The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWTR2701707 PLAT OF BRINTWOOD PARK W-541 OV TtIE CI'CY OF RENTON &� MUNICIPAL eUILOINO 200 MILL AVE SO RENTON,W"M aaoaa CHARLESJ 0ELAURENT1, MAYOR • DELORE6 A. MEAD 'O CITY CLERK f �'f0 sip' April 23, 1979 APPEAL FILED BY: Belterra Development Corporation 12843 NE 14th Pi . Bellevue, MA 98005 Del Bennett, President RE: Appeal o` Land Use Hearing Lxaminer's decision dated April 13, 1979, PP-316-79, E-317-79, E-318-79, and E-319-79. Belterra Development Corporation (Brentwood Park Addition) To Parties of Record: Appeal of Land Use Hearing Examiner's decision has been filed with the City Clerk's Office on April 23, 1979, along with the proper fee of $25.0u, 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 8 Development Committee. Please contact the Council Secretary, 235-2536, for date and time of the committee meeting, if so desired. NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN that the above-referenced appeal will be considered by the Renton City Council at its regular meeting of May 14.1979 at 8:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave. S. , Renton. Yours very truly, CiTY OF RE4TON �QCt�i2cv C/ 11�1a�t% Dolores A. Mew, C.M.C. City Clock DAM/st cc: Parties of Record i ce �i«gg� nag �yKi 1. rJK Iyr,p W EASTSIOE CONSULTANTS, OC. UEUTEL IF TPUMJ 6900ML " 505 Rainier Blvd N ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027 - oair Ph si 392•5351,O To —� a v J _ r JC] rYyLleao .. Idea GENTLEMEN: '"— n i •'� , t �- WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached Under separate cover vw..._ __tha folbwlrg hams: v,YSI}6 7 Shop dravangs L_; Prints L; Ram l: Samples Specifications Copy of biter C3 Change order U _..... . . . .. . .. .._...-_.__ '� kC Oon[s oAI1 No tISeGINtWR "+T iRb> y } rR THESE ARE TRA 1TSE0 as checked below or approval Approved as submitted Resubmit—,__„_copes for approval For your use Approved as noted Submit...,_.__copies for distribution As requested Returned for corrections Return__.,__,corrected prints For rew'" and ommenl i FOR BIDS DUE __.—...-19_.._._...- PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO U! REMARKS__.- _. CM TO SIGNED: O/awasso rrrewa/ef♦FlMpwwarvtraeu,a w aru.h,.•re.ern nw ., �nrra /,nab/.wrM/va N aa/a 9 x� �a 1 r. 'Iht SPEED LETTER TO: [ DATE: 9 /s,; In, may.-.. PROJECT: �' • f _+.y lC P� YC SUBJECT: !t ,(Crc/osa�✓ /Cµ 5 �acK t� //ems' ye fwc6w f�.c.. /n.e. he a W(z P-, LRO�,o- a r �a ,�_ / C•Jes(d /1f�—�C Krs� -Y:2e,_-ye VZ� ..Y&,f, .ScLedu. c r oe M (SiqIIQ 1 ° o -- Cc✓5T, E.ST/MATE 'SAN/T/�A-'✓ SEWED ' °, 664 S, F• Q C��cF /i95z,o G 5.5. Y,pc! 1ss c,F. G /Z•'/cf 417Go.o Ala„kale, 2 is n. /zoo'Y/d. Z4ua.0 � � 1 A IA F+ t .STrCEer 3To4'M � 690 G, F , 290 L,i," c_ /G ""/G,F, 3, 4841 v Goo *s/,,� r s' Asp! . C•.�c. /3: �o :y E: 30t'/�._ Crus/.td roc/c zlo /. w Pe /575 'L• Curb ; c� .i/eti G3 : L •G, 7SZ°�cF. 445G �°� 3rorr,uoIL' p t W a�er- r 4' A1. P, a., /OS L,F �' /Z A VD.Z. yr/c" /r0 G.i B^/LF asa— FN, 4ssn y. / La E /zoo= /zoo '- i ...brol.I ;J4otr I i ` I /Soyo,( Gi /n'-' _ 194, G � 3, o u t /7f,l 7 9s 000. oo y �W. y1 rM. Ytx: c. CATION — r)ATF _9LLL 179� ' 8y7 � P.ERl'l1T ryyjE Ic,9! ) Slr1e Viewer "torm Sewer RM Construction -V,ov voter F%/stem Derelmnant 77z,ao linter kntecaner _ .later insnectlon _2(,q?- newer .tiste� Develarrent 9z3�v _ "ewer Intecxner '-ewer In%wtlon y2A.&g _ 50 y fe�M fK 7 T/7 r1v i :r j �rccL , i L ! ZLIEPLL -CL DORR64POSDCLC6 Data December 31 , 1980 to, Mike McCarty ►1101, Arlene Haight, Utilities fng;neeri- , sumile.T, Plat of Brentwood Park Water Project No. 541 Take into planL the following Inventory undt•, the above referenced project: Watermaln 4" - 187LF Cost $1 ,683.00 valves: 1- 4" Gate Valve Hydrants: Cost TOTAL COST $1,683.00 Arlene Haight , t BEGINNINMG OF FILE FILE TrTLE •. u 1 i SPEED LETTER TO: �., ../Y, J, �a.<�../ 1s DATE: /47 4 `1 L PROJECT: �lr°k� usn 7r SUBJECT: SA / 3 — Tr qn WATER AND 9EWER PROJECTS PRESENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN THE CITY OF RENTON WATER PROJECT I .54_ smw PROJECT I DATE WATER PROJECT TITLE ! PROJECT LOCATION Ls-,- DEVELOPER ADDRESS PHONE EMERGENCY PHONE CONTRACTOR_ ADDRESS —_/..Y.'1��,r ,S' fJ. J+�d./J/'f7. PHONE3�- 'S��-. E 4LY PHONE FOREMAN lrn/ N�/�f.EL PHONE EMERGENCY PHONE City of Renton Ivsvector_ Other Insvectot_ _-.. WATER AND 92M!R PROJECTS PRESENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN THE CITY OF RENTON WATER PROJECT N S 41 SEWER PROJECT 0 DATE 11-26-79 WATER PROJECT TITLE Brentwood Park Addition PROJECT LOCATION Pierce Ave. N.G. 6 N.L. Ilth St. DEVELOPER Pulte Hones Corp. ADDRESS 812 N. Central, Kent WA 98031 PHONE 852-3100 EMERGENCY PHONE CONTRACTOR Ryker Const. ADDRESS 1275 S.W. 301st St. PHONE 839-8472 EMERGENCY PHONE 839-8472 FOREMAN Dan Neigel (HONE 839-8472 EMERGENCY PHONE City Of Reston Inspector Other Inspector : . \w / ��. City a Renton, _naDept. � .tea_ TEST _. / \ Water Project . \ \ Na_ @ Project This test was taken w — „ . _ At . p_sure of PSI , for w mi__. The test "Failed" o. „_r , on c__: F RECEI t RYKER CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING PHONE 12061 0394472 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING Ins S.W.sel,t FEDERAL WAY, WA 06000 "arch 25, 1980 Pulte Home Corporation R E C E1V E 03900 suiite East 201 valley Hwy.suite 26 1980 Renton, WA 98055 Attentions (tick Hathaway - RE Plat of Brentwood Park Addition Dear Rick; Following is the information that the City centmi needs in order to put a value on the utility systems that you had us install for this subdivisions A) SANITARY SEVER 1 8" Sanitary Sewer Main - 665 ft 'g $13.30 $8,844.50 -- 2 48" Diam. Std. Manhole - 3 ea 2 $970.00 2,910.00 3 Connect to Exist. Manhole - 1 ea It $180.00 180.00 4 60 Side Sewer - 381 ft ce $14.90 5,676.90 Sub Total Sanitary Sewer 17,611.40 Plus 5.3% W.S.S.Tax 933.40 Total Sanitary Sewer $18,544.60 D) WATER SYSTEM 1) 4^ D.I. Pipe - 187 ft -t $14.90 32,786.30 2))) 2- B.O. Assembly - 1 ea -P '$250.00 250.00 3 4s, ,ate Valve - 1 ea .:& $255.00 255.00 4 Service Connections (By City) -- Sub Total Water System 3,291.30 Plus 5.3% W.S.S.Tax 174.44 Total Water S}stem $3,465.74 Very ! , yours, Park t ter-, Pres. ltyker Co:istruction C. Engineering, 'Inc. PR me E 11 rN,s r.a eewes run sscosas s user 1�11Ogr NMwN 1NN Ip�lrla CpBlrl 3 rAM,.MOTOM fIT4�/OIV.a10N lea, Record at Request of c C TO � � NLNTON ML^tt• 11'11 RLIN.. .� � �.!✓ Cc yi W y 1ta[N rO\. WASH. 9Ws' N � Y��L rears • sera BIL OF s7/'►U i [NOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRF.SE-%'TE: That POLTE NONE CORPORATIt'R! .Q of City of Renton (� County of King ,State of Washington, the party of the first part. .. for and in coniderstim at She cons of one and ro/100 o Dollars �? lawful mre of the United Stater of America, to THEM in hand paid by THE CITY OF RLNTON �N the party of the raved part, the tweeipt whereof is hereby ukr:owledged, ,lope by the r presents gram. bargain, ell aw ddieer aer the Said pang of the second part, the following described personal property now keeled at NE 12th Street L Pierce Avenu_ N..E., water Project a541 is the City of Renton , Canty of King and State of Waddeglns to-wit Approxivately 197 lineal feet of a" D.I. war pipe, One (1) blow-off a*amaislY, and one (1) 4" get* valve seseebly, and all appurtenaroes pertaining to said weterwin, expressly warranting said watersain against any expenses, costs or liens hereto incurred thereon by, through or under seller herein. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the arise to the said party of the secwd ;:rt, it's brie, eas:utas. administrators and assigns forever. And said party of Or fire pan, for it's heirs, encuton, administrators, anenunt a and agree a to and with the said party of the wood part, it'a ea*cuturs, administratan and reigns, that said party of the first part is the owner of the rid property,goods and chattels and be a good riXht said full authority to sell the mine and that It will warrant and delerd th, Sale heraby made unto the mid patty of the word ,.an, it's esecsnort, administrawn and assigns, against all said eaary panes a persons, whomsoever, lawfully ctaimiar or to chin the arise, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The said party of the Are part baa brAl sec, 's had an sad d thin 26to day of Nor 9 0 i (rat) Tt "a ns I L ---- -- ---- - - -- ------ (eau.) aYz NORBOT L. LANGLEY DIVISION P1!ESIDENT loess) STATE OF WASMUCTON, 54. Canty of /t/N 4 Os tW day personally appeared baNe ins t 1.. l+ell*Y to sin knows to be *A ladhidwal 4wArW StM%60 aatstatad as raft is sad kn'gskg isrrunent and erhsewls is wl that he loped Abe hie UM and aduatsry or, said deed for Hw win gad pwpors Shards stwhped. alvtN.ter w lemma/i.e pllw�t 4.1 wa V J da!41 NW&-y Mile lie and/or 84v Slate of M*sAs.pw, rrYgg r ri } Iq M�. r SAFECO'TITL.E INSURANCE COMPANY Fourth 4 Vine 101:1ing P.O. &.x 21987 Seattle, !a:>hington 98111 PLAT CER?IFICATE Telephone: (206) 292-1550 TOs BP,I,TERRA CORPORATION 12843 Northeast 14th Place Bellevue, Washington 98009 + a Order No. 412029 Proposed Plat of; BRENTWOOD PARK ADDITION -- � Genticrneni .,, . . This is a certificate as of February 20, 1979 at 8:00 a.m., for a • Plat of the following property: & PARCEL As That portion of the Fast half Of the East half of the Northwest quarter $ ,IM, ., of the Northeast quarter of ,Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, M.M., In King County, Washington, lying Northerly of Northeast I0th Court; EXCEPT the North 708 fret of the Fast half [hereof; �. :CEPT the North 591 feet of the West half thereof; - - - LACEPT an 18 foot strip adjoining Lot 8, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2, Albert Balch's President Park No. 12. PARCEL Is The North 591 feet of the West nalf of the Fast half of the East half of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; EXCEPT the West 67 feet of the North 240 feet thereof; EXCEPT the East 2C feet thereof conveyed to City of Renton by Deed recorded under Auditor's File No. 4852985; EXCEPT the West 10 feet of the East 30 feet and that portion of the West 20 feet lying South of the North 351 feet as conveyed to City of Renton by Deed recorded under Auditor's File No. 7108130410 and 7108130412, EXCEPT the North 30 feet for road. This Company certifies that record title is vested in: PRESBYTERY OF SEATTLR, t Washington corporation, as to Parcel "A"; MARGARET CRAWFORD BALL, formerly MARGARET CRAWFORD. also appearing of record as MARGARET LILLIAN CRAWFORD, as her separate estate, as to Parcel "S". (Continued) - i- :a PULTE PULTE HOME CORPORATION A7 812 North Central P 0. Box 5038 Kent,WA 98031 i2081 852 3100 o December 5,1979 Wa City of Renton Department of Public Works - Utilities 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 RE: Brentwood Park Addition Watr,r Stub Service Agreement Listed below are the square footage; for each lot you requested in order to complete the above referenced agreement: Lot 1 7,992.47 2 7,993.0 3 7,995.27 4 9,760.79 5 12,442.37 6 7,725.51 7 9,537.27 8 7,251.16 9 9,344.85 Lot A 29,033.38 e 73,998.39 Please forward to me a completed copy of the agreement shooing the property addresses for each lot. t Thank You. 4chtar W�..ay f V.P. - Land Development RRH/kl Wad,lnelan Slate Canuwtm Lrrnsrl P/14Tt.HCl/fill Nit hi pn Ma,l'tand Vlrelnla //find, 6,wV4 Cal~a Ohio hnr.y/wna Pae,la Rita T,ml A,Imne it::111 y1- �vo/Tro.J LOT Ar 1102 \ 5 BRENTWOOD PARK ADDITION PUNCH LIST May 19, 1980 Correct the tollowing iLewy before calling for final inspection. 1. Pour sidewalks. 2. Sanitary Sewer a. Bolts missing in locking covers in easement b. Manhole in cul-de-sac - locate and adjust to grade per A.P.W.A. Spec. 3. Storm brains a. Grate Missing b. C.B. full of debris. c. Provide locking device for grate. 4. Curb and Gutter - replace broken curb an p digutter in cul-de-sac nton Polic S. Monuments noes too shallowac eucasedC i o concrete Rentonof casesyhavee concrete to surface on outside - replace and set to grade ?er A.P.W.A. Spe 6. Water - B.O. assembly wrong cap on pipe (no chain and wrong threau.) straighten valve box in cul-de-sac, behind curb. (y./ /I � U sl f 9i Moir( a/r w� �n,J m e� jo) _ , nrJ 1 - a V P ULTE' PULTE HOME CORPORA]ION RIAwd R.Hathmry V,r.L.nd n.wleNm.nl MnN U ion ]W)o E Vdle7 H,"--v WN..,N,in_NAVW.�.NA.40..(�4lo.frr... ♦r'r A.. I.•.Y.r� In.., tY �n M. Mrs. Delores Mead Page 2 April 20, 1979 We strongly disagree with the. Hearing Examiner's conclusion on this item of his recommenda^.ion and request the Council's reconsideration of this matter. Sincerely, BELIERRA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION for Del nett, Presiben %* }'3 i� i R- �i 1 /j 1w . 1 . hagc 0 � H1 I.TERRA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION i.'843 NE 141h PL. BELLEVUE. WA 98005 phone 206.454-0539 April 20, 1979 `�«lNf. =• i'�D Mrs. Delores Mead . City Clerk Renton Municipal Building 'A "s#'• 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 99055 Re: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision r File No.: PP-316-79 Brentwood Park Addition R Dear Mrs. Mead: 1 Pursuant to Section 4-3016 of the Land Use Hearing Examiner's Ordinance of the City of Renton, we are submitting our ippeal i to the City Council for reconsideration of Item 1 of the Hearing t , Examiner's recommendation dated April 13, 1979. In hie report, the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the preliminary plat of Brentwood Park Addition iubject to conditions. Condition - No. 1, which is the sub;ect of our appeal, reads as fellows: "Revision of the southerly property line to be 100 feet from adjacent church buildings, or approval of a variance therefrom by the Board of Adjustment." Section 4-706(3)(a)3 of the City's Zoning Coda serves as the basis for his decision and reads, in part as follow;: "(a) Such lot or parcel of land to be used for church purpof,es shall, among others, meet the following requ:.rements: . . . 3. setback. Building and structures shall not be located closer than 1CO feet to any other developed lot whici is zoned residential. ." It is our contention that this arovision is not applicable in the case of our proposed plat, is it clearly relates only to property to be used for church iurposes--not for residential uses that may be constructed subsequent to the location of a church in a neighborhood. At the continuation of the public hearing on April 10, we specifically asked the Hearing Examiner to seek as interpretation from the City Attorney's Office. In his Report and Recommendation to the City Council dated April 13, he co:oluded that a legal opin:.on was not necessary. i L Mf r . .I Y: ENDING OF I �r I� t l t � 1 . .ra I i 1 �• .. ...___� •�1 m —T all J � 1 _- r• � 1 i I' a ' Q '� Rho , ILIA I r w 1t• x + r N M sr i 14 a I ❑ 0-- a3lFwIR 0 a U ❑ � � 444111 1 0 ❑ lJ N fo If ❑ d ' Q _ r► 11 + e QJ 1 yZ c NE Ord 6 ❑ W0 Tolm 13 0 ❑ c= L7 c ❑ O ❑ Nc wn/ sr NL /i ttl yrPt ° Q Q Q ,�� Oc :3oqo (3 ° 6 � a ❑ o DU NL lorN 94 pm ct C 3 m ❑ 0 O /�� Ooo � ❑ lys � � D NE ; ro fYO�d� Gam' �„� gti�ITio�l SAT PF-116-7, Pagc 'fen, TRANSMITTED THIS 13th day of April, 1979 br Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Del Bennett, Belterra Development Corp. , P.O. Box 1282, Bellevue, WA 98u09 Cheryl Henry, Belterra Development Corp. , P.C. Box 1282, Bellevue, WA 98009 Morman Abrahamson, 3408 N.E. 17th St. , Renton, WA 98055 Charles s Florence Shoaf, 11U8 Queen Ave. N.E., Renton, WA 98055 Stan F.orickson, 1111 Pierce Ave. N.E., Renton, WA 98055 Lariy Masted, 1115 Pierce Ave. N.E., Renton, WA 98055 Emma Tucker, 12U6 Tlxaas Lane, Thunder Hill Apts. , #252, Renton, WA 98055 William A. Jackson, 3508 N.E. llth Place, Renton, WA 98055 Dan Nomura, 3188 Sunset Blvd. N.E., Renton, wA 98055 TRANSMITTED THIS 13th day of April, 1979 to the following: mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Councilman Richard M. Stradlcke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y, Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Don Monaghan, Public Works Department ' Ron Olson, 1 'lities Division Pal Lumbers, Traffic Engineering Division ,,.,an Webley, Parks 6 Recreation Director Pursuant to Tl.sle IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsidera<<on mus, Le filed in writing on or before April 27, 1979. Any aggrieved person ;eelinq chat rh,. decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or -act, 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 suc' peal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting c spaficied requirercnta. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall, or same may be parch .: at cost in said department. w PP-316-79 Fag: Nine 6. Off-site improvements along N.E. 12th Street and N.E. loth Court were not sufficiently defined or justified to be required. However, sufficient doubt exists, due to existing traffic along these streets, to preclude a clear conclusion that a waiver should be granted. It appears appropriate under these circumstances to allow the normal LID process to run its course for any improvements along this street. The owners of Lot A have apparently already agreed W participate in this LID (Exhibit 07) . 7. Off-site improvements along Pierce Avenue N.E. abutting the proposal appear necessary for safe and adequate traffic and pedestrian safety. Abutting Lots A and 1 through 4 should be constructed improvements of curb, gutter, paving, sidwalk and street lighting. Same form of transition between these improvements and existing improvements should occur in the to-be-dedicated right-of-way abutting Lot A. Lacking specific de ign details, it seems reasonable and logical for the Public Works Department staff t lezign this transition to enhance the public health, safety, welfare and qeneral aesthetics. These improvements conform to Exhibits 46 and 7. S. Relative to the existing church buildings on Lot B, Section 4-706. (3) . (a) .3 specifically requires a 100-foot setback from any residentially zoned lot. Between Lot 8 and the nea.est church building must exist 100 feet. Priur to the proposal compliance with this requirement existed. Only as a result of the proposal is the nonconformity produced. It is a fundamental land use principle and doctrine that new development cannot increase the nonconformity or create nonconformity of an existing conform ng situation. Since the proposal, by design, is creating a conflict with zoning requirements the design must be revised (or varied by the board of Adjustment) to conform. Due to this very fundamental principle and doctrine, it does not appear tnat a legal opinion of the City Attorney is necessary for confirmation. 9. Since Lot 4 does not meet the minirum width requirements rf Section 9-1108.23.F. t4) additional width must be added to secure compliance. An exception was not requested from this requirement. 10. The utilities serving the proposal have been designed reasonably and in response to existing conditions. In resp-ise to Exhibit 05 the applicant agreed to provide a storm ewer and utilities easement from the mouth end of Queen Avenue N.E. to the proposed N.L. llth Court. REC7NNENDATI0N: - Approval of Exhibit N2 subject to: 1. Revision of the southerly property line to be i00 feet from adjacent church buildings, or approval of a variance therefrom by the boarl of Adjustment. 2. Placement. of a restriction. on the plat and in restrictive covenants, if needed, prohibiting access of any lot to Queen Avenue N.E. 3. Installation of off-site improvements along Pierce Avenue N.E. from Lot 4 to Lot A. tapering W existing improvements, oar review and approval of the Public Works Department according to Conclusion Nr. S. 4. Wideninn of Lot 4 to conform to Section 9-1106.23.F. (4) per review and approval of the Planning Department. 5. Submittal �f storm drainage plans for review and approval of the Public Works Department prior to submittal of the final plat. 6. Compliance with all other applicable ordinances and regulations of the City of Renton, Approval of the exception to permit pipestem Lot 5. ORDERED THIS 13th day if April, 1979. L. RIA Beeler Land Use Hearing Examiner 1 r�z PP-316-79 Page Eight 8. Restrictive covenants exist on the northerly approximate 300 feet of the property as a result of reclassifying the property to R-1 (R-083-71) which attest to participation in an LID for required off-site improvements such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street paving, undergrounding of utilities, and street lighting. The southerly approximate 270 feet of the R-1 zoned portion of the property was recently rezoned to R-1 (R-270-78) and covenants completed requiring: a. Subdivision of the total property owned by the United Presbyterian Church. b. "Dedication of the easterly 20 feet of Pierce Avenue N.E. for public right-of-way and agreement to participate in an LID for construction of 'he required off-site improvements is required at such time as development of the a itern 20 feet of Pierce Avenue N.E. between N.E. llth Street and N.E. Street is possible and required by the City of Renton. 9. The applicant testified that restrictive covenants for the proposal would contain restrictions prohibiting access from the proposal to Queen Avenue N.E. 10. The Public Works Department staff stated that sufficient area apparently exists in the right-of-way of Queen Avenue N.E. to develop an adequate turnarcund. 11. An exception (originally requested as a waiver) was requested by the applicant of the requirement of off-site improvements along Queen Avenue N.E. Improvements are prcposed along Pierce Avenue N.E. abutting Lots 1 through A but not on the remaining northerly portion of this street (exhibit 03) . Also abutting the proposal is N.E. 12ch Street and N.E. loth Court, for which off-site improveme.ts, in addition to Queen Avenue N.E. , were not proposed or recommended by staff. _ Regarding off-site improvements north of Lot 1 along Pierce Avenue N.E., disagreement exists between the applicant and staff on how to appropriately reduce from a two-lane to a single-lane configuration in this street (F+"bit 11)) . Staff recommended tapering from a point parallel to the northerly right-of-m. ry line of N.E. llth Place meeting the easterly right-of-was, Pierce Avenue N.E. to the southwest corner of the abutting Tax Lot 205. The applicant offered the alternative of beginning the taper at a more southerly point, that of the northwest corner of proposed Lot 1. 12. Storm drainaye plans were not submitted. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposal conforms to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and appears to serve the public interest, health, safety and welfare (Section 9-1106.2.E. (2) ) . This proposal is slightly unusual in that it combines two separate ownerships with a plat between two of another ownership and leaves the two same ownerships at opposite ends ^f the plat. Some of the conflicts with the zoning regulations and Subdivision Ordinance are a result of this situation. 2. The ;ipestem configu-ation of Lot 5 appears appropriate under the circumstances of the difficult "L-shaped" configuration of the southeastern corner of the property (Section 9-1309.1.A) . Strict conformance with the Subdivision Ordinance would - necessitate deletion of Lot 5 of provision of dedicated public access, both of which - appear to substantially reduce the reasonable use of the property (Section 9-1109.1.A) . Under similar circumstances other properties in the area would be entitled to the same application for an exception, and the pipestemm is a commonly used design for ".;. solving difficult problems of property configurations (Section 9-1109.1.B) . Detriment to the public or other properties is not apparent (Section 9-1109.1.0. 3. Based upon the statement of the applicant that restrictions upon the plat would prohibit access from the proposal onto Queen Avenue N.E., it has not been shown that _ the proposal will impact this road sufficiently to burden the applicant with off-site improvements. Benefit to the public and interest of the public health, safety and welfare car, be shown for some improvements in this street in view of the substandard condition that exists. Howexar, it has not peen clearly demonstrated that these improvements are necessary and what specific improvements should be required. 6. Relative to the length, of Queen Avenue N.E. (beyond the 500 foot minimum of Section ' 9-1108.23.A. (7)) the applicant is not affecting th existing length. This nonconforming situation can continue to exist under the established doctrine and land use principle of nonconforming uses. An exception does not appear to be rexluired. 5. Sinte Queen Avenue N.E. is an existing street that will be unaffected by the proposal i (access prohibited from the plat) an except. ,in does not appear required for the yy turnaround requirement of Section 9• 1108.23.A. (7) . A turnaround does not currently exist, therefore, a nonconforming situation is permitted to continue until directly aftected or altered by subsequent development. 4 �4 t N PP-316-79 Page Seven The Examiner requested further comments. Mrs. Ewa Tucker inquired regarding procedures for conroection to proposed sower lines. The Examiner advised that the developer should be co.ltacted regarding connection procedures. Mr. Bennett indicated rillingness to coordinate the matter with existing residents on Queen Avenue N.E., noting that the cost would be borne by property Owners benefiting from the extension. Mrs. Florence Shoaf indicated concern regarding provision of a turnaround area at the end of Queen Avenue N.E. , and inquired if sufficient dedicated property was available for that purpose. Mr. Lumbert indicated that 15 foot on either side of the roadway would be required for turnaround area, and depending upon the configuration of the roadway, the dedicated 50-toot width could possibly accommodate the proposed turnaround. Mr. Bennett indicated that it would be logical for those residents who utilize Queen Avenue N.E. to provide additional access and bear the cost of the improvement in conjunction with utility line extension if desired. Mr. Charles Shoaf stated that provision of additional access may be acquired from a property owner located at the and of Queen Avenue N.E. to provide sufficient turnaround for the cul-de-sac. The Examiner requested that the matter be resolved separately from the subject application. The Examiner requested further comments. Since there vera none, the hearing on File No. PP-316-79, E-317-79, E-318-79, and E-319-79 was closed by the Examiner at 9:52 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS G RECODfFNDATIONS: Having reviwad the record in this matter, the Examirer now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The request is for approval of an 11-10t single family preliminary plat of Brentwood Park Addition, together with exceptions from the Subdivision Ordinance for one pipe=tin lot, 560-foot cul-de-sac, deletion of cul-de-sac turnaround, and deletion of off-site improvements s 2. The Planning Department report accurately set., forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter, and is hereby attached as Exhibit ,l and inceroorated in this report by reference as - met 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 A.C.W. 43.21.C. , a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for tt= subject proposal by Gordon Y. Erickson, responsible official (Exhibit M1) . 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; except for a required sanitary sewer extension. C. The proposal is compatible with the lot area and dimension requirements of Sections 4-706 (R-1) and 4-729 (G) of Title IV, and Section 9-1108.23 (Minimum Standards for Residential Design-Subdivision Ordinance) , Title I%, Ordinance No. 1628, Code of General Ordinances; except for: a. Pop •stem Lot 5 (Section 9-1108.23.F. 0) . (d) .) . i b. '�c. ver. Avenue N.E. cul-de-sac of 560 feet instead of the 500-foot maximum of ' Section 8-1108.23.n (7) . C. Deletion of cul-de-sac turnaround at the end of Queen Avenue N.E. which is required by Section 9.1108.23.A. (7) . d. Deletion Of off-site improvements along N.E. 12th Street, Queen Avenue N.E., along Pierce Avenue N.E. north of N.E. llth Place, and along N.E. loth Court. e. Setback of the proposal of 25 feet from the abutting church buildings instead cf the required 100-foot setback per Sections 4-729 and 4-706. (3) . (&) .3. f. Lot 4 is not platted wider than interior lots per Section 9-1108.23.F'. (4) . 7. A variance from the setback requirement of Section 4-706, (3) . (a) .3 has Leen request-d by the applicant of the Board of Adjustment. A decision will be made by ward after conclusion of this public hearing. \ PP-316-79 Page Sax Mr. Lumbert was affirmed by the Examiner. The Examiner referenced comments contained in Exhibit e8 regarding requirement for improvement of Pierce Avenue N.F. north of Lot No. 1 and requested clarification of the request. Mr. Lumbert indicated that curb• and gutters would be provided along Pierce Avenue N.E. to the north side of the proposed intersection of N.E. llth Place and Pierce to expedite safe traffic flow through the intersection and protect pedestrian safety beyond the proposed curb and gutter section. The Examiner asked Mr. Clemens to review requirements for off-site improvements along Pierce Avenue N.E. Mr. Clemens indicated that from Lot No. 1 westerly to N.E. llth Court, on-site improvements consisting of curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lighting and paving should continue northward to the southwest corner of Tax Lot 205. Mr. Lumbert clarified that a tapered section would be installed in the section of roadway abutting Lot A to provide a transition to current alignment and preclude access in the privately owned property contained in Tax lot 205. The Examiner requesed testimony from the applicant. Responding was: Del Bennett Selterra Development Corp. • P.J. Box 1282 Bellevue, WA 98009 Mr. Bennett was affirmed by the Examiner. Regarding transition of roadway section to the existing pavement, Mr. Bennett objected to staff recommendations for tapering to the north :n boundary of Lot A as being incorsistent with recommendation contained within Exhibit s8 from the Public Works Director. He advised current city requirements for provision of full improvements to right-of-way abutting the development including curb, gutter, sidewalk, paving, underground wiring and full utilities, and noted his intent to provide a transition from the northern boundary of Lot 1 tc the proposed intersection of N.E. llth Place and Pierce Avenue N.E. back to the exi-Ling pavement width of Pierce, although he felt provision of full off-site improvements in the transition area would not benefit the public. He also advised that improvements to the section abutting Lot A would require approval of the property owner, Mr Ray Ball. Responding to the Examiner's inquiry regarding concerns expressed in Mr. Abrahamson's letter, Exhibit 05, Mr. Bennett • . indicated his intent to mitigate current drainage problems existing at the southern portion of Queen Avenue N.E. by extension of storm sewer system along proposed lot lines. Regarding _ proposed restrictive covenants requiring property owners abutting Queen Avenue N.. . to participate in an LID at a future date, Mr Bennett indicated that he had suggested to Mr. Abrahamson that current requirements included in an LID may be in excess of the desired standard of improvement, and minimum provision of paving at a future date may satisfactorily '4 improve existing substandard conditions. n The Examiner referenced f vious discussion relating to extension of sewer lines to N.E. 12th Street in lieu of • osed extension to N.E. loth Court. Mr. Bennett indicated that various alternatives fog Rrension were reviewed, but due to topography and required depth .+ for installation of the line, the proposed location had been finally determ used. The Examiner inquired if a pumping facility would be required to extend lines to N.E. 12th street. Mr. Bennett responded affirmatively Mr. Bennett advised that although apple, —ion for a variance through the Board of Adjustment had occurred to reduce the required setback of 100 feet from the church property located 'l'¢ south of the site, he requested that a legal opinion be obtained to clarify the purpose of the requirement % ich he felt was imposed to protect existing single family neighborhoods from intrusion by church construction, and not to protect church proper. / f ,m single family home construction. ,he Examiner requested comments from the applicant regarding the request for exception to - delete requirement for turnaround area. Mr. Bennett indicated that although the application ` for exception had been made, it was his opinion that it was not necessary due to his intent to preclude access onto Queen Avenue N.E. in the form of restrictive covenants included ="a on the face of the plat. He also advised his opinion that responsibility for provision of turnaround area should be shared by those property owners who utilize Queen Avenue N.E. for access. The Examiner inquired if staff has evaluated compliance of proposed Lot 5 with dimension requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Clemens responded affirmatively. The Examiner referenced Section L.10 of Exhibit 01 regarding critical need for recreational space in the general neighborhood, and requested clarification of the recn endation as it relates to the proposal. Mr. Clemens reiterated previous testimony by M. Aebley, Parks and Recreation Director, noting that. a requirement for open space as part of the plat _ approval had not been included in t..a Planning Department recommendation. The Examiner requested a final recommendation from the Planning Department representative. Mr. Clemens indicated that the recommendation would remain as submitted with the exception of correction to section M.7 of Exhibit el, previously stated during no initial hearing. i` tv li. a PP-316-79 Page Five The Examiner requested further comments. Responding was: Florence Sheaf 1108 Qu�en Avenue N.C. Renton, MA 98055 Mrs. Shoaf emphasized that residents of Queen Avenue N.R. will be greatly impacted by the rroposed developent through final determination of location of sanitary and storm sewer lines, as well as development of access roads. She indicated that Queen Avenue N.E. is designated as a 50-foot right-of-way of which only 20 feet has been developed, and requested the Examiner's consideration of total impact of development upon existing residents. The examiner advised that the subject of off-site improvements will remain open for dismission at the continued hearing as well as the subjects of exception from the Subdivision Ordinance. He indicated t information regarding these subjecla would be obtained from the Public Works Department prior to the meeting, and inquired if parties .n attendance objected to this procedure. There was no objection. The Examiner requested further comments. Since there were none, the hearing regarding File No. PP-316-79 was closed at 12:15 p.m. and continued to April 10, 1979. CONTINUANCE: The hearing was opened on April 10, 1979 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The Examiner advised receipt of a letter which was read into the record and entered as .follows: Exhibit s5: Letter to Hearing Examiner from Norman Abrahamson, dated March 30, 1979. Exhibit s5 reviewed Mr. Abrahamson's ests of the proposed development, which included provision of storm sewer drainage a: ilities easement between the south end of Queen Avenue N.E. and proposed N.E. llth Court; provision of restrictive covenants to limit ac�czs fr= Queen Avenue N.F. to the four lots abutting Queen; and provision of restrictive covenants requiring owners of lots abutting Queen to participate in an LID at a future date if proposed. The letter also stated that Mr. Abrahamson's objections will be withdrawn if the aforestated conditions are met. The Examiner also entered the following additional documents into the record: Exhibit 06: Restrictive Covenants required by rezone of subject property; File No. R-270-78. Exhibit e7: Restrictive Covenants required by rezone of northern portion of the property owned by Margaret and Ray Ball; File No. R-083-77. Mr. Clemens advised receipt of a memorandum from the Public Works Director which was entered as follows: Exhibit e8: Memorandum to Hearing Examiner from Warren C. coniason, dated April 10, 1979. Exhibit 48 responded to previous inquiries regarding requirement of off-site improvements as part of proposed development, and stated the department has no object-on to approval of a waiver on Queen Avenue N.E. since public health, safety and welfare would not be adversely affected. Regarding a waiver of off-site improvements on N.E. loth Court and N.E. 12th Street, because properties fronting on these roadways are not proposed to be developed as part of the plat, the department would have no objection tc granting of a waiver subject to execution 01 restrictive covenants agreeing to participate in a future LID. The memorandum advised that improvement of Pierce Avenue N.E. north of Lot No. 1 should be sufficient to provide for a complete intersection at this point subject to approval of the Public Works Department. Responding to the Examiner's request, Mr. Clemens designated on Exhibit 03 the specific location of the proposed improvements on Pierce Avenue N.E. He noted that the intersection at N.E. llth Place and Pierce Avenue N.E. should be completed with full width pavement to provide safe traffic movement in the area. 'R,e Examiner stated that the subject of utility lu.e extension would require claeificetion as a result of discussion at the previous hearing, and requested a representative of the Public Works Department to testify. Responding was: Paul :,umber t Traffic Engineering Divinaon Y'^ y !I t eP-316-79 Page Pour or required additional time to submit a recommendation in writing. Mr. 140naghan indicated his preference to submit the departmental recommendation in writing. Mr. Abrahamson felt that previous testimony relating to loca in of utility lines consisted of conjecture, and requested further research to determine the feasibility of extension of lines to N.E. 12th Street. He also requested further information regarding provision of storm drainage facilities. The Examiner advised that appr.val of the preliminary plat requires submittal of plans for underground sanitary and storm sewer lines as well as details for connection to utility systems. Mr. Clemens indicated that the information provided within the drawings submitted by the applicant sufficiently meta ordinance requlresm.mts. The Examiner requested further testimony from the applicant. Ms. Henry advised that to her knowledge, determination of utility line connection had occurred as contained in submitted plans due to wxruting elevations within the plat and the city's policy regarding installation of lift stations. She also concurred with Mr. Monaghan's statement that the property owner has the option of determining the direction of the sewer lines. Ma. Henry requested that representatives from the city's Engineering Division and Traffic Engineering Division be in attendance at the continued public hearing to further clarify the question of installation of utility lines to serve the proposed plat, requirement of off-site improvements, and extent of turnaround area at the end of Queen Avenue N.E. The Examiner inquired if utility plans are normally reviewed in detail upon submittal of the final plat. Mr. Clemens advised that plans submitted with the preliminary plat request are int .nded to be sufficient to determine if the site can be adequately served by existing utilities in tee vicinity, and precise details would follow the preliminary plat. tie noted that upon submittal of final engineering drawings, these details will be reviewed. The Examiner requested a representative from the Parks and Recreation Department to testify regarding the intent of Section .,.10 of Eriribit 41, which states that recreational space should be acquired prior to final approval of the plat. Responding was: John Webley Parks s. Recreation Director Mr. Webley was affirmed by the Examiner. The Examiner requested clarification of the requirement for provision of recreational area in the vicinity prior to approval of the plat. Mr. Webley advised that the subject site is located within Neighborhood No. 10, Sierra Heights and Heather Downs area, as designated in the Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan, adopted in March of 1978. He indicated that although the subject development does not constitute a major impact to existing parks in the general vicinity, expanding growth in the surrounding area has required acquisition of a 12-acre recreational site to accommodate the increased demand. The Examiner noted that acquisition of r. 12-acre site is a long-term goal, and inquired if delaying approval of the subject development was the intent of the recommendation. Mr. Webley indicated that since the acquisition is considered of low priority, it was not the intent to delay approval. The Examiner requested testimony from a representative of the nttl..t4es Division to respond to previous inquiries regardinq location of utility lines. Responding was, Ron Olson Utilities Division Public corks Department Mr. Olson was affirmed by the Examiner. The Examiner reiterated previous inquiries regarding the rationale utilized to determine connection of utility lines to N.E. loth Court and whether it is feasible to direst utility lines to N.E. 12th Street as an alternative. Mr. Olson adviq�J that the existing sanitary sewer in the intersect-on of Pierce Avenue N.E. and N.E. 12th Street extends down Pierce Avenue N.E. to N.E. llth Street. He noted that due to the elevation di. ym fferences, he would asste that connection was found necessary to the south to eliminate the necessity of a pumping station. The Examiner inquired if a sewer line extends east of Pierce Avenue N.E. along N.E. 12th Street. Mr. Olson advised that a sewer line does not exist in N.E. 12th St.-et. The Examiner inquired if finish elevations of the roadway and location of utility lines into the plat would be required is order to provide more definitive testimony. Mr. Olson indicated that. actual elevations had not been investigated, but he would issumn that the enginee:r for the project would have preferred installation of 100 feet of sewer line to the north rather than the proposed 400 test to th- south if the possibility had existed. Mr. Abrahamson objected to Mr. Olson's use of the word "assume," and requested that additional technical investigation be accr- shed prior to finalizing the utility plans in order to provide the most feasible p' future development in the area, pueen A.eenue N.E. in particular. PP-316-79 Page Three Mr. ►orickson supported improvement of Pierce Avenue M.E. to the northern boundary of Lot A per the Planning Department recommendation to provide traffic safety adjacent to N.E. llth Place. lie inquired regarding limitation of access on Pierre Avenue N.E. during construction activity, extant of improvements on that roadway, an` extent of impact to existing residents by increased traffic. The Examiner indicated that access may be temporarily limited during construction activity and off-site improvements, if required, must be justified by reason of public health, safety and welfare. Mr. Eorickson advised that the existing condition of Pierce Avenue N.E. is substandard and would require substantial improvement to bear increased traffic. Responding was: Larry Kamstad 1115 Pierce Avenue N.E. Renton, WA 90055 Mr. Raastad supported provision of full off-site imr,"wemients on Pierce Avenue N.E. to a point beyond N.E. llth ' .ace to preclude creation Ji a bottle-neck and provide safety for parked vehicles as well as emergency tehicles. Responding was: Emma Ticker 1206 Thomas lane Thunder Hill Apartments, #252 Renton, WA 98055 Ms. Tucker, purchaser of property at 1108 Queen Avenue N.E., inquired regarding the extent of pavement on the proposed pipestem Lot No. 5, and if drainage problems would occur adjacent Lao her property as a result of paving. The Examiner advised that a certain amount of run-off would occur adjacent to the paved area, but approval of the building permit which is required prior to development of Lot No. 5 would address the specific atom drainage details. Ms. Tucker inquired regarding location of the proposed sewer line on the pipectem road. Utilizing Exhibit s3, Mr. Clemens designated proposed location of sanitary sewer and storm drainage lines, which will extend around the perimeter of Lots Mc. 5 and 6 southerly to N.E. loth Court and connect to Redmond Avenue N.E. Ms. Tucker ;,lso indicated her concern regarding disposition of )ueen Avenue N.E. as as alley. Mr. Abrahamson requested explanation of the rationale for the decision to extend utility lines south to N.E. loth Court rather than northerly to N.E. 12th Street, noting his opinion that it would be more beneficial to provide utility lines in proximity to existing residences to enable future connection. The Examiner requested testimony from a representative of the Public Works Department. Responding was: Don Monaghan Public Works Departtw. ' Mr. Monaghan was affirmed by the Examiner. The Examiner reiterated Mr. Abrahamson's inquiry regarding utility line extension to the south rather than in a northerly direction to N.E. 12th Street. Mr. Monaghan responded that the choice of directional route would lead him to believe that contours of the land and higher elevation of N.E. 12th Street had effected the final determination of utility lint extension to the south. Mr. Abrahamson inquired if Mr. Monaghan's comment. were fact or conjecturc. Mr. Monaghan advised that. review rf the plans would he necessary to verify information regarding elevations contained within the site. Following review of the submitted plans, Mr. Clemens indicated that contours shown on the plat designate a five-foot increase in elevation on N.E. 12th Street from the proposed cul-de-sac. Mr. Monaghan advised that due to ground elevations and because lines must be placed as shallow as possible, the connection to existing lines on N.E. loth Court was determined most feasible. He also noted that dtre_tlaq lines to a higher elevation such as exists on N.E. 12th ^rest would necessitatx Provlsjon of a pumping facility which is not economically is .ail ie for the :ub ect proposal and discouraged by the city due to continual smint:raace problems. Mr. Monaghan indicated that it is the option of the develops, to determine utility line location acd in this case the route had been chosen because there had Lien no other alternative available. The Examiner requested comments from Mr. Monaghan regarding requirements for off-site improvements for the subdivision in the interest of public health, safety and welfare. Mr. Monaghan indicated that improvements along Pierce Avenue N.°- would be required to the south line of t`,a unincorporated parcel adjacent to tot A to expedite traffic movement, but improvements to other access street, bordering the subject site had been refsrred to the Examiner without consent. The Examiner indicated that he would require testimony to enable him to pro ide a recammandation on the matter. Mr. Mo-ighan stated that if improvements are uetermined to be required on M.E. 12th Stier , Queer. Avenue N.E. and N.F. loth Court, they would consist of installation of curbs, guitars, sidewalks, street paving and lighting; however, he preferred not to comment on the necessity for such iminovemer.ts. The Examiner requested clarification regarding whether Mt. Monaghan preferred not to comment PP-316-o9 Page 1vo improvements mist he justified on the basis of public health, safety and welfare.. The Examiner .sked the applicant if one concurred in Exhibit 41. Responding was: Cheryl Henry Selterra Development Corporation P.O. Box 1282 Bellevue, NA 98009 Ma. Henry indicated general c ncurrence, but expressed concern regarding several recommendations contained in exhibit 01. Referencing Section M.2 which recommends widening of corner Lot No. 4 to a width of 75 feet, she advised that the Subdivision Ordinance requires that corner lots be platted wider than interior lotei however, specific width area is not delineated within the ordinance. She advised that through a process of utilizing a tangent and arrivinq at a seen average, the width of Lot No. 4 had been established at 71.3 feet which meets ordinance requirements. No. Henry noted that square footage of 9,670 contained in the lot far exceeds minimum zonino requirement of 7200 square feet, and immovable constraints of property sines created by existence of property not owned by the applicant on the northern and southern boundaries of the site preclude , widening the lots. She advised that a drafting error had been discovered on the plat and lot depths of Lots 1, 2 and 3 as well as a portion of Lot No. 4 ..coated between Pierce Avenue N.E. and Queen Avenue N.E. total 114 feet rather than 104 feet as indicated on the plat. Mr. Clemens designated the location of the subject lots on Exhibit 03 and confirmed the existence of a drafting error. Ms. Henry indicated that necessary front, rear and sideyard setbacks had been provided in conformance with ordinance requirements, and the imposition of five additional feet on the sideyard of Lot No. 4 would not substantially benefit the lot. She also noted that the lot width requirement for a corner lot under King County regulations is 70 feet.. Referencing Section M.3 of Exhibit 41, which recommends provision of a 15-foot utility easement and store drainage provisions across Wt No. 4 from Queen Avenue N.E. to N.E. loth Court, Ms. Henry objected to the recommendation due to the current necessity to extend utility liL99 an excessive distance to connect to existing lines, and because of Potential disruption and detriment to Lot No. 4. She also felt that if other properties are served by the proposed utilities, the cost of installatio• should be shared by all property owners on a fair-share basis. Referencing Section M.1 which recommends improvement of Pierce Avenue N.E. to the north line of L-t A, (caned by Mr. Ray Ball, Ms. Henry advised that because purchase and development or the Ball property by the applicant is not intended, the requirment should be modified to extend the improvements to a midway point further south, possibly adjacent to N.E. llth Place. The Examiner requested comments in support of the request. There was no response. He then requested tesitmony in opposition to the application. Responding was: Norman Abrahamson 3408 V.E. 17th Street Renton, NA 98055 Mr. Abrahamson, owner of property at 1110 Queen Avenue N.E., responding tc the intention of the Applicant to develop Pierce Avenue N.E. ind front proposed residences towards that street, objected to relegation of Queen Avenue N.E., containinc, five homes and a vacant lot, to function as ar alley, since it had originally been designated as a full public street in city development plans. He also objected to application by the developer for a number of exceptions to the Subd:•eision Ordinance, and felt that elimination of exceptions could occur through development of Queen Avenue N.E. which would also benefit future development of the area. Mr. Abrahamson supported provision of a utility easement across Lot No. 4 as well as provision of store drainage facilities to alleviate existing drainage problems in the vicinity of Queen Avenue N.E. Re:;pordinq was: Charles Shoaf 1108 Queen Avenue N.E. Renton, MA 98055 Mr. d of concurred in testimony provided by Mr. Abrahamson. we x.•iterated comments relating to original city plans for development of Queen Avenue N.E. in, a a `ull rity street, and requested mitigation of existing drainaae probiems on Quern Avenue N.E. Responding was: Stan Eorickson 1111 Pierce Averut N.E. Renton, WA 9605i f , April 13, 1979 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE Hf ARIN X JjKR CITY OF RENTON RFPORT AND RcCOMMFNDATION TO THE RFNTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: Belterra Development ;orporatitn FILE NO. PP-j16-79, E-317-79, E-318-79, *N-319-79, revised to E-319-79 LOCATION: Southeast corner of Pierce Avenue N.E. and N.E. 12th Street. SUMMARY OF PEIQUEST: Applicant seeks pre.'.iminsry plat approval o•° an II-lot single family subdivision. In addition, the.e are requests for an exception to the Sundivision nrdinwnro n ncernlnq pipestem lot, cul-de-sac lergth and deletion of turnaround, and a waiver of off-sits improvements. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval subject to conditions ROCOMMENDA'_r ION: Hearing Examiner: Approval subject to conditiona • PLANNING_DEPARTMENT The Planning Depactment preliminary report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on March 23, 1979. _PUBLIC H_PARING: After reviewing •he Planning Department report, examiurng available infor^t ation on file with the application, and field checking the prcperty and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a pub:.ic hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on March 27, 1979 at 10:25 a.m. in the Council Clambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. ' 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 sl. David Cleme•is, Asecciate Planner, reviewed Exhibit 01, and entered the following adAitional exhibits into the record: Exhibit M2: Preliminary Plat as submitted Exhibit N3: Preliminary Plat with staff comments Exhibit 06: Letter to Planning [apartment from applicant, dated February 21, 1979, regarding requests for exceptions and waiver. Mr. Clemens corrected Section M.7 of Exhibit 01 (Departmt.ntal Recoamendations) which stated: "Approval of the exception to tha cul-de-sac length and provision of a minimum e.ergency vehicle turnaround for Queen Avenue N.E." to read: "Approval of the a caption to the cul-de- snc length. Provision of a minimum ame_gwncy vehicle turnaround for Queen Avenue N.E. per Section L.5 of the Departments.'. Analysis." Section L.', reviews various aspects Of the access proposal and recommends that the Hearing Examiner cons''d, ision cf a minimum turnaround for emergency vehicles at the south end of Queen AM The Examiner advised that th.i notice of public hearing contal., epplicaLion file does not include reference to applicat.ons for exceptions 4tn v .1. t..•mmens confirmed that an error had occurred, thereby precluding discussion of to : at the designated public hearing. The Examiner also noted that procedures for prelit... �-y and final plat approval contained in Sections 9-11D6.2 a,.d 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance do not include provision for a waiver of off-site itrprovementsl however, option for application for deferral for a period of two years it, available to the applicant. Following review of the ordinance, Mr. Clemens concurred w.ti the Examiner's interpretation. In view of the substantial impact of this information, it was agreed that the public hear inq regarding the preliminary plat would proceed, and a subsequent public hearing would be scheduled for April. 10, 1979, for the purpose of review of the requests for exception. The Examiner asked the applicant if she concurred in the proposal to reogxn the p.1blic hearing at a later date. The applicant indicated concern tnat testimony may be repetitious, but concurred it the request. Reeponding to the Fxaminer's inquiry, nther parties in attendance at the hearing also indicated roncurrence. The Examiner advised that he would proceed with testimony regarding the preliminary plat and the subject of off-site improvements, noting a recent opinion from the City Attorney that requirement of off-sat: