Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA80-064 7 MP5 BEGINNING OF FILE FILE TITLE SPEGIHL . PERMIT SP- nC��1- 8U N• E • con' SrREEr AND MONROE AVE . N.E. GERALD E. SCMNEIOER F/2 OF IR4,, a. ' ° ° THE CITY OF RENTON `$ MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 p o Ni) BARBARA'. Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR ® LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER �o Pco• FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235-2593 9ArF � 0 SEP� tj, September 16, 1980 Mr. Gerald E. Schneider 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: File No. SP-064-80; Schneider Construction Company; Hilltop Apartments. Dear Mr. Schneider: As I indicated in both the hearing of August 26, 1980 and in my letter to you, dated September 8, 1980, the request for a variance is inappropriate to accomplish your intended purpose, and more to the point, a variance is an impermissible means of accomplishing your goals. I have therefore dismissed your application without prejudice effective this date so that you can meet with the Planning Department and file an application which meets the requirements of the City of Renton Zoning Code. • The variance you have requested would be to permit the parking of vehicles, an associated accessory use of a more intense principal use (R-3; Medium Density Multifamily) , in a less intense zone (R-2; Low Density Multifamily) . This cannot be accomplished by variance. Zoning which characterizes both property and associated uses is not entirely a matter of the density of population, but, in addition, a matter of development type or character. The purpose of designating a zoning category or classification is to set limits upon population, accessory uses such as parking, and type of development. Not considering the merits of your case, that is, whether or not what you have proposed is meritorious, the limits of my jurisdiction and the limitations of the Zoning Code preclude outright the consideration of a variance to accomplish your aims. The portion of your property which is zoned R-2 may be used for any purpose designated for an R-2 zone by the Zoning Code, including accessory uses and including by special permit up to 11 units per acre and the accessory uses of those 11 units subject to approval of both the Hearing Examiner and the City Council . In addition, you may file a petition to rezone that portion of your property which is now zoned R-2 to R-3 to permit R-3 principal and accessory uses, or you may file an application to develop a Planned Unit Development (PUD) on the entire acreage under your control which permits the underlying zoning to be overridden within limits prescribed within the PUD Ordinance. fl Gerald E. Schneider September 16, 1980 Page Two Therefore, as I have indicated above, I have no choice but to dismiss your application. The dismissal without prejudice permits you to refile without waiting a prescribed period of time before the matter can again be submitted for consideration. Yours truly, • ‘S Fred J . Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc: City Attorney Mayor Planning Director City Clerk Roger H. Newell , AIA, 1102 19th Ave. E. , Seattle, WA 98112 Carl Bloss, Schneider Construction Co. , 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Seattle, ,WA 98188 D I `5 M I SSE D 0 N 9-16-80 1 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL, APPLICANT: Gerald E. Schneider FILE NO. SP-0164-80 LOCATION: East side of Monroe Avenue N.E. approximately 600 feet noorth of N.E. 4th Street. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a special permit to allow construction of 62 multiple family units (part of a 158 total unit complex) in an R-2 zone. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval with conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner: Dismissal without prejudice. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was received by the ' REPORTS: Examiner on August 21 , 1980. A supplementary report was received on August 26, 1980. 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 was opened on August 26, 1980 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers 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 preliminary. report. Roger Blaylock, Associate Planner, reviewed the report, and entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #1 : Application File Exhibit #2: Site Plan as submitted Exhibit #3: Site Plan with staff comments Exhibit #4: Alternate Site Plan as proposed by Planning Department • Referencing Section L.2, third paragraph of the initial Planning Department report, which discusses application fora variance to allow placement of a portion of the R-3 parking. area in the R-2 zone, the Examiner indicated his opinion that a variance is not permitted to change the intensity of a specific zone since such action constitutes a rezone. He then inquired regarding the number of parking spaces required for townhouse development in an R-2 zone. Following deliberation regarding definition of the word, "townhouse," Mr. Blaylock concurred that two-family dwellings such as townhouses would require two parking spaces per unit, and sufficient area in the northern portion of the site exists to provide the required 30 additional parking spaces. The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Gerald E. Schneider 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Mr. Schneider indicated nonconcurrence in the proposed alternate site plan, and preferred implementation of the original design as submitted which orients proposed units towards the sun to the west, east and south rather than to the north as proposed by the Planning Department. He also objected to facing proposed units towards the parking lot which is not aesthetically acceptable, and requested that the hearing be continued to allow application for a variance. The Examiner reiterated previous comments regarding the inappropriateness of a variance, noting that the recent reclassification of the entire site had established specific•zones to provide transition from existing single family residential areas. He suggested that the applicant revise his application from a Special , Permit to a Planned Unit Development to allow blending of densities and provide flexibility in site design in view of topographical constraints. The Examiner explained the PUD procedure in which the application would be submitted in two phases and would require' SP-064-80 Page Two final approval by the City Council . Mr. Schneider advised that a PUD had not been requested due to time constraints and because he was unaware that the city had adopted the procedure. The Examiner suggested that the public hearing be continued to September 16, 1980, to allow the applicant's architects and engineers the opportunity to review the alternate plan, redesign the plat, or resubmit a PUD application. The Examiner requested further comments. Since none were offered, the hearing regarding File No. SP-064-80 was continued by the Hearing Examiner at 9:37 a.m. CONTINUATION: The hearing was opened on September 16, 1980 at 9:04 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. - Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The Examiner advised that a request for variance had been filed by the applicant subsequent to the previous hearing on August 26, 1980, and the Hearing Examiner had responded to the applicant's architect on September 8, 1980 in a letter which informed the applicant that a variance cannot be utilized to achieve an increase in density by overburdening the R-2 zone with accessory parking. Responding for the applicant was: Carl Bloss Schneider Construction Co. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Mr. Bloss requested that the public hearing regarding the special permit be continued for one week to allow review of the requested variance. The Examiner reiterated previous comments regarding the inappropriateness of the variance procedure, and advised that the application would be dismissed without prejudice. Responding to further inquiry from Mr. Bloss, the Examiner stated that a letter of dismissal would be transmitted to the applicant for review by legal counsel who in turn may respond to the city. The hearing was subsequently closed by the Examiner at 9: 15 a.m. OF R.� °sy,`' O THE CITY OF RENTON o® , MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 n UMW M * BARBARA'. Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR r LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 09A � o9gT�D SEP� vr$' September 8, 1980 FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235-2593 Mr. Roger H. Newell , AIA 1102 19th Avenue East Seattle, WA 98112 RE: Variance Application for Hilltop Apartments; Schneider Construction Co. Dear Mr. Newell : I have read your request and find that while it is couched in terms of a request for a variance, it is, in fact, a request for rezone of the subject property. Under Section 4-708 of the Zoning Code, the R-2 property'can only be used for duplex residential uses and its accessory, subordinate or ordinarily incident related uses. Your request goes beyond the limits of a variance in that the request asks for--approval of a right to overburden the subject property with parking for a more dense use than the type of use permitted in the R-2 zone. The accessory parking is not accessory to the use proposed for the R-2 portion of the property and the request cannot be heard in it.s present form. As I indicated at the original hearing of August 26, 1980 (SP-064-80) , such a request is an inappropriate method of achieving the results you desire. The proper request would be either to resubmit the issue of the current zoning of the subject parcel for reconsideration in light of changed conditions (if such changed conditions' can be evidenced since the previous reclassification approved by the City Council in Ordinance No. 3193, dated March 12, 1979) , or to submit a request for a PUD to allow you to merge the three parcels into one for purposes of determining the overall density requirement of the subject parcel . The PUD Ordinance is the appropriate tool to accomplish your aims, and it is well suited to your purpose by providing design flexibility for sites which are difficult to develop. To summarize then, while you have in form applied for a variance from the provisions of the Parking and Loading Ordinance (Section 4-2204.3(C) (1 ) (d) ) , the request is in actuality a request for reclassification of the zoning of the R-2 portion of the subject property to permit an other than authorized accessory use, and a variance cannot be used to achieve this purpose. Yours truly, • ‘COA'AN • Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc: City Attorney Mayo r PYanning Director /City Clerk Gerald E. Schneider, 6510 Southcenter Blvd. , Tukwila, WA 98188 ROGER H. NEWELL AIA ARCHITECT 1102 19TH AVENUE EAST •SEATTLE 98112 • (206) 322-1192 September 4, 1980 V- Hearing • S Examiner _ . -- • - Renton City Hall Renton, Washington /UDC D�pP7 Re: Variance Application for Hilltop Apartments, Renton, Washington Schneider Construction Company - Developer Dear Sir: The applicant, Schneider Construction Company, is seeking a variance to locate a portion of the required parking stalls required by those units located in an R-3 zone to be located in the R-2 zone portion of the same contiguous lot. We submit the following in support of the variance application of Schneider Constr. , Company, for the Hilltop Apartments: a. ) The applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property. The unusual zoning configuration has created essentailly three seperate long and narrow lots. This configuration was advocated and supported by the Renton Planning Department over other proposed solution, which would have created more conventionally proportioned lots. The unusual shape of the three lots and the requirement to maintain buildings and their respective parking of the same individual lot creates a hardship in design and denies the applicant normal use of his property others enjoy with more normal shaped lots. b. ) The ,granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to any property in the vicinity. Subject R-2 zoned lot is sandwiched between two lots being developed as one contiguous development by one owner. Therefore, the proposed parking should have no impact at all on nearby properties. Requested variance will not grant any alterations to the required zoning bulk, lot coverage, unit count or set-back requirements. c. ) The granting of the variance shall not constitute a grant of special priviledge to the applicant. Since no change to bulk, lot coverage, unit count or set-back requirements are requested, no special priviledge will be granted. September 4, 1980 Hearing Examiner • -- Renton City Hall Renton, Washington page 2 d. ) Approval shall constitute a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. According to the Planning Department report for the Special Permit Application, August 26, 1980, states that allowing the portion of the parking in the R-2 zone "may be a legitimate means to reach the rezoning ordinances intent". It is the applicants desire to provide a pleasing solution to all parties involved including, the City of Renton, the adjacent property owners and the future residents of this development.To provide the amenities (as outlined in our design analysis dated July 15, 1980) desirable in a large scale development of this kind, ;a variance is required. The proposed solution with the necessary variance follows the Planning Department's goals for the development of this site and provides the community with a quality project. We, therefore, request the granting of a variance for the placement of 64 of the required 144 parking stalls to be located on the adjacent R-2 zoned portion of the developed site, as a condition attached to the granting of Special Permit SP-064-80. Res ectfully, H. NEWELL, AIA RHN; jls OF I •� 9n; " THE CITY OF RENTON C.7 O/ ' .% Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 o BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 09,0 235- 2550 • 0,9gTED SEP-C -05�Q MEMORANDUM September 16, 1980 TO: All Concerned Parties FROM: Planning Department RE: SCHNEIDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (HILLTOP APARTMENTS) VARIANCE APPLICATION V-090-80 The Hearing Examiner, after consulting with the City Attorney, has determined that the above appli- cation is inappropriate and will therefore not hear the request as previously noted in legal publications and the agenda of September 23 , 1980. RJB:wr OF R4,4 �� © 0 THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL.. BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT -9 co• 235- 2550 0,91 1- 6- 0 SEP-C°° September 5 , 1980 Gerald E . Schneider 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila , WA 98188 Re : APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE , FILE V-090-80, TO ALLOW PARKING REQUIRED BY APARTMENTS LOCATED IN THE R-3 ZONE TO BE LOCATED IN THE ADJACENT R-2 ZONE ; Property located on the east side of Monroe Avenue. N .E . approximately 600 feet north of N . E . 4th Street . Gentlemen : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on September 5 , 1980 . A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for September 23 , 1980 at 9 :00 a .m . Representatives of the applicant are asked to be present . All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing . If you have any further questions , please call the Renton Planning Department , 235-2550 . Very truly yours , Gordon Y . Ericksen , Planning Director B y • Roge .Bajlock Associate Planner RJB : yb cc : James Kressbach Roger H . Newell , AIA, Architect 1102 19th Avenue East Seattle, WA 98112 ' * ' . C.'y f } ,. : ,T�•'�f..t ', I �M I. THIS , , . , • „- . ., vt _ . : , . GENERAL, LOCATION: AND, OR ADDRESS: PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF MONROE AVENUE N.E. APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET NORTH OF N .E. 4TH STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON FILE IN THE RENT-ON PLANNING DEPARTMENT I S POSTED TO NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS OF ,E..1.4- i, 4ii . :,. ' ,t, , .,•N' .a`.., 1 ♦hi , - ' • , I' TO BE HELD . IN CITY ' COUNCIL CHAMBERS, MUNICIPAL BUILDING ON SEPTEMBER 23, 1980 BEGINNING At 9 :00 A.M. P.M. CONCERNING ITEM WI . 1 REZONE • • SECL4.. . PEIT . 1 SITE AP* ROVL ' . U WAIVER • • SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW PARKING REQUIRED BY APARTMENTS ,. LOCATED IN THE R-3 ZONE TO BE LOCATED IN THE ADJACENT R-2 ZONE ' FILE II V-090-80 i ii 'FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL 235 255Q THIS NOTICE[ NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT. PROPER AUTHORIZATION { r PLANNING DEPARTMENT SIWPPLIMIENTAL REPIIF T ID THE HEARING EXAMINER AUGUST 26 , 1980 PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT : GERALD . E . SCHNEIDER FILE NUMBER : SP-064-80 A . SUMMIA G Y & PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a Special Permit to allow construction of 62 multiple family units ( part of a 158 unit total complex) in an R-2 zone. B . PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS : 1 . Under point #5 of the Preliminary Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner on the proposed Hilltop Apartments , alternative designs were suggested as being possible and meeting the specific require- ments of Rezone Ordinance #3293 . 2 . The Planning Department presents the attached schematic design as an alternative that meets the Ordinance ' s intent . The design eliminates proposed Buildings C and E. Total dwelling unit count is not reduced because the units are added to Buildings B, D and F . The parking lot on the north side of Building D is relocated to the south side of the building.. Relocation requires the undergrounding of the storm water detention system and the modification of the entrances to Building D from the north side to the south side. The open space acts as a buffer in between the two densities of apartments loc'aed on the R-2 and R-3 zones . In addition , the relocation of the open space provides a more centralized recreational area for -the complex adjacent to the community building and swimming pool . 3. The following minor modifications are necessary to meet the Parking and Loading Ordinance require- ment of 1. 5 parking spaces per dwelling unit and still have those parking spaces accessible : A . An additional row of 10 parking spaces should be provided on the north side of the island between Buildings F and J . B . The Recreational Vehicle storage area between Building F and G should be moved to the northern most parking area between Buildings H and J . C . The sidewalks adjacent to Building J on the east should be removed . This will orient the parking lot between Building H and J to Building H . PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUPPLIMENTAL REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER AUGUST 26, 1980 PAGE TWO cm C . DEPARTMENTAL 'EE®IMMEIN®AT I®INS: Based upon the above analysis, and the primary •analysis of the Preliminary Staff Report , the Planning Department recommends that the Hearing Examiner either grant a continuance to Tuesday , September 16th to hear a variance request or approve the Alternative Design subject to the following conditions : 1 . Construction of the sidewalk on the east side of Monroe Avenue N .E . from the northern boundary of the Hilltop Residential Subdivision . 2 . Approval of a storm water retention system by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of a building permit . qa. c .-- da. ' ' '''''''' • Oa:. ". ''k, • t l'o. ' . „ L.„..„,,..... .....,_ ,....;.., ,.,.. re. „... 4„... to4....„...., i'3' ...a.Ti t.. '' •1.: '');" . le• , .- t.i. ...,, ',i . , _ -- A ..14 ' , 1 tr _ 4,-,7 • i "..• .., .. 't 4,-,,,tt ; Er ,...4. , i - .4,„..* - .”.0..., , , ,. '71•11, .,,r1f. • .. ••, "ntc I. ,- ••,-.., •-' n. 'i t !. .• - .. I • ft.-- . . .,,y7,41-,, " • • ;•••• - ...,•--4-,..•• .,...? qp. '4 ' 4 ,,,, , : ‘ 7.•,-, \ , -.-- • i. .,. , ..,,-P \:".,,, ':'‘: tl" . , - _ . . - --- 1--.71,0; l.,. ,; '1--3.,«e gib ,,,--,- 1 '• .i. -• ' -----_ . --- • , . '-ez , Vitt; .51, v R..41.. -• . , • / _.------• . \ LM,C,H ,..,• ,,., 1' *- ;411;,,' *. 4; 46 4: v., --, 4 - . / ,. •.t.A,:lL 4, ., A'F,, , .r !"41 .,` t. i ' .'t, W • . . ':. Vii i xt4. 5# k., 3gev -e 1 1: i..,,t44^7 -., . t x• %, .‘,.,t,k. 4 0 ...7o ,, ,_ 4 ..:, .. ..., - - -.7... ....-• ..-.. ,4„,,,....-:_-_ ,.•V'L. , .c,''',. '.- , , ...• x-, . ••• " ' ., .3-----„ . ,.,:, ;.,..,,,,:1 _, I':.4. : Ic ,,--: .17- I .,.;.'. .4.....a. .....,-,......, --;‘,AV • fa. - a" .....?•f; • ,r... .a .. ,,..."- ...a A. 1074 ..• ' tao It fi t. •';' 'at. ril '4. ., tor' 4O- ,.. a i •- .i.4. I' Tract 2 ::',.. • 4 ' if .."..7410. iiof,4' -0- ,. \,,-,- . • ' , „ ,,,,, .4•• 3 t • :,. ,•._ „ .ii..--- „ .. _ . - - ••., • • ` .C. i•-r . ,..-.*' -,,,. :11 I Z'O' •-• .stal . ,, •- -, ... 01 , `' e Ereal , i • ',.-4- '1 c,c. . .,;1.... :..;?,-. * ‘ - . .'4*. . ,,i;::114.5,3,ra-t:-.4,IIF;:tio.*:41.\,4,,Airlf.,;.::,:u4mriz,....ke..!::::..4.77..2.,.:Anr47,,,,...,....7.5:7;',1_,,....:47.,:.9.01,;:.7.-izas.7%...*;.,,,.4..... .*,:tal:''',„....,471..,.4.i.:1-, ,,,-*-,.;:z••, ",. :::4161,00„,-‘2....N.,...:,..I.'......"...:_ii, 1„..14:4 jo.",,.../41::01.47.1..ezt.1 i....,:.1.1.....,:oxr_...h.::;,,...::44r...i.Ailie. ic","..los.,..31:,_ ....... ...; L J , 1 gl-ioAct .... ,: ay.." • - - . ,I•t,'".-.W.1 - .74;-f__'tr 2 4 • •,, 4 -- - Ar'......, ..w. • -0,gif 4,... l'f 4,.....momow. „+„•••• ct• -. t7w..,- ;..•t,;.,,-.".,..$•..- -'-"-•k-li';t*•.l Tf-ylk-'0F..ica-rry, - -.4-•-•.•••,- ;•*-4••••• I--;1. ".--• ••• -.. . • e LI ,, ,. ,..st,A,•„,4 -, .-:,..,_ j .. - r s, ..-, ,, ,..-!---,.,i,., ,i, $ : Paolo o. 1-- . _i kr•-;'; *;13:r1-1 -._''f,.,,,,,,,-„tt..1 ,..,...,0- • ,•:- r,el „...,--• . ..... .. . • ,0„,:....,.._... . ..... , :‘, l • • .... "••• I i:(.., 0.;i0,12.1i....a ''Il,, .# :Olt ...9 •••'.',1b la 1 .: 4.' '117••#•#:.4.•''J:_. :- ••••!..-3,__ L ) I " ., ., ........... .,. .. 7,...e.ffre ...--• =,- ... ,:;7'!, ,f5 - - ) A :,i•-‘ ' ;•- '- - - .1.42 ,3' , 9, .7' ' 'it'i',.. 1: 4'4‘.‘0.4‘ .., ..... .............. ...• •o .. ....• 'P.- a• I • '.---.• • - • '3,,, 41\04. MEM, ' .0. .. . ,tr. -4-1- i 1../...,-/it' : s "b. il 'a:''''''' ••'''''''. "-:-- ".44",t'-' I I , . • . I'Li ''',,," ...,‘Nr-'‘L'''''''. ... •x +.... , _______ .. ,.. -....„ ,1" AM,.- 4- 4. .. ''01,:.'5"'" '4. , RZ._42kts .i.'-' 1,..' - it-T- t.x.*--. .v4'''''', '''''''.. -'44..'3,541-7.4'T,*..4 IT--•:'',,,..''..`,.: - ',..4"." . 1.... --- , t *. "/ to.,0-41 -:, .,. , . . ,„ -- 44-'4- - - 31.fit, r'44."0.,ps , - MI -•dm 0.,s •••4?•••• `'''' •••-•-•1•;--...- .,slaclaw,..f1;.,....,r„,,i7.-,, ,I...ZI;.c....r.,,,..?.t.te ',.,....o,'" ..,,,c,.'.7 : a,..r.14•",,..a :,.....-••''' __ - - .. .' ...,. ; i.7411311111 (41.11-'111 ..._....._4......i Wil.,4-)4':a '4.144 if4.114*-tt. 1114.‘L'.'.,,,,,,,,,,.' 4:4'. .., 1 - 1,0„,.‘" ' "X-- •••,...A.;.----,4r•., - • _,- . a I. ' • ) ‘•1 AlommosiononimMENNEJ tp......W.4-. - . ,,-,..r.:„ .., , , ,,.. .,, ' . i,,,,,,„,,,,, , .#-. :-...*.‹.. .,,, • .0,,..-;i,-•'`.1"0;''''il$:f4-4.. ..:,t.,... '- _ 41-44--tiroi.-0„/-1„,-.....,.. --q:-w-,..4,4r.,,,q;.. : 6 - ..'" , te- . . 11%21:-ri , .„ ,. .. •4 < ',. g '-k-t.V - 4,' '" t " '''''' ' - .. ' - .f!.%..Air'd''.. . -` ".""ri"'P... . ..,_ +. :' .4.....;; •• ' '' ACP:44'7r, '''147414,41434 t", , .4::4.,501".K•*'" I'1 .:'.' V ' . '''': ,' -, '. .•^ ' 1- 43\ i k 1. 7 ...„ a-. __. -, .- , . , , ,,...„ at. .t.......... „„ ... tt,s'41' -O.,+.44"•••::A.-A 4..-.tr'I ,.. --. , ---,,_„_--. .., ..... .t.tt,,,, eza...4 : -__‘..-__r_- - -_ P . .- `-‘ -V•.4.n,..,.I,:...,k.4/',.i,,i.,_`,1; -,--•_;,1 1I:Ii 1'%.II1;••0 ,:?i'°2.4-.1--.,-:'1t';II• ,,%L,„-A'.4._'.a,;.1';.-:,,1'1.a1.,'I.l4•.-'3k,-.. '=-_.•.-s,, 'c••I' ••' e1lVv,.'ot4 1i'l•••„." -%'.'.-1•.‘-.•.t•10-4,F'4.-•-'P•.••..•.4•'.•A,'•,_I'O'1s-__,,4 V-:4:,•_OK si_•.,._tJ,N p,4._.,\\V..'.0_'riA'V_T i.7,I;!,'.tt.r.,.•.V.,-. ..'...I 'E 1''i,e,'*"g.'•..'i;•-.•_•l,,-,fl-,i,4,s1„.,rl q--:•.,-i-i,.:-,,'1I,-,,.''.1.ce 1._-1i r.'"•1.'f: .;.••,,,'---',.4.:'y'''-•-1'-:*.4 4 f-..p.l•,••l 1,-.1-,..,r.-,'e,1i it..-..-.„,•-. • J . *,-':1'•.7• 1-i..t•0'D•••t0.'.7e.-',.'..‘...:.;1%s(-.f.:,1l„ ,-...1-'ma;.4,.;".;..;..•.;,"..V.'. ...a..4'6"-...,3....-C-k 1:.n,i,,1.ty„.,.'•F______ „_-"y:_.,6-*3.,2-_.i r4•.,'_'.__F..''.,'„_°_& ._'-?t-:1_I-,-,._.^--1,;t't k.-,-„,-.r.•.••.--.-._;:..,.", ..-.„3.r-7..,f,4,--7;-7_A--_-1',.,-,,',,.,,•,•31,-,1..4i.....'3a..a•;si.4-.._,. 4q.4.Pf,4•tr:•,-1' ,'1-7';_,xi•.„••e..7._7rn.4_-..w..r•i; 2.• ._.-....:. -..IV-I...'._.:1;..6"'t.';4'",Nt?•.,L7-i.Y...„-r00.„'".%,-4,-.,4„1..',•1.:.'r.',..'4 I,.s• #'..,.:t.-. :.'.. • .. .• ..I.••-:la • '"•a v"tr1,.t.-..••*1k 7.'•i."4''s-' O.i,a.,_,•.-PC.•,' ! •.•e ,,..,.. le , .....,V ,111.4 .. 1 •-• • .'-i"., `"4: • .• •.-- I • • k• 4tai? , . - . .., , A . ...t. i' '.. •C's. ..; a' SITE PLAN • Tract 1 ', ,. . -L, ... ..... .. ,, ,... ..... . ..- . --i-_,_-.-. 7-1..-• - ,....-,...,,,,-...--- -.-1-_-_,-- .,, ‘.4. / 4.... % ::iir..... ' • il -t. ....... ..... .-, --./....Ly ,--•... ..1... ,r....-..-,---.. k. ...,' - •-.... - ._ g ; ''.. ''.' ,:: ' 1 . - , ...,.- - . t..•.".= Q 1.7._:---.1."--•-,-0- o'-' '-.":-- • ,, I' 1 1 0 ,„,1, . , ., r = , 21-!.._ , _ - - 158unit development by Cwt....nip/es., Pennne.......4:...... es... ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT • PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE. HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING : GERALD E . SCHNEIDER , SP-064-80 AUGUST 26, 1980 PAGE TWO D. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1 . Topography : The site has generally irregular topography with several knolls and valleys throughout . 2 . Soils : Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam (AgC) . Perme- ability is moderately rapid in surface layer and very slow in the substrata . Runoff is slow to medium, and hazard of erosion is moderate . This soil is used for timber , pasture , and for urban development . 3 . Vegetation : The site consists of brush and scrub grass groundcover , together with various sizes of Douglas Fir trees scattered throughout the site . 4. Wildlife : Existing vegetation on the site provides suitable habitat for birds and small mammals . 5. Water : No surface water was observed on the subject site (8/12/80 ) . 6 . Land Use : The subject site is presently undeveloped. Two single family residences are located to the southwest of the property , adjacent to Monroe Avenue N .E. A preliminary plat of 20 lots for single family residences has been approved to the north , while a 244 unit apartment complex is proposed to the south. Renton Vocational Technical dnstitute is located to the west of the site across Monroe Avenue N .E . E . NEICBBORHOOD CBAR' CTERISTICS : The area consists of a mixture of undeveloped land, commercial uses , and sparsely developed single family residences . The subject site is within a transitional area from the business uses and zoning along N .E . 4th Street to the single family residential community along and north of N . E . 6th Street . The immediate area is dominated by the function of Renton Vo-Tech Institute . F . PUBLIC SERVICES : 1 . Water and Sewer : Existing in the area are six 10-inch water mains along Monroe Avenue N . E . , and an 8-inch sewer main , while a 12-inch storm sewer is found on N .E. 4th Street . 2 . Fire Protection : Provided by the Renton Fire Department as per ordinance requirements . 3 . Transit : Metro Transit Route 107 operates along Monroe Avenue N.E . adjacent to the subject site . 4. Schools : The subject site is within 1/2 mile of the Highlands Elementary School , while McKnight Middle School is approximately one mile to the north , and Hazen High School is within two miles to the east . G 5. Recreation : In addition to the vocational school grounds , Kiwanis Park is approximately 1/2 mile from the subject site . w PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEA4RIING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 26 , 1980 APPLICANT : 0 GERALD E . SCHNEIDER FILE NUMBER : SP-064-80 A. SUMMARY & PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a Special Permit to allow construction of 62 multiple family. units (part of a 158 unit total complex) in an R-2 zone . B . GIE IER!' L INFORMATION: 1 . Owner of Record : GERALD E. SCHNEIDER 2 . Applicant : GERALD E . SCHNEIDER 3. Location : East side of Monroe (Vicinity Map Attached) Avenue NE approximately 600 ' north of NE 4th Street 4. Legal Description : A detailed legal • description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department . 5 . Size of Property: +5 .65 acres (R-2 portion) + 9 .4 total complex 6 . Access : Via Monroe Avenue N .E . 7 . Existing Zoning: R-2 , Residence Multiple Family ; Minimum lot size 7200 +, R-3, Residence Multiple Family 8 . Existing Zoning in the Area : GS-1 , SR-1 , R-2 , R-3 , B-1 9 . Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Medium Density Multiple Family 10 . Notification : The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date . Notice was properly published in the Seattle Times on August 13 , 1980 and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City ordinance on August 12 , 1980 . C . HISTORY/BACKGROUND: The subject site was part of the original plat of the City of Renton . It was rezoned from S-1. to R-2 and R-3 by ordinance #3293 of March 16 , 1979 . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING : GERALD E . SCHNEIDER , SP-064-80 AUGUST 26 , 1980 PAGE FOUR L . PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS : .1 1 . The proposal is inconsistent . with the existing. zoning of R-2 and R-3 and for the subject site . However , the intensity is appropriate in the Comprehensive Plan designation 'of medium density multiple family . 2 . On January 23 , 1979 the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the rezone to R-2 and R-3 subject to the seven conditions . In the Hearing Examiners conclusions two alternatives of development wec e suggested for the site . One was a P .U .D. and the other was a Special Permit to allow the construction of apartments in the R-2 zone. The applicant has submitted an application for Special Permit . However , the design does not specifically follow the other seven conditions . The applicant has placed necessary parking required for the R-3 area into the R-2 zone thus increasing the use and development intensity of the R-2 zone above that allowed by the rezoning ordinance and the City Municipal Code . The applicant has complied with the overall maximum density of less than 180 units on the entire site , the retention of a 100 foot landscape buffer on the eastern boundary of the property , and the filing of restrictive covenants to implimant these conditions . The applicant ' s architect Roger H . Newell has submitted a design analysis supporting This particular design . Specifically the design team felt that all of the available solutions were insensitive to the actual site conditions except for this proposal . Unfortunately the design team did not realize that they only had this design latitude if the applicant chose to go through a Planned Unit Development where he could vary the density and associated uses over the entire parcel . In actuality , the design has created the two zone buffer that was intended, but has not specifically complied with rezoning the property . If the applicant had submitted a variance the Hearing Examiner could have considered its merits in his present review . The Planning Department believes that the variance to allow a portion of the parking _in the R-2 zone may be a legitimate means to reach the rezoning ordinance ' s intent . The design buffers the adjacent uses and separates the two intensities within the development . It also appears to provide balanced open space areas per the apartment concentrations in the project . The three design schemes proposed by the applicant in their justification would create is barracks like affect and not be as creative. and asthetically pleasing as the present proposal . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING : GERALD E . SCHNEIDER , SP-064-80 AUGUST 26 , 1980 PAGE THREE G . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: • 1 . Section 4-722B, Special Permit 2. Section 4-708 , R-2 , Residence District H . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: • 1 . Comprehensive Plan , 1965 , Land Use Report , Objective 6 , Page 18 . I . IMPACT OF THE NATURAL OR HUMAN ENVIRONMENT : 1 . Natural Systems : Conversion of the subject site to multiple family residential from undeveloped will disturb soils and vegetation , increase storm water runoff, and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area . However , through appropriate landscaping and screening, many of these impacts .can be mitigated, while increasing the human activity on the site . 2 . Population/Employment : The total proposal of 158 units will increase the area population by approximately 400 persons ( 2. 5 persons per unit x 158 units) . Development in the R-2 portion of the site will increase population by an estimated 155 persons . 3 . Schools : The subject proposal will increase the school population by approximately 40 students ( 2. 5 students per unit x 158 units) , while an estimated 16 students will be generated by the apartments in the R-2 zone . These students are likely to be scattered throughout the grades and not siginificanty impact existing services . 4. Social : Increased oppurtunities for social interaction will be available for the new residents of the proposed units . The community building , laundry and outdoor recreational facilities will provide focal points . 5 . Traffic : The proposed complex will increase traffic in the area by approximately 950 trips per day (6 trips per unit x 158 units) . This will be routed on Monroe Avenue N.E. J . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton ' s Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended, RCW 43-21C , the ERC issued a Final Declaration of Non- Significance for the Subject proposal on July 30 , 1980 . The appeal period expired on August 20 , 1980 . K . AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: le City of Renton Building Division 2 . City of Renton Engineering Division 3 . City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division 4. City of Renton Utilities Division 5 . City of Renton Fire Division 6 . City of Renton Parks Division F .... nr ri, . 77- • ' LJ-017 -.1. • j i' -.1'-i'. ' 170k: "-1-1:‘• 1-. 10 . kfil .. il; g •••• . - • .... i _acor Pa. . W. ,•34 , • • •l • I,- : , ,.,,i/13,.. ,• . ..,,,.. -. , .5 • .4; , , / /../...sii "...Ili•, •.I, . .... „ . .. • . .4. . . , ,•. ..'.4- , •/ /.., ,x • ... (,•, ,.',,° : , 4 4` ' •; . .'I. z• / \... / / ' ' r` -- , • ., ' /, 1,..g • .02 1 .•'ii0. 11 • •. 1 • r...••••• f.1 •. • • .. .•1.,.; . . • ..A.:, „... .. . . . ... i 1 : 4 • •:.• . • I " It : . .' '' ' - - ' .7k ' • ' " . ''' ,: './4, .1 L"I'''i•,••,',•3•••••• .- •••,- •1' . r poi. . I t .1 • • . ' . •'•ay .....!•••1 . "I'9' . './ 14. i t • -..1 ' i."71:: . 1•1`:::. I: ,..A '. t.. ..,.• . ...S1-7,1......•ei 10Ir 7 . 1 i ,.o.a. ' ' a • tedi•11 t i- , -rs•--.4 •,,_!_t_t:j . •, • . 1,1,•• . A .., .1 .•,I,L,...e.gy 1. \ , 141100.114-.. . i • Q , , .)-L.t....:L..•...3-22-4-t-L. ---11• '• , , ii •• '.r.' IP: .............i i . . . . , r" : ,. ,. ti -! - '••..••.• • •.,7 1 i'.. ...C.r.'.',','.'::.:.:::.:.:-..A ., •, -- : - I. J....,...) :-... . •1. l'4,:•._....J L' .s : .•,....•..ri,,. . . . . .. • \ , ., . 1-• ::: ••.07.-...:.-1::' ;.7!...."::.•/:.-1.--,•.!..1 •• TI.41r::...:71.7‘': -/ / :ea%nA • 1441 .;ii . .4 42P:''•4 .::".1:,. ,, ' .. 1 ..1.-e- •.. 4: •• , - 'On-I -1-.' G ...‘,-,..1<-- .... , 1 .ivir.. .1 ,. , ,. . 14. .4. -,,, ;„,.. ..,,,54. ,_. ,... . ,. „. . , . " : it.... , . • .1 •f 11_0 tk.- - :- • R- '. • Gs...1 • i 'f 1 2+'44'ammo (..•.': 1'•'-' .•{I '4 '- . :-. i " '-'s . ...tt .,--...:,% • - 2.1 ' -.. ..,•-r4•-: '..As.• " - L',-,"-IL ' ,• •:-..• ;(.4 1.--...- .,. . . 1•i. .-- _ ,„1\01 - '' t. • • ••• i;7.4. ••.,••••..c ••••-•...,.....:••,•••,., •, •.1. i ;1 1 . • I , .....M.1•11,100=1.11•1041•1•0)... -- - - .-- • It , . ' . '. ---- , • , . . . , R.,,i ,,i,: : :i--•••6 ._) . 1 I 0% .,i 1 ;;011:- , ' • 4. ' ' . • „.• -_ 'l i •4 'I .L. i 1._i_-1 I • . „• •I ' -:; C -. • .1' %.1.".1 -720 0 . . •" ''4. • .1 '..!A•2 O-' %11"i'1••a'• • __*5- 111111 ..,4 I.,4. I .1. : .! : • • : : 7 ' ' 4, ... * i :I a.•-!•-ln: T., 1 ' OleFt *I ,^C . - ' • ..' t•., '... . •Illi ' ; -4 ) '' jC -1 1 , ".22-1. ra••.'r'{;:a+-, 1 s.? ,.. , ..! : • ! .. 01 „ . . . N kr...+., .(-- 1,..- .i.„.• ,, 2 .4? : - • ..11- z- • °•.." •: ' It ;Tilt..-?.'....:•i4:.-irX •"....'• .•s • 4 *! - ''' t i irt' 6,1,`...et. ..: 1•• • , T1,.▪ . I. 111 III . l'ri i ... t h• • $ ..:1..-.-i.,,: 'pr- . . . i 7, ',1-.:.-0 .1.. i , .. _--,. • ... 3 ROM/ 1 rl • , 10- • • N II. .••L "a•^' . . 1,, 4::.• • i; 7.4" il A -.44; -;,,,,ii• ,,,. ;.1.:.•44.1,1.7,I.T •4;......-r,• ,ar ••4-.7)7,3-'1 a_•. Z CI ,▪IP ' • ' litil . 'r'• ' I o'14:,Zh." 41.•••• IT srol•ab.?rapist! 0.114 ••, .1..7..:1 'bi '1. .'6. 7. .• III: -'. A':I ' ell g.5112 1 * . Z ••••••11..1..m...•• •oni r ...r% ' LP'•--- 0 W..":4' PIABRI' . i I a • t.)- 7.,Iltil: Waal...m I 44. .,..,-4.:-.•-•oer•00„.0,__ .m_.. 11... .- . . cp......in .1 R-3 • . ..,,,,lk ri- - , , ---1 . 1 1 • 11 AI y' 19 •'• I ,7 • 2.- I . ,70,,4W• ;74./ ! ,C - I , 1 , I •. . , , 7710.s.r.V41: 01 ' • ' 1-* A: - ....... „A ..4_ , L 1 T 1 i • i , , , B..i _ , . , ao , 1, , . , ., , , . I i, , _ • '. 1 i , . F , G • t i , . .1 1 i,- ' ''' '-4--.----1-- -e• --- 1 / i' I GRENVVpOD . * ..„, 1 ,., I1 4 '-' I I CEMETERY 7 - G . , „ i , ...,.... , 5 4 E •. • .'•••=7j • I / 4 1 j ilpirlo••••"4111p- - __ r• _________ ......, #14 . I i 1 ,..„, „, . . -I• . . . • , ! • 5. ',..,' • . . , . , APPLICANT GERALD E. SCHNEJDER TOTAL AREA 9. 4 Acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Monroe Avenue N.E. EXISTING ZONING R-2 and R-3 EXISTING USE Vacant PROPOSED USE 158 unit multiple family complex COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Medium Density Multiple Family COMMENTS • ., • . . • - .• • . . • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING : GERALD E . SCHNEIDER , SP-064-80 AUGUST 26 , 1980 PAGE FIVE L . PLANNING DEMtTIEJT ANALYSIS : 3 . Comments from the other departments suggests that the only major problem remaining with the site is the storm drainage system . The Engineering Department advises that the storm drainage system can be developed, however the system requires further study at this time to determine the best system . It is also recognized that revisions to off-site improvements will be required . This would include the sanitary and storm sewer plus the improvement of Monroe Avenue N . E . The Police has expressed a concern that the development plans for Monroe Avenue N .E . as submitted by the applicant do not include the sidewalks in front of the two single family residences to the northeast of the proposed project . This would create a gap between the approved Hilltop single family residential subdivision and the Hilltop Apartments along Monroe and it should be filled in . 4. In addition the Police Department has advised that building numbers should be placed on each of the buildings in at least 12 inch high numbers painted in a contrasting color to facilitate affective access by emergency services . 5 . There are alternative designs which would comply with both the site characteriptics and zoning G limitations on subject site without reducing units . M. DEPARTMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the above analysis , the Planning Department recommends that the request by the applicant , File SP-064-80 , not be approved because it does not comply with the specific ordinance requirements concerning the rezoning of the subject site in File R-271-78. ��«/ � 4-'00RfrIP• 1.0'i tJH IT xNEDUI.a . zo••'w c•2,t.e zoo- 11 �' _ / ' `� —♦_- __ _ —,�1 )1.. fir'. Lo•bf/nr .M'/ vM i+wia71T •c . . / / / / t 4iM T Ilp tee,f I.9.O4N ILLW '•�•AV► •/ / / ! I Du C/w fk..� 1S7 ' / ,- _/ // /. i v' y e*. • - a• to•Ib /` / I .', MM.1»OW WTI'Id 'WObe/Pr4+D1. y9 — — \ •'ram era / / / v i Gts•�•1 •ff ilm WI. / \\ ---t - �_..AC ,�°-_ TP''2 _ �� • -,--— 3 . \:�• - A.YMPih M+-MO. • ` }R•I 2046_—— �f \'b-'�ts�' • �,i 7 �7 1�. 1-� 'd\ . ;f: ..� �� \♦ `�` !R2IAG filh • '�,• u...:..••e-M--,--ww Limn, - —., ,., :e.07. L . r.. '..a v e1'. — N. t'�u . M a' / - i.p.. 1 O - }..__ ,_ .--�(�_ 1.q.�Y' ' M 1'L' 1. t \ \i —\ ,� is,,,, i:.\:..A.<\\s‘,• ,i ��. I I I / pi.I I �.«S.v�..ea ' •I I I O : Q • >; ., 1+•��N. 1 . -'i /'c' i i I •' J I t'; `' '• `-1 , !yam o a ! '_ , il` i L _ ` ya � IJh;1 ;; RL �.t — I1 \ :y/ \ �� y�! w ",s T' ,a.'up- / i�o. '--\ . • , I I I _ \ \ / }�j, ti/ "w_ `•oi �.-. -• :M �♦ (Q` J _(Ze» 11-.-t' i • }tl\,� , , t ! �• �,,5tle.). - %.„,,, 1 . :Wes _to I O/�, r ° e ' ✓• ,� H— ' i 1 ^l- .. - �+ i�_ •n _ _ -_ _ ___—__�_� :l: /Y"7.i' -F',i '`fit-- I _;} `� _•o... •, � � •. __ / ..Fti•(C,ltpata 4, .1•w7�ti ..: -•ly...\' ,..--1. t4•�,•a.Y' 'S.',S-.J 3- - _ -- �� L V11V i•:fa U.� .-ll'Isw `fM.A-' ` r �a J e': • l ' i. rL ' S u•,» "+n.,sM• c• ,.s" +afr _• . � / Kr! Wl.l••Y+`�\ WRIWID \ — ;/A7d✓rf. 1;_ it• I--- - _ tau,rp 1oea� ••ei' i� �.- — _� i_.—`�. \ -- \ e, ../. '' ';7:14 1. • JFC•JUO:iS SNARE TREE MIN ENO/=/F CU • �� • .. -- 4 (VIPGREEN TREE Ira rS"/0'0C J QAiECIL GAZIX•SHRUB 07.N S0S CONTA/NER /•• ••• / •I C s LYlargreer, c ' IIILLTOP rQ :; J S. . :� -� by Schneider Homes L., 1pe n, tr _ �..rf pf F4lY k"i.i4 4,�?.�'P �31 f• ': a ..1 • �@- �' , rrti 1.►z,� � ,.� , NE 11TH ST ',V ix �, NEM11 1TH ,p CT ; Pl ' fl`1, e,� '�j'!• y,t''" 1 j } -W_ ` Sr- br ���•�T�1 ÷ •..£; ,'m" r ,..ea,, eivi ,�4' ;:,.•_ • NE E 10'P H P L a g s N E }N 1 , , ' •- �,��.r-�' •.. �'' _4t1z , 4j h F ` 4 T ,q 3` -•, ,• ` `''a PIERCE-- -- i;a :, 1:� r 4t `' • • w P y. •-„f.,M t , w CT NE ., '• , �'y ' �`•�'t.; a +rLN 'vlfjn..v, • � �:r a9� • a tr. •• } NE LOTH . . ....ST 4k®,071 � .. W' '. -.t tag i '•,,t1 •i c 1� .r• . R, y mo V:i •rr �. z g I •J ' kd'• 0 a t}® ' RE 9TH . ST ' r ....... _.k- � Z r ff / ,£. 1 :J 1 ,' qjNST o• R 5� ° • `W �' , Ja �r '�'. 1 Q ..a ,'q ��rf ',, V`•,� .� � 1 � � ,. � "4j � '�. ,,�'j . �:c+eyJ'`,i , > t'+' .!W ' G .. • , Zi ; �„ Z \ (+' - fs�,,h, 4. 5Q' •(,�i e,..rl. _ •1.1 i Pn.,,,,• > 4 tP4 1 ►� , ' •'' NE 'ST . • y �,.t=;. t , j a . ' # , ',' SE. 1 S ` • d R pp :. ,_ ' ,•.-'..' s, ,, .. • • ott - ., —. t, , —-1- :, 0 : . to . 0 ,- '4. . , , ; ,. ®:, ��►tA9• , n k A ,',11 :,.ST. 2 Z ,r R 4: NE «t 6TH W r ' AC , pl` F® ' e4"; + • < i' � ti.. - r. %3• i w 1 4j. W W . , ,.-..• ,, , t 76.,44 .W W,, , i ;!� W 6TN4„ ' ,'� r ,• NE 0- 1 a 6TH y p ' Q t f $ `: ill • v`4 � a '# t' • • Fpaj P �: y . r ,i:v ,• a � y t Y . 1'•" * �q.,' "'.+ ''R.i y la:aENTONf,' ""-tiyrT 1,„ ,',•?t.. 4 .�'"e a .�.E �.W : Y' (} ' 1 ' ,�t'. "',rd' F,}.• t `J.,S \,1 N;i'ti. �1�'^t11 .t` i.ra. } S.}a-" r.,�+ g ( r t '•itf 'n.a= �7S i• V®�•T��I e t :4 . Y r` 4,,1;^' �- //�� 'a A •,., Jib rkii,4‘., illy c.,,. /.1 'I� Ti H". i y' v 4t. .l 1 e . ' -�..- ? ', } ',e a, v. G y d, e.,.1 .y '-.'' �N`hZ�,a a T *' r1 ra r �,•.�� r/'" E '�_Qw ''l •. 4 . - t ,,., "M , :r +J iiw .. , 'r.,i'7 ','''...'-',rlrs2,, n'k�+ .7Z••'f'!'S � v°+I'' { .-y4.4 •,f'• , ' ' . "`'� _ 3r 1�tENAN( r „�itr t •4 , te,i� .•,� ' y . y,,,} f , f ,, ,. biw�Y M ' f 4 4f, riari S H( '"•tg M ltr ., 'N i.• e'• , 1�'r t a , r , �1 .;,•`a, t ,+ E ,i-, � ,t,r+ v s`. '1 ° g.t., _: ,yyrgaa t» ,n:tt t• { a`,y, , , t S+ InrtP. : . ,^ r•,, , ♦ �i ')954"'Pi1 q t r ix i, a. � MA ,N1U�CEr�' :. • '..s. '..,4%i. t, Tt kY i A NOP . , r.,, . • AIM t: • i . •,, . •.. -!, , ,, -.• ,.., a if P/40 ,0111 J • , ' p o----- — 4 S E 1 �: "; ;t+.; , ,, . - 32ND`.ST . - , . ;. . ..I.tt:..-, .�Y'r.,J•i:'d!,P•.rM.t... .. .. lc Q 'aA.•/• ~r+. _ Ni• • A P XI 5G-- , . • 0 _ 0U R 1 A --AGRiCLU L`'LiR� Li - I -I I Pits' Y 5r- 5I1�1G-L FAMILY WI - HA Y IMP •, RY L p— LOUV r5 J3rYY MLI 1,-",. IA P MAid Li EA1(U RI G�- PARK MD MWILIM P�NSi1(Y ML1 ( C. - GOMM'RGIDcI' ki P-�I� PLSI`1Y MLi L`, �'PEceN4 PONtr /R- ARKREA1iOLi SP- ?-80 CZro� e-.Schneicte P/op PO is/QLlA?I • PLIBLIG . ....,.,,__, , ROGER H. NEWELL AIA ARCHITECT 1102 19TH AVENUE EAST •SEATTLE 98112 • (206) 322-1192 July 15, 1980 Hearing Examiner • Renton City Hall Renton, Washington Re: Application for Special Permit for Hilltop Apartments, Renton, Washington Schneider Construction Co. , - Developer Dear Sir: In support of the residential development proposed by Schneider Construction Co. , at the Monroe Avenue near N. E. 4th Street site, we would like to submit the following design analysis of the use of auxiliary parking on the section of the site zoned R-2. On January 23, 1979 the Land. Use Hearing Examiner of Renton ruled approval on the configuration of Exhibit #6, prepared by the Renton Planning Department, subject to the southerly 150 feet of the property being re-zoned R-3, the middle 242 feet re-zoned R-2 and the northerly 260 feet re-zoned R-1. The examiner's conclusions suggested two alternatives to development (1) the entire project as a PUD or (2) the Subdivision Ordinance (R-1), building permit process (R-2 & R-3) and special permit process (R-2). To minimize costly time delays the developer decided to proceed with the second alternative. Specifically, we are seeking approval for permipssion to locate scene of the parking required by those units, located on the R-3 zone, be allowed to be located on the R-2 zone for the reasons stated below. Early in the design process three schemes were considered (see enclosed). Each ' included grouping all of the required 96 units and their 144 parking stalls totally on the R-3 zoned section of the site. Schemes A and B were rejected because of the bowling alley effect of the drive and parking lots and because of their insensitivity to the natural topography and existing vegetation. Scheme C created an equally impersonal arrangement of buildings into a barracks type appearance and because of the required inefficient circulations, this solution is unable to provide the required parking. Generally to provide access to such a long and narrow site requires the circulation to consume a high percentage of the available land necessitating a double loaded driveway type solution or greatly decreasing available green space with acres of asphalt parking and drives. The design team after careful analysis of the site felt that the available solutions were totally insensitive to the actual site conditions and would not create the kind of housing environment the planning department had in mind when recommending their solution. At that time it . . 1 • ... ... . . . . ., .".1 . . 0....t.t... . :_____________•-.7::, ..' ••.7'.-N . • "r . . .,. •••••• '''-, •:?';'\ ••••. ,\ • ' ' - --- ,11 . '1. \,, , '' " •.•,,.4.4"...:21. (-) \'' ,.\\ • ,, . , •, •:.1 c.`,-'..\ • !..,. • e'-:,\ ; ' '..,i; .. . . /1......*..- , 1:1 r-;• ' 4." .1.4 . . . . .. ... , , . \.t,.. 1L-.1,,, • 4;3_0-7 c.,)if • .5,1 . --, ",.• ., . . r ,..., • it.....--- 7 • 4.'- . . . . • :,i au':1. . 1 ,\S..•/ 1,),......1. 1 . \,•--• i ... `- . ,,,. • . ti i . . ill..-1 • ... 4...-, •:-...,.. . . . • Gient, ea• •'1 . • . . . • e..!..,1/.: Z.; :I itsvcr , . . .. . . . . . .• ..,:. , .. . e..t, . . ...' -.. C,) ..,.'. .-- ••4701••••V:-•';' •••i r; • l .". X-.-.. ,.- , 1 • ,F..„. . ..... __ . . . ., , . ,..., „...... . , . . .. .., . .,. , , • .. , .. . . . •e ::. . •IP 1 . III .... ... • .. ... .. ....... - f • . ' . • . e • . . . - ' ,• . • Ora `i.''. I . • • '7-7. .1•4ki. . . . t I • - . . C.' •. o., . ,,:..---- . . , :1,.. • •':k 'r n ' . ''0;:,4.•. .,-0' ' - ."•.„- 4..4 . . . . . III 1014 "•%,••'1, • . • . . V ' • . . • "—0 " fili '.• - 't.•• „ 9" • . . . . - A • -,- t., • ,. , • P „4., . .. A. :,.•"•••••••-rg,.., ''''4,. t•-.4te. • • • . . . . . ... • et 0 . /••?' " . • . ,e •, "* )"'.,',/ 54 . r.0 - 7 . I, - • . . ••••5". • eV ' . • ••t.1 •, [011 '.,402-- If 1:."`,11, , . . . ' . -A V • • '...' ' ,..r".. ••••••A•tr• .. ,,APS‘f, . . ; t.—'-:t•,...;T:i 404:,lifikr:di,..-1i• ...k4t . .. . . . . . . . . t. . . . . . . . . • ' --:. ti • .. . . 0,14 1•11- its.Y-chr" . . ,.... 1111 11 Nil ' . -- ."*..t-,," ne' . '- -1.. • • o's, ',-..4,..,.,..:•••••;?•••,,,, t';''''':-. 1!,... • • :• " ' ..,,,.."4"-;74 ' . -, i • - : T7' '•''''' , ,., , ..S.,: ,•'' A „;' ' i . .. . . , ..„. , J.....i.i 1.,g''.• • ... e 4,•-', , •-• •.'-'- '' '' „?,,,jup,,,“ , • • t1:4. ,.,/ :. .. . ,-,,. '"'.•i . . . . ..4 • , . . . • . •• I ,. ' ' . 'W. , , ' '' •it.. . ' -.. '•.,,L' ,..'4 .` - :.. ,i i,i' '..' .it. "14 1%1! . • . . '• . t '..,;:;:* • s. . ' s...-.... 1.,,..... , •P • .;1,' li ._1 1 .7.1.... t.'. ; ' /' '' c••/...ri .~r . ( 1 • i 'Mar ... .. .. . :........„11,::.4: 111 0:.7.,:i ........,.; 1 , _if M 1 .... . I IA 1, 4 . i7c11!:•;11`„ 7.• .. 7. . • • . ' . I- ? 'Mt 1 .. ... •C` • . c7.13.. , A r•0 ',A'..-..t ,'— •. 'Y'-. .":.,;.2'4- • 0:- :•-. ,. ill- *L •• • i• . ' i . 7 g 4 •'s...#:. • g544..<, ( g' • NI,' ---- ... ;',...•„"... . .,, . r - • .4 • ' '44je.:..'::V '-:-...1 TT-7-V...A.:6. ..,.... ,44..• A ;„.,, NAP,' • .....,". "ft...L.b... . i . _ ._ __ .:. .. , .. . _ . . . 1 _ .i _i_. _. _.1 ..._1.___ ,i!.._. .I._. _i_. „I_ . . __-_,- -i- •- 1.1 i i... 41 ! --1---'. - I IJ t T --f!- . i--1- --- � � . . I 'a � .�ws ••ate. '- •o-. •-• ...®�- I - � 1irI . . . [ .... +! rpm, ®Ib un t1111=111 — �� � � � ' -1-- i ® p% _ --�i . 1 nrinitinTifflitail . 0 I I Uirl-FritilliliMilaT -1.- : . Is-3 - . , , : iv : --- • C1 1 • ` • } L 1 I 1 i t ! 1 1� f1 f i�9 i T M J 1 a 16o' er • ; 1 I I .L ! 1 ! ! 1 1 ► 1• • •s•� + • j-1 I cnTrnTrUr-rh-rrft ( . • MINE Mk w�. Mab • 1 .( 1 ( 1 11 t l HILL l00' - • 6 13,140ea IS kb u rtgt, .a. 119 yogi" - • . ! - ! - , t I . Ze)I d5iThi4-14. ' ; ft"""`", 1 I I ; , ': a 1 -' .. . • 1 i j I I I I I 1 I i I I 1 . :4� (_ � 1 1 ! 1 11 1 II . F --, • • I • -� - • , - , ►-I . I®0 . • 4 - . i ; V Mom- /9) 1�' : . i I �- f BUFra• i.• __. .. ► . .. mom. .. pq9 ... . • .. • July 15, 1980 O Hearing. Examiner Renton, Washington page 2 • was decided that' the best possible solution was, to join the circulation with that of the R-2 area, creating a double loaded loop drive, thru the multi-family units, respecting the existing topography as much as possible. The advantages include: a break-up in the bowling alley effect, a more desirable arrangement and massing of buildings, a more compatable siting to the natural topography, better view orientation, increased driveway efficiency, reducing pained surface areas, better emergency vehicle access and more functional open spaces. • Additional factors should also be taken into consideration. This particular site is and always has been one contiguous site, to be developed by the owner/ developer as one project. The peculiar configurations of the re-zone of this property was made at the suggestion of the Renton Planning Department. The goal of the re-zone was to solve the problem of transitional density of development between sites of different uses and in the process fails to address the feasibility of a sensitive design solution on a 150 ft. by 1090 ft. strip of land. We feel that our solution as proposed, follows the. Planning Deparlirents goals for the development of this site and provides the community with a quality project. Further comments can be made regarding interpretation of the Renton Zoning Code. According to Chapter 22, Parking and Loading, Section 2204, paragraph 3.c.l.d. • auxiliary parking may be on a contiguous lot "except those zoned exclusively for single family and two (2) family dwellings." Chapter 7 Zoning, Section 4708 paragraph 3, specifically allows dwelling units of a configuration other than single family or duplex with a special permit in an R-2 zone. Since the issuance of a special permit would allow multi-family structures such as those in a R-3 or R-4 zone it would seem logical that auxiliary parking, from the adjacent similar development should be allowed within an R-2 zone without destroying the 'intent of the code. We therefore, request that under the above mentioned provisions within the zoning code, that parking required for those units located in the R-3 zone be allowed to be placed within the area of R-2 zoning as a condition of the Special Permit. Respectfully, • AL\-: (41°24444'.14. 1p JAMES KRESSBACH ROGER H. NEWELL, AIA, Architect • JK:RHN:jls Ends. • � . P1 anni nc. 7/7/So 12-1979 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Appli cation : Siftehitiit PS ) Av cove 40et 6a ototetAf gma� Unit* �" �..,D,c- 4 ditty s ;Asp®®® I." ask4N A-a gigipea Location :E. Sae denfoto Age # .a*PE everiZoN9460 Appl i cant.: Sc Ane er e rdJc W, TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : 4-4® Police Department A, R, C, MEETING DATE : 7 2 Y/ Public Works Department aC I d 1 0 MAIO Engineering Division v //TTraffic Engineering L. ' . Building Division Utilities Engineering • Fire Department (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITIN FO THE APPLICATION REV EW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON AT :9;�U A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YO R D P TMENT DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TQ A TEND THE ARC, PLEASE PR VIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY :OU P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: 4))e _i.,)(_ � Approved . Approved with Conditions Not Approved 1 ) 4,77e, (.. , ./..-Zip z,-___________ Si ure of Director or Authorized Representative Date . REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 11 • • `„ ___ )1-78 Page Nine RECOMMENDATION: Approval of configuration of Exhibit #6, subject to: 1. The southerly 150 feet of the property being rezoned to R-3. 2. The easterly 100 feet of the R-3 zone being a landscaped buffer area with some recreation facilities per approval of the Planning Department or the Examiner if a subsequent public hearing is held. • 3. The easterly and westerly 50 feet of the R-2 zone abutting single family zoned . property being preserved in a landscaped buffer area with some recreation facilities per approval of the Planning Department or the Examiner if a subsequent public hearing is held. 4. A maximum total overall density of 180 individual dwelling units on the subject site. 5. Preservation of as much of the existing vegetation as possible. Clearing of existing vegetation and grading shall conform to approved development and occur after approval of site plans. 6. Incorporation of these conditions in and completion of restrictive covenants. 7. Compliance with all other applicable ordinances and regulations of the City of Renton. ED THIS 23rd day of January, 1979. --• L. Ri k Beeler Land Use Hearing Examiner • TRANSMITTED THIS 23rd day of January, 1979 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Gerald E. Schneider, 6510 Southcenter Blvd. , Tukwila, WA 98188 Roger H. Newell, 1102 19th Avenue E. , Seattle, WA 98112 John & Nola Tilton, 3511 N.E. 6th St. , Renton, WA 98055 Philip Nangle, 614 Queen Ave. N.E. , Renton, WA 98055 Norman Jacobs, 550 Monroe Ave. N.E., Renton, WA 98055 Sandra Keyashian, 3404 N.E. 6th St. , Renton, WA 98055 Doug Sweeney, 3617 N.E. 6th St. , Renton, WA. 98055 Sandra Robinson, 3605 N.E. 6th St. , Renton, WA 98055 Jeanette Mayer, 3712 N.E. 7th St. , Renton, WA 98055 Lewis Pappas; 3517 N.E. 6th St. , Renton, WA 98055 Walt Muodusquewski, 3428 N.E. 6th St. , Renton, WA 98055 TRANSMITTED THIS 23rd day of January, 1979 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Councilman Richard' M. Stredicke - Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron• Nelson, Building Division Clint Morgan, Traffic Engineering Division Lawrence J. 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 February 6, 1979. 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 th..' 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. . . .....,,..,., , .ir.,:a.,rl ':'�""�pnY;:°C�''dyF`�i`'.�,�-�3�'�.rEasaae•.. .,.,,�,... ,.. 7/7/so .- Plannin ° 12-1979 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT 'DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Ap p 1 i c a t i on:aSikG/09/. PAFRA1 i t aixw®g$09—,71 d Corr s Ttpajo - I, - I • 2.` A* ' .fie`,. =I� ».� nt® Location:R. sap filiedge Ave a rox.itato° IV. deem fitsatsi Applicant: ha®jllPr GCrela • TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: .% '.%7O Police' Department,, A.R.C. MEETING DATE : 70/6' ,f Public; Works Department 04C t ® calkiedfea • ) ngineering Division • Ve Traffic Engineering Building Division Utilities Engineering Fire Department (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITI FO THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON AT 9:00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YO R D P TMENT/ DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TQ A TEND THE ARC, PLEAS PR VIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING' DEPARTMENT BY :0U P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION :' f AKsPOC EA/GiOSEniutelp )'.. Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved q/ -1// Signature of Director or Authorized R=rresentative Date 1 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved 1 1 Sigpature of Director or Authorized. Representative , Date 7I7/so Pl12a-1979nnin RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: sAgewpoRmir 'my-se jO copy s:6ue� 6a_fituftAfavekty 011 it, 6" ,eJ 4.e ; " diftift ,tistet6 Location:A. 5/ I Wit" •IrSb fatifier®Fr. got"' Af Q¢ire 9#1651 Applicant: ., cjittbitlPr0Vera.14 �r TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED NEARING DATEL-4,--&—*C 61. Police Department A. R.C. MEETING DATE : 0 Public W rks Department XikC� t t I 47/1/9� Engineering Di-vision Traffic Engineering Building Division Utilities Engineering Fire Department (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE- PROVIDED - IN WRIT D P FO THE APPLICATION REV EW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON '7 A • AT 9:UO A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOUR ' 'TMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TQ ATTEND THE ARC, PR PLEAS VIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING' DEPARTMENT BY 7:OO P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : f;,, ' Approved . X Approved with Conditions _ Not Approved l /J � ,ra�o r Ja-Ae- Sd o� w-. oI �a c S s /e-a►z - / �e ✓�lo � _ bps v/.ices - v1�l-�✓ ,S' g �S?-- -,,2 iglan r n1 4 Sft 2,n MA( / I Cl'1 Si e/9 S`72i V S/ Signature of Director or Authorized Reprse tative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved. with Conditions Not Approved Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 7/7/so RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: eihd. poRm r ifv..ogy.19 s ier„.,ct „ , I • . „ . "AAP —, Location:X. 5,40,'derMoopree Ave•ifre evreext gao° d dVe 10265i Applicant: TO: arks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE :,/ip® Police Department A.R.C. MEETING DATE : lailitrige) Public Works Department 7 .)c I a o 7/�'/9® Engineering Division Traffic Engineering Building Division Utilities Engineering Fire Department (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BEI'PROVIDED IN WRITI FO THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE tARC) TO BE HELD ON ._ AT 9: U A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YO R D Pg "TMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TQ A TEND THE ARC, R V PLEASE PIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING, DEPARTMENT BY :OU P.M. ON 112.31 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : POLICE DEPT. Approved XXXX Approved with Conditions Not Approved 1) Better plans for the overall traffic circulation be submitted. 2) Improvement of Monroe N.E. from N.E. 6th to the South towards N.E. 4th so that there is not a gap in the road improvements . 3) House numbers be gap on the buildings that are 12" in height and are of a br. o contrasting the building color. Lt �D':� e 710/80 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved Signature of Director or Authorized Representative. Date • � Planni n� �® 12-1979 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT • DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: .}: e,' y. , ; j� ; , �44 ®. ®CO j fir . -ter ma Location: . ° oprie . PE amoo1es'®Je, �� :A ifee . App 1 i cant: SCAittibillPr GTO°0-1 TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : 49191, Police Department A.R.C. MEETING DATE : 'xi!; Public Works Department /ikc 6 I $ 1 7/1194® Go; . . Engineering Division Traffic Engineering Building Division Utilities Engineering 1✓ Fire Department (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITIN FO THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON Ai' AT 9:UU A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOUR D P ' •TMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TQ ATTEND THE ARC, PLEASE$PAR gVW THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING' DEPARTMENT BY :OO P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 62=7 ,Akj��e - • Approved . % Approved with Conditions Not Approved /4./(VS.. /eZCPui/2� S o u Signature of Director or Authorize Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : ( �jk ri ►to Of Approved ✓ Approve:d with Conditions Not Approved Sua) (% D' APPatc vifre-n, PLAfa -01 754 Fr. kmlbt.. s,c I • eI.uu.- 04 /Sq Pr SC," ;iL 7/iv;O Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s ) : SP-064-80 Environmental Checklist No . : 'bt4n;=1.=., Description of Proposal : Special permit for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone (portion of 158 unit total complex) Proponent : GERALD E . SCHNEIDER Location of Proposal : East side of Monroe Avenue NE approximately 600 feet north of NE 4th Street Lead Agency : PLANNING DEPARTMENT This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on July 30, 1980 following a presentation by Steve Munson of the Planning Department . Oral comments were accepted from: Warren C . Gonnason expressed confidence that adequate storm drainage will be provided . Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF--580-80 are the following : 1) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet , prepared by : Steve Munson and Roger Blaylock , dated July 7 and 21 , 1980 . 2 ) Applications : SP-064-80 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance: Recommended by Pplice, Traffic , Building, Engineering, Fire and Utilities Engineering and Planning Departments . Acting as the Responsible Official , the ERC has determined this development does not have significant adverse impact on the environment . An EIS not required under RCW 43 . 21C .030( 2) (c ) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance : Provide adequate storm drainage; provide improvements on Monroe Avenue N .E . (turning lanes and lane widening) . Signatures : /1 / P 7 (.�� 4,Ql�-{ ,o<` ce 4v J hn E . Webley , Parrs and Gordon Y. Eri`cksen recreation rector Planning Director Warren C. Gonnason Public Works Director DATE OF PUBLICATION : August 6 , 1980 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD : August 20 , 1980 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 CHAMBERS , CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON , ON SEPTEMBER 23 , 1980 , AT 9 :00 A .M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . KOHL EXCAVATING, INC . , Applications for preliminary approval for a proposed 7-lot subdivision together with an exception for access by two ( 2) 20-foot pipestem roads (Files PP-076-80 and E-091-80) ; property located between 80th Avenue South and S .W. 3rd Place, north of S .W. Sunset Boulevard. 2 . LEWIS, OLGA M. , Application for a rezone to permit construction of a 2 , 500 square foot building designed for use as a light assembly and storage facility for a cabinet contractor (File R-080-80 ) ; property located in the vicinity of 519 S .W. 12th Street . 3 . SCHNEIDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (Gerald E . Schneider ) (HILLTOP APARTMENTS) , Application for a variance to allow parking required by apartments located in the R-3 zone to be located in the adjacent R-2 zone (File V-090-80) ; property located on the east side of Monroe Avenue N.E . approximately 600 feet north of N .E . 4th Street . Legal descriptions of files noted above are on file in the Renton Planning Department . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE' INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 23 , 1980 , AT 9 :00 A .M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS . PUBLISHED : September 10 , 1980 GORDON Y . ERICKSEN , RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I , ROGER BLAYLOCK , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me , a Notary Public , in and for the State of Washington residiI/; ' g in/King C6-4nty , oV the 15th da of:'Sept'emb�et', , 1980. / SIGNED : 11-0)tike,91361,6C1 Date circulated : �/7180 Comments due : -7f7/N7 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIIE, SHEET ECF - reed - $o APPLICATION No (s ) . $/Q•-06y 80 PROPONENT : cAnefeer16"ere .ld E. PROJECT TITLE : ,Sek-C1nL /0E0 ur �t Brief Description of Project : /apOceIGoitS'T7vd/ev, „)-64ahidit-ami 0A,7 - in '-Zone • ( i'ex n `1S$oniffria.lco clle0 LOCATION : EsdetegoAree 4t'e./VG ct ,rDk. 600 'i SITE AREA : '..5:6a,crrs BUILDING AREA (gross) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : �• 3) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7) Light & glare : I 8) Land Use ; north : IJAGeije6tprod �f /' east : �;; Ce Lindy C.56tt erect) /� south : 1Jr �/�Jep 4Qp r' Ses l�g-+c(�c000tteretal west : j/o.Ted.,(e..,-rwr- Land use conflicts : i(j A stAe p e �1Q,re.,..�` _Alat.4).A4a4.4,, r-��'Y /�c.r 1a ar s'�s�'ld v�iO� �� �Yep.,we�e�- View obstruction : „{fie ,.C.errs� 4p'� l�ePra�owl s �o �r�a� Cele 9) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : rid (. r 14-as era 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE) :Ar 370.,�.L4 '`fnf►s1�°`7 JJJ.�.� // �,,/ traffic impacts : fQ�-�, ei/1cr�•�to ih e&dex y c-o , /w�Atvebt p 14) Public services : ��• 15 ) Energy : !i 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 1� 19 ) Recreation : !/ 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed b y : cS*I.e UJt.SO/J Title : S15 t`��.e„stet-- Da t e : 7(.7/A FORM: ERC-06 V FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s ) : SP-064-80 Environmental Checklist No . : Description of Proposal : Special permit for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone (portion of 158 unit total complex ) Proponent : GERALD E . SCHNEIDER Location of Proposal : East side of Monroe Avenue NE approximately 600 feet north of NE 4th Street Lead Agency : PLANNING DEPARTMENT This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on July 30, 1980 following a presentation by Steve Munson of the Planning Department . Oral comments were accepted from : Warren C . Gonnason expressed confidence that adequate storm drainage will be provided . Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF--580-80 are the following : 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet , prepared by : Steve Munson and Roger Blaylock , dated July 7 and 21 , 1980 . 2 ) Applications : SP-064-80 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance : Recommended by Pplice , Traffic , Building , Engineering, Fire and Utilities Engineering and Planning Departments . Acting as the Responsible Official , the ERC has determined this development does not have significant adverse impact on the environment . An EIS not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030( 2) (c ) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance : Provide adequate storm drainage ; provide improvements on Monroe Avenue N .E . (turning lanes and lane widening) . Signatures : J hn E . Webley , Parlhs and Gordon Y. Eri'cksen _Recreation rector Planning Director Warren C . Gonnason Public Works Director DATE OF PUBLICATION : August 6 , 1980 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD : August 20 , 1980 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a final declaration of non-significance for the following projects : 1 . GERALD E . SCHNEIDER (HILLTOP ) (ECF-580-80 ) application for special permit ( SP-064-80) for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone (portion of 158 unit total complex ) ; property located on the east side of Monroe Avenue N . E . approximately 600 feet north of N .E . 4th Street . 2 . JAMES BANKER (ECF-582-80) , application for building permit (B-233 ) to allow for third floor addition (approximately 6 , 721 sq . ft . ) to existing building ; property located at 405 South 7th Street . 3 . DENNIS SCHWARTZENBERGER (ECF-583-80) , application for building permit (B-234 ) to construct two four-plexes (Olympic Terrace) ; property located on the west side of Moses Lane south of South 7th Street . Further information regarding this action is available in the Planning Department , Municipal Building, Renton , Washington, 235-2550 . Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Hearing Examiner by August 20 , 1980. GENERAL LOCATION: AID, OR ADDRESS: PROPERTY LOCATED ON EAST SIDE OF MONROE AVENUE N. E. APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET NORTH OF N .E. 4TH STREET . LEGAL. DESCRIPTION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON FILE IN THE RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT I S POSTED TO NOTIFY. PROPERTY OWNERS OF ID TO BE HELD IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, MUNICIPAL BUILDING ON AUGUST 26, 1980 BEGINNING AT 9 :00 A.M. P.M. CONCERNING ITE ■ REZINE VSPECIAL Pr:, RUT FOR PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF 62 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS - FILE SP-064-80 •r SITE APPR s. VAL S WAIVER V I SHORELINE ANAGEMENT PERMIT se, DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE - DIRECT APPEALS TO HEARING EXAMINER BY AUGUST 20 , 1980 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL 236 2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION OF i -34 THE CITY OF RENTON `$ © O MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. AS 98055 o BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 90 co' 235- 2550 O91'F0 5EP1 �P August 8, 1980 Gerald E . Schneider 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila , WA 98188 Re : Application for Special Permit for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone (portion of 158 unit total complex ) , File SP-064-80 ; property located on east side of Monroe Avenue N .E . approximately 600 feet north of N . E . 4th Street . Gentlemen : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on July 18 , 1980 . A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for August 26 , 1980 at 9 :00 a .m . Representatives of the applicant are asked to be present . All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing . If you have any further questions , please call the Renton Planning Department , 235-2550 . Very truly yours , Gordon Y . Erickson , Planning Director By : l ) � Ro erlJlay ock Associate Planner cc : James Kressbach , Roger H . Newell , AIA, Architect 1102 19th Avenue East , Seattle WA 98112 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 CHAMBERS, CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON, ON AUGUST 26 , 1980 , AT 9:00 A .M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . GERALD E . SCHNEIDER (HILLTOP APARTMENTS) , application for special permit for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone (portion of 158 unit total complex) , File SP-064-80; property located on east side of Monroe Avenue N .E . approximately 60n feet north of N.E . 4th Street . 2 . RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 403, (NELSON MIDDLE SCHOOL SHORT PLAT ) applications for two-lot short plat approval , File 070-80, and waiver of off-site improvements , File W-071-80 ; property located on the east side of Benson Road South , south of South 27th Street . Legal descriptions of files noted above are on file in the Renton Planning Department . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 26 , 1980 , AT 9 :00 A .M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS . PUBLISHED : August 13 , 1980 GORDON Y. ERICKSEN, RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I , STEVE MUNSON , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me , a Notary Public , in and for the State of Washington residing in King County , on the 8th dqy of August , ,1980 . SIGNED: . A, II 1 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 CHAMBERS, CITY HALL , RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON AUGUST 26 , 1980 , AT 9 :00 A .M . TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . GERALD E . SCHNEIDER (HILLTOP APARTMENTS) , application for special permit for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone (portion of 158 unit total complex) , File SP-064-80; property located on east side of Monroe Avenue N .E . approximately 600 feet north of N.E . 4th Street . 2 . RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 403, (NELSON MIDDLE SCHOOL SHORT PLAT ) applications for two-lot short plat approval , File 070-80, and waiver of off-site improvements , File W-071-80 ; property located on th - east side of Benson Road South, south of South 27th Street . Legal descriptions of files noted above are on file in the Renton Planning Department . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 26 , 1980 , AT 9 :00 A .M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS . PUBLISHED : August 13 , 1980 GORDON Y. ERICKSEN, RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I , STEVE MUNSON , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me , a Notary Public , in and for the State of Washington residing in King County , on the 8th day of August , 1980 . SIGNED: ,t,. y1 EMIIPIROIW�'I[\IAL R[VI[ COI1 ITTEE JULY 30 , 1980 A4 C E N D A9, COMMENCING AT 10 : 00 A. M . : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM 1 . OLD BUSINESS : SP-064-80 GERALD E . SCHNEIDER ( ECF-580-80 ) ( NEW INFORMATION SUBMITTED ) Application for special permit for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone ( portion of 158 unit total complex ) ; property located on east side of Monroe Avenue NE approximately 600 feet north of N . E . 4th Street 2 . NEW BUSINESS : B-233 JAMES BANKER (ECF-582-80 ) Application for building permit to allow for third floor addition ( 6 , 721 sq . ft . ) to existing building ; property located at 405 S . 7th St . B-234 DENNIS SCHWARTZENBERGER (ECF-583-80 ) Application for building permit to construct two 4-plexes ( Olympic Terrace ) ; property located on the west side of Moses Lane , south of South 7th Street ENVIRONMENTAL ENITAL REVIEW/ COMMITTEE JULY 23, 1980 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 :00 A .M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM 1 . OLD BUSINESS : (NEW INFORMAIION SUBMITTED) SP-064-80 GERALD E . SCHNEIDER (ECF-580-80 ) Application for special permit for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone (portion of 158 unit total complex) ; property located on east side of Monroe Avenue N .E . approximately 600 feet north of N .E . 4th Street • owlItschneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard ® Suite #1 *Tukwila, WA 98188 ®(206) 248-2471 July 17, 1980 Mr. Gordon Ericsen Director of Planning City of Renton Renton, Washington 98055 Subject: Schneiders R-2 Special Permit Application Dear Mr. Ericsen: In compliance with your request, we have revised our July 1, 1980 Special Permit Application to include the following: Revised application to include 96 multifamily units on contiguous R-3 portion of Tract 1 2 copies Design analysis prepared by the architect 2 copies Revised EIS check list to include 96 multifamily units on contiguous R-3 portion of Tract 1 2 copies Revised site plan to include 96 multifamily units on contiguous R-3 portion of Tract 1 8 copies Super - K reduction of site plan 1 copy Our check in the amount of $192. 00 is also enclosed to cover the increase EIS check list fee for the additional 96 multifamily units included in the review. Sincerely Yours, Gerald E. Schneider President cc: file jn rTh ROGER H. NEWELL AIA ARCHITECT 1102 19TH AVENUE EAST •SEATTLE 98112 • (206) 322-1192 July 15, 1980 Hearing Examiner _ Renton City Hall - Renton, Washington Re: Application for Special Permit for Hilltop Apartments, Renton, Washington Schneider Construction Co. , - Developer Dear Sir: In support of the residential development proposed by Schneider Construction Co. , at the Monroe Avenue near N. E. 4th Street site, we would like to submit the following design analysis of the use of auxiliary parking on the section of the site zoned R-2. On January 23, 1979 the Land'Use Hearing Examiner of Renton ruled approval on the ' configuration of Exhibit #6, prepared by the Renton Planning Department, subject to , the southerly -150 feet of the property being re-zoned R-3, the middle 242. feet re-zoned, R-2 and the northerly 260 feet re-zoned R-1. The examiner's conclusions suggested two alternatives to development (1) the entire project as a PUD or (2) the Subdivision Ordinance (R-1), building permit process (R 2 & R-3) and special permit process (R-2). To minimize costly time delays the developer.decided to proceed with the second alternative. Specifically, we are seeking approval for permission to locate some of the parking required by those units, located on the R 3 zone, be allowed to be located on the R-2 zone for the reasons stated below. Early in the design process three schemes were considered (see enclosed). Each included grouping all of the required 96 units and. their 144 parking stalls totally on the R-3 zoned section of the site. Schemes A and B were rejected because of the bowling alley effect of the drive and parking lots and because of their insensitivity to the natural topography and existing vegetation. Scheme 'C created an equally impersonal arrangement of buildings into a barracks type appearance and because of the required inefficient circulations,- this solution is unable to provide the required parking. Generally to provide access to such a long and narrow site requires 'the circulation to consume a high percentage of the available land necessitating a double loaded driveway type solution or greatly decreasing available green space with acres of asphalt parking and drives. The design team after careful analysis of the site felt that the available solutions were totally insensitive to the actual site conditions and would not create the kind of housing environment the planning department had in mind when recommending their solution. At that time it • July 15, 1980 Hearing Examiner Renton, Washington page 2 was decided that the best possible solution was, to join the circulation with that of the R-2 area, creating a double loaded loop drive, thru the multi-family units, respecting the existing topography as much as possible. The advantages include: a break-up in the bowling alley effect, a more desirable arrangement and massing of buildings, a more compatable siting to the natural topography, better view orientation, increased driveway efficiency, reducing paned surface areas, better emergency vehicle access and more functional open spaces. Additional factors should also be taken into consideration. This particular site is and always has been one contiguous site, to be developed by the owner/ developer as one project. The peculiar configurations of the re-zone of this property was made at the suggestion of the Renton Planning Department. The goal of the re-zone was to solve the problem of transitional density of development between sites of different uses and in the process fails to address the feasibility of a sensitive design solution on a 150 ft. by 1090 ft. strip of land. We feel that our solution as proposed, follows the Planning Departments goals for the development of this site and provides the community with a quality project. Further comments can be made regarding interpretation of the Renton Zoning Code. According to Chapter 22, Parking and Loading, Section 2204, paragraph 3.c.l.d. auxiliary parking may be on a contiguous lot "except those zoned exclusively for single family and two (2) family dwellings." Chapter 7 Zoning, Section 4708 paragraph 3, specifically allows dwelling units of a configuration other than single family or duplex with a special permit in an R-2 zone. Since the issuance of a special permit would allow multi-family structures such as those in a R-3 or R-4 zone it would seem logical that auxiliary parking, from the adjacent similar development should be allowed within an R-2 zone without destroying the intent of the code. We therefore, request that under the above mentioned provisions within the zoning code, that parking required for those units located in the R-3 zone be allowed to be placed within the area of R-2 zoning as a condition of the Special Permit. Respectfully, 644449 (49"244440.4.4. JAMES KRESSBACH ROGER H. NEWELL, AIA, Architect JK:RHN:jls Encls. - - • • - . --- --• • ; . .. , ' : I-- T r -+- - • -1 I-- - : -1 - 1-- I- -- 1 - 1 - t•-- i ------------------- r—r-----111-----1-- — _l__ _l_ .1 __L_ •i_. I 1 1 . ________ ..._:______ I 1 -7-1----r- T--1---T I-m-7-1-1 I 1 r • 1 1 I ', ; 1 1 , . 1 , 1 ! I 1 • I I .: . .. .. 1 • i--r-'' -- , • 1_.____t_l ___!_.....,..t ____i_4._ ----4- -r- ---t 71 , . . . :. ., • 1 ! ; ; ! 1 ; 11 t__. . . ; .. t . . __, ... , .... .. . ._. 1.._ __I_Ir_ ...1_._ -1.___i .__ _.[-___.i. __,106_,i..__.L.,.._.....J.i.._1_11 _ ; 1. -- -1 -t- . , , 1 1 ; 1 1 1 t .7.- ri 1"...." .......... .......... :,...... 1 . IIINBOOMISI-.....illimm•m• eimmam.mo PO.. iimIC•••••2•... ,90......., .._ mi...._ , .‘.......... . .I _ .. . , I =_.. ._.1' I IIIII :_- t.- I • , , t 1 , :— 43 ark, 616(noir') z: elo Of I , • ,1 • . illtliggi : 1 i: 1 lbe i — .,--T '.0 7- • ' '• ' — "- - I. " . ! • -t - • -... _ ' _ - ' . -'',• • '• F5 0 F FEZ eb ''.-- •'• I_.•--'1 --./- • ' ... ._: 4 ! I ! 1 .__..1.1 I. I ! . • • . I i , ' • ....... , 't , i 1 ' I I • ' _ . I 1 1.7127111117 I .t_ _L•1. : ii . : .-:. .. • - • --f .1 'I-- , . I . 144 oirAuf2 pE4/9 1 1 • i • . , .. , it, , . , . . . _ - •• , 1 t-t ri I 1 --1.. -T---,- • --: •- , , •04-1111Maft •0. ..m111.17......O 4.4. 41111....•111MMIMw1 . . '1:•i - 1 11 1 I I I I I I : i • ' igen ! • I . ... ..I ' :•. I I I. 1111 il • .11 ,- ; ••• 111 ; . . r! 4...-.......-.-I----.....--L.--4 -.4 . I "- --r--1—---1----4- 1 • I 1 .• • j *cii-eme. 44._ i _i_i__...., _ : . • 14 11 160. inna ' 1 ! ' I ! i I :. , I - 1_ 1 1 I -•-i-- 1 1___ I.- --I.• I I -1-- . . ' I --t---r- i , . • I 1 I . I I. • ; • . .L.2,_ .]____ !____1____.i_ 1.. :_i . _.: _i__ } • ! 1 1 • 1 1 1 ' ' w/iF. ' } i___. i _ _l____. [.._ . i . i , : I ' ' : ' 1 1 • 1 I •1 ---i.- • -- 1 . 1 I _:--•--`•• - L : ,-• ' - ! • 1 1I . -----.-----t---,----t-- ----t-"---!---T- I I I ik7.2. i I. 1 I I • ! - I 1 I . •. i . ! 1 ! I t • 1 i I ! I ' : I % I • - - (-II -t-i-( (i 11 .... ..°°Iii I -". - •I -- 1 - . .: . ..... ' • 14 /W.V. re.COP - - - I • • . . • OfAVE. i . . . . , I i 1 I . . 1 . 1 11111111111Lril \1_ 1 aillin.1 II( t__1 1_111 I-1 1 loo• - _ , . . 1 Muff= 4 _ 111.1111 ..., 6 &woe, a kb LI mg, st. glip uore, . . ,.. ; • L. i.._ 1. _ .. t : i , . • . .. : L. : • . • , 1 - 1 1. 1 . .. 1 , I I .7-0 • 05erbie•44. ' .,,. . I . . i 1. I i I..• 1 I •'. 4; ' ' • . I. :. •• • •., ... - 60 . a• ••• .......'...•• •• 0 I ••••••••••••'.... •. : . • ' i ' 1 : •; ,. . . •.1 i r ;• . I 1 . . ' . '. 1 . I I,- - 4' -i. - • •©.....:. • ' . t . I ,,. • , ',__ • ! 1 ' 1 1 -! P 4..- (at:0 : i ! - 1 1 • ! • , , . • i • - --- - - --;----F--4---1-----1-----1 - i--- i- ; '-- --i ,---!--- -; - ' 7 . • - - , i f , . . I 'I •1- , -,. . . . i • ! ! 1_ 1 _ 1,_ l• i I . I• • • •iii • 11 i t li - 1 I 1 . 1 . I ' I ' I.: 1 1 . 1 • 1 I . I.• -1 I 1 11 _1.11 1 . ._ •1. • . _ - 1,. I i I 1 i 1 i . " fat5 ; , . v . • __. . , . "----fi...._.. T. i•.. _.. .._. • . .,___ . • ... . _.....; Hi ‘,.... i ..,,,..it 121 , ._._.... 1 , . . . , I . ,. , .i - !_ -1--- I- , • DO' . , L 1 -. , 1 ; I.. I I ! ".- I ---1- - !- • .t.-- . , ,.. ---.• t_.- i ... • — i ..---4-,:- --• . - - 1:„,,-• --: :-- :-- -7-- 1 .--1- --::----+-...._• -.: r. /6. : : .:. _ ____:____,__J _ __L.. ' ' .411 1 • - 1- . 0 V ' ' ; '— . ,. : ;„ic,,,.....•......-..........,..__-_, _._•_.P_A.__.V.S_,...:._2,.-., ' -• 1 .4.4, .1 1 ---C1 -7i • ' 64' 57.1 . • .A' .:!,•e ,'o/s(7o-w6 : st•+i •••r • . •-4 ' •:.-....I L .. 1 -044. t - - 1 1.,, .1Ir1 ,....._1 _ ,!. . ,'1 , --:,1 ________ 41 •0 • I ., - - •• ' • • 4 , . : • ,. . • ! 1 i 1 ' • ; t .. • I I . j tgl/ I I • : , • . . .. I i I , I • i• I . ' • : I •.. • o II L , , . .. .. .. AI . • I : e7614P_AAS_ i . ' n. 1 .• II itett. , . ! . i , i •1 • ,- .., • , . „ • . ! . , , , , , , i . , • ,• • . • ,•• ... ; • .• __:.1.,„iii GODS INFORMATION UHT a'J-IffDJ it ze..4•4I1J4 R•2 e4 12,5 CREZG}ie) Tees'A' -GNE P97ea -1 3.11 - \ GY R. 'b.-Two e0 C7r1 G7 -= S "�I - FIRE ZG4-4 El 'c'--Itw M 4•4 - 04"'Tr.-r'7 v.H 24T<x'(',0,F,. LIM) 'D'-71-tRE6 DEGReuM D _- F 251exY^21'D51"17 T07,14.. I56 U-41?- - (b-rze,Ab,,c.,D,EHIµ K.) _ • R.;_uHE=62.14nlT5(21 I eL.4 GG 2te.4 Co 4 ) UHIT 'A'- 6,7o*an' '_ • K•7 ZL.1-IE. Wo Ur1ITk,(15 l0,#45 2 0-4 2 3ER) 'd- 1a'a h2pr• =J ID- 129U 44 F.7. �{�� /T �C I�,t Icy 1°jE,ur117S x I.5 a 237 ljpi-LL RF1.1D 1 1� 1 M1t�r-ul AMEI HTELJ -- Rv J(/�uh E +w ram-1-th ISM �I x. MHur+'TY ai_Cyj 0 ' 6WIMMIHCI PPi'1- TTaiRNS Cave( FIRE q be,.. --'P131.1 aa1M. yew-323 OF1 Rv {arCi ° `-I • SITe COve E VIC.IHITY Mae' R'2 71HE .'3 ZGN Tara-3 R•2 4-R'3 EDIUaHY( 1.51 ra 26,87. v.64k 22.30 2.3,3-- 25.4 0 Ifi2f11- S LkvLh 24t0 4G 40.1 7. 49.67 k 17.37a 2.'3,•c '31.I ap.TwOer-, 0, e,k 0.77.. 0,10,•G 2.a7o •4e,ea 5.1 - l#+Det DgePei fixes. 1.41 - 24.44. 2.15/G 57,171, 3.6.1.2- 38.7% 47rO152 S•G43G IA7% 3,7G.-G pre% .14-ra- Va Tract 2 a y'.- 41'.:1 I 74 c1',0' 144•'' ta-c2 4c'.0' 'o .C".' ' U 3', ' , 9Y'•o" i, 4L-.i 120'.0" ' co'iewe OLYMPIa N/E H.a RI ZA4E 41oD.�l' -- '1 4. • .. �--R.Z.z_ -B I -•-_ - -� `25Pf• W-D3�PED �JF R - \ -- ZGda er � u re .. R•17,fNE � 1_ 1 'I-' i - R•271hHE .. 1-si' 2'G' Z V ^ 2.C,,2'G' \ T2h p1.P.'F 1\:•��\ oz.',,2•G' UnR4.1 UH'9 v., I2'G' IV :2-'0 LPNFLP'117. 2.'‘, i2'v Y' Un�f UHry, Unt.p.1UH1,. Ur17h:UH17. Loir7.11 trM, I _ Ne _ 454 T M r'1 L I L 2G' I2'G' uH7�, LIn1'•i-24H'UT• 2'lG'� i-r I� rry 2'D'#I'6' rH �Un'5 1 \ �L+ M ( , c •i1 _ ' I p ! �J I• - uH W ` 3. 1 •�.3 • \ ' PP.r.i+ oq1 ' I I I I I II I I fI rL , - ^ - _yifrt r Hurt5 -4.- x ,1.U+. �UHOKY , Tra 1 ny� ;sr' f 3'A' UHP` .. -\_ TEh1Nh �� °� I I I I III -.l I l l -� 3'd q� 1 Y I 1 T 1 / . IZ:2•=1•e K8- - _ / _ __ III _-1- -=- '� 1 - - \ Ra12:3Ie :11-. - -, - . 1 ! i `- __� _RsD ra•1e _. -_ 1 I 2 1'�I NI," ' ' 1 i11 _ •3''b' 1 : IG 31p 3'e' 3.i0, '5,b' 12'94 re,. 111 Vb. 1e'* - _ 1\\\ __.T--- --- - - • _UHI 4-114f 1UH11i3} d UHT:. 1un1Tb a'a'1 3'3 Ur1rte 1UHrt - n UH11� • \ '_'__ 1 UHI ,unl7; 1 unIT4I unrns Y _� I, rt5 • a�I �:P. --- --i C I - - W. v54. -' - t- i'� ii�F �i I- I.\L` Gw+bi'� 1a0,-K, A } UH T5 s5o - J I 2'G' !VG' �'- r 3 11 i a lbi~1.�,a, 13:,_ 13'd',3'C ---1_ M19 _ �pYCiRQ.1"1D 2'G 2 YJ U1y175'UHRS 2'U 12'C' ul' 1.'5' • 4' __�� y UHI UHMS UHI'Ih'UHIT. _IORY -'-" y UH17:1UHIF UM 1'h UHtF 'OHM i-4615 _i let -nw-I 3- 1 - I ;1 I - - e 20 FT.Y6RD .d'FFJ"tGE - ,-;oe o'Fgxe .1 , Sao -1 �,�, I I I 1091,'Us' 1 13/i'•0' UL'.o. 7.4',O. 152'•G" ryp..G. 42..pu o'lo. ,,p'.o• Iv7,.¢r 20.0.: ,16'•0• ie4. it•e-c' LA,1.0. e21.0^ II01.C„ or 4 SITE PLAN • Tract 1 ,� I'.4o' 9?���{"1IT P7='I_}A'pbl'f NTH�i�h} o Hilltop GH TitE R'2 zcHefleelY1-1 T1 T 1. 158 unit development by Schneider Construction Co. '-• yr tSGI' IUP4 • APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL MIT • FOR OFFICE USE ONLY cc File No. - n t O� �y Date Rec' d. 1 /0�c 10� Application Fee $ Receipt No . Environmental Review Fee $ • APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH .6 : 1 . Name Gerald E. Schneider Phone 248-2471 Address 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 2. Property location South of Northeast Sixth Street and east of Monroe Avenue Northeast 3. Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) (See attachment for legal description) • Number of .acres or square feet 9.4 Present Zoning R72 11-3!__ What do you propose to develop on this property? 62 multi-family units on R-2 portion of tract 1 (5.65 acres) and 96 multi-family units on R-3 portion of Tract 1 (3.76 acres) The following information shall be submitted with this application : A. Site and access plan (include setbacks , Scale existing structures , easements , and other factors limiting development) 1" = 10 ' or 20 ' B . Parking, landscaping and screening plan 1 " = 10 ' C. Vicinity map (include land use and zoning on adjacent parcels) 1" = 200 ' to B00 ' D. Building height and area (existing and proposed) E. A special permit required by the Renton Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance shall submit the information listed in Section 4-2307. 5 in addition to the above. LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER'S ACTION: Date Approved Date Denied Date Appealed Appea.I Action • • Planning Dept . 1-77 • AFFIDAVIT • Gerald E. Schneider being duly sworn, declare that I am the ownei. 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 26th day of June 19 80 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle ,�j / j j `. �i (Name of Notary Public) • •(Signature of Owner) • 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Seattle Tukwila, Washington 98188 (Address) (Address) (City) (State) • (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 , 19 By : • Renton Planning Dept . • .2-73 • • • • HILLTOP APARTMENTS LEG/IL DESCRIPTION i 24 7 1 • • . That portion of the North 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 - of the Southeast 1/4 of Section .9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in King County, Washington described as follows: COMMENCING at the monument at the Northwest corner of said subdivision; thence S 0°09'20"E along the West line of said subdivision 419.40 feet to the South line of the North 89.70 feet of North 1/2 of the South 1/2 of said subdivision; thence S 88°59'27" E along said line 30.01 feet to the East line of the West 30.00 feet of said subdivision and the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence .S 0°09'20" E along said line 239.94 feet to the South line of said subdivision; thence S 89°01 '39" E along said line 1091 .38 feet to the East line of the West 460.00 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Southwest 1/4 of, the Southeast 1/4; thence N 0°14'55" W along said line 328.97 feet to the North line of said subdivision; thence N 88°59'27" W along said line 100.00 feet; thence N 34°18'07" W 38.53 feet to a point on the arc of a curve to the right from which the center bears N 34°18'07" W 46.00 feet; thence Westerly along said curve through a central angle of 80°34'50" an arc distance of 64.69 feet to a point of reverse curvature and the beginning of a curve to the left having a radius of 25.00 feet; thence Westerly along • said curve through. a central angle of 45°13'59" an arc distance of 19.74 feet to a point of tangency; thence N 88°57' 16" W 159.59 feet . to the beginning of a curve to the right having a radius of 125.00 feet; thence Westerly along said ' through a central angle of 31°07'46" an arc distance of 67.91 feet; thence N 88°57' 16" W 468.61 feet. to the East . line of the West 230.00 feet of the North 1/2 of the, Northwest 1/4 of said Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4; thence S 0°09'.20" E along said line 62.47 feet to the South line of said subdivision; thence N 88°59'27" W along said line 46.01 feet to the East line of the West 184.00 feet of the North 1/2 of the South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of said Southwest 1/4;. of the Southeast 1/4; thence S 0°09'20" E along said line' 89.72 feet to said South line of the North 89.70 feet of said subdivision; thence N 88°59'27" W along said line 154.03 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. • • • • • • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HILLTOP A PRELIMINARY PLAT CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 79-8.048 • 1. BACKGROUND • 1. NAME OF PROPONENT SCHNEIDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE 6510 Southcenter Blvd. NUMBER OF PROPONENT Tukwila, Washington 98188 248-2471 3. DATE CHECKLIST SUBMITTED July 11 1980 4. AGENCY REQUIRING CHECKLIST City of Renton, Planning Dept. 5. NAME OF PROPOSAL • HILLTOP 6. NATURE AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL This is an application for a special permit per zoning ordinance 4-708 (3) to construct eleven multifamily units per acre on the north portion of tract one,which is currently zoned R-2. 7. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL • The site is located south of N.E. 6th Street and east of Monroe Avenue N.E. It is located approximately 600 feet north of N.E. Fourth Street and across Monroe Avenue from the Renton Voc-Tech facility. 8. ESTIMATED DATE FOR COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSAL Road and utility construction fall of 1980 9. LIST OF ALL PERMITS, LICENSES OR GOVERNMENT APPROVALS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSAL Preliminary and final plat, grading permit, sewer and water connection, building permits • 10. FUTURE ADDITIONS, EXPANSION, OR FURTHER ACTIVITY RELATED TO OR CONNECTED WITH THIS PROPOSAL Tract 2 will be developed as a single family complex as permitted by the zoning. The remaining portion of tract • 1 not included in this waiver permit will be developed for multi-family as permitted by zoning. . 11. PLANS BY OTHERS WHICH MAY AFFECT THE PROPERTY COVERED BY YOUR PROPOSAL None known 12. APPLICATION FORMS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED REGARDING THE PROPOSAL Rezone on site as per Ordinance #3293 (R-2271-78) • 11 . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of impacts begin on page 6.) (1) Earth. will the proposal result in: a No (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b Yes (b) Disruptions , displacements , compaction or overcovering of the soils? c Yes (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? (d) The destruction, overcovering or modification of any unique geologic d No or physical features? (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the e Maybe site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in silt- ation deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or f No stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? (2) Air. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b Maybe (b) The creation of objectionable odors? (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in c No climate, either locally or regionally? (3) Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements , in a No either marine or fresh waters? (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount b Yes of surface water runoff? . c No (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d Maybe (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or e Maybe • turbidity? f No (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of..- an aquifer g No by cuts or excavations? (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injections or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates , detergents, waterborne h No virus or bacteria , or other substances into the ground waters? ( i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water i No supplies?. (4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of flora? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of b No flora? (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to c Yes the normal replenishment of existing species? d No (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? (5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of b No fauna? (c), Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier c No to the migration or movement of fauna? d No (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Maybe (7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? Yes (8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or . • Yes planned land use of an area? (9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b No (b) Depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? • • • (1.0) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset No conditions? ( 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density Yes or growth rate of the human population of an area? (12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for Yes additional housing? (13) Transportation/circulation. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? b No (b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking? c Maybe (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? d No (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e No (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail , or air traffic? f No ( f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists or pedes- trians? (14)L Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following: a No (a) Fire protection? b No (b) Police protection? -c Yes (c) Schools? d Yes (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? e Yes (e) Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? f Maybe (f) Other governmental services? (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: a Maybe (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b No (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy or require the develo Anent of new sources of energy? (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or alterations to the following utilities? a Yes (a) Power or natural gas? b Yes (b) Communications systems? c Yes (c) Water? d Yes (d) Sewer or septic tanks? e Yes (e) Storm water drainage? f Yes ( f) Solid waste and disposal ? (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard No or potential health hazard? (18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista No or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or No quantity of existing recreational opportunities? (20) Archeological/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a No significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? III. SIGNATURE • I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above . information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue: in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: , /� H. C. Bloss Agent for Applicant • • • II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS • 1 . EARTH • The topography of the site is essentially rolling with a knoll elevation of 370 ft. and the low in the Southeast corner of 350 ft. The 1973 Soil Conservation Service King County Soil Survey indicates that ' the site lies on an Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. (AgC) from 6-15% in slope. This soil unit is the most common soil in the region and is typical to the hilltops and plateaus around Renton. This soil poses no "severe" constraints for development of utilities, roads or buildings. • Road and building sites would be cleared, graded, filled ' and compacted where necessary for proper grade transition, drainage and foundation stability. 2. AIR • During construction activities there would be increased exhaust and dust particle emissions to the ambient air. Objectionable odors may be caused by the roofing of homes or the paving of streets. After construction, the principle .source of pollution would be exhaust from vehicular traffic. The approximately 253 automobiles associated with the single-family development would contribute CO, NO, and SO2 emissions to the ambient air. 3. WATER No streams enter or exit the property, nor does the site lie within any floodplain. • Absorption would, decrease and runoff would increase due to impervious surfaces created by development. Alteration of ground water flow would most likely be insignificant due to the pervious substratum that underlies the surface soils. . The potential for surface runoff pollution would be greatest during construction activities when silt loads could be large. Temporary siltation control dvices should be implemented in drainage channels to settle particulate matter before stormwater runoff leaves the site. After construction, pollutants would be mostly debris and oil washed from the roads. Parxing• & circulation roads .would create about, 2.9aacres of impervious surface. Stormwater runoff would be collected by'the storm drainage system ' and directed to the natural drainage of the area. • Retention/detention and catch basins with petroleum separators would be installed in the storm drainage system. • 4. FLORA Vegetation on the site is sparce with little tree cover or substantial cover. The major coverage is be scotch broom, scrub alder, and typical with grasses. Other trees include douglas firs, magnolia, and some fruit trees. Some of the second growth coniferous forest still exists along the east property,. line. This area is dominated by large mature douglas firs with a sal al undergrowth. Development wi 11 resul t in a decrease in the numbers of plats; al though, graded areas would be landscaped with species common to suburban areas. The keeping of lawns and gardens would prevent the normal re-population of natural species. No unique, rare or endangered species of flora would be jeopardized nor would any agricultural lands be reduced by development. • 5. FAUNA The Size and present condition of the site normally precludes large populations of natural species. Small rodents, reptiles , and birds likely to inhabit the site would be further reduced by residential develo Anent. Species that can withstand the change of habitat or are suited to the new habitat would survive in reduced numbers. Animals displaced from the site would eventually be eliminated through competitive exclusion. The introduction of house pets (dogs and cats) would further limit the re-population of natural species. To our knowledge, no unique, rare, or endangered species would be jeopardized by development. 6. NOISE Noise levels would be intermittently high throughout construction, but should be limited to normal waking hours. After construction, residential activity and traffic noise created by approximately 341 average daily vehicular trips , would increase ambient noise levels. 7. LIGHT AND GLARE An increase in the amount of light and glare from streetlights, automobile headlights and home lighting can be anticipated. 8. LAND USE The existing site is undeveloped and uninhabited. To the north and east of the site are single-family lots. The Renton Voc-Tech Center is to the west across Monroe Ave. To the south is a mixture of commercial land and undeveloped acreage. The commercial uses include a gas station, miscellaneous commercial buildings, General Telephone and a trailer park. The site was recently rezoned with the northerly plus or minus 260 feet from N.E. Sixth Street designated as SR-1. The southerly 150 feet is ' R-3 whereas 'the `remainder is R-2. 9. NATURAL RESOURCES Development would create short-term increases of the use of resources such as lumber and gravel. There would be permanent increase in the use of power_ and water. The land itself is a rapidly diminishing re source and development must be considered a long-term committment. There should be no major depletion of any natural resources. 11. POPULATION • Upon completion _ he development would increase population in that area by approximately 277 people(158 x 1.75) but should not create or alter any trend in population growth. 12. HOUSING ' The project would create158 multi-family units. 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Assuming 1. 5 cars per unit there would be an additional 25R automobiles wtrj h would generate approximately 869 average daily vehicular trips • 158 x 5. 5 ADT) . Access will be from Monroe Avenue. There should be little cause for increased hazard to motor vehicles, bicyclists, ped- estrians, or equestrians, considering the playground, open area, ped- estrian walkways and jogging- path proposed,along with a well defined parking and vehicle circulation plan. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire protection is provided by the Renton Fire Department. The nearest stations are located at N.E. Ninth Street and Harrington Avenue N.E. and 138th Avenue S.E. and S.E. 128th Street. Police protection is provided by the Renton Police Department, out of the Renton City Hall. The site lies within the Renton School District No. 403 and would be served by the following facilities : . Highlands Elementary School Hazen High School 2727 N.E. Ninth Street 1101 Hoquiam •N.E. McNight Middle School 2600 N.E. 12th Street Parks within the area include Kiwanis Park and Winsor Hills Park. The proposal will improve the area water system and fire flow capacities by providing a 10 O ' pipe line in Monroe Avenue between N.E. Fourth St. 1 , and N.E. Seventh Street. . . Additional demands would be made on librarie, mail-delivery, public health and other miscellaneous services by new residents. 15. ENERGY No excessive demands would be made on energy sources nor would development require any new sources of energy.. '16. UTILITIES All utilities would be extended from existing services. (Refer to attached site plan. ) r • • (ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE JULY 9 , 1980 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 :00 A.M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM - 1 . NEW BUSINESS : SP-064-80 ECF-580-80 GERALD E. SCHNEIDER Application for special permit for proposed construction of 62 multi-family units in R-2 zone (portion of 158 unit total complex) ; File No. SP-064-80 ; property located. on east side of Monroe Avenue. N.E. approx. 600 feet north of N. E. 4th Street . B-232 ECF-581-80 PACIFIC CAR & FOUNDARY Application for building permit for addition to paint shed (55 ' x 80 ' addition) ; Building Permit No . B-232 ; property located at 1400 North 4th Street. } :ti 1 r;;V CITY OF RENTON V�� RCCFII,l �� CD O . A&LI CATI ON FOR SPECIAL PER. ,� JUL 1 1980 .. . FOR OFFICE USE ONLY VP/ ,,� ' ``` G PRE File_ No . SP- Q, /1--`-'8® Date Rec'd. o Application Fee $ /6,0 . Receipt No. �/ J� Environmental Review Fee $ ` -. 41)° . APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6 : 1. Name Gerald E. Schneider • Phone 248-2471,.+__ Address 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 2. Property location South of Northeast Sixth Street and east of Monroe Avenue Northeas.. 3. Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) . (See attachment for legal description) 7 • 8.9 R-2 - R-3 4 . Number of acres or square feet - Present Zoning 5 . What do you propose to develop on this property? 62' ulti-famil��ui son R-2 portion of tract ' (5.65 acres) 6 . The following information shall be submitted with this application : A. Site and access plan (include . setbacks , Scale existing structures , easements , and other l" = 10'or 20 ' factors limiting development) B. Parking, landscaping and screening plan 1" 10 ' C. Vicinity map; (include land use and zoning 1, 200 ' to 800 °, , on adjacent parcels) D. Building height and area (existing and proposed) . E. A special permit required by. the Renton Mi ,lExcavation and Grading Ordinance shall submit the information d in Section 4-2307. 5 in addition to the above., • 7. LAND USE HEARING, EXAMINER'S ACTION: Date Approved Date Denied Date Appealed Appeal Actio» Rema7'1c.S' Planning Dept. Z-77 • • • • • HILLTOP APARTMENTS :., LEGAL • DESCRIPTION /e/i r .Z That .portion of the 'North 1/2 "of the Southwest 1/4 , of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 9, •T.ownship. 23 North, Range. 5 East, N,M. , in King County, Washington described as follows: COMMENCING • at the monument at the Northwest corner of said subdivision; thence -. S O°09'20"E along the West line of said subdivision 419.40 feet to •the South line. of the North 89:70. feet of North. 1/2 of the South 1/2 of said subdivision; thence S 88°59'27" E along said line 30.0'1 feet to• the East line of the West 30.00 feet of said subdivision and the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence 'S 0°09'20" E along said line 239.94 feet to the South line of said subdivision; thence S 89°O1 '39" 'E along said line 1091 .38 feet' to the East line of the West 460.00 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Southwest 1/4 ' of, the Southeast 1/4; thence N. 0°14'55" W along said line 328.97 feet to the North line of said subdivision; thence N 88°59'2.7" W along said • line 100.00 feet; thence N 34°18'07" W 38.53 ;feet to a point on the arc of a curve to the, right from which the center -bears N 34°18107" W 46.00 feet; thence Westerly along said curve through a central angle of 80°34'50" an arc distance of 64.69 feet to' a point of reverse curvature and the beginning of a curve• to the left having a radius of 25:00 feet; thence Westerly along said curve. through a central angle of '45°13'59" an art distance of 19.74 feet to a point of tangency; "thence'' N 88°57'16" W 159.59 feet - to the ' beginning of a curve to the right having a radius of 125.00 feet; thence Westerly along said : through a central angle of 31°07'46° an arc distance of 67.91 feet; thence N 88°57'16" W 468.61 feet to the East ' . line of the West 230_.00 'feet of the' North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of. said Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4; thence S 0°09'20' E along said line 62.47 feet to the 'South' line of said subdivision; thence N 88°59'27" W along said line 46.01 feet to the East line of the west ' 184.00 feet of ,the North 1/2 of the South 1/2 of the• Northwest 1/4 of said Southwest • . 1/4;, of the••Southeast 1/4; thence S 0°09'20" E along said line'89.72 feet to said South line of the North 89.70 feet of' said subdivision; thence 'N' 88°59'27" W along said line, • • ' 154.03 feet to the POINT. OF BEGINNING. , . ' ' . • I . .•., . , . irej RECEIVED r6„ . . ' , . • JUL 1 1980 • �\ -- , \� . . • . . AFFIDAVIT • Gerald E. Schneider , 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 26th day of June , 19 80 , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle . / obe .',-Ke/se .::.: ; /A, / _ /j, (Name of 'Notary Public) j . (Signature of Owner) 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Seattle Tukwila, Washington 98188 (Address) (Address) (,<\ PEGElltolvr\c, JUL 10 (City) (State) 198 (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 , 19 By : Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 I * • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HILLTOP A PRELIMINARY PLAT CITY OF RENTON 7of Rk� JUL 1 1989 G D>Q t;,. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 79-8048 • 1. BACKGROUND • 1. NAME OF PROPONENT SCHNEIDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 2 . ADDRESS AND PHONE 6510 Southcenter Blvd. NUMBER OF PROPONENT Tukwila, Washington 98188 248-2471 3. DATE CHECKLIST SUBMITTED July 1, 1980 4. AGENCY REQUIRING CHECKLIST City of Renton, Planning Dept. 5. NAME OF PROPOSAL HILLTOP 6. NATURE AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL This is an application for a special permit per zoning ordinance 4-708 (3) to construct eleven multifamily units per acre on a portion of tract two zoned R-2. 7. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL . The site is located south of N.E. 6th Street and east of Monroe Avenue N.E. It is located approximately 600 feet north of N.E. Fourth Street and across Monroe Avenue from the Renton Voc-Tech facility. 8. ESTIMATED DATE FOR COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSAL Road and utility construction fall of 1980 9. LIST OF ALL PERMITS, LICENSES OR GOVERNMENT APPROVALS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSAL Preliminary and final plat, grading permit, sewer and water connection, building permits 10. FUTURE ADDITIONS , EXPANSION, OR FURTHER ACTIVITY RELATED TO OR CONNECTED WITH THIS PROPOSAL Tract 2 will be developed as a single family complex as permitted by the zoning. The remaining portion of tract Si not included in this waiver permit will be developed for multi-family as permitted • by zoning. 11. PLANS BY OTHERS WHICH MAY AFFECT THE PROPERTY COVERED BY YOUR PROPOSAL None known 12. APPLICATION FORMS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED REGARDING THE PROPOSAL Rezone on site as per Ordinance #3293 (R-22.71-78) .. 11 . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of impacts begin on page 6.) (1) Earth.. will the proposal result in: a No • (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b Yes • (b) Disruptions , displacements , compaction or overcovering of the soils? c Yes (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? • (d) The destruction, overcovering or modification of any unique geologic d No or physical features? (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the e Maybe site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in silt- ation deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or f No stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? (2) Air. Will the proposal result in:. a Yes (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b Maybe (b) The creation of objectionable odors? (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in c No climate, either locally or regionally? (3) Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in a No either marine or fresh waters? (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount b Yes 'of surface water runoff? c No . (c) Alteration.s to the course or flow of flood waters? d Maybe (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or e Maybe turbidity? f No (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer g No by cuts or excavations? (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injections or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates , detergents, waterborne h No virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? ( i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water i No supplies? (4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of flora? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of b No flora? (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to c Yes the normal replenishment of• existing species? d No (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? (5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of b No fauna? (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier c No to the migration or movement of fauna? d No (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Maybe (7 ) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? Yes (8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or Yes planned land use of an area? (9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b No (b) Depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? N V • '(10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset No conditions? ( 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density Yes or growth rate of the human population of an area? (12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for Yes additional. housing? (13) Transportation/circulation. Will the proposal result in: a Yes (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? b No (b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking? c Maybe (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? d No (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e No (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail , or air traffic? f No ( f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists or pedes- trians? (14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following: a No (a) Fire protection? b No (b) Police protection? c Yes (c) Schools? • d Yes (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? e Yes (e) Maintenance of .public facilities , including roads? f Maybe (f) Other governmental services? (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: a Maybe (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b No (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or alterations ' to the following utilities? a Yes (a) Power or natural gas? 0 b Yes (b) Communications systems? c Yes (c) Water? d Yes (d) Sewer or septic tanks? e Yes (e) Storm water drainage? f Yes (f) Solid waste and disposal ? (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard No or potential health hazard? (18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista No or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or No quantity of existing recreational opportunities? • (20) Archeological/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a No significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? III. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of •my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent:• H. C. Bloss Agent for Applicant II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1 . EARTH The topography of the site is essentially rollingg with a knoll elevation of 370 ft. and the low in the Southeast corner of 350 ft. The 1973 Soil Conservation Service King County Soil Survey indicates that the site lies on an Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgC) from 6-15% in slope. This soil unit is the most common soil in the region and is typical to the hilltops and plateaus around Renton. This soil poses. no "severe" constraints for development of utilities, roads or buildings. Road and building sites would be cleared, graded, filled and canpacted where necessary for proper grade . transition, drainage and foundation stability. 2. AIR • ,During construction activities there would be increased exhaust and dust particle emissions to the ambient air. Objectionable odors may be caused by the roofing of homes or the paving of streets. After construction, the principle source of pollution would be exhaust from vehicular traffic. The approximately 93 automobiles associated with the single-family development would contribute CO, NO, and SO2 emissions to the ambient air. 3. WATER No streams enter or exit the property, nor does the site lie within any floodplain. • Absorption would decrease and runoff would increase due to impervious surfaces created by development. Alteration of ground water flow would most likely ,be insignificant due to the pervious substratum that underlies the surface soils. The potential for surface runoff pollution would be greatest during construction activities when silt loads could be large. Temporary siltation control dvices should be implemented in drainage channels to settle particulate matter before stormwater runoff leaves the site. After construction, pollutants would be mostly debris and oil washed from the roads. parking' & circulation roads . would create about 2. 26acres of impervious surface. Stormwater runoff would be collected by the storm drainage • system and directed to the natural - drainage of the area. Retention/•detention and catch basins with petroleum separators would be installed in the storm drainage system. V , • • 4. FLORA Vegetation on the; site is sparce with little tree cover or substantial cover. The major coverage is be scotch broom, scrub alder, and typical with grasses. Other trees include douglas firs, magnolia, and some fruit trees. Some of the second growth coniferous forest still exists along the east property line. This area is dominated by large mature douglas firs with a salal undergrowth. • Development will result in a decrease in the numbers of plats; although, graded areas would be landscaped with species common to suburban areas. The keeping of lawns and gardens would prevent the normal re-population of natural species. ' No unique, rare or endangered species of flora would be jeopardized nor would any agricultural lands be reduced by developnent. 5. FAUNA The Size and present condition of the site normally precludes large populations of natural species. Small rodents, reptiles, and birds likely to inhabit the site would be further reduced by residential developnent. Species that can withstand the change of habitat or are suited to the new habitat would survive in reduced numbers. Animals displaced from the site would eventually be eliminated through competitive exclusion. The introduction of , house pets (dogs and cats) would further limit the re-population of natural species. To our knowledge, no unique, rare, or endangered species would be jeopardized by development. 6. NOISE Noise levels would be intermittently high throughout construction, but should be limited to normal waking hours. After construction, residential activity and traffic noise created by approximately 341 average daily vehicular trips ,' would increase ambient noise levels. 7. LIGHT AND GLARE An increase in the amount of light and glare from streetlights, automobile headlights and home lighting can be anticipated. • 8. LAND USE The existing site is undeveloped and uninhabited. To the north and east of • the site are single-family lots. The Renton Voc-Tech Center is to the west across Monroe Ave. To the south is a mixture of commercial land and undeveloped acreage. The commercial uses include a gas station, miscellaneous commercial buildings,. General Telephone and a trailer park. • The site was recently rezoned with the northerly plus or minus 260 feet from N. E. Sixth Street designated as SR-l. The southerly 150 feet is R-3 whereas the remainder is R-2 . 9. NATURAL RESOURCES Development would create short-term increases of the use of resources such as lumber and gravel. There would be permanent increase in the use of power and water. The land itself is a rapidly diminishing re- source and development must be considered a long-term committment. There should be no major depletion of any natural resources. 11. POPULATION . Upon completion the development would increase population in that area by approximately 109 people (62 x 1. 75) but should not create or alter any trend in population growth. . 12. HOUSING The project would create 62 multi-family units. • 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Assuming 1. 5 cars per unit there would be an additional 93 automobiles which would generate approximately 341 average daily vehicular trips (62 x 5. 5 ADT) . Access will be from Monroe Avenue. There should be little cause for increased hazard to motor vehicles, bicyclists, ped- estrians, or equestrians, considering the playground, open area, ped- estrian walkways and jogging path proposed, along with a well defined parking and vehicle circulation plan. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire protection is provided by the Renton Fire Department. The nearest stations are located at N.E. Ninth Street and Harrington Avenue N.E . and 138th Avenue S .E. and S.E. 128th Street. Police protection is provided by the Renton Police Department, out of the Renton City Hall. The site lies within the Renton School District No. 403 and would be served by the following facilities : Highlands Elementary School Hazen High School 2727 N.E. Ninth Street 1101 Hoquiam N.E. McNight Middle School 2600 N.E. 12th Street Parks within the area include Kiwanis Park and Winsor Hills Park. The proposal will improve the area water system and fire flow capacities by providing a 1Q" 0 pipe line in Monroe Avenue. between N.E. Fourth St. and N.E. Seventh Street. • . Additional demands would be made on " librarie, mail-delivery, public. health and other miscellaneous services by new residents. . 15. ENERGY No excessive demands would be made on energy sources nor .would 'development require any new sources of energy. ' . , r//i 16. UTILITIES All utilities would be extended from existing services. (Refer to attached site plan. ) schneider homes, inc. REGISTRATION #SC-HN-EI-245Pg 6510 Southcenter Boulevard © Suite Me Tukwila, WA 98188 ® (206) 248-2471 June 30, 1980 Mr. Gordon Y. Ericksen Director City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Subject: Hilltop Apartments Special Permit, R-2 Dear Mr. Ericksen: In conformance with Zoning Ordinance 4-708 (3) our application for a special permit is enclosed. The permit will allow development of 11 multi-family units per acre on that portion of Tract 1, zoned R-2. The remaining area of Tract I is zoned R-3 and will be developed for multi-family units as permitted by zoning. Also enclosed are: affidavit of ownership 2 copies environmental checklist 2 copies site plan 8 copies landscape plan 8 copies special permit fee-check $.160. 00 environmental review fee-check . $124.00 Sks�la l7� Please call me at 248-2471 if you require any additional infor- ia=7/2 mation. Sincerely Yours, iht,e '641 Gerald E. Schneider President • 2 , enclosures jn