inquired as to why the building and parking had been planned for the heavily wooded area on the westerly end of the site rather than on the east . Mr . Porter responded that they would like to have a Monroe Avenue address and be visible from Monroe . Also responding to Commissioner Teegarden ' s inquiries with reference to plans for the original increment of construction , Mr . Porter indicated that the first phase will include an auditorium with a seating capacity of 188 and ten classrooms . The second phase would have a seating capacity of approxi - mately 370 with no immediate plans for additional classrooms . Directly to the north a parsonage is planned . Commissioner Teegarden noted his concern for sufficient consideration of the complete plan for construction . Renton Planning Commission Meeting June 25 , 1975 Page !Fourteen Further discussion followed with Commissioner Rivily and ommissioner Gibson also indicating their concerns with egard to access and location of the structure and parking n the property . r. Porter noted that the neighbors on Olympia Avenue do of want a large building in the back of their houses . he Chairman invited comment from the audience . andy Gist , 1025 Monroe Avenue N . E . , Renton , noting that r. Porter had not talked to anyone along Monroe , stated hat they are very much against the proposal due to increased raffic on Monroe . She stated that should the development roceed , she would favor the access from N . E . 10th . She ited the number of churches already located in the area 4nd the traffic they generate . rthur Sibley , 3414 11th Pl . N . E . , Renton , member of the ongregation , stated that it was his feeling that the people n the area should have the privilege of attending the hurch of their choice and noted that Renton does not have nother church of this denomination . oyle Newsome , 13205 S . E . Fairwood , Renton , also of the hurch of Christ , noted that the nearest churches of this enomination are in Federal Way and Bellevue . He stated hat they are presently meeting in a rented place . He aid it was their belief that access from N . E . 10th would educe the impact to residents along Monroe Ave . N . E . r. Porter , noting that they are a small congregation , stated hat they felt fortunate in being provided a man who is a sreacher and has construction experience . He noted that this ndividual has assisted in building churches , most recently n Aberdeen and Mountlake Terrace . He added that he will e coming to work with the membership this month and asked or an early decision while the weather is favorable , in order to begin construction as soon as possible . oting that he felt further study was necessary , along with ork with the staff , applicant and neighbors , Commissioner eegarden indicated it was his opinion that it be referred o committee . Mr. Porter invited Commissioner Teegarden o visit the church in Mountlake Terrace . oting no further discussion , IT WAS CTION: OVED BY TEEGARDEN, SECONDED BY WIK, THAT THE ITEM BE CON- ITINUED AND REFERRED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT COM- ITTEE FOR STUDY AND REPORT BACK AT THE JULY 23RD PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION CARRIED. It was noted that concerned parties would be welcome at any committee meetings on the subject . STAFF REPORT JEUNE 25 , 1975 APPLICATION : SITE APPROVAL APPLICANT : HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST ` LOCATION : The property is located on the northeast corner of N . E . 10th Street and Monroe Avenue N . E . ZONING : GS-1 APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE SECTION 4-722 ; 4-729 ZONING CODE : REQUEST : Applicant requests to construct a church in a GS-1 zone . COMMENTS : 1 . The site is heavily wooded with mature Douglas fir trees on the westerly one- third of the property. The remainder of the site is either cleared or wooded with small fir trees or small deciduous trees . 2 . The church building and the parking lot have been located on the site in such a manner as to remove as few trees as possible . 3 . Access and egress from the parking lot is onto N . E . 10th Street which is a residential street . Access onto Monroe Avenue N . E . would be a more desirable situation considering that Monroe Avenue N . E . is a collector arterial on the 6-year street plan . 4 . Sidewalks along Monroe Avenue N . E . and N . E . 10th Street would be desirable . At least a pedestrian walkway should be required . 5 . A detailed landscape plan should be submitted for the buffering and screening of the parking lot . STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS : Recommend approval subject to the following : 1 . Submittal of a detailed landscape plan for Planning Department approval . 2 . Addition of sidewalks or pedestrian access on the site plan along Monroe Avenue N . E . and N . E . 10th Street is recommended . 3 . Prefer access from Monroe Avenue N . E . rather than the indicated access on N . E . 10th Street . Applicant has been informed about this request and prefers to discuss the merits of the Monroe Avenue N . E . access with the Planning Commission . 9 1444-45 0110\itt1 o Renton Planning Commission Meeting June 11 , 1975 Page Eleven SITE APPROVALS: E, AIRPORT SPECIALTIES ; Appl . No . SA-829-75 ; site approval for Aircraft Hangars in a P- 1 zone and Cedar River Waterway ; property located in the Renton Municipal port adjacent to the Cedar River . The undeveloped approximate two acre site located pri - marily in the Cedar River Waterway and partially in a P- 1 zone was noted by the Assistant Planner. The opinion of the City Attorney is being sought with regard to appro- priate zoning and controls in that area . The proposal is for construction of two hangar facilities . The request also falls under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Manage- ment Act . A brief discussion followed , and Commissioner Scholes requested that the matter of a vested right to a public right-of-way be referred to the City Attorney . Commis- sioner Teegarden suggested review by the Council Airport Committee , and Commissioner Wik inquired if the private company had agreements to lease the space . 1 F. HIGHLANDS CHURCH OF CHRIST ; Appl . No . SA-830-75 ; Site Approval to construct a church in a GS- 1 zone ; prop- erty located on the N. E . corner of N . E . 10th Ave . and Monroe Ave. N . E. The proposal to construct a church on an approximate three acre site in a single family residential district was des- cribed by Mr . Smith . It was noted that there were other church facilities to the north and east. Natural character- istics of the site were discussed , and it was stated by the Assistant Planner that the church plans to preserve as many of the evergreens as possible . The plot plan , including parking , structures and circulation was described . Planned access from N . E . 10th was discussed in view of no improvements on the street . It was agreed that the staff would explore the possibility of access off Monroe in view of the above . Further discussion ensued with regard to this type of development in a single family residential area , possible height restrictions , and topographical conditions . G. ALASKA FISH FERTILIZER CO. ; Ap?1 . No . SA-831-75 ; Site Approval for a warehouse addition in an M-P zone ; property located at 865 Lind Ave . S . W. The approximate one acre site located in Earlington Indus- trial Park north of N. E. 10th on Lind Avenue was described by the Assistant Planner . It was noted that there is an existing warehouse/office facility on the property and that a new addition for additional warehouse space is proposed in an area that would eliminate the 20 foot rear yard set- back requirement of the M-P zone . Mr . Smith advised of previous Planning Commission approval of the facility with restrictive covenants for parking . The previous ownership included another warehouse , but a change of ownership is involved with the resulting request. Mr . Smith noted that the applicant had requested a vari - ance to construct the addition to the Renton Board of Adjust- ment but that the item had been continued for further study and also referred to the Planning Commission . Mr. Smith noted proposed installation of 16 parking stalls along the south side of the building . He advised that the matter of whether or not this is a legal use was being studied by the Assistant City Attorney at this time . Renton Planning Commission Meeting June 11 , 1975 Page Twelve WAIVER OF OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: H. RICHARD R. REEVES; Appi . No . W-826-75 ; Request for Waiver of Off-site Improvements for a Short Subdivision ; property located on the east side of Jones Ave. N . E . approximately 500 feet north of N . E. 24th St . A wAver of off-site improvements in conjunction with a one acr: short plat in the Kennydale area was described by the Ass stant Planner. The property is planned for subdivision into three lots . Existing off-site improvements in the area wil be reviewed by the staff. 6- ADM NISTRATIVE : A. ( FIELD TRIP A tentative field trip was scheduled for Monday , June 16th , at 4 : 30 p . m. i B. CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL The Planning Director referred a letter from the Committee Against Unnecessary Sacrifice of the Environment (C . A. U . S . E . ) addressed to the Mayor and Members of the City Council dated June 2 , 1975 , and referred to the Planning Commission for study and recommendation back to the Council with reference to zoning and planning controls . A brief discussion fol - lowed in which it was noted that the questions and suggestions were rather broad and should be referred to the Committee-of- the-Whole with no established time limit in view of the Plan- ning Commission ' s full schedule . C. COMMITTEE REPORTS It was reported by Chairman Teegarden of the Community Devel - opment Committee that the main concern at this time was the resolution of the Comprehensive Plan in the Green River Valley . No report was offered by the Environmental Development Com- mittee at this time. D. ELECTION OF OFFICERS It was noted that election of officers will be conducted at the June 25th public hearing in accordance with Planning Commission By- laws . E. OTHER 11 . MICROPHONE FACILITIES Commissioner Gibson requested that the microphone facili - ties in the Chambers be inspected as to possible need for maintenance , particularly those located to the right of the rhlr^;an . He also requested that the possibility of coffee facilities in the lunchroom area during public meetings be explored . 2 . H- 1 ZONING MODIFICATIONS The Planning Director presented for Planning Commission approval data relating to hydrocarbon emissions to be included in Subsection 4-713(B) (4 ) of the proposed H- 1 Flouridation Issue Discussed G.Erc-A rr1e 4ENro i ‘,(4-ws e• y Council Waives Fee For C catinhurchOnVa Streetg By MARY WILBERT SMITH of 138th Ave. S.E.,Sunset Blvd. and Ha- Street vacation, flouridation, prop- • zen High School, will be held Oct. 21. erty annexation and salary increases Fifty-two percent of the tax paying were among the topics discussed at this property owners in the affected area week's Renton City Council meeting. signed the petition favoring annexation. The City Council concurred in the Under new business, Councilman recommendation from the Public Works Henry Schellert stated that the cost of Department to vacate a street in the living has increased 9.41 percent in the Newport Ave.N.E.and M Place N.area. Seattle-Everett area from May, 1973 to The Highlands Church of Christ owns the same month this year. He recom- the land on both sides of the street and mended a four percent salary adjustment lone hundred percent of the affected for non-represented city employees on residents agreed to the vacation,accord- , the basis of this report. A four percent ing to Warren Gonnason, public works cost of living increase was already grant- director. ed for 1974. The discussion of salaries A spokes.nan for the church request- was tabled and rescheduled for next ed that fees other than filing be waived Thursday's Committee of the Whole and explained that the 3.2 acres in ques- meeting at 8 p.m. in the Council Cham- tion would be used for community pur- bers. poses such as a park and day care center ecologically planned" with a naturally A public works committee meeting designed playground area. will be held tonight at 7 in the fourth floor, The Council agreed to the request conference room of the Municipal Build- with only Richard M. Stredicke dissent- ,}ing. ing. There are five churches within a zoning radius of 10 blocks. I don't see why they need that property," he said. The councilman argued that it was un- necessary to waive any fees if the council is "working in the best interests of the public." Public Works. Director Gonnason requested input from the City Council in regard to flouridation of the city's water system. A Renton representative will attend a State Board of Health meeting next week to discuss the proposal made by the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services to floridate all large water systems in the state. Gonnason explained that this regulation ' would require Renton to flouridate its water system at city expense, which could be about $250,000 with an annual operational cost of$40,000. City Councilman Charles Delaurenti said that the citizens of Renton have already shown that they don't want water flouridation. He suggested putting the issue on the ballot again. Another councilman, Earl Clymer stated that he was in favor of flourida- tion but wanted financial assistance from the state if the state imposes new re- quirements of cities. A public hearing on the proposed an- nexation located on the eastern_boundary of Renton which includes the intersection