No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutShort Plat File No 088-77” STOP STOP STOP’ STOP STOP! DOCUMENTS ONDER THIS NOTICE HAVE BEEN MICROFILMED. DO NOT REMOVE NOTICE FROM FILE. NEW FILING SHOULD BE ADDED ON TOP OF NOTICE. PAGES REMOVED UNDER THE NOTICE FOR COPYING MUST BE RETURNED TO THE SAME PLACE UNDER THE NOTICE. ene oT] OP! STOP STOP STOP’ STOP BEGINNING OF FILE Sh $871». aa ¥( 16 (te 516 SW 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 August 13, 1976 Renton City Council City Hall Renton, WA 98055 Dear Council members, I am dismayed over an article I read in the Record Chronicle concerning the changing of the city code regulating pipestem lots. We own a lot in Earlington that is accessable in just this manner. All utilities are in and we refused a $7,500.00 offer to purchase the lot because we intend to build on it next summer. May we, and many others in our position, have your assurance that this legislation would pertain to future development only? Sincerely, Arlene L. Ross Renton City Council 8/16/76 - Page 4 CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS Bids for Surplus Letter from Public Works Director Gonnason reported review of the Property - NE 24th bids received on 7/21/76 on sale of two lots declared surplus property & Anacortes NE located at the northwest corner of Anacortes Ave. N.E. and N.E. 24th St. and recommended that all bids be rejected and the property be short- platted into two parcels and be advertised for sale at a later date, upon completion of the short plat. The letter also suggested if the City Council desires to afford an opportunity for the petitioners desir- ing to develop the property into a neighborhood park to put together a program, this sale could be scheduled to allow the community to put together such an effort. MOVED BY SEYMOUR-THORPE, SECONDED BY CLYMER, TO REFER THIS MATTER TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Amendment to code regulating pipestem lots as they own a lot in Earlington that Zoning Ord. is accessible in only that manner; all utilities are in and they intend to build on the lot. She asked if she could have any assurance this legislation would pertain to future development only. MOVED BY McBETH, | SECONDED BY PERRY, TO REFER THIS LETTER TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES~COMMITTES \ TO RESPOND. MOTION CARRIED. il ncana Wheat Pipestem Lots Letter from Arlene L. Ross expressed concern over the change in city k | Report from Fire Letter from Michael L. Smith, Chairman, Fire Station Advisory Committee Station Advisory requested the Council: To authorize the Mayor, on behalf of the city, Committee to enter into a contract with architect Gerald Cichanski for the purpose of developing preliminary plans and drawings for a new main fire station, and authorize the Administration to determine the availability and market prices of the several potential fire station sites; and authorize the Mayor, City Attorney and City Clerk to proceed with those actions necessary to allow a $750,000 general obligation bond proposal to be placea on the general election ballot in November. MOVED BY McBETH, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE REPORT AND REFER TO THE LEGISLATION COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Application to HUD Letter from A. J. Ladner, Executive Director, Housing Authority of the For Program City of Renton, reported the Commissioners had requested him to commence Reservation preparation of an application to Housing and Urban Development for a pro- Low Income Housing gram reservation of 100 units of new construction for low income Senior Senior Citizens Citizen Housing under the Section 8 (Housing Assistance Payment Program), and requested the continued cooperation assistance of the Mayor and Council, so this request can become a reality. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE ANY CITY PARTICIPATION IN APPLICATION FOR THIS PROJECT. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CLYMER, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE LEGISLATION COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Renton Park & Ride Letter from Fred H. Knack, President, Sound Ford, 750 Rainier Ave. So. Site - Support of advised that the 97 employees of Sound Ford, Inc. entirely support the Site #8 Washington State Highway Commission and the Renton City Engineers in the?r support of Site #8 for the proposed Park & Ride site, and felt that all other sites considered, especially Site #34, will not be advantageous to the citizens or the business community. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY McBETH, TO REFER THE LETTER TO THE PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. L.1.D. 291 Final Letter from Public Works Director Gonnason reported that on Parcei No. 16 Assessment of the final assessment roll for L.1.D. 291, Robert E. Miller, et al, 119 S. Main St., Seattle, it was found that he was assessed on two sides of his property in the final assessment roll and since this does not follow the city's policy on assessment, it was recommended that nis assessment be decreased by $1,901.84, the Utilities Division to be respon- sible for paying this additional amount. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY PERRY, TO CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND REFER THE LETTER TO THE LEGISLATION COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Order of Dismissal Letter from City Attorney Shellan advised that the appeal by King County Renton vs. King Fire District #25 was dismissed on August 6, 1976 and the result of this County Fire dismissal is to remit the matter to the Superior Court which in turn District #25 will reinstate the city's judgment against the Fire District in the sum of $3,241.60, together with interest at rate of 8% from date of judgment, together with the city's costs and disbursements incurred. It further advised that it would be appropriate for the city to get together with representatives of the District to settle the matter so the city can collect the amount due it. a % es THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 = 8 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR ° DELORES A. MEAD o CITY CLERK & 7D sept Re: Recorded documents Dear Sir: Enclosed please find your copy of the document {(s) recorded with King County Records and on file with the City Clerk's Office of Renton. Very truly yours CITY OF RENTON MMebrree Q.mbad Delores A. Mead City Clerk DAM/db Bie (+) o> “ O THE CITY OF RENTON <3 Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 wll, s CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR @ PLANNING DEPARTMENT o 235 - 2550 eS 7ED septe™ MEMORANDUM March 27, 1979 TO: Del Mead, City Clerk FROM: Planning Department RE s ROSS SHORT PLAT The attached Ross Short Plat mylar is forwarded for recording with King County. Please note that the $25 recording fee has been paid, and that there are no restrictive covenants that apply. Tnank you. wr Attachment . Ret charl Ass ail Fiod me Shei af V/ at O+4¢-77 THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 CHARLES J. DELAURENT! , MAYOR © PLANNING DEPARTMENT 235~ 2550 February 22, 1979 Mrs. Arlene L. Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, Washington 98055 mE: EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE ROSS SHURT PLAT Dear Mrs. Ross: We nave reviewed your request for extension of time for your short plat application. Based upon the facts contained in your letter, it apodears reasonable to extend your proposed plat for a period of six months. This will expire on April 4, 1979. It is our under- standing that you are proceeding now with final plat drawings and that we can expect them shortly. If you have any questions, we will be happy to assist you. Very my yours, Gordon Y. Ericksen Pla Pt ag Directo / if ad A vane avi Clemens Teeerins Planner DRC:wr January 31, 1976 2 Sti Mr. David R. Clemens 7 Associate Planner Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 eee Ad RE: ROSS SHORT PLAT Dear Mr. Clemens; You have requested that I explain the reasons for the delay in the completion of the above-referenced short plat. I will not review the problems that arose in our attempts to obtain this short plat as you have access to the files and records in this case and, in addition, Mike Smith can probably asnwer any questions that you may have. The reasons for the delay as I see them as are follows: 1. It was my understanding that the short plat would be finalized when the road was completed and deeds recorded with the county. We have complied with these requirements. 2. When the building permit was issued in August, 1978, I understood that all problems had been resolved in connection with the short plat and that as soon as the deeds were re- corded all requirements of the city would have been satisfied. 3. The deeds were to be recorded all at one time rather than in a piece meal fashion. One deed was held up through an unfortunate misunderstanding that took place at the time of the original recording in 1965. This was resolved just short of a law suit and resulted in delaying the recordings required by the city. 4. Finally, had I been aware of any additional steps to be taken OR the fact that there was any time limit involved, I would have been communicating with your office long before this time. Please contact me of the additional work that must be done to have this finalized as soon as possible. I am sure that you are as anxious as we are to have this matter cleared up and the filed closed. Very truly yours, op. . Arlene L. Ross OF Re A ih, Sy . = B® % 7ED septe™ January 22, Mrs. 516 §.Ws Renton, Washington RE? Dear As I have plat Yort PYat olF-94 FOIE Aken k Sax > S THE CITY OF RENTON : MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 s CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR @ PLANNING DEPARTMENT se 235 - 2550 L732 Arlene L. Ross 3rd Place 98055 ROSS SHORT PLAT Mrs. Ross: indicated to you on the phone, January 22, we received your request for extension of your short application. As I also indicated, your request is must include the reasons that the application desired to be extended and background as to why the olat was not completed during the one year that is provided by ordinance. Upon receipt of more detailed information as noted above, we will further consider your request. If you have any questions, please contact me. Very truly yours, Gordon Y. Ericksen Plawning Director f (ff x (/ Va (4 Md avid R. Clemens Associate Planner DRC:wr IN B 3 Oars > Sa eo ay & Dy ut January 8, 1979 Mr. Dave Clemmons Planning Department Renton City Hall 200 Mill Ave. South Renton, Washington 98055 RE: Ross Short plat Dear Mr. Clemmons; I am hereby requesting a six month extension of the required time in which to file the map of the proposed short plat in Case No. 088-77 and 089-77. Very truly yours, . . , QUIT CLuIM DEED S¢ -068.7% THiS INDENTURE W'TNESSETH: That wg, I, JOHN GRUHALLA, Executor of the estate * “of Vera Dale, deceased, who was the executrix of the estate of Carl L. p) i Dale, deceased , of Kirg County, State of Washington, for and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further consideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us op therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, ‘fe a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other _ public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and . being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: win ee wie Northerly 20 ft. of Lots 19, 20 and 21 Block 2 of the Phat of Eanlington as necorded in the book of plats, volume 14, page 7, records of King County, \ Washington. Dec 14 12 so PAT? RECORDED KC RECOROS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. -F WITNESSETH our hands and seals this 043 day of Ch Ls 5 Wr FILED iw) } IB EXCISE 1% NOT REQUIRED ab Ene 2 (SEAL) nF ge, ae us Division ohn Gruhalla By.. Vag ., Deputy : (SEAL) STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) I, fiber a. 4. » a Notary Public in and for the said State, F do hereby certify that on this 25C day of Octo » 19 2 _, personally f appeared before ine : LL cate Lhe ‘io to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within instrument,. “@ and acknowledge that _@_ _ signed and snaled the same as woes free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposos therein mentioned. Ii] WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public i and for the State of Wash: Residing at » ib caty . 8s Sa y ) =P ee SE Q Ee a s° Bar Bu tee i DE C - 1 4 - 7 8 , 00 2 9 9 78 1 2 1 4 0 8 0 3 LS T B af - aE - ‘ ~ a . Sr-0 ' f _ . . . 3 QUIT CLAIM DEED 4 THIS INDENTURE WITWESSETH: That we, J0/" J. Lissman and mT Jung M. Livemsn (hes wefe) of King County, State of Washington, for and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further consideration of the general public welfare and the special benefits accuring to us therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 4t. of Lots 22 and 23 and northerly 20 ft. of west one-half of Lot 24 ak in Block 2 of the pkat of Earlington, as recorded in | Volume 14, page 7, records of King County, Washington anic deed tz not to a efective vat’ l at Jeast 14 Leet of paving is completed and grading wore i. asne, £1] to norms] standards of City of senton, and iv not so dong vi thin one year from date of this deed, this deed shal! be null <nd void. This deed iw given on the condition tnt tre vity of .enton will not anprove subdivision or consi: elon of Curther improvesieut. upon lots LO, 20, 27, IB, Soy So, 3b of) 26, dlgok 2, Sarit gton, Volume 14 of flit, pure 7, using ‘thie deeded right of wsy ~s the oily developed } legal success. Violation of this condi tion will ee in automatic reverter of this property to t , o% their “gore in interest a if this doad hud never b:en greuted. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, ite successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our hands and seals this 7 Ficcl 1® EXCISE TAX NOT RTCU'RED ing Co. Records Division BY... Deputy WITNESSES: . STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING y) 3 dy Libre Pa : iQ » &@ Notary Public in and for the said State do hereby ce on this wW7 day of ()- Fre. 19 perso : appeared before me (/., AE: oe EE 4 POP FR” IEA o to.me known to be tk mat vidual nd wit exec A th phir instr ume and acknowledge that 8 hed and ‘sealed the same as “. 4 free and voluntary , for the uses and purposes therei: atLoned. In WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand end afrixed wy offieial seal ¢ day and YeAr.tt piteis ‘carysFicate ti708 haw Mri. 7 8 1 2 1 4 0 8 0 3 ‘ 42] Qys/ pm Fe ee ee eee eee eee % 42? Pe | 2 vin : nt : ] 3 ; Bi 3 ny ye 38 at = .. Rt = | ‘ul My ate wh hae (‘ Hy ft. N, wt \ ~My a tN —_ “aig is, x, “iy ' . ™\ _~ x» Py. tw & ‘\ it nine i is i i hte hw ea ea vo pene ie . oF] _ ‘ : ye 1a .' ‘a ‘A aN] 3. WM Br o d LA C E Seer anges awe a ¢-- . QUJT CLaIM DEED THIS INDENTURE WTNESSETH: That we, S2OUsEXKXSSHEKXSAXKK HK ERS KAMER ; SCHXEXIOCSA SG YKXIREXNKGARHOKERR and Olga Ropetowke (Konsevagey 4 oe , of King County, State of Washington, for and in * Gonsideration of the sum of One ($2.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further mb consideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us me therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, a municipal corporation of the State of “ashington, for street, alley and any other © public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and »:. being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 §t. of Lots 19, 20 and 21 Block 2 of the Plat of Eanlington as ° necorded in the book of plats, volume 14, page-7, records of King County, - Washington. Dec 14 12 yo PM’ 7E RECORDED KC RECORDS F TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described prenises unto the said City of Renton, its i successor or successors for the use of the public forever. oe WITNESSETH our hands and seals this .7/ day of C Fe an 9 a9 IS. r r,Rec t Request o} 1® EXCISE TAX NOT REQUIRED AA Cree ee (SEAL) tue CH, Ruor “as Division Sige eiecoeel (Konsevage ‘ (SEAL) t By ; , , Deputy f TNYSSES STATE OF WASHINGTON) .. F COUNTY OF KING io é I, Zh Lens A. —- » a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certity that of this — 77 * day of Zea n<. 5 of he » personally é appeared before me eA me ‘ 3 to me known to be the indfvidual_ described in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledge that o Ky. signed and sealed the same as’ free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposos therein mentioned. IU WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Oe Tay Bee: Lealerg 5 & hose BS Notary Public and for the State, at WA Residing at , an "4 ¢ or e s ov 0 0 CO9LLIASGIFTOA/ AVE FW : | : ! : i | 2 S 2, 7 | 2 / | 2, pe : a | | a 2 oe a cu e 1Y : , | | \ § , ! | | Q Q | | i i | 20 . 0 0 BW M BS “L A L E ; 66 2 0 r 1 C1 8 2 x, - ‘ , .. . i Se a c e /° ' * So ! ey Re H : i i : i . =) S h-O¥B- 77 , QUIT CLAIM DEED "THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH: That we, KENNETH W. WILLIAMS AND 2 , HIS WIFE} re Helen A. Williams i , of King Zounty, State of Washington, for and in ongsideration of the sum of One ($1.90) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further Consideration of the general public welfare and the special benefits accuring to us ‘ASherefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, municipal corporation of the State of washington, for street, alley and any other ublic uses and purposes, the following lots, pleces and parcels of land lying and ing in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: 00 2 9 6 78 1 Z 1 4 0 8 R O ol s ! Northerly 20 §t. of Lots 25, 26 and the northerly 20 ft. of east one-hal{é of Lot 24, Block 2 of the plat 0f Earkin ; Lats sity gton as recorded in th volume 14, page 7 records of King County, Washington. WERE DOCK OF , This deed is not to be effective until! at least 14 feet of paving is completed and grading work is done, all to normal standards of City of Renton, and if not so done within one year from date of this deed, this deed shall be null and void. This deed is given on the condition that the City of Renton will not approve subdivision or construction of further improvements upon lots 15, 16, 17, 18, 33, 34, 35 and 36, Block 2, Earlington, Volume 14 of Plats, page 7, using this deeded right of way as the only developed legal access. Violation of this condition will result in automatic reverter of this property to the grantors or their successors in interest as if this deed had never been granted. BE C - 14 - 7 8 Bec 14 12 so PTS RECORDED KC RECORDS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our hands and seals this _/ Par day of Qr2m 2, 1978 . Cc ne FILED for Record at Request ot oh URED PEL Z t/a (SEAL) 23 Givision STATE OF WASHINGTON ) saa De auty = We COUNTY OF KING ._— a Trin mM ‘ [Ua » a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certify that on this 2 7u day of — peat. ,19 78 , personally appeared before me A ekave7H Os re ber Ames eewk HFLE“Y A> Wieks ans to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within instrument, and aclmowledge that Vax signed and sealed the same as FAH ec R free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. P RAYS 1) Thy, ; In Siwigikor, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the _ day ands) if “Ain thpegertificate first above written. - “oe ew Sy yOTARy oY cy me, ape ~~ ew . : ova) . Tota, Mm LOK - 8 ee Fy Woe Notary Public in and for the State of Washington ie Beare: a Residing at Kier. » in said County. WITNESSES: D E C - 1 N - 7 8 0 0 2 9 7 7 8 1 2 1 4 0 8 0 1 L T B QUIT CLAIM THIS INDENTURE WITWESSETH: That we, %. P. Ross and Artene Ross (his wxfe) of King County, State of Washington, for and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further consideration of the general public welfare and the special benefits accuring to us therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, a@ municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 §t. of Lot 27 and the northerky 20 ft. of the west one-hal{ of Lot 28 Block 2 of the Pkat of Earlington as recorded in the book of plats Volume 14, page 7, neconrds of King County, Washington Dec 14 12 se PM'78 RECORDED KC RECORDS = TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our hands and seals this “<= day of aka 5 9 7y. FILCD for econ 1% SRA TAX NO NOT RE, CURED _ Hi 2. Got erts : Uivision Z Y ; Deputy a hens =m STATE OF WASHINGTON) , COUNTY OF KING )° I, —James Law Rie » 8 Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certii hat, on this @ caay of , » 19_7s% personally . appeared before me K)C HAA . Cif Ee. Pyke Ag ied ee hi 2 to me known to be im d who exec the hin instrument, and acknowledge that led: and sealed the sane as free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. nd. yuay ip tide cettitioate firet above Wittens ‘> one 9 a ct oe il i 9 dh cE 2 OE S SE E PB T NE 8 WE E OR E EE : GE ES ov a -— — — ~ . re ee ee co r e s ee me e om e an a 2 ? é a, ¢ Se t De e d fe ! fo i 43 | l I ¢ y @ ye NG ia n A “t k er Bd Ce o f y | J | | | | I i “. ow VE L . SE AR 7 Al MUEE a eee ee - 5 4° lt Pa a re i ae | rs a “i e a ae eo a id o F ag h ol ot ’ =e : o? , es ?@ ¢ K- ww ee / oe aa a : Se e Lf to e Le CGAL AUG TON SB . M FG r o S “L A E SPEED LETTER Tox Uy, Jitad Cu, Chk. pate: fA F- TF Cutis Yrba ge) _ pROJECT:_Cértenre nee suBsect:__, Alehud Rf) t) Ct, Mhat (Pest Chita (Kore JSP Zs OSB-77 (Leave. Atttnh Th aAtMtatkhs lL, Ayptenen he Lio) Oud, Cure. Apgiane Kass Soo St) B32 PL. Kew, bla. F808 Sr bh Alta d hicg ail Z ZY nit 4g 7 1 Ll Wg ge 4 99: (Signed) C/ June 5, 1978 Monday, CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OF COUNCIL CITY OFFICIALS IN ATTENDANCE PRESS MINUTE APPROVAL AUDIENCE COMMENT Smoke Detector Ordinance Planning and Development Report . James W. Dalpay Appeal of Examiner's Decision Rezone R-145-78 Union NE between NE 12th and NE Sunset Blvd. Remanded Back to Hearing Examiner R. P. Ross Appeal Examiner's Reconsideration Decision 12/9/77 Short Plat 088-77 and Except. 089-77 Area of 516 SW 3rd Place 8:00 P.M. RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Council Chambers Municipal Building MINUTES Mayor C. J. Delaurenti led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and called the regular meeting of the Renton City Council to order. EARL CLYMER, Council President; GEORGE J. PERRY, PATRICIA M. SEYMOUR-THORPE, RICHARD M. STREDICKE, BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, CHARLES F. SHANE AND THOMAS W. TRIMM. CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, Mayor; GWEN MARSHALL, Finance Director; DEL MEAD, City Clerk; LAWRENCE WARREN, Acting City Attorney; GORDON Y. ERICKSEN, Planning Director; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Director; DONALD CUSTER, Administrative Assistant; JOHN BUFF, Police Representative; RICHARD GEISSLER, Fire Chief; SHARON GREEN, Personnel Director; JOHN WEBLEY, Parks and Recreation Director. GREG ANDERSON, Renton Record Chronicle MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL APPROVE MINUTES OF MAY 22, 1978 AS PREPARED. CARRIED. James Van Osdel1, 3030 NE 10th St., Manager of Sunset View Apart- ments, requested Council reconsider Ordinance #3222 which requires installation of smoke detectors in occupancies rented, leased or let. Mr. Van Ausdal explained problems anticipated with require- ment that tenants furnish maintenance of the unit and asked for reconsideration in order to comply with RCW 59.18 Landlord Tenant Act. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, MR. VAN AUSDAL'S REMARKS BE REFERRED TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Due to interested persons being present, Committee Chairman Perry presented Planning and Development Committee report re James W. Dalpay Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision of 4/17/78 Sunset Rezone R145-78, noting review and consideration with applicant and his attorney, Robert McBeth, present. The report noted the applicant agreed to amend his application to provide for a less intensive use of the southern portion of the parcel to provide buf-~ fering between proposed B-1 rezone on the northern portion and the single family residential zoning to the South. The committee recommended that the Council remand this matter to the Hearing Examiner for reconsideration of this application as amended. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND SHINPOCH, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE RECOM- MENDATION. CARRIED. (See later action - Correspondence. ) ‘The Planning and Development Committee Chairman Perry presented the following report: The Planning and Development Committee has considered the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings and conclusions R.P. Ross Appeal of Examiner's reconsidera- tion decision of 12/9/77 re Short Plat 088-77 and Exception 089-77. The Committee has considered the hardship imposed upon the appli- cant by the provisions of the Short Plat Ordinance in that other surrounding neighbors have been able to short plat their property without providing the access required by the present Short Plat Ordinance. Applicant has obtained alternative access to the property in accordance with the conditions imvoosed by the decis- sion of the Hearing Examiner. recommended that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner and recommended approval of the application for short plat and exception under the same conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner, and further conditioned upon delivery to the City of deeds of dedication to the alternative access way. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDA-~ TION. CARRIED. The Planning and Development Committee Renton City Council 6/5/78 Page 2 OLD BUSINESS Transportation Committee Report Parkwood South Access Six-Year Street and Arterial Program : Public Hearing 6/19/78 Signalization Contract Award Federal Aid/FAM Project Ways & Means Committee Report Bond Sale LID #306 Seattle Northwest Securities Publication of Mans Legal Publications Questioned Community Services Committee Report Proposed Agreement Interurban Trail Riverside Drive Proposed Closure Public Meeting 6/19/78 Transportation Committee Chairwoman Shinpoch presented report regarding Parkwood South Sub-Division Plat and recommended that the Administration be directed to discuss with the Developer the feasibility of a direct route from Division #3 to 116th Ave. SE rather than the proposed connection to Edmonds Dr. SE. The report also requested the Administration report back to the Transporta- tion Committee. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE REPORT. CARRIED. The committee report recommended that a public hearing be set for June 19, on the Six-Year Street Program. Chairwoman Shinpoch noted the plans and maps are available with the Public Works Department. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. The Transportation Committee report recommended acceptance of the low bid by Signal Electric, Inc. in the amount of $101,945.50 for signalization of Duvall Ave. WE and NE Sunset Blvd along with NE 4th St.and Monroe Ave NE, as recommended by the Public Works Department. The report noted award will be contingent upon receipt by the City of an “Authorization to Award" from the Federal and State agencies. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT. Councilwoman Thorpe inquired re inclusion of provisions for prevention of cost overruns, Public Works Director Gonnason noted precautions taken. MOTION CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented committee re- port recommending that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign an agreement with Seattle Northwest Securities for the sale of $35,477.36 in bonds on LID #306 (Sanitary Sewers, area between Sunset Blvd. NE and FAI-405, north of NE 7th Street). MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT APPROVING SALE OF BONDS FOR LID #306. CARRIED. The Ways and Means Committee report recommended that the referral of 2/27/78 re publication of maps with legal descriptions requires no action by the Council as the Administration is studying the proposal. Councilman Stredicke called attention to legal publications stating building of condominiums and inquired as to location of 2020 Grant Ave. S., being advised by Planning Director Ericksen of location, northeast corner of intersection of Grant Ave. S and Puget Drive, West of Rolling Hills with no access to the north. Stredicke ob- jected to legal publications by attorneys and builders which appeared as City. Community Services Committee Chairwoman Thorpe presented report noting review of the proposed agreement for the Interurban Trail System and findings that it is consistent with present planning within the City and Green River Valley. The report noted funding for the trail would be from a federal grant of $320,000; staff con- cern for clarification noted and committee recommended the contract be referred to the Ways and Means Committee for review and recom- mendation. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN REPORT AND REFER AGREEMENT TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. The committee report noted review and meeting with residents of Riverside Drive area adjacent to Cedar River Trail, Phase III, and reported the following: (1) Riverside Drive is City-owned property deed to City in 1956 by the Commercial Waterway District and is not a dedicated street; (2) Only one residence has access solely to Riverside Drive, all other structures and properties have access to N. Ist St.; (3) Per City Attorney, rights of access have been established by the property owners through some years use as a street; (4) The City has the right to close or leave open as long as no property owner is landlocked, but decision should be made after public meeting for the purposes of allowing public comment. The report recommended referral back to Council for public meeting ong eine 6/19/78. MOVED STREDICKE, SECOND THORPE, CONCUR IN REPORT. OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY e RENTON,WASHINGTON POST OFFICE BOX 626 100 2nd AVENUE BUILDING @ RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 255-8678 LAWRENCE J.WARREN, city attorney DANIEL KELLOGG, assistanT CITY ATTORNEY June 2, 1978 MEMORANDUM TO: COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RE: FILE NO. SHORT PLAT 088-77, and Exception 089-77 R. P. Ross Appeal of Examiner's Reconsideration Decision dated December 9, 1977 The Planning and Development Committee has considered the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings and conclusions in the above matter. The Committee has considered the hardship imposed upon the applicant by the provisions of the Short Plat Ordinance in that other surrounding neighbors have been able to short plat their property without providing the access required by the present Short Plat Ordinance. The applicant has obtain alternative access to the property in accordance with the conditions imposed by the decision of the Hearing Examiner. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner and recommend approval of the application for short plat and exception under the same conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner, and further conditioned upon delivery to the City of deeds of dedication to the alternative access way. George Perry, Chairman Barbara Shinpoch Patricia Seymour-Thorpe SA 235-2550 4 a £ og oem “0 THE CITY OF RENTON e Ll aa Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 2 2 jh, [S) gS wll > 2 CHARLES J. DELAURENT|, MAYOR @ PLANNING DEPARTMENT D ‘ o ee) & February 27, 1978 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, Washington 98055 RE: Dear SHORT PLAT NO. 988-77 AND EXCEPTION NO. E-089-77 Mr. and Mrs. Ross: Pursuant to your letter dated February 22, 1978, to the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council, we have hie the following responses to your questions: It was the Planning and Public Works Department's recommendations that the short plat be permitted only if 20 feet of public right-of-way be dedicated at this time with 14 - 16 feet of roadway paving provided. This would provide half of the 40 foot public right-of-way required by the Subdivision Ordinance. The other 20 feet of dedication will be required of the property to the north at the time of its subdivision and/or development. This will ultimately result in a dedicated 40 foot public right-of-way the entire length of the present ease- ment road. Any lot bordering either north or south of the existing easement road will be subject to the same requirements at the time of subdivision and/or house construction. Pipestem lots are not permitted outright by ordi- nance. They would only be permitted by exception to the ordinance with a finding that no other rea- sonable access alternatives exist. We hope that this answers your questions with regard to platting and development of the subject site and surrounding properties. Mr. and Mrs. Richard Ross February 27, 1978 Page Two If you or your neighbors have any further questions, do not hesitate to contact the Planning or Public Works Departments. Very truly yours, Gordon Y. Ericksen 7 Oe iw, Nn ‘i S Michael L. Smith Associate Planner MLS:wr cc:: Public Works Department > 3 THE CITY OF RENTON — MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON. WASH. 98055 j=) 2 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR @ PLANNING DEPARTMENT e 235-2550 January 26, 1978 MEMORANDUM TOs Planning and Development Committee FROM: Planning Department RE: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS SHORT PLAT Pursuant to the request for reconsideration of the Examiner's decision on this short plat, it has come to our attention that the title company has indicated that the subject site was divided into two lots in approximately 1927. This is new information, which was not presented during discussions with Mrs. Ross prior to the short plat submittal or at the public hearing. In any event, if this can be verified in writing by the title company, it renders further review of the short plat unnecessary. The two-lot plat would then be an existing non-conforming situation that occurred prior to the adoption of the Subdivision Ordinance. However, if this does not prove to be the case, and the cur- rent short plat application still applies, we must refer you to the previous recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Division, Engineering Division, and Fire Department (see attached). All these departments, together with the Planning Department, feel that there are reasonable alternatives that can be provided to allow short platting of the subject site while still providing adequate access per ordinance standards. The subject proposal was considered insufficient, given the availability of providing better access to the site and area. This becomes quite apparent upon field inspection of the site and present access situation. No alternative proposal to improve the present access situation was presented by the Rosses. An alternative solution can be attained, which would be con- sistent with the spirit of the law, the Hearing Examiner's decision, and departmental recommendations and allow for short platting of the subject site or other parcels in this area. This solution would be to establish a dedicated 20 foot right-of-way in lieu of the present private easement and improve it to a level acceptable by the City. (i.e., 14-16 foot pavement, excluding sidewalks, etc.). This Planning and Development Committee January 26, 1978 Page Two would spread the cost equitably to all property owners along the 20 foot right-of-way, rather than to each person who subdivides or builds a home (See Fire Department report with regard to 20 foot paving for home construction.). Any further platting and development to the north would then be subject to the same requirements, which would ultimately result in a 40 foot public right-of-way. This right-of-way would then be maintained by the City rather than at the cost of each owner. MLS:wr Attachments MEMORANDUM DATE: October 31, 1977 Mike Smith, Planning Department Paul Lumbert, Traffic Engineering Richard §& Arlene Ross Short Plat The Traffic Engineering Division recommends that access to the above short plat be made by a 40' minimum public right-of-way and provide f¥11 improvements which would help solve any future ingress or egress problems in this area. PL:ad 1EMORANDUM TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE 10/17/77 FROM FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential use. All buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and.having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance, Ws JML/jeb 10(02/77 En 4 / neew ins Shoot plat (s seo recosmmendet Siaeett Lacks aolag nate access and ately Sev vr we, xo ee tow th Le *: RiGee UAUthuties Gi The PRomens TuaT HAUG To BE Resocven ARE WATER SEQNCE AND SEVER SEANCE To PHfaatTy A VIAW SHoucD BE EXTEND QOUN ERSEWENT, To EnhLine Tont AUG SW anio/ on ~PAVvi0G UTILITY ERSEXENT Tien FrowT oT. Fo sw. SH Puc, GS hRBACE CoceEcTiow 6G esTasusteo F TLAFEI® §=EmGenmEEhinG@ Ov, | THE 20° AccESS ¢ UTieiTy EASEMENT 3 sefour Be FAVED with ASPHACT 1¢'TO 16" gos WwiVTh ‘7s INTIRE CEWCTH To Flovig— Access Fok, EMELGEWCY VEHICLES LocaTom wan Have To Tea ea a ae Te i ‘ TOO PremeN 8 se apt Bene aaa Cad ihr ab] was evacae ete § 3 C14 os of, batts uw, Tes a ory oe ay ¢. AE eon RSS. Me ay Sana “S731 3k ie - - » - 77 Tyo 4929 paceday a a 4. B.'s e wes “nae w a he a ae EASEMENT os —— / . * WHERSAS, Goorge BH, Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott,his wife, and Carl Le. Dele and ee Vora M, Dale, his wife, ard Olga Repetowski, a widow, all of King County, Washington, . fe are the owrers of3 : at e d *, s Tho North 20 feet of Lots 19, 20 and an, Block 2, Earlingten according to pike plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, ee 7 records of King County, i, if a Washington, ; = s " tg : an Wwisereas: Jorn J. Ttosman = Sone ae Licaran, bia wife, of king County, s ¥ashington, an the omers of: ss a . i 3 ‘ats 22, 23 and tin West half of lot 24, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, “ _ . and WEFIGAS, Carl L. hare and Vora M, Dale, his wife, are the owners of: Tho East half of Tot 24, and all of Lots 25 and 26, Block 2, Farlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, rocords of King County, Washington. . and WHEISAS, Goorge He Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott, his wifo, are the owners of: lot 27 and the West half of Lot 28, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 1 of cite Page 7, records of King County, Washington, ; and WHSIGAS, Olga Repetowski, a widow, is the owner of: The North 120 foet of the East half of Lot 28 and the North 120 feet of . Tot 29, all in Block 2 of Earlington, according to the plat thereof recorded dn Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and, each conveys to the other parties to thiga agreement, a perpetual casement ‘for purposes of ingress and ogress and utilities to and from thoir respective tracts, the said easement to bo 20 fcet in width, being the North 20 foot of Ints 19 to the West lim of the East half of Jot 28 inclusive, and to oxtend fron Earlington Street in an oasterly direction to tho westerly lire of said Jot 19, ara thencso continuing in an easterly direction 20 feot in width to the West linc of the East half of Lot 28, and the terminus of the casement. 3 The said Merth 120 feat of the East half of Lot 29 and the North 120 feet of lot 29, shall have access for ingress and egross and utilities to said caserent right of way. ae i ee . Pape ore Leonean SP MAOMETI INES ee teeeetneet raueeaterreannraaserraceusaeh a eat Seenoneaten ste eat: ve Ded nbid's daikon Unb is Diba ae ers Sas irae SALAS i Qe OS EELS anal cb tod cndbacale dae Rdkdstanc lediwals meee Maes AERP ADIOS A re eT: Aaa x ILO , a, si es a ey aye Sere a co Ria aes Sierra sermons ‘ Pe a orn a ae seein eet es Ivinennny on reece TR ee? vere rs ee a en StS? 000 mare, te Cie a “es ee oath A529. 0550 : 22 OS STL aay | sae - The cost of upkeep ‘of this casemont a be equally barne y the respoctiny | ie i partion hereto, their: betrs, paceessors and assigns in title. : -e oY - ee ee ‘ oe re + we: This shalt be decked a3 a'covenaat running with the Lard, . q: Z u° ok be ; a noe ra Z - *: gy ~ ° rp) . “3. a, r J . ¢ ie Fa pe ftp) 2 . RADI oy het Ly, ae | “ i: “a, ; | 7 Lal be -{ alt : f : f . 1 3 STATZ OF WASHINGTON) a ) sa. oo COUNTY OF KING ) : i On this day personally appecred before me John J. Lissman, June M, Lissman, pa g e Carl L, Pale, Vera M, Dale, Ceorge H. Scott Sr., Ruth Scott and Olga Ropetowsic : y ' . 7 to te known to bo tho individuals doserited in and who executod the within and ‘. b fos, foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they signed the nama as thelr free ; “ and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and eure therein mntionred. ; , 1 GIVEN under ry hand and official seal this - day of Ita. < _» 1964. ton G4 ect : be a CO 200.) Mey “so ' Notary Public in and for the Stato of . a . a Pay % é Washington, residing at Penton ie.V OYE "3% Sry tte of Zi en SR OFS BDO NSS oh 8 ¥ “aio . eae a Se Lp, oy Te : i if ‘ 3 , \ Wl 44 re Z af tte ys : @ ' “a : necro Magy wey jim ; Pe cn ot Ate %. Treesse Lielly i ae . iH ROBERT A. MORRIS, Comty Auditor mE ee ff . . a “ A f Dp a ° SAVANE OBEN. « . x Sumner ws ream ere SrA as tbat nl RAISE AP aL MIRO ee oo aed MARA ORAM S09) HOON AOR. 6 OL AY NBO tee sd. de dO) offs PA wa spat satin “ cers ‘ 4 _.STATE OF WASHINGTON } COUNTY OF KING 5S J, EDWARD J. LOGAN, Director of Records and Elections, King County, State of Washington, and cx-offic “. Recorder of Deeds, and the legal keeper of records hereinafter mentioned, in and for said County, do hercby certify t attached to be a true and correct copy of Or. FASOMO Me a assecsuecsueesasecesesnessnecuscauessasesecsnsesecctessesevaneesuessevee PPPTTTTTTTTTTTT TILT TTTITTTTTTTTTTT TILT eer ieee eee Poor oreccerorvere eee ee ree n sere eee ee esses eee enenes sere neon sa es seer ee Ses seseee SE SSOSSOSOSsOUDSSED SUAS OR SOOTASBIIOS OOS! SORIFOAISSOSUDYCR OSS HOTONGEIOSOS VOSS OOH IP NESS STSOSIESIOS ODIO OHH OCOD OOEOSEOOS DODO DONE EELOree be sty As recorded in this office in Vol...4529......of.......D2eds we Page. 5...989-590 | or as filed in this office under File No......... WITNESS my hand and official seal this......25¢..... dp ef December 19 71 Pe es ebannsasauarnunsaneavoeenerdedqvesi y BAetnn } RYE DW J) LOGAN Pus ae . ifecto nie a fections ) : By... 2c LEY OEE a ..-» Deput 10 i N@ = 6575 | 7 10M 12-69-1507 Swan | ! ! i: joo. : hood ae % ! ! ; i ; a a 1 “ A THE CITY OF RENTON 7 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 2 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR e DELORES A. MEAD e CITY CLERK 7€D sepv™ December 23, 1977 APPEAL FILED BY RICHARD & ARLENE ROSS Re: Appeal of Examiner's Reconsideration Decision- dated 12/9/77, R. P. Ross, et ux, Short Plat 088-77 and Exception 089-77 To Parties of Record: Appeal of Land Use Hearing Examiner's reconsideration decision has been filed with the public records office this date, along with the proper fee of $25.00, pursuant to Title 4, Ch. 30, City Code, as amended. The City Code requires the appeal must be set forth in writing. The written appeal and all other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee. Please contact the Council Secretary, 235-2586, for date and time of the committee meetings if so desired. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above-referenced appeal will be considered by the Renton City Council at its regular meeting of January 9, 1978 at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Second Floor, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave. S. Yours very truly, CITY OF RENTON “\ POD 00rc. Eo P26 TP Maxine E. Motor Deputy City Clerk MEM: jt Sn op PR L A Si n n ly 5 OM E N S ho n 7 - Ss = Te e an g e le ta e . Ki . 1O F - s , , 7 #7 v 9 5 ro | § \ ; . i a f 8 ae re ee ee a io af A) ot "s e as l es e " ie a L- C3 Go ly ' P 6 tL Ca és / nN H ' 2 | OD P : : 5 a e a e ae Q os wt ae wa i l SP ag Se : N ° we . a «a k re Py N rn he e ge ae 74 : A p2 3 « oe A Hf YA S NS A te e == ! ; id 1, £ 4 .w ' e ? | | . si t 7 2 ry , Ji f JA oP oe rg ' ( A S ( I O L 4 7 2 VO T O C o t a 51 1 ) T0 0 W ta i # B T I D ? T H V I Fa LL D S ‘A I D L I O Se 4D Pye . i} c ‘ HS 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, Washington 98055 December 23, 1977 Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti and Renton City Council c/o City Clerk Renton, Appeakh OF Examiner's . é RE: Hleasos t Reconsideration) Washington 98055 ajar Exception No. E-089-77 Dear Mayor Delaurenti and Renton City Council; An appeal to the City Council is requested in the case referred to above. On October 25, 1977, a hearing was held regarding approval of our application for a two lot short plat and exception to subdivision ordinance. On November 16, 1977, a decision was rendered to deny the application. A brief was prepared and a Request for Reconsideration applied for. An answer to this denying reconsideration was issued on December 9, 1977, also the application for exception. All records of prior action are incorporated herein. The Hearing Examiner, Rick Beeler, states in his letter of December 9, 1977, paragraph 2, that..."without being granted an exception your proposal could not be approved...'"'. We are well aware that the proposal no longer meets the city code, this is the reason why we have requested the Exception. If it was our contention that our proposal met with the requirements we would not have taken this approach. Throughout the letter Mr. Beeler refers to a 40 foot road and an been to L.I.D. The purpose of this entire procedure has obtain an exception to the ordinance. As explained in detail on page 7 of our Request for Reconsideration, an L.1.0; Each of already 20 feet 40 foot what we vehicle is not a viable alternative. the three other owners of the easement road is free to use his land without the loss of an additional of land or the expense of an L.I.D. Although a road is ideal, 20 feet is definitely sufficient for propose. Should the occasion arise for an emergency to use the road it would be necessary to back it out. Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Renton City Council Page -2- December 23, 1977 While this is not as convenient as a turn around, it certainly shouldn't be the basis for refusing us the use of our land. There has not been any evidence to show that granting us an exception would be...determental to the public welfare... nor can the public possibly gain by the loss we will experience if refused the use of our land. "Investment prospects" and "property investments" are referred to in Mr. Beeler's letter. We are not speculators, contractors, or investors. We have owned and lived on this piece of property for 13 years; we like the area, schools, neighbors, and city and wish to utilize our property and remain where we are. If time had permitted it would have been interesting to have analyzed the last 20 exceptions granted in Renton; to determine who they were tranted to and how they could have been less...detrimental to the public welfare... than what we propose to do. On page 2 of the Hearing Examiners decision of December 9, 1977, he states that "Perhaps another alternative is available, but none has been raised at this point...'"'. We are now, and always have been open to suggestions. If there are options of which we are unaware, is it not the duty of the Planning Commission or Hearing Examiner to enlighten us? We didn't approach them as adversaries, but for assistance in obtaining a short plat in order to personally utilize our property. Our request to the Council is that all of the records enclosed be thoroughly evaluated, the property viewed, and a decision made thatreflects the rights of the individual unless a proper showing can be made that the public welfare would be adversely affected by allowing such an exception. Respectfully Submitted, Wf ae po - , Lf) Z Mc toe! fire Ax Rate! A-aeote Mr. and Mrs. Richard P. Ross 4 GF tS, a S ~ ° THE CITY OF RENTON S hla bo MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 So 3 r— a CHARLES J. DELAURENT!, MAYOR @ LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER *, es eceemer 5, 1877 L. RICK BEELER, 235-2593 7€0 sepve™ Mr. & Mrs. Richard Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 RE: Request for Reconsideration; Short Plat No. 088-77 & Exception No. E-089-77 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Ross: Your request for reconsideration by the Examiner was reviewed together with the record of this application. A re-examination of the record and pertinent sections of city ordinances was conducted and the Examiner's decision of November 16, 1977 reconsidered. This reconsideration reinforced the earlier conclusion that your situation is fairly unique due mainly to the passage of the existing Subdivision Ordinance before your subdivision request was submitted. The Subdivision Ordinance rendered nonconforming the 20-foot access easement serving your property and three other properties. Otherwise, your proposed subdivision is similar to the short plats accomplished on the other properties having access to the easement. But without being granted an Exception your proposal could not be approved with anything less than a 40-foot access easement/street. And this is the issue of your request for reconsideration and was the main issue of the Examiner's original decision as the proposed configuration of the property was acceptable. Property rights and privileges are vested for a particular property by filing an application to exercise the rights and privileges available under ordinances in effect at that time. In order for the rights and privileges prior to the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance to be vested, your application would have to have been submitted prior to passage of that ordinance. This would apply to any property. Any properties that do not conform to that ordinance become noncomforming and could not be further subdivided except in conformance with that ordinance. In your situation, this means that your property could not be subdivided today in the same manner as prior to 1971 and that the point of reference for rights and privileges shifted to those established in 1971. All properties, therefore, enjoy the same rights and privileges, while some property owners were able to accomplish subdivisions differently prior to 1971 (Section 9-1109. 1iBie)\e Testimony given at the public hearing indicated that the insufficient width (20 feet) of the easement created problems for safe and adequate access for private, commercial or public safety vehicles. A width of 40 feet per the Subdivision Ordinance was necessary to insure safe and adequate access, and the easement required paving and a cul-de-sac. For this reason, the Examiner found that the Exception, if granted, would be "...detrimental to the public welfare..." (Section 9-1109.1.C.), and that a 40-foot easement would not. The problems of the condition and width of the existing easement would be increased by allowing additional sole access by additional parcels. Mr. & Mrs. Richard Ross Page Two December 9, 1977 Turning attention to Section 9-1109.1.A. and the issue of "...reasonable use or development of...land...", the Examiner's opinion was that the use of the property prior to 1971 was single family. This use continued unchanged after 1971. It was not "...special physical circumstances or conditions..." that modified the use of the property. The investment prospects of an additional lot were changed, not use, as a result of the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance, which is the common risk factor in every property investment. Your circumstances were not physical but created by an ordinance revision which required additional width of the access to the property. Access remains via a dedicated public street (S.W. 3rd Place) to your property; therefore, the issue is not lack of access. Unfortunately, you are the victim of timing of not only your application but also of the ordinance revision. In terms of philosophy of the purpose of the Subdivision Ordinance, it is clear that the application is to any proposed subdivision of property regardless of size. The specified width of access serving the created parcels was specified for reasons of safety and adequacy for use by all vehicles, not just private automobiles. With this in mind, the Exception process was created to allow deviation in unusual, specific circumstances which did not violate this purpose. Accordingly, it was found that the proposed Exception was contrary to this purpose. Provision could be made on your proposed parcel for the 40-foot easement; however, the entire easement abutting the other properties remains deficient and a part of the problem. Only by an L.I.D. for improvements and providing 40 feet of access can the problems be solved, based upon the record available. Perhaps another alternative is available, but none has been raised at this point, and any alternative would have to be reviewed in a public hearing. Upon completing this review it was concluded that an error of law was not committed or satisfactorily substantiated. However, a good presentation was given in your request of your position and arguments for the proposal. Therefore, basically a difference of opinion occurred, which is understandable. But the Examiner's opinion remains unchanged from the decision of November 16, 1977 based on the available record. Renpeotrulty yours, Laity ST ——» (pp RS L. Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner LRB : mp cc: Larry Warren, City Attorney Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director ME M.O..RSA' N- DAe MM TO: Rick Beeler, Hearing Examiner December 8, 1977 FROM: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Re: Richard € Arlene Ross - Request for Reconsideration - Short Plat #088-77 and E-089-77 Dear Rick: This note is to confirm our conversation of Wednesday, December 7th, concerning the above captioned matter. At that time I indicated to you that your letter on the reconsideration correctly stated the law, in my opinion. If you have any furthe questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me. a y aad A? ( ISON ic CO Lawrence J. Warren LJW:nd Gor s Mayor Council President Del Mead MEMORANDUM DATE 12-5-77 TO ~ Larry:-Warren, City Attorney FROM _L. Rick Beeler, Hearing Examiner Richard & Arlene Ross Request for Reconsideration: Short Plat #088-77 ana E-089-77 SUBJECT This letter is to Mr. and Mrs. Ross regarding reconsideration. Please review to confirm my presentation of the legal issues. I believe I am correct, but I'd like your comment prior to publication. > Tis Office of Land Use Hearing Examiner From: Richard and Arlene Ross Re: Request for Reconsideration of Decision File No: Short Plat 088-77 E-089-77 Dear Sir: We hereby request reconsideration of the decision rendered on November 16, 1977 by L. Rick Beeler on the above matter. We feel that errors of judgment and law were made in the decision denying the exception to the short plat. In this report we will comment on the Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner; list the action taken in antici- pation of eventually building on the property; discuss our interpretation and understanding of the City Ordinance; and explain why we feel that an exception should be granted in this case. RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER NOV 301977 AM eve PM 2:81:96 N22 121:3:41516 a, Introduction Background Facts Analysis of Preliminary Report of Hearing Examiner Analysis of Examiner's Report and Recommendation of Renton Subdivision Ordinance Conclusion I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Renton Subdivision Ordinance is twofold (Section 9-1101 (2)): 1) To protect the interests of the public; 2) To protect the interests of the pronerty owners; The interests of the public to be protected are enumerated as: a) protection of public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics; and b) provisions for wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and thoroughfares. It is conceded that under special circumstances, interests of property owners must be subordinate to public interests. This is not the case here. This application affects a small portion of the "public" all of whom are property owners who will be affected hereby. No violation of public interest is present, while the applicants are adversely affected "property owners". In such a case, the purpose clause mandates that the interests of property owners shall be protected. Section II sets forth steps and expenses taken and incurred by applicants in reliance upon the continuity in City Ordinances. The present ordinance undermined these steps to the detriment of the applicants. Strict application of the ordinance will serve none of the enumerated public interests to be protected. However, without the granting of the exception requested, the property owners (who are to be protected) will suffer undue hardship in that: 1) Applicants are being deprived of the anticipated and reasonable use and development of their property (§9-1109 (1) (A)). 2) Applicants are being deprived of property rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity (adjoining lots) and under similar circumstances. With this in mind, it is submitted that errors of law, fact, and judgment were present in the decision rendered November 14, 1977. II. BACKGROUND FACTS In 1964 a 20 foot easement for the purpose of utilities and ingress and egress was established to provide access to lots 22 through 29, located in the vicinity of S.W. 3rd Place between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue 5.W. Those involved in developing this were Mr. and Mrs. John Lissman, Mr. and Mrs. Carl Dale, Mr. and Mrs. George Scott, and Olga Repetowski. In 1965 we purchased the property owned by the Scotts. Our understanding at the time of the purchase, and from talking to subsequent owners of the properties bordering the easement over the years, was to allow for eventual development of each of these lots. Mr. and Mrs. Ken Williams purchased the East half of lot 24 and all of lots 25 and 26 originally owned by Mrs. Vera Dale and, in 1973, built a home on this site. Steps that we have taken over the years toward the same eventual goal on our property, lots 27 and the west half of lot 28, are: 1. Payment of 1/4 of the taxes on the 20 foot easement since 1965. 2. Obtaining a release from the mortgage company of the property that we are presently attempting to shortplat. This was done in 1975 and resulted in our owning the back half of our property outright and owing a mortgage on the house and front half of the lot. 3. Recording the division with King County. Since this time we have paid the taxes separately on the two vieces of property. 4. Meeting with the owners of the other three lots involved in this easement, planning the develonment of the road, and paying 1/4 of the cost of the same. 5. Granting an easement through our property in order that the Williams could provide their property with utilities from S.W. 3rd Place. In lieu of payment for this easement, all utilities were provided, underground, to our property also. 6. Hiring a surveyor to provide the City with the necessary drawings for the short plat. 7. Applying for a short plat and exception to the Ordinance. We feel that our strongest argument on this subject is that we are not attempting to create a road that does not meet existing city codes. We are merely applying for per- mission to use the road that met the code at the time that it was created. The road was created and the above-mentioned steps taken in good faith that new rules and regulations should be prospective only and not take effect retroactively. he Analysis of Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner Planning Dept. Analysis - 0.5. The suggestion was made that if the road was permanently surfaced the entire distance to the west 1/2 of lot 28 that possibly limited use for access (total potential lots served approximately 4) would be acceptable. We have indicated our willingness to comply with this. Planning Dept. Analysis - 0.6. Concedes that there is no other reasonable means of providing access to the proposed short plat. Any other questions raised in this analysis have already been dealt with as have the concerns raised by: The Utilities Department -- Water, sewer, electricity, telephone and television cable are provided to the lot from SW 3rd Place. There is a gas main from SW Earlington to lot 26. Garbage collection could take place from SW Ear lington in the same manner as presently serves the William's residence. Traffic Engineering Department -- We have expressed willingness to provide a permanent surface for the easement road and have requested that it take place at the time of construction for the sake of economy and convenience. Engineering Department -- Previously discussed. Their concerns were the same as the Utilities and Traffic Engineering Departments. Fire Prevention Department -- The possibility of a waiver of the requirements by the fire department has already been considered and also the fact that permission from the fire department is premature as they are only concerned at the time of construction. Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation and Renton Subdivision Ordinance In the Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation, Conclusion #4, the purpose of the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance was quoted as stating, "In the interest of protecting the '...public health, safety, welfare...' and providing '...wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and throughfares' §9-1101.2"" What also is mentioned in the purpose is the interest of property owners. We strongly believe that, when adopting this Ordinance, the council had no intention of denying the existing property owners of the rightful use of their proper- ties. The Ordinance was more reasonably geared to "future" development in order that the anticipated platting and sub- dividing of large blocks of land that has taken place in the past few years could be conducted in an orderly manner. Most of the Ordinance is aimed at large development. §9-1108. 23.F.2 states that "Each lot must front upon a public street or road with width of not less than specified in §9=1108.23.A. §9-1108.23.A.9 states that "There shall be no private street platted in any subdivision, and every subdivision property shall be served from a publicly dedicated street" When the entire section is read, rather than taking the above mentioned sections out of context, it becomes increasingly convincing that what is being referred to is large scale develon- ment. §9-1108.23 begins as follows: ‘Minimum Standards for Residential Design. In the planning of a subdivision. What we are proposing is not a subdivision, but merely a single short plat. Conclusion #5 states, "Any hardship created by requiring access via a 40-foot public right-of-way is not undue since the re- quirement applies to all properties in the area". This is incorrect. The properties immediately to the east and west of the proposed plat are served solely by the 20-foot ease- ment. The steps taken in Section II were in anticipation of sharing equal rights of adjoining owners. §9-1109.1.B states that "The exception is necessary to insure such property the rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under similar circumstances." The access to our lot is not only similar, but identical to the other 3 lots served by this easement road. Conclusion #5 further states, "The avplicant continues to enjoy the reasonable use and development of his/her land for single family residential purposes (Section 9-1109.1) The existing use is unchanged. "This is untrue. While the existing use remains unchanged the reasonable use and development of the land have been seriously affected. The existing use is unchanged because it is presently UNdeveloped and UNused. The purpose of applying for this short plat was to prepare the property for the day when it WOULD be used. For this reason we contend that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance will deprive us of the reasonable use and development of our land. Conclusion #5, paragraph 4, states that "adding further traffic to the existing easement in its present condition is detrimental to public welfare". This is contrary to the facts. The following is true: 1. At the original hearing a willingness to improve the condition of the road was expressed, and 2. Under Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations, #10, the statement is made that "to date, two dwelling units use the easement as their only access". Actually, only one residence is presently being served by this access. This is the Williams residence and they own two vehicles. The road is very adequately maintained considering it's limited and infrequent use. 3. No showing has been made of any effect on pnublic welfare. Conclusion #5 further states that, “at full development of the properties with access rights to the easement, as many as 5 dwelling units might use this access, (Interpreted from Exhibits 1 and 2)". Only 4 landowners own rights in this easement. I have enclosed the map on which the red X's were marked indicating the possibility of 5 homes. The property shaded in red is owned by Mr. and Mrs. George Johnson. They do not have ownership in the easement. The easement, as written in 1964, serves lots 22 through 29. This would indicate that only 4 residences would conceivably use this road. The property to the North of the easement could not gain access without the authorization of the Hearing Examiner. The city retains total control over development of property to the Notth of the easement. A recommendation was made by the Planning Commission to form an LID to improve the easement to conform to city standards. This requires approval of at least 50% of the effected property owners. There are 4 owners of this ease- ment road. According to Section 9-1108.23.A.3.d, the property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Lissman, (lots 22, 23, and the West 1/2 of 24), could qualify as a pipesteam lot and, therefore, be short platted. The lots owned by the Williams, (the East 1/2 of lot 24, and lots 25 and 26), and those owned by Mrs. Repetowski, (North 120 feet of the East 1/2 of lot 28 and the North 120 feet of lot 29), were short platted prior Fe 1971. We have discussed the possibility of the LID with the other owners of the easement road. While each sympathizes with our problem, they are all interested in maintaining the quiet and privacy presently enjoyed in this area. As he indicated at the Hearing, Mr. Brinson, the owner of the property to the north of the easement, desires that multiple family housing be developed in the area. For this reason we have to concur with the other 3 owners of the easement road: Except for the purpose of allowing us to short plat our lot, development of a 40 foot road that would allow large scale development to the north of the easement would be detrimental to the interests of everyone involved. Vv. Conclusion In this case you are not working with a large builder or land developer with many options who is attempting to realize large personal profit from an exception. We are people who have owned the same piece of property for 13 years and are attempting to abide as nearly as vossible to the regulations set by the City Council. Prior to the new ordinance of 1971, we had the right to short plat and build on our lot. If we are now refused this right, it would mean that a valuable piece of view property has been deemed worthless. As previously stated, there are 4 owners of the easement road: two had short vlatted their property prior to the new ordinance and one lot can qualify as a pipvesteam lot. This would indicate that we alone are being singled out of this group and being denied the use of our land; that the City of Renton will take 4 lots, situated side by side, and allow the owners of 3 of them to use their land and deny the fourth the same privelege. The very fact that a procedure, application and fee has been established for exceptions indicates that the regu- lations set in this Ordinance were not intended to be complied with 100% of the time. This Ordinance represents the ideal. Exceptions are granted regularly when a viable alternative is not available. For the reasons set forth in this report as well as for the purpose of promoting new development in one of the city's oldest neighborhoods, we respectfully request that this exception be granted. Sincerely, / oo 2 See eno el en ai, ee bhi, KK LJ Richard and Arlene Ross cc Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Counselman Richard M. Stredicke & -@S7-77 SHORT FlAT #088-77 id : , | be : ot e ‘ ee e mn e e November 16, 1977 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. APPLICANT: Richard and Arlene Ross FILE NO. Short Plat 088-77 E-089-77 LOCATION: The vicinity of 516 Southwest 3rd Place along the north side of S.W. 3rd Place approximately midway between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.W. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of an exception to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty (20) foot easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department: Recommend denial. Hearing Examiner Decision: Denial. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on October 18, 1977. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing, which was continued on October 25, 1977, was reopened on November 1, 1977, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1 and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #2: King County Assessor's Map Exhibit #3: Short Plat Map Exhibit #4: Letter from the applicant regarding request for exception, dated 10-3-77. Exhibit #5: Memorandum from Traffic Engineering Division, dated 10-31-77. The Examiner asked the applicant if she concurred in Exhibit #1. Responding was: Arlene Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Ross reported that she did not concur in Exhibit #1 and objected to the recommendation for denial by the Planning Department. She referred to Exhibit #4 which lists reasons for approval of the request including existence of the easement roadway since 1964 prior to adoption of the Subdivision Ordinance in 1971; limited utilization of the easement by only one residence; and good condition of the roadway for the current use. She objected to comments in Exhibit #1 regarding the condition of the subject roadway stating that costly improvements were premature because of existence of only one residence on the easement and emphasized that the roadway was created for purposes of ingress and egress and not for utilities which were installed several years ago. She also stated that although the width of the roadway prevented motorists from turning around, vehicles could turn in driveways or back out to the street. Referring to statements in Exhibit #1, Mrs. Ross advised that application for a waiver was not submitted because of the possibility of denial of the short plat request and subsequent forfeiture of the waiver fee, although she wished to reserve the right to apply at a later date. She also stated that garbage collection could occur at the end of the easement roadway and felt that paving the easement should not be required until future construction commenced. Short Plat 088-77 Page Two E-089-77 She asked for clarification on Item C., page 2, of Exhibit #1 regarding Subdivision Ordinance requirements for frontage on a dedicated right-of-way and inquired if the easement would be dedicated to the city and width requirements of the roadway if this occurred. Mr. Smith indicated that since vacant property exists along the easement which may be developed in the future, a 50-foot roadway was a minimum requirement, although a 40-foot roadway would be acceptable per the ordinance requirements since the topography of the property qualified it as a hillside area. Mrs. Ross stated that because of the location of residences on Stevens Avenue S.W. east of the subject property and the steep grade of the area, the easement would remain as a dead end street or cul-de-sac and should not be considered a public right-of-way. Regarding fire department requirements for hydrants and access roadway improvements, Mrs. Ross reported discussions with fire department personnel had indicated that regulations were established for new development and should not be applied to the individual homeowner. She indicated that a fire hydrant exists 600 feet from the subject property which did not meet the 500-foot limit required but could be reached by fire apparatus. The Examiner called for testimony from the fire department. Responding was: Jack McLaughlin Inspector, Renton Fire Department The Examiner asked Mr. McLaughlin if requirements for a hydrant and improvements to the 20-foot easment could be waived by the fire department. Mr. McLaughlin indicated that the requirements could be waived during application for a short plat, but would be instated as conditions at the time of construction on the property. Mr. Smith added a clarification from Section 9-1105.9 of the Subdivision Ordinance which requires all utilities and improvements to be installed prior to construction on the site. Mrs. Ross reviewed conditions outlined in the ordinance for requesting an exception and felt that the situation of the property warranted approval of the request. In response to the Examiner's inquiries, Mr. Smith reported that certain certification requirements had been met or would be met prior to final submittal to King County; no restrictive covenants had been submitted; a final plat map is contained in Exhibit #3; and no application for deferral or waiver had been received by the department or the Board of Public Works although all utilities and improvements were required to be installed prior to the filing of the short plat with King County. The Examiner asked for testimony in favor of the application. Responding was: Jim Lawrie 10828 Lakeridge Drive S. Seattle, WA Mr. Lawrie indicated that he is Mrs. Ross's employer. He felt that provisions for application for an exception were included in the ordinance to prevent undue hardship to property owners and felt that certain flexibility should be allowed depending upon individual circumstances. He reported that creation of a mutual easement in 1964 had occurred to provide access for only those property owners on the easement and that if adoption of the city's Subdivision Ordinance in 1971 had been anticipated, the property would have been subdivided prior to that time. Mr. Lawrie inquired if the Examiner may impose conditions to defer installation of improvements. The Examiner advised that a deferral can only be granted by the Board of Public Works for a maximum period of two years. Mr. Lawrie suggested that an alternative would be approval of the exception with the inclusion of conditions. The Examiner advised that the purpose of the subject exception application was to request a deviation from the required frontage on a public street. Mr. Smith reported that the ordinance required filing of the plat within one year of submittal of the application on October 4, 1977 by which time the improvements must be installed or a deferral granted. The Examiner indicated that the hearing could be continued until such time as an application for waiver was submitted which could be reviewed concurrent with the short plat request or continued subject to review of a deferral by the Board of Public Works. In response to Mrs. Ross's inquiry regarding improvements, the Examiner stated that installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and possibly storm sewers as well as conditions imposed by the fire department would be required before final filing of the plat with King County. The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition to the application. Responding was: H. A. Brinson 264 Earlington Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 Short Plat 088-77 Page Three E-089-77 Mr. Brinson stated that the property in question was unsuitable for single family homes because of steep grades and expressed his preference for multiple family development in the area. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding lot size, Mr. Smith reported that the square foot computation on the north lot included the easement. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for additions, corrections or modifications to Exhibit #1. Mr. Smith indicated that the department's original recommendation would remain and expressed a concern that approval of the request would set a precedent for narrow easement roadways. He emphasized ordinance requirements and suggested formation of an LID to improve the easement to conform to city standards. Mrs. Ross restated her opinion that the roadway was originally created only for access to those residences located on the easement and objected to inability to develop her property because of city requirements. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding the legal status of the easement for future access to the lots, Mr. Smith indicated that he had not contacted the City Attorney regarding the matter but felt that the intent of the ordinance was to impose restrictions upon easements and did not pertain to subdivision of property. The Examiner asked for further testimony. Since there was none, the hearing on Item #Short Plat 088-77 and E-089-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10:25 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: FINDINGS: l. The request is for approval of a two-lot short plat and exception to allow access via a 20-foot easement. 2. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter and is hereby attached as Exhibit #1 and incorporated in this report by reference as set forth in full therein. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended by R.C.W. 43.2.C., a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required setbacks and lot coverage requirements of Section 4-706 of Title IV, Code of General Ordinances. 7. Final plat certification per Section 9-1105.3.A (reference to Section 9-1106.3.H) is normally processed administratively prior to filing the short plat at King County. 8. Restrictive Covenants were not proposed (Section 9-1105.3.B). 9. Dedication of public right-of-way is not proposed (Section 9-1105.3.D and E). 10. An existing 20-foot vehicular access and utilities easement crosses the northern portion of the proposal and extends to the abutting easterly property. This easement was created in 1964 for access to Earlington Avenue S.W. Subsequent to its creation and prior to the 1971 edition of the city Subdivision Ordinance, short plats similar to the proposal were approved with access for the northerly lots via the easement. Section 9-1108.23.F.(2) requires residential lots front a public street which Section 9-1108.7 (Table 1) specifies as a minimum of 40 feet in width. To date two dwelling units use the easement for their only access. At full development of the properties with access rights to the easement, as many as five dwelling units might use this access. (Interpreted from Exhibits #1 and #2). Properties immediately north of the easement do not have access via the easement, however, should this access be gained, approximately five additional dwelling units would utilize the easement. Short plats that are served by a 20-foot easement have not been approved in the area under the existing Subdivision Ordinance. A review of Exhibit #2 indicated that similar easements do not exist in other locations in this block. Ll. 12. 3% 14. Short Plat 088-77 Page Four E-089-77 Improvements of curbs, gutters and sidewalks are not proposed within the 20-foot easement. Pavement exists for approximately the westerly 30 feet of the easement. A waiver or deferral application has not been filed per Section 9-1105.6. The applicant testified that improvements within the easement would preferably be accomplished at the time construction occurs on the created lot. Improvements are required (Section 9-1105.6) to be installed prior to final Signature by staff (Section 9-1105.7) and filing with King County (Section 9-1105.8). Construction or excavation cannot occur prior to filing the short plat (Section 9-1105.10). Water, sewer and electricity are available on the northern portion of the site. The northern lot of the short plat contains 7,560 square feet without subtraction of the 20-foot easement. Excluding the easement (1200 square feet) the net lot area would be 7,440 square feet which meets the requirements of Section 4-706. CONCLUSIONS : The proposed short plat conforms to the Comprehensive Plan for the area. The existing easement that will serve as the only access to the proposed northerly lot is in physical condition unconducive to the public health, safety and welfare. It is unreasonable to require the applicant to correct the entire deficiency. Instead the more equitable LID process should be used. During the LID process consideration can be given to the anticipated subdivision of the property north and south of the easement. Section 9-1108.7 rendered the existing easement nonconforming but allowed the easement to continue as access to the existing properties. Any subdivision of land after enactment of this section is required to meet its requirements. The subdivision of properties south of the easement will not affect the density of dwelling units using the easement. Instead, the impact will be to change the status of the easement to that of sole access for these units. At the time of its creation the easement served as a secondary access for the homes which fronted S.W. 3rd Place. Since that time at least one-half of the properties have been subdivided in such a way that the southern portions front and access to S.W. 3rd Place and the northerly portions front and access via the easement. In the interest of protecting the "...public health, safety, welfare..." and providing "...wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and thoroughfares" (Section 9-1101.2), the City Council determined in 1971 that 40 feet of right-of-way would be minimum in this situation instead of the existing 20-foot easement. Deviation or relief from these requirements may be granted per Section 9-1109 (Exceptions). Any hardship (Section 9-1109.1) created by requiring access via a 40-foot public right-of-way is not undue since the requirement applies to all properties in the area. Access continues to be from the 20-foot easement serving the subject property. The applicant continues to enjoy the reasonable use and development of his/her land for single family residential purposes (Section 9-1109.1.A.). The existing use is unchanged. When the 20-foot easement is increased to 40 feet the applicant should be able to subdivide the property. The rights and priviliges (Section 9-1109.1.B) of subdivision of property depend upon ordinances in effect at application. Other properties were subdivided under regulations precedent to Chapter 11. The subject site must comply with the requirements of Chapter 11 as do other properties in the area in order to be subdivided. Adding traffic to the existing easement in its present condition is potentially detrimental to the public welfare (Section 9-1109.1.C). An improved 40-foot public street would provide safe private and public access and turn-around capability. For the aforementioned reasons the Exception application should be denied. Safe and adequate access is critical to the subdivision of land, and the existing 20-foot easement is inadequate per the intent, purpose and requirements of Chapter ll. Short Plat 088-77 Page Five E-089-77 6. Opportunity is lacking within the 20-foot wide easement for sufficient backing-up Maneuvers by private, commercial or public safety vehicles. A hammerhead or cul- de-sac should be created on the northeastern portion of the subject property in conjunction with adjoining properties to permit turning around of vehicles. 7. %XIn view of the probable subdivision of property north of the easement a comprehensive overview would suggest that an additional 20 feet of right-of-way should eventually be dedicated parallel to the easement. The accumulated 40 feet should be dedicated for a public street to serve the interior of this residential block and to coordinate development. 8. The short plat requires access via a 40-foot public right-of-way (Section 9-1108.7). Disapproval of the Exception application renders moot the short plat. When sufficient right-of-way is established per Section 9-1108.7 the short plat can again be considered. DECISION: Based upon the record, testimony, findings and conclusions, it is the Examiner's decision to disapprove the Short Plat and Exception requests. ORDERED THIS 16th day of November, 1977. de GRE — L. Rick Beeler Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of November, 1977 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Arlene Ross Jack McLaughlin Jim Lawrie H. A. Brinson TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of November, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division Larry Warren, City Attorney Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before November 30, 1977. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the City Clerk's office, first floor of City Hall, or same may be purchased at cost in said office. Richard and Arlene Ross 3rd Place WA 98055 516 SW Renton Renton Renton Renton Dear Sirs, October 3, Planning Department City Hall WA 98055 EXHIBIT NO. £08 G-F7 RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER NOV 11977 PM 2, 8:90 Ih 12:3,4:5,6 ay ITEM NO. O8§- 77, E-0f97-77 We are applying for a short plat of the property described in the accompanying documents. The purpose of this letter is to explain our reasons for believing that a variance should be granted in this case. yo At The regulation requiring that each lot border a cit county road was passed by the city council in 1974. 1g7/ that time I wrote a letter to the council requesting that this new ruling be prospective only and not effect present property owners. The easement road in question was created in 1964 and we have owned a one quarter interest in it since 1965. Since that time we have paid onequarter of the taxes and development and maintenance of the road with the intention that we would eventually be using it :as ‘access to the home we :honed to build. The road is presently serving as the sole access to the Williams residence located at 314 Earlington SW. The property was divided for tax purposes in 1973. At that time we were unaware that a separate division had to be made by both the city and the county. In summation, tes our reasons for believing that the variance should be granted are as follows: Easement road is not newly created, having been in existence since 1964. The easement road presently serves the residence at 314 Earlington SW. The road is developed and well maintained and has been for several years. The regulation for 1974 should be effective prospectively only rather than taking effect retroactively. Sincerely, Richard and Arlene Ross MEMORANDUM DATE: October 31, 1977 TOs Mike Smith, Planning Department FROM: Paul Lumbert, Traffic Engineering SUBJECT: Richard § Arlene Ross Short Plat The Traffic Engineering Division recommends that access to the above short plat be made by a 40' minimum public right-of-way and provide fll improvements which would help solve any future ingress or egress problems in this area. PL:ad RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER NOV 11977 AM PM 71819 10121 12131415,6 N <) A is gy al n maT ITEM NO. of 8 7- E-pgao4 RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER PLANNING DEPARTMENT Noy 11977 AM PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER — 7,9,Qy10)fts12:11213141516 PUBLIC HEARING 4 OCTOBER 25, 1977 CXHIBIT NO._! APPLICANT: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS 3; py l¥i NE ), (£8-71, E- 099. 77 FILE NO.: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of an exception to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty (20) foot easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS 2. Applicant: Richard and Arlene Ross 3. Location: The vicinity of 516 Southwest 3rd Place along. the north side of SW 3rd Place approximately midway between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.W. 4. Legal: Detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. Said legal description also contains an easement for ingress and egress and utilities over the north twenty feet of lots 19 thru the west half of lot 28. Lots 19 thru 26 are located directly west of the Subject site. 6. Access: The southerly portion of subject site attains access via S.W. 3rd Place. The proposed lot in the northerly portion of the site is proposed to attain access via twenty (20) foot access utilities easement. 7. Existing Zoning: R-1, Residential Single Family Se. Existing Zoning in the Area: R-1, Residential Single Family R-2, Duplex Residence District 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Single Family Residential 10. Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three places On or near the site as required by City Ordinance. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE TWO RES 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS PURPOSE OF REQUEST: To obtain approval of a two-lot short plat with lot sizes 7,560 Square feet and 7,200 square feet respectively together with approval of an exception from Subdivision Ordinance requirements of proper frontage on the dedicated public right-of-way to allow access via an existing twenty (20) foot access of utilities ease- ment extending from Earlington Avenue S.W. to the easterly property line of the subject site. This easement is located along the northerly twenty (20) feet of the subject site. HISTORY BACKGROUND: The subject site was part of the original plat of Earlington which created blocks with long narrow lots approximately 40 feet wide by approximately 246 feet deep. Through the years some of these lots have been subdivided to reduce their length with provision of access by various means. The abovementioned ease- ment, copy of which is attached, was more than likely established for this reason. However, since the twenty (20) foot access easement was established, the City Subdivision Regulations have disallowed subdivisions utilizing access of this nature. The northerly half of the property immediately west of the subject site was subdivided prior to this ordinance requirement. A house was subsequently constructed on the site due to the legal nonconforming nature of the lot. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1. Topography: The subject site rises from S.W. 3rd Place approximately 25 feet in height within the southerly 120 feet of the subject site. The slope levels off toward the middle of the site and gently rises towards the northerly property line. 2. Soils: Beausite gravelly sandy loam (BeC), permeability is moderately rapid, available water capacity is low, runoff is medium, and hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for timber, pasture, and urban development. 3. Vegetation: The approximate southerly one-half of the subject site contains various trees and shrubs typical to single family residential area. The northerly one-half of the site is primarily scrub grass, blackberries, and scattered fruit and deciduous trees. 4. Wildlife: The existing vegetation on the site may provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. Water: No existing streams or surface water are apparent on the subject site. 6. Land Use: There is an existing single family residence located on the southerly portion of the subject site adjacent to S.W. 3rd Place. There are other single family residences located along S.W 3rd Place in the general area. There is an existing single family residence located adjacent to and west of the northerly portion of the subject site. This residence is presently served by the 20 foot access road from Earlington Avenue S.W. There is undeveloped orchard land located directly north of the subject site and adjacent to the easterly side of the subject site. Beyond these areas, single family residences are located in the general vicinity. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE THREE RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: Generally single family residential nature. PUBLIC SERVICES; 1. Water and Sewer: The six (6) inch water main is located along S.W. 3rd Place and along Earlington Avenue S.W. An eight (8) inch sewer main is located along S.W. 3rd Place and a six (6) inch sewer main is located along Earlington Avenue S.W. No storm sewers are presently available in the area. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department and subject to City of Renton requirements. See attached comments by the Renton Fire Department. 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route 107 operates along Sunset Blvd. approximately one block south of the subject site. 4. Schools: Earlington Elementary School is located approximately three quarters of a mile north and west of the subject site. Dimmit Junior High School is located approximately two (2) miles north of the subject site. Renton High School is located approximately one (1) mile north and east of the subject site. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-706, R-1 - Residential Single Family APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS: 1. Subdivision Regulations: a. Section 9-1105, Plat Requirements for Short Subdivisions b. Section 9-1108, Plat Improvements and Development Standards c. Section 9-1109, Exceptions 2. Policy Statement, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area 1965 3. Subdivision of Land Page 5 and 6 4. Traffic Ways, page 6 IMPACTS ON NATURAL SYSTEMS: Subdivision of the property will not have a direct impact on the natural systems, however, the eventual development of the subject site will disturb soil and vegetation, increase storm water runoff, and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. However, these can be mitigated by proper devel- opment controls and proceedures. SOCIAL IMPACTS: Relatively minor. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE FOUR RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS EMVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/ THRESHOLD: Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 as amended (RCW 43.21C), this project is exempt from the Threshold Determination and Environmental Impact Statement process. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A vicinity map and site map are attached. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: City of Renton Building Division City of Renton Engineering Division City of Renton Utilities Division City of Renton Traffic Engineering Divison City of Renton Fire Department Oa P w W N M H — Copies of certain memorandum are attached. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The proposed short plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Existing Zoning, and existing uses in the area. 2. The two lots meet minimum ordinance size and dimension require- ments. The subdivision of the lot in half is reasonable, given the existing long narrow configuration. 3. The applicant proposes access to the northerly lot via an existing 20 foot easement. Other similiar plats have been permitted in the area, particularly directly adjacent to the westerly boundary of the subject site, where a residence has been recently constructed. However, these subdivisions allowing such easement road access occurred prior to the City's Subdivision Ordinance which established the requirement for proper frontage on a dedicated public street. 4. There are many disadvantages to permitting private easement roads. They are generally undermaintained or sometimes completely neglected, with the City having no jurisdiction for maintenance. They cause dust and mud problems in the area, and are generally of insufficient width for proper fire, service, and emergency vehicle access. However, certain advantages include privacy, less noise, and less traffic hazards. 5. The subject easement road is permanently paved for only the first approximately 30 feet east of Earlington Avenue S.W. The remainder of the existing developed portion of the 20 foot easement is presently a combination of dirt and gravel in rather poor condition. If the easement were to be used for access, it should be permanently surfaced the entire distance to the east half of lot 28. If this were accomplished it is possible that limited use for access (total potential lots served approximately 4) would be acceptable. However, until such time creating additional traffic on such access is not acceptable. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE FIVE RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS 6. The attached copy of the common easement states that "the cost of upkeep of this easement shall be equally borne by the respective parties hereto." It appears from the existing condition of the easement that this upkeep has been minimal. 7. There is no other reasonable means of providing access to the proposed short plat. 8. All off-site improvements should be installed along the portion of the property fronting S.W. 3rd Place. Curb, gutter and sidewalk exist along the southside of S.W. 3rd Place approximately 150 feet west of the subject site. 9. There is a question as to how the applicant intends to serve the property with utilities. Two alternatives exist; either provide the utilities from S.W. 3rd Place via an easement across the southerly lot, or provide them from Earlington Avenue S.W. via the existing 20 foot easement. There is also a question of proper fire hydrant access. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, the recommendation of the Engineering Division, Traffic Engineering Division, Utilities Division, the subdivision regulations, and the intormation presented by the applicant, it is recommended that the proposed short plat and exception be denied. However, if the problems stated above can be resolved, such short plat may be acceptable at a future date. INT CRIT PARTMENTAL REVIEW REQUEST ee TO: © PUBLIC WORKS DIREC LY : Y Aon NGDIVISION SL a va iN / ; LY Nw INEERING DIVISION 7 O ~ - oad, \TRAFFIC ENGINEERING scvTSstOn & —— U. UTILITIES DIVISION naa: asa \~ FIRE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WhicilAg, <uytid Contact Person RE: Rees SHoer PLAT # OXS- 77 Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it, to the Planning Department by loft2 raed with your written recommendation. Nou response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. : Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Date jaheales 7 7 INTER: PARTNCHTAL FEVIEW REQUEST ar. IC WORKS DIRECTOR TO: NGINEERING-BH¥4S TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISIQ —— UTILITIES DIVISION RE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT (lichag, <huitH Contact Person RE: RietAer 4 AZLENE ROSS. Exasetie > SWEPIVI SION) OiPIWWANCE TC AULOw A LoT Sm with Access VA A 20 Foot PENATE EASEMENT DAD. Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it to the Planning Department by __ (ee /i2/27 with your written recommendation. our response will be included as part of the ‘staff report to the Hearing Examiner. ? Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Date jo [io (77 WA 7 40(¢ 2477 ee Shoot i? la # (s seat TE COs mended Slnec oft Cacks ale a inn te ACCeESS a a atest, Sevvren “A Ka. Hee Ph Lat Riso UTiutes , BA The PRomens THAT HAUG To BE ResocvEe”O ARE WATER SEAUCE AND SEVER SEnNCcE To PafaertTy A WAwW SHouLcDd BE TXTEND PDUN EASCUENT, TO EPALING Tonal AUG SW Ane/ Oh PAIVIPEG UTILITY EASEXENT Tien FrouTt LOT. To SW. SH PUG , GARKRECE eoccEcTions VET 6 EsTasusHeo J P op, — LOCATION wit WA TRAFEIS = ENWCtnEELING OV, THE 20‘ AccESS 4 UTILITY EASEMENT 3 sHouc Wd Be FAVEO wiTH ASPHACT 14¢'To 16‘ par Wwi~TH 17s ENTIRE CEWGTH To PlovigE Access Fok. EMERGENCY VEMCLES . MEMORANDUM TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT pATE 10/17/77 FROM FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT 1. <A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential use. 2. All buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. SS JML/jeb ic e -. mi s e iracaiidecstia iS andiesiaonl ciel musts iss re 3 S93h48r Rev ae ‘EASEMENT y WHEREAS, George H. Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott,his wife, and Carl L. Dale and Vera M, Dale, his wife, and Olga Repetowski, a widow, all of King County, Washington, are the owrers of: s The North 20 feet of Lots 19, 20 and 21, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 1+ of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, ; - : and WHEREAS: John J, Idssman and June M, Lissman, bis wife, of King County, ‘Washington, ere the cuners of: ~ _ oe “3 lots 22, 23 and the West half of lot 24, Block 2, Earlington according to ' plat thereof recorded in Voluve 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King Comty, Washington, , . : _ and WEEFEAS, Carl L, ta: and Vera M, Dale, his wife, are the owners of: The East half of lot 24, and all of lots 25 and 26, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. and WHEREAS, George H, Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott, his wife, are the owers of: lot 27 and the West half of lot 28, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and WHSREAS, Olga Repetowski, a widow, is the owner of: The North 120 feet of the East half of Lot 28 and the North 120 feet of Lot 29, all in Block 2 of Earlington, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and,. each conveys to the other parties to this agreement, a perpetual casement ‘for purposes of ingress and ogress and utilities to and from their respective . Pape ore tracts, the said easement to be 20 feet in width, being the North 20 feet of Ints 19 to the West lines of the East hai of lot 28 inclusive, and to extend from Earlington Street in an easterly direction to the westerly line of said Iot 19, ard thence continuing in an easterly direction 20 feet in width to the West line of the East half of Lot 28, and the termirms of the easement, The said North 120 feet of the East half of Lot 2B and the North 120 feet of let 29, shall have access for ingress and egress and utilities to said caserent right of way. 5 PH aha aA a BAST Mich ND tierce ana nant Re RGD AE ERE RIE asia SLE a Se hanced bictrat aeRO sith AOR aiden IAD LAL Ot OL ae Scared aren tk oe ee aL SEIS aa a CLA dalal he 0 da tn cA bet Dir leer eT ab) Reina dale BSA AAS cd Sgge hh OP EAA Ce hE ie oe 7 Fa 4529 02589 1 34 & iS Te a s e is e d AySE, \" ihe N FS ee Ne ae ON Or eA tae? “A520. naS0 The cost of pkoep of this oasenent ohalt, be equally barne by the respocting | e! -. parties hereto, their heirs, successors and asnigas in title, : ~, mids sball be decued as @*covenant running with the land, - ss ct each et, Ee L° IN WITNESS WHEFSOF, the parties hereto, have bereunto set their hands 3 am : - : r nat . H seals this. Qadk day of ee » 1968, Hy hd <4 . a a oO . 3: AS rad ; , id : os Bi — 7 Ff ao rR a. =< steele eee nae sectkossg ermine = Fi f . ~ & 2 . : we) ee ‘ - | LER. ¢ dade WF ° ee . & ry bs aed . () >. wey f Lipson det Ly | “ hig . fol be ba { all f 9 ‘ STATS OF WASHINGTON) ) S3e 3 COUNTY OF KING ) ; i On this day personally appeared before me John J. Lissman, June M, lissmn, ; Carl L, Dale, Vera M, Dale, Georges H. Scott Sr., Ruth Scott and Olga Repetowski 2 to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the within and E foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they signed the same as their free : and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and upases therein mentioned. 4 E 7 GIVEN under ry band and official seal this ” day of ae » 196. i ae RPK i bee.) Coll v ee es Notary Public in and for tha State of Washington, residing at Renton if . ) 4 ‘ C3 yy ’ al Kecora Mop 4 Waal 12m ! ; i i of pte & Ttrcwse Laelty Oy , if ROBERT A. MORRIS, Coonty Aud4or . oa fs rs A ; | ; ny aa oe , SEKI IPRS wo ahereretene : LAPP EE LITT NTR LI sine ROTTS CNW EHSL ORN: Cueva aed Fade AD HOLLER itso" woe ipheettsahs Pr PU AE | / -STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING les I, EDWARD J. LOGAN, Director of Records and Elections, King County, State of Washington, and ex-officic Recorder of Deeds, and the legal keeper of records hereinafter mentioned, in and for said County, do hereby certify the attached to be a true and correct copy of 2 Easement eee mew eewwn eee cwwecwwmesmen scan sacs ee seaesersccsees JOM 12-69-1507 «ites rv \i} WITNESS my hand and official seal this...... 15 day <n 21 DWARD JJ LOGA 5 PE a By. LA Se Sn alae | -» Deputy dF oo t SE N E C A av e ow | | 1 SHORT PLAT AND EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: RICHARD AND ARLENE: ROSS; Application No. 088-77 and E-089-77; application for two-lot short plat approval and exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty foot easement road; property located in the vicinity of SW 3rd Pl, approx. midway between Earlington Ave SW & Stevens Ave SW it | | APPLICANT Richard and Arlene Ross TOTAL AREA + .3 Acre | PRINCIPAL ACCESS | S.W. 3rd Place EXISTING ZONING R-1 EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE | Residential T COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Single Family Residential COMMENTS SCALE = 200° op sugseey FE RICHARD ¢ ARLENE | ~ £9SS E -089-77 SHOET FLAT # 088-77 Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Margaret Herbeugh breieiiscanesaR clare omnia being first duly swornon Chief Clerk of THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four (4) times a week. That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- paper published four (4) times a week in Kent, King County, Washington, and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the Renton Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the County in which it is published, to-wit, King County, de stamieeay Seapmnsaemineee ye Sune RareemrenonwTS as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period miexemmees PAY OF ccccs se cmssersuanmenamsien suatuestenualepeneercmeusmurenea , both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee bas been paid in fullatthe rateof per folio of one hundred we for the first insertion and _ per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent insertion. Wevas | we +H HH on hting, gre Subscribed and sworn to before me this ..................99! Sec e eee ee eee Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Kent, King County. — Passed by the Legislature, 1955, knownas Senate Bill 281, effective June 9th, 195S. — Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. V.P.C. Form No. 87 SONS TO SAIDPETITIONS NIONS. ARE INVITEE SENT AT HEARING C 25, 1977 AT EXPRESS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAM- BERS, CITY HALL, RE- NTON, WASHINGTON, ON OCTOBER 25, 1977, AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETI- TIONS: 1. MacPHERSON'S, INC., APPLICATION FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 14-LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBDIVISION, File No. FP-087-77; Property lo- cated on northeast corner of Monroe Ave. N.E. and N.E. 10th St. 2. RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS, APPLICATION FOR TWO-LOT SHORT PLAT APPROVAL AND EXCEPTION TO SuB- DIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING ACCESS, Files 088-77 and E-089- 77, Property located inthe vicinity of 516 S.W. 3rd PI. Legal descriptions on file in the Renton Planning De- partment. ALL INTERESTED PER- ‘gn Y. Ericksen nning Director n The Renton nicle October 392 CITY OF RENTON PLAT APPLICATION SHORT PLAT MAJOR PLAT TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY tataicess, PLN Ady det: 4089-97 FILE NO. ect fal of 8-77 fl 27 DATE REC'D. APPLICATION FEE $ ne ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FEE § RECEIPT NO. <7 Y77 SM NO. PUD NO, iPPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 7: bn Plat Name & Location Koss Spoer PLAT Slle_suw BPP a { No. Lots Owner fiahwad f Arlene Ross Total Acreage Zoning Phone 22¢-st¢¥s” ) Address b/¢ Sw 3” f/f fen ton Underground Utilities: Telephone Electric Street Lights Natural Gas TV Cable Sanitation & Water: (X ) City Water ( ) Water District No. Not Installed — ~~ x< Sanitary Sewers Dry Sewers Septic Tanks Vicinity and plat maps as required by Subdivision Ordinance. DATE REFERRED TO: ENGINEERING BUILDING TRAFFIC ENG. FIRE BD. PUBLIC WORKS STAFF ACTION: TENTATIVE PLAT LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER'S ACTION: SHORT PLAT PRELIMINARY PLAT FINAL PLAT CITY COUNCIL ACTION: PRELIMINARY PLAT FINAL PLAT DEFERRED IMPROVEMENTS: TYPE PARKS HEALTH STATE HIGHWAY COUNTY PLANNING OTHER APPROVED DENIED APPEALED EXPIRED APPROVED DENIED APPROVED DENIED APPEALED EXPIRED APPROVED DENIED APPEALED EXPIRED DATE DATE BOND NO. AND GRANTED EXPIRES AMOUNT Planniny Dept. Pav, 1/77 AFFIDAVIT I, Arlene L. Ross , 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 22nd day of September , 1977, Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle ‘ xh Gore’ Lilne J, ho me of ee Sk are 2 hpta Rie (Signature of Ownér) 10828 Lakeridge Dr. S. Seattle 98178 516 SW 3rd Place (Address) (Address) Renton WA 98055 (City) (State) 226-5645 (Telephone) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found. to be- thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the,rules and» regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the ‘filing of such application. | | i Date Received. K/f, 19 By: Renton Planning Dept. 2273 oe Ra Ne pees Va ikebe nh amy awe at ? Ayes ecu a Cre at: § 3 eu 3 SAIC Bane % aie ag ge f ies it Y 2. per 4 eer) i : is .EASEMENT rt , - fi WHERESAS, George H. Scott Sr. and Rath Scott,his wife, and Carl L. Dale and 7” Vera M, Dale, his wife, and Olga Repetowski, a widow, all of King County, Washington, r: ie are the owners of: The North 20 feet of Tas 19, 20 se ‘21, Block 2s faniidoben according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 1+ of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, j ~ and WHEREAS: Jokn J. | Ttsspan and June M. , Lisspan, his wife, of King County, Washington, are the owners of: va ft ’ Lots 22, 23 and the West half of lot 24, Block 2, Earlington according to ' plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. . and WEEREAS, Carl L.. hoa and Vera M, Dale, his wife, are the owners of: The East half of lot 24, and all of lots 25 and 26, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. and WHERGAS, George H. Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott, his wife, are the owners of: lot 27 and the West half of Lot 28, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. ard WHEREAS, Olga Repetowski, a widow, is the owner of: The North 120 feet of the East half of lot 28 and the North 120 feet of lot 29, all in Block 2 of Earlington, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and,. each conveys to the other parties to this agreement, a perpetual easement ‘for purposes of ingress and egress and utilities to and from their respective tracts, the said easement to be 20 feet in width, being the North 20 feet of Ints 19 to the West line of the East half of Lot 28 inclusive, and to extend from Earlington Street in an easterly direction to the westerly line of said ba! Iot 19, and thence continuing in an easterly direction 20 feet in width to the West line of the East half of lot 28, and the termirms of the easement, The said North 120 feet of the East half of Lot 23 and the North 120 feet of Lot 29, shall have access for ingress and egress and utilities to said caserent right of way. . Page ore es3 seicn Beltn Get tte le kbs neteoneas wae iret place pE ase BS Sipe ant, ge oA ee oe aves pa Aes Weactniacthe ceed swt Pe ow nh adke wimect a AES ae seer” ar 4529. — ” ” BY ety Se ho The cost of whoop of thls sAsgmnt shall be eqlly bare Ly thn respocting = a pole poniciss hereto, their: heirs, saccessors and assigns in title, . i. Tis shall be rey a rannding with the lam, - P gon 1S be IN WITNESS WHERSOF, the parties hereto, have berennte set their bands and . ee this” Quad day of ct eae , 196. eee er tne eee ower gereers 5 ase - Lipton 7 dct Lf; Fz {1 * t all STATS OF WASHINGTON) , ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me John J. Lissman, June M, lissmn, Carl L, Dale, Vera M, Dale, George H. Scott Sr., Ruth Scott and Olga Repetowski os aoe Terunees hsp Ton Thee Seidel dental, do, ca whe exerted Che lhe edl foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they signed the sama as their free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under ry band and official seal this Aen aad day of Tat Vn Pte ae Notary Public in ard for tha State of Washington, residing at Renton 1964. oF woot “I AS e “etna P, yy y i wa l : 4 . vt » Keo oh ae 4 Wer 127M : of FL he Stree Laelly tice, y ROBERT A. MORRIS, County Auditor : tau on ff ebncrenergvatiics ia pA RPSL Wa CH EIEN ER RO ie PEST ASCHER TNL HY ee Tey SR err ny 4 ya AA P O R EA R WB GE PE I N A OD L Fe SS S ra r e ea AV I S RL PE E L IK EE st aS ‘ d - .STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING 55 I, EDWARD J. LOGAN, Director of Records and Elections, King County, State of Washington, and ex-officio Recorder of Deeds, and the legal keeper of records hereinafter mentioned, in and for said County, do hereby certify the attached to be a true and correct copy of at.......EAS OMe cc eeeccccccannsceeescnneceeceneesnmuestesnmunsesueesesessuseseuuessenesene rv \i} 10M 12-69-1507 «Gs as wOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON OCTOBER 25 , 19 77 , AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: 1. MacPHERSON'S, INC., APPLICATION FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 14-LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBDIVISION, File No. FP-087-77; property located on northeast corner of Monroe Ave. N.E. and N.E. 10th St. , 2. RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS, APPLICATION FOR TWO-LOT SHORT PLAT APPROVAL AND EXCEPTION TO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING ACCESS, Files 088-77 and E-089-77; property located in the vicinity of 516 S.W. srd Pi. Legal descriptions on file in the Renton Planning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON OGTOBER 25, 1977 AT 9:00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. GORDON Y. ERICKSEN PUBLISHED October 14, 1977 RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION ly MICHAEL L. SMITH » 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. Jf ‘ Miiie f" / ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before,me, a Notary Public, fp on the 'yiday of Qrnher ss WL! py if “__. SIGNED Z Co Wore Sn Wube £ -04f9-77 October 3, 1977 Richard and Arlene Ross 516 SW 3rd Place Renton WA 98055 Renton Planning Department Renton City Hall Renton WA 98055 Dear Sirs, We are applying for a short plat of the property described in the accompanying documents. The purpose of this letter is to explain our reasons for believing that a variance should be granted in this case. ga / The regulation requiring that each lot border a city or county road was passed by the city council in 1974. ~At that time I wrote a letter to the council requesting that this new ruling be prospective only and not effect present property owners. The easement road in question was created in 1964 and we have owned a one quarter interest in it since 1965. Since that time we have paid onequarter of the taxes and development and maintenance of the road with the intention that we would eventually be using it as access to the home we :honed to build. The road is presently serving as the sole access to the Williams residence located at 314 Earlington SW. The property was divided for tax purposes in 1973. At that time we were unaware that a separate division had to be made by both the city and the county. In summation, our reasons for believing that the variance should be granted are as follows: 1. Easement road is not newly created, having been in existence since 1964. 2. The easement road presently serves the residence at 314 Earlington SW. The road is developed and well maintained and has been for several years. The regulation for 1974 should be effective prospectively only rather than taking effect retroactively. Sincerely, {Tokioes & fredeng/ free Richard and Arlene Ross PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 25, 1977 APPLICANT: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS FILE NO.% 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of an exception to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty (20) foot easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: Is 2. 10. Owner of Record: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS Applicant: Richard and Arlene Ross Locatiun: The vicinity of 516 Southwest 3rd Place along. the north side of SW 3rd Place approximately midway between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.W. Legal: Detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. Said legal description also contains an easement for ingress and egress and utilities over the north twenty feet of lots 19 thru the west half of lot 28. Lots 19 thru 26 are located directly west of the subject site. Access: The southerly portion of subject site attains access via S.W. 3rd Place. The proposed lot in the northerly portion of the site is proposed to attain access via twenty (20) foot access utiiities easement. Existing Zoning: R-1, Residential Single Family Existing Zoning in the Area: Residential Single Family R-1, R-2, Duplex Residence District Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Single Family Residential Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE TWO RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS PURPOSE OF REQUEST: To obtain approval of a two-lot short plat with lot sizes 7,560 square feet and 7,200 square feet respectively together with approval of an exception from Subdivision Ordinance requirements of proper frontage on the dedicated public right-of-way to allow access via an existing twenty (20) foot access of utilities ease- ment extending from Earlington Avenue S.W. to the easterly property line of the subject site. This easement is located along the northerly twenty (20) feet of the subject site. HISTORY BACKGROUND: The subject site was part of the original plat of Earlington which created blocks with long narrow lots approximately 40 feet wide by approximately 246 feet deep. Through the years some of these lots have been subdivided to reduce their length with provision of access by various means. The abovementioned ease- ment, copy of which is attached, was more than likely established for this reason. However, since the twenty (20) foot access easement was established, the City Subdivision Regulations have disallowed subdivisions utilizing access of this nature. The northerly half of the property immediately west of the subject site was subdivided prior to this ordinance requirement. A house was subsequently constructed on the site due to the legal nonconforming nature of the lot. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1. Topography: The subject site rises from S.W. 3rd Place approximately 25 feet in height within the southerly 120 feet of the subject site. The slope levels off toward the middle of the site and gently rises towards the northerly property line. 2. Soils: Beausite gravelly sandy loam (BeC), permeability is moderately rapid, available water capacity is low, runoff is medium, and hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for timber, pasture, and urban development. 3. Vegetation: The approximate southerly one-half of the subject site contains various trees and shrubs typical to single family residential area. The northerly one-half of the site is primarily scrub grass, blackberries, and scattered fruit and deciduous trees. 4. Wildlife: The existing vegetation on the site may provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. Water: No existing streams or surface water are apparent on the subject site. 6. Land Use: There is an existing single family residence located on the southerly portion of the subject site adjacent to S.W. 3rd Place. There are other single family residences located along S.W 3rd Place in the general area. There is an existing single family residence located adjacent to and west of the northerly portion of the subject site. This residence is presently served by the 20 foot access road from Earlington Avenue S.W. There is undeveloped orchard land located directly north of the subject site and adjacent to the easterly side of the subject site. Beyond these areas, single family residences are located in the general vicinity. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE THREE RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: Generally single family residential nature. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Water and Sewer: The six (6) inch water main is located along S.W. 3rd Place and along Earlington Avenue S.W. An eight (8) inch sewer main is located along S.W. 3rd Place and a six (6) inch sewer main is located along Earlington Avenue S.W. No storm sewers are presently available in the area. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department and subject to City of Renton requirements. See attached comments by the Renton Fire Department. 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route 107 operates along Sunset Blvd. approximately one block south of the subject site. 4. Schools: Earlington Elementary School is located approximately three quarters of a mile north and west of the subject site. Dimmit Junior High School is located approximately two (2) miles north of the subject site. Renton High School is located approximately one (1) mile north and east of the subject site. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-706, R-1 - Residential Single Family APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS: 1. Subdivision Regulations: a. Section 9-1105, Plat Requirements for Short Subdivisions b. Section 9-1108, Plat Improvements and Development Standards c. Section 9-1109, Exceptions 2. Policy Statement, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area 1965 3. Subdivision of Land Page 5 and 6 4. Traffic Ways, page 6 IMPACTS ON NATURAL SYSTEMS: Subdivision of the property will not have a direct impact on the natural systems, however, the eventual development of the subject site will disturb soil and vegetation, increase storm water runoff, and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. However, these can be mitigated by proper devel- opment controls and proceedures. SOCIAL IMPACTS! Relatively minor. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE FOUR RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS EMVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/ THRESHOLD: Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 as amended (RCW 43.21C), this project is exempt from the Threshold Determination and Environmental Impact Statement process. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A vicinity map and site map are attached. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: City of Renton Building Division City of Renton Engineering Division City of Renton Utilities Division City of Renton Traffic Engineering Divison City of Renton Fire Department OP w W N — Copies of certain memorandum are attached. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The proposed short plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Existing Zoning, and existing uses in the area. 2. The two lots meet minimum ordinance size and dimension require- ments. The subdivision of the lot in half is reasonable, given the existing long narrow configuration. 3. The applicant proposes access to the northerly lot via an existing 20 foot easement. Other similiar plats have been permitted in the area, particularly directly adjacent to the westerly boundary of the subject site, where a residence has been recently constructed. However, these subdivisions allowing such easement road access occurred prior to the City's Subdivision Ordinance which established the requirement for proper frontage on a dedicated public street. 4. There are many disadvantages to permitting private easement roads. They are generally undermaintained or sometimes completely neglected, with the City having no jurisdiction for maintenance. They cause dust and mud problems in the area, and are generally of insufficient width for proper fire, service, and emergency vehicle access. However, certain advantages include privacy, less noise, and less traffic hazards. 5. The subject easement road is permanently paved for only the first approximately 30 feet east of Earlington Avenue S.W. The remainder of the existing developed portion of the 20 foot easement is presently a combination of dirt and gravel in rather poor condition. If the easement were to be used for access, it should be permanently surfaced the entire distance to the east half of lot 28. If this were accomplished it is possible that limited use for access (total potential lots served approximately 4) would be acceptable. However, until such time creating additional traffic on such access is not acceptable. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE FIVE RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS 6. The attached copy of the common easement states that "the cost of upkeep of this easement shall be equally borne by the respective parties hereto." It appears from the existing condition of the easement that this upkeep has been minimal. 7. There is no other reasonable means of providing access to the proposed short plat. 8. All off-site improvements should be installed along the portion of the property fronting S.W. 3rd Place. Curb gutter and sidewalk exist along the southside of S.W. 3rd Place approximately 150 feet west of the subject site. 9. There is a question as to how the applicant intends to serve the property with utilities. Two alternatives exist; either provide the utilities from S.W. 3rd Place via an easement across the southerly lot, or provide them from Earlington Avenue S.W. via the existing 20 foot easement. There is also a question of proper fire hydrant access. Based on the above analysis, the recommendation of the Engineering Division, Traffic Engineering Division, Utilities Division, the subdivision regulations, and the intormation presented by the applicant, it is recommended that the proposed short plat and exception be denied. However, if the problems stated above can be resolved, such short plat may be acceptable at a future date. —— oo TO: | PUBLIC WORKS DIREC LF “//7 \ BUILDING DIVISION Wek INEERING DIVISION 2 a6, - ve TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION > —_f{- Ba Meee ——— / O.. UTILITIES DIVISTON \\S (FIRE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WicilAgL Smit Contact Person RE: Rees <Hoer PLAST # OXR- 77 Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it, to the Planning Department by Joft2 oF with your written recommendation. Nou response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ml hie. Date Jofro MEA 7 7 INT EPED PARTACUTAL REVIEW REQUEST \ TO? TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISIO UTILITIES DIVISION RE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Micttagsy, <quyttf Contact Person RE: Ric Aer f ALLENE ROSs > SW BPI NOW) OCPIWAMCKE TO ALLOW A LOT Sige wird Access VA A ZO Foot FRNATE EASEMENT oan. Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it to the Planning Department by __ @) /iz/27 with your written recommendation. four response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. ; Fi Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Wdl he. Date io [10 (77 v4 7 POL) EF FP En q0 teri ns SAoet P let fs seat’ eto mm enue eHt S(i2ee if Cacks ala g nate. ACCeESsS and wtel 45 Sev vr oe. Yo Ka. Aor th La t BieGoe Uniuties ; BH The PRoMEMS THAT HAUG To BE REsowvE”O ARE WATER SEQAUNCE AND SEVER SEnicE To PaHfaeaTy A WiAW SHoucd BE EXTEND COUN EASEMENT, To EARLING Ton AUG SW Ano/ OR PAVIOG UTILITY ERSEAENT THe FrowT LOT. To SW. sf PLUG , GARBECE eoccEcTioal YE Te GE ESTASCISFED 4 2 od — LOCATION uyitte WA TRAFFEIS = ENGINEELING DIV, WWE 20' AccEsS ¢ UTILITY EASEMENT 3 sHrouc BE FAVED wiTH ASPHALT /4¢'TO 16" pas WifTH 17s ENTIRE CEWGTH To PlovipE Access Fok. EMERGES Y VEHICLES 7. ov. MEMORANDUM TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE 10/17/77 FROM FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT 1. A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential use. 2. All buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. SS JML/jeb Sy: tow oe Boer ice anode ated ve! wii 51734434 ee - teekmewtegen 6 ot 7 twa AOZS eceOOY ees * bad EASEMENT wt z ks WHERBZAS, George H. Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott, his wife, and Carl L. Dale and ~ Vera M. Dale, his wife, and Olga Repetowski, a widow, all of King County, Washington, i are the owrers of: The North 20 feet of lots 19, 20 and 21, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. - ; : and WHEREAS: Join J, Iissman and June M, Lissman, his wife, of King County, ‘Washington, are the owners of: - felts i: Lots 22, 23 and the West half of Lot 24, Block 2, Earlington according to ' plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. . and WEEREAS, Carl Le hs. and Vera M, Dale, his wife, are the owners of: The East half of Iot 24, and all of lots 25 and 26, Block 2, Farlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. and WEERCAS, George H. Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott, his wife, are the owners of: lot 27 and the West half of lot 28, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and WHEREAS, Olga Repetowski, a widow, is the owner of: The North 120 feet of the East half of lot 28 ard the North 120 feet of Tot 29, all in Block 2 of Earlington, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and,. each conveys to the other parties to this agreement, a perpetual easement ‘for purposes of ingress and ogress and utilities to and from their respective tracts, the said easement to be 20 feet in width, being the North 20 feet of lots 19 to the West line of the East half of Lot 28 inclusive, and to extend from Earlington Street in an easterly direction to the westerly line of said Tot 19, ard thence continuing in an easterly direction 20 feet in width to tre West line of the East half of Lot 28, and the terminus of the easement. The said North 120 feet of the Fast half of Lot 23 and the North 120 feet and egress and utilities to said of lot 29, shall have access for ingress caserent. right of way. . Pape ore cee SINT raei toon kn dt ed eel Sa DSpace UR ira aah ZO tr HCP ediicn in ip ela OE 08) OO A sel bY de ATC De he AR sae AA sdid chias Su e ae ad bs Sc h ain he s s6 eS TS ~ == partion hereto, their: heirs, s successora and assigns in Binls., | ree 7 ies A, be cored ara eae geen with the land, - - z IN WITNESS WHERSOF, the parties hereto, have hereunto set their tard an and Tl this: Amd ay 0 of a » 196. a WZ : ,. 7 kph oy dew <4, Lal tet al STATS OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) “ee On this day personally appeered before me John J. Lissman, June M, Iissmn, Carl L, Dale, Vera M, Dale, George H. Scott Sr., Rath Scott and Olga Repetowski to me known to be the individuals descrited in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under ry hand and official seal this hu A day of Hate » 1964. VP te) Cal 10 y Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Penton Oe: Me Hee r i “n, or “I AS ‘ , i ‘ 7 As “0 es Oe Bey “ f if i, 3 j 6 Cel g ut , Dos Bees | Kexord weg 7 Wey 12 Aim H . . 1s of pte &. Stress Kually ROBERT A. MORRIS, County Auditor UNC AaS FER AS SAT RY Stee AS DINGS NSCOR NS Rag ae Tt PON ets) r ty Cort hee Lief aS, Nor bial? ty AML HRD othet UAE SSL iG POON EE pT PR A L I N E I PO ot ? PA D R E S Pa y a At TO AD L PI G S FE I N Ao LO Y Fa y Ma c e ! SA T S ha g VI E ES NS AK E: st e UR E T ) STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING i I, EDWARD J. LOGAN, Director of Records and Elections, King County, State of Washington, and ex-oflicic Recorder of Deeds, and the legal keeper of records hereinafter mentioned, in and for said County, do hereby certify the attached to be a true and correct copy of m..Basememt eee Serre rere) Perrier rrr rere rere) N° = 6575 iG} * YOM 12-69—1507 «zt as S- PR p> NS —*ez is _ (2 , -—_ = TINE Tete Lo aS ess u SHORT PLAT AND EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS; Application No. 088-77 and E-089-77; application for two-lot short plat approval and exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty foot easement road; property located in the vicinity of SW 3rd Pl, approx. midway between Earlington Ave SW & Stevens Ave SW APPLICANT Richard and Arlene Ross TOTAL AREA + .3 Acre PRINCIPAL ACCESS | S.W. 3rd Place EXISTING ZONING R-1 EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE ' Residential COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Single Family Residential COMMENTS SCALE 12200" . Th supsecr STE ry RICHARD ¢, ARLENE | © £0SS E -089-77 SHORT FLAT #088-77 MEMORANDUM TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE 10/17/77 FROM FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT 1. A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential use. 2. All buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. SS JML/jeb INTEND: PARTMLHTAL PEVIEW REQUEST a \ UBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ee BUILDING DIVISION NGINEERING—BV4 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISIO UTILITIES DIVISION RE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Wicthassy, uit Contact Person RE: Rick Aer 4 Aglens Koes, _bxceen EXC Tien) TO SW BPIVi NO) OCP iWANCKE Te ALLOW A LoT Samm wird Access VA A ZO Foot PRNATE EASEMENT FOAD. Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it to the Planning Department by __ [od /i2/27 with your written recommendation. four response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Medel hee. Date yo (10 (27 v4 Tt INF CANE PARTMERTAL REVIEW REQUEST TO: Cy PUB LORKS DIREC LF SS 7 \BUIL G-DIVISION Fite NGINEERING DIVISION2. 7 0 i TRAFFIC ENGINEERING srungien a WA UTILITIES DIVISION WS (FIRE DEPARTMENT Sak \ HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Wicil/As, Suit Contact Person RE: Rees <SHoer PLAT + Of8- 77 Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it, to the Planning Department by Jofi2 aes with your written recommendation. Nou response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. ? Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Date bejrel es Y i vA MEMORANDUM _ PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE 10/17/77 — FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT 1. A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential Use. 2. All buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance, NY JML/jeb PALES IF En qc mee ims S Zoe plat is sav ceocomnm ended S (nec ft Cracks ang nate ACCESS and. atest, Sev vice + yo re Aoye th iat: Ri oGre UTiuties , Bi The PRomMEMS THAT HAVE To BE Resocvelro ARE WATER SEQUCE AND SEWER SEAMNCE To Poorealy A ViAw SHoucd BE EXTEND PDUN EASEMENT TO EBRLING Tdrl AUG SW Ane/ OR PAvi0OG UTILITY EASEMENT THK FruonT LoT. To sw. SH Puc. GARKICE eoceEcTIow bE esTascsHen I p oO, — LOCATIOM yt Wave To TRAFEIS §=ENCINEELING DIV. THE 20' AccESS £ UTILITy EASEMENT 3 sttourc BE FAVEO wiTH ASPHACT !¢' To 16‘ pas ws OTH EMELGCEVCyY VEHICLES . STOP STOP STOP STOP S TOP! DOCUMENTS UNDER THIS NOTICE HAVE BEEN MICROFILMED. DO NOT REMOVE NOTICE FROM FILE. NEW FILING SHOULD BE ADDED ON TOP OF NOTICE. PAGES REMOVED UNDER THE NOTICE FOR COPYING MUST BE RETURNED TO THE SAME PLACE UNDER THE NOTICE. Sf OP! STOP STOP STOP STOP I Ae ee e Te eR en ao e a es s BaP | QUT CL&IM DEED , THIS INDENTURE WTNESSETH: That we, _ S2dUpEXICOSEXRIQOSNKKK RSE SOSEEX WERE; | YEN EXOCX HER NX XK HRS KARR and Olga Repetowski (Konsevage) - Yas , of King County, State of Washington, for and in -eonsiceration of the sum of One ($2.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further 4 E consideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us = . therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, } a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and {. being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 §t. of Lots 19, 20 and 21 Block 2 of the Plat of Eanrlington as necorded in the book of plats, volume 14, page-7, records of tlie County, Washington. Dec 14 12 49 PATE RECORDED KC RECORDS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described prenises unto the said City of Renton, its Successor or successors for the use of the public forever. - CrtLtc 7 (SEAL) IOT RE ‘QUIRED mons IS EXCISE ae: Pars cs Division Olga Repetowski (Konsevage (SEAL) 7 , Deputy ‘s STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING ) I, Zz Lived A. hee » a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certify that on this 27 * day of anc. zg 19 eld » personally appeared before :e co ia a prick rng * to me known to be the individual descrited in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledge that 9 X¢. signed and sealed the same as AL 2 free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposos therein mentioned. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. a TET, a ree ts Lhhewg ae a Soha" Notary Public in and for the State qe tA Residing at Las Len Foe Bbg MA A é ee we e n ” ME t e h Se o 28 nN a | ‘ x -* e Xe ee ty - a < _ Ry om a sJ ‘ ‘\ “eo “N ee bal AFB. BS’ A%@a. Gol PILLAGE TOA/ ALE SB | ' ee e LE aL ; , : | | @Z O . L O - l : {2 | BO BS PR I BE PH ) BS ) me Io : ee pew 8 7 1 . 9 2 ; { i ' XN N = i ! | | ce | | a | : | | 4 i i | | GO . OD : | BW BS PL A C E ; a i 66 2 Z 0 v 1 C I 8 2 ro e iy a Gi aw e Be e e a s l e oe we te ed Se s em c e e s se h a SB S ae se w x wa c d d Z - ai e eS ~ 23 . : Sc 4 c e 4 So t wy od : ee A a oe . ‘ : Z fe . . S ReOGE-27 , QUIT CLAIM DEED 3 . 0 0 THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH: That we, KENNETH W- WILLIAMS AND a aie ted (HIS WIFE) Helen A. Williams , of King County, State of Washington, for and in onsideration of the sum of One ($1.90) Dellar to us in hand paid and in further onsideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us “eherefrom, do, by these presents grant, ccnvey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, "@ Municipal corporation of the State of washington, for street, alley and any other lic uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and SBeing in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 ft. of Lots 25, 26 and the northerl ere . Y 20 §t. of east - Lot 24, Block 2 of the plat of Earkington as ronteaad << es book Gf pees volume 14, page 7 records of King County, Washington. , This deed is not to be effective until! at least 14 feet of paving is completed and grading work is done, all to normal standards of City of Renton, and if not so done within one year from date of this deed, this deed shall be null and void. This deed is given on the condition that the City of Renton will not approve subdivision or construction of further improvements upon lots 15, 16, 17, 18, 33, 34, 35 and 36, Block 2, Earlington, Volume 14 of Plats, page 7, using this deeded right of way as the only developed legal access. Violation of this condition will result in automatic reverter of this property to the grantors or their successors in interest as if this deed had never been granted. DE C * 1 4 - 7 8 i, 0 0 2 9 6 18 1 2 1 N 0 G B Q ot s ! Dec 14 12 so PH TTS RECORDED KC RECORBS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our hands and seals this 79 # day of ()e 272, 1978 . eS olde (arene ptee » ace FILED for Record at Request ot pm ‘ne e Fy “OUIRED 4 (SEAL) _ ay a a a3 Uivision ’ By... a) MAdasgr ne [)-911hy ee WITNESSES: STATE OF WASHINGTON) .. COUNTY OF KING ) I, Tleme Mm. (Loh. , a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certify that on this 2Ppsre day of frases 19_78 _, personally appeared before ne A RawertA wi ber Ams perk HELE @. Wiese, ams to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledge that Waa Signed and sealed the same as FH Suc KR free and v act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. et yen! " Ine, ry et ty a J yoTs Ry oA V Ba a wm % <u , 1 ofu oes . Wn LoK ms . To a Pie ae Notary Public in and for the State of Washington “x + ogee “ye Residing at » in said County. Ww ' ‘ SP: 068-2: QUIT CLAIM DEED 3 . 0 0 THLS INDENTURE WI°NESSUTH: That we, George H, Scott, St. & Ruth Seott, RLS Wwe se; ? , of Kirg County, State of Washington, for and in S=consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further consideration of the generai public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us w therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, <3@ municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and S being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: co ree) =| cy <4 ~ —< co ~ Cs) ‘ n Nortnerty 20 <t. of Lots 19, 20 and 21 Block 2 0f the Plat of Earkington as ° reccerded in the book of plats, volume 14, page 7, records of King County o Washington. , 1 £2 = <> Fa] Bec ld i2soPK'l: RECORDED KC RECORDS o TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described prenises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our nands and seals this _23 S day of Belin: » 1978. 1% EXCISI FILED for Record at Request 9 | (SEAL) By....f..\Wpne Buth Aeekl (SEAL) STA COW uaek WwW. Owens » a Notary Public in and for the said State, du he roby certify tnat on this aizre day of » a2 78 » personally appeacea before n> Geoese YL. Scott Pwo oth Sc ctf to me mown to be the individual g deserived in and who executed the, within instrument, and acKknowled:e that signed and soaled the same as Kae free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. TH WITNESS WISREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and err “ames seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. ry EVA, Pree es Fi \: fe Cee 4 SieKuh ay stay Public_in and for the State, ‘of Washington Te kegs esiding at ELGi a)” ; in said County. DE C - 1 4 - 7 8 . 00 2 9 9 78 1 2 1 4 0 8 0 3 LS I B RF oF -9 QUIT CLAIM DEED 4 THIS INDENTURE WITWESSETH: That we, Jn J. Lissman and June M. Lissman (his wife) of King County, State of Washington, for and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further consideration of the general public welfare and the special benefits accuring to us therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 ft. of Lots 22 and 23 and northerly 20 §t. of west one-half of Lot 24 all in Block 2 of the pkat of Earlington, as recorded in | VoLume 14, page 7, records of King County, Washington anic deed is not to oa effective :at'l at least 14 feet of poving is Gomoleted and gruding wore i. vone, £]1]1 to normel standards of City of uenton, snd iv not 59 done hie one year from dite of this deed, this deed shel! be null -nd void. Yhis deed ig given on the condition th t the City of venton will not approve subdivision or consi: "eto Of Surther improveieat. upon lotsa 15, 10, 17, 28, So, 24, 35 au% 36, Jlock 8, sarlinugton, Volums 14 of Yl tc, » ve 7, using this deeded right of wey -3 te o11" aeveloped } legsl sccesse Violation of this condi tion will result in atonetee reverter of this projgerty, To t : or thelr srecs:sors in {noterect #8 1f thi. dead hid never buen ervuted. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the a forever. IS EXCISE TAX NOT POCU RED f Records Division By. Deputy WITNESSES: ‘ STATE OF ae a j COUNTY OF KING p ; I, a Notary Public in and for the said State do hereby ce oie 63 de Gs oo Ea day of a ft . ) 19 persc . y appeared before me (/-7,. AE: ety eae « een TE <i 7 to.me known to be the’ individual: I wh executed the within instr un and acknowledge that 8 nd and sanled the sane 0 Lesa — : free and voluntary , for the uses and purposes there ed. WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand amd affixed my official seal + ae certificate first above written, a 7 8 1 2 1 4 0 8 0 3 OZ a - = . SP Py/ ‘ Ce Cy Mm | y n . 2 \ a. /2 Pe CC ax 2 vi BS : ‘$ “W Y J@ 0 PL . EE F GA S LA M A | os +4 ti, > “ IN Vl SX i 3. NM Br o S “L A M E RADA ae ae MSF TOE LVDS 4% QUIT CLiIM DEED & S € -0&6-7: E a JOHN GRUHALLA, Executor of the estate ¥ THiS INDENTURE WT NESSETH: That #¢, I “of Vera Dale, deceased, who was the executrix of the estate of carl L. Dale, deceased LH , of King County, State of Washington, for and in - consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further @= consideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 ft. of Lots 19, 20 and 21 Block 2 of the Plat of Eanlington as necorded in the book of plats, volwne 14, page 7, records of King County, Washington. Dec 14 12 so PA?" RECORDED KC RECORDS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. -F WITNESSETH our nands and seals this 075 day of Ci dln » 1997/7. FILED for Record equest ol IR EXCISE TX NOT REQUIRED Sar ae (SEAL) Cat oS, Reo 3:d5 Division ohn Gruhalla By... 4: <<., Deputy (SEAL) ea e . STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) i, aa. Pal -_ » a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certify that on this 25 C day of Cetidu , 19 22 _, personally appeared before ine f to me known to be the {individual described in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledge that A . Signed and sealed the same as : % free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. ‘ lil WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above iritten. SR ‘ liken re rb Dy | etary Public and for the Sta OW Lng torn tp. : a a Residing at OR CRS Vy aN pig as Freya pe’ ae ae OF s, , 7 #7 9 9 5 PI T S (~ E WH €& + ee meee oneal Le ow CO Cry 8 q ‘ . . 4 ~. oe , oe } pe se - oy ae Ne ! By £4 ot te e | “y e oe OP ou s ’ 8 . é Fi ” a “f a o e ~ o \” . , s Pt ei ) ay wi e SF fa a HG Ve LP AA be ‘ | [ A r 3 0 9 2 V O T O | | C e n c r s i t t ) I N O W t e i n s F I T 1 I 0 7 | e S U ) L O S U N E § ° % 6 O S A F O U O I D = - AL U L I P ! AP so r m a ~ P O 8 O F L C I 8 L Co k e ae s BO E Fe e > ° - ’ so r t e b 2 MSF Ae Voc UWISseyr 7S Ppr 4D Pes ~ a os ao — “> a | cd few] co Hy oo | pg Cee | iN — ioe) ~~ td oO an oO oO | = Pm pa e'> Foas) QUIT CL&IM DEED THIS INDENTURE WITWESSETH: That we, %. P. Ross and Artene Ross (his wife) King County, State of Washington, for and in consideration of the sum of One” ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further consideration of the general public welfare and the special benefits accuring to us therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, a@ municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 §t. of Lot 27 and the northerly 20 ft. of the west one-half of Lot 28 Bkock 2 of the Plat of Earlington as recorded in the book of plats Volume 14, page 7, necornds of King County, Washington Dec 14 12 se PH78 RECORDED KC RECORDS = TO HAVE AND TO HOID the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our hands and seals this “day of ela »1I9Zy. FILcD for ecord 1% EXC] as NOT RECUIRED WO\C. Boior's Division Z , ft By... 2 Deputy a ; om STATE OF WASHINGTON) , COUNTY OF KING )° I, James haw Ric » a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certii hat on this /@ day of ‘ » 19_ 7s personally appeared before me K\CHARY ?. hk 2 10> FILLEM LE. Ko ; te to me known to be the ingivic nd who executed the hin instriment, and acknowledge that 77 saied And uoklet a coule as THE/R free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand amd affixed my official seal the gh certificate first above written, if 9 % ¢ i Dr UVoy- ie Ba e ee Pe oe OA T A ON O EE E ce BI T E OR E RA R E SE S . ee ac e me wa t e ee e re e sa n e on s e n — ey * i) ‘ 0 rt |e Z Ze wr e NN we A a a ‘o e . SE ow 4 s ae sd ’ oe @ 4 se y ot a “= a4 ML. i? id as 3 4? 6? ° 4 : 3 ee e e 4. 5 " Ql d Ga l s ¢ = yy @5 . 2 0 4 | Y re s t } wy a) yi » oa n on -. oe eo s ye e +, @ / 9 > , : Ye Pe P) 74 2 . a” ot \ Fa d ow e » Ga s a a ha , l= a al Fo e .. SB S . NM Br o MA L E ) ‘L O 8 O F L Z I 8 Z Laon / f Ul achat py Peed eae fe Cole [Pane : RENTON CITY “7. (De henanee Regular Meeting June 5, 1978 Council Chambers Monday, 8:00 P.M. Municipal Building MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor C. J. Delaurenti led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and called the regular meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF EARL CLYMER, Council President; GEORGE J. PERRY, PATRICIA M. COUNCIL SEYMOUR-THORPE, RICHARD M. STREDICKE, BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, CHARLES F. SHANE AND THOMAS W. TRIMM. CITY OFFICIALS CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, Mayor; GWEN MARSHALL, Finance Director; IN ATTENDANCE DEL MEAD, City Clerk; LAWRENCE WARREN, Acting City Attorney; GORDON Y. ERICKSEN, Planning Director; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Director; DONALD CUSTER, Administrative Assistant; JOHN BUFF, Police Representative; RICHARD GEISSLER, Fire Chief; SHARON GREEN, Personnel Director; JOHN WEBLEY, Parks and Recreation Director. PRESS | GREG ANDERSON, Renton Record Chronicle MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL APPROVE MINUTES OF MAY 22, 1978 AS PREPARED. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT James Van Osdell, 3030 NE 10th St., Manager of Sunset View Apart- ments, requested Council reconsider Ordinance #3222 which requires Smoke Detector installation of smoke detectors in occupancies rented, leased or Ordinance let. Mr. Van Ausdal explained problems anticipated with require- ment that tenants furnish maintenance of the unit and asked for reconsideration in order to comply with RCW 59.18 Landlord Tenant Act. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, MR. VAN AUSDAL'S REMARKS BE REFERRED TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Planning and Due to interested persons being present, Committee Chairman Perry Development Report . presented Planning and Development Committee report re James W. James W. Dalpay Dalpay Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision of 4/17/78 Sunset Appeal of Examiner's Rezone R145-78, noting review and consideration with applicant Decision Rezone and his attorney, Robert McBeth, present. The report noted the R-145-78 Union NE applicant agreed to amend his application to provide for a less between NE 12th and intensive use of the southern portion of the parcel to provide buf- NE Sunset Blvd. fering between proposed B-1 rezone on the northern portion and the single family residential zoning to the South. The committee all aaa to recommended that the Council remand this matter to the Hearing @ EASMBEy Examiner for reconsideration of this application as amended. MOVED BY PERRY. SECOND SHINPOCH, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE RECOM- -MENDATION. CARRIED. (See later action - Correspondence. ) The Planning and Development Committee Chairman Perry presented the following report: The Planning and Development Committee has considered the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings and conclusions R.P. Ross Appeal of Examiner's reconsidera- tion decision of 12/9/77 re Short Plat 088-77 and Exception 089-77. The Committee has considered the hardship imposed upon the appli- cant by the provisions of the Short Plat Ordinance in that other surrounding neighbors have been able to short plat their property without providing the access required by the present Short Plat Ordinance. Applicant has obtained alternative access to the property in accordance with the conditions imoosed by the decis-. sion of the Hearing Examiner. The Planning and Development Committee recommended that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner and recommended approval of the application for short plat and exception under the same conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner, and further conditioned upon delivery to the City of deeds of dedication to the alternative access way. MOVED Y PERRY, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDA- TTON. CARRTED. R. P. Ross Appeal Examiner's Reconsideration Decision 12/9/77 Short Plat 088-77 and Except. 089-7 Area of 516 SW 3rd OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY e RENTON,WASHINGTON POST OFFICE BOX 626 100 2nd AVENUE BUILDING @ RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 255-8678 LAWRENCE J.WARREN, city attorney DANIEL KELLOGG, assistant city ATTORNEY June 2, 1978 MEMORANDUM TO: COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RE: FILE NO. SHORT PLAT 088-77, and Exception 089-77 R. P. Ross Appeal of Examiner's Reconsideration Decision dated December 9, 1977 The Planning and Development Committee has considered the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings and conclusions in the above matter. The Committee has considered the hardship imposed upon the applicant by the provisions of the Short Plat Ordinance in that other surrounding neighbors have been able to short plat their property without providing the access required by the present Short Plat Ordinance. The applicant has obtain alternative access to the property in accordance with the conditions imposed by the decision of the Hearing Examiner. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner and recommend approval of the application for short plat and exception under the same conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner, and further conditioned upon delivery to the City of deeds of dedication to the alternative access way with referral to the Ways and Means Committee. eege: Dh eve Géort ge Perry, Chairman \@” Barbara Shinpoch Patricia Seymour-Thorpe OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY e RENTON,WASHINGTON POST OFFICE BOX 626 100 2nd AVENUE BUILDING @® RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 255-8678 LAWRENCE J. WARREN, city attorney DANIEL KELLOGG, assistant city ATTORNEY June 2, 1978 MEMORANDUM TO: COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RE: File No. R145-78 James W. Dalpay Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision dated April 17, 1978 "Sunset Rezone" The Planning and Development Committee has considered the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings and conclusions in the above matter. The applicant was present at the Committee meeting with his attorney, Robert McBeth. At that time the applicant agreed to amend his application to provide for a less intensive use on the southern portion of the parcel in order to provide buffering between the proposed B-1l rezone on the northern portion and the single family residential . zoning to the south. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the Council remand this matter to the Hearing Examiner for reconsideration of this application as amended. This reconsideration should be accomplished as quickly as possible, and after public notice is given of the nature of the amended application. George Perry, Chairman Barbara Shinpoch Patricia Seymour-Thorpe June 5, 1978 Monday, CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OF COUNCIL CITY OFFICIALS IN ATTENDANCE PRESS MINUTE APPROVAL AUDIENCE COMMENT Smoke Detector Ordinance Planning and Development Report , James W. Dalpay Appeal of Examiner's Decision Rezone R-145-78 Union NE between NE 12th and NE Sunset Blvd. Remanded Back to Hearing Examiner R. P. Ross Appeal Examiner's Reconsideration Decision 12/9/77 Short Plat 088-77 and Except. 089-77 Area of 516 SW 3rd Place 8:00 P.M. Lt Hoe Gpeck RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Council Chambers Municipal Building MINUTES Mayor C. J. Delaurenti led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and called the regular meeting of the Renton City Council to order. EARL CLYMER, Council President; GEORGE J. PERRY, PATRICIA M. SEYMOUR-THORPE, RICHARD M. STREDICKE, BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, CHARLES F. SHANE AND THOMAS W. TRIMM. CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, Mayor; GWEN MARSHALL, Finance Director; DEL MEAD, City Clerk; LAWRENCE WARREN, Acting City Attorney; GORDON Y. ERICKSEN, Planning Director; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Director; DONALD CUSTER, Administrative Assistant; JOHN BUFF, Police Representative; RICHARD GEISSLER, Fire Chief; SHARON GREEN, Personnel Director; JOHN WEBLEY, Parks and Recreation Director. GREG ANDERSON, Renton Record Chronicle MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL APPROVE MINUTES OF MAY 22, 1978 AS PREPARED. CARRIED. James Van Qsdel1, 3030 NE 10th St., Manager of Sunset View Apart- ments, requested Council reconsider Ordinance #3222 which requires installation of smoke detectors in occupancies rented, leased or let. Mr. Van Ausdal explained problems anticipated with require- ment that tenants furnish maintenance of the unit and asked for reconsideration in order to comply with RCW 59.18 Landlord Tenant Act. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, MR. VAN AUSDAL'S REMARKS BE REFERRED TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Due to interested persons being present, Committee Chairman Perry presented Planning and Development Committee report re James W. Dalpay Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision of 4/17/78 Sunset Rezone R145-78, noting review and -consideration with applicant and his attorney, Robert McBeth, present. The report noted the applicant agreed to amend his application to provide for a less intensive use of the southern portion of the parcel to provide buf~ fering between proposed B-1 rezone on the northern portion and the single family residential zoning to the South. The committee recommended that the Council remand this matter to the Hearing Examiner for reconsideration of this application as amended. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND SHINPOCH, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE RECOM- MENDATION. CARRIED. (See later action - Correspondence. ) The Planning and Development Committee Chairman Perry presented the following report: The Planning and Development Committee has considered the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings and conclusions R.P. Ross Appeal of Examiner's reconsidera- tion decision of 12/9/77 re Short Plat 088-77 and Exception 089-77. The Committee has considered the hardship imposed upon the appli- cant by the provisions of the Short Plat Ordinance in that other surrounding neighbors have been able to short plat their property without providing the access required by the present Short Plat Ordinance. Applicant has obtained alternative access to the property in accordance with the conditions imposed by the decis- Sion of the Hearing Examiner. recommended that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner and recommended approval of the application for short plat and exception under the same conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner, and further conditioned upon delivery to the City of deeds of dedication to the alternative access way. MOVED BY PERRY. SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDA- TION. CARRIED. we The Planning and Development Committee Renton City Council 6/5/78 Page 2 OLD BUSINESS Transportation Committee Report Parkwood South Access Six-Year Street and Arterial Program ; Public Hearing 6/19/78 Signalization Contract Award Federal Aid/FAM Project Ways & Means Committee Report Bond Sale LID #306 Seattle Northwest Securities Publication of Mans Legal Publications Questioned Community Services Committee Report Proposed Agreement Interurban Trail Riverside Drive Proposed Closure Public Meeting 6/19/78 Transportation Committee Chairwoman Shinpoch presented report regarding Parkwood South Sub-Division Plat and recommended that the Administration be directed to discuss with the Developer the feasibility of a direct route from Division #3 to 116th Ave. SE rather than the proposed connection to Edmonds Dr. SE. The report also requested the Administration report back to the Transporta- tion Committee. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE REPORT. CARRIED. The committee report recommended that a public hearing be set for June 19, on the Six-Year Street Program. Chairwoman Shinpoch noted the plans and maps are available with the Public Works Department. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. The Transportation Committee report recommended acceptance of the low bid by Signal Electric, Inc. in the amount of $101,945.50 for signalization of Duvall Ave. NE and NE Sunset Blvd along with NE 4th St.and Monroe Ave NE, as recommended by the Public Works Department. The report noted award will be contingent upon receipt by the City of an "Authorization to Award" from the Federal and State agencies. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT. Councilwoman Thorpe inquired re inclusion of provisions for prevention of cost overruns, Public Works Director Gonnason noted precautions taken. MOTION CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented committee re- port recommending that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign an agreement with Seattle Northwest Securities for the sale of $35,477.36 in bonds on LID #306 (Sanitary Sewers, area between Sunset Blvd. NE and FAI-405, north of NE 7th Street). MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT APPROVING SALE OF BONDS FOR LID #306. CARRIED. The Ways and Means Committee report recommended that the referral of 2/27/78 re publication of maps with legal descriptions requires no action by the Council as the Administration is studying the proposal. Councilman Stredicke called attention to legal publications stating building of condominiums and inquired as to location of 2020 Grant Ave. S., being advised by Planning Director Ericksen of location, northeast corner of intersection of Grant Ave. S and Puget Drive, West of Rolling Hills with no access to the north. Stredicke ob- jected to legal publications by attorneys and builders whicn appeared as City. Community Services Committee Chairwoman Thorpe presented report noting review of the proposed agreement for the Interurban Trail System and findings that it is consistent with present planning within the City and Green River Valley. The report noted funding for the trail would be from a federal grant of $320,000; staff con- cern for clarification noted and committee recommended the contract be referred to the Ways and Means Committee for review and recom- mendation. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN REPORT AND REFER AGREEMENT TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. The committee report noted review and meeting with residents of Riverside Drive area adjacent to Cedar River Trail, Phase III, and reported the following: (1) Riverside Drive is City-owned property deed to City in 1956 by the Commercial Waterway District and is not a dedicated street; (2) Only one residence has access solely to Riverside Drive, all other structures and properties have access to N. Ist St.; (3) Per City Attorney, rights of access have been established by the property owners through some years use as a street; (4) The City has the right to close or leave open as long as no property owner is landlocked, but decision should be made after public meeting for the purposes of allowing public comment. The report recommended referral back to Council for public meeting ne a 6/19/78. MOVED STREDICKE, SECOND THORPE, CONCUR IN REPORT. OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY e RENTON,WASHINGTON POST OFFICE BOX 626 100 2nd AVENUE BUILDING @ RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 255-8678 LAWRENCE J.WARREN, city artorney DANIEL KELLOGG, assistant City ATTORNEY June 2, 1978 MEMORANDUM TO: COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RE: FILE NO. SHORT PLAT 088-77, and Exception 089-77 R. P. Ross Appeal of Examiner's Reconsideration Decision dated December 9, 1977 The Planning and Development Committee has considered the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings and conclusions in the above matter. The Committee has considered the hardship imposed upon the applicant by the provisions of the Short Plat Ordinance in that other surrounding neighbors have been able to short plat their property without providing the access required by the present Short Plat Ordinance. The applicant has obtain alternative access to the property in accordance with the conditions imposed by the decision of the Hearing Examiner. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner and recommend approval of the application for short plat and exception under the same conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner, and further conditioned upon delivery to the City of deeds of dedication to the alternative access way wh ae referral to the Ways and Means Committee. hope Pf eo in Géorge Pe erry, Chairman Porbare) Srurpoctr Barbara Shinpoch Prteinsn _dugmuur. Jotpe Patricia Seymou@-Thorpe MEMORANDUM TO: Rick Beeler, Hearing Examiner December 8, 1977 FROM: Lawrence J, Warren, City Attorney Re; Richard & Arlene—Rass - Request for Reconsideration - Short Pla 088-77-and E-089-77 Dear Rick: This note is to confirm our conversation of Wednesday, December 7th, concerning the above captioned matter. At that time I indicated to you that your letter on the reconsideration correctly stated the law, in my opinion. If you have any further questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Lawrence J. Warren LJW:nd ce: Mayor Council President Del Mead Renton City Council 1/9/78 Page 3 Correspondence and Current Business - Continued Transamerica records for review by the Court. Trial date to be given, Attorney Court Case Warren anticipating early date. The letter noted the Attorney Continued would be going back to the Court to obtain clarification as wording would prevent the City from taking any action on Renton Hill and the Attorney was of the opinion the intent was to limit the City's right to act strictly to the Transamerica property. Councilman Perry inquired of Planning Director Ericksen re P.U.D. application, being advised that consultant working for Mr. Farrel] had indicated intent to present plans for P.U.D. but plans have not been received. Appeal of Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision was filed by Roger E. Berg SCS & Stirskey re SCS & Stirskey Holdings Rezone 091-77 from R-2 to R-3 for Holdings R-091-77 property located north of the Seattle Pipeline R/W just south of Rezone Denied. SW 2nd St. and between the City limits and Hardie Ave. SW. Hearing Examiner Land Use Hearing Examiner recommendation: Denial. The appeal Denial Upheld alleged Examiner was not logical and decision not based on facts and testimony and claimed error in judgment. The Planning and Development Committee report submitted by Chairman Perry reported examination of the record and the Examiner's decision, findings and conclusions pursuant to Section 4-3017, and recommended that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Exami- ner for denial of the rezone request of R-2 to R-3.and refer to the Ways and Means Committee. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOP- MENT COMMITTEE, CONCUR IN EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL OF REZONE. CARRIED. Appeal of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's reconsideration decision dated Examiner's 12/9/77 was filed by Richard and Arlene Ross for Short Plat Reconsideration 088-77 and Exception 089-77, property located in the vicinity of R. P. Ross et ux [516 SW 3rd Pl. along the north side of SW 3rd Pl. approximately Short Plat 088-77 |midway between Earlington Ave. SW and Stevens Ave. SW. The appli- and Exception 089 cant had requested approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of exception allowing access to one of the two lots via existing 20 ft. easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. The appeal charged error in judgment or law and explained being owners of the property for 13 yrs.; prior to change in ordinance in 1971 owner had right to short plat and build on the lot; noting three adjoining owners have developed their property using the easement road in the manner now being denied and without request to furnish 40 ft. r/w. Planning and Develop- ment Committee report was presented by Chairman Perry noting review of record according to City Code and recommended that the Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner for denial of the short plat and exception and refer the item to the Ways and Means Committee for proper resolution or ordinance. Moved by Shinpoch, Second Perry, Council concur in the committee report. Councilwoman Thorpe inquired regarding dedication of the right-of-way. Councilman Perry used map showing area and discus- sion ensued regarding access to the subject property. Mr. Ross, being present, advised perpetual 20 ft. easement providing ingress and egress and utilities had been submitted with the application. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, THE ROSS APPEAL MATTER BE REFERRED BACK TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. er Human Rights Letter from Y.W.C.A. President Sharon Wylie, Committee of Manage- ment of the East Valley YWCA, complimented the City for continu- ing interest in human rights for the community. The letter noted emphasis on the goal by the YWCA to eliminate prejudice and in- justice and went on record supporting the adoption of the revised Human Rights Commission ordinance. Introductions Mayor Delaurenti introduced newly appointed State Senator "Bud" Shinpoch and State Representative Avery Garrett. Renton City Council 1/9/78 Page 4 OLD BUSINESS Committee on Committees Report Council Committees for 1978 Council Agenda Committee Referrals Ways & Means Committee Report Appointment Peggy Ziebarth Planning and Development Committee Report E.Coleman SP-078 Reconsidered Council President Clymer presented Committee on Committees report recommended change in committee structure to six committees and the matter be referred to the Ways and Means Committee for incorp- oration of ordinance changes. Committee assignments were also re- ported (first name listed being chairperson): COMMUNITY SERVICES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Patricia Seymour-Thorpe George Perry Richard Stredicke Barbara Shinpoch Thomas Trimm Patricia Seymour-Thorpe WAYS AND MEANS PUBLIC SAFETY Richard Stredicke Thomas Trimm George Perry Charles Shane Barbara Shinpoch Patricia Seymour-Thorpe TRANSPORTATION UTILITIES Barbara Shinpoch Charles Shane Charles Shane Thomas Trimm Richard Stredicke George Perry MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES. CARRIED. Committee on Committees report made recommendation to the Committee of the Whole that the Council Agenda be established on Wednesday by 5:00 P.M. and the Council packet and Staff report be placed on each Council Member's desk by Friday, 12:00 noon. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. The Committee on Committees report recommended that the referrals to the Public Services Committee still remaining from 1977, be separated and referred back to the appropriate committee: Public Safety Committee 11/3/75 Tow Truck Rates 3/22/76 Taxi Regulations 10/25/76 Fire Protection Master Plan 9/19/77 Ambulance and Aid Car Fees Utilities Committee 8/29/77 Talbot Crest Dr.S. Residents' request - Surface Water 10/3/77. +=Ray Brown request for latecomer's agreement 11/7/77 ~+=McElroy sewer connection request 11/21/7 Miller/Cline request to connect to City sewer 12/5/77. +~—Loveless/Powell request water/sewer latecomer's agrmt. Transportation Committee 4/11/77 Talbot roadway construction overrun 6/20/77. Monitoring 6-Year Street Construction Program 9/19/77 Amtrak Passenger service information 11/7/77. Brown/Strand petition for alley vacation in Kennydale 11/14/7. + South Renton Park & Ride Facility - Review/Report back 12/19/7 ~=Renton Center traffic signals MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES RECOMMENDATION REGARDING SEPARATION OF REFERRALS. CARRIED. The Ways and Means Committee concurred in the Mayor's reappoint- ment of Peggy Ziebarth to the Municipal Arts Commission for three year term expiring 12/31/80. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND THORPE, COUN- CIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning and Development Committee Chairman Perry presented com- mittee report noting review of the request for reconsideration and request for appeal, filed by separate parties, regarding the Ernest Coleman Short Plat No. 078-77 and recommended that the matter of reconsideration be remanded back to the Hearing Examiner for review and response. The committee further recommended that Council action on the appeal request be postponed until the com- pletion of the Hearing Examiner's reconsideration review. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Alon tal PHent oF Rey : e % 5% . THE CITY OF RENTON > aL — MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 4 So 5 = 2 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR @® PLANNING DEPARTMENT % a 235-2550 "ED sepr™ MEMORANDUM March 22, 1978 * - TO: George Perry, Chairman and Committee Members, Planning and Development Committee FROM: Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director By: Michael L. Smith, Associate Planner - RE: STATUS OF ROSS SHORT PLAT AND STREET DEDICATION A telephone call was received by Michael Smith from Mrs. Ross. She indicated that she had the concurrence of all the neighbors along the south side of the existing 20 foot easement road to proceed with dedication and development of the easement as a public street. She was told the dedication could probably be handled by a Quit Claim Deed to the City but that she should contact Del Bennett, Deputy Public Works Director, for details of the! dedication procedure. She asked about establishing grade and was told that Mr. Ben- nett's office could assist her as previously stated. The matter was discussed later with Del Bennett. He said that he had talked to Mrs. Ross and referred the matter to his per- sonnel to accomplish. It is our recommendation that the committee should not take action on the Ross matter until the dedication has been completed. MLS:wr 235-2550 > a feat Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 all oS g CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR @ PLANNING DEPARTMENT > - 2 eS February 27, 1978 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, Washington 98055 RE: Dear SHORT PLAT NO. 988-77 AND EXCEPTION NO. E-089-77 Mr. and Mrs. Ross: , Pursuant to your letter dated February 22, 1978, to the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council, we have Ls the following responses to your questions: It was the Planning and Public Works Department's recommendations that the short plat be permitted only if 20 feet of public right-of-way be dedicated at this time with 14 - 16 feet of roadway paving provided. This would provide half of the 40 foot public right-of-way required by the Subdivision Ordinance. The other 20 feet of dedication will be required of the property to the north at the time of its subdivision and/or development. This will ultimately result in a dedicated 40 foot public right-of-way the entire length of the present ease- ment road. a ae Any lot bordering either north or south of the existing easement road will be subject to the same ~° requirements at the time of subdivision and/or house construction. Pipestem lots are not permitted outright by ordi- nance. They would only be permitted by exception: to the ordinance with a finding that no other rea- sonable access alternatives exist. We hope that this answers your questions with regard to platting and development of the subject site and surrounding properties. z Mr. and Mrs. Richard Ross February 27, 1978 Page Two If you or your neighbors have any further questions, do not hesitate to contact the Planning or Public Works Departments. Very truly yours, Gordon Y. Ericksen Michael L. Smith Associate Planner MLS:wr cc:: Public Works Department lenny ‘ECEIVED FEB 2 2 1978 CITY COUNCIL RENTON, WA RY 2 516 S.W. 3rd Place a BE Renton, Washington 98055 ae February 22, 1978 TO: George Perry Members of Planning and Development Committee RE: Ross Short Plat Dear Mr. Perry and Members; > This letter is to inform you of the progress we are making in regards to dedicating the 20 feet easement road to the city. We had a meeting on February 13, 1978, with all of the people having an interest in the road and Mr. Brinson, owner of the property to the north, to inform them of the background regarding the short plat and the necessity to dedicate the road. As with most first meetings, we didn't even come close to making any decisions. While some of the parties refused to believe that a dedication was necessary for either a short plat or development, none was totally unreceptive to the idea of dedicating the road. We feel that it would be most helpful in negotiating .f with these people if we could have some kind of verification of the facts from the city. Perhaps : a letter of intent from the planning department : ’ stating the following: 1. A short plat will not be granted unless the road is dedicated to the city and permanently surfaced 14 feet in width the entire length of the road. 2. Future development is not going to be recommended on any of the lots bordering the easement road unless the road is permanently surfaced. George Perry and Members ete 22, 1979 Page -2- 3. Development to the north of the easement road would not be allowed unless an additional 20 feet was dedicated to the city, eventually providing a publicly dedicated road 40 feet wide the entire length of the present easement road. 4. Pipestream lots are accepted by the City as an exception to the ordinance only when a better alternative is unavailable. We have also discussed the cost involved to surface the road. We are getting an estimate for the paving but are unable to anticipate the additional cost for » rading Mr. Bennett indicated that city resourses would fe avatleple to assist with the grade after the property owners had agreed to the dedication. However, everyone is reluctant to commit to this action without having any idea of the additional costs of grading. Since the final acceptance of the road will not take place until the road meets the standards that have been set, i.e. permanent sur- facing 14 feet in width the entire length of the easement road, perhaps a grade plan could be prepared upon tentative approval of the dedication by the property owners involved. We appreciate your assistance in these matters. Very truly yours, a 4 a Ztbs vA Fa - he gt aos Mr. and Mrs. Richard {Ross RENTON CITY COUNCIL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT January 9, 1978 TOS Council Members FROM: Planning and Development Committee RE: File No. Short Plan 088-77, and Exception 089-77; R. P. Ross Appeal of Examiner's Reconsideration Decision Dated December 9, 1977 The Planning and Development Committee, after examination of the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings, and conclusions pursuant to Section 4-3017, recommends that the City Council concur in the recommenda- tion of the Hearing Examiner for denial of the short plat and exception and refer the item to the Ways and Means Committee for proper resolution or ordinance preparation. /s/ George Perry, Chairman [sf Barbara SHinpoch, Member ——_——— am Richard Stredicke, Member fi.firre rs O THEH CITY OF RENTON an Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 fo) 1 2 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR @ LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER & L. RICK BEELER, 235-2593 w 7ED seprit December 23, 1977 Members, Renton City Council Renton, Washington RE: File No. Short Plat 088-77 and Exception No. 089-77, Richard and Arlene Ross Short Plat and Exception Applications; Appeal of Examiner's Decision. Dear Council Members: On December 23, 1977 Mr. and Mrs. Ross filed an appeal of the Examiner's decision to not reconsider his previous decision to not approve their short plat and exception application. Attached are pertinent documents. The Examiner's decision of November 16, 1977 was to disapprove the applications. A request for reconsideration was submitted on November 30, 1977, and was subsequently denied by the Examiner in a a letter dated December 9, 1977. Because of the legal issues involved the Examiner in a memorandum of December 5, 1977 requested review by the City Attorney, which was was answered in a memorandum of December 8, 1977. If you require additional information regarding this application, please contact the Examiner. Sincerely,” Tis ck- Beeler Hearing Examiner Attachments cc: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti A 5 THE CITY OF RENTON - MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 2 CHARLES J. DELAURENT! , MAYOR e DELORES A. MEAD e CITY CLERK December 23, 1977 APPEAL FILED BY RICHARD & ARLENE ROSS Re: Appeal of Examiner's Reconsideration Decision- dated 12/9/77, R. P. Ross, et ux, Short Plat 088-77 and Exception 089-77 To Parties of Record: Appeal of Land Use Hearing Examiner's reconsideration decision has been filed with the public records office this date, along with the proper fee of $25.00, pursuant to Title 4, Ch. 30, City Code, as amended. The City Code requires the appeal must be set forth in writing. The written appeal and all other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee. Please contact the Council Secretary, 235-2586, for date and time of the committee meetings if so desired. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above-referenced appeal will be considered by the Renton City Council at its regular meeting of January 9, 1978 at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Second Floor, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave. S. Yours very truly, CITY OF RENTON ie POPtaerc. Co Mier Maxine E. Motor Deputy City Clerk MEM: jt Oe FROM: SUBJECT: CITY “CLERK"S OFFICE INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: > % =) THE CITY OF RENTON “7 3 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 — = CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR ® DELORES A. MEAD Es CITY CLERK 7ED sepve™ December 23, 1977 APPEAL FILED BY RICHARD & ARLENE ROSS Re: Appeal of Examiner's Reconsideration Decision- dated 12/9/77, R. P. Ross, et ux, Short Plat 088-77 and Exception 089-77 To Parties of Record: Appeal of Land Use Hearing Examiner's reconsideration decision has been filed with the public records office this date, along with the proper fee of $25.00, pursuant to Title 4, Ch. 30, City Code, as amended. The City Code requires the appeal must be set forth in writing. The written appeal and all other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee. Please contact the Council Secretary, 235-2586, for date and time of the committee meetings if so desired. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above-referenced appeal will be considered by the Renton City Council at its regular meeting of January 9, 1978 at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Second Floor, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave. S. Yours very truly, CITY OF RENTON DP Dehra GE pte ollde. Maxine E. Motor Deputy City Clerk MEM: jt cc: Mayor Planning Dept. Planning & Development Committee (3) Public Works Director Hearing Examiner Finance Director Ron Nelson, Building Div. gy es) on, = °o 2p ¢ 4 & "£0 sepre™ Renton , thit Avenue South Wa: ngton 98055 H. A. Brinson 264 Earlington Ave. S.W. Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Jim Lawrie 10808 Lakeridge Drive S. Seattle, WA 98178 Jack McLaughlin Inspector, Renton Fire Department Mr. & Mrs. Richard Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, Washington 98055 — CLERK'S OF “f December 23, 1977 S, Xe C; Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti and Renton City Council c/o City Clerk Renton, Washington 98055 jon is sq@kh = OF EXAMINE r'S go! RE: i a £h-/Reconsideration}) Short Plat No. 088-77 Exception No. E-089-77 Dear Mayor Delaurenti and Renton City Council; An appeal to the City Council is requested in the case referred to above. On October 25, 1977, a hearing was held regarding approval of our application for a two lot short plat and exception to subdivision ordinance. On November 16, 1977, a decision was rendered to deny the application. A brief was prepared and a Request for Reconsideration applied for. An answer to this reconsideration was issued on December 9, 1977, also denying the application for exception. All records of prior action are incorporated herein. The Hearing Examiner, Rick Beeler, states in his letter of December 9, 1977, paragraph 2, that..."without being granted an exception your proposal could not be approved...". We are well aware that the proposal no longer meets the city code, this is the reason why we have requested the Exception. If it was our contention that our proposal met with the requirements we would not have taken this approach. Throughout the letter Mr. Beeler refers to a 40 foot road and an L.I.D. The purpose of this entire procedure has been to obtain an exception to the ordinance. As explained in detail on page 7 of our Request for Reconsideration, an L.I.D. is not a viable alternative. Each of the three other owners of the easement road is already free to use his land without the loss of an additional 20 feet of land or the expense of an L.I.D. Although a 40 foot road is ideal, 20 feet is definitely sufficient for what we propose. Should the occasion arise for an emergency vehicle to use the road it would be necessary to back it out. 2 CT, Aon, ifs] er. Grugiines, [2723S CC [LL ¢2 Cigecs moe . ‘ € a : . W] if ‘ {* la muha ¥ Orrvelrpusd Orn mM Pé Aa M4 a Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Renton City Council Page -2- December 23, 1977 While this is not as convenient as a turn around, it certainly shouldn't be the basis for refusing us the use of our land. There has not been any evidence to show that granting us an exception would be...determental to the public welfare... nor can the public possibly gain by the loss we will experience if refused the use of our land. "Investment prospects" and "property investments" are referred to in Mr. Beeler's letter. We are not speculators, contractors, or investors. We have owned and lived on this piece of property for 13 years; we like the area, schools, neighbors, and city and wish to utilize our property and remain where we are. If time had permitted it would have been interesting to have analyzed the last 20 exceptions granted in Renton; to determine who they were tranted to and how they could have been less...detrimental to the public welfare... than what we propose to do. On page 2 of the Hearing Examiners decision of December 9, 1977, he states that "Perhaps another alternative is available, but none has been raised at this point..."'. We are now, and always have been open to suggestions. If there are options of which we are unaware, is it not the duty of the Planning Commission or Hearing Examiner to enlighten us? We didn't approach them as adversaries, but for assistance in obtaining a short plat in order to personally utilize our property. Our request to the Council is that all of the records enclosed be thoroughly evaluated, the property viewed, and a decision made thatreflects the rights of the individual unless a proper showing can be made that the public welfare would be adversely affected by allowing such an exception. Respectfully Submitted, f ie Mr. and Mrs. Richard P. Ross Introduction Background Facts Analysis of Preliminary Report of Hearing Examiner Analysis of Examiner's Report and Recommendation of Renton Subdivision Ordinance Conclusion CITY OF REN. IN No. 7204 FINANCE DEPARTMENT. <> Ses Dk Stee | wee RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 7.3% “iy 4% 19 0 RECEIVED OF TOTAL GWEN E. MARSHALL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ig CITY OF RENT N No, 2404 INANCE DEPARTMENT <»- ‘Waals : ee LSS IT RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 WW gen fe 972 ig 7 RECEIVED OF 4.1% 3g Appeal of Land Use Hearing Examiner - Short Plat 088-77 & Exception 089-77 TOTAL Ebay GWEN E. MARSHALL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ay: / f i; : be -f Row on CORRECTED DATE ON RECEIPT Suh G Rahand Ke (24 2%)97 CITY OF RENI_N No, 3401 FINANCE DEPARTMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 __ 7 (VtZ 23 1972. RECEIVED OF £4 (cit LAs fp 4X KA / f. 2’) TOTAL AT, » } L™ GWEN E. MARSHALL, FINANCE DIRECTOR BY ge Ke (ft 3 3 , “ CITY OF RENT N No. 3401 _ | FINANCE DEPARTMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 __, Mek 23 192Z_ RECEIVED OF LA Og. _Ufkipidhe Jo LY dapiarisa/ 2S \09 YL, <a 7 fy ‘s } t TOTAL we OO GWEN E. MARSHAL PINANCE DIRECTOR - nn ; . Lf , . os BY Ca CO fe LED Lee Office of Land Use Hearing Examiner From: Richard and Arlene Ross Re: Request for Reconsideration of Decision File No: Short Plat 088-77 E-089-77 Dear Sir: We hereby request reconsideration of the decision rendered on November 16, 1977 by L. Rick Beeler on the above matter. We feel that errors of judgment and law were made in the decision denying the exception to the short plat. In this report we will comment on the Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner; list the action taken in antici- pation of eventually building on the property; discuss our interpretation and understanding of the City Ordinance; and explain why we feel that an exception should be granted in this case. I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Renton Subdivision Ordinance is twofold (Section 9-1101 (2)): 1) To protect the interests of the public; 2) To protect the interests of the pronerty owners; The interests of the public to be protected are enumerated as: a) protection of public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics; and b) provisions for wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and thoroughfares. It is conceded that under special circumstances, interests of property owners must be subordinate to public interests. This is not the case here. This application affects a small nortion of the "public" all of whom are property owners who will be affected hereby. No violation of public interest is present, while the apvlicants are adversely affected "property owners". In such a case, the purpose clause mandates that the interests of property owners shall be protected. Section II sets forth steps and expenses taken and incurred by applicants in reliance upon the continuity in City Ordinances. The present ordinance undermined these steps to the detriment of the applicants. Strict application of the ordinance will serve none of the enumerated public interests to be protected. However, without the granting of the exception requested, the property owners (who are to be protected) will suffer undue hardship in that: 1) Applicants are being deprived of the anticipated and reasonable use and development of their property (§9-1109 (1) (A)). 2) Applicants are being deprived of property rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity (adjoining lots) and under similar circumstances. With this in mind, it is submitted that errors of law, fact, and judgment were present in the decision rendered November 14, 1977. ae II. BACKGROUND FACTS In 1964 a 20 foot easement for the purpose of utilities and ingress and egress was established to provide access to lots 22 through 29, located in the vicinity of S.W. 3rd Place between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue 5.W. Those involved in developing this were Mr. and Mrs. John Lissman, Mr. and Mrs. Carl Dale, Mr. and Mrs. George Scott, and Olga Repetowski. In 1965 we purchased the property owned by the Scotts. Our understanding at the time of the purchase, and from talking to subsequent owners of the pronverties bordering the easement over the years, was to allow for eventual development of each of these lots. Mr. and Mrs. Ken Williams purchased the East half of lot 24 and all of lots 25 and 26 originally owned by Mrs. Vera Dale and, in 1973, built a home on this site. Steps that we have taken over the years toward the same eventual goal on our property, lots 27 and the west half of lot 28, are: 1. Payment of 1/4 of the taxes on the 20 foot easement since 1965. 2. Obtaining a release from the mortgage company of the property that we are presently attempting to shortplat. This was done in 1975 and resulted in our owning the back half of our property outright and owing a mortgage on the house and front half of the lot. 3. Recording the division with King County. Since this time we have paid the taxes separately on the two vieces of property. 4. Meeting with the owners of the other three lots involved in this easement, planning the development of the road, and paying 1/4 of the cost of the same. 5. Granting an easement through our property in order that the Williams could provide their property with utilities from S.W. 3rd Place. In lieu of payment for this easement, all utilities were provided, underground, to our property also. 6. Hiring a surveyor to provide the City with the + necessary drawings for the short plat. 7. Applying for a short plat and exception to the Ordinance. We feel that our strongest argument on this subject is that we are not attempting to create a road that does not meet existing city codes. We are merely applying for per- mission to use the road that met the code at the time that it was created. The road was created and the above-mentioned steps taken in good faith that new rules and regulations should be prospective only and not take effect retroactively. LLL Analysis of Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner Planning Dept. Analysis - 0.5. The suggestion was made that if the road was permanently surfaced the entire distance to the west 1/2 of lot 28 that possibly limited use for access (total potential lots served approximately 4) would be acceptable. We have indicated our willingness to comply with this. Planning Dept. Analysis - 0.6. Concedes that there is no other reasonable means of providing access to the proposed short plat. Any other questions raised in this analysis have already been dealt with as have the concerns raised by: The Utilities Department -- Water, sewer, electricity, telephone and television cable are provided to the lot from SW 3rd Place. There is a gas main from SW Earlington to lot 26. Garbage collection could take place from SW Earlington in the same manner as presently serves the William's residence. Traffic Engineering Department -- We have exvressed willingness to provide a permanent surface for the easement road and have requested that it take place at the time of construction for the sake of economy and convenience. Engineering Department -- Previously discussed. Their concerns were the same as the Utilities and Traffic Engineering Departments. Fire Prevention Department -- The possibility of a waiver of the requirements by the fire department has already been :considered and also the fact that permission from the fire ‘department is premature as they are only concerned at the time of construction. -« Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation and Renton Subdivision Ordinance In the Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation, Conclusion #74, the purpose of the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance was quoted as stating, "In the interest of protecting the '...public health, safety, welfare...' and providing '...wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and throughfares' §9-1101.2" What also is mentioned in the purpose is the interest of property owners. We strongly believe that, when adopting this Ordinance, the council had no intention of denying the existing property owners of the rightful use of their proper- ties. The Ordinance was more reasonably geared to "future" development in order that the anticipated platting and sub- dividing of large blocks of land that has taken place in the past few years could be conducted in an orderly manner. Most of the Ordinance is aimed at large development. §9-1108. 23.F.2 states that "Each lot must front upon a public street or road with width of not less than specified in §9-1198.23.A. §9-1108.23.A.9 states that "There shall be'no private street platted in any subdivision, and every subdivision Property shall be served from a publicly dedicated street" When the entire section is read, rather than taking the above mentioned sections out of context, it becomes increasingly convincing that what is being referred to is large scale develonp- ment. §9-1108.23 begins as follows: "Minimum Standards for Residential Design. In the planning of a subdivision..." What we are proposing is not a subdivision, but merely a single short plat. Conclusion #5 states, "Any hardship created by requiring access via a 40-foot public right-of-way is not undue since the re- quirement applies to all properties in the area". This is incorrect. The properties immediately to the east and west of the proposed plat are served solely by the 20-foot ease- ment. The steps taken in Section II were in anticipation of sharing eaual rights of adjoining owners. §9-1109.1.B states that "The exception is necessary to insure such property the rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under similar circumstances." The access to our lot is not only similar, but identical to the other 3 lots served by this easement road. dé Conclusion #5 further states, "The applicant continues to enjoy the reasonable use and development of his/her land for single family residential purposes (Section 9-1109.1) The existing use is unchanged. "This is untrue. While the existing use remains unchanged the reasonable use and development of the land have been seriously affected. The existing use is unchanged because it is presently UNdeveloped and UNused. The purpose of applying for this short plat was to prepare the property for the day when it WOULD be used. For this reason we contend that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance will deprive us of the reasonable use and development of our land. Conclusion #5, paragraph 4, states that "adding further traffic to the existing easement in its present condition is detrimental to public welfare". This is contrary to the facts. The following is true: 1. At the original hearing a willingness to improve the condition of the road was expressed, and 2. Under Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations, #10, the statement is made that "to date, two dwelling units use the easement as their only access". Actually, only one residence is presently being served by this access. This is the Williams residence and they own two vehicles. The road is very adequately maintained considering it's limited and infrequent use. 3. No showing has been made of any effect on nublic welfare. Conclusion #5 further states that, "at full development of the properties with access rights to the easement, as many as 5 dwelling units might use this access, (Interpreted from Exhibits 1 and 2)". Only 4 landowners own rights in this easement. I have enclosed the map on which the red X's were marked indicating the possibility of 5 homes. The property shaded in red is owned by Mr. and Mrs. George Johnson. They do not have ownership in the easement. The easement, as written in 1964, serves lots 22 through 29. This would indicate that only 4 residences would conceivably use this road. - The property to the North of the easement could not gain access without the authorization of the Hearing Examiner. The city retains total control over development of property to the Notth of the easement. A recommendation was made by the Planning Commission to form an LID to improve the easement to conform to city standards. This requires approval of at least 50% of the effected property owners. There are 4 owners of this ease- ment road. According to Section 9-1108.23.A.3.d, the property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Lissman, (lots 22, 23, and the West 1/2 of 24), could qualify as a pipesteam lot and, therefore, be short platted. The lots owned by the Williams, (the East 1/2 of lot 24, and lots 25 and 26), and those owned by Mrs. Repetowski, (North 120 feet of the East 1/2 of lot 28 and the North 120 feet of lot 29), were short platted prior to 19/1, We have discussed the possibility of the LID with the other owners of the easement road. While each sympathizes with our problem, they are all interested in maintaining the quiet and privacy presently enjoyed in this area. As he indicated at the Hearing, Mr. Brinson, the owner of the property to the north of the easement, desires that multiple family housing be developed in the area. For this reason we have to concur with the other 3 owners of the easement road: Except for the purpose of allowing us to short plat our lot, development of a 40 foot road that would allow large scale development to the north of the easement would be detrimental to the interests of everyone involved. Conclusion In this case you are not working with a large builder or land developer with many options who is attempting to realize large personal profit from an exception. We are people who have owned the same piece of property for 13 years and are attempting to abide as nearly as vossible to the regulations set by the City Council. Prior to the new ordinance of 1971, we had the right to short plat and build on our lot. If we are now refused this right, it would mean that a valuable piece of view property has been deemed worthless. As previously stated, there are 4 owners of the easement road: two had short vlatted their property prior to the new ordinance and one lot can qualify as a pivesteam lot. This would indicate that we alone are being singled out of this group and being denied the use of our land; that the City of Renton will take 4 lots, situated side by side, and allow the owners of 3 of them to use their land and deny the fourth the same privelege. The very fact that a procedure, application and fee has been established for exceptions indicates that the regu- lations set in this Ordinance were not intended to be complied with 100% of the time. This Ordinance represents the ideal. Exceptions are granted regularly when a viable alternative is not available. For the reasons set forth in this report as well as for the purpose of promoting new development in one of the city's oldest neighborhoods, we respectfully request that this exception be granted. Sincerely, ee ee , Co ingen i a J lle CR Kp 7 Richard and Arlene Ross cc Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Counselman Richard M. Stredicke SCALE 12200" FP suaster $16 po | RICHARD % ARLENE | ~ £0SS E -089-77 SHORT flaty st OBO-77 oF Re Ps V2 yw fe) THE CITY OF RENTON bes =e Zz MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 4 fo) 3, ual = CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR @ LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER a = ro) & Decenber 9, 1977 L. RICK BEELER, 235-2593 TED sepre™ Mr. & Mrs. Richard Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 RE: Request for Reconsideration; Short Plat No. 088-77 & Exception No. E-089-77 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Ross: Your request for reconsideration by the Examiner was reviewed together with the record of this application. A re-examination of the record and pertinent sections of city ordinances was conducted and the Examiner's decision of November 16, 1977 reconsidered. This reconsideration reinforced the earlier conclusion that your situation is fairly unique due mainly to the passage of the existing Subdivision Ordinance before your subdivision request was submitted. The Subdivision Ordinance rendered nonconforming the 20-foot access easement serving your property and three other properties. Otherwise, your proposed subdivision is similar to the short plats accomplished on the other properties having access to the easement. But without being granted an Exception your proposal could not be approved with anything less than a 40-foot access easement/street. And this is the issue of your request for reconsideration and was the main issue of the Examiner's original decision as the proposed configuration of the property was acceptable. Property rights and privileges are vested for a particular property by filing an application to exercise the rights and privileges available under ordinances in effect at that time. In order for the rights and privileges prior to the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance to be vested, your application would have to have been submitted prior to passage of that ordinance. This would apply to any property. Any properties that do not conform to that ordinance become noncomforming and could not be further subdivided except in conformance with that ordinance. In your situation, this means that your property could not be subdivided today in the same manner as prior to 1971 and that the point of reference for rights and privileges shifted to those established in 1971. All properties, therefore, enjoy the same rights and privileges, while some property owners were able to accomplish subdivisions differently prior to 1971 (Section 9-1109. 1s Be) Testimony given at the public hearing indicated that the insufficient width (20 feet) of the easement created problems for safe and adequate access for private, commercial or public safety vehicles. A width of 40 feet per the Subdivision Ordinance was necessary to insure safe and adequate access, and the easement required paving and a cul-de-sac. For this reason, the Examiner found that the Exception, if granted, would be "...detrimental to the public welfare..." (Section 9-1109.1.C.), and that a 40-foot easement would not. The problems of the condition and width of the existing easement would be increased by allowing additional sole access by additional parcels. Py > Y a! «ow Mr. & Mrs. Richard koss Page Two December 9, 1977 Turning attention to Section 9-1109.1.A. and the issue of "...reasonable use or development of...land...", the Examiner's opinion was that the use of the property prior to 1971 was single family. This use continued unchanged after 1971. It was not "...special physical circumstances or conditions..." that modified the use of the property. The investment prospects of an additional lot were changed, not use, as a result of the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance, which is the common risk factor in every property investment. Your circumstances were not physical but created by an ordinance revision which required additional width of the access to the property. Access remains via a dedicated public street (S.W. 3rd Place) to your property; therefore, the issue is not lack of access. Unfortunately, you are the victim of timing of not only your application but also of the ordinance revision. In terms of philosophy of the purpose of the Subdivision Ordinance, it is clear that the application is to any proposed subdivision of property regardless of size. The specified width of access serving the created parcels was specified for reasons of safety and adequacy for use by all vehicles, not just private automobiles. With this in mind, the Exception process was created to allow deviation in unusual, specific circumstances which did not violate this purpose. Accordingly, it was found that the proposed Exception was contrary to this purpose. Provision could be made on your proposed parcel for the 40-foot easement; however, the entire easement abutting the other properties remains deficient and a part of the problem. Only by an L.I.D. for improvements and providing 40 feet of access can the problems be solved, based upon the record available. Perhaps another alternative is available, but none has been raised at this point, and any alternative would have to be reviewed in a public hearing. Upon completing this review it was concluded that an error of law was not committed or satisfactorily substantiated. However, a good presentation was given in your request of your position and arguments for the proposal. Therefore, basically a difference of opinion occurred, which is understandable. But the Examiner's opinion remains unchanged from the decision of November 16, 1977 based on the available record. Respectfully yours, i L. Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner LRB:mp cc: Larry Warren, City Attorney Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director : & e November 16, 1977 CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. APPLICANT: Richard and Arlene Ross FILE NO. Short Plat 088-77 E-089-77 LOCATION: The vicinity of 516 Southwest 3rd Place along the north side of S.W. 3rd Place approximately midway between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.W. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of an exception to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty (20) foot easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department: Recommend denial. Hearing Examiner Decision: Denial. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on October 18, 1977. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing, which was continued on October 25, 1977, was reopened on November 1, 1977, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1 and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #2: King County Assessor's Map Exhibit #3: Short Plat Map Exhibit #4: Letter from the applicant regarding request for exception, dated 10-3-77. Exhibit #5: Memorandum from Traffic Engineering Division, dated 10-31-77. The Examiner asked the applicant if she concurred in Exhibit #1. Responding was: Arlene Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 -Mrs. Ross reported that she did not concur in Exhibit #1 and objected to the recommendation for denial by the Planning Department. She referred to Exhibit #4 which lists reasons for approval of the request including existence of the easement roadway since 1964 prior to adoption of the Subdivision Ordinance in 1971; limited utilization of the easement by only one residence; and good condition of the roadway for the current use. She objected to comments in Exhibit #1 regarding the condition of the subject roadway stating that costly improvements were premature because of existence of only one residence on the easement and emphasized that the roadway was created for purposes of ingress and egress and not for utilities which were installed several years ago. She also stated that although the width of the roadway prevented motorists from turning around, vehicles could turn in driveways or back out to the street. Referring to statements in Exhibit #1, Mrs. Ross advised that application for a waiver was not submitted because of the possibility of denial of the short plat request and subsequent forfeiture of the waiver fee, although she wished to reserve the right to apply at a later date. She also stated that garbage collection could occur at the end of the easement roadway and felt that paving the easement should not be required until future construction commenced. fe & Short Plat 088-77 Page Two E-089-77 She asked for clarification on Item C., page 2, of Exhibit #1 regarding Subdivision Ordinance requirements for frontage on a dedicated right-of-way and inquired if the easement would be dedicated to the city and width requirements of the roadway if this occurred. Mr. Smith indicated that since vacant property exists along the easement which may be developed in the future, a 50-foot roadway was a minimum requirement, although a 40-foot roadway would be acceptable per the ordinance requirements since the topography of the property qualified it as a hillside area. Mrs. Ross stated that because of the location of residences on Stevens Avenue S.W. east of the subject property and the steep grade of the area, the easement would remain as a dead end street or cul-de-sac and should not be considered a public right-of-way. Regarding fire department requirements for hydrants and access roadway improvements, Mrs. Ross reported discussions with fire department personnel had indicated that regulations were established for new development and should not be applied to the individual homeowner. She indicated that a fire hydrant exists 600 feet from the subject property which did not meet the 500-foot limit required but could be reached by fire apparatus. The Examiner called for testimony from the fire department. Responding was: Jack McLaughlin Inspector, Renton Fire Department The Examiner asked Mr. McLaughlin if requirements for a hydrant and improvements to the 20-foot easment could be waived by the fire department. Mr. McLaughlin indicated that the requirements could be waived during application for a short plat, but would be instated as conditions at the time of construction on the property. Mr. Smith added a clarification from Section 9-1105.9 of the Subdivision Ordinance which requires all utilities and improvements to be installed prior to construction on the site. Mrs. Ross reviewed conditions outlined in the ordinance for requesting an exception and felt that the situation of the property warranted approval of the request. In response to the Examiner's inquiries, Mr. Smith reported that certain certification requirements had been met or would be met prior to final submittal to King County; no restrictive covenants had been submitted; a final plat map is contained in Exhibit #3; and no application for deferral or waiver had been received by the department or the Board of Public Works although all utilities and improvements were required to bé inslaliecd prive to Une filing of the short plat with King County. The Examiner asked for testimony in favor of the application. Responding was: Jim Lawrie 10828 Lakeridge Drive S. Seattle, WA Mr. Lawrie indicated that he is Mrs. Ross's employer. He felt that provisions for application for an exception were included in the ordinance to prevent undue hardship to property owners and felt that certain flexibility should be allowed depending upon individual circumstances. He reported that creation of a mutual easement in 1964 had occurred to provide access for only those property owners on the easement and that if adoption of the city's Subdivision Ordinance in 1971 had been anticipated, the property would have been subdivided prior to that time. Mr. Lawrie inquired if the Examiner may impose conditions to defer installation of improvements. The Examiner advised that a deferral can only be granted by the Board of Public Works for a maximum period of two years. Mr. Lawrie suggested that an alternative would be approval of the exception with the inclusion of conditions. The Examiner advised that the purpose of the subject exception application was to request a deviation from the required frontage on a public street. Mr. Smith reported that the ordinance required filing of the plat within one year of submittal of the application on October 4, 1977 by which time the improvements must be installed or a deferral granted. The Examiner indicated that the hearing could be continued until such time as an application for waiver was submitted which could be reviewed concurrent with the short plat request or continued subject to review of a deferral by the Board of Public Works. In response to Mrs. Ross's inquiry regarding improvements, the Examiner stated that installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and possibly storm sewers as well as conditions imposed by the fire department would be required before final filing of the plat with King County. The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition to the application. Responding was: H. A. Brinson 264 Earlington Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 a 12. Le 14. Short Plat 088-77 Page Four E-089-77 Improvements of curbs, gutters and sidewalks are not proposed within the 20-foot easement. Pavement exists for approximately the westerly 30 feet of the easement. A waiver or deferral application has not been filed per Section 9-1105.6. The applicant testified that improvements within the easement would preferably be accomplished at the time construction occurs on the created lot. Improvements are required (Section 9-1105.6) to be installed prior to final signature by staff (Section 9-1105.7) and filing with King County (Section 9-1105.8). Construction or excavation cannot occur prior to filing the short plat (Section 9-1105.10). Water, sewer and electricity are available on the northern portion of the site. The northern lot of the short plat contains 7,560 square feet without subtraction of the 20-foot easement. Excluding the easement (1200 square feet) the net lot area would be 7,440 square feet which meets the requirements of Section 4-706. CONCLUSIONS : The proposed short plat conforms to the Comprehensive Plan for the area. The existing easement that will serve as the only access to the proposed northerly lot is in physical condition unconducive to the public health, safety and welfare. It is unreasonable to require the applicant to correct the entire deficiency. Instead the more equitable LID process should be used. During the LID process consideration can be given to the anticipated subdivision of the property north and south of the easement. Section 9-1108.7 rendered the existing easement nonconforming but allowed the easement to continue as access to the existing properties. Any subdivision of land after enactment of this section is required to meet its requirements. The subdivision of properties south of the easement will not affect the density of dwelling units using the easement. Instead, the impact will be to change the status of the easement to that of sole access for these units. At the time of its creation the easement served as a sevoudary access fur the homes which fronted S.W. 3rd Place. Since that time at least one-half of the properties have been subdivided in such a way that the southern portions front and access to S.W. 3rd place and the northerly portions front and access via the easement. In the interest of protecting the "...public health, safety, welfare..." and providing'"...wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and thoroughfares" (Section 9-1101.2),° the City Council determined in 1971 that 40 feet of right-of-way would be minimum in this situation instead of the existing 20-foot easement. Deviation or relief from these requirements may be granted per Section 9-1109 (Exceptions). Any hardship (Section 9-1109.1) created by requiring access via a 40-foot public right-of-way is not undue since the requirement applies to all properties in the area. Access continues to be from the 20-foot easement serving the subject property. The applicant continues to enjoy the reasonable use and development of his/her land for single family residential purposes (Section 9-1109.1.A.). The existing use is unchanged. When the 20-foot easement is increased to 40 feet the applicant should be able to subdivide the property. The rights and priviliges (Section 9-1109.1.B) of subdivision of property depend upon ordinances in effect at application. Other properties were subdivided under regulations precedent to Chapter 11. The subject site must comply with the requirements of Chapter 11 as do other properties in the area in order to be subdivided. Adding traffic to the existing easement in its present condition is potentially detrimental to the public welfare (Section 9-1109.1.C). An improved 40-foot public street would provide safe private and public access and turn-around capability. For the aforementioned reasons the Exception application should be denied. Safe and adequate access is critical to the subdivision of land, and the existing 20-foot easement is inadequate per the intent, purpose and requirements of Chapter 11. Short Plat 088-77 Page Three E-089-77 Mr. Brinson stated that the property in question was unsuitable for single family homes because of steep grades and expressed his preference for multiple family development in the area. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding lot size, Mr. Smith reported that the square foot computation on the north lot included the easement. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for additions, corrections or modifications to Exhibit #1. Mr. Smith indicated that the department's original recommendation would remain and expressed a concern that approval of the request would set a precedent for narrow easement roadways. He emphasized ordinance requirements and suggested formation of an LID to improve the easement to conform to city standards. Mrs. Ross restated her opinion that the roadway was originally created only for access to those residences located on the easement and objected to inability to develop her property because of city requirements. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding the legal status of the easement for future access to the lots, Mr. Smith indicated that he had not contacted the City Attorney regarding the matter but felt that the intent of the ordinance was to impose restrictions upon easements and did not pertain to subdivision of property. The Examiner asked for further testimony. Since there was none, the hearing on Item #Short Plat 088-77 and E-089-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10:25 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: FINDINGS: l. The request is for approval of a two-lot short plat and exception to allow access via a 20-foot easement. 2. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter and is hereby attached as Exhibit #1 and incorporated in this report by reference as set forth in full therein. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended by R.C.W. 43.2.C., a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required setbacks and lot coverage requirements of Section 4-706 of Title IV, Code of General Ordinances. 7, Final plat certification per Section 9-1105.3.A (reference to Section 9-1106.3.H) is normally processed administratively prior to filing the short plat at King County. 8. Restrictive Covenants were not proposed (Section 9-1105.3.B). 9. Dedication of public right-of-way is not proposed (Section 9-1105.3.D and E). 10. An existing 20-foot vehicular access and utilities easement crosses the northern portion of the proposal and extends to the abutting easterly property. This easement was created in 1964 for access to Earlington Avenue S.W. Subsequent to its creation and prior to the 1971 edition of the city Subdivision Ordinance, short plats similar to the proposal were approved with access for the northerly lots via the easement. Section 9-1108.23.F.(2) requires residential lots front a public street which Section 9-1108.7 (Table 1) specifies as a minimum of 40 feet in width. dwelling units might use this access. (Interpreted from Exhibits #1 and #2). Properties immediately north of the easement do not have access via the easement, however, should this access be gained, approximately five additional dwelling units would utilize the easement. Short plats that are served by a 20-foot easement have not been approved in the area under the existing Subdivision Ordinance. A review of Exhibit #2 indicated that similar easements do not exist in other locations in this block. et ee Short Plat 088-77 Page Five E-089-77 6. Opportunity is lacking within the 20-foot wide easement for sufficient backing-up Maneuvers by private, commercial or public safety vehicles. A hammerhead or cul- de-sac should be created on the northeastern portion of the subject property in conjunction with adjoining properties to permit turning around of vehicles. 7. %In view of the probable subdivision of property north of the easement a comprehensive overview would suggest that an additional 20 feet of right-of-way should eventually be dedicated parallel to the easement. The accumulated 40 feet should be dedicated for a public street to serve the interior of this residential block and to coordinate development. 8. The short plat requires access via a 40-foot public right-of-way (Section 9-1108.7). Disapproval of the Exception application renders moot the short plat. When sufficient right-of-way is established per Section 9-1108.7 the short plat can again be considered. DECISION: Based upon the record, testimony, findings and conclusions, it is the Examiner's decision to disapprove the Short Plat and Exception requests. ORDERED THIS 16th day of November, 1977. a. L. Rick Beeler Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of November, 1977 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Arlene Ross Jack McLaughlin Jim Lawrie H. A. Brinson TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of November, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division Larry Warren, City Attorney Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before November 30, 1977. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the City Clerk's office, first floor of City Hall, or same may be purchased at cost in said office. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 25, 1977 APPLICANT: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS FILE NO.: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of an exception to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty (20) foot easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Ee 1s Owner of Record: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS Applicant: Richard and Arlene Ross Location: The vicinity of 516 Southwest 3rd Place along the north side of SW 3rd Place approximately midway between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.W. Legal: Detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. Said legal description also contains an easement for ingress and egress and utilities over the north twenty feet of lots 19 thru the west half of lot 28. Lots 19 thru 26 are located directly west of the subject site. Access: The southerly portion of subject site attains access via S.W. 3rd Place. The proposed lot in the northerly portion of the site is proposed to attain access via twenty (20) foot access utilities easement. Existing Zoning: R-1, Residential Single Family Existing Zoning in the Area: Residential Single Family R-1, R-2, Duplex Residence District Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Single Family Residential Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE TWO RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS PURPOSE OF REQUEST: To obtain approval of a two-lot short plat with lot sizes 7,560 square feet and 7,200 square feet respectively together with approval of an exception from Subdivision Ordinance requirements of proper frontage on the dedicated public right-of-way to allow access via an existing twenty (20) foot access of utilities ease- ment extending from Earlington Avenue S.W. to the easterly property line of the subject site. This easement is located along the northerly twenty (20) feet of the subject site. HISTORY BACKGROUND: The subject site was part of the original plat of Earlington which created blocks with long narrow lots approximately 40 feet wide by approximately 246 feet deep. Through the years some of these lots have been subdivided to reduce their length with provision of access by various means. The abovementioned ease- ment, copy of which is attached, was more than likely established for this reason. However, since the twenty (20) foot access easement was established, the City Subdivision Regulations have disallowed subdivisions utilizing access of this nature. The northerly half of the property immediately west of the subject site was subdivided prior to this ordinance requirement. A house was subsequently constructed on the site due to the legal nonconforming nature of the lot. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1. Topography: The subject site rises from S.W. 3rd Place approximately 25 feet in height within the southerly 120 feet of the subject site. The slope levels off toward the middle of the site and gently rises towards the northerly property line. 2. Soils: Beausite gravelly sandy loam (BeC), permeability is moderately rapid, available water capacity is low, runoff is medium, and hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for timber, pasture, and urban development. 3. Vegetation: The approximate southerly one-half of the subject site contains various trees and shrubs typical to single family residential area. The northerly one-half of the site is primarily scrub grass, blackberries, and scattered fruit and deciduous trees. 4. Wildlife: The existing vegetation on the site may provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. Water: No existing streams or surface water are apparent on the subject site. 6. Land Use: There is an existing single family residence located on the southerly portion of the subject site adjacent to S.W. 3rd Place. There are other single family residences located along S.W 3rd Place in the general area. There is an existing single family residence located adjacent to and west of the northerly portion of the subject site. This residence is presently served by the 20 foot access road from Earlington Avenue S.W. There is undeveloped orchard land located directly north of the subject site and adjacent to the easterly side of the subject site. Beyond these areas, single family residences are located in the general vicinity. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE THREE RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: Generally single family residential nature. G. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Water and Sewer: The six (6) inch water main is located along S.W. 3rd Place and along Earlington Avenue S.W. An eight (8) inch sewer main is located along S.W. 3rd Place and a six (6) inch sewer main is located along Earlington Avenue S.W. No storm sewers are presently available in the area. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department and subject to City of Renton requirements. See attached comments by the Renton Fire Department. 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route 107 operates along Sunset Blvd. approximately one block south of the subject site. 4. Schools: Earlington Elementary School is located approximately three quarters of a mile north and west of the subject site. Dimmit Junior High School is located approximately two (2) miles north of the subject site. Renton High School is located approximately one (1) mile north and east of the subject site. H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-706, R-1 - Residential Single Family I. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS: 1. Subdivision Regulations: a. Section 9-1105, Plat Requirements for Short Subdivisions b. Section 9-1108, Plat Improvements and Development Standards c. Section 9-1109, Exceptions 2. Policy Statement, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area 1965 3. Subdivision of Land Page 5 and 6 4. Traffic Ways, page 6 J. IMPACTS ON NATURAL SYSTEMS: Subdivision of the property will not have a direct impact on the natural systems, however, the eventual development of the subject site will disturb soil and vegetation, increase storm water runoff, and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. However, these can be mitigated by proper devel- opment controls and proceedures. K. SOCIAL IMPACTS: Relatively minor. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE FOUR RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS EMVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/ THRESHOLD: Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 as amended (RCW 43.21C), this project is exempt from the Threshold Determination and Environmental Impact Statement process. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A vicinity map and site map are attached. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: City of Renton Building Division City of Renton Engineering Division City of Renton Utilities Division City of Renton Traffic Engineering Divison City of Renton Fire Department OP W w W N M — Copies of certain memorandum are attached. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The proposed short plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Existing Zoning, and existing uses in the area. 2. The two lots meet minimum ordinance size and dimension require- ments. The subdivision of the lot in half is reasonable, given the existing long narrow configuration. 3. The applicant proposes access to the northerly lot via an existing 20 foot easement. Other similiar plats have been permitted in the area, particularly directly adjacent to the westerly boundary of the subject site, where a residence has been recently constructed. However, these subdivisions allowing such easement road access occurred prior to the City's Subdivision Ordinance which established the requirement for proper frontage on a dedicated public street. 4. There are many disadvantages to permitting private easement roads. They are generally undermaintained or sometimes completely neglected, with the City having no jurisdiction for maintenance. They cause dust and mud problems in the area, and are generally of insufficient width for proper fire, service, and emergency vehicle access. However, certain advantages include privacy, less noise, and less traffic hazards. 5. The subject easement road is permanently paved for only the first approximately 30 feet east of Earlington Avenue S.W. The remainder of the existing developed portion of the 20 foot easement is presently a combination of dirt and gravel in rather poor condition. If the easement were to be used for access, it should be permanently surfaced the entire distance to the east half of lot 28. If this were accomplished it is possible that limited use for access (total potential lots served approximately 4) would be acceptable. However, until such time creating additional traffic on such access is not acceptable. ‘ PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE FIVE RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS 6. The attached copy of the common easement states that "the cost of upkeep of this easement shall be equally borne by the respective parties hereto." It appears from the existing condition of the easement that this upkeep has been minimal. 7. There is no other reasonable means of providing access to the proposed short plat. 8. All off-site improvements should be installed along the portion of the property fronting S.W. 3rd Place. Curb gutter and sidewalk exist along the southside of S.W. 3rd Place approximately 150 feet west of the subject site. 9. There is a question as to how the applicant intends to serve the property with utilities. Two alternatives exist; either provide the utilities from S.W. 3rd Place via an easement across the southerly lot, or provide them from Earlington Avenue S.W. via the existing 20 foot easement. There is also a question of proper fire hydrant access. P. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, the recommendation of the Engineering Division, Traffic Engineering Division, Utilities Division, the subdivision regulations, and the information presented by the applicant, it is recommended that the proposed short plat and exception be denied. However, if the problems stated above can be resolved, such short plat may be acceptable at a future date. INGER: PARTMLATAL FEVIEW REQUEST i, TO: —* PUB WORKS DIREC _"S #7 BUILDING DIVISION oa fy 28 —__ Weg \ INEERING DIVISION L ood, \TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION é ae AU. UTILITIES DIVISION Vs Se AS (FIRE DEPARTMENT Paw HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WiicylAs, Spit Contact Person RE: Rees Storey PLAT tt OX - 77 Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it, to the Planning Department by lofi7 “9 with your written recommendation. Nou response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. / Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Date jofrof7> TO: NGINEERING-DHVESI TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISIQ UTILITIES DIVISION) RE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Mic4Ag, <qattl Contact Person RE: Vira A 20 Foot PENATE EASEMENT OAD. Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it to the Planning Department by {od rik; via with your written recommendation. four response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. \ Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mehl Lee. Date ro [10 (77 vA Zz COLE Lf PF En 4 7eleN ta S4oet Fr la # rs tart re COs m ended Sinaec it Cracks ale g nn ta AaCCeSsS a fl atest, Sevrvree 7A Ka. tor th Lif. RieGn_ Utiuties . BH Tue PRoMEMS THAT HAVE To BE REsowvEO ARE WATER SEQUICE AND SEWER SEaicE To PafrealT/ A VWiAWw SHoucd BE EXTENO ODUN EASEMENT, TO EARLING Ton AUG SW ane/ on. PUVvieG UTILITY ERSEXENT THeK FuonT LoT. To sw. BS& Puce. GhRBSCE eoccEcTIow BE ESTASUISHED 4 P op, — Location wre Wave TO TRAFFIC «=ENCINEELING DY, THE 20' AccESS 4 STILITy EASEMENT § stout Be PAVED wiITH ASPHALT /4¢'TO 16‘ par WwiyTH 17s ENTIRE CEWCTH To PlovipE= Access Fok. EMELGEVCY VEMICLES . MEMORANDUM _ PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE 10/17/77 eROH FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT 1. A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential use. 2. All buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. SS JML/jeb or e | SS mw 8 re TA LU EPEES nee OR OR oe ete ee erotic i a . ere ou Yee aot ice SVBAABE | | egemeee: ak. 7) Wor 4029 ecco ‘EASEMENT WHEREAS, George H. Scott Sr. and Rath Scott,his wife, and Carl L. Dale and Vera M, Dale, his wife, and Olga Repetowski, a widow, all of King County, Washington, are the owrers of: oO . . . The North 20 feet of Lots 19, 20 and 21, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. j - and WHEREAS: Jom J. Lissman and June M, Liesman, his wife, of King County, ‘Washington, ere the comers of: ‘ta = 3 lots 22, 23 and the West half of Lot 24, Block 2, Earlington according to ' plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. _ and WEEFEAS, Carl L. in, and Vora M, Dale, his wife, are the owers of: The East half of lot 24, and all of lots 25 and 26, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. and WHERGAS, George H. Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott, his wife, are the owners of: lot 27 and the West half of Lot 28, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. and WHEREAS, Olga Repetowski, a widow, is the owner of: The North 120 feet of the East half of Lot 28 and the North 120 feet of lot 29, all in Block 2 of Earlington, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and,. each conveys to the other parties to this agreement, a perpetual casement ‘for purposes of ingress and ogress and utilities to and from their respective tracts, the said easement to be 20 feet in width, being the North 20 feet of Iots 19 to the West line of the East half of Jot 28 inclusive, and to extend from Earlington Street in an easterly direction to the westerly line of said Tot 19, and thence continuing in an easterly direction 20 feet in width to the West line of the East half of Lot 28, and the termirms of the easement, The said North 120 feet of the East half of Lot 23 and the North 120 feet of lot 29, shall have access for ingress and egress and utilities to said caserent right of way. . Pape ore es Se s s 95 Se Ap g a r ¢. Ae eK ae ta t e ee De PS R ER O T A N ie gl i e y ate en Ce e PT S t v5 yy <8) ot } Se i c e s Po t s . we e a #2 3 4 be e n . Leary, iv hadi erry, ORT INTER FOP ee Free an TIS pg TER ry Adrien aN dasored wees CAA Le Bed SORT Re Ce a ok ea OE is oy apt; eaten: pee onal Sean are cing? Se PAPIINE GUE AAONORIR Gea aA eee eT TOT UA TOS Tema re SELON Cap ats dean wt he oat] Ee FO ER ere eure a mee a sat Re so Neate oe 4 ' ve Bea) Dre oe a Pau a a 4529. nce 550 ae Tbe cost of peep of this casement shall. be equally: bane by the respective pares hereto, their: heirs, successors and aasleos in title, ot . * 7 rs 4 rey oe 4 eee oh See” Tis sball be deemed as a’ covenant running with the land, , IN WITNESS WHERSOF, the parties hereto, have hereunto set their hands and seals this Awd day of aie em _f pte tool » heat Ly, Lal : a all : STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me John J. Lissman, June M, Jdssman, Carl L, Dale, Vera M, Dale, George H. Scott Sr., Rath Scott and Olga Repetowskt to ne Jocam: He be Bhs dniiivilinws deserted Jn and whe executed the within ani foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under ry hand and official seal this An nad day of Linear. » 1964. eee, : Vanilli) Cab va) e%, - Notary Public in amd for tha State of z Washington, residing at Renton Vo s " e ay a t % E s WG il ne wr *. - cy aS oer pe, D ; on Keo neg 4 Was 127im : . of pte le. Spree Poelly Oe = ROBERT A. MORRIS, County Auditor 2 7 eateries et hay NERROO N99 8 Steed > Pea. eh eit Late ts ria spouted 5 erga leteak AOR Trak FeTCURS, PENNS EMU AS ACER ER AAU SL Pa l e n 3 OP T Pe e RO W S Oa AA P A VR PE A S Aw OO O Fe s a! ST i ee VI E L ON AK Ok e ro e 4 4 .STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING hss I, EDWARD J. LOGAN, Director of Records and Elections, King County, State of Washington, and ex-oflicic Recorder of Deeds, and the legal keeper of records hereinafter mentioned, in and for said County, do hereby certify th: attached to be a true and correct copy of @2........ BASCOM ee cccccecececceccennnnmesssesoununtuusuecsesesunnsesanesessnsennauesese sessuveesessnuessesessenuuesesenesuaneseesesensnseccesssnsesceesnesee AUGTtOR'S ROC, F573 As recorded in this office in Vol...4929...of....- D&C oo ccccccccassnneseeessessseneesesseenueeesseeen Page.& 989-590 | or as filed in this office under File No.............22..22.:-.2:eseeeeeeeee WITNESS my hand and official seal this....... ist. day a December nc ccccccsscsssesssesssen 619.24 / ae By. A202 LES Sreainnenmmnasnyp ATELY N° = 6575 axa h VOM 12-69-1507 Gt ae Aaa I SHORT PLAT AND EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS; Application No. 088-77 and E-089-77; application for two-lot short plat approval and exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty foot easement road; property located in the Vicinity of SW 3rd Pl, approx. midway between Earlington Ave SW & Stevens Ave SW APPLICANT __ Richard and Arlene Ross TOTAL AREA_ + .3 Acre PRINCIPAL ACCESS | S.W. 3rd Place ! EXISTING ZONING _R-1 EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE _ Residential COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Single Family Residential COMMENTS STOP STOP STOP STOP © TOP! DOCUMENTS UNDER THIS NOTICE HAVE BEEN MICROFILMED. DO NOT REMOVE NOTICE FROM FILE. NEW FILING SHOULD BE ADDED ON TOP OF NOTICE. PAGES REMOVED UNDER THE NOTICE FOR COPYING MUST BE RETURNED TO THE SAME PLACE UNDER THE NOTICE. ST OP! STOP STOP STOP- STOP 4 cd ae . QUIT CLuIM DEED S¢ -086-7% THiS INDENTURE WITNESSETH: That w¢, I, JOHN GRUHALLA, Executor of the estate “of Vera Dale, deceased, who was the executrix of the estate of Carl L. yi Dale, deceased , of King County, State of Washington, for and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further -consideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other a public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and *. being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 gt. of Lots 19, 20 and 21 Block 2 of the Plat of Earkington as : neconded in the book of plats, volume 14, page 7, records of King County 5 Washington. , Dec 14 12 so PHT? RECORDED KC RECORDS 3 EZ TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. FF WITNESSETH our hands and seals this 075 day of OI = ,; 1977. FILED for, Record ISEXCISE T"X NOT REQUIRED ) ay (SEAL) ae Rec ads UiviSiOn ohn Gruhalla By... eo ~<=., Deputy (SEAL) STATE OF WASHINGTON) ., COUNTY OF KING ) ) 1) Ry Ji Meins ra x » a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certify that on this 25C day of (ected », 19_2y_, personally appeared before ine : to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledge that ht . Signed and sealed the same as ma : q free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposos therein mentioned. Ii] WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Lees B St Residing at sated sah nae bili sii a, tail saith ts diel na ta i intl ok shins betel re ~ pR B I AO E T R A E E . BEE A EO E RB se a m e n \O F 2 , , 7 # 7 9 2 5 Er e , (Y e me Loomw COZ a wo e ° ec —_ - . ~, o- ‘ ’ _ ° ee ee ” Ce wo ? Cc , i 2 = 4 t Pi ae se Pa l l * ao te oF ne ? Jo o s a Sw o t ue oe : o lo e tl fo e és ’ 1 { : { t J { CV v o r i { = sh e s Se y ro dy ce . *% os e ! J ° Av eo wl 3. 4 oS ' ~~ - bax N ~~ » ‘ ay J . al . . v » ' J Pd AF FAG Veco > ~- bs \ . . ~- . >» » - . - x . YR S 1O L 24 3 VO T O Sa r si f t ) Wd W ta i # PI V O T TH 0 7 \ Ba LD S "A I O H I O SD Dyes 42? Pe ~~ N i} ft 7 ‘ . _ PO 8 O F L Z I B L SS A {S e AS te ; ne bs \ a jue Ae | 4 : ) : . QUIT CLAIM 4 THIS INDENTURE WITWESSETH: That we, J0/" J. Lissman and June M. Liveman (his wefel | of King County, State of Washington, for and in Consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Doller to us in hand paid and in further consideration of the general public welfare and the special benefits accuring to therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of hasten: a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 £t. of Lots 22 and 23 and northerly 20 ft. of west one-hal{ of Lot 24 akf in Block 2 of the pkat of Earkington, as recorded in | Volume 14, page 7, records of King County, Washington ahic deed is not to sa evfective -at'l at least 14 feet of paving is comoleted and grading wore i. aone, #11 to norms] standards of City of uanton, ane iv not so ding vithin one year from dute of this deed, this deed shal! be null :nd void. This deed is given on the condition tht tre city of centon will not approve subdivision or coneti:vet on Of Surther improveneat. upon lots 46, 16, 17, 1G, Zc, 24, 30 abt G6, Aoee z, ies be Volume 14 o? we] ic, p ge 7, using thie deeded right of way <3 the onl: caeveloped } legel success. Violation of this condi tion will result in automatic reverter of this propsit,: > t i Ox their seuseoee: gore in {ntere.t 8 if toie doad hd never bien er: ated. DE C - 1 4 - 7 8 ; 00 2 9 9 78 1 2 1 4 0 8 0 3 LS T B RF TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our hands and seals this god » 19.2P. =i ee ii a E P Re Be IS EXCISE TAX NOT PO CU RED ing Co. Racord3 Division a and acknowledge that aa Sr ap 5 free and voluntary theta for the uses and purposes there ° | Di KGZOEA GREP, T have heveusto, aot tay Reatigge A ftimed ay oTaigh Seal My day and Ros this certificate first above written, ie Po e 78 1 2 1 4 0 8 0 3 Q %\ | ZF é fe c n e oe OA S . SL =a rr S ~s, wa ‘i: % “ wy ‘s i p. ON . *° r( qs aes hy ae NAY ‘ alt v ; . Me . o <> oe “i WN s ee a a iy *. Se C so8 { “su r S_« \ » es c t ay ‘ hd ‘ ma ak \) a SS - anes oe ~ ef ~ A y my we ~ re) SB N Br o d PL A C E oO QUIT CLRIM DEED ie O88 -2 3! 3 . 0 0 THIS DYDENTURE WT 'NESS*TH: That we, George H, Scott, St. & Ruth Seott, hes ut fe; ay , of Kirg County, State of Washington, for and in S=consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further consideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, *3a municipal corporation of the State of ‘ashington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and ™ being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: iB Nortnerty 20 §t. of Lots 19, 20 and 21 Block 2 of the Plat of Eankington as recernded in the book of plats, volume 14, page 7, records of King County Washington. , DE C - 1 4 - 7 8 . 00 2 9 8 78 1 2 1 4 0 8 0 Bec 14 (2 soPK'72 RECORDED KC RECORDS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described prenises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our nands and seals this 43 JS_day of SI Oe 7 19 78 . 5 TAX NOT RFQUIRED FILED for Record at Request > fay 3. Try ON Ley Pecd cath (884s) Bith Soe (SEAL) 1% EXC! STA 2 OW COUNTY OF KENS - MARK WwW. Owen » a Notary Public in and for the said State, du hereby certify tnat on this Q23°¢ day of » 1 78 » personally appeared before in Geoese Yl. Scott Ano oth Sc off to me kmown to be the individual ¢ de Serabed in and who executed the, within instrument, and acknowledje that _ Signed an om sealed the same as Har free and volu nLary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. f TN WITNESS WHSREOF, J have hereunto set my hand ang a ftined, official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. x Sse | ‘nahh Notury Public in and Por the atest Washington Te py Residing at ELGi A). » in. Seid County. 2 S -O%8- 37 QUIT CLAIM DEED " PHIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH: That we, KENNETH W. WILLTAMS AND 2 Hel A. Willi (HIS WIFE) a ———EEEEE , of Kirg county, State of Washington, for and in onsideration of the sum of One ($1.90) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further onsideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us herefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other Spublic uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and ‘Seeing in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 §t. of Lots 25, 26 and the north erly 20 kt. of east - Lot 24, Block 2 of the plat of Earkington as recorded in the book of br "i volume 14, page 7 records of King County, Washington. , This deed is not to be effective untii! at least 14 feet of paving is completed and grading work is done, all to normal standards of City of Renton, and if not sO done within one year from date of this deed, this deed shall be null and void. “1 U - 7 8 §, 0 0 2 9 6 7e 1 2 1 u 0 g p g ol s ! This deed is given on the condition that the City of Renton will not approve subdivision or construction of further improvements upon lots 15, 16, 17, 18, 33, 34, 35 and 36, Block 2, Earlington, Volume 14 of Plats, page 7, using this deeded right of way as the only developed legal access. Violation of this condition will result in automatic reverter of this property to the grantors or their successors in interest as if this deed had never been granted. Bi Bec 14 12 so PMT! RECORDED KC RECORBS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its Successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our aands and seals this Zit day of ()e z+. 2, 1978 . Ce ae FILED ppt ea g Reypst ot é ’ . i “ | ie “QUIRED d (SEAL) F a3 Division ; Deputy [Ue ea STATE OF WASHINGTON) a COUNTY OF KING ) Ds The AM Mm ‘ [Usk » a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certify that on this 2Ppre day of _ frets. 19_78 _, personally appeared before me A Save7 Hy Ws we ber Amys exh HRLEY 2. Brets agus to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledge that LHR Signed and sealed the same as Kies free and Noluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. iit SS hagkor, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the , hin th Sy/gertificate first above written. oars) 4 ae) f RyoTAay a | Vonvares 2 / Corr, Mn LOA. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington ee a Residing at Xen in said County. ek :; WITNESSES: rene? ia d se TR I E LE S SF PI Bs sa l a |. ye | QUJT CLaIM DEED . ? THIS INDENTURE WT"NESSETH: That we, S@OUSMXKXOSSHEKKSAXXK RHEM NCEE XH KRGE ; ae WHNEXIKX DREK HX XNA MRE KAKO and Olga Repetowski (Konsevage) | 4 ane , of King County, State of Washington, for and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar to us in hand paid and in further @.. consideration of the general public welfare ard the special benefits accuring to us we therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, —! a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other — . public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and mm. being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 §t. of Lots 19, 20 and 21 Bkock 2 of the Pkat of Earington as recorded in the book of plats, volume 14, page-7, records of King County, Washington. Dec 14 12 us PM’ TE RECORDED KC RECORDS TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. Wien day of Cova ‘ 1y97y. r,Recofd at Request oi OT REQUIRED Wy Av Ort eereg ¢ (SEAL) 1% EXCIS® Bae ee de Division Olga//Repetowski (Konsevage) WITNESSETH our hands and seals this ,~77/ Sus Go SEAL By ma Deputy, ae TNYSSES STATE OF WASHINGTON) oe COUNTY OF KING ~~ ; Reed / a4 fe Me a2 vale fee » a Notary Public in and for the said State, do hereby certify that on this 27 day of Zu. ¥ ae 2f » personally appeared before me , TPITerTye. a to me known to be the i eae in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledge that of. Signed and sealed the same as’ ALY free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Ii] WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this cortificate first above written. Lee oT “3 if: Rs ie VEZ ra Lise Ms se, ho a, 1 Notary Public in and for the State, OF MAG LE on ey ae Residing at Lee Le ics - in € f) % ov c w — , | x . g & Fi l s ca r e n DE ey Te ee e | : La e : SC S — : — ti e s ae d — } .< . | 43 ° so e te as __ ia n ac t a | EA S EA # ta a l OL G A RE P E Te GE O R G E R . , SC O T T Se . 4 RU T H SO T (r s wr e ) CA R L LO M L E FV E E A MI M E (l i a n e ) : | AFB. Gal SE. Gal x : “" c 4 pe ° + by *@ or Se l ‘ Cs EA E PA G OI A : i ; J va s a? Pa . wo n t a A CZ ' - uU ‘ | Se te +0 -¢ i 5 oe “ ” eS . Fa i l ‘ y | | : BO . N N iy ot it ) sp e p ] ei ae eo y a | en t g at —~ - af § Ae ! ia t | te e F a ga s TS 6 y | | | ; ° ! | | | ‘ y | 4 ! | | | L [ GO . OD ; BW Bt PL A C E . 66 2 0 " C1 8 2 A « ~~ % ‘ . . St d z e 7° " So t = SS —_ , fas] — ed oo | me low ] & & = vt a 3 cd co ~ e Nm Oo Oo a | = —T ce > r—} ‘D>r UVoo-7E QUIT CLAIM “A THIS IMDENTURE WITWESSETH: That we, %. P. Ross and Artene Ross (his urge) King County, State of Washington, for and in soustdavation oF the sux of tae ($1.00) foliar %o us in band pais’ent in further consideration of the general public welfare and the special benefits accuring to us therefrom, do, by these presents grant, convey and quit-claim to the City of Renton, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, for street, alley and any other public uses and purposes, the following lots, pieces and parcels of land lying and being in said King County, State of Washington, and described as follows: Northerly 20 §t. of Lot 27 and the northerky 20 ft. of the west one-hal{ of Lot 28 Block 2 of the Pkat of Earlington as recorded in the book of plats Volume 14, page 7, records of King County, Washington Dec 14 (2 se PM'78 RECORDED KC RECORDS = TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said described premises unto the said City of Renton, its successor or successors for the use of the public forever. WITNESSETH our hands and seals this “<"— _day of | Lnaha » 19Zy. FILCD for a —_ TRECUIRED z (SEAL) ae 9 ne a 7! iSj ion : YL deputy Lhe Khoo (SEAL) COUNTY OF KING ai 7, s CO Lawrie » & Notary Public in and for the said State, z : day of ‘ , 19_2% 5 personally he ing ’ de Y: , 7 d the nstrument, ad deed, for the uses and purposes tant mentioned. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand end affixed my official seal the day andar, AB, oe certificate first above written, if “a 4 ry GiOH ey ey s/s on io Swot * ey) ~~» { st: ve Si e Z SO E BS Sy RE RO S er a i RO SN S TR E N Si t i ie tn Se p t we , ° OO -— — ~ ow io i t i e s Ce ee —e am e om on d b> me am om e 4 “FO. Gel 20° ce Si h EE IB N wi g af ie SI. Ss? | | l | | ar r eS ° 4 ay oe 9 3- 7 0 sl s “ aa d 4 7c Zo A # be GS v OL Y : \ te , ie 7 Ad ; N | X | e Ce te of : | 3 i ha es ee <8 | af 29 . 0 0 Y N 0 ¥a l i on y om , @ an on ) wr e ~Z “3 6 4 or n ? é -7 | - \ J wa t s ; / = a4 2 5 fo e ra or g s g a iz , t y | ' | | , | | BG O . OS D SW Gr d LA E ‘L O 8 O F L Z I 8 Z * Pity ar bad June 5, 1978 Monday, CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OF COUNCIL CITY OFFICIALS IN ATTENDANCE PRESS MINUTE APPROVAL AUDIENCE COMMENT Smoke Detector Ordinance Planning and Development Report , James W. Dalpay Appeal of Examiner's Decision Rezone R-145-78 Union NE between NE 12th and NE Sunset Blvd. Remanded Back to Hearing Examiner R. P. Ross Appeal Examiner's Reconsideration Decision 12/9/77 Short Plat 088-77 and Except. 089-77 Area of 516 SW 3rd Place S200 P.M. RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Council Chambers Municipal Building MINUTES Mayor C. J. Delaurenti led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and called the regular meeting of the Renton City Council to order. EARL CLYMER, Council President; GEORGE J. PERRY, PATRICIA M. SEYMOUR-THORPE, RICHARD M. STREDICKE, BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, CHARLES F. SHANE AND THOMAS W. TRIMM. CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, Mayor; GWEN MARSHALL, Finance Director; DEL MEAD, City Clerk; LAWRENCE WARREN, Acting City Attorney; GORDON Y. ERICKSEN, Planning Director; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Director; DONALD CUSTER, Administrative Assistant; JOHN BUFF, Police Representative; RICHARD GEISSLER, Fire Chief; SHARON GREEN, Personnel Director; JOHN WEBLEY, Parks and Recreation Director. GREG ANDERSON, Renton Record Chronicle MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL APPROVE MINUTES OF MAY 22, 1978 AS PREPARED. CARRIED. James Van Osdel1, 3030 NE 10th St., Manager of Sunset View Apart- ments, requested Council reconsider Ordinance #3222 which requires installation of smoke detectors in occupancies rented, leased or let. Mr. Van Ausdal explained problems anticipated with require- ment that tenants furnish maintenance of the unit and asked for reconsideration in order to comply with RCW 59.18 Landlord Tenant Act. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, MR. VAN AUSDAL'S REMARKS BE REFERRED TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Due to interested persons being present, Committee Chairman Perry presented Planning and Development Committee report re James W. Dalpay Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision of 4/17/78 Sunset Rezone R145-78, noting review and consideration with applicant and his attorney, Robert McBeth, present. The report noted the applicant agreed to amend his application to provide for a less intensive use of the southern portion of the parcel to provide buf- fering between proposed B-1 rezone on the northern portion and the single family residential zoning to the South. The committee recommended that the Council remand this matter to the Hearing Examiner for reconsideration of this application as amended. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND SHINPOCH, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE RECOM- MENDATION. CARRIED. (See later action - Correspondence. ) The Planning and Development Committee Chairman Perry presented the following report: The Planning and Development Committee has considered the record and the Hearing Examiner's written decision, findings and conclusions R.P. Ross Appeal of Examiner's reconsidera- tion decision of 12/9/77 re Short Plat 088-77 and Exception 089-77. The Committee has considered the hardship imposed upon the appli- cant by the provisions of the Short Plat Ordinance in that other surrounding neighbors have been able to short plat their property without providing the access required by the present Short Plat Ordinance. Applicant has obtained alternative access to the property in accordance with the conditions imposed by the decis- sion of the Hearing Examiner. recommended that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner and recommended approval of the application for short plat and exception under the same conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner, and further conditioned upon delivery to the City of deeds of dedication to the alternative access way. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDA- TION. CARRIED. The Planning and Development Committee Renton City Council 6/5/78 Page 2 OLD BUSINESS Transportation Committee Report Parkwood South Access Six-Year Street and Arterial Program Public Hearing 6/19/78 Signalization Contract Award Federal Aid/FAM Project Ways & Means Committee Report Bond Sale LID #306 Seattle Northwest Securities Publication of Mans Legal Publications Questioned Community Services Committee Report Proposed Agreement Interurban Trail Riverside Drive Proposed Closure Public Meeting 6/19/78 Transportation Committee Chairwoman Shinpoch presented report regarding Parkwood South Sub-Division Plat and recommended that the Administration be directed to discuss with the Developer the feasibility of a direct route from Division #3 to 116th Ave. SE rather than the proposed connection to Edmonds Dr. SE. The report also requested the Administration report back to the Transporta- tion Committee. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE REPORT. CARRIED. The committee report recommended that a public hearing be set for June 19, on the Six-Year Street Program. Chairwoman Shinpoch noted the plans and maps are available with the Public Works Department. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. The Transportation Committee report recommended acceptance of the low bid by Signal Electric, Inc. in the amount of $101,945.50 for signalization of Duvall Ave. WE and NE Sunset Blvd along with NE 4th St.and Monroe Ave NE, as recommended by the Public Works Department. The report noted award will be contingent upon receipt by the City of an "Authorization to Award" from the Federal and State agencies. MOVED BY SHINPOCH, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT. Councilwoman Thorpe inquired re inclusion of provisions for prevention of cost overruns, Public Works Director Gonnason noted precautions taken. MOTION CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented committee re- port recommending that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign an agreement with Seattle Northwest Securities for the sale of $35,477.36 in bonds on LID #306 (Sanitary Sewers, area between Sunset Blvd. NE and FAI-405, north of NE 7th Street). MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT APPROVING SALE OF BONDS FOR LID #306. CARRIED. The Ways and Means Committee report recommended that the referral of 2/27/78 re publication of maps with legal descriptions requires no action by the Council as the Administration is studying the proposal. Councilman Stredicke called attention to legal publications stating building of condominiums and inquired as to location of 2020 Grant Ave. S., being advised by Planning Director Ericksen of location, northeast corner of intersection of Grant Ave. S and Puget Drive, West of Rolling Hills with no access to the north. Stredicke ob- jected to legal publications by attorneys and builders which appeared as City. Community Services Committee Chairwoman Thorpe presented report noting review of the proposed agreement for the Interurban Trail System and findings that it is consistent with present planning within the City and Green River Valley. The report noted funding for the trail would be from a federal grant of $320,000; staff con- cern for clarification noted and committee recommended the contract be referred to the Ways and Means Committee for review and recom- mendation. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN REPORT AND REFER AGREEMENT TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. The committee report noted review and meeting with residents of Riverside Drive area adjacent to Cedar River Trail, Phase III, and reported the following: (1) Riverside Drive is City-owned property deed to City in 1956 by the Commercial Waterway District and is not a dedicated street; (2) Only one residence has access solely to Riverside Drive, all other structures and properties have access to N. Ist St.; (3) Per City Attorney, rights of access have been established by the property owners through some years use as a street; (4) The City has the right to close or leave open as long as no property owner is landlocked, but decision should be made after public meeting for the purposes of allowing public comment. The report recommended referral back to Council for public meeting one enoa 6/19/78. MOVED STREDICKE, SECOND THORPE, CONCUR IN REPORT. A &% fe) THE CITY OF RENTON 7 z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON. WASH 98055 jo) — 2 CHARLES J. DELAURENT|, MAYOR @ PLANNING DEPARTMENT a 235-2550 "ap ue £0 sept January 26, 1978 MEMORANDUM Tus Planning and Development Committee FROM: Planning Department RE: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS SHORT PLAT Pursuant to the request for reconsideration of the Examiner's decision on this short plat, it has come to our attention that the title company has indicated that the subject site was divided into two lots in approximately 1927. This is new information, which was not presented during discussions with Mrs. Ross prior to the short plat submittal or at the public hearing. In any event, if this can be verified in writing by the title company, it renders further review of the short plat unnecessary. The two-lot plat would then be an existing non-conforming situation that occurred prior to the adoption of the Subdivision Ordinance. However, if this does not prove to be the case, and the cur- rent short plat application still applies, we must refer you to the previous recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Division, Engineering Division, and Fire Department (see attached). All these departments, together with the Planning Department, feel that there are reasonable alternatives that can be provided to allow short platting of the subject site while still providing adequate access per ordinance standards. The subject proposal was considered insufficient, given the availability of providing better access to the site and area. This becomes quite apparent upon field inspection of the site and present access situation. No alternative proposal to improve the present access situation was presented by the Rosses. An alternative solution can be attained, which would be con- sistent with the spirit of the law, the Hearing Examiner's decision, and departmental recommendations and allow for short platting of the subject site or other parcels in this area. This solution would be to establish a dedicated 20 foot right-of-way in lieu of the present private easement and improve it to a level acceptable by the City. (i.e., 14-16 foot pavement, excluding sidewalks, etc.). This Planning and Development Committee January 26, 1978 Page Two would spread the cost equitably to all property owners along the 20 foot right-of-way, rather than to each person who subdivides or builds a home (See Fire Department report with regard to 20 foot paving for home construction.). Any further platting and development to the north would then be subject to the same requirements, which would ultimately result in a 40 foot public right-of-way. This right-of-way would then be maintained by the City rather than at the cost of each owner. MLS:wr Attachments MEMORANDUM DATE: October 31, 1977 TO: Mike Smith, Planning Department FROM: Paul Lumbert, Traffic Engineering La e ar e ae SUBJECT: Richard § Arlene Ross Short Plat Ad ‘ The Traffic Engineering Division xecommends that access to the above short plat be made by a 40° minimum public right-of-way and provide f¥1l improvements which would help solve any future ingress or egress problems in this area. 4 r : { iI PL:ad oa AN S ' Re t e ty Me me l i e e d i n g Es al a e eb e n on t am tn e ed f MEMORANDUM TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT pate 10/17/77 FROM FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT 1. A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential use. 2. Alt buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that. 20- feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and.having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. SW JML/jeb St et n a ea l da n t e ai e le k i & ae te s 10(42/77 En gi mee ins Shoot plat (s seat recommended Sineztit Cacks aclag nate access and. wtel 45 Sev wi ce. xo Sh. 4tow th Le. - Rio Uniunes , | aie a GA Tne PROMENS “THAT Have To BE ResocveD — ARE WATER SEWNCE AND SEWER Seance To PasrartTy A Visw SHoucd 6E TXATENO DOUN CASEUENT, <r) ERLLING Tonal AUG SW poie/ OL PaviwoG UTILITY EXSEXGUT TK Fro SBS Puce , - G4arwece COoceEcToas Ve Te EE ESTASUYSED s THAFEIS =EnbemEELine OLY, . THE 20° AccESS £ TiuiTy EASEMENT srtouc Be PAVEO WITH ASPHALT "1¢'T 16" p00 WAOTM | ‘7s ENTIRE CEWCGTH To Plovig= Access Fok, | EMERG EC Y vEHWICCES . Lv Lot. To SW. LOCATION Lyne wa we e mies se Rea oy Or aenanaeenmameemaaieataimiia ee ot LOTS NIN TITTY Reyer Trey LES Re hy enn we Eee CHR TEN acta eee i ape. 00 EU SNE ee ONO, wim ote crane : 5 . ee * 2 A a go hye fs, a . % ee Re oe AY Pie West line of the East half of lot 28, and the terminus of the casement, - bi Tho said Merth 120 feat of the East. half of Lot 23 and the North 120 feet = ee Fi of lot 29, shall have access for ingress and egress and utilities to said a Rea . . > 3 a oaserent right of way. wo Peas ges. ; se TAT OS Ss, 3 < pry eps fe ee onan) N 4 . Pape ore - ae \ 4 “ 8) éo8, ' = Y et a | fc - 4 ic / EL 4 ) . - . eenree ere ey 4 "3 Aes ' ‘5 vs aout “d od 26 pep? a fi a ‘Y ‘ Sepia ehaaaratstd tote Sree mor emp teen menmensee rmentan ay rr PROT A eT et emery Sonia by ri On Duhihre sd aiF ca Sik was Draboelnt Sage) Ra cas el WA SIAL as lsu OOS ROSAS eo cad sale Se waseorn Wesea as hres Secs nen eoegoa Ssufainetas : TA R ° © sis = . S731131 5 « = Ne . “6 we ages a mdee 7 TWAOZ9 ced 7. > Ld oo! : Oo, fF : a2 WHE RSAS, Coorge H. Scott Sr. and futh Scott, his wife, ond Carl Le mle and ¥ ad Vora M. Palo, his wife, ond Olga Repetovskd, a widew, all of King County, Washington, are the ovrers of3 : Tho Nortb 20 foot of ints 19, 20 nret an, Block 2. Earlingten securing to plat thereof recorded in Volune 14 of Plato, Fage 7 records of King County, MASHER CeAs ; ~. aie VWwerreas: Jota a Tdosnan ant June Me Licaran, its wife, of Sine County, Washington, ere “the ownera of: a . “oe a “Lots. 22, 23 and tis Wost half of ot 24, Bloek 2, Earlington according to plat thoreof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, . ond WHIGAS, Carl Le hove and Vora M, ‘Dale, his wife, are the owners of: Tho East half of Lot 24, and all of Lots 25 and 26, Block 2, Barlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Pago 7, rocords of King County, Washington. . and WHEIEAS, Goorge H, Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott, his wifo, are the omora of: lot 27 ard tho West half of lot 28, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, reeords of King County, Washington. and WESITAS, Olga Repetowski, a widow, is the owner of: The North 120 foet of the East half of Lot 28 and tho North 120 feet of . Tot 29, all in Block 2 of Earlington, according te tho plat thercof recorded in Voluz ls of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, ard, . ay oach conveys to the other parties to this agreement, a perpetual oaserent ‘for purposes of ingress and ogress and utilities to and from thoir rospectivoe tracts, the said casement to bo 20 foet in width, being tho North 20 foot. of Ints 19 to the Wust lim of tho East half of Jot 28 dnelusive, and to oxtend Firms Farlingrton Street in an oasterly direction to ths wosterly line of said Tot 19, ara thenco continuing in an easterly direction 20 feot in width to the Nenty atryrrstaretyyns i Ginc. AR wer ce . a, ay waa eg a pe aap i ’ beet ‘ we ee nny Sone ere oa ie ne + Nome Vege a) each Leila phelidbbes Niall arg ; i he baie} het Deets! 0 tess cee ai oieten En “ “tygiersipaerer oS Lees tacel IS eT Te vee mere aa * Axe Epa Teee Ope re: heen cee : we 8 es ee i , ee Sy yy ion dint a b528. nS a = partics joreto, thetr- betrs, mucrecsara and assigas ip title, oo Par ee Ld wa "eo" o: fe ~; hia shal be destod a9 a’ covenant running with the land zr c . we at i ¢ one 4 : . — A ee ‘ . de == . ) . : tins, % ’ MAT Alta) oy hed L;, ws - } se / “. lt: , “yp & Th . Lot bee ft Gll f é, e ; Ly j : . i STAT. OF WASHINGTON) mf ) ss. BE. COUNTY OF KING ) : / On this day personally appecred tefere me John J, Lissman, June HM, Jissman, i Carl L, Dale, Vora M, Dale, Ceorge H. Scott Sr., Ruth Scott and Olgs Fopetawsid ! . . . 4 to we knoam to bo tho individuals deseribted Ln and who exocutod tho within and " j i " foreyoing instrunont, and acknowledged that they aigned the nane as their froe : “ and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mntiored. ; ; GIVEN under ry hand and official seal this » day of Fits < _» 1964. pega Ca Fs Mn, ‘ ‘ bee A. ul 1 Cal 0.) is ore % ' Notary Publie in ard for the Stato of ; Washington, residing at Penton vee , 7 Ww : tf ? Oo vf yp. | aac Magy weg 12 7fm~ NMG. Srrese Kaelhy i "ROBERT A. MORRIS, Comty Buditor jwe7: SELATAN a An 46 DARWEN rte i) BBialne ei °° enh yn cA ae ee eed Meee Pee rearees CAs hiatal A Hens Hid MEME cei parte : * " si fits Ys Aare GRRL OR) PCAN Lith Mel lates = a0 taste Waadsar aad notte weed Ne “4 4 _. STATE OF WASHINGTON } COUNTY OF KING 5S. . I, EDWARD J. LOGAN, Director of Records nod Eleetions, King County, State of Washington, and ex-of “: Recorder of Deeds, and the Iegal keeper of records hereinafter mentioned, in and for said County, do hercby certify ~ attached to be a true and correct copy of m........F ASEMOME occ ccceccccaccuccsecessesesecsaseesvess iuguiemenpemennesnuese ieee Auditor's Ree. #5731131 — a oo As recorded in this office in Vol...4:922.....0f.......D2eds Page. 8...989-59! or ns filed in this office under Filo No..........csscccseccossssoeseseorees . WITNESS my hand and official seat this......25¢........4 December 19.2 SOOO SEO OAOOEA OEE EDOS OEE ET Meee eee SEDO OEEHSPOOEHODOEEH SOOO EEEOOSOERE i} Peeeeees ' AN , . feetions ¢ yp BYR LEEK LEZ? Fs eetionn lh ee Pi ts J ry | N® = 6575 on ; VOM 12-69-1507 Swan _ ; e a, - , cal - w ay ! — 2% a. : i i be,! é : - ‘| { 7 : 4 ae 1 . z te, + ; 6 \ of be OY fh 7G Fg i. © _ \ ( OL 7 / Age C7 a P i ey : ; MEMORANDUM TO: Rick Beeler, Hearing Examiner December 8, FROM: Lawrence J, Warren, City Attorney Re: Richard §& Arlene—Rass - Request for Reconsideration - Short Plat-#088-77 and E-089-77 K —_ ~~ Dear Rick: This note is to confirm our conversation of Wednesday, December 7th, concerning the above captioned matter. At that time I indicated to you that your letter on the reconsideration correctly stated the law, in my opinion. If you have any furthe questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Lawrence J. Warren LJW:nd ec: Mayor Council President Del Mead 1377 Vv & 2 THE CITY OF RENTON aT - MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 — 2 CHARLES J. DELAURENT! , MAYOR e DELORES A. MEAD g CITY CLERK "ED sepr™ December 23, 1977 APPEAL FILED BY RICHARD & ARLENE ROSS Re: Appeal of Examiner's Reconsideration Decision- dated 12/9/77, R. P. Ross, et ux, Short Plat 088-77 and Exception 089-77 To Parties of Record: Appeal of Land Use Hearing Examiner's reconsideration decision has been filed with the public records office this date, along with the proper fee of $25.00, pursuant to Title 4, Ch. 30, City Code, as amended. The City Code requires the appeal must be set forth in writing. The written appeal and all other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee. Please contact the Council Secretary, 235-2586, for date and time of the committee meetings if so desired. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above-referenced appeal will be considered by the Renton City Council at its regular meeting of January 9, 1978 at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Second Floor, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave. S. Yours very truly, CITY OF RENTON PO Dice, Ef fA Maxine E. Motor Deputy City Clerk MEM: jt fs > £ a fe) THE CITY OF RENTON 7 Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 S ef it 5 CHARLES J. DELAURENT!, MAYOR @ LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER % & L. RICK BEELER, 235-2593 "4p ws ED septt December 23, 1977 Members, Renton City Council Renton, Washington RE: File No. Short Plat 088-77 and Exception No. 089-77, Richard and Arlene Ross Short Plat and Exception Applications; Appeal of Examiner's Decision. Dear Council Members: On December 23, 1977 Mr. and Mrs. Ross filed an appeal of the Examiner's decision to not reconsider his previous decision to not approve their short plat and exception application. Attached are pertinent documents. The Examiner's decision of November 16, 1977 was to disapprove the applications. A request for reconsideration was submitted on November 30, 1977, and was subsequently denied by the Examiner in a a letter dated December 9, 1977. Because of the legal issues involved the Examiner in a memorandum of December 5, 1977 requested review by the City Attorney, which was was answered in a memorandum of December 8, 1977. If you require additional information regarding this application, please contact the Examiner. Sincerely, gered. ick-Beeler Hearing Examiner Attachments cc: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti ys po vib We e Se eeerivtd — atrak ) ad 516 S.W. 3rd Place oe v of WEE Renton, Washington 98055 ee cis . HICK UW! > gene's CHIME Gus Nee, we December 23, 1977 Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti and Renton City Council c/o City Clerk Renton, Hashtagton 98055 yon Yyrigk BE BiAaine ss pee ¢! . GR, Bf Reconsideration, Short Plat No. 088-77 Exception No. E-089-77 Dear Mayor Delaurenti and Renton City Council; An appeal to the City Council is requested in the case referred to above. On October 25, 1977, a hearing was held regarding approval of our application for a two lot short plat and exception to subdivision ordinance. On November 16, 1977, a decision was rendered to deny the application. A brief was prepared and a Request for Reconsideration applied for. An answer to this denying, reconsideration was issued on December 9, 1977, also the application for exception. All records of prior action are incorporated herein. The Hearing Examiner, Rick Beeler, states in his letter of December 9, 1977, paragraph 2, that..."without being granted an exception your proposal could not be approved...". We are well aware that the proposal no longer meets the city code, this is the reason why we have requested the Exception. If it was our contention that our proposal met with the requirements we would not have taken this approach. Throughout the letter Mr. Beeler refers to a 40 foot road and an L.1I.D. The purpose of this entire procedure has been to obtain an exception to the ordinance. As explained in detail on page 7 of our Request for Reconsideration, an Ly bas Each of already 20 feet 40 foot what we vehicle is not a viable alternative. the three other owners of the easement road is free to use his land without the loss of an additional of land or the expense of an L.I.D. Although a road is ideal, 20 feet is definitely sufficient for propose. Should the occasion arise for an emergency to use the road it would be necessary to back it out. Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Renton City Council Page -2- December 23, 1977 While this is not as convenient as a turn around, it certainly shouldn't be the basis for refusing us the use of our land. There has not been any evidence to show that granting us an exception would be...determental to the public welfare... nor can the public possibly gain by the loss we will experience if refused the use of our land. "Investment prospects" and "property investments" are referred to in Mr. Beeler's letter. We are not speculators, contractors, or investors. We have owned and lived on this piece of property for 13 years; we like the area, schools, neighbors, and city and wish to utilize our property and remain where we are. If time had permitted it would have been interesting to have analyzed the last 20 exceptions granted in Renton; to determine who they were tranted to and how they could have been less...detrimental to the public welfare... than what we propose to do. On page 2 of the Hearing Examiners decision of December 9, 1977, he states that "Perhaps another alternative is available, but none has been raised at this point..." We are now, and always have been open to suggestions. If there are options of which we are unaware, is it not the duty of the Planning Commission or Hearing Examiner to enlighten us? We didn't approach them as adversaries, but for assistance in obtaining a short plat in order to personally utilize our property. Our request to the Council is that all of the records enclosed be thoroughly evaluated, the property viewed, and a decision made thatreflects the rights of the individual unless a proper showing can be made that the public welfare would be adversely affected by allowing such an exception. Respectfully Submitted, v4 . 4 As . , i) y Me toed file haha! fo free Mr. and Mrs. Richard P. Ross 4 oF Me, A Es } THE CITY OF RENTON OG ~N4 Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 a wil & CHARLES J. DELAURENT!, MAYOR @® LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER Op, & December 9, 1977 L. RICK BEELER, 235-2593 7€0 sepv™ Mr. & Mrs. Richard Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 RE: Request for Reconsideration; Short Plat No. 088-77 & Exception No. E-089-77 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Ross: Your request for reconsideration by the Examiner was reviewed together with the record of this application. A re-examination of the record and pertinent sections of city ordinances was conducted and the Examiner's decision of November 16, 1977 reconsidered. This reconsideration reinforced the earlier conclusion that your situation is fairly unique due mainly to the passage of the existing Subdivision Ordinance before your subdivision request was submitted. The Subdivision Ordinance rendered nonconforming the 20-foot access easement serving your property and three other properties. Otherwise, your proposed subdivision is Similar to the short plats accomplished on the other properties having access to the easement. But without being granted an Exception your proposal could not be approved with anything less than a 40-foot access easement/street. And this is the issue of your request for reconsideration and was the main issue of the Examiner's original decision as the proposed configuration of the property was acceptable. Property rights and privileges are vested for a particular property by filing an application to exercise the rights and privileges available under ordinances in effect at that time. In order for the rights and privileges prior to the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance to be vested, your application would have to have been submitted prior to passage of that ordinance. This would apply to any property. Any properties that do not conform to that ordinance become noncomforming and could not be further subdivided except in conformance with that ordinance. In your situation, this means that your property could not be subdivided today in the same manner as prior to 1971 and that the point of reference for rights and privileges shifted to those established in 1971. All properties, therefore, enjoy the same rights and privileges, while some property Owners were able to accomplish subdivisions differently prior to 1971 (Section 9~-1109. 1.B.). Testimony given at the public hearing indicated that the insufficient width (20 feet) of the easement created problems for safe and adequate access for private, commercial or public safety vehicles. A width of 40 feet per the Subdivision Ordinance was necesSary to insure safe and adequate access, and the easement required paving and a cul-de-sac. For this reason, the Examiner found that the Exception, if granted, would be "...detrimental to the public welfare..." (Section 9-1109.1.C.), and that a 40-foot easement would not. The problems of the condition and width of the existing easement would be increased by allowing additional sole access by additional parcels. Mr. & Mrs. Richard Ross Page Two December 9, 1977 Turning attention to Section 9-1109.1.A. and the issue of "...reasonable use or development of...land...", the Examiner's opinion was that the use of the property prior to 1971 was single family. This use continued unchanged after 1971. It was not "...special physical circumstances or conditions..." that modified the use of the property. The investment prospects of an additional lot were changed, not use, as a result of the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance, which is the common risk factor in every property investment. Your circumstances were not physical but created by an ordinance revision which required additional width of the access to the property. Access remains via a dedicated public street (S.W. 3rd Place) to your property; therefore, the issue is not lack of access. Unfortunately, you are the victim of timing of not only your application but also of the ordinance revision. In terms of philosophy of the purpose of the Subdivision Ordinance, it is clear that the application is to any proposed subdivision of property regardless of size. The specified width of access serving the created parcels was specified for reasons of safety and adequacy for use by all vehicles, not just private automobiles. With this in mind, the Exception process was created to allow deviation in unusual, specific circumstances which did not violate this purpose. Accordingly, it was found that the proposed Exception was contrary to this purpose. Provision could be made on your pronosed parcel for the 40-foot easement; however, the entire easement abutting the other properties remains deficient and a part of the problem. Only by an L.I.D. for improvements and providing 40 feet of access can the problems be solved, based upon the record available. Perhaps another alternative is available, but none has been raised at this point, and any alternative would have to be reviewed in a public hearing. Upon completing this review it was concluded that an error of law was not committed or satisfactorily substantiated. However, a good presentation was given in your request of your position and arguments for the proposal. Therefore, basically a difference of opinion occurred, which is understandable. But the Examiner's opinion remains unchanged from the decision of November 16, 1977 based on the available record. Respect fully yours, ala ““\ 9 a 2 N\ . oo L. Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner LRB : mp cc: Larry Warren, City Attorney Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director é @ MEMORANDUM TO: Rick Beeler, Hearing Examiner December 8, 1977 FROM: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Re: Richard € Arlene Ross - Request for Reconsideration - Short Plat #088-77 and E-089-77 Dear Rick: This note is to confirm our conversation of Wednesday, December 7th, concerning the above captioned matter. At that time I indicated to you that your letter on the reconsideration correctly stated the law, in my opinion. If you have any furthe questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me. ee wt pik £99 “ft , is Feria Lawrence J. Warren LJW:nd cc: Mayor Council President Del Mead MEMORANDUM DATE 12-5-77 TO __Larry Warren, City Attorney FROM _L. Rick Beeler, Hearing Examiner SUBJECT _Richard & Arlene Ross Request for Reconsideration: Short Plat #088-77 ang E-089-77 This letter is to Mr. and Mrs. Ross regarding reconsideration. Please review to confirm my presentation of the legal issues. I believe I am correct, but I'd like your comment prior to publication. > To: Office of Land Use Hearing Examiner From: Richard and Arlene Ross Re: Request for Reconsideration of Decision File No: Short Plat 088-77 E-089-77 Dear Sir: We hereby request reconsideration of the decision rendered on November 16, 1977 by L. Rick Beeler on the above matter. We feel that errors of judgment and law were made in the decision denying the exception to the short plat. In this report we will comment on the Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner; list the action taken in antici- pation of eventually building on the property; discuss our interpretation and understanding of the City Ordinance; and explain why we feel that an exception should be granted in this case. RECEIVED CIFY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER NOV 301977 Mere PM 7181911090121 112131415,6 ai Introduction Background Facts Analysis of Preliminary Report of Hearing Examiner Analysis of Examiner's Report and Recommendation of Renton Subdivision Ordinance Conclusion I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Renton Subdivision Ordinance is twofold (Section 9-1101 (2)): 1) To protect the interests of the public; 2) To protect the interests of the vproverty owners; The interests of the public to be protected are enumerated as: a) protection of public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics; and b) provisions for wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and thoroughfares. It is conceded that under special circumstances, interests of property owners must be subordinate to public interests. This is not the case here. This application affects a small nortion of the "public", all of whom are property owners who will be affected hereby. No violation of public interest is present, while the apvlicants are adversely affected "property owners". In such a case, the purpose clause mandates that the interests of property owners shall be protected. Section II sets forth steps and expenses taken and incurred by applicants in reliance upon the continuity in City Ordinances. The present ordinance undermined these steps to the detriment of the applicants. Strict application of the ordinance will serve none of the enumerated public interests to be protected. However, without the granting of the exception requested, the property owners (who are to be protected) will suffer undue hardship in that: 1) Applicants are being deprived of the anticipated and reasonable use and development of their property (§9-1109 (1) (A)). 2) Applicants are being deprived of property rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity (adjoining lots) and under similar circumstances. With this in mind, it is submitted that errors of law, fact, and judgment were present in the decision rendered November 14, 1977. II. BACKGROUND FACTS In 1964 a 20 foot easement for the purvose of utilities and ingress and egress was established to provide access to lots 22 through 29, located in the vicinity of S.W. 3rd Place between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.VW. Those involved in developing this were Mr. and Mrs. John Lissman, Mr. and Mrs. Carl Dale, Mr. and Mrs. George Scott, and Olga Repetowski. In 1965 we purchased the property owned by the Scotts. Our understanding at the time of the purchase, and from talking to subsequent owners of the proverties bordering the easement over the years, was to allow for eventual development of each of these lots. Mr. and Mrs. Ken Williams purchased the East half of lot 24 and all of lots 25 and 26 originally owned by Mrs. Vera Dale and, in 1973, built a home on this site. Steps that we have taken over the years toward the same eventual goal on our property, lots 27 and the west half of lot 28, are: 1. Payment of 1/4 of the taxes on the 20 foot easement since 1965. 2. Obtaining a release from the mortgage company of the property that we are presently attempting to shortplat. This was done in 1975 and resulted in our owning the back half of our property outright and owing a mortgage on the house and front half of the lot. 3. Recording the division with King County. Since this time we have paid the taxes separately on the two vieces of property. 4. Meeting with the owners of the other three lots involved in this easement, planning the develonment of the road, and paying 1/4 of the cost of the same. 5. Granting an easement through our property in order that the Williams could provide their property with utilities from S.W. 3rd Place. In lieu of payment for this easement, all utilities were provided, underground, to our property also. 6. Hiring a surveyor to provide the City with the necessary drawings for the short plat. 7. Applying for a short plat and exception to the Ordinance. We feel that our strongest argument on this subject is that we are not attempting to create a road that does not meet existing city codes. We are merely applying for ner- mission to use the road that met the code at the time that it was created. The road was created and the above-mentioned steps taken in good faith that new rules and regulations should be prospective only and not take effect retroactively. EAL Analysis of Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner Planning Dept. Analysis - 0.5. The suggestion was made that if the road was permanently surfaced the entire distance to the west 1/2 of lot 28 that possibly limited use for access (total potential lots served approximately 4) would be acceptable. We have indicated our willingness to comply with this. Planning Dept. Analysis - 0.6. Concedes that there is no other reasonable means of providing access to the proposed short plat. Any other questions raised in this analysis have already been dealt with as have the concerns raised by: The Utilities Department -- Water, sewer, electricity, telephone and television cable are provided to the lot from SW 3rd Place. There is a gas main from SW Earlington to lot 26. Garbage collection could take place from SW Earlington in the same manner as presently serves the William's residence. Traffic Engineering Devartment -- We have exoressed willingness to provide a vermanent surface for the easement road and have requested that it take place at the time of construction for the sake of economy and convenience. Engineering Department -- Previously discussed. Their concerns were the same as the Utilities and Traffic Engineering Departments. Fire Prevention Department -- The possibility of a waiver of the requirements by the fire department has already been considered and also the fact that permission from the fire department is premature as they are only concerned at the time of construction. Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation and Renton Subdivision Ordinance In the Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation, Conclusion #4, the purpose of the 1971 Subdivision Ordinance was quoted as stating, "In the interest of protecting the '...nublic health, safety, welfare...' and vroviding '...wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and throughfares', §9-1101.2" What also is mentioned in the purpose is the interest of property owners. We strongly believe that, when adopting this Ordinance, the council had no intention of denying the existing property owners of the rightful use of their proper- ties. The Ordinance was more reasonably geared to "future" development in order that the anticipated platting and sub- dividing of large blocks of land that has taken place in the past few years could be conducted in an orderly manner. Most of the Ordinance is aimed at large development. §9-1108. 23.F.2 states that "Each lot must front upon a public street or road with width of not less than specified in §9-1108.23.A. §9-1108.23.A.9 states that ''There shall be no private street platted in any subdivision, and every subdivision pronerty shall be served from a publicly dedicated street". When the entire section is read, rather than taking the above mentioned sections out of context, it becomes increasingly convincing that what is being referred to is large scale develov- ment. §9-1108.23 begins as follows: ‘Minimum Standards for Residential Design. In the planning of a subdivision..." What we are proposing is not a subdivision, but merely a single short plat. Conclusion #5 states, "Any hardship created by requiring access via a 40-foot public right-of-way is not undue since the re- quirement applies to all properties in the area". This is incorrect. The properties immediately to the east and west of the proposed plat are served solely by the 20-foot ease- ment. The steps taken in Section II were in anticipation of sharing egual rights of adjoining owners. §9-1109.1.B states that "The exception is necessary to insure such property the rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under similar circumstances.". The access to our lot is not only similar, but identical to the other 3 lots served by this easement road. Conclusion #5 further states, ''The avplicant continues to enjoy the reasonable use and development of his/her land for single family residential purposes (Section 9-1109.1) The existing use is unchanged."' This is untrue. While the existing use remains unchanged the reasonable use and development of the land have been seriously affected. The existing use is unchanged because it is presently UNdeveloped and UNused. The purpose of applying for this short plat was to prepare the property for the day when it WOULD be used. For this reason we contend that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance will deprive us of the reasonable use and development of our land. Conclusion #5, paragraph 4, states that "adding further traffic to the existing easement in its present condition is detrimental to public welfare". This is contrary to the facts. The following is true: 1. At the original hearing a willingness to improve the condition of the road was expressed, and 2. Under Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations, #10, the statement is made that ''to date, two dwelling units use the easement as their only access'’. Actually, only one residence is vresently being served by this access. This is the Williams residence and they own two vehicles. The road is very adequately maintained considering it's limited and infrequent use. 3. No showing has been made of any effect on vublic welfare. Conclusion #5 further states that, "at full develonment of the properties with access rights to the easement, as many as 5 dwelling units might use this access, (Interpreted from Exhibits 1 and 2)"". Only 4 landowners own rights in this easement. I have enclosed the map on which the red X's were marked indicating the possibility of 5 homes. The property shaded in red is owned by Mr. and Mrs. George Johnson. They do not have ownershiv in the easement. The easement, as written in 1964, serves lots 22 through 29. This would indicate that only 4 residences would conceivably use this road. The property to the North of the easement could not gain access without the authorization of the Hearing Examiner. The city retains total control over development of property to the Notth of the easement. A recommendation was made by the Planning Commission to form an LID to improve the easement to conform to city standards. This requires approval of at least 50% of the effected property owners. There are 4 owners of this ease- ment road. According to Section 9-1108.23.A.3.d, the property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Lissman, (lots 22, 23, and the West 1/2 of 24), could qualify as a pipesteam lot and, therefore, be short platted. The lots owned by the Williams, (the East 1/2 of lot 24, and lots 25 and 26), and those owned by Mrs. Repetowski, (North 120 feet of the East 1/2 of lot 28 and the North 120 feet of lot 29), were short platted prior to 1971. We have discussed the possibility of the LID with the other owners of the easement road. While each sympathizes with our problem, they are all interested in maintaining the quiet and privacy presently enjoyed in this area. As he indicated at the Hearing, Mr. Brinson, the owner of the property to the north of the easement, desires that multiple family housing be developed in the area. For this reason we have to concur with the other 3 owners of the easement road: Except for the purpose of allowing us to short plat our lot, development of a 40 foot road that would allow large scale development to the north of the easement would be detrimental to the interests of everyone involved. v. Conclusion In this case you are not working with a large builder or land developer with many options who is attempting to realize large personal profit from an exception. We are people who have owned the same piece of property for 13 years and are attempting to abide as nearly as vossible to the regulations set by the City Council. Prior to the new ordinance of 1971, we had the right to short plat and build on our lot. If we are now refused this right, it would mean that a valuable piece of view property has been deemed worthless. As previously stated, there are 4 owners of the easement road: two had short vlatted their property prior to the new ordinance and one lot can qualify as a pivesteam lot. This would indicate that we alone are being singled out of this group and being denied the use of our land; that the City of Renton will take 4 lots, situated side by side, and allow the owners of 3 of them to use their land and deny the fourth the same privelege. The very fact that a procedure, application and fee has been established for exceptions indicates that the regu- lations set in this Ordinance were not intended to be complied with 100% of the time. This Ordinance represents the ideal. Exceptions are granted regularly when a viable alternative is not available. For the reasons set forth in this report as well as for the purpose of promoting new development in one of the city's oldest neighborhoods, we respectfully request that this exception be granted. Sincerely, . —, Cn te 4. ee Cfo Re pp—attn lbele Pef yee ) Richard and Arlene Ross cc Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Counselman Richard M. Stredicke SCALE 12 200° op suBseCT $16 py PUCHARD ¢, ARLENE £955 £-089-77 SHORT. FLAT st 088-77 November 16, 1977 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, APPLICANT: Richard and Arlene Ross FILE NO. Short Plat 088-77 E-089-77 LOCATION: The vicinity of 516 Southwest 3rd Place along the north side of S.W. 3rd Place approximately midway between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.W. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of an exception to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty (20) foot easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department: Recommend denial. Hearing Examiner Decision: Denial. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on October 18, 1977. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing, which was continued on October 25, 1977, was reopened on November 1, 1977, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1 and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #2: King County Assessor's Map Exhibit #3: Short Plat Map Exhibit #4: Letter from the applicant regarding request for exception, dated 10-3-77. Exhibit #5: Memorandum from Traffic Engineering Division, dated 10-31-77. The Examiner asked the applicant if she concurred in Exhibit #1. Responding was: Arlene Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Ross reported that she did not concur in Exhibit #1 and objected to the recommendation for denial by the Planning Department. She referred to Exhibit #4 which lists reasons for approval of the request including existence of the easement roadway since 1964 prior to adoption of the Subdivision Ordinance in 1971; limited utilization of the easement by only one residence; and good condition of the roadway for the current use. She objected to comments in Exhibit #1 regarding the condition of the subject roadway stating that costly improvements were premature because of existence of only one residence on the easement and emphasized that the roadway was created for purposes of ingress and egress and not for utilities which were installed several years ago. She also stated that although the width of the roadway prevented motorists from turning around, vehicles could turn in driveways or back out to the street. Referring to statements in Exhibit #1, Mrs. Ross advised that application for a waiver was not submitted because of the possibility of denial of the short plat request and subsequent forfeiture of the waiver fee, although she wished to reserve the right to apply at a later date. She also stated that garbage collection could occur at the end of the easement roadway and felt that paving the easement should not be required until future construction commenced. Short Plat 088-77 Page Two E-089-77 She asked for clarification on Item C., page 2, of Exhibit #1 regarding Subdivision Ordinance requirements for frontage on a dedicated right-of-way and inquired if the easement would be dedicated to the city and width requirements of the roadway if this occurred. Mr. Smith indicated that since vacant property exists along the easement which may be developed in the future, a 50-foot roadway was a minimum requirement, although a 40-foot roadway would be acceptable per the ordinance requirements since the topography of the property qualified it as a hillside area. Mrs. Ross stated that because of the location of residences on Stevens Avenue S.W. east of the subject property and the steep grade of the area, the easement would remain as a dead end street or cul-de-sac and should not be considered a public right-of-way. Regarding fire department requirements for hydrants and access roadway improvements, Mrs. Ross reported discussions with fire department personnel had indicated that regulations were established for new development and should not be applied to the individual homeowner. She indicated that a fire hydrant exists 600 feet from the subject property which did not meet the 500-foot limit required but could be reached by fire apparatus. The Examiner called for testimony from the fire department. Responding was: Jack McLaughlin Inspector, Renton Fire Department The Examiner asked Mr. McLaughlin if requirements for a hydrant and improvements to the 20-foot easment could be waived by the fire department. Mr. McLaughlin indicated that the requirements could be waived during application for a short plat, but would be instated as conditions at the time of construction on the property. Mr. Smith added a clarification from Section 9-1105.9 of the Subdivision Ordinance which requires all utilities and improvements to be installed prior to construction on the site. Mrs. Ross reviewed conditions outlined in the ordinance for requesting an exception and felt that the situation of the property warranted approval of the request. In response to the Examiner's inquiries, Mr. Smith reported that certain certification requirements had been met or would be met prior to final submittal to King County; no restrictive covenants had been submitted; a final plat map is contained in Exhibit #3; and no application for deferral or waiver had been received by the department or the Board of Public Works although all utilities and improvements were required to be installed prior to the filing of the short plat with King County. The Examiner asked for testimony in favor of the application. Responding was: Jim Lawrie 10828 Lakeridge Drive S. Seattle, WA Mr. Lawrie indicated that he is Mrs. Ross's employer. He felt that provisions for application for an exception were included in the ordinance to prevent undue hardship to property owners and felt that certain flexibility should be allowed depending upon individual circumstances. He reported that creation of a mutual easement in 1964 had occurred to provide access for only those property owners on the easement and that if adoption of the city's Subdivision Ordinance in 1971 had been anticipated, the property would have been subdivided prior to that time. Mr. Lawrie inquired if the Examiner may impose conditions to defer installation of improvements. The Examiner advised that a deferral can only be granted by the Board of Public Works for a maximum period of two years. Mr. Lawrie suggested that an alternative would be approval of the exception with the inclusion of conditions. The Examiner advised that the purpose of the subject exception application was to request a deviation from the required frontage on a public street. Mr. Smith reported that the ordinance required filing of the plat within one year of submittal of the application on October 4, 1977 by which time the improvements must be installed or a deferral granted. The Examiner indicated that the hearing could be continued until such time as an application for waiver was submitted which could be reviewed concurrent with the short plat request or continued subject to review of a deferral by the Board of Public Works. In response to Mrs. Ross's inquiry regarding improvements, the Examiner stated that installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and possibly storm sewers as well as conditions imposed by the fire department would be required before final filing of the plat with King County. The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition to the application. Responding was: H. A. Brinson 264 Earlington Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 Short Plat 088-77 Page Three E-089-77 Mr. Brinson stated that the property in question was unsuitable for single family homes because of steep grades and expressed his preference for multiple family development in the area. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding lot size, Mr. Smith reported that the square foot computation on the north lot included the easement. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for additions, corrections or modifications to Exhibit #1. Mr. Smith indicated that the department's original recommendation would remain and expressed a concern that approval of the request would set a precedent for narrow easement roadways. He emphasized ordinance requirements and suggested formation of an LID to improve the easement to conform to city standards. Mrs. Ross restated her opinion that the roadway was originally created only for access to those residences located on the easement and objected to inability to develop her property because of city requirements. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding the legal status of the easement for future access to the lots, Mr. Smith indicated that he had not contacted the City Attorney regarding the matter but felt that the intent of the ordinance was to impose restrictions upon easements and did not pertain to subdivision of property. The Examiner asked for further testimony. Since there was none, the hearing on Item #Short Plat 088-77 and E-089-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10:25 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: FINDINGS: 1. The request is for approval of a two-lot short plat and exception to allow access via a 20-foot easement. 2. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter and is hereby attached as Exhibit #1 and incorporated in this report by reference as set forth in full therein. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended by R.C.W. 43.2.C., a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required setbacks and lot coverage requirements of Section 4-706 of Title IV, Code of General Ordinances. 7. ‘Final plat certification per Section 9-1105.3.A (reference to Section 9-1106.3.H) is normally processed administratively prior to filing the short plat at King County. 8. Restrictive Covenants were not proposed (Section 9-1105.3.B). 9. Dedication of public right-of-way is not proposed (Section 9-1105.3.D and E). 10. An existing 20-foot vehicular access and utilities easement crosses the northern portion of the proposal and extends to the abutting easterly property. This easement was created in 1964 for access to Earlington Avenue S.W. Subsequent to its creation and prior to the 1971 edition of the city Subdivision Ordinance, short plats similar to the proposal were approved with access for the northerly lots via the easement. Section 9-1108.23.F.(2) requires residential lots front a public street which Section 9-1108.7 (Table 1) specifies as a minimum of 40 feet in width. To date two dwelling units use the easement for their only access. At full development of the properties with access rights to the easement, as many as five dwelling units might use this access. (Interpreted from Exhibits #1 and #2). Properties immediately north of the easement do not have access via the easement, however, should this access be gained, approximately five additional dwelling units would utilize the easement. Short plats that are served by a 20-foot easement have not been approved in the area under the existing Subdivision Ordinance. A review of Exhibit #2 indicated that similar easements do not exist in other locations in this block. Short Plat 088-77 Page Four E-089-77 11. Improvements of curbs, gutters and sidewalks are not proposed within the 20-foot easement. Pavement exists for approximately the westerly 30 feet of the easement. A waiver or deferral application has not been filed per Section 9-1105.6. The applicant testified that improvements within the easement would preferably be accomplished at the time construction occurs on the created lot. 12. Improvements are required (Section 9-1105.6) to be installed prior to final signature by staff (Section 9-1105.7) and filing with King County (Section 9-1105.8). Construction or excavation cannot occur prior to filing the short plat (Section 9-1105.10). 13. Water, sewer and electricity are available on the northern portion of the site. 14. The northern lot of the short plat contains 7,560 square feet without subtraction of the 20-foot easement. Excluding the easement (1200 square feet) the net lot area would be 7,440 square feet which meets the requirements of Section 4-706. CONCLUSIONS : 1. The proposed short plat conforms to the Comprehensive Plan for the area. 2. The existing easement that will serve as the only access to the proposed northerly lot is in physical condition unconducive to the public health, safety and welfare. It is unreasonable to require the applicant to correct the entire deficiency. Instead the more equitable LID process should be used. During the LID process consideration can be given to the anticipated subdivision of the property north and south of the easement. 3. Section 9-1108.7 rendered the existing easement nonconforming but allowed the easement to continue as access to the existing properties. Any subdivision of land after enactment of this section is required to meet its requirements. 4. The subdivision of properties south of the easement will not affect the density of dwelling units using the easement. Instead, the impact will be to change the status of the easement to that of sole access for these units. At the time of its creation the easement served as a secondary access for the homes which fronted S.W. 3rd Place. Since that time at least one-half of the properties have been subdivided in such a way that the southern portions front and access to S.W. 3rd place and the northerly portions front and access via the easement. In the interest of protecting the "...public health, safety, welfare..." and providing "...wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and thoroughfares" (Section 9-1101.2), the City Council determined in 1971 that 40 feet of right-of-way would be minimum in this situation instead of the existing 20-foot easement. 5. Deviation or relief from these requirements may be granted per Section 9-1109 (Exceptions). Any hardship (Section 9-1109.1) created by requiring access via a 40-foot public right-of-way is not undue since the requirement applies to all properties in the area. Access continues to be from the 20-foot easement serving the subject property. The applicant continues to enjoy the reasonable use and development of his/her land for single family residential purposes (Section 9-1109.1.A.). The existing use is unchanged. When the 20-foot easement is increased to 40 feet the applicant should be able to subdivide the property. The rights and priviliges (Section 9-1109.1.B) of subdivision of property depend upon ordinances in effect at application. Other properties were subdivided under regulations precedent to Chapter 11. The subject site must comply with the requirements of Chapter 11 as do other properties in the area in order to be subdivided. Adding traffic to the existing easement in its present condition is potentially detrimental to the public welfare (Section 9-1109.1.C). An improved 40-foot public street would provide safe private and public access and turn-around capability. For the aforementioned reasons the Exception application should be denied. Safe and adequate access is critical to the subdivision of land, and the existing 20-foot easement is inadequate per the intent, purpose and requirements of Chapter ll. Short Plat 088-77 Page Five E-089-77 6. Opportunity is lacking within the 20-foot wide easement for sufficient backing-up Maneuvers by private, commercial or public safety vehicles. A hammerhead or cul- de-sac should be created on the northeastern portion of the subject property in conjunction with adjoining properties to permit turning around of vehicles. 7. In view of the probable subdivision of property north of the easement a comprehensive overview would suggest that an additional 20 feet of right-of-way should eventually be dedicated parallel to the easement. The accumulated 40 feet should be dedicated for a public street to serve the interior of this residential block and to coordinate development. 8. The short plat requires access via a 40-foot public right-of-way (Section 9-1108.7). Disapproval of the Exception application renders moot the short plat. When sufficient right-of-way is established per Section 9-1108.7 the short plat can again be considered. DECISION: Based upon the record, testimony, findings and conclusions, it is the Examiner's decision to disapprove the Short Plat and Exception requests. ORDERED THIS 16th day of November, 1977. a wa : - L. Rick Beeler Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of November, 1977 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Arlene Ross Jack McLaughlin Jim Lawrie H. A. Brinson TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of November, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division Larry Warren, City Attorney Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before November 30, 1977. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the City Clerk's office, first floor of City Hall, or same may be purchased at cost in said office. nc | ee SHORT PLAT AND EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS; Application No. 088-77 and E-089-77; application for two-lot short plat approval and exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty foot easement road; property located in the vicinity of SW 3rd Pl, approx. midway between Earlington Ave SW & Stevens Ave SW APPLICANT pichard and Arlene Ross TOTAL AREA + .3 Acre PRINCIPAL ACCESS S.W. 3rd Place EXISTING ZONING R-1 EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE Residential COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Single Family Residential COMMENTS SCALE 12200" OP susstcr se RICHARD ¢, ARLENE : £0SS E -089-77 SHORT PLAT st O0B8-77 November 16, 1977 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, APPLICANT: Richard and Arlene Ross FILE NO. Short Plat 088-77 E-089-77 LOCATION: The vicinity of 516 Southwest 3rd Place along the north side of S.W. 3rd Place approximately midway between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.W. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of an exception to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty (20) foot easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department: Recommend denial. Hearing Examiner Decision: Denial. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on October 18, 1977. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing, which was continued on October 25, 1977, was reopened on November 1, 1977, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1 and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #2: King County Assessor's Map Exhibit #3: Short Plat Map Exhibit #4: Letter from the applicant regarding request for exception, dated 10-3-77. Exhibit #5: Memorandum from Traffic Engineering Division, dated 10-31-77. The Examiner asked the applicant if she concurred in Exhibit #1. Responding was: Arlene Ross 516 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Ross reported that she did not concur in Exhibit #1 and objected to the recommendation for denial by the Planning Department. She referred to Exhibit #4 which lists reasons for approval of the request including existence of the easement roadway since 1964 ‘prior to adoption of the Subdivision Ordinance in 1971; limited utilization of the easement by only one residence; and good condition of the roadway for the current use. She objected to comments in Exhibit #1 regarding the condition of the subject roadway stating that costly improvements were premature because of existence of only one residence on the easement and emphasized that the roadway was created for purposes of ingress and egress and not for utilities which were installed several years ago. She also stated that although the width of the roadway prevented motorists from turning around, vehicles could turn in driveways or back out to the street. Referring to statements in Exhibit #1, Mrs. Ross advised that application for a waiver was not submitted because of the possibility of denial of the short plat request and subsequent forfeiture of the waiver fee, although she wished to reserve the right to apply at a later date. She also stated that garbage collection could occur at the end of the easement roadway and felt that paving the easement should not be required until future construction commenced. Short Plat 088-77 Page Two E-089-77 She asked for clarification on Item C., page 2, of Exhibit #1 regarding Subdivision Ordinance requirements for frontage on a dedicated right-of-way and inquired if the easement would be dedicated to the city and width requirements of the roadway if this occurred. Mr. Smith indicated that since vacant property exists along the easement which may be developed in the future, a 50-foot roadway was a minimum requirement, although a 40-foot roadway would be acceptable per the ordinance requirements since the topography of the property qualified it as a hillside area. Mrs. Ross stated that because of the location of residences on Stevens Avenue S.W. east of the subject property and the steep grade of the area, the easement would remain as a dead end street or cul-de-sac and should not be considered a public right-of-way. Regarding fire department requirements for hydrants and access roadway improvements, Mrs. Ross reported discussions with fire department personnel had indicated that regulations were established for new development and should not be applied to the individual homeowner. She indicated that a fire hydrant exists 600 feet from the subject property which did not meet the 500-foot limit required but could be reached by fire apparatus. The Examiner called for testimony from the fire department. Responding was: Jack McLaughlin Inspector, Renton Fire Department The Examiner asked Mr. McLaughlin if requirements for a hydrant and improvements to the 20-foot easment could be waived by the fire department. Mr. McLaughlin indicated that the requirements could be waived during application for a short plat, but would be instated as conditions at the time of construction on the property. Mr. Smith added a clarification from Section 9-1105.9 of the Subdivision Ordinance which requires all utilities and improvements to be installed prior to construction on the site. Mrs. Ross reviewed conditions outlined in the ordinance for requesting an exception and felt that the situation of the property warranted approval of the request. In response to the Examiner's inquiries, Mr. Smith reported that certain certification requirements had been met or would be met prior to final submittal to King County; no restrictive covenants had been submitted; a final plat map is contained in Exhibit #3; and no application for deferral or waiver had been received by the department or the Board of Public Works although all utilities and improvements were required to be installed prior to the filing of the short plat with King County. The Examiner asked for testimony in favor of the application. Responding was: Jim Lawrie 10828 Lakeridge Drive S. Seattle, WA Mr. Lawrie indicated that he is Mrs. Ross's employer. He felt that provisions for application for an exception were included in the ordinance to prevent undue hardship to property owners and felt that certain flexibility should be allowed depending upon individual circumstances. He reported that creation of a mutual easement in 1964 had occurred to provide access for only those property owners on the easement and that if adoption of the city's Subdivision Ordinance in 1971 had been anticipated, the property would have been subdivided prior to that time. Mr. Lawrie inquired if the Examiner may impose conditions to defer installation of improvements. The Examiner advised that a deferral can only be granted by the Board of Public Works for a maximum period of two years. Mr. Lawrie suggested that an alternative would be approval of the exception with the inclusion of conditions. The Examiner advised that the purpose of the subject exception application was to request a deviation from the required frontage on a public street. Mr. Smith reported that the ordinance required filing of the plat within one year of submittal of the application on October 4, 1977 by which time the improvements must be installed or a deferral granted. The Examiner indicated that the hearing could be continued until such time as an application for waiver was submitted which could be reviewed concurrent with the short plat request or continued subject to review of a deferral by the Board of Public Works. In response to Mrs. Ross's inquiry regarding improvements, the Examiner stated that installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and possibly storm sewers as well as conditions imposed by the fire department would be required before final filing of the plat with King County. The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition to the application. Responding was: H. A. Brinson 264 Earlington Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 Short Plat 088-77 Page Three E~-089-77 Mr. Brinson stated that the property in question was unsuitable for single family homes because of steep grades and expressed his preference for multiple family development in the area. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding lot size, Mr. Smith reported that the square foot computation on the north lot included the easement. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for additions, corrections or modifications to Exhibit #1. Mr. Smith indicated that the department's original recommendation would remain and expressed a concern that approval of the request would set a precedent for narrow easement roadways. He emphasized ordinance requirements and suggested formation of an LID to improve the easement to conform to city standards. Mrs. Ross restated her opinion that the roadway was originally created only for access to those residences located on the easement and objected to inability to develop her property because of city requirements. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding the legal status of the easement for future access to the lots, Mr. Smith indicated that he had not contacted the City Attorney regarding the matter but felt that the intent of the ordinance was to impose restrictions upon easements and did not pertain to subdivision of property. The Examiner asked for further testimony. Since there was none, the hearing on Item #Short Plat 088-77 and E-089-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10:25 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: FINDINGS: l. The request is for approval of a two-lot short plat and exception to allow access via a 20-foot easement. 2. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter and is hereby attached as Exhibit #1 and incorporated in this report by reference as set forth in full therein. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended by R.C.W. 43.2.C., a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required setbacks and lot coverage requirements of Section 4-706 of Title IV, Code of General Ordinances. 7. Final plat certification per Section 9-1105.3.A (reference to Section 9-1106.3.H) is normally processed administratively prior to filing the short plat at King County. 8. Restrictive Covenants were not proposed (Section 9-1105.3.B). 9. Dedication of public right-of-way is not proposed (Section 9-1105.3.D and E). 10. An existing 20-foot vehicular access and utilities easement crosses the northern portion of the proposal and extends to the abutting easterly property. This easement was created in 1964 for access to Earlington Avenue S.W. Subsequent to its creation and prior to the 1971 edition of the city Subdivision Ordinance, short plats similar to the proposal were approved with access for the northerly lots via the easement. Section 9-1108.23.F.(2) requires residential lots front a public street which Section 9-1108.7 (Table 1) specifies as a minimum of 40 feet in width. To date two dwelling units use the easement for their only access. At full development of the properties with access rights to the easement, as many as five dwelling units might use this access. (Interpreted from Exhibits #1 and #2). Properties immediately north of the easement do not have access via the easement, however, should this access be gained, approximately five additional dwelling units would utilize the easement. Short plats that are served by a 20-foot easement have not been approved in the area under the existing Subdivision Ordinance. A review of Exhibit #2 indicated that similar easements do not exist in other locations in this block. ll. Improvements Short Plat 088-77 Page Four E-089-77 of curbs, gutters and sidewalks are not proposed within the 20-foot easement. Pavement exists for approximately the westerly 30 feet of the easement. A waiver or deferral application has not been filed per Section 9-1105.6. The applicant testified that improvements within the easement would preferably be accomplished 12. Improvements signature by Construction at the time construction occurs on the created lot. are required (Section 9-1105.6) to be installed prior to final staff (Section 9-1105.7) and filing with King County (Section 9-1105.8). or excavation cannot occur prior to filing the short plat (Section 9-1105.10). 13. Water, sewer 14. The northern and electricity are available on the northern portion of the site. lot of the short plat contains 7,560 square feet without subtraction of the 20-foot easement. Excluding the easement (1200 square feet) the net lot area would be 7,440 square feet which meets the requirements of Section 4-706. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed 2. The existing short plat conforms to the Comprehensive Plan for the area. easement that will serve as the only access to the proposed northerly lot is in physical condition unconducive to the public health, safety and welfare. It is unreasonable to require the applicant to correct the entire deficiency. Instead the more equitable LID process should be used. During the LID process consideration can be given to the anticipated subdivision of the property north and south of the easement. 3. Section 9-1108.7 rendered the existing easement nonconforming but allowed the easement to continue as access to the existing properties. Any subdivision of land after enactment of this section is required to meet its requirements. 4. The subdivision of properties south of the easement will not affect the density of dwelling units using the easement. Instead, the impact will be to change the status of the easement to that of sole access for these units. At the time of its creation the easement served as a secondary access for the homes which fronted S.W. 3rd Place. Since that time at least one-half of the properties have been subdivided in such a way that the southern portions front and access to S.W. 3rd place and the northerly portions front and access via the easement. In the interest of protecting the "...public health, safety, welfare..." and providing ".. -wholesome environmental conditions in the community, adequate public services, and safe and functional streets and thoroughfares" (Section 9-1101.2), the City Council determined in 1971 that 40 feet of right-of-way would be minimum in this situation instead of the existing 20-foot easement. 5. Deviation or (Exceptions). relief from these requirements may be granted per Section 9-1109 Any hardship (Section 9-1109.1) created by requiring access via a 40-foot public right-of-way is not undue since the requirement applies to all properties in the area. Access continues to be from the 20-foot easement serving the subject property. The applicant continues to enjoy the reasonable use and development of his/her land for single family residential purposes (Section 9-1109.1.A.). The existing use is unchanged. When the 20-foot easement is increased to 40 feet the applicant should be able to subdivide the property. The rights and priviliges (Section 9-1109.1.B) of subdivision of property depend upon ordinances in effect at application. Other properties were subdivided under regulations precedent to Chapter 11. The subject site must comply with the requirements subdivided. of Chapter 11 as do other properties in the area in order to be Adding traffic to the existing easement in its present condition is potentially detrimental to the public welfare (Section 9-1109.1.C). An improved 40-foot public street would provide safe private and public access and turn-around capability. For the aforementioned reasons the Exception application should be denied. Safe and adequate access is critical to the subdivision of land, and the existing 20-foot easement is inadequate per the intent, purpose and requirements of Chapter ll. Short Plat 088-77 Page Five E-089-77 6. Opportunity is lacking within the 20-foot wide easement for sufficient backing-up maneuvers by private, commercial or public safety vehicles. A hammerhead or cul- de-sac should be created on the northeastern portion of the subject property in conjunction with adjoining properties to permit turning around of vehicles. 7. %In view of the probable subdivision of property north of the easement a comprehensive overview would suggest that an additional 20 feet of right-of-way should eventually be dedicated parallel to the easement. The accumulated 40 feet should be dedicated for a public street to serve the interior of this residential block and to coordinate development. 8. The short plat requires access via a 40-foot public right-of-way (Section 9-1108.7). Disapproval of the Exception application renders moot the short plat. When sufficient right-of-way is established per Section 9-1108.7 the short plat can again be considered. DECISION: Based upon the record, testimony, findings and conclusions, it is the Examiner's decision to disapprove the Short Plat and Exception requests. ORDERED THIS 16th day of November, 1977. L. Rick Beeler Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of November, 1977 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Arlene Ross Jack McLaughlin Jim Lawrie H. A. Brinson TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of November, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division Larry Warren, City Attorney Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before November 30, 1977. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title Iv, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the City Clerk's office, first floor of City Hall, or same may be purchased at cost in said office. Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING BS: Mergeret Uerbeugh being first duly swornon wf _ Chief Clerk Sisnetaiimne of THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four (4) times a week. That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- paper published four (4) times a week in Kent, King County, Washington, and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the Renton Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the County in which it is published, to-wit, King County, sap enero ceromr estamos sues EERE Bromwesingne as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period eciosmrecents GAVIOL sccrssssserionassuaraneseorawaneme srw seineMiaenictenmesusent , both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee ta been paid in fullattherateof per folio of one hundred wont for the first insertion and _ per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent Dla. geet He eee _ LL chase Clerk 1h a geerEeRibiermeese day of Subscribed and sworn to before me this.................. 19.7.7. ae Netahenr....... , Notary Public in and ‘for the State of Washington, residing at Kent, King County. — Passed by the Legislature, 1955, known as Senate Bill 281, effective June Oth, 1955S. — Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. V.P.C. Form No. 87 SONS TOSAID PETITIONS NIONS. ARE INVITEL SENT AT HEARING C 25, 1977 AT EXPRESS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAM- BERS, CITY HALL, RE- NTON, WASHINGTON, ON OCTOBER 25, 1977, AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETI- TIONS: 1. MacPHERSON'S, _INC., APPLICATION. FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 14-LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBDIVISION, File No. FP-087-77; Property lo- cated on northeast corner of Monroe Ave. N.E. and N.E. 10th St. 2. RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS, APPLICATION FOR TWO-LOT SHORT PLAT APPROVAL AND EXCEPTION TO SUB- DIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING ACCESS, Files 088-77 and E-089- 77; Property located in the vicinity of 516 S.W. 3rd PI. Legal descriptions on file in the Renton Planning De- partment. ALL INTERESTED PER- ‘on Y. Ericksen nning Director n The Renton nicle October 392 CITY OF RENTON 2 SHORT PLAT PLAT APPLICATION MAJOR PLAT TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY mune FINAL Y a FILE No. ~Zech L7al OL¢-77 DATE REC'D. —LLELZ2 APPLICATION FEE §$ ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FEE §$ RECEIPT NO. =17 Y77 SM NO, PUD NO. iPPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 7: Plat Name & Location Koss Steer ear | Sle sw BP? pa ] No. Lots Total Acreage Zoning pone fix hand of Arlene Fis vo Phone 23¢-suyvs PA Address 3/6 Sw 3" fd I a shies Underground Utilities: Yes Telephone ( xX Electric (Xx Street Lights ( Natural Gas ( TV Gable . (X Sanitation & Water: ( X ) City Water ( Xx ( ) Water District No. ( No Not Installed ) Sanitary Sewers ) Dry Sewers ) Septic Tanks Vicinity and plat maps as required by Subdivision Ordinance. N DATE REFERRED TO: ENGINEERING PARKS BUILDING HEALTH TRAFFIC ENG. STATE HIGHWAY PIRE COUNTY PLANNING BD. PUBLIC WORKS OTHER STAFF ACTION: TENTATIVE PLAT APPROVED DENIED APPEALED EXPIRED LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER'S ACTION: SHORT PLAT APPROVED DENIED PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED DENIED FINAL PLAT APPEALED EXPIRED CITY COUNCIL ACTION: PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED DENIED FINAL PLAT APPEALED EXPIRED DEFERRED IMPROVEMENTS: DATE DATE BOND NO. AND TYPE GRANTED EXPIRES AMOUNT Planning Dept. Pay, 1/77 AFFIDAVIT Ti, Richard Patrick Ross , 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 22nd day of September , L977 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle : / a) “y;, ; ; destin Oy a (Name of Notary Publicljiizves Cnise/e— (Signature of Owner) 10828 Lakeridge Dr. S. Seattle 98178 516 SW 3rd Place (Address) (Address) Renton WA 98055 (City) (State) 226-5645 (Telephone) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application. Date Received p Lo By: Renton Planning Dept. 7 79 oie x Ay . Ae < YX ee rei vi ne ¥ a Es “hi, ae oe ere SCE CS at Sa r i s | m6 7S ‘. CS Aan ede AL eens ae RAL Lelie MAU a Ce ater ed Seat ash Leo do teliies ALOE LUA Ton a wane e NTC BE oe S933 43t Syd at EASEMENT WHEREAS, George H, Scott Sr. and Rath Scott,his wife, and Carl L. Dale and Vera M. Dale, his wife, and Olga Repetowski, a widow, all of King County, Washington, are the owners of3 i i . The North 20 feet of Lots 19, 20 and 21, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. and ‘Winreas: John é. | Tagsnan and =omm M. , Lisspan, bis wife, of King County, vashington, exe tbe comers ) obs 2 Soe tots 22, 23 and the West half of Lot 24, Block 2, Earlington according to ’ plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. Pa . and WEERBAS, Carl hare and Vera M, Dale, his wife, are the owners of: The East half of lot 24, and all of Iots 25 ard 26, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and WHEREAS, George H, Scott Sr, and Ruth Scott, his wife, are the owners of: lot 27 and the West half of Lot 28, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. and WHSREAS, Olga Repetowski, a widow, is the owner of: The North 120 feet of the East half of lot 28 ard the North 120 feet of lot 29, all in Block 2 of Earlington, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and,. each conveys to the other parties to this agreement, a perpetual easement ‘for purposes of ingress and egress and utilities to and from their respective tracts, the said easement to be 20 feet in width, being the North 20 feet of lots 19 to the West line of the East half of Lot 28 inclusive, and to extend from Earlington Street in an easterly direction to the westerly line of said Iot 19, and thence continuing in an easterly direction 20 feet in width to the West line of the East half of Lot 28, and the termims of the easement, The said North 120 feet of the East half of Lot 23 and the North 120 feet of Lot 29, shall have access for ingress and egress and utilities to said caserent right of way. . Page ore TR pete ReQh Ese a eb iio eyes atc fae ee Ce at Le ‘h d & er ie is 5} se k AD ra e < at Se c o u r s PS N R wo k Ba i n s : Ot ea e RR S EE R oC BL E co t RI V A TL R ry : EE La n n e ey oe BOAR os o oe ‘ Pade aes fre: ae pi " Se = 1529, a0 : \ ae . s = pe parties hereto, thet betray guscessors and cautigas din title, ~ This sball be doened as a’covenant running with the land, he ie IN WITNESS WHERSGF, the parties hereto, have bereunto set their bands and mB é =f : ol F vies te a ni ~ & Q- £ : 5 —_ 2 f -. 8 pce mean cer settee at IB = } ‘ " 2 eR 3 LLL son Yd oe , i . Lal be ~ all : ; ! - 3 H STATE OF WASHINGTON) 5 ) ss. H COUNTY OF KING ) % 3 On this day personally appeared before me John J. Lissman, June M, lissman, 4 ‘ : Carl L, Dale, Vera M, Dale, George H. Scott Sr., Ruth Scott and Olga Repetowsid q 2 to re known to be the individuals described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they signed the same as their free ; and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. 3 GIVEN under ry bard and official seal this Au ad day of Liteon » 1964. Va Pt) Cole ) Notary Public in and for the State of 3 Washington, residing at Renton &. - any TRO ww “inna f vt ‘ tion i ‘ 4 1 Kod hie, aa Wer 2 iim . Hs ‘ ot GL ee. Fre swe. oelly “a F ; ROBERT A. MORRIS, Comty Auditor : ee ; ‘ TERMI ST LIS RTT LY UNITE TIS : Le ' .STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING 58 I, EDWARD J. LOGAN, Director of Records and Elections, King County, State of Washington, and ex-officio Recorder of Deeds, and the legal keeper of records hereinafter mentioned, in and for said County, do hereby certify the attached to be a true and correct copy of 21... BaSeme el acccececccenntesecanuaeeee —— As recorded in this office in Vol..4529...of......-D2CAS ooo ce eececccssnnseeseeseninesssenneesseoneeesesee Page.S 989-590 or as filed in this office under File No............22-.---0ece+eeseeeeeeeeee* , WITNESS my hand and official seal this....... ist day ae | 19.04 W. DLOGA ji . Sri vot Records and Elections By. LLC: ar eae an iieemeneg, EDIIty Leo 10M 12-69—1507 <S 3) APPLICANT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 25, 1977 RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS FILE NO.: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a two-lot short plat and approval of an exception to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty (20) foot easement road in lieu of standard frontage on a dedicated public right-of-way. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: bs a - 10. Owner of Record: Applicant: Location: Legal: Access: Existing Zoning: Existing Zoning in the Area: Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Notification: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS Richard and Arlene Ross The vicinity of 516 Southwest 3rd Place along the north side of SW 3rd Place approximately midway between Earlington Avenue S.W. and Stevens Avenue S.W. Detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. Said legal description also contains an easement for ingress and egress and utilities over the north twenty feet of lots 19 thru the west half of lot 28. Lots 19 thru 26 are located directly west of the subject site. The southerly portion of subject site attains access via S.W. 3rd Place. The proposed lot in the northerly portion of the site is proposed to attain access via twenty (20) foot access utilities easement. R-1, Residential Single Family R-1, Residential Single Family R-2, Duplex Residence District Single Family Residential The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE TWO RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS PURPOSE OF REQUEST: To obtain approval of a two-lot short plat with lot sizes 7,560 square feet and 7,200 square feet respectively together with approval of an exception from Subdivision Ordinance requirements of proper frontage on the dedicated public right-of-way to allow access via an existing twenty (20) foot access of utilities ease- ment extending from Earlington Avenue S.W. to the easterly property line of the subject site. This easement is located along the northerly twenty (20) feet of the subject site. HISTORY BACKGROUND: The subject site was part of the original plat of Earlington which created blocks with long narrow lots approximately 40 feet wide by approximately 246 feet deep. Through the years some of these lots have been subdivided to reduce their length with provision of access by various means. The abovementioned ease- ment, copy of which is attached, was more than likely established for this reason. However, since the twenty (20) foot access easement was established, the City Subdivision Regulations have disallowed subdivisions utilizing access of this nature. The northerly half of the property immediately west of the subject site was subdivided prior to this ordinance requirement. A house was subsequently constructed on the site due to the legal nonconforming nature of the lot. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1. Topography: The subject site rises from S.W. 3rd Place approximately 25 feet in height within the southerly 120 feet of the subject site. The slope levels off toward the middle of the site and gently rises towards the northerly property line. 2. Soils: Beausite gravelly sandy loam (BeC), permeability is moderately rapid, available water capacity is low, runoff is medium, and hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for timber, pasture, and urban development. 3. Vegetation: The approximate southerly one-half of the subject site contains various trees and shrubs typical to single family residential area. The northerly one-half of the site is primarily scrub grass, blackberries, and scattered fruit and deciduous trees. 4. Wildlife: The existing vegetation on the site may provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. Water: No existing streams or surface water are apparent on the subject site. 6. Land Use: There is an existing single family residence located on the southerly portion of the subject site adjacent to S.W. 3rd Place. There are other single family residences located along S.W 3rd Place in the general area. There is an existing single family residence located adjacent to and west of the northerly portion of the subject site. This residence is presently served by the 20 foot access road from Earlington Avenue S.W. There is undeveloped orchard land located directly north of the subject site and adjacent to the easterly side of the subject site. Beyond these areas, single family residences are located in the general vicinity. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE THREE RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: Generally single family residential nature. Ge PUBLIC SERVICES? 1. Water and Sewer: The six (6) inch water main is located along S.W. 3rd Place and along Earlington Avenue S.W. An eight (8) inch sewer main is located along S.W. 3rd Place and a six (6) inch sewer main is located along Earlington Avenue S.W. No storm sewers are presently available in the area. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department and subject to City of Renton requirements. See attached comments by the Renton Fire Department. 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route 107 operates along Sunset Blvd. approximately one block south of the subject site. 4. Schools: Earlington Elementary School is located approximately three quarters of a mile north and west of the subject site. Dimmit Junior High School is located approximately two (2) miles north of the subject site. Renton High School is located approximately one (1) mile north and east of the subject site. H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-706, R-1 - Residential Single Family I. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS: 1. Subdivision Regulations: a. Section 9-1105, Plat Requirements for Short Subdivisions b. Section 9-1108, Plat Improvements and Development Standards c. Section 9-1109, Exceptions 2. Policy Statement, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area 1965 3. Subdivision of Land Page 5 and 6 4. Traffic Ways, page 6 J. IMPACTS ON NATURAL SYSTEMS: Subdivision of the property will not have a direct impact on the natural systems, however, the eventual development of the subject site will disturb soil and vegetation, increase storm water runoff, and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. However, these can be mitigated by proper devel- opment controls and proceedures. K. SOCIAL IMPACTS: Relatively minor. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE FOUR RE: N. 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS EMVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/ THRESHOLD: Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 as amended (RCW 43.21C), this project is exempt from the Threshold Determination and Environmental Impact Statement process. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A vicinity map and site map are attached. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: City of Renton Building Division City of Renton Engineering Division City of Renton Utilities Division City of Renton Traffic Engineering Divison City of Renton Fire Department Om P w W h r — Copies of certain memorandum are attached. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The proposed short plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Existing Zoning, and existing uses in the area. 2. The two lots meet minimum ordinance size and dimension require- ments. The subdivision of the lot in half is reasonable, given the existing long narrow configuration. 3. The applicant proposes access to the northerly lot via an existing 20 foot easement. Other similiar plats have been permitted in the area, particularly directly adjacent to the westerly boundary of the subject site, where a residence has been recently constructed. However, these subdivisions allowing such easement road access occurred prior to the City's Subdivision Ordinance which established the requirement for proper frontage on a dedicated public street. 4. There are many disadvantages to permitting private easement roads. They are generally undermaintained or sometimes completely neglected, with the City having no jurisdiction for maintenance. They cause dust and mud problems in the area, and are generally of insufficient width for proper fire, service, and emergency vehicle access. However, certain advantages include privacy, less noise, and less traffic hazards. 5. The subject easement road is permanently paved for only the first approximately 30 feet east of Earlington Avenue S.W. The remainder of the existing developed portion of the 20 foot easement is presently a combination of dirt and gravel in rather poor condition. If the easement were to be used for access, it should be permanently surfaced the entire distance to the east half of lot 28. If this were accomplished it is possible that limited use for access (total potential lots served approximately 4) would be acceptable. However, until such time creating additional traffic on such access is not acceptable. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF OCTOBER 25, 1977 PAGE FIVE RE: 088-77, SHORT PLAT; 089-77, EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS 6. The attached copy of the common easement states that "the cost of upkeep of this easement shall be equally borne by the respective parties hereto." It appears from the existing condition of the easement that this upkeep has been minimal. 7. There is no other reasonable means of providing access to the proposed short plat. 8. All off-site improvements should be installed along the portion of the property fronting S.W. 3rd Place. Curb gutter and sidewalk exist along the southside of S.W. 3rd Place approximately 150 feet west of the subject site. 9. There is a question as to how the applicant intends to serve the property with utilities. Two alternatives exist; either provide the utilities from S.W. 3rd Place via an easement across the southerly lot, or provide them from Earlington Avenue S.W. via the existing 20 foot easement. There is also a question of proper fire hydrant access. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, the recommendation of the Engineering Division, Traffic Engineering Division, Utilities Division, the subdivision regulations, and the intormation presented by the applicant, it is recommended that the proposed short plat and exception be denied. However, if the problems stated above can be resolved, such short plat may be acceptable at a future date. INTCRTE PARTMENTAL REVIEW REQUEST ———— ——— = To: = € SLIC WORKS DIREC NG-DIVISION Fak INEERING DIVISION? TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION UTILITIES DIVISION FIRE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WiiclAs, Spy Contact Person RE: _ Rees SHoet PLAT # OX¥8-77 Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it to the Planning Department by lofi2 77 with your written recommendation. You response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. : # Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT LAL ie Date jofiolr> — | INTERDE PARTNCNTAL PEVIEW REQUEST 1 UBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR QO: oe LE BUILDING DIVISION a NGINEERING—-BIVTS TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISIO UTILITIES DIVISION RE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WlicthAge, <quity Contact Person RE: Ritner 4 ALLENE ROSS . Exctyerion) To SWBRpPiWisieow) OCPiWAnice TO ALLOW A LoT Sagem vyrA Access VA A ZO Fort PRINATE EASEMENT OAD. Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it to the Planning Department by va /(7 FF with your written recommendation. tour response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. # Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Widel He. Date jo [10 (27 ro 1002/77 ee ee SA ae? p let is seo Te COsm ended Sine if Cracks Ang nn te AaCOCeSS and. atel sf. Ser vr eve, % 4 Aor th La 7 Umniuntes ) BA The PRoRMEMS THAT HAVE To BE REsowVE”O ARE WATER SEWCE AND SEWER SEanicE To Paolealty A WAm SHoucDd BE EXTENO RDUN EASEMENT TO EBRALING Td AUG SW Ante/ OR PRVIDE UTILITY EeSEXGT Tin FrowT LOT. To sw. BSH PUG, GARBECE CoceGcTron VE Te GE ESTAsusHeo F 2 Ob — LOCATION wpe WA TLAFFEIS §=ENGINEELING DIV, THE 20' AccESS 4 UTILITy EASEMENT § §stfouc Jd BE FAVEO WITH ASPHALT (14¢'To 16" pa wiOTh | 17s ENTIRE CEWCGTH To PlovipE AecessS Fok. EMERGEWVCY VEMCLES . | fo. MEMORANDUM TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT paTE 10/17/77 EROM FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT 1. A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential use. 2. All buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. SS JML/jeb pe hae x 6 N PG a eto rear tips a PI C s 4, se e & 9e : Pte IE Ss Pa. § ud . wee . ~ a ete eee ah i woes a ; 5731431 ~ oe ee a. leon | | ~ cee tee 7) AN SZS face 89 en e t eeehs ie e . _ ad EASEMENT . Ag oe . ff " : - WHEREAS, George H, Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott,his wife, and Carl L. Dale and ~ Vora M, Dale, his wife, and Olga Repetowski, a widow, all of King County, Washington, u are the owrers of: : The North 20 feet of Iots 19, 20 and 21, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 1+ of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. j - é and WHEREAS: John J, Idssman and June M, Lissman, his wife, of King County, ‘Washington, ere the owners of: 2 fs” 3 “3 lots 22, 23 and the West half of lot 24, Block 2, Earlington according to ' plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King Comty, Washington. . : and WEEREAS, Carl idles and Vora M, Dale, his wife, are the owners of: The East half of lot 24, and all of lots 25 and 26, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. and WHERGAS, George H. Scott Sr. and Ruth Scott, his wife, are the owers of: lot 27 and the West half of Lot 28, Block 2, Earlington according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington. ard WESREAS, Olga Repetowski, a widow, is the owner of: The North 120 feet of the East half of Lot 28 and the North 120 feet of lot 29, al1 in Block 2 of Earlington, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, Page 7, records of King County, Washington, and, . each conveys to the other parties to this agreement, a perpetual easement ‘for purposes of ingress and egress and utilities to and from their respective se tracts, the said easement to be 20 feet in width, being the North 20 feet of 3 lots 19 to the West line of the East half of lot 28 inclusive, and to extend from Earlington Street in an easterly direction to the wosterly line of said Tot. 19, ard thence continuing in an easterly direction 20 feet in width to the West line of the East half of Lot 28, and the terminus of the easement, The said North 120 feet of the East half of Lot 2B and the North 120 feet of lot 29, shall have access for ingress and egress and utilities to said pS caserent right of way. . Pape ore 9, RISMIABDD INE EPSEE WE mee WAN? Wag Liking wie akeenees Ohad trols as ae 5 amoNvaneyeuyr ene é nA ee TRIM Sone BP el ret OC Le Tee DPW OPT TN] fess weed lad eer sat aod -% baa cin die. 2 * ary ve 529, 850 “ee Base F het : e tana “el Te cost of yrhogp of this easomnt shal tw eqnally Parse ty the respacting = ieee peer es their: aes saccessors and assigns in title, : SY ~ dhis shall, te deoika as" s'enxenan’ pontine with the land, a tw: an i! a: t ai aes | - 6a ; ov B ‘ an i ~ i oO 2. : ae 3 ~; B +7 fi “s. 0 ' & -< ff K z ; 2 4 4 LL on fp det Ly, — Ebest al . Fs LL -¢ Le C ° i tc ‘ STATS OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) i On this day personally appeared before me John J. Lissman, June M, Jissmn, 4 Carl L, Dale, Vera M, Dale, George H. Scott Sr., Roth Scott and Olga Repetowski F P é to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the within and ; foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they signed the sama as their free : and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. : q GIVEN under ry band and official seal this Au aad day of Hate 1964. “yu oa " | 7 Twn Coll D Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Renton x : ‘ i AMS 5 ‘) ’ Ren yen wr nn * ing ani 1 fa y itt Bs D Kacord Cyto 4 Wars 125m of [Ae &. Trrcse Loelly ROBERT A. MORRIS, Comty Auditor " 7 s tere? peoye Prater) Mah xi aah GORA AERA Mobs tat ai ae AFR? Spaeth eae hats Prey ia Pe 2 Sy saben 4 .STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING sia I, EDWARD J. LOGAN, Director of Records and Elections, King County, State of Washington, and ex-officic Recorder of Deeds, and the legal keeper of records hereinafter mentioned, in and for said County, do hereby certify the attached to be a true and correct copy of a.......Easement a caassnusescssuseccnseesseusesatesacasaneccsesuesese ba een e eee ee meee eee nec een e ewe e cee cece tena nnene cena ete nee neocons weceeee ee en ee Bee een ne cee eee eee weer een nee n eee tween cans eee e nc owen ne comment eee nena e eee e ene eee Oem eee ee tee Re Nee RNR e eee enna een nen eee enema amen een semen nen aes met n eerste eee en ee een es me rene ces eaceneesneee As recorded in this office in Vol..2t929.....of 2... D2CUS oc cesesesssneessesssessecineessuecsuueeseneess Page.S._.289-590 _ or as filed in this office under File No.........2....2..22:c:eceeeeeeeeecee WITNESS my hand and official seal this......25¢ day a ck. | ae » 19.04 Wy DLOGA i Sr of} . caayptlsion By. LK LZ Mien ke Pigitiin: iecmmmmcsonovssy DISPUT N? 6575 rv \ . 10M 12-69—1507 Gy 3 SHORT PLAT AND EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: RICHARD AND ARLENE ROSS; Application No. 088-77 and E-089-77; application for two-lot short plat approval and exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to allow access to one of the two lots via an existing twenty foot easement road; property located in the vicinity of SW 3rd Pl, approx. midway between Earlington Ave SW & Stevens Ave SW APPLICANT Richard and Arlene Ross TOTAL AREA + .3 Acre PRINCIPAL ACCESS S.W. 3rd Place EXISTING ZONING R-1 EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE - Residential COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Single Family Residential COMMENTS SCALE 12200" ; T J suBsecy SE pm RICHARD ¢ ARLENE | - £0Ss E -9089-77 SHORT PLAT #088-77 ® IN; Ofoe PARTMERTAL REVIEW REQUEST ee, TO: G5 PUBLIC WORKS DIREC LF ag BUILDING DIVISION Zon y INEERING DIVISIONL = oO aii sod, \TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION & ie UTILITIES DIVISION —E ANS FIRE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WicilAs, Suit Contact Person RE: Kees Soe PLAT + OXS- 77 Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it, to the Planning Department by Jo/12 Ms with your written recommendation. ‘Your response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Date jofel 77 a TO: oo SIMte ambos beeeee Wawa DIVISION RE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Wicttags) <quittl Contact Person RE: OCP WAcre To AUOw A LoT Smee wir Access VA A 20 Foot PREWNATE EASEMENT OAD. Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it to the Planning Department by __ (od /i2 {27 with your written recommendation. our response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. \ Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Date yo [10 (277 a | % 10©Lf¢2f 77 En g0 eer i ms S4oet pet is wee Tre COsmsmendeHt S (nec if fine Fs ale gna ta access and. atel fo Sev vice x 7 toe Th Lat RiGee UTiutes , BH The PRoKEMS THAT HAUG To BE REsocvEIO ARE WATER SEQUCE AND SEWER SEnICE To Pafanty A VtAw SHoucd BE EXTEND POUN ESSEUENT TO ELRUING Tol AUG SW ane/ Oh ~aAviWG UTILITY ERSEAENT Tien FrowT LoT. To sw. SH Puc. GARBECE @oceEcTrons VE Te bE |EsTasusHen FI 2 Ob — LOCATION Cyt WA TRAFFIC. «EWEN EELING DIV, THE 20' AccEsS 4 UTILITY EASEMENT 3 srtouc BE FAVEO WITH ASPHACT /4¢'TO 16° par Wi~Th 17s ENTIRE CEWGTH TFTo Plovip~ AecesS Fok. EMELGEWCY VEHICLES . MEMORANDUM TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT pate 10/17/77 EROM FIRE PREVENTION SUBJECT 1. <A fire hydrant or hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided within 500 feet of building or buildings used for residential use. 2. All buildings constructed within the City shall be access- ible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access road- ways with all-weather driving surface of not less that 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. SS JML/jeb ENDING OF FILE "Aw Phot 088-77 ©