HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPL_Appeal Documents_100717.pdfDenis Law City OfMayor IlkAIF
N t
City Clerk - Bonnie LWa{ton
August 17, 2010
Robert Wilson
21703 60th St. E.
Lake Tapps, WA 98391
Re: Wilson Park. Preliminary Plat; LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
720 S. 55th St.
Dear Mr. Wilson:
At the regular Council meeting of August 16, 2010, the Renton City Council adopted the
recommendation of the Planning and Development Committee approving the
referenced preliminary plat with modifications, and adopting amendments to the
Hearing Examiner's findings, conclusions, and recommendations. A copy of the
approved Committee report is enclosed.
Pursuant to RCW, a final plat meeting all requirements of State law and Renton
Municipal Code shall be submitted to the City for approval within five years of the date
of preliminary plat approval
For additional information or assistance, contact City Clerk Bonnie Walton.
Sincerely,
PasonSeth
Deputy City Clerk
Enclosure
cc: Mayor Denis Law
Council President Don Persson
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Parties of Record (11)
1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057 • (425)430-6510/ Fax (425)430-6516- rentonwa.gov
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL.
PLANNING fir. DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
August 16, 2010
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat Appeal
LUA 09-140, PP, ECF
Referred June 28, 2010)
The Planning & Development Committee recommends.'that the full Council find that the Wilson'
Park Preliminary Plat be'approved with 12 lots, with the 12th lot being designed.as'proposed in
the Applicant's..recl6est for reconsideration, shifting the building area to the east and reducing
the size of the retaining walls. - The Planning &. Development Committee further recommends
that the Council adopt amendments to the Nearing Examiners findings, conclusions and.
recommendations as follows:
Finding 14 should be amended to read: "The tree inventory showed 101 significant
trees on.the subject site. Code.requires the retention of 25 trees whereas the applicant
proposes retaining 24 trees. The replacement ratio is six (6) trees for each one removed
that should .have been retained. Six new trees would be planted mainly in the open
space corrido- rs."
Finding 16 should be amended by adding a sentence that reads: "The revised plan
submitted with'the request for reconsideration would move this open space area to the
western portion of Lot 12, adjacent to lots in the Geneva Court Plat."
Finding 29 should be renumbered as Finding '19, and should be amended to read: "The
revised plan submitted with the request for reconsideration substantially reduced the
wall to approximately 6-S feet in height and moved the location of the wall away from
the Geneva Court property lines."
Conclusion 1 should be amended to read: "The Wilson Park Preliminary Plat with Lot 12
designed as proposed in the Applicant's request for reconsideration appears to serve
the public use and interest."
Conclusion 2 should be. amended by substituting the word "twelve" for the word
eleven" when referring to the number of lots in the preliminary plat.
Conclusion 5 should be stricken in its.entirety.
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat Appe
August 16, 2010
Page 2
The Recommendation section should be altered bychangingthe introductory sentence
to read: "The City Council should approve a TWELVE LOT plat of the subject site subject
to the following conditions:"
Recommendation 3 should be amended by-substitutingthe following language for the first
sentence thereof. "A Native Growth. Protection Easement; (NGPE) should be -recorded over.
the western portion of proposed Lot 12, as shown in the revised plan submitted with the.
request for reconsideration, and Tracks B, C and D." The remainder of Recommendation 3
should remain as drafted.
Recommendation 5 should be amended to read: "The applicant shall establish a
Homebwners' Association for the maintenance of the NGPE and the storrriwater vault and
each home shall have an undivided interest in the western retaining wail and the retaining
walls associated with time road. The appropriate documents shall be reviewed and
approved by the—Planning Division project. manager prior to the recording of the final plat."
Terri Briere, air
King Park r, VQethair
Rich Zwicker, Membe
J.,vi. C'f`
tc lr
Qom=ecw erva c c>Y >c=D caa oz'S y Y N.E Z, E 3'o i. yZ''AG7E- b' a v c rS w = o xawF"O d z— , y oma? y ` m ° aW a.a " vol; cCi Z+ .•E b0c p C eo
E EAo-C 3=a o' Q C a ccD
00 GwW xaZ'> o c C 'o 0 0 0 3b[j9 ,b,U•v`' m U w E .Ery
iE inOr] c 3 o a h moo cN.E Q E Q
co` o "mss
o °.. yc e.G °—.d eU i a .c0._
rte n°o.m' o mbW aq c ti
bb ao U
e e r u FV v-
a.Qaa xQ o 3iaWrno h= Qzs o
t111I1Ijn,lrr, x111
Lu
F
t" Ln LA Vi
ca o
o64 va..d
a
wz
ZZ
12-tptoo
y
0 va w U+ 4% y . 2 an ai o
a i3 ai QFF
L 6i y a N p111.4
V
F*
0
w
421
an
VyIL) o
G
pro
FiE W i
w o0
V co
Q4
W Q rx mo=o o o
oo
4ca G.
L4'j
Cp ar °3 cn
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
August 16, 2010 Council Chambers
Monday, 7 p.m. M I N U T E S Renton -City Hall
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Law called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the
Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
ROLL CALL OF DON PERSSON, Council President; MARCIE PALMER; GREG TAYLOR; RICH
COUNCILMEMBERS ZWICKER; TERRI BRIERE. MOVED BY ZWICKER, SECONDED BY PALMER,
COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS RANDY CORMAN AND KING
PARKER. CARRIED.
CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE DENIS LAW, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative Officer; ZANETTA
FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; JASON SETH, Deputy City Clerk; ALEX PIETSCH,
Community and Economic Development Administrator, GREGG ZIMMERMAN,
Public Works Administrator,- PETER RENNER, Facilities Director, CHIP VINCENT,
Planning Director; LESLIE BETLACH, Parks & Natural Resources Director; FIRE
AND EMERGENCY SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR MARK PETERSON and
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR DEBORAH NEEDHAM, Fire & Emergency
Services Department; COMMANDER FLOYD ELDRIDGE, Police Department.
PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Law was read declaring the month of September,
Ready in Renton Month - 2010 to be "Ready in Renton Month" in the City of Renton, and encouraging all
September 2010 citizens to prepare their homes, businesses, and community for any type of
emergency. MOVED BY TAYLOR, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN
THE PROCLAMATION. CARRIED.
Emergency Management Director Deborah Needham accepted the
proclamation with appreciation and thanked City officials for focusing on
emergency management preparedness issues. She announced that all fire
stations, except Station 14, will be open to the public on September 11, 2010
for emergency management training.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION Fire and Emergency Services Administrator Mark Peterson described an
Fire: Citizen Recognition incident that occurred at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park on July 31, 2010.
He recognized five citizens, nominated by Captain John Hettick, for their efforts
to help rescue a gentleman who collapsed and fell into the water: Chris Coates,
Faisal Jaswal, Felix Osorio, Emmanuel Predad, and an anonymous bystander.
Chief Peterson also presented a message from the victim's wife in which she
expressed her extreme gratitude to these citizens who helped her husband.
APPEALS Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report
Planning &„Development recommending that the full Council find that the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
Committee 1 be approved with 12 lots, with the 12th lot being designed as proposed in the
Appeal: Wilson Park Applicant's request for reconsideration, shifting the building area to the east
Preliminary Plat, Wilson, PP- 1 and reducing the size of the retaining walls. The Committee further
09-140 recommended that the Council adopt amendments to the Hearing Examiner's
j findings, conclusions and recommendations as follows:
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
August 16, 2010
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat Appeal
LUA 09-140, PP, ECF
Referred June 28, 2010)
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL
Cate
The Planning & Development Committee recommends that the full Council find that the Wilson
Park Preliminary Plat be approved with 12 lots, with the 12th lot being designed as proposed in
the Applicant's request for reconsideration, shifting the building area to the east and reducing
the size of the retaining walls. The Planning& Development Committee further recommends
that the Council adopt amendments to the Hearing Examiner's findings, conclusions and
recommendations as follows:
Finding 14 should be amended to read: "The tree inventory showed 101 significant
trees on the subject site. Code requires the retention of 25 trees whereas the applicant
proposes retaining 24 trees. The replacement ratio is six (6) trees for each one removed
that should have been retained. Six new trees would be planted mainly in the open
space corridors."
Finding 16 should be amended by adding a sentence that reads: "The revised plan
submitted with the request for reconsideration would move this open space area to the
western portion of Lot 12, adjacent to lots in the Geneva Court Plat."
Finding 29 should be renumbered as Finding 19, and should be amended to read: "The
revised plan submitted with the request for reconsideration substantially reduced the
wall to approximately 6-8 feet in height and moved the location of the wall away from
the Geneva Court property lines."
Conclusion 1 should be amended to read: "The Wilson Park Preliminary Plat with Lot 12
designed as proposed in the Applicant's request for reconsideration appears to serve
the public use and interest."
Conclusion 2 should be amended by substituting the word ."twelve" for the word
eleven" when referring to the number of lots in the preliminary plat.
0 Conclusion 5 should be stricken in its entirety.
r
Wilson Parc Preliminary Plat Appea
August 16, 2010
Page 2
The Recommendation section should be altered by changing the introductory sentence
to read: "The City Council should approve a TWELVE LOT plat of the subject site subject
to the following conditions:"
Recommendation 3 should be amended by -substituting the following language for the first
sentence thereof: "A Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) should be recorded over
the western portion of proposed Lot 12, as shown in the revised plan submitted with the
request for reconsideration, and Tracks B, C and D." The remainder of Recommendation 3
should remain as drafted.
Recommendation 5 should be amended to read: "The applicant shall establish a
Homeowners' Association for the maintenance of the NGPE and the stormwater vault and
each home shall have.an undivided interest in the western retaining wall and the retaining
walls associated with the road. The appropriate documents shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Division project manager prior to the recording of the final plat."
Terri Briere, air
King Park r, e -Chair
Rich Zwicker, Membe
UL, /t 4 Cc 4 f
Je VI VI i
e + r P" -V/":, s 5 C
Y
June 28, 2010 Renton City Council Minutes Page 201
Appointment. Airport Advisory Mayor Law reappointed the following individuals to the Airport Advisory
Committee Committee for three-year terms expiring 5/7/2013: Lee Chicoine (North
Renton Neighborhood, primary); Ben Johnson (North Renton Neighborhood,
alternate) Robert Ingersoll (Airport Leaseholders, alternate); Diane Paholke
Airport -at -Large, primary); and Todd Banks (Airport -at -large, alternate).
Council concur.
Latecomer Agreement: Jones, City Clerk submitted request from Wm. Wayne Jones, Jr., Classic Concepts V,
Classic Concepts V, LA -10-001 LLC, for a latecomer agreement for sanitary sewer extension in the vicinity of SE
2nd Pl. and SE 2nd St_, west of Hoquiam Ave. NE. Refer to Utilities Committee_
Appeal: Wilson Park City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Wilson
Preliminary Plat, Wilson, Park Preliminary Plat by Robert Wilson, accompanied by required fee. Refer to
PP -09-140 Planning and Devela ment Committee.
CED: 2010 Budget Community and Economic Development Department requested authorization
Amendment, Clean Economy to amend the 2010 Budget to allocate $35,000 from the unallocated reserve
Strategy fund for the "Clean Economy Strategy" project. Refer to Finance Committee_
CED: 2010 Lodging Tax Community and Economic Development Department recommended approval
Allocation, Marketing Video of the Renton Lodging Tax Advisory Committee recommendation to allocate
65,000 of unallocated Lodging Tax Fund reserves to develop a new marketing
video. Council concur.
CAG: 09-084, Seismic Retrofit Community Services Department submitted CAG -09-084, Seismic Retrofit of
of Fire Station #11, Landon Fire Station #11; and requested approval of the project, authorization for final
Construction Group pay estimate in the amount of $23,536.54, commencement of a 60 -day lien
period, and release of retained amount of $32,203.91 to Landon Construction
Group, contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur.
Community Services: Amend Community Services Department recommended concurrence in the Park
Park Rules & Regulations, Trail Commissioners' recommendation to amend existing Park Rules and Regulations
Safety regarding trail safety. Council concur. (See page 204 for ordinance.)
Finance: Police In -Car Video Finance and Information Services Department recommended approval of a
Systems, Coban Technologies contract in the amount of $214,756.88 with Coban Technologies to equip 30
police vehicles with in -car video systems_ Refer to Finance Committee.
Police: Wireless Device Use Police Department recommended amending City Code to add a new section
While Driving entitled "Wireless Communication Device Use," and to add by reference State
law regarding the use of wireless devices while driving. Council concur. (See
page 203 for ordinance.)
Public Works: Cascade Public Works Department recommended adoption of a resolution declaring an
Interceptor Repair, Declaring emergency for the purpose of repairing the Cascade Interceptor at Royal Hills
an Emergency Dr. SE. Council concur_ (See page 203 for resolution.)
Public Works: Electric Hybrid Public Works Department recommended acceptance of grant funds in the
Vehicle Purchase, Puget Sound amount of $114,289 from the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency for the purpose of
Clean Air Agency Grant purchasing three electric hybrid vehicles in 2011. Refer to Finance Committee.
Lease: Addendum, AirO Inc, Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an addendum to
LAG -03-002 airport lease JAG -03-002, with AirO, Inc., to defer rent payments and late fees
to 8/31/2010 in exchange for a significant penalty and collateral. Refer to
Transportation Aviation Committee.
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
Subject/Title:
Appeal of Hearing Examiner's April 1, 2010
decision regarding the Wilson Park Preliminary
Plat, 720 5 55th St (LUA-09-140 PP, ECF)
Meeting:
Regular Council - 28 Jun 2010
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Response to appeal notice - Witt/Duong (6/17/2010) Executive
City Clerk's notification letters (6/7/2010&6/21/2010)
Appeal filed by Robert Wilson (6/1/2010)
Response to Request for Reconsideration Staff Contact:
5/1a/201o) Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk, x6502
Request for Reconsideration (4/6/2010)
Hearing Examiner's Report & Decision (4/1/2010)
Recommended Action:
Refer to Planning and Development Committee
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ N/A Transfer Amendment: $ N/A
Amount Budgeted: $ N/A Revenue Generated: $ N/A
Total Project Budget: $ NIA City Share Total Project: $ N/A
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat, 2.5 acres located at 720
S 55th 5t., was filed on June 1, 2010 by Robert Wilson, accompanied by the required $250 fee.
Preliminary Plat Applicant/Contact: Jay Derr, GordonDerr LLP
Preliminary Plat Owner: Robert Wilson
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Take action on the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat appeal and determine approval of the preliminary plat
as recommended by the Hearing Examiner.
June 16, 2010
Ms. Bonnie Walton, City Clerk
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
CITY OF RENTON
JUN 1 7 2010
CITY RED
RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Wilson Parr Preliminary Plat application,
located at 720 S. 55ti' Street. (File No. LUA09-140, ECF, PP )
Ms. Walton:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comments on the above appeal. As owners of
property adjacent to the subject site (located directly below/west of the site), we have an interest in
insuring negative impacts are avoided and appropriate measures are taken in the possible development
of this site.
We became Parties of Record for this application last year, submitting written comments in November
of 2009 and attending the Hearing held by the Examiner in March of 2010. While we were informed of
the Hearing Examiner's final decision on this application, we were not informed as a Party of Record of
the request for reconsideration or the Hearing Examiner's denial of that request. When we recently
received notice of the Appeal to City Council on this matter, we were at a disadvantage in that we did
not have the information contained in the request for reconsideration submitted by the applicant.
We were able to obtain a copy of the letter of request for reconsideration from the Clerk's office, but do
not have the detailed engineering material on the reconsideration request.
As owners of existing homes located adjacent to the proposed Plat, we maintain our concerns over four
specific areas in the Appeal (these are consistent with concerns shared in the initial Plat application)_
These are safety, drainage, privacy and maintenance.
1. SAFETY
This site sits on a fairly significant slope, While site development documents may address the
actual slopes on the listed property, we are concerned that development plans include
addressing impacts to existing slopes, below (west) of the proposed site. We remain concerned
that changes to Lot 12, as well as the entire west border of the site, address the close proximity
of the roadway to our adjoining property. In that the Plat's east/west roadway makes a 90
degree turn to the south directly above our adjoining property, we feel steps must be taken to
insure that vehicles cannot, under any circumstances, (especially ice/snow conditions) slide from
the roadway and down the hill onto our adjoining property/homes. An initially discussed
concrete retaining wall along the Plat's west boundary would address this along Lot 12 and
should be included adjacent to all down slope abutting properties for public safety, which would
include all 4 Geneva Court adjunct properties.
2. DRAINAGE
We are concerned that every effort be made to insure that the changes in site drainage not
impact property located directly below the proposed development. It is unknown how the
proposed two tiered rockery will be engineered to provide drainage that does not impact
existing homes below Lot 12 or any other adjunct properties should the rockery be extended.
3. PRIVACY
The proximity of the Plat being located directly above the Geneva Court subdivision creates the
potential for significant impacts to existing homeowners. Any development of areas adjunct to
property lines of all 4 Geneva Court homes should be considered in privacy screening. Proposed
site development mentions either road or common areas adjunct to current Geneva Court
properties. Any of these would equally impact our properties. We request a "buffer" to
minimize this impact whether that is a wall, green belt, or fence, etc.
4. MAINTENANCE
We understand that requirements made by the City for this Plat would be required of the
owner/developer (to Lot 12 and also the entire site). our concerns are that once the site
infrastructure is done and the developer/contractor moves on that home owners living in that
new development will be required and should be able to maintain the required items that are
common to our adjoining property. These include any rockery, retaining walls, fences and
vaults, etc. If these responsibilities/items are not clearly specified by the City in the approval of
the Plat or well monitored during development, the potential for us as adjacent property
owners to have to deal with failed design and/or lack of maintenance of those structures
dramatically increases. Please make every effort in the appeal/approval process to insure that
requirements and responsibility are indicated, designed, engineered and constructed reliably in
order to avoid any problems in the future.
The need to maintain, and the access to do so, a two-tiered rockery, where the tiering faces
Geneva Court properties instead of tiering toward the new development, may not be obvious to
those homeowners and could easily be overlooked. Geneva Court residents should not be
burdened with maintenance of such a rockery_ We have a two-tiered rockery in our
neighborhood and there is a fair amount of maintenance needed and limited homeowners
willing to do this.
Respectfully submitted,
Paul & Frieda Witt
617S.53 rd Place
Renton, WA 98055
425)227-5462
i
Quang Dang &ICT Duu000ng .
J\
6235.53 rd Place
Renton, WA 98055
425)917-9733
Deniso w
City of, May- - } !
rF'-__ - 1 -• _.
t'
til j.
Gty Clerk - Bonnie L Walton
June 21, 2014
RE: Revised Dates for -the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat Appeal• (File LUA-09-140 PP, ECF)
To: All Parties of Record
A fetter- Was sent to you from this office dated June 7, 2010, giving notice regardiing the
referenced appeal. The date -fins now been changed 'for review of the appeal before the Renton
City Cobncil's Planning and Development Committee.
The hearing,date before.the. Planning & Development Committee has been rescheduled from
July 8, 2i.}10, to:
Thursday, august 12, 2010
2:00 p.i n.
7th Floor Council Chambers
Renton City Hall
1055 5.. GradyWay
Renton, Washington. 98057.
For further information or'assistance,. please -call this office at 42$=430-651(1.
Sincerely,
r
Bonnie 1. Walton, CMC
City. Clerk
1455 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (47.5) 43.M510/ Fax f425) 430-6516 - rentonwa.gov
Denis Law
Mayor . City Of t r
City Clerk - Bonnie I'Malton'
June 7, 2010
APPEAL FILED BY:. - Robert Wilson
RE:- Appeal of -Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
applicatiori,.located at 720 5 55th Street. (File No. LUA-09-144 PP, ECF)
To Parti es_ df Record:
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code -of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing
examiner'sdegsion on.the Wilson Park 'Preliminary Plathasbeen filed with the City Clerk.
In acco.'rdance with Renton MLMicipal Code Section 44410Prwithin-five days o€receipt ofth6
notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, - the City
deck shall'nptify all parties of record of the receipt of the ,appeal_ -Other parties of record may
submit tetters limited to support of their pasitians-regarding th-e appeal within ten (1.D) days of
the date of mailing -Df this notificatiori, The'deadline for sob -mission of-ad"ditional -letters is by -
5:00 P.m., Thursday, June 17, 201.0.
NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN -that the writie•.n: appeal and other pertinent documents will be
reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committe-e-at 3:013 p.m: on July 8, 2030,
Cinthe ouncil Chambers, 7#' Floor of Rentori-City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,:
Washington 95057:.. The"reMrnmendatian'of t"he Committee will. be. presented for
consideration bythefull Cotjftd at a'subsequentCduncil.rrieefing.
Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code.regarding.appeal of Hearing Examiner
decisions or recommendations.is attached. Please.note that the City Council -will tie bonsidering
the merits of the appeal based upon the written record prev'io'usly established. lJnless%a
showing can be made -that'additional-evidence could not reasonably have been available at the
prior hearing held by. the Hearing -Examiner; no furthergvidence ortestimony on this matter
will be accepted by the'.City Council:
For additional information or assistance, please calf me at 42.5-430-6510.
5i:ncerely, -
Bonnie L -Walton .
City Clerk
Attachments
1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 - {425} x€30-551 D I Fa c {425} 430-65; 6 rentonwa.gov
APPEAL TO RENTON CITY COUNCIL
OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISIONIRECO1VIl MNDATION
APPLICATION NAME gison Park Preliminary Plat FIIE NO LuA09-140,ECF, PP
The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or re-comuncr dati f the
Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated 18 & April l 20
10 OPfiENTON
1UN 01 2010
1. IDENTIFICAT70N OF PARTY '
RECEIVED
11
APPELLANT: REPRESENTA= (IF ANY): CITY CtERK1S OFpfCF '
Naive: Name: Jay Der - _GUdppDerr LLP
Address: 21703 60th Street E"
Address:
2025 ' First Ave., Suite 500
Lake Ta"bps, WA 98391 _ Seattle, WA 98121
Phone Number: 253-862`7285 Phone Number: 206-382-95110
Email: NU Email: er-r-.4ardond_err rQm. —_ !
2. SPECIRCATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary)
Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based:
FindfnL, of Fact: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report)
No_ Error. Elease Ref, appeal statement. at+-ched "Hereto
Correction:
Conclusions:
No. i Error: "Proposed _Lot 12 should be eliminated from the plat- and its
natural features and slope reserved."
Correction: Proposed Lot 12, as modified by the applicant in -its
reconsideration request dated April 6, 2010, is hereby apbroved-
Other: Hearing Examiner's Decision on Reconsideration
No. HSA Error. Denial of reconsideration
concerning the elimination of proposed Lot 12 from the plat.
CQrreCtion: Apprnva.l of mndifi ed Jrpt 12 i n Wilsonson Park Prelimi na.ry Plat.
3. SUMMARY -OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief:
Attach explanation, if desircd)
Reverse the decision, or recommendation -and grant the following relief:
Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: .
Remand to theaminer for further consideration as follows.
Other:
Yrl v !
Appellan epr n'a'ive griaftrre Typell'rinted Name Date
NOTE: P refer to Title IV, Chap 8, of the R ton Municipal Cod;, and Section $-1 1p , for spec if c appeal procedures.
City of Renton Municipal Code: Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 — Appeals
4-8-110C4
The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of
the City. (Ord_ 3658,9-13-82)
4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council --- Procedures
1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the
Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party
aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the
City Council, upon a form furnished by the City CIerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the
date of the Examiner's written report.
2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City
Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal.
3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of
their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of
the notice of appeal.
4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the
City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or
recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of
appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord_ 3658, 9-13-1982)
5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or
additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by
the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time
of the hearing before the Examiner_ If the Council determines that additional evidence is required,
the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional
evidence_ The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the
absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional
evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or
testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by
the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before
the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993)
6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely
upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional
submissions by parties.
7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner
on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F1, and after examination of the
record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it
may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the
decision of the Examiner accordingly.
8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an
application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F2 and F3, and after examination of the record, the
Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a
recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may
remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the
application.
9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall
specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of
the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982)
10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision
of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames
established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997)
1
2
3
4,
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
33
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
C'MY OF RENTON
JUN 0 Y 2010
CITY CLERK 5OFFICE
BEFORE THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL
STATE OF WASHINGTON
In the Matter of the; )
WILSON PARK PRELMIINARY PLAT ) No. LUA09-140, ECF, PP
APPLICATION )
APPLICANT ROBERT
For a Preliminary Plat for a Subdivision } WILSON'S APPEAL
j } STATEMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to Renton Municipal Code 4-8-110(F), Applicant Robert Wilson (fine
Applicant") respectfully submits this appeal statement in support of its appeal of the
Hearing Examiner's decision to eliminate Lot 12 from Applicant's Wilson Park
Preliminary PIat, File No. LUA09-140, PP, ECF, including his Decision on Applicant's
Request for Reconsideration dated May 18, 2010 (the "Reconsideration Decision")' and
his underlying Findings, Conclusions, -and Recommendation dated April 1, 2010 (the
Original Decision")' (colIectively, the "Decisions").
The Reconsideration Decision is attached hereto as Attachment I _
The Original Decision is attached hereto as Attachment 2.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 1
ordonDeH
2625 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, SPh 96121-3140
12061 382-954D
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
In his Decisions, the Hearing Examiner erroneously rejects the Planning Director's
Administrative PohcylCode Interpretation regarding the Talbot Urban Separator open
space requirements dated January 14, 2010 (hereinafter the "Talbot Road Urban Separator
Code Interpretation"T. Moreover, without basis in the facts or the requirements of City
policy or code, the Hearing Examiner eliminated Lot 12 from the preliminary plat,
contrary to the staff's recommendation, based on visual impacts to adjoining property
owners to the west of the site and vague concerns regarding "appropriate density" in the
Urban Separator portion of the lot. The Hearing Examiner's Decisions constitute an
improper collateral attack on the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation; are
based on a flawed interpretation of the City of Renton's Urban Separator Overlay
regulations (RMC 4-3-110); and are inconsistent with the City's standards for preliminary
plat decisions. As such, the Hearing Examiner's Decisions are based on "substantial
error[s] in fact and law"4 and the Applicant respectfuIly requests that the Renton City
Council ("City Council") modify both the Hearing Examiner's Decisions and approve
inclusion of Lot 12 of the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat as part of the City's preliminary
plat approval.
H. ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS
The Applicant hereby specifically assigns error to the following conclusions,
recommendations, and decisions of the Hearing Examiner: (1) Original Decision,
Conclusion #i; (2) Original Decision, Conclusion #5; (3) Original Decision,
3 Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation is attached hereto as Attachment 3-
4 RMC 4-8-11 O(F)(7), (s) -
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 2
GMENEM
2025 First Avenue, suite $Go
Seattle, WA 9ei21-al4D
Z06) 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Recommendation 43, and (4) the Reconsideration Decision in its entirety. For the reasons
discussed in length below, the Hearing Examiner erred in excluding Lot 12 from, the
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat Approval. First, the Hearing Examiner's Decisions
constitute an improper collateral attack on the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code
Interpretation that is barred by both the City's statutory 14 -day appeal period for code
interpretations (RMC 4-8-110) and the state's Land Use Petition Act. Second, the
alternative interpretation of the Urban Separator regulations adopted in the Hearing
Examiner's Decisions conflicts with both the legislative intent behind RMC 4-3-110 and
the basic rules of statutory construction. Third, if the Planning Director's Talbot Road
Urban Separator Code Interpretation is overturned, the Urban Separator regulations may
violate RCW 82.02.020. Last, as modified in the Applicant's request for reconsideration,'
Lot 12 resolves all of the concerns raised in the Hearing Examiner's Original Decision
i.e., visual impacts, significant tree retention, excessive grading, and retaining wall
height) and meets the City's zoning, subdivision, and development regulations. Thus, in
reaching his decision to exclude Lot 12., the Hearing Examiner made substantial errors in
fact and Iaw, which the Applicant respectfully requests the City Council modify by
approving the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat with Lot 12.
M. FACTS
The Wilson Park Preliminary Plat site consists of 2.5 acres split up between the R-
14, R-1, and R-8 Zones.' The R-1 zoned portion of the site coincides with the Talbot Road
See Attachment 5.
See Wilson Park Preliminary Plat application submittals attached hereto as Attachment b.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 3
Gor0Mon I
1025 First Avenue, Suite SOD
Seattle, HA 95121-3146
206} 362-4540
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Urban Separator depicted in RMC 4-3-110(C)(2). The City has two Urban Separator
areas: May Valley and Talbot Road. See RMC 4-3-110. In the May Valley Urban
Separator, entire properties are included in the Urban Separator designation; whereas, in
the Talbot Road Urban Separator, only portions of properties are with the Urban
I Separator.
RMC 4-3-110(E)(2)(a) requires properties located within the Urban Separator to
dedicate 50% of the gross Iand area of the parcel or parcels as a non -revocable open space
tract:_ In May Valley, since the entire property is designated Urban Separator, the
dedication of 50% of the gross site area is required. In the Talbot Road Urban Separator,
however, where only a very small portion of the site may be designated Urban Separator,
the City has determined it is inequitable to require that 50% of the gross site area be
retained.' Here, for instance, only 23,795 square feet of Wilson. Park Preliminary Plat's
2.5 -acre lot is designated Urban Separator. Fifty percent of that area would require 11,898
square feet of open space. Fifty percent of the gross site, however, is 54,442 square feet
more than Twice the actual land area actually located within the Talbot Road Urbana
Separator.
Instead, on January 14, 2010, following the Applicant's submittal of its
preliminary plat application, the Planning Director issued the Talbot Road Urban
Separator Code Interpretation. The interpretation states:
Urban Separator regulations require dedication of 50% of designated
properties gross area as open space. Tor properties in May Valley, where
the entire site is within the Urban Separator, this is appropriate. However,
See Attachment 6.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 4
6rdanDe C
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3159
206) 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
for properties in the Talbot area, where only a portion of the site is
designated Urban Separator, the requirement for dedication of 50% of the
area as open space is a hardship. By requiring 50% of the area designated
as Urban Separator to be dedicated as open space, there is uniformity and
fairness between the Talbot and May Valley areas.
Properties in the Talbot Urban Separator will be required to dedicate 50%
of the gross land area in the Urban Separator as open space, rather than
50% of the gross site area. The area to be dedicated may also include
portions of the site abutting the Urban Separator, in order to create a
contiguous open space corridor.'
This Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation was posted on the City's website;
formal comment and appeal periods were published; no appeals of this interpretation were
filed; and the interpretation is currently pending before the City's Planning Commission
as part of the 2010 annual docket list to be codified in the Renton Municipal Code next
year. Pursuant to this code interpretation, the Applicant is required to dedicate 11,898
square feet of open space; however, the open space actually provided in the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat exceeds this requirement by more than 1,000 square feet.'
In its Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner dated March 9, 2010 (the
Preliminary Report"), the City's Department of Community and Economic Development
recommended approval of the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat containing 12 lots and 3 tracts
for open space.10 The Preliminary Report concluded that the 12 -lot Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat complied with the City's preliminary plat criteria; Renton
Comprehensive Plan designation; underlying zoning designation; and subdivision
6 Id.
9 Department of Community and Economic Development's Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner
dated March 9, 2010, attached hereto as Attachment 4, at p. 9 _
10 See Attachment 4.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 5
ardODefit
2025 First Avenue, Suite SOO
Seattle, WA 98122-3140
1206) 362-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I regulations." The Hearing Examiner, however, rejected the Department's
recommendation and, instead, recommended that the City Council approve the Wilson
Park Preliminary Plat with only eleven lots_' The Hearing Examiner based his decision to
eliminate Lot 12 on the following criteria: Lot 12 sacrificed too much of the natural terrain
of the area designated Talbot Road Urban Separator (even though it exceeded the amount
of open space required under the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation);
elimination of Lot 12 preserved the site's natural features and slope; Lot 12 made the plat
excessively dense"; and the 20 -foot retaining walls necessary to create Lot 12 imposed
visual impacts on adjoining property owners directly to the west of site.13
On April 6, 2010, the Applicant submitted a timely reconsideration request to the
Hearing Examiner. In an attempt to address the concerns of the Hearing Examiner as
stated in his Original Decision, the Applicant's reconsideration request submittal relocated
Lot 12 to the east (hereinafter "Modified Lot 12") and placed the open space easement on
the west side of Modified Lot 12." The relocation of Modified Lot 12: (1) substantially
reduced the length of the wall along the east property line of Geneva Court Lots 13-16
from 200 feet tb 55 feet and shifted the wall further to the east to reduce impacts to
adjoining property owners; (2) replaced the 20 -foot retaining wall with two stepped
rockeries of6-feet and 8 -feet in height significantly reducing the visual impact of the
retaining walls to the westerly adjoining property owners; (3) increased the number of
11 Id
12 See Attachment 2, p.11.
13 Id
i4 See Reconsideration Request and enclosures dated April 6, 2014, attached hereto as Attachment 5,
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMEIv'T - 6
GOf'dOnffi4t
2025 First Avenue, Suite 506
Seattle, 1 .98121-314D{
2061 382-9540
I significant trees to be retained on site from 15 to 24; and (4) substantially reduced the
2 grading on Modified. Lot 12 leaving most of the proposed open space easement
3
undisturbed native vegetation.
4
Despite these changes to the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat and Modified Lot 12,
5
b
the Hearing Examiner again refused to allow the inclusion of Modified Lot 12 in the
7 Wilson Park Preliminary Plat. Instead of approving Modified Lot 12, the Hearing
8 Examiner explicitly rejected the City's Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation
4 as "inappropriate" and held that the Urban Separator portion of Wilson Park Preliminary
10 Plat should remain as "natural as possible."15
11
The Hearing Examiner's Decisions should be modified to authorize inclusion of
12
Modified Lot 12 in the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat for the following reasons: (1) the
13
14 Hearing Examiner's Decisions are improper collateral attacks on the Planning Director's
1s Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation; (2) the Hearing Examiner's Decisions
16 are based on an invalid interpretation of the City's Urban Separator regulations; (3)
17 without the Planning Director's Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation, the
18
City's Urban Separator regulations may violate RCW 82.02.020; and (4) the Wilson Park
19
Preliminary Plat complies with the City's Comprehensive Plan policies and code
20
requirements.
21
22
23
24
25 s Attachment 1 at P. i.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 7
otdonDeff
2025 First Avr=ue, Suite 540
Seattle, WA 48121-3140
206} 382-4540
2
4
C
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
N. LEGAL ARGUMENT
A_ The Hearing Examiner's Decisions Constitute an Improper Collateral_ Attack on
the Planing Division's Code interpretation.
Washington case law is clear that a land use decision that is not timely appealed
may not be collaterally attacked in a later proceeding. " Renton provides a formal
comment period and a 14 -day appeal period for administrative code interpretations_ See
RMC 4-8-110. Here, the Planning Director issued the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code
Interpretation on January 14, 2010." The formal code interpretation and its appeal period
were published on the City's website. The appeal period expired on January 28, 2010.18
Thus, any appeals filed after those dates are untimely and prohibited under Washington's
Land Use Petition Act ("LUPA").
Moreover, the Washington Supreme Court has previously held that an issuing
locality cannot collaterally attack the validity of its own land use decisions outside the
LUPA 21 -day appeals period. Chelan County v. Nykrezm, 146 WD 2d 904 (2002). In
Nykreim, Chelan County's own planning director erroneously approved a boundary line
adjustment ("BLA") that was contrary to law in that it'created three lots out of one,
See Land Use Petition Act ("LUPA"), RCW Chapter 36.70C; see also Habitat Watch v. Skagit County,
155 Wn-2d 397,410-11 (2005) (holding that a challenge to a grading permit was an unacceptable collateral
attack on the issuance of an improperly granted special use permit); see also Samuel's Furniture, Inc. v.
Dept of Ecology, 147 Wn2d 440, 54 P.3d 1194 (2002) (Department of Ecology is barred from collaterally
attacking the city's allegedly improper determination that the property was outside its shoreline jurisdiction
or not subject to shoreline Management Act jurisdiction through a later enforcement action); Chelan County
v. Nykreim, 145 Wm2d 904, 52 P_3d 1 (2002) (holding that LUPA's statutory time limits prevent the county
from revoking an improperly granted boundary line adjustment); Wenatchee Sportsmen Assn v. Chelan
County, 141 Wn2d 169, 4 P.3d 123 (2000) (holding that a challenge to a development permit was an
improper collateral attack on the improper rezone of the area in violation of the Growth Management Act)-
See Attachment 3.
18 No appeals were filed during the applicable appeal period.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 8
GDrdnnDert
2025 First Avenue, Sv>te 50D
Seattle, wA 98121-3140
2D67 362-9540
I instead of simply adjusting the boundary lines of existing lots. Id. at 911-12. Fourteen
2 months after approving the BLA, the County discovered the mistake and challenged the
3
decision in superior court_ rd. at 914. The Court found that because Chelan County failed
4
to timely appeal an erroneous land use decision made by its own planning director, it
5
6
could not file an action for declaratory relief challenging the BLA granted to the applicant
7 even though it contravened county code. Id.
g Finally, both Habitat Watch and Wenatchee Sportsmen Assn v. Chelan County,
9 141 Wn.2d 169, 4 P.3d 123 (2000) support the argument that the City's code
10 interpretations cannot be collaterally attacked in a different City decision. See Habitat
11
Watch, 155 Wn.2d at 410-411 (`Because appeal of the special use permit and its
12
extensions are time barred under LUPA, Habitat Watch cannot collaterally attack there
13
14
through its challenge to the grading permit"); Wenatchee Sportsmen, 141 Wn.2d at 173
15 ("WS A's failure to file a timely LUPA challenge to the rezone bars it from collaterally
16 challenging the validity of the rezone in this action opposing the project application").
17 The Hearing Examiner's Decisions are essentially an untimely collateral attack on
18
the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation. The Hearing Examiner cites no
19
authority in his Decisions that permits the rejection of a formally adopted code
20
interpretation. The Hearing Examiner himself admits in his Reconsideration Decision that
21
22
the "interpretation appears to permit development of [Modified] Lot 12." The Applicant
23 respectfully requests that the City Council correct the Hearing Examiner's LUPA
24
25
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 9
6rdO OM
2025 rirst Avc r_ Suite 500
Seattle, WA 48121-3140
206) 38z-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8i
9I
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
violation, reaffirm the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation, and modify the
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat approval to include Modified Lot 12.
B. Even if the Hearing Examiner Could Contest the Talbot Road. Urban- S arator
Code Inte retation City Staff's InLeMretation is Correct.
Consistent with the Planning Director's code interpretation, the Urban Separator
Regulations can only reasonably be interpreted to apply to the portion of the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat subject to the overlay. The mere fact that the City Council chose to zone
only part of the Wilson. Park Preliminary Plat site R -I evidences that this was the
legislature's intent and supports staffs interpretation. R-8 zoning is not an urban separator
zone.19 Had the City Council wanted the entire lot to be subject to the Urban Separator
regulations, and, more specifically, RMC 4-3-100(E)(2)(a)'s 50% gross site area
requirement, it would have zoned the entire site R -I instead of zoning the majority of the
I parcel R-8.
Moreover, substantial weight is given to the agency's interpretation of the statutes
it administers which are within the agency's specialized expertise. Manlce Lumber Co. v.
Diehl, 91 Wn.App. 793, 802, (1998). An agency's interpretation will be upheld if it is a
plausible construction of the statute or rule. Seatoma Convalescent Or v. Dep't of Soc. &
Health Servs., 82 Wn_App. 495, 518 (1996). Here, the Planning Director's interpretation
of RMC 4-3-110 is entitled to deference.
In contrast, the Hearing Examiner's interpretation of the City's Urban Separator
regulations conflicts with the actual language of RMC 4-3-110. In his Decisions, the
tl)
Renton Comprehensive Plan, Policy LU -147, p. EK -26.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 10
GOrdanOi -
2025 First Avenue, suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
205) . -9540
I Hearing Examiner concludes that the Urban Separator designated portion of the Wilson
2 Park Preliminary Plat site should remain undeveloped_ See Attachment 1; see also
3
Attachment 2, Conclusion 41. This effectively means that 100% of the property located
4
within the Talbot Road Urban Separator should be dedicated as non -revocable open space
5
6
tract. A 100% requirement is notably absent from RMC 4-3-110, and is, in fact, dixectly
7 contradictory to the 50% dedication requirement found in RMC 4-3-110(E)(2)(a). A
g legislative body is presumed not to include unnecessary language when it enacts
9 legislation. See Davis v. State ex rel. Dept of Licensing, 137 Wn.2d 957, 969 (1999) ("A
10 fundamental canon of construction holds a statute should not be interpreted so as to render
11
one part inoperative."); Judd v. Am, Tel. & TeL Co_, 152 Wn.2d 195, 202 (2004) (no
12
portion of a statute shall be rendered meaningless or superfluous through interpretation).
13
14
A statutory interpretation that conflicts with a statute is given no deference. AFelson v.
15 Appleway Chevrolet, 160 Wn.2d 173, 184 (2007). Here, the interpretation of RMC 4-3-
16 110(e)(2)(a) put forward by the Hearing Examiner conflicts with its 50% dedication
17 requirement, or, at best, renders it inoperative. Thus, it must be rejected.
18
C_ Without the Limitation in the Planning Director's Code Interpretation, the City's
19 Urban S arator Regulations May Violate RCW 82.02.020.
20 Washington courts have looked critically at regulations that impose across -the -
21 board open space requirements or clearing limitations that are not directly related to the
22 level of development.oz impacts created by a specific development proposal. See, e.g., Isla
23
Verde Int'1 Holdings, Inc. v. City of Camas, 146 Wn.2d 740, 759 (2002) ("Isla Verde")
24
where Supreme Court rejected an ordinance that imposed a 30% open space requirement
25
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 11
6Oi`don0err
2M25 First Avenue, suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
205) 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on all proposed subdivisions); Citizens' Alliance v. Ron Sims, 145 Wa.App. 649 (Div. 1,
2008), cert. denied, 203 P.3d 378 (2009) ("Citizens'Alliance") (where the Court of
Appeals held a King County ordinance that limited clearing on rural property to a
maximum of 50% violated RCW 82.02.020). Those courts have invalidated such
regulations as a violation of RCW 82-02-020, a statutory prohibition on any "tax, fee, or
charge, either direct or indirect," on the construction or reconstruction of buildings or on:
the development, subdivision, classification, or reclassification of land. The Urban
Separator open space requirement, particularly if imposed on the Wilson Park Preliminary
Plat parcel without the limitation identified in the Planning Director's code interpretation,
would run afoul of the legal limitations discussed in Isla Verde and Citizens' Alliance_
The Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation, applying the Urban Separator open
space requirement on only that portion of the parcel located within the Urban Separator
zone, strikes a more appropriate and reasonable limitation on the requirement that reduces
the City's vulnerability in imposing the requirement on parcels such as the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat parcel. Appellant has previously, and continues to, express his
willingness to comply with the Urban Separator open space requirement, provided it only
applies to that portion of the parcel located within the Urban Separator zone, thus allowing
the City to include Modified Lot 12 within the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat approval.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 12
OMEN
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 38121-3140
f 06) 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9i
10
11
12
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
D. The Modifications to Lot 12 Prosed by the Applicant in his Request for
Reconsideration. Address the Concerns Raised by the Hearin Examiner in his
Original Decision.
As summarized in Section Ill entitled "FACTS" above, the Applicant in his
Reconsideration Request20 sought to address all of the Lot 12 concerns raised in the
Hearing Examiner's Original Decision. By modifying the location of Lot 12 and its
associated open space area, the Applicant reduced the length of retaining walls required
and shifted a wall farther to the east to further reduce impacts to adjoining property
owners; reduced visual impacts by replacing a 20 -foot retaining wall with two stepped up
rockeries 6 -feet to 8 -feet in height, retained more significant trees; and substantially
reduced the amount of grading required within the portion of the site designated Urban
Separator .21 Indeed, the Hearing Examiner recognized in his Reconsideration Decision
that shifting the location of Modified Lot 12 "does reduce the impact on the properties to
the west.X22 Further, modifications to Lot 12 bring the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat even
more into conformance with Community Design Element, Policy CD -123, which
encourages developers to adjusting site plans to preserve slopes, trees, and vegetation.
While RMC 4-7-130(C)(1)(B) prohibits the creation of a lot that primarily has slopes forty
percent (40%) without adequate area at lesser slopes upon which development may occur,
this prohibition is inapplicable to Modified Lot 12 — it does not have slopes over 40% and
20 See Attachment 5.
21 Id
Z2 Attachment 1, p. 1.
23 Renton Comprehensive Plan, Community Design Element, Policy CD -1, p. N-2.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 13
t
Goffiffi ff-
2025 First Avenue, State 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
205) 382-9590
I
P -A
3
4
5
6
7
S{
1
91',
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1$
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
has adequate area for a house site_ Last, there is no provision within the City's regulations
that limit the use of retaining walls_
In addition to the issues resolved above, the Hearing Examiner's Original
Decision, without any analysis or support, raised the appropriateness of the density
proposed in the Wilson. Park Preliminary Plat application. The lots in the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat range from 4,500 to 13,006 square feet with an overall density of 7.99
dwelling units per acre. Staff concluded that the 12 -lot Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
complied with the City's underlying zoning designation. See Attachment 4 at pp. 6-7.
Moreover, proposed Lots S through 11, are wider than required by the City's regulations
60 feet versus 50 feet) in order to meet the intent of RMC 4-7-220(C)(4) and Housing
Element Policy H-924, which recommends Iarger lots in steeper parts of subdivision sites.
Thus, there is no evidence in the record that the proposed density of the 12 -lot Wilson
Park Preliminary Plat violates the City's applicable development regulations.
For these reasons, the Hearing Examiner had no basis in the record or the law to
eliminate Modified Lot 12 from the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat approval based on
compliance with the City's comprehensive plan policies and code requirements including
density, lot dimensions, building standards, open space, and setbacks.
V. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Applicant respectfully requests that the City Council
modify both the Hearing Examiner's Decisions, affirm the Talbot Road Urban Separator
Code Interpretation issued by the staff on January 14, 2010, and approve the Modified Lot
Renton Comprehensive Plan, Housing Element, Policy 1-1-9, p. VII -8.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 14
UNdffiOB
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, SPA 96121-3140
206) 392-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
71
8'
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12 of the Applicant's Wilson Park Preliminary Plat as shown in the Applicant's
reconsideration request slated April 6, 201 0.25
DATED this 1" day of June, 2010.
Attachment 5_
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 15
GORDONDERR LLP
ByZ&M a W ,
Jay P. D , WSBA # 12620
Megan Nelson, WSBA # 37996
Attorneys for Applicant Robert Wilson
GaidBID MR.
2025 First Av=ue, Suite 504
Sr ttle, 17A 98121-3190
206} 362-9540
Encompass,
ENGINEERING Ft SURVEYENG
IL L
Together with
Baima & Holmberg
April 6, 2010
Fred Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
Renton City Hall
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
RE: Wilson Park LUA-09149, PP, ECF
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
CI—I Y OF RENTON
APR 0 7 2010
RECEIVED
OrFY CLERK'S OFFICE
Pursuant to Title W, Chapter 8, Section 100G of Renton's Municipal code, please
consider this letter a request for reconsideration of the April I'`. 2010 recommendation to
the City Council for approval of the Wilson Park subdivision.
The reason for the reconsideration request is that information regarding Lot 12 is
available that was not available at the Hearing. At the Hearing, the possibility of flipping
Lot 12 and malting the open space easement on the west side was raised, however, plans
were not available at the Hearing that would show the ramifications of the change. The
conceptual grading, drainage, utility and tree plans have now been revised to reflect the
change to Lot 12 and are hereby submitted with this letter in support of the
reconsideration request.
As it turns out, the revision to lot 12 has the following advantages:
The wall along the east property line of Lots 13 through 16, Geneva Court is
substantially reduced.. Instead of a 200 ft long wall along the property lines, we
now have approximately 55 ft of wall.
Two stepped rockeries 6' to 8' in height would follow the alignment of the new
roadway across the westerly portion of Lot 12. The rockeries would then turn
north to allow a 10 ft wide ramp access the open space easement on the westerly
portion of Lot 12. This allows the retention of most of the significant trees in the
open space easement on Lot 12 and substantially reduces the visual impact of a
wall to the Geneva Court neighbors_
Western Washington Division
155 NE Juniper St, Ste 201, Issaquah, WA 98027
Phone: (425) 392-0250 Fax: (425) 391-3055
www.Encompass$S.net
Eastern Washington Division
108 East 2n" Street, Cle Elven, WA 98922
Phone: (509) 674-7433 Fax: (509) 674-7419
1 t
Fred Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
City of Renton
Page two
With the proposed revision, the number of significant trees that will be retained
on site is 24, which is only one less than the 25 trees required to be retained. This
is a significant increase from the initial proposal of 15 retained trees and will only
require the planting of 6 two-inch replacement trees.
The grading on Lot 12 will be substantially reduced as well, leaving most of the
proposed open space easement undisturbed native vegetation.
Although the primary reason for non approval of Lot 12 appears to be the impact of the
20 ft wall on the neighbors, it appears that a secondary issue is density. While
elimination of Lot 12 would reduce the density somewhat, it would not provide that much
of an environmental benefit to the site. Lots 8 through 11 are wider than required by
zoning (60 ft vs. 50 ft) as it was the applicants intent to build nicer (wider) homes on the
property than what is the norm by today's standards. By providing wider lots than
required by the zoning code, the intent of Section 4-7-220 c.4, Renton's Hillside
Subdivision code recommending larger lots iD steeper parts of the site is met. The
requirement to stab a road to the north in it's present location is one that staff considered
at length, so with the road location established, and lots 8 through 11 wider than normal,
the elimination of Lot 12 would have little beneficial impact to the site. The proposed
revision of the open space easement location to the west side of Lot 12 accomplishes the
same goal and retains the lot.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. Revised plans showing the proposed
revision are enclosed for your use and have also been sent to staff.
very truly yours,
BAiMA & HOLMBERG,INC.
Shupe Holmberg, PE PLS
Enclosures
cc: Jennifer Henning
Bob Wilson
Steve Beck
WSHbbIn9542 Feed Knack®
April 1, 2010
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMTNER
CITY OF RENTON
Minutes
OWNERIAPPLICANT:
CONTACT:
LOCATION:
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT
Robert Wilson
21703 6e Street East
Lake Tapps, WA 98391
Shupe Holmberg
Baima & Holmberg Inc.
100 Front Street
Issaquah, WA 98027
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
File No.. LUA 09-140, PP, ECF
720 South 551 Street
Applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary Plat for the
subdivision of 2.5 acre parcel to encompass 12 lots and 3 tracts
for open space.
Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to
conditions.
Staff Report was delivered to the Hearing Examiner on March
9, 2010.
PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining
available information on file with the application, field
checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner
conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
MIl TiJ'iES
The following minutes are a summary off the March 16, ZDIO hearing.
The legal record is recorded on CD.
The hearing was opened on Tuesday, March 16, 2010, at 9:32 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor
of the Renton City Hall. parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner.
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 2
Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original
application, proof of posting, proof of publication and
other documentation pertinent to this request.
Exhibit No. 2: Vicinity Map
Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Plat Map Exhibit No. 4: Boundary/TopogRphy Ma
Exhibit No. 5: Generalized Utilities/Drainage/
Control/Coace tuaI Grading/Landscaping Plan
Exhibit No. 6: Road Profile
Exhibit No. 7: Wall. Profiles & Cross Sections Exhibit No. S: Tree Inventory
Exhibit No. 9: Zoning Map Exhibit No. 10: Administrative Policy/code
Interpretation Affecting Urban Separator Overlay
Regulations, effective January 14, 2010
Exhibit No. 11: Street Modification Letter, dated
November 10, 2009
Exhibit No. 12: Plat Map Showing All Zoning
Designations
Exhibit No. 13: Map Showing Urban Separator Areas
in the Talbot Area of Renton
Exhibit No. 14: Generalized Utilities and Drainage
showing the Retainin Walls
Exhibit No. 1S: Planter Strips for Sidewalks Exhibit No. 16: Large Sheet Showing Most Recent
Drainage and Grading Plan with the Retaining Walls
Exhibit No. 17: Right of Way Papers for 5 Street Exhibit No. 18: Existing Easement Document for the
Smithers EmEgencyEmergencyAccess Roadway
Exhibit No. 19: Aerial Photo of Existing Area Exhibit No. 20: Going Native Brochure
The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager,
Community and Economic Development Division, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington
98057. The proposed project is a 2.5 acre site, the nearest access street is South 55tf' Street. The access street is
very steep and has several serpentines with a speed limit of 25 MPH. This site has been constrained by trying to
get access to it due to the steep slopes. There also have been some difficulties due to City Code because of the
Urban Separator Overlay and all the various zoning designations.
The final plat has gone through several revisions to meet all requirements, this presentation today has 12 lots
suitable for the development of single-family residential homes_ There are three open space tracts, Tracts B, C,
and D. There is no Tract A. Tract B is greater than a 40% slope and as such is a protected area that cannot be
touched. Tracts C and D are open space areas and are split by the zoning designation. R-1 zone is on the west
side and R -S zone is on the east. All open spaces are considered reserved areas and would be planted with trees
by the applicant.
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
bile No.: LUA--09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 3
Part of Lot 12, to the north is within the R- I zone, a portion of this Iot would have an easement overlaying it to
be considered open space that satisfies the Urban Separator requirements. It is not a separate Tract, but an area
that will have an easement over the top.
The remainder of the lots in the plat are between 4,500 and 6,270 square feet. There is a lot of topography on
the lots and in order to develop the lots there would need to be some retaining walls constructed. The wails
would vary in size from 12-20 feet in height. One retaining wall would be located on the eastern border of Lot 7
and the other would be located on the western border of Lot 12. The retaining wall on the east side would be
either poured concrete or soil nail composition; the wall on the west side would be poured concrete or stabilized
soil. The walls abutting the property both to the north and the west will have some impact to the property
owners at least during construction and perhaps during maintenance. The applicant has been required to secure
both construction and maintenance easements. The plan is to terrace those walls and landscape them, it has been
requested by Staff that those walls be maintained by the Homeowner's Association_ The applicant would like to
see the individual homeowners maintain the walls in their particular lot.
The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated with eleven
mitigation measures. No appeals were filed.
The project is compliant with both Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan policies. The density of the
proposed plat is 7.99 dwelling units per acre. All lots comply with the minimum width and depth.
The plat would be accessed via a new street that would extend from S
55a'
Street. It would be a 50 -foot right-of-
way and enters into the plat, makes a curve and becomes S 53`d Place_ It eveatually ends in a "T" that will
eventually extend to the north and south property lines with a gated emergency access at the south property line,
All on-site roads will be dedicated rights -of -way -
Because of the restraint in this plat, it would be required to have sidewalks and planting strips on one side of the
roadway. The sidewalk and planting strip would be located along the west side of the street coming into the plat.
There also would be a sidewalk and an 8 -foot wide planting strip on the north side of South 53rd Place. The
planting strip would be 5 feet wide along the north/south interior road.
A tree inventory plan has been submitted, currently there are 101 trees on site, of those 25 must be retained. The
applicant has stated that they can only retain 15 trees. The applicant bas proposed 60 trees to be planted
primarily in the open space areas (Tracts C and D as well as the open space area that is part of Lot 12). Staff has
asked for a split rail fence to define these areas_
A goal of the Urban Separator is to create corridors of open space for wildlife to roam through. There are only
two areas of the City where the Urban Separator applies, the Talbot Bill Area and May Creek. In Talbot, the
Urban Separator slices through the hill and takes just portions of the property and this is why Lot 12 has been
designed with the open space that will be surrounded with a split rail fence.
Police and Fire have indicated that there are sufficient resources to serve this area_ The project is located in the
Renton School District and they do have sufficient room for the projected new students_ This project would be
subject to School Impact Fees.
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
File No__ LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 4
There have been some letters sent to the City of Renton concerning the safety on S 55's Street and the new
driveways that would be taking access onto that street A safety evaluation was done and it was determined that
the roadway was safe based on a higher speed than what is currently allowed on S 55` Street
A drainage report was completed and showed that the parcel to the east drains onto this site and runoff from this
site flows to the west into Geneva Court, this flow collects in a drain and flows into the storm system located in
the road inside Geneva Court and finally flows into Springbrook Creek.
The drainage vault for this project would be located under the roadway with an easement for maintenance. The
opening to the vault would not be located in the roadway, but placed into the landscaping or sidewalk areas
adj acemt to the vault. There has been vandalism where the grates have been removed which creates a grave
traffic safety issue.
Water service would be provided by Soos Creek, the Certificate of Water Availability has been issued for this
site. Sewer service would be provided by the City of Renton with a minimum 8 -inch diameter extension
required_ The public streets would become part of the City System with the exception of the emergency access
road.
It was requested that a 9`t Condition be added indicating that the grate covering the drainage vault be located in
the sidewalk or the landscaping.
A 15 Minute Recess was taken.
The Hearing Resumed at 10.31 am_
Shupe Holmberg, 165 NE Juniper Street, Issaquah 98027 stated that if the proposed plat is approved subject to
the recommended Staff conditions they believe that the public's interest in safety and welfare would be met,
Condition #5 calls for the Homeowner's Association to maintain the retaining walls. It would appear to the
applicant that the individual homeowners should maintain those walls within their own respective lots. That
would involve Lot 7 and 12.
The Drainage and Grading plan that was shown today is not the latest version. The north wall would still be a 5 -
foot High retaining wall. On the east portions of Lots 4-7 there would be two staged rockeries that would be 2 to
6 feet in height with the highest part being at the north. end_ The retaining wall on the west side is the same on
both plans. The retaining wall on Lot 12 would be approximately 20 -feet tail. There would be a fence on top of
the 20 -foot wall. Since the 20 -foot wall does cover several parcels, it might be best if the Homeowner's
Association would maintain that particular wall.
In the drainage report it does state that the runoff from the site currently runs through Geneva Court. The
proposal for this site is to pick up the drainage, pipe it to the detention vault within the off-site roadway and
discharge that to the roadside ditch on S 55`h Street. Any drainage impacts to Geneva Court would be lessened,
no drainage from this site would go to Geneva Court.
The 2009 King County Stormwater Manual would apply to installation and operation of the vault. Each
individual lot will have a connection and drainage would be piped directly to the conveyance system.
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
Pile No_: LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April I, 2010
Page 5
The emergency access to the site would be paved. Some cut and grading will take place along the road and
adjacent lots.
Vincent Geglia, 11410 NE 124'" St., ,Ste. 590, Kirkland 98034 stated he had an aerial photo of the site and
surrounding areas. The new public road off of S 551 Street to the site was pointed out showing that the new
interior road, S 53d would hit just on the outside comer of the curve giving the optimum sight distance looking
in both directions on S 55h. The site distance does meet the City of Renton requirements.
Paul Witt 617 S 53`a P1, Renton 95059 stated that he Iives in Geneva Court, Lot 13. He is not opposed to this
project, but does want to make sure that any project in the area is done correctly and safely. This is a
challenging project, from his front porch up to the far side ofthis new site, it is over 110 -feet in difference. His
concern is to make sure that the retaining wails along the west side are done correctly, he still feels a .little vague
about exactly what materials are being used to create these retaining walls. He was further concerned about the
terminus and vagueness of how far the wall at his corner lot would continue. Going into his back yard and
looking up,there would just be a 20 -foot wall going straight up, how is that going to look At that location, the
road would be above grade. That roadway could be prone to accidents especially in the snow and ice.
He would prefer to see the maintenance kept with the Homeowner's Association, it sounds great on paper,
however, in reality it most likely will not get done. It seems strange to have a Homeowner's Association
responsible for something built on City property. The vault that they are responsible for is not on any property
they have vested interest in, it is on a City right-of-way on a dedicated street. It would stand to reason that the
engineering would be strong enough to hold large vehicles_
Steven Beck, 4735 NE 0° Street, Renton 98059 stated that he is the manager of Amberwood LLC and
consultant for Wilson Park Preliminary Plat before the Hearing Examiner today.
Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7 to the east will have a rockery on their site. He was involved with the Cherie Lane plat
several years ago and recently brought plans to a meeting showing how rockeries and vegetation was handled in
the Cherie Land. It was not pretty. They did not want that on this site, so everywhere they can, even on the
west side to try to step up and do rockeries and vegetation, it looks much better and is better for the
environment. On Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7 where there is approximately a 120 -foot depth, the plans include a garage
under a two story basement with decks off the main floor. These plans were used in Cherie Lane and worked
very well. With that house plan, the back yards can be tiered up with 4-6 foot rockeries at a time and use
vegetation on tbem.
Lot 12, they have discussed how to do that:, possibly sloping the hill up slowly to the building pad. If a wail is
used, it would have to be textured or soil nail used, but the end product would have to look good.
Kayren Kittrick, Community and Economic Development stated that Geneva Court has a north connection, a
small bit of right -0f --way that was reserved for future use.
Rockeries four feet and over must be structurally engineered. They require a separate building permit and a
separate inspection, there is a special inspection required with a structural engineer on site at the time of the
inspection.
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 6
The Examiner stated that the road is pretty much at the south end of the retaining wall leaving no room to create
terraced or sloped retaining walls_
Ms. Kittrick stated that her concern is that could be a focal point for erosion, she will instruct her staff to pay
particular attention to that area. If the wall stops right there, something will have to be placed there to protect
the area. The wall and transition would be required to meet building standards.
S 55'h ideally would be required to have sidewalk, curb and gutter. The problem is that is a third party property
and therefore if there were to be any improvements through there it should be associated with designs to
accommodate what may be developed on that proerty. There have been inquiries on that property and it willhappenatsometime. It is also possible that S 55 should be something that the City is looking at as a general
overall plan as opposed to putting it on each individual property. They are not prepared to do that today, but it is
on their agenda.
Road A will either be called Smithers or Morris, it has not been determined as yet. The preference at this point
is to call it Smithers. The north/south connection from S 53`d to S 55h will be subject to traffic and building
requirements. The sidewalk is situated next to the slope and will require a pedestrian level barrier or guard rail
of some type. There is a possibility that the school bus may pickup children on S 55e' that has not been
established as yet
The drainage with the walls must meet the 2009 Manual requirements. The vault would be located in the
dedicated right-of-way and the grate would be placed outside the traffic right-of-way. The sewer line would run
down S 55`s Street.
Because of the protected area on Lot 12,'they can only clear 35%. It seems it may be complicated to build the
wall, do the grading and remain at less than 35%. They will also need the permission of Mr. Witt and any other
neighbors prior to building this retaining wall. Her opinion is that the maintenance of that particular retaining
wall should be spread over the whole group in a Homeowner's Association. That particular wall on Lot 12 is in
essence holding the entire plat in place. It might have to be in an easement where all the property owners have
an undivided interest, which may be stronger than putting it on the Homeowner's Association.
There could be a possibility of flipping Lot 12 and making the open area next to the retaining wall rather than
the house.
Mr. Holmberg stated that he had a Geotech engineer present, but did not have a structural engineer in the room
today.
The Examiner asked if this wall could be built without disturbing the properties to the west. Permission would
be needed to shore it up as it is being built or the piles being driven from the top for the soldier walls and then
doing what was necessary.
Mr. Holmberg stated that technically they could build the wall on Lot 12 with no off-site easements. It would be
a fill behind the wall. It will have impacts on the four lots in Geneva Court because it is going to be a large wall
in their backyard. They did look at putting the building area on the west side of Lot 12, there was less of a
building envelope doing it that way, but they could revisit that possibility. It could also be a condition that they
work with the homeowners of Geneva Court to try to address some of the visual impacts of that wall.
Wilsoa Park Preliminary Plat
File No.. LUA-09-140, PP, ECP'
April 1, 2010
Page 7
They are proposing larger lots in this development because of the retaining walls and rockeries that are
necessary because of the steep slopes. Lot 12 is a difficult lot
Moin Kadri, 19213 Kenlake Place NE, Kenmore 98028 stated the soil investigation that was done found the soil
in that area to be a glacial till and generally has a fairly high sheer strength. If the foundations are built on that
native material that can withstand the bearing capacities and even a retaining wall_ The report has options for
three different types of retaining structures, in this type of environment, taking care of drainage is very
important.
The Examiner stated that he had some concerns with the retaining wall, its length and height and its affect on the.
properties to the west as well as supporting anything built on Lot 12. He may impose another condition for Lot
12, in that if it can be built it can be built, but it may actually yield to the Urban Separator_ These are steep
slopes and adjoin other people's property, there are a lot of things involved in malting sure it is done safely
without jeopardizing anybody on this site or adjacent sites.
Ms. Henning checked on the requirements for a Hillside Subdivision. Lots are required to be larger than the
minimum size. Erosion control, grading and Geotech information seem to be the criteria. This is a difficult site,
the applicant has been very responsive in working with the City. The remaining concerns would be how
clearing would be accomplished on Lot 12 in order to preserve the number of trees required and accommodate
all the improvements. There will be export from the site which does not seem to be severe.
The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and
no farther comments from staff. The hearing closed at 11:36 a.m_
FIND]NGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMNfENDATION
Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS:
1. The applicant, Robert Wilson, filed a request for an approval of a Preliminary Plat for the subdivision of
a 108,884 square foot (2.5 acre) parcel in the R-1, R-8 and R-14 zones and
mi
the Urban Separator
Overlay. The original proposal encompassed 13 -lots and 4 -tracts (for open space and storm detention).
The revised proposal encompasses 12 -lots and 3 -tracts (for open space).
2. The yellow file containing the staff report the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation
and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit 41.
3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of
Nan -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M).
4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter.
5. The subject site is located at 720 South 55th Street. The subject site is located north of 55th and does
not front directly on that street. The subject site is east of Talbot Road South and is generally south of
w
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
Pile No.: LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 8
Valley Medical Center and directly south of the eastern portion of the Sikh Temple site. An existing
home is located on the eastem end of the parcel. That home would be removed if the plat is approved,
The map element of the Comprehensive PIan designates the area in which the subject site is located as
suitable for the development of a variety of residential uses ranging from low density to medium density
uses, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan.
7. The subject site is currently zoned R-1 (Single Family - 1 dwelling unit/acre), R-8 (Single Family - 8
dwelling units/acre) and RR 14 (medium density - 14 units/acre). The R-14 portion is only about 10 feet
wide.
The subject site is also subject to the Talbot Road Urban Separator Overlay requiring preservation of a
corridor of open space_ The overlay is located. near the westernmost portion of the subject site and is the
portion zoned R-1. It is approximately 23,795 square feet_ An Administrative Interpretation found that
only 50 percent of the area defined by the urban separator rather than 50 percent of the entire site should
be restricted to open spare use.
The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 3268 enacted in December
1978.
10. The subject site is approximately 2.49 acres or 108,884 square feet_ The rectangular subject site is
approximately 207 feet wide (north to south) by 510 feet long. The southwest corner of the subject site
is approximately 290 feet north of South 55th_
11. The subj ect site slopes downward over 110 feet from approximately 3 70 feet in the northeast comer of
the site to approximately 254 feet at its western boundary. The slopes range from 13 percent 39 percent
with an area exceeding 40 percent east of the southwest corner of the site_ Slopes exceeding 40 percent
are designated as protected slopes.
12. The site's sloped topography means the site falls within the definition of a Hillside Subdivision. Larger
lots and decreased density are permitted in Hillside Subdivisions.
13. The applicant proposes grading the subject site to create building pads for homes as well as appropriate
grades for roads to and through the site. The applicant proposes approximately 17,000 cubic yards of
cut and approximately 6,000 cubic yards of structural fill.
14. The tree inventory showed 101 significant trees on the subject site. Code requires the retention of 25
trees whereas the applicant proposes retaining 15 trees. The replacement ratio is six (6) trees for each
one removed that should have been retained. Sixty new trees would be planted mainly in the open space
corridors. Additional street trees would be required
15. Access to the subject site would be provided via a new public roadway that connects S 55th with the
subject site across a neighboring, third -party property. This south to north roadway would be paved to a
width of 26 feet and have an eight foot planter strip and a 5 foot sidewalk on its west side. It would
connect to a new roadway, Road A, through the site that would curve to the east and end in a T -
intersection with another north -south road, Road B. This Road B would extend to the north and south
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
Pile No.; LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 9
property lines. The north Ieg would eventually connect to properties north of the subject site_ The south
leg would connect to a secondary, gated emergency access easement that connects to S 55th. The
emergency road would have 20 feet of paving. Road A, the main road through the site would have a
public right -0f --way 42 feet wide and would continue the sidewalk on its north side. A modification to
reduce Road A to less than 42 feet was denied.
16. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into 12 lots and 3 tracts (labeled Tracts B, C and D -
there is no Tract A). The three tracts are located south of Road A as you enter the plat from the west,
followed by Proposed Lots 1, 2 and 3. Proposed Lots 4.7 are located along the eastern edge of the plat,
east of Road B. Proposed Lots 8-12 are located along the north side of Road A. Tract B would
encompass the critical slopes_ Tracts C and D would be open space areas. As initially proposed the
eastern portion of Proposed Lot 12 would be an open space easement as it is governed by the Urban
Separator overlay.
17. The lots would range in size from 4,500 square feet to 13,006 square feet_ Most of the lots would be
between 5,400 square feet and just under 6,000 square feet. The different zones have different
development standards. Proposed Lots 1 - i I are subject to the R-8 standards. Proposed Lot 12 is
subject to the R -I standards. There are actually no lots subject to the R-14 standards. Staff noted that
the proposed lots appear to meet the appropriate zoning standards.
is. The applicant proposes installing a number of rockeries along the north and east side of the plat to
terrace the lots and provide more Ievel building pads or yard areas. These rockeries will vary in height.
The initial plans show them as 5 and 6 foot rockeries_
29. The applicant proposes a tall retaining wall along the western boundary of the subject site adjacent to
the four (4) lots of the adjacent Geneva Court Plat. The wall will be twenty (20) feet tau. Walls or
rockeries will also be provided along the entry road from S 55th to provide suitable grades for a road in
the steeper slopes.
20. Construction of walls or rockeries along property lines may require cooperation and even construction
easements from adjoining property owners. The applicant cannot enter upon or injure neighboring
properties without legal consent. The ERC imposed conditions to address the visual impacts of the
large retaining structures.
21. The three zoning districts each have their own density standards and staff calculated that they all comply
with their underlying standards. The overall density for the plat would be 7.99 dwelling units per acre
after subtracting sensitive areas and roadways.
22. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate
approximately S or 6 school age children_ These students would be spread across the grades and would
be assigned on a space available basis. The proposal is subject to the Renton School Impact fee.
23. The development will increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 120 trips for the
12 single family homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 12 additional peak
hour trips will be generated in the morning and evening.
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 10
24. There was concern about traffic and sight distance issues where the plat's access road intersects S 55th.
Accidents along this roadway have been reported, including a fatality. The traffic analysis indicated
that there is adequate sight distance on this area of the curving, hilly street. S 55th and the access to the
plat may be impaired in inclement, snowy weather.
25. Stormwater from the east drains onto the subject site and then west toward Geneva Court where it is
collected and conveyed to 53rd and Talbot. This stormwater will be collected on the subject site and
conveyed to an off-site detention vault located under the western roadway that connects the plat to S
55th. The project will have to comply with the 2009 King County Stormwater Manual.
26. Sewer service will be provided by the City.
27. Water service will be provided by the Soos Creek District.
CONCLUSIONS.
While the division of the subject site into additional lots appears to serve the public use and interest, the
twelve lot plat is excessively dense. The proposed plat attempts to maximize the density limitations of
the subject site and it does so by sacrificing too much of the natural terrain of the property, particularly,
the area designated by the Talbot Urban Separator Overlay. Not only does it sacrifice the natural slopes
but it would impose a huge 20 foot tall retaining wall on its neighbors creating an aesthetic blight in the
rear yards of four separate homes. Rather than blend this plat's terrain with its western neighbors, it
creates an obstacle to neighborliness. Staff calculated that the plat would achieve a density of 7.99
dwelling units per acre. That certainiy approaches the permitted density of 8 dwelling units per acre, the
upper range, of the R-8 including what should be an R I dwelling where the lot size is ordinarily one (1)
dwelling unit for an over 43,000 square foot area. The Hillside Subdivision regulations suggest
reducing densities on steeper properties. The comprehensive plan suggests making use of the natural
contours of a site rather than substantially altering them. The applicant will be substantially altering the
grades and slopes of a majority of the property, particularly the easternmost lots. It will also be
substantially altering property on either side of the new road connecting the site to S 55th. It does not
serve the public use and interest to further alter or damage the natural contours along the westernmost,
Urban Separator portion of the property, in addition to the other alterations necessary to develop this
otherwise substantially constrained parcel. Proposed Lot 12 and Road A are proposed to occupy too
much of what should be protected property. Eliminating Proposed Lot 12 will also reduce the potential
issues of a 20 foot wall holding up a large area of slope behind the existing Geneva Court homes.
Proposed Lot 12 should be eliminated from the plat and its natural features and slope preserved.
2_ An eleven lot plat will serve the public use and interest even though it will still substantially alter the
terrain of the site and require engineered rockeries or walls along the road and easternmost lots. It will
create eleven new parcels that can provide additional housing choices for residents of the City. It .
apparently can be served by urban services including domestic water and sewer and storm water. It
appears that the stormwater can be contained or controlled by inline systems and an off-site vault under
the new road. The access to the subject site might preclude access during inclement weather but it is not
the only area subject to such constraints as hilly terrain and steeper roads are the only means of
accessing certain parcels. Staff reviewed the traffic report and it appears that while the new access road
will be steep it can meet engineering standards and its intersection provides reasonable sight distance for
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
Pile No.: LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 11
all turning directions.
The applicant will be providing mitigation fees to offset some of its impacts on emergency services,
traffic, parks and schools. The development of eleven new lots should also increase the tax base of the
City. The provision of Road B, the eastern north -south road will provide secondary access for
emergency vehicles to the south and a potential connector to the worth so that if additional development
occurs north of the subject site through access might be available on public roads_ A sign should be
installed warning potential residents that Road B might be a through road with additional traffic in the
future.
4. The Zoning, Comprehensive Plan and Urban Separator Al recognized that this site would have
additional development potential. The development of the subject site will obviously increase traffic on
a steep„ serpentine road. It will also introduce what should be short-term construction noise and impacts
as well as the permanent additional impacts of an increased population on a parcel which now only
supports one home.
In conclusion, while the development of the subject site was envisioned by the City's Zoning and
Policies, the site is also severely constrained by topography and access limitations. Reducing the
density by one lot will not unduly limit development of the site, still provide additional housing choices
and also retain some of the natural features that the comprehensive plan and the urban separator
intended to protect. Reducing the density by one lot will also protect neighboring properties from severe
disruption along their eastern boundaries and protect them from an unsightly 20 foot tall wall.
RT CONEWENDAT ION:
The City Council should approve an ELEVEN LOT plat of the subject site subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non -Significance --
Mitigated that was issued by the Environmental Review Committee on February 22, 2020 for
Project File No. LUA-09-140, ECF, PP.
2. The applicant shall apply for a demolition permit, remove the existing residence and complete final
inspections of the demolition prior to plat recording.
3. A Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) shall be recorded over all of Proposed Lot 12 and
Tracts B, C, and D and Lot 12 shall be eliminated. The edge of the NGPE shall be delineated with a
split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Planning Division project manager.
A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Planning Division proj act manager for review
and approval at the time of construction permit application. The fencing and signage shall be
installed prior to recording the final plat.
4, The applicant shall be required to plant replacement trees as indicated on Exhibit 8 prior to
recording of the final plat
S. The applicant shall establish a Homeowners Association for the maintenance of the NGPE and the
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
File No_: LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 12
stormwater vault and each home shall have an undivided interest in the western retaining wall or
walls along the road and if Lot 12 is ultimately approved provide the appropriate documents for the
review and approval of the PIanning Division project manager prior to recording of the final plat.
6. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat which indicates that Lots 3 and 8 shall be oriented to
take access from proposed Road A.
7_ The applicant shall place signs at the northerly terminus of proposed Road B which alert future
property owners that this road may be extended'to the north should future development warrant such
an exte4nsion. These signs shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat.
8. The applicant shall obtain any necessary construction and maintenance easements for the retaining
walls and the stormwater vault subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.
9. The grate covering the drainage vault shall be located either in the sidewalk or the landscaping.
10. All retaining wall, rockeries and transitions shall meet the building standards.
ORDERED THIS I# day of April 2010.
FRED J. KAUF
HEARING EXAMINER
TRANSMITTED THIS V" day of April 2010 to the parties of record:
Jennifer Henning
Development Services
Renton, WA 98057
Shupe Holmberg
Baima & Holmberg
100 Front Street
Issaquah, WA 98027
Moin Kadri
19213 Kenlake Place NE
Kenmore, WA 98028
Robert Thomas
18833 102°d Ave SE
Renton, WA 98055
Kayren Kittrick
Development Services
Renton, WA 98057
Vincent Geglia
11410 NE 124' St., Ste, 590
Kirkland, WA 98034
Ravinder & Jasbir Aluwalia
730 S 556 Street
Renton, WA 98055
Michael Link
19249 98's Place S
Renton, WA 98055
Khanh Nguyen Steve McNamee
Robert Wilson
21703 60`' Street East
Lake Tapps, WA 98391
Paul Witt
617 S 53`d Place
Renton, WA 98055
Steven Beck
Amber -wood LLC
473 5 NE 4' Street
Renton, WA 98059
Quang Dang & Kim Duong
623 S 53`d Place
Renton, WA 98055
WitsoA Park Prellminary Plat
File No.. LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
April 1, 2010
Page 13
616 S 53`d Place
Renton, WA 98055
701 S 52' Street
Renton, WA 98055
TRANSMITTED THIS V' day of April 2010 to the following:
Mayor Denis Law
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
Julia Medzegiau, Council Liaison
Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development
Jennifer Henning, Development Services
Stacy Tucker, Development Services
Marty Wine, Assistant CAD
Dave Pargas, Fire
Larry Meckling, Building Official
Planning Commission
Transportation Division
Utilities Division
Neil Watts, Development Services
Janet Conklin, Development Services
Renton Reporter
Pursuant to Title 1V, Chapter 8, Section 10OGof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in
writing on or before 5:00 p.m., April 15, 2.010. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the
Examiner is ambiguous or 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 a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This
request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered 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 1V, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal
be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $250.00 and meeting other specified requirements.
Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City
Hall. An appeal mast be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., April 15, 2010.
If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the
executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You
may contact this office for information on formatting covenants.
The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur
concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in
private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the Iand use process include both
the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council.
All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all
interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the
evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court.
The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all. Requests for Reconsideration as well as
Appeals to the City Council.
I
Project Location: 720 South 55'h Street
Project Lo=Nan Map LUA09-140, ECF, PP
m
t W
H3 — 30 T23N RSE E 112
g -
EXHIBIT 5
x
a
Pk -
e
s = 1m
a -J
W ]IHVd ii0a71111 --
at Cs+a Mraks wum-r•-r.^..-'• a
R
i
E
CC
f¢axa}l+r s¢Rlra
F
rt-
R
EXHIBIT 5
x
a
Pk -
e
s = 1m
a -J
W ]IHVd ii0a71111 --
at Cs+a Mraks wum-r•-r.^..-'• a
R
EXHIBIT 5
x
a
Pk -
e
s = 1m
a -J
W ]IHVd ii0a71111 --
at Cs+a Mraks wum-r•-r.^..-'• a
of P
PAL
Cts X
e
14d Aarwvzwwrtm=e
Mr.[ Mt]
M
Denis Law
Mayor
I
June 21, 2010
City
ofrtr( ff
City Clerk -Bonnie I. Walton
RE: Revised Dates for the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat Appeal (File LUA-09-140 PP, ECF)
To: All Parties of Record
A letter was sent to you from this office dated June 7, 2010, giving notice regarding the
referenced appeal. The date has now been changed for review of the appeal before the Renton
City Council's Planning and Development Committee.
The hearing date before the Planning & Development Committee has been rescheduled from
July 8, 2010, to:
Thursday, August 12, 2010
2:00 p.m.
7th Floor Council Chambers
Renton City Hall
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, Washington 98057
For further information or assistance, please call this office at 425-430-6510.
Sincerely,
Bonnie 1. Walton, CMC
City Clerk
1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 + (425) 430-6510 1 Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov
June 21, 2010
RE: Revised Dates for the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat Appeal (File LUA-09-140 PP, ECF)
To: All Parties of Record
A letter was sent to you from this office dated .lune 7, 2010, giving notice regarding the
referenced appeal. The date has now been changed for review of the appeal before the Renton
City Council's Planning and Development Committee.
The hearing date before the Planning & Development Committee has been rescheduled from
July 8, 2010, to:
Thursday, August 12, 2010
2:00 p.m.
7th Floor Council Chambers
Renton City Hall
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, Washington 98057
For further information or assistance, please call this office at 425-430-6510.
Sincerely,
Bonnie 1. Walton, CMC
City Clerk
June 16, 2010
Ms. Bonnie Walton, City Clerk
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
REN TON
1. 7Cii
C LERC'SOFFN'E
RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat application,
located at 720 S. 55th Street. (File No. LUA09-140, ECF, PP )
Ms. Walton:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comments on the above appeal. As owners of
property adjacent to the subject site (located directly below/west of the site), we have an interest in
insuring negative impacts are avoided and appropriate measures are taken in the possible development
of this site.
We became Parties of Record for this application last year, submitting written comments in November
of 2009 and attending the Hearing held by the Examiner in March of 2010. While we were informed of
the Hearing Examiner's final decision on this application, we were not informed as a Party of Record of
the request for reconsideration or the Hearing Examiner's denial of that request. When we recently
received notice of the Appeal to City Council on this matter, we were at a disadvantage in that we did
not have the information contained in the request for reconsideration submitted by the applicant.
We were able to obtain a copy of the letter of request for reconsideration from the Clerk's office, but do
not have the detailed engineering material on the reconsideration request.
As owners of existing homes located adjacent to the proposed Plat, we maintain our concerns over four
specific areas in the Appeal (these are consistent with concerns shared in the initial Plat application).
These are safety, drainage, privacy and maintenance.
1. SAFETY
This site sits on a fairly significant slope. While site development documents may address the
actual slopes on the listed property, we are concerned that development plans include
addressing impacts to existing slopes below (west) of the proposed site. We remain concerned
that changes to Lot 12, as well as the entire west border of the site, address the close proximity
of the roadway to our adjoining property. In that the Plat's east/west roadway makes a 90
degree turn to the south directly above our adjoining property, we feel steps must be taken to
insure that vehicles cannot, under any circumstances, (especially ice/snow conditions) slide from
the roadway and down the hill onto our adjoining property/homes. An initially discussed
concrete retaining wall along the Plat's west boundary would address this along Lot 12 and
should be included adjacent to all down slope abutting properties for public safety, which would
include all 4 Geneva Court adjunct properties.
2. DRAINAGE
We are concerned that every effort be made to insure that the changes in site drainage not
impact property located directly below the proposed development. It is unknown how the
proposed two tiered rockery will be engineered to provide drainage that does not impact
existing homes below Lot 12 or any other adjunct properties should the rockery be extended.
3. PRIVACY
The proximity of the Plat being located directly above the Geneva Court subdivision creates the
potential for significant impacts to existing homeowners. Any development of areas adjunct to
property lines of all 4 Geneva Court homes should be considered in privacy screening. Proposed
site development mentions either a road or common areas adjunct to current Geneva Court
properties. Any of these would equally impact our properties. We request a "buffer" to
minimize this impact whether that is a wall, green belt, or fence, etc.
4. MAINTENANCE
We understand that requirements made by the City for this Plat would be required of the
owner/developer (to Lot 12 and also the entire site). Our concerns are that once the site
infrastructure is done and the developer/contractor moves on that home owners living in that
new development will be required and should be able to maintain the required items that are
common to our adjoining property. These include any rockery, retaining walls, fences and
vaults, etc. If these responsibilities/items are not clearly specified by the City in the approval of
the Plat or well monitored during development, the potential for us as adjacent property
owners to have to deal with failed design and/or lack of maintenance of those structures
dramatically increases. Please make every effort in the appeal/approval process to insure that
requirements and responsibility are indicated, designed, engineered and constructed reliably in
order to avoid any problems in the future.
The need to maintain, and the access to do so, a two-tiered rockery, where the tiering faces
Geneva Court properties instead of tiering toward the new development, may not be obvious to
those homeowners and could easily be overlooked. Geneva Court residents should not be
burdened with maintenance of such a rockery. We have a two-tiered rockery in our
neighborhood and there is a fair amount of maintenance needed and limited homeowners
willing to do this.
Respectfully submitted,
Paul & Frieda Witt
617S.53 rd Place
Renton, WA 98055
425) 227-5462
Quang Dang & IEifn Duong
623 S. 53`d Place
Renton, WA 95055
425) 917-9733
44
0
t w
3 2
7Z5
m0
o q
Sandi Weir
From: Bonnie Walton
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 11:47 AM
To: Sandi Weir
Subject: Wilson Park appeal
Update:
August 12 at 2 pm is the new date & time for the Wilson Park hearing with the P&D Committee.
That info needs to go out in the notification letters.
Thanks.
Bonnie
June 7, 2010
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
STATE OF WASHINGTON }
COUNTY OF KING }
BONNIE 1. WALTON, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath,
deposes and says that I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of
Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter.
That on the 7`h day of .lune, 2010; at the hour of 5:00 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in
the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail to all
parties of record, notice of appeal filed by Robert Wilson of the Hearing Examiner's
recommendation regarding the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat. (File No. LUA-09-140, PP, ECF)
Bonnie 1. Walton, City Clerk
rSUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFO 'W[T ` day of June, 2010.
5s4aN I
o NOTARY Win`
CynthiA R. Moya -.
27Notary1
c in and the
Washingtoresiding in
bli rRenante of =
Op WA$N
tJill
My commission expires: 8/27/2010
Denis Law Cl OfMayorI ; - ti y
City Clerk -Bonnie I_ Walton-
lune 7, 2010
APPEAL FILED BY:. Robert Wilson
RE: Appeal of -Hearing Examiner's decision -regarding the Wilson Park Preliminary Platthapplication, -located at 720 S 55. Street. (File No. Lf3A-09-14D PP, ECFV
To Parties of Record:
Pursuant to Trtle IV, Chapter B, Renton Crty-Code of Ordinances, written ap pea'l of the. hearing_
examiner'sdeci$ion on the Wilson Park Preliminary Plathas been filed with.the City Clerk.
In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 48-110F, within'five days of receipt of the
potiee of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, ' the City
Clerk shall nptify all parties of record of the receipt of the ,appeal. Other parties of record may
submit letters limited. to support oftheirp6sitions'regardingthe appeal within ten (10) days of
th'e date of mailing of this notification. The deadline'for submission of.additional letters is by-
SsQU p.m., Thursday, lune 17, 2019.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will b -e
reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:0i) p.m : on July S, 2010,
in 'the .Council Chambers, 7th Floor. of Renton' City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way; Renton,
Washington 98057:'.The:recommendation-ofthe Committee will, be presented fo•r
consideration b,ythefull Council. at a subsequent Council meeting.
Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code.regarding.appeal of Hearing -Examiner
decisions or recommendations is attached. Please.note that the City Ceuncil'will be considering
the merits of the appeal based upon the written record .previously established. Unless.a
showing can be made that additiorial-evidence could not reasonably have been available at the
prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner; no further -evidence or testimony on this matter
will be accepted by the-.ety Council: -
For additional information or assistance, please tail me at 475-430-6510_
Sincerely, .
Bonnie I. -Walton.
City Clerk
Attachments
1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 96957 • (425)430--6510/ Fax (425)43G-6516;. rentonwa.gov
Jennifer Henning Kayren Kittrick
Development Services Development Services
Shupe Holmberg
Baima &Holmberg
Vincent Gegliah
11410 NE 124 St, Ste 590
100 Front St
IKirkland,
WA 98034
Issaquah, WA 98027
Moin Kadri Ravinder & Jasbir Alurwalia
19213 Kenlake PI NE 730 S
55th
St
Kenmore, WA 98028 Renton, WA 98055
Robert Thomas Michael Link
18833102 nd Av SE 19249 98th PI S
Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055
Khanh Nguyen Steve McNamee
616S53'dP1 701S52ndSt
Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055
Robert Wilson
21703
60th
St East
Lake Tapps, WA 98391
Paul Witt
617 S. 53rd PI
Renton, WA 98055
Steven Beck
Amberwood LLC
4735 NE
4tn
St
Renton, WA 98059
Quang Dang & Kim Dugong
623S53 d PI
Renton, WA 98055
June 7, 2010
APPEAL FILED BY: Robert Wilson
RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
application, located at 720 S
55th
Street. (File No. LUA-09-140 PP, ECF)
To Parties of Record:
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing
examiner's decision on the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat has been filed with the City Clerk.
In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F, within five days of receipt of the
notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City
Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may
submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of
the date of mailing of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by
5:00 p.m., Thursday, June 17, 2010.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be
reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:00 p.m. on July 8, 2010,
in the Council Chambers,
7th
Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,
Washington 98057. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for
consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting.
Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner
decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be considering
the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a
showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the
prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter
will be accepted by the City Council.
For additional information or assistance, please call me at 425-430-6510.
Sincerely,
Bonnie I. Walton
City Clerk
Attachments
APPEAL TO RENTON CITY COUNCIL
OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
APPLICATION NAME Filson Park Preliminary Plat FILE NO. LUA09-140,ECF, PP
The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendatiR,qf tcee
Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated may 18 & April 1 20
10 CIO -441
I. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY 0
11
APPELLANT:
Name: Robert Wilgor
Address:
21703 60th Street E
Lake Tapes, WA 98391
Phone Number: 253--862-7285
Email:
REPRESENTATE (IF ANY): Uln' ERSSOIVFFtCE
Name: Jay Derr' GgXaonDerr LLP
Address:
2.025 ' First Ave., Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121
Phone [Number: 2o6-382-951+0
2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary)
Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based:
Finding of Fact: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report)
No. Error:
Correction:
Conclusions:
No_ i Error: "Proposed Lot 12 should be eliminated from the plat and its _
natural features and slo e reserved."
Correction: Proposed Lot 12, as modified by the applicant in its
reconsideration request dated A ril 6 2010 is hereby approved.
Other: Hearing Examiner's Decision on Reconsideration
No. NSA Error. Denial of reconsideration
concerning the elimination of proposed Lot 12 from the plat.
Correction: eliaLaary Plat.
3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief -
Attach explanation, if desired)
Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following relief:
Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: .
Remand to th" E-aminer for further consideration as follows:
Other: ,
Jay P. Derr
Appellan epre ntative gnature Type/Printed Name Date
NO'T'E: P ase refer to Title IV, Chap 8, of the R2 ton
DUNtf`1a
Municipal Cod and Section
0
110 , for specific appeal procedures
D
City of Renton Municipal C(,-,; Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 - Appe.. -
4-8-110C4
The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of
the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82)
4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council -- Procedures
1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the
Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party
aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the
City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the
date of the Examiner's written report.
2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City
Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal.
3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of
their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of
the notice of appeal.
4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the
City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or
recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of
appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982)
5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or
additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by
the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time
of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required,
the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional
evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the
absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional
evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or
testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by
the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before
the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993)
6_ Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely
upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional
submissions by parties.
7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner
on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F1, and after examination of the
record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it
may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the
decision of the Examiner accordingly.
8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an
application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050172 and F3, and after examination of the record, the
Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a
recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may
remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the
application.
9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall
specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of
the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982)
10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision
of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames
established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997)
EAL TO RENTON CITY COUNC
OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
APPLICATION NAME FILE NO
The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of the
Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated 20
1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY
APPELLANT:
Name:
2
Address:
Phone Number:
Email:
REPRESENTATIVE (IF ANY):
Name:
Address:
Phone Number:
Email:
SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary)
Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based:
Finding of Fact: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report)
No. Error:
Correction:
Conclusions:
No_ Error:
Correction:
Other:
No, Error:
Correction:
3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief:
Attach explanation, if desired)
Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following relief:
Modify the decision or recommendation as follows:
Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows:
Other:
Appellant/Representative Signature Type/Printed Name Date
NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 8, of the Renton Municipal Code, and Section 4-8-110F, for specific appeal procedures.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
r EC-i11 f]
iTi ti LERK'S OFFICE
BEFORE THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL
STATE OF WASHINGTON
In the Matter of the: }
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT } No. LUA09-140, ECF, PP
APPLICATION }
APPLICANT ROBERT
For a Preliminary Plat for a Subdivision } WILSON'S APPEAL
STATEMENT
i
I. INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to Renton Municipal Code 4-8-110(F), Applicant Robert Wilson (the
Applicant") respectfully submits this appeal statement in support of its appeal of the
Hearing Examiner's decision to eliminate Lot 12 from Applicant's Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat, File No. LUA09-140, PP, ECF, including his Decision on Applicant's
Request for Reconsideration dated May 18, 2010 (the "Reconsideration Decision")' and
his underlying Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation dated April 1, 2010 (the
Original Decision")2 (collectively, the "Decisions").
The Reconsideration Decision is attached hereto as Attachment 1.
The Original Decision is attached hereto as Attachment 2.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 1
Go donDerf,
2025 Furst Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
206} 362-4544
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
In his Decisions, the Hearing Examiner erroneously rejects the Planning Director's
Administrative Policy/Code interpretation regarding the Talbot Urban Separator open
space requirements dated January 14, 2010 (hereinafter the "Talbot Road Urban Separator
Code Interpretation")'. Moreover, without basis in the facts or the requirements of City
policy or code, the Hearing Examiner eliminated Lot 12 from the preliminary plat,
contrary to the staff's recommendation, based on visual impacts to adjoining property
owners to the west of the site and vague concerns regarding "appropriate density" in the
Urban Separator portion of the lot. The Hearing Examiner's Decisions constitute an
improper collateral attack on the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation; are
based on a flawed interpretation of the City of Renton's Urban Separator Overlay
regulations (RMC 4-3-110); and are inconsistent with the City's standards for preliminary
plat decisions. As such, the Hearing Examiner's Decisions are based on "substantial
error[s] in fact and law"' and the Applicant respectfully requests that the Renton City
Council ("City Council") modify both the Hearing Examiner's Decisions and approve
inclusion of Lot 12 of the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat as part of the City's preliminary
plat approval.
11. ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS
The Applicant hereby specifically assigns error to the following conclusions,
recommendations, and decisions of the Hearing Examiner: (1) Original Decision,
Conclusion #1; (2) Original Decision, Conclusion #5; (3) Original Decision,
3 Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation is attached hereto as Attachment 3.
4 RMC 4-8-11 O(F)(7), (8).
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 2
Gordon0e ..
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
206) 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Recommendation #3; and (4) the Reconsideration Decision in its entirety. For the reasons
discussed in length below, the Hearing Examiner erred in excluding Lot 12 from the
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat Approval. First, the Hearing Examiner's Decisions
constitute an improper collateral attack on the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code
Interpretation that is barred by both the City's statutory 14 -day appeal period for code
interpretations (RMC 4-8-110) and the state's Land Use Petition Act. Second, the
alternative interpretation of the Urban Separator regulations adopted in the Hearing
Examiner's Decisions conflicts with both the legislative intent behind RMC 4-3-110 and
the basic rules of statutory construction. Third, if the Planning Director's Talbot Road
Urban Separator Code Interpretation is overturned, the Urban Separator regulations may
violate RCW 82.02.020. Last, as modified in the Applicant's request for reconsideration,'
Lot 12 resolves all of the concerns raised in the Hearing Examiner's Original Decision
i.e., visual impacts, significant tree retention, excessive grading, and retaining wall
height) and meets the City's zoning, subdivision, and development regulations. Thus, in
reaching his decision to exclude Lot 12, the Hearing Examiner made substantial errors in
fact and law, which the Applicant respectfully requests the City Council modify by
approving the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat with Lot 12.
III. FACTS
The Wilson Park Preliminary Plat site consists of 2.5 acres split up between the R-
14, R-1, and R-8 Zones.' The R-1 zoned portion of the site coincides with the Talbot Road
s See Attachment 5.
See Wilson Park Preliminary Plat application submittals attached hereto as Attachment 6.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 3
2025 First Avenue. Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
206) 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Urban Separator depicted in RMC 4-3-110(C)(2). The City has two Urban Separator
11 areas: May Valley and Talbot Road. See RMC 4-3-110. In the May Valley Urban
Separator, entire properties are included in the Urban Separator designation; whereas, in
the Talbot Road Urban Separator, only portions of properties are within the Urban
Separator.
RMC 4-3-11 O(E)(2)(a) requires properties located within the Urban Separator to
II dedicate 50% of the gross land area of the parcel or parcels as a non -revocable open space
tract. In May Valley, since the entire property is designated Urban Separator, the
dedication of 50% of the gross site area is required. In the Talbot Road Urban Separator,
however, where only a very small portion of the site may be designated Urban Separator,
the City has determined it is inequitable to require that 50% of the gross site area be
retained.' Here, for instance, only 23,795 square feet of Wilson Park Preliminary Plat's
2.5 -acre lot is designated Urban Separator. Fifty percent of that area would require 11,898
square feet of open space. Fifty percent of the gross site, however, is 54,442 square feet —
more than twice the actual land area actually located within the Talbot Road Urban
Separator.
Instead, on January 14, 2010, following the Applicant's submittal of its
preliminary plat application, the Planning Director issued the Talbot Road Urban
Separator Code Interpretation. The interpretation states:
Urban Separator regulations require dedication of 50% of designated
properties gross area as open space. For properties in May Valley, where
the entire site is within the Urban Separator, this is appropriate. However,
See Attachment 6.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 4
6, W6, Derr .
2025 First Avenue, Suite 504
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
206) 382-9540
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
for properties in the Talbot area, where only a portion of the site is
designated Urban Separator, the requirement for dedication of 50% of the
area as open space is a hardship. By requiring 50% of the area designated
as Urban Separator to be dedicated as open space, there is uniformity and
fairness between the Talbot and May Valley areas.
Properties in the Talbot Urban Separator will be required to dedicate 50%
of the gross land area in the Urban Separator as open space, rather than
50% of the gross site area. The area to be dedicated may also include
portions of the site abutting the Urban Separator, in order to create a
contiguous open space corridor.'
This Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation was posted on the City's website;
formal comment and appeal periods were published; no appeals of this interpretation were
filed; and the interpretation is currently pending before the City's Planning Commission
as part of the 2010 annual docket list to be codified in the Renton Municipal Code next
year. Pursuant to this code interpretation, the Applicant is required to dedicate 11,898
square feet of open space; however, the open space actually provided in the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat exceeds this requirement by more than 1,000 square feet.'
In its Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner dated March 9, 2010 (the
Preliminary Report"), the City's Department of Community and Economic Development
recommended approval of the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat containing 12 lots and 3 tracts
for open space," The Preliminary Report concluded that the 12 -lot Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat complied with the City's preliminary plat criteria; Renton
Comprehensive Plan designation; underlying zoning designation; and subdivision
ft Id
9 Department of Community and Economic Development's Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner
dated March 9, 2010, attached hereto as Attachment 4, at p. 9.
10 See Attachment 4.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 5
GordonDe.
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 95121-3140
206) 382-9540
1.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
regulations." The Hearing Examiner, however, rejected the Department's
recommendation and, instead, recommended that the City Council approve the Wilson
Park Preliminary Plat with only eleven lots.''- The Hearing Examiner based his decision to
eliminate Lot 12 on the following criteria: Lot 12 sacrificed too much of the natural terrain
of the area designated Talbot Road Urban Separator (even though it exceeded the amount
of open space required under the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation);
elimination of Lot 12 preserved the site's natural features and slope; Lot 12 made the plat
excessively dense"; and the 20 -foot retaining walls necessary to create Lot 12 imposed
visual impacts on adjoining property owners directly to the west of site."
On April 6, 2010, the Applicant submitted a timely reconsideration request to the
Hearing Examiner. In an attempt to address the concerns of the Hearing Examiner as
stated in his Original Decision, the Applicant's reconsideration request submittal relocated
Lot 12 to the east (hereinafter "Modified Lot 12") and placed the open space easement on
the west side of Modified Lot 12." The relocation of Modified Lot 12 : (1) substantially
reduced the length of the wall along the east property line of Geneva Court Lots 13-16
from 200 feet to 55 feet and shifted the wall further to the east to reduce impacts to
adjoining property owners; (2) replaced the 20 -foot retaining wall with two stepped
rockeries of 6 -feet and 8 -feet in height significantly reducing the visual impact of the
retaining walls to the westerly adjoining property owners; (3) increased the number of
Id.
12 See Attachment 2, p. 11.
13 Id.
a See Reconsideration Request and enclosures dated April 6, 2010, attached hereto as Attachment 5.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 6
Wonerr.
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
2061 362-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
significant trees to be retained on site from 15 to 24; and (4) substantially reduced the
grading on Modified Lot 12 leaving most of the proposed open space easement
undisturbed native vegetation.
Despite these changes to the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat and Modified Lot 12,
the Hearing Examiner again refused to allow the inclusion of Modified Lot 12 in the
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat. Instead of approving Modified Lot 12, the Hearing
Examiner explicitly rejected the City's Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation
as "inappropriate" and held that the Urban Separator portion of Wilson Park Preliminary
Plat should remain as "natural as possible.""
The Hearing Examiner's Decisions should be modified to authorize inclusion of
Modified Lot 12 in the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat for the following reasons: (1) the
Hearing Examiner's Decisions are improper collateral attacks on the Planning Director's
Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation; (2) the Hearing Examiner's Decisions
are based on an invalid interpretation of the City's Urban Separator regulations; (3)
without the Planning Director's Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation, the
City's Urban Separator regulations may violate RCW 82.02.020; and (4) the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat complies with the City's Comprehensive Plan policies and code
requirements.
15 Attachment 1 at p. 1.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 7
GaR '
oinDerf..
2025First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
206) 382-9540
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
TV. LEGAL ARGUMENT
A. The Hearing Examiner's Decisions Constitute an Improper Collateral Attack on
the Planning Division's_ Code Interpretation.
Washington case law is clear that a land use decision that is not timely appealed
may not be collaterally attacked in a later proceeding. " Renton provides a formal
comment period and a 14 -day appeal period for administrative code interpretations. See
RMC 4-8-110. Here, the Planning Director issued the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code
Interpretation on January 14, 2010." The formal code interpretation and its appeal period
were published on the City's website. The appeal period expired on January 28, 2010.16
Thus, any appeals filed after those dates are untimely and prohibited under Washington's
Land Use Petition Act ("LUPA").
Moreover, the Washington Supreme Court has previously held that an issuing
locality cannot collaterally attack the validity of its own land use decisions outside the
LUPA 21 -day appeals period. Chelan Countv v. Nykreim, 146 Wn.2d 904 (2002). In
Nykreim, Chelan County's own planning director erroneously approved a boundary line
adjustment (" BLA") that was contrary to law in that it created three lots out of one,
6 See Land Use Petition Act (' t.UPA"), RCW Chapter 36.70C -,.see also Habitat Watch v. Skagit County,
155 Wn.2d 397, 410-11 (2005) (holding that a challenge to a grading permit was an unacceptable collateral
attack on the issuance of an improperly granted special use permit); see also Samuel's Furniture, Inc. v.
Dep 't of Ecology, 147 Wn.2d 440, 54 P.3d 1194 (2002) (Department of Ecology is barred from collaterally
attacking the city's allegedly improper determination that the property was outside its shoreline jurisdiction
or not subject to Shoreline Management Act jurisdiction through a later enforcement action); Chelan County
v..1VOreim, 146 Wn.2d 904, 52 P.3d 1 (2002) (holding that L.UPA's statutory time limits prevent the county
from revoking an improperly granted boundary line adjustment), Wenatchee Sportsmen Assn v. Chelan
County, 141 Wn.2d 169, 4 P.3d 123 (2000) (holding that a challenge to a development permit was an
improper collateral attack on the improper rezone of the area in violation of the Growth Management Act).
See Attachment 3.
6 No appeals were filed during the applicable appeal period_
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 8
Goh
Ad""O'r'..
2425 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
206) 382 9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
instead of simply adjusting the boundary lines of existing lots. Id. at 911-12. Fourteen
months after approving the BLA, the County discovered the mistake and challenged the
decision in superior court. Id. at 914. The Court found that because Chelan County failed
to timely appeal an erroneous land use decision made by its own planning director, it
could not file an action for declaratory relief challenging the BLA granted to the applicant
even though it contravened county code. Id.
Finally, both Habitat Watch and Wenatchee Sportsmen Assn v. Chelan County,
141 Wn.2d 169, 4 P.3d 123 (2000) support the argument that the City's code
interpretations cannot be collaterally attacked in a different City decision. See Habitat
Watch, 155 Wn.2d at 410-411 ("Because appeal of the special use permit and its
extensions are time barred under LUPA, Habitat Watch cannot collaterally attack them
through its challenge to the grading permit"); Wenatchee Sportsmen, 141 Wn.2d at 173
WSA's failure to file a timely LUPA challenge to the rezone bars it from collaterally
challenging the validity of the rezone in this action opposing the project application").
The Hearing Examiner's Decisions are essentially an untimely collateral attack on
the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation. The Hearing Examiner cites no
authority in his Decisions that permits the rejection of a formally adopted code
interpretation. The Hearing Examiner himself admits in his Reconsideration Decision that
the "interpretation appears to permit development of [Modified] Lot 12." The Applicant
respectfully requests that the City Council correct the Hearing Examiner's LUPA
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 9
o1AonDe,
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, wA 98121.-3140
206) 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
violation, reaffirm the Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation, and modify the
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat approval to include Modified Lot 12.
B. Even if the Hearin Examiner Could Contest the Talbot Road Urban Se arator
Code Interpretation, City Staff's Interpretation is Correct.
Consistent with the Planning Director's code interpretation, the Urban Separator
Regulations can only reasonably be interpreted to apply to the portion of the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat subject to the overlay. The mere fact that the City Council chose to zone
only part of the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat site R-1 evidences that this was the
legislature's intent and supports staff s interpretation. R-8 zoning is not an urban separator
zone." Had the City Council wanted the entire lot to be subject to the Urban Separator
regulations, and, more specifically, RMC 4-3-100(E)(2)(a)'s 50% gross site area
requirement, it would have zoned the entire site R-1 instead of zoning the majority of the
parcel R-8.
Moreover, substantial weight is given to the agency's interpretation of the statutes
it administers which are within the agency's specialized expertise. Manke Lumber Co. v.
Diehl, 91 Wn.App. 793, 802, (1998). An agency's interpretation will be upheld if it is a
plausible construction of the statute or rule. Seatoma Convalescent Or v. Dep 't of Soc. &
Health Servs., 82 Wn.App. 495, 518 (1996). Here, the Planning Director's interpretation
of RMC 4-3-110 is entitled to deference.
In contrast, the Hearing Examiner's interpretation of the City's Urban Separator
regulations conflicts with the actual language of RMC 4-3-110. In his Decisions, the
Renton Comprehensive Plan, Policy LU -147, p. IX -26.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 10
GofdonDe" ir,
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
t296) 362-9590
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Hearing Examiner concludes that the Urban Separator designated portion of the Wilson
Park Preliminary Plat site should remain undeveloped. See Attachment 1; see also
Attachment 2, Conclusion #1 . This effectively means that 100% of the property located
within the Talbot Road Urban Separator should be dedicated as non -revocable open space
tract. A 100% requirement is notably absent from RMC 4-3-110, and is, in fact, directly
contradictory to the 50% dedication requirement found in RMC 4-3-11 O(E)(2)(a), A
legislative body is presumed not to include unnecessary language when it enacts
legislation. See Davis v. State ex rel, Dept of'Licensing, 137 Wn.2d 957, 969 (1999) ("A
fundamental canon of construction holds a statute should not be interpreted so as to render
one part inoperative."); Judd v. Am. TeL & Tel. Co., 152 Wn.2d 195, 202 (2004) (no
portion of a statute shall be rendered meaningless or superfluous through interpretation).
A statutory interpretation that conflicts with a statute is given no deference. Nelson v.
Appleway Chevrolet, 160 Wn.2d 173, 184 (2007). Here, the interpretation of RMC 4-3-
I I O(e)(2)(a) put forward by the Hearing Examiner conflicts with its 50% dedication
requirement, or, at best, renders it inoperative. Thus, it must be rejected.
C. Without the Limitation in the Planning Director's Code InteEpretation, the City's
Urban Separator Regulations May Violate RCW 82.02.020.
Washington courts have looked critically at regulations that impose across-the-
board open space requirements or clearing Iimitations that are not directly related to the
level of development or impacts created by a specific development proposal. See, e.g., Isla
Verde Int'l Holdings, Inc. v. City of Camas, 146 Wn.2d 740, 759 (2002) ("Isla Verde")
where Supreme Court rejected an ordinance that imposed a 30% open space requirement
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 11
GordonDerr,.
2925 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 99121-3190
206) 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on all proposed subdivisions); Citizens' Alliance v. Ron Sims, 145 Wn.App. 649 (Div. 1,
2008), cert. denied, 203 P.3d 378 (2009) ("Citizens' Alliance") (where the Court of
Appeals held a King County ordinance that limited clearing on rural property to a
maximum of 50% violated RCW 82.02.020). Those courts have invalidated such
regulations as a violation of RCW 82.02.020, a statutory prohibition on any "tax, fee, or
charge, either direct or indirect," on the construction or reconstruction of buildings or on
the development, subdivision, classification, or reclassification of land. The Urban
Separator open space requirement, particularly if imposed on the Wilson Park Preliminary
Plat parcel without the limitation identified in the Planning Director's code interpretation,
would run afoul of the legal limitations discussed in Isla Verde and Citizens' Alliance.
The Talbot Road Urban Separator Code Interpretation, applying the Urban Separator open
space requirement on only that portion of the parcel located within the Urban Separator
zone, strikes a more appropriate and reasonable limitation on the requirement that reduces
the City's vulnerability in imposing this requirement on parcels such as the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat parcel. Appellant has previously, and continues to, express his
willingness to comply with the Urban Separator open space requirement, provided it only
applies to that portion of the parcel located within the Urban Separator zone, thus allowing
the City to include Modified Lot 12 within the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat approval.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 12
Gordo iIrr..
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 9a121-3140
206) 342-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
D. The Modifications to Lot 12 Proposed by the Applicant in his Request for
Reconsideration Address the Concerns Raised by the Hearing, Examiner in his
Original Decision. -
As summarized in Section III entitled "FACTS" above, the Applicant in his
Reconsideration Request2l sought to address all of the Lot 12 concerns raised in the
Hearing Examiner's Original Decision. By modifying the location of Lot 12 and its
associated open space area, the Applicant reduced the length of retaining walls required
and shifted a wall farther to the east to further reduce impacts to adjoining property
owners; reduced visual impacts by replacing a 20 -foot retaining wall with two stepped up
rockeries 6 -feet to 8 -feet in height; retained more significant trees; and substantially
reduced the amount of grading required within the portion of the site designated Urban
Separator.'' Indeed, the Hearing Examiner recognized in his Reconsideration Decision
that shifting the location of Modified Lot 12 "does reduce the impact on the properties to
the west."' Further, modifications to Lot 12 bring the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat even
more into conformance with Community Design Element, Policy CD -121, which
encourages developers to adjusting site plans to preserve slopes, trees, and vegetation.
While RMC 4-7-130(C)(1)(B) prohibits the creation of a lot that primarily has slopes forty
percent (40%) without adequate area at lesser slopes upon which development may occur,
this prohibition is inapplicable to Modified Lot 12 — it does not have slopes over 40% and
20 See Attachment S.
Id.
22 Attachment 1, p. 1.
2' Renton Comprehensive Plan, Community Design Element, Policy CD -1. p. IV -2,
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 13
GordonOerr.
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 96121-3140
266} 362-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
1.8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
has adequate area for a house site. Last, there is no provision within the City's regulations
that limit the use of retaining walls.
In addition to the issues resolved above, the Hearing Examiner's Original
Decision, without any analysis or support, raised the appropriateness of the density
proposed in the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat application. The lots in the Wilson Park
Preliminary Plat range from 4,500 to 13,006 square feet with an overall density of 7.99
dwelling units per acre. Staff concluded that the 12 -lot Wilson Park Preliminary flat
complied with the City's underlying zoning designation. See Attachment 4 at pp. 6-7.
Moreover, proposed Lots 8 through 11 are wider than required by the City's regulations
60 feet versus 50 feet) in order to meet the intent of RMC 4-7-220(C)(4) and Housing
Element Policy H-924, which recommends larger lots in steeper parts of subdivision sites.
Thus, there is no evidence in the record that the proposed density of the 12 -lot Wilson
Park Preliminary Plat violates the City's applicable development regulations.
For these reasons, the Hearing Examiner had no basis in the record or the law to
eliminate Modified Lot 12 from the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat approval based on
compliance with the City's comprehensive plan policies and code requirements including
density, lot dimensions, building standards, open space, and setbacks.
V. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Applicant respectfully requests that the City Council
modify both the Hearing Examiner's Decisions, affirm the Talbot Road Urban Separator
Code Interpretation issued by the staff on January 14, 2010, and approve the Modified Lot
24 Renton Comprehensive Plan. Housing Element, Policy H-9, p. VII -8.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 14
GoE<
ffl on0err-
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98121-3140
f20C 382-9540
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12 of the Applicant's Wilson Park Preliminary Plat as shown in the Applicant's
reconsideration request dated April 6, 2010.25
DATED this 1 st day of June, 2010.
GORDONDERR LLP
By
Jay P. D rr, WSBA # 12620
Megan Nelson, WSBA # 37996
Attorneys for Applicant Robert Wilson
2 5 Attachment 5.
APPLICANT'S APPEAL STATEMENT - 15
60aonDer ..
2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 9612]-314p
206) 382-9540
Clerk's Office Distribution List
Appeal, Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
Located at: 720 S 5S
h
St
File No. LUA-09-140, PP, ECF
June 1, 2010
1 Renton Reporter
1 City Attorney Larry Warren
1 City Council * Julia Medzegian
1 CED Alex Pietsch
1 Mayor's Office (Assistant CAO) Marty Wine
1 Assistant Fire Marshal David Pargas
1 Planning Commission Judith Subia
14 Parties of Record** see attached list)
1 PW/Administration Gregg Zimmerman
b CED/Development Services Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
Stacy Tucker
Kayren Kittrick
Janet Conklin
Larry Meckling
1 PW/Transportation Services Rich Perteet
1 PW/Utilities & Tech Services Lys Hornsby
1 1 LUA-08-097
i
City Clerk's Letter & POR List only
Jennifer Henning Kayren Kittrick
Development Services Development Services
Shupe Holmberg Vincent Geglia
Baima &Holmberg h
11410 NE 124 5t, Ste 590
100 Front St
IKirkland,
WA 98034
Issaquah, WA 98027
Moin Kadri Ravinder & Jasbir Alurwalia
19213 Kenlake PI N6 730 S 55" St
Kenmore, WA 98028 Renton, WA 98055
Robert Thomas Michael Link
18833 102nd Av SE 1924998
th
PI S
Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055
Khanh Nguyen Steve McNamee
616S5 3rd PI 7015 52nd St
Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055
Robert Wilson
21703
60th
St East
Lake Tapps, WA 98391
Paul Witt
617S.53 rd PI
Renton, WA 98055
Steven Beck
Amberwood LLC
4735 NE 4th St
Renton, WA 98059
Quang Dang & Kim Duong
623 S 53`d PI
Renton, WA 98055
y CITY OF RENTON
Urn
O City Clerk Division
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
425-430-6510
Receipt
Date
150-3
rCash El Copy Fee El Notary Service
l Check No. r t Appeal Fee
Description: 1+ '
Funds Received From:
Name
Address
City/Zip
Amount $ r
Ci Staff Sigizature
0- IL
GORDONDERR LLP 35786
CHECK
DATE DESCRIPTION INVOICE # AMOUNT DEDUCTION NET AMOUNT
510 City of Renton
05/27110 City of Renton - 2321.1 - Appellate
Fees 250.00 250.00
CHECK DATE CONTROL NUMBER
05/27/10 35786 TOTALS Gross: 250.00 Ded: 0.00 Net: 250.00
35786
GordonDerr. 2025 First Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, Washington 98121-3140
ATTORNEYS AT LAW (
206)382-95Q
PAY
TO THE
ORDER
OF City of Renton
BANK OF AMERICA
WA
19-2-1250
DATE
05/27110
TWO HUNDRED FIFTY & 001100 DOLLARS
00 3 5 78 611' 1: L 2 50000 2 to: L 6 300 10 Slim
CHECK AMOUNT
35786 ****$250.00
C
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
r. 0
5 M E A D
No. 2821 FD5
UPC 35650
smead.com • Made in USA
Denis Law City Of JMayor
0t
March 9, 2014
Department of Community and Economic Development
Alex Pietsch, Administrator
Shupe Holmberg
Baima & Holmberg Inc.
165 NE Juniper Street #201
Issaquah, WA 98027
SUBJECT: Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
LUA09-140, ECF, PP
Dear Mr. Holmberg:
This letter is to inform you that the appeal period will end March 12, 2010 for the
Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non -Significance -
Mitigated for the above -referenced project.
If no appeals are filed on t! -ie ERC determination by the appeal period end date the
decision will become final. The applicant must comply with all ERC Mitigation Measures
outlined in the Report and Decision dated February 22, 2010.
A Hearing Examiner Public Hearing has been scheduled for March 16, 2010, where Site
Plan Conditions may be issued. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant are
required to be present. Enclosed is a copy of the Preliminary Report to the Hearing
Examiner for your review.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (425) 430-7382.
For the Environment: Review Committee,
Com, _5 /
Gerald C. Wasser
Associate Planner
Enclosure
cc: Robert Wilson / Owner(s)
Steve Beck - Arnberwood LLC / Applicant
Paul Witt, Ravinder & lasbir Aluwalia, Robert Thomas, Michael Link, Quang Dan & Kim Duong, Khanh
Nguyen, Steve McNamee / Party(ies) of Record
Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way a Renton, Washington 98057 .• rentonwa.gov
ATTACHMENT 4
0
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D o
c1 of
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT egt nQ 8
HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING
March 16, 2010
AGENDA
COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM,
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL
The applicatlon(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be
heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner.
PROJECT NAME: Drofiak Apartments
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-112, ECF, SA -M
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and
Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a 3 -story, approximately 33 -foot tall multi -family
apartment building. The 19,889 square foot site is located within the Residential Multi -Family (RMF)
zoning designation. The proposed building would include 10,879 square feet of residential space within 8
residential units and an apartment leasing office. The applicant is proposing 16 parking stalls which
would be located within a surface parking lot located north and west of the proposed building. Access to
the site would be provided from SE Petrovitsky Rd via one existing curb cut. There are no critical areas
located on site.
PROJECT NAME: Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-140, ECF, PP
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat for the subdivision of
a 108,884 square foot (2.5 acre) parcel in the R-1, R-8 and R-14 zones and in the Urban Separator
Overlay. The original proposal encompassed 13 -lots and 4 -tracts (for open space and storm detention).
The revised proposal encompasses 12 -lots and 3 -tracts (for open space). A portion of proposed Lot 12
would also contain an open space easement. A proposed stormwater vault would be located under the
proposed access road, Proposed lots range in size from 4,500 to 13,006 square feet with a density of
7.99 dwelling units per acre. The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family
residences. Slopes generally range from 13% to 39% and the southwestern portion of the site contains a
small area of protected slopes (over 40%). Access to the proposed lots would be via a new street off of
South 55th Street; a secondary access for emergency vehicles is also proposed. Grading would involve
approximately 17,000 cubic yards of cut with approximately 6,000 cubic yards used as structural fill.
Approximately 500 cubic yards of crushed rock fill would be used for road construction.
HEX Agenda 3-16-10doc
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
b
cof
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT a
HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING
March 16, 2010
AGENDA
COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM,
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL
The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be
heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner.
PROJECT NAME: Drofiak Apartments
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-112, ECF, SA -M
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and
Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a 3 -story, approximately 33 -foot tall multi -family
apartment building. The 19,889 square foot site is located within the Residential Multi -Family (RMF)
zoning designation. The proposed building would include 10,879 square feet of residential space within 8
residential units and an apartment leasing office. The applicant is proposing 16 parking stalls which
would be located within a surface parking lot located north and west of the proposed building. Access to
the site would be provided from SE Petrovitsky Rd via one existing curb cut. There are no critical areas
located on site.
PROJECT NAME: Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-140, ECF, PP
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat for the subdivision of
a 108,884 square foot (2.5 acre) parcel in the R-1, R-8 and R-14 zones and in the Urban Separator
Overlay. The original proposal encompassed 13 -lots and 4 -tracts (for open space and storm detention).
The revised proposal encompasses 12 -lots and 3 -tracts (for open space). A portion of proposed Lot 12
would also contain an open space easement. A proposed stormwater vault would be located under the
proposed access road. Proposed lots range in size from 4,500 to 13,006 square feet with a density of
7.99 dwelling units per acre. The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family
residences. Slopes generally range from 13% to 39% and the southwestern portion of the site contains a
small area of protected slopes (over 40%). Access to the proposed lots would be via a new street off of
South 55th Street; a secondary access for emergency vehicles is also proposed. Grading would involve
approximately 17,000 cubic yards of cut with approximately 6,000 cubic yards used as structural fill.
Approximately 500 cubic yards of crushed rock fill would be used for road construction.
HEX Agenda 3-16-10.doc
PUBLIC City of Renton
Department of Community and Economic Development
HEARING
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: March 15, 2010
Project Name: Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
ApplicantlOwner: Robert Wilson; 21703 50th Street East; Lake Tapps, WA 98391
Contact: Shupe Holmberg; Baima & Holmberg Inc., 100 Front Street; Issaquah, WA 98027
File Number., LUA09-140, PP, ECF
Project Manager., Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner
Project Summary: The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat for the subdivision of a 108,884
square foot (2.5 acre) parcel in the R-1, R-8 and R-14 zones and in the Urban Separator
Overlay. The original proposal encompassed 13 -lots and 4 -tracts (for open space and
storm detention). The revised proposal encompasses 12 -lots and 3 -tracts (for open
space). A portion of proposed Lot 12 would also contain an open space easement. A
proposed stormwater vault would be located under the proposed access road. Proposed
lots range in size from 4,500 to 1.3,006 square feet with a density of 7.99 dwelling units
per acre. The proposed lots are intended for the future construction of single family
residences. Slopes generally range from 13`Yo to 39% and the southwestern portion of
the site contains a small area of protected slopes (over 40%). Access to the proposed
lots would be via a new street off of South 55th Street; a secondary access for
emergency vehicles is also proposed. Grading would involve approximately 17,000 cubic
yards of cut with approximately 5,000 cubic yards used as structural fill. Approximately
500 cubic yards of crushed rock fill would be used for road construction.
Project Location: 720 South 55th Street
Project Location Map LUA09-140, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic lopment Deportment P inary Report to the Hearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC HEARING DATE March 36, 203 Page 2 of 13
B. HEARING EXHIBITS:
Exhibit 1: Project file ("yellow file") containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other
material pertinent to the review of the project.
Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map (date stamped 10/16/09)
Exhibit 3: Preliminary Plat Map (Baima & Holmberg Inc., Sheet 1/1, revised 01/11/10)
Exhibit 4: Boundary/Topography Map, (Baima & Holmberg Inc., Sheet 1/5, revised 01/11/10)
Exhibit 5: Generalized Utilities/Drainage/Control/Conceptual Grading/Landscaping Plant (Sheet
2/5, revised 01/11/10)
Exhibit 6: Road Profile (Baima & Holmberg Inc., Sheet 3/5, revised 01/11/10)
Exhibit 7: Wall Profiles & Cross Sections, (Baima & Holmberg Inc., Sheet 4/5, revised 01/11/10)
Exhibit 8: Tree Inventory, (Baima & Holmberg Inc., Sheet 5/5, revised 01/11/10)
Exhibit 9: Zoning Map (Sheet 13, East %)
Exhibit 10: Administrative Policy/Code Interpretation affecting Urban Separator Overlay
Regulations, effective January 14, 2010
Exhibit 11: Street Modification letter, dated November 10, 2009
C. GENERAL INFORMATION.
1. Owner of Record: Richard Wilson
21703 601h Street East
Lake Tapps, WA 98391
2. Zoning Designation: Residential —1 du/ac (R-1); Residential — 8 du/ac;
Residential —14 du/ac (R-14); Urban Separator Overlay
3. Comprehensive Plan Designation:
4. Existing Site Use:
5. Neighborhood Characteristics:
North:
East:
South:
West:
6. Site Area:
D. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND:
Action Land Use File No.
Annexation N/A
Comprehensive Plan N/A
Zoning Code N/A
E. PUBLIC SERVICES:
1. Utilities:
Residential Low Density (RLD); Residential Single Family
RSF); and, Residential Medium Density (RMD)
Single-family home
Vacant (R-1, R-8, and R-14
Vacant (R-4)
Vacant and Single Family Home (R-1, R-8, and R-14)
Single Family Residential Plat (Geneva Court, R-14)
2.49 acres (108,884 gross square feet)
Ordinance No.
3268
5099
5100
Water: Water service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District.
Date
12/13/78
11/01/2044
11/01/2004
LUA09-I40, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARYPLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC HEARING DATE March 16, 2010 Page 3 of 13
Sewer: Sewer service is provided by City of Renton. An 8 -inch diameter sanitary sewer is
required to be extended to serve the site.
Surface Water/Storrn Water: Storm conveyance is City of Renton.
2. Streets: All streets are within the City of Renton.
3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department
F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE:
1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts
a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts
b. Section 4.2.070: Zoning Use Tables
c. Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards
d. Section 4-2-115: Residential Design and Open Space Standards
2. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards
a. Section 4-2-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations
3. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards
a. Section 4-"60: Street Standards
4. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations
a. Section 4-7-080: Detailed Procedures for Subdivision
b. Section 4-7-120: Compatibility with existing Land Use and Plan — General Requirements
and Minimum Standards
c. Section 4-7-1.50: Streets — General Requirements and Minimum Standards
d. Section 4-7-170: Residential Lots — General Requirements and Minimum Standards
e. Section 4-7-220: Hillside Subdivisions
S. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria
6. Chapter 11 Definitions
G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
1. Land Use Element: Residential Low Density; Residential Single Family; Residential Medium
Density
2. Community Design Element: Natural Areas; Urban Separators; New and Infill Development:
Site Planning;
3. Environmental Element: Storm Water; Steep Slopes, Landslide, and Erosion Hazards
H. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS:
1. Project Description/Background
The applicant proposes subdividing an existing 2.49 acre parcel (APN 312305-9125) into 12 lots suitable
for the eventual development of detached single family homes and 3 tracts for open space. The
resulting parcels would range in size from 4,500 to 13,006 square feet. In addition, the applicant is also
LUA09-140, ECF, PP
Citrof Renton Community and Economic opment Deportment P nary Report to the Hearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC NEARING DATE March 16, 2020 Page 4 of 13
proposing that 4,884 square feet of proposed Lot 12 (which is within the Talbot Urban Separator) be
designated as a Native Growth Protection Easement.
The site is comprised of three zoning classifications: 27,156 square feet in the Residential -1 dwelling
units per acre zone (R-1) ; 79,343 square feet in the Residential — 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone;
and, 2,384 square feet in the Residential —14 dwelling units per acre (R-14) zone. In addition, the
Talbot Urban Separator Overlay is present and corresponds to the R-1 zoning in the western portion of
the site. Overall density of the 12 -lot proposal on the site would be 7.99 dwelling units per acre.
Primary access to the site would be via a 50 -foot wide access easement from South 55th Street. This
access easement is approximately 300 -feet in length and accesses the westerly portion of the site and is
identified as "Road A" on the revised site plan. A secondary emergency access on the easterly side of
the property is also proposed via a 30 -foot wide access easement and continues to the northerly
property line. This access is identified as "Road B" on the Preliminary Plat plan. A stormwater
detention vault is proposed off-site and to be located under proposed Road A.
The applicant is proposing grading involving 17,000 cubic yards of cut with a pproximately 6,000 cubic
yards of it being used as structural fill material with the remainder to be exported. In addition,
approximately 500 cubic yards of crushed rock fill would be imported to the project site for road
construction.
An existing single family residence (3,520 square feet) would be demolished to accommodate the
proposed development.
Because average slopes are in excess of 20 percent this project is considered a hillside subdivision.
2. Environmental Review
Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended),
on Feb 22, 2010, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non -Significance
Mitigated (DNS -M) for the Wilson Park Preliminary Plat. A 14 --day appeal period commenced on
February 26, 2010 and ended on March 12, 2010. No appeals of the threshold determination were filed
as of the writing of this staff report.
3. Compliance with ERC Conditions
Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee
ERC) issued the following mitigation measure with the Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated:
1. The applicant shall place a note on the face of the plat which requires a 15 -foot building
setback line from the top of slopes which are 40% or greater.
2. The applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations contained in the
Geotechnical Engineering Study, prepared by Liu & Associates, Inc. dated February 20, 2009.
3. The applicant shall clearly mark and fence trees outside the construction area and replant
exposed ground as soon as possible after construction activities.
4. That the applicant shall provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Plan designed
pursuant to the 2005 Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements and
provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of construction permits.
LUA09-140, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic Deveoopment Deportment Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner .
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC HEARING DATE March 16, 2010 Poge 5 of 13
S. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any
recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be
submitted by the Project Engineer of record to the Public Works inspector.
6. Grading and foundation activities shall be conducted during the dryer months of the year from
April 1 through October 31 unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division.
7. The final drainage report and design shall be subject to the 2009 King County Surface Water
Design Manual.
8. The applicant shall be required to pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.75 per each new
single family lot prior to recording the final plat (with credit given for the existing house). The
fee is estimated to be $5,838.36.
9. The applicant shall be required to pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new
average daily vehicle trip associated with the proposed project prior to recording of the final
plat (with credit given for the existing house). The fee is estimated to be $7,895.25.
10. The applicant shall be required to pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per each new
single family Jot prior to recording the final plat (with credit given for the existing house). The
fee is estimated at $5,368.00.
11. The applicant shall submit a sample board indicating the texture and tinting to be used on all
visible surfaces of retaining walls for the review and approval of the Planning Division project
manager prior to the issuance of construction permits.
4. Staff Review Comments
Representatives from various departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and
address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file,
and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report
and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of the report.
5. Consistency with Preliminary Plat Criteria
Approval of a plat is based upon several factors. The following preliminary plat criteria have been
established to assist decision -makers in the review of the plat:
a) Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Designation
The site is designated Residential Low Density (RLD), Residential Single Family (RSF), and
Residential Medium Density (RMD) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map.
The proposal is consistent with all of the following Comprehensive Plan Land Use policies:
Policy CD -1. Integrate development into natural areas by clustering development and/or
adjusting site plans to preserve wetlands, steep slopes, and notable stands of trees or other
vegetation. Natural features should function as site amenities. Use incentives such as
flexible lot size and configuration to encourage preservation and add amenity value.
Policy Objective Met 0 Not Met
Policy CD -22. During land division, all lots should front streets or parks. Discourage
single tier lots with rear yards backing onto a street. Where a singie-tier plat is the only
LUA09-140, ECF PP
City of Renton Community and Economic Iopment Department P inary Report to the Hearing Examiner
WIMN PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC NEARING DATE March 16, 2010 Page 6 of 13
viable alternative due to land configuration, significant environmental constraints, or
location on a principal arterial, additional design features such as larger setbacks, additional
landscaping, or review of fencings should be required.
a. Evaluation of land configuration should consider whether a different layout of streets or
provision of alleys is physically possible and could eliminate the need for a single -tier
plat.
b. Evaluation of environmental constraints should consider whether the location and
extent of critical areas prevents a standard plat design.
c. Review of fencing should ensure that the development does not "turn its back" to
public areas.
Policy Objective Met Not Met
Policy CD -25. Streets, sidewalks, and pedestrian or bike paths should be arranged an
interconnecting network. Dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs should be discouraged. A grid
or "flexible grid" pattern of streets and pathways, with a hierarchy of widths and
corresponding traffic volumes, should be used.
Policy Objective Met Not Met
Policy CD -26. Interpret development standards to support plats designed to incorporate
vehicular and pedestrian connections between plats and neighborhoods. Small projects
composed of single parcels and/or multiple parcels of insufficient size to provide such
connections, should include future street stubs. Future street connections should be clearly
identified to notify residents of future roadway connections.
Policy Objective Met Not Met
Policy EN -28. Minimize on-site erosion and sedimentation during and after construction.
Policy Objective Met Not Met
Policy EN -71. Allow land alteration only for approved development proposals or approved
mitigation efforts that will not create unnecessary erosion, undermine the support of
nearby land, or unnecessarily scar the landscape.
Policy Objective Met Not Met
Policy LU -156. Residential Low Density areas may be incorporated into Urban Separators.
Policy Objective Met Not Met
Policy EN -28. Minimize on-site erosion and sedimentation during and after construction.
Policy Objective Met Not Met
6j Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation
The subject site is designated R-1, R-8, and R-14 on the City of Renton Zoning Map. The
proposed development would allow for the future construction of 12 new single-family
dwelling units.
Density: The density permitted in the R-1 zone is a maximum of 1 dwelling per net acre
du/ac). The density range in the R-8 zone is a minimum oof 4.0 up to a maximum of 9_0
du/ac. The density range in the R-14 zone is a minimum of 10.0 and a maximum of 14.0
du/ac. Net density is calculated after public rights -of way, private access easements, and
LUA09-140, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP ECF
PUBLIC HEARING DATE March 16, 2010 Page 7 of 13
critical areas are deducted from the gross acreage of the site. The net acreage of the R-1
area of the property is 0.3882 acre (23,795 sf — 5,927 sf of road area and 958 sf of steep
slope area = 16,910 sf or 0.3882 ac); the net acreage of the R-8 portion of the property is
63,277 sf or 1.4526 ac (80,632 sf —17,355 sf of road area = 63,277 sf or 1,4526 ac); and the
net acreage of the R-14 area of the property is 2,094 sf or 0.0481 acre (2,384 sf — 290 sf of
road area= 2,094 sf or 0.0481 acre). The overall net density for the project is 7.99 du/ac.
Lot Dimensions: Twelve lots and three tracts are proposed. The minimum lot size required
in the R-1 zone is 1 acre or 10,000 sf for cluster developments; minimum lot width in the R-
1 zone is 75 -feet for interior lots and 85 -feet for corner lots and the minimum depth is 85 -
feet. The minimum lot size in the R-8 zone is 4,500 sf for parcels greater than one acre in
size; the minimum lot width in the R-8 zone is 50 -feet for interior lots and 60 -feet for corner
lots. No lots are proposed in the R-14 portion of the property. As proposed and
demonstrated in the table below, all lots meet the requirement for minimum width.
Lot Area (s4. ft.) Width/Depth (ft. 1 Notes
1 4,594 63/75 R-8 Zone; abuts open
space Tracts B &D
2 4,500 60/75 R-8 Zone
3 5,896 80/75 R-8 Zone; corner lot
4 5,993 50/120 R-8 Zone
5 5,979 50/120 R-8 Zone
6 5,964 50/120 R-8 Zone
7 5,782 57/120 R-8 Zone; future road
connection to north
8 6,269, 70/90 R-8 Zone; corner lot
9 5,400 60/90 R-8 Zone
10 5,400 60/90 R-8 Zone
11 5,404 60/90 R-8 and R-1 Zones
12 73,006 (net lot area
8,122)
108/90 Ft. R-1 Zone; includes 4,884
sq. ft. of open space
B 958 N/A I Steep Slope Open Space
Tract
C 4,195 N/A Open Space Tract
D 2,900 N/A Open Space Tract
Setbacks: Proposed Lots 1 -11 are subject to the setback requirements of the R-8 Zone. Lot
12 is entirely within the R-1 Zone, and is, therefore, subject to R-1 setbacks. None of the
proposed lots are subject to the requirements of the R-14 zone.
R-1 zone setback requirements are a minimum of 30 -feet front yard, 15 -feet side yard and
25 -feet rear yard. R-8 setback requirements are a minimum of 15 -feet for the primary
LUA09-140, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic . lopment Department P inary Report to the Nearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC NEARING DATE March 16, 2010 - Page 8 of 13
structure and 20 -feet for attached garages in the front yard, 5 -feet side yard and 20 -feet
rear yard.
As proposed, all lots appear to contain adequate area to provide all required setback areas.
Compliance with building setback requirements would be reviewed at the time of building
permit review.
The applicant has indicated that the existing residence on portions of proposed Lots 2, 3, 8,
and 9 would be removed. Since the existing house is within the area of several proposed
lots and the Road 8, the house will need to be removed prior to recording. Staff
recommends as a condition of approval, that the applicant apply for and obtain a
demolition permit, remove the existing residence, and complete final inspections of the
demolition prior to plat recording.
Building Standards:_ The R-1 and R-8 zones permit one residential structure per lot. Each of
the proposed lots would support the construction of one detached single family home/
Building height in the R-1 (Lot 12) and R-8 zones (Lots 1 - 11) is limited to 30 feet. The
maximum lot coverage in the R-1 Zone (Lot 12) is 35% percent; while the maximum
impervious lot coverage in the R-8 Zone is dependent on the lot size. For lots greater than
5,000 square feet (Lots 3 - 11) 35% lot coverage or 2,500 sq. ft. is permitted, whichever is
greater; for lots less than 5,000 sq. ft. (tots 1 and 2) 50% lot coverage is permitted. it
appears that all of the proposed parcels contain enough area to accommodate single family
residential homes that comply with the lot coverage requirements. The building standards
for proposed lots would .be verified at the time of building permit review. Proposed Lot 12
contains an open space easement which would be recorded as a part of the Native Growth
Protection Easement (NGPE) recommended in this report.
d) Community Assets
Landscaping: The applicant will be required to provide landscape strips along the internal
roads where street trees shall be planted. Proposed Road A within the plat would require
an 8 -foot landscape strip between the street and the sidewalk along the north side of the
street. The off-site portion of Road A will also require an 8 -foot planter strip between the
street and the sidewalk. Proposed (toad B is required to have a 5 -foot planter strip
landscaped with street trees.
The applicant has submitted a tree inventory and tree retention worksheet which indicates
that there are 101 trees on the site. A total of 25 trees must be retained and the applicant
is proposing to retain 15 of these trees_ The replacement ratio is six, 2 -inch caliper trees
per tree removed. The applicant is proposing to provide 60 replacement trees. The
majority of these replacement trees are proposed to be planted within the Urban Separator
Area (R-1 zoning) which encompasses the eastern portion of proposed Lot 12, and Tracts B,
C, and D. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that a Native Growth Protection
Easement (NGPE) be recorded over the eastern portion of Lot 12 and Tracts B, C, and D.
The edge of the NGPE shall be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage
as approved by the Planning Division project manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be
submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval at the time of
construction permit application. The fencing and signage shall be installed prior to
recording the final plat_ In order to ensure that the proposed open space area would be
provided with vegetation enhancement, staff recommends as a condition of approval that
the applicant be required to plant replacement trees as indicated on Exhibit 8. Staff further
recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant establish a Homeowners
LUA49-140, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preiiminory Report to the Nearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LLiA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC NEARING DATE March 16, 2010 Page 9 of 13
Association which would be responsible for maintenance of the open space areas within
the plat.
Open Space: The R-1 zoned portion of the property coincides with the Talbot Road Urban
Separator Overlay. RMC 4-3-110 identifies two Urban Separator Overlay areas in the City:
the May Valley Urban Separator and the Talbot Road Urban Separator. In the May Valley
Urban Separator, entire properties are included in the Urban Separator designation.
However, in the Talbot Road Urban Separator only portions of properties are within the
Urban Separator. Urban Separators are intended to create contiguous open space corridors
within and between urban communities, which provide environmental, visual, recreational
and wildlife benefits. The purpose of the Urban Separator is also to protect resources and
environmentally sensitive areas. Properties located within Urban Separators are required
to dedicate 50 percent of the designated gross area of the property as open space. For
properties in May Valley, where entire properties are within the Urban Separator, this is
appropriate. However, for properties in the Talbot Road area, where only portions of the
sites are within the designated Urban Separator, the requirement for dedicating 50 percent
of the area as open space is a hardship. By requiring 50 percent of the area designated as
Urban Separator to be dedicated as open space, there is uniformity and fairness between
the Talbot Road and May Valley Urban Separator areas. An Administrative Policy/Code
Interpretation which became effective on January 14, 2010 states that properties in the
Talbot Urban Separator will be required to dedicate 50 percent of the gross land area in the
Urban Separator as open space, rather than 50 percent of the gross site area. The area to
be dedicated may also include portions of the site abutting the Urban Separator.
The area of the project site within the Talbot Road Urban Separator (R-1 zone) is 23,795 sf.
Using the Administrative Policy/Code Interpretation cited, above, the applicant would be
required to dedicate 11,898 sf of open space. The applicant proposes to provide 12,937 sf
of open space (958 sf in Tract B, 4,195 sf in Tract C, 2,900 sf in Tract D, and 4,884 sf in the
open space easement as part of proposed Lot 12).
e) Compliance with the Subdivision Regulations
Streets: Access to the site would require the dedication of a new public street across an
abutting property. This street would 26 -feet of paving, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot
sidewalk. A secondary emergency access across the abutting property to the southeast is
required. This emergency access would be gated and is required to have 20 -feet of paving.
Residential Blocks: RMC 4-7-160A states that blocks shall be wide enough to accommodate
two tiers of lots, except where the location and extent of environmental constraints
prevent a standard plat land configurations including size and shape of the parcel. In
addition, prior the approval of a single tier of lots, the applicant must demonstrate that a
different layout or provision of an alley system is not feasible.
The site contains environmental constraints including limited access, steep slopes, and
narrow underlying lot width which preclude a double tier of lots or an alley configuration.
Furthermore, the applicant initially proposed a different lot layout, with more parcels, and
redesigned the plat to conform to the multiple underlying zone classifications and the
Urban Separator Overlay. Staff supports the current lot layout. The parcels are ,uniform in
size and shape.
Lots: The proposed lots are generally rectangular in shape and conform to Code
requirements in terms of minimum size and width_ Proposed Lots 3 and 8 would be corner
lots and frontage has been determined to be on proposed Road A. Staff recommends as a
LUA09-140, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic . lopment Department P inary Report to the Nearing Examiner
WIL50N PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC NEARING DATE March 16, 2010 Page 10 of 13
condition of approval that proposed Lots 3 and 8 front on proposed Road A and, therefore,
a note shall be placed on the face of the plat prior to recording.
D Reasonableness of Proposed Boundaries:
Access: Each of the proposed lots and tracts would have access to a public street. The
applicant has proposed to extend a new 42 -foot wide public street from South 55`
h
Street.
This street would have 26 -feet of paving, an 8 -foot planter strip, a five-foot sidewalk, curb
and gutter along the westerly side of the street. This street would require off-site
dedication. Within the plat, Road A would be a 42 -foot wide right-of-way consisting of 26
feet of paving, with and 8 -foot wide landscape strip and 5 -foot wide sidewalk fronting
proposed Lots 8 —12. The sidewalk and planting strip would be located on only on the
north side of the street fronting Road A. Improvements proposed on proposed Road B
fronting Lots 4 — 7 consist of a 5 -foot wide sidewalk and a 5 -foot wide sidewalk and a 5 -foot
wide planting strip along the east side of proposed Lot 8. improvements for proposed Road
B would end at the northern property line. Staff recommends as a condition of approval
that the applicant place a sign at the northern terminus of proposed Road B that alerts
future property owners that this road may be extended to the north should future
development warrant such an extension. Emergency secondary access would be provided
via an emergency vehicle access extending from the southeast terminus of Road 'B' (near
Lots 3 and 4) to South 55'h Street. This emergency access would require 20 -feet of
pavement.
Property owners to the west have expressed concern about the installation of new roads to
the proposed project. They are concerned about appropriate setbacks, easements and
fences along property lines. Additionally, these property owners are concerned about
safety on these roads in inclement weather. The surrounding property owners also
suggest a concrete barrier wall for cars travelling southbound (downhill) on proposed Road
A. The applicant must address all appropriate City of Renton road safety issues at the time
of construction.
The property owners to the west are also concerned about traffic on S 551h Street which is
serpentine and slopes downward from east to west in the vicinity of the proposed project.
While it is acknowledged that vehicle accidents have occurred in this area on S 55th Street,
the Traffic Study submitted with the application materials indicates that sight distances at
the proposed access point for the proposed project are adequate. This has been verified by
City staff.
Topography: The site contains areas of protected slopes (greater than 40 percent) in the
southwestern portion of the property. The Environmental Review Committee imposed a
mitigation measure which requires the applicant to place a note on the face of the plat that
requires a 15 -foot building setback line from the top of slopes which are 40 percent or
greater. The applicant has indicated proposed retaining walls along the westerly side of
proposed Lot 12 (within the R-14 portion of the property) and through proposed Lots S, 6,
and 7. These walls range in height from 12 to 20 -feet in height. The retaining wall on the
easterly side of the property would be poured concrete or soil nail composition. The
retaining wall on the westerly side of the property would be poured concrete or reinforced
earth. Because the height of these proposed walls may cause visual impacts to adjoining
property owners to the west and northeast, the Environmental Review Committee imposed
a mitigation measure to require a combination of texturing and tinting on all visible surfaces
LUA09-140, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Nearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC HEARING DATE March 16, 2010 Page 11 of 13
of the proposed retaining walls. Because proposed retaining walls would be in close
proximity to property lines, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant
obtain any necessary construction and maintenance easements for the retaining walls and
the stormwater vault.
Property owners to the west of the project site have expressed concern about appropriate
engineering of the proposed project so that the properties below the site are not
compromised by increased danger of landslides or run-off. The Geotechnical Engineering
Study prepared by Liu & Associates, Inc., dated February 20, 2009 and the Technical
Information Report prepared by Baima & Holmberg, Inc., dated May 5, 2009 address these
issues and present recommendations to avoid such consequences.
Relationship to Existing _Uses: Single-family residences abut the project site to the west
and south with vacant land to the north and east. The detached single-family residences
would be compatible with the surrounding development.
g) Availability and Impact on Public Services (Timeliness)
Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to
furnish services to the proposed development. Due to limited access staff recommends, as
a condition of approval, any future residence constructed within the plat shall be sprinkled
unless the requirement is removed by the City of Renton Fire Marshal or his/her designee.
A note shall be recorded on the face of the short plat to this effect.
The proposal would add new residential units to the City that would potentially impact the
City's Police and Fire Emergency Services. Staff recommended through SEPA Environmental
Review as a condition of approval to mitigate for these impacts that requires the applicant
to pay a Fire Mitigation Fee, based on $488.00 per new single-family residence payable
prior to recoding of the final plat. The fire mitigation fee is estimated to be $5,386 (11 new
units x $488.00 = $5,386.00)
Schools: The project site is served by schools in the Renton School District. It is anticipated
that the Renton School District can accommodate any additional students generated by this
proposal at the following schools: Benson Hill Elementary, Nelsen Middle School and
Lindbergh High School.
School impact fees are regulated under RMC 4-1-160 and are in effect at the time of permit
application or final plat approval. Currently, the Renton School District required fee is
6,310.00 per each new single-family residence; however, school mitigation and impact
fees are updated annually and are subject to change.
Surface Water: The applicant submitted a Technical Information Report for Wilson Park,
prepared by Baima & Holmberg, Inc. dated May 5, 2009. That report includes an analysis of
upstream tributary drainage which states that the parcel to the east drains onto the site.
The Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis in the report states that runoff from the site
flows west into lots in the adjacent Geneva Court development. The majorities of these
flows collect in a drain constructed along the back yards of the western -most lots of the
Geneva Court development and then flow into the storm system in South 53rd Place. This
flow collects in a stormwater pond/bioswale facility located at the intersection of Talbot
Road S and South 53`d Place approximately 750 -feet downstream from the site. This facility
outfalls through an 18 -inch pipe to the west side of Talbot Road S into a poorly defined
channel flowing into the woods. The flows then pass through a 12 -inch culvert under a
walking path and continue to flow west to a wooded wetland area more than a quarter
LUA09-240, ECF, PP
City of Renton Community and Economic opment Deportment Pr )cry Report to the Nearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140 PP, ECF
PUBLIC HEARING DATE March 16, 2010 Page 12 of 13
mile downstream from the site. Flows into the ditch along S 551" Street continue west in a
rock lined channel along the north side of the street to the intersection of Talbot Road S
and S 55`h Street. The channel is eroded and shows signs of flowing into the street. Flows
from the ditch along Talbot Road S collect in the storm system about 850 -feet downstream
from the site eventually flowing into Springbrook Creek at about 1,800 -feet downstream
from the site. Springbrook Creek continues flowing west to about one-half mike
downstream of the site where it enters a box culvert crossing SR 167. The Technical
Information Report indicates that there are no apparent drainage problems.
The plans submitted by the applicant indicate that a proposed storm water detention vault
would be located off-site in the easterly proposed access road to control downstream
stormwater impacts. The Environmental Review Committee imposed a mitigation measure
that requires the final drainage report shall be subject to the 2004 Icing County Surface
Water Design Manual.
Property owners to the west have expressed concern about changes in drainage
due to impervious surfaces created by the proposed project. The applicant
proposes to install a stormwater vault within the off-site portion of proposed Road
A. Additionally, the applicant would be required to use the 2009 King County
Surface Water Design Manual in the final drainage report.
Water: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivision with a public water supply
and distribution system managed by the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. A Certificate
of Water Availability, dated November 7, 2008, has been issued by the Soos Creek Water &
Sewer District.
The applicant will show, during engineering review, the location and distance of all existing
fire hydrants within 300 feet of the site. Existing and new hydrants will be required to be
retrofitted with Storz "quick disconnect" fittings, if not already in place. Furthermore, the
Fire Department requires that all new houses be sprinklered.
Sewer: The site is within the City of Renton sewer service area. A minimum 8 -inch
diameter sanitary sewer extension is required to serve the site.
Streets: The streets within the proposed project would be dedicated public streets and
would become part of the City's street system. Improvements required on these streets
are described ion the Access section, above. As indicated in that section, the neighboring
property owners are concerned about how street safety issues would affect them. The
Traffic Study prepared by Traffex, dated June 23, 2004 cites accident history in the project
vicinity on South
551h
Street between 98th Avenue S and 99t11 Place S. A total of four
accidents occurred between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2008. Two of the accidents
were injury accidents with one of them being fatal. None of the accidents occurred at the
curve on South 551h Street where the site access is proposed. The Traffic Study indicates
that sight distances are adequate for the curves in the vicinity of the proposed project. The
adequacy of sight distances has been verified by City staff and has been found to be
appropriate for the proposed plat
LUAC9-140, FCF, PP
city of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Nearing Examiner
WILSON PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA09-140, PP, ECF
PUBLIC NEARING DATE March 16, 20I0 Page 13 of 13
G. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the Wilson Park Prellminary Plat, Project File No. LUA09-140, PP. ECF)
subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non -Significance —
Mitigated that was issued by the Environmental Review Committee on February 22, 2010 for
Project File No. LUA09-140, ECF, PP.
2. The applicant shall apply for a demolition permit, remove the existing residence and complete final
inspections of the demolition prior to plat recording.
3. A Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) shall be recorded over the eastern portion of Lot 12
and Tracts B, C, and D. The edge of the NGPE shall be delineated with a split rail fence and
identified with signage as approved by the Planning Division project manager. A fencing and
signage detail shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval
at the time of construction permit application. The fencing and signage shall be installed prior to
recording the final plat.
4. The applicant shall be required to plant replacement trees as indicated on Exhibit 8 prior to
recording of the final plat.
5. The applicant shall establish a Homeowners Association for the maintenance of the NGPE, the
stormwater vault and the retaining walls and provide the appropriate documents for the review
and approval of the Planning Division project manager prior to recording of the final plat.
6. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat which indicates that Lots 3 and 8 shall be oriented to
take access from proposed Road A.
7. The applicant shall place signs at the northerly terminus of proposed Road B which alert future
property owners that this road may be extended to the north should future development warrant
such an extension. These signs shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat.
8. The applicant shall obtain any necessary construction and maintenance easements for the retaining
walls and the stormwater vault subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.
EXPIRATION PERIODS:
The Preliminary Plat approval will expire 5 years from the date of approval. An extension may be requested
pursuant to RMC Section 4-7-080.1_.
LUA09-140, ECF, PP
EXHIBIT 2
r .a :
A3
5
F`$•a a}'
er
s'
4
ei `
a
r _ S
tg ° Bei a! ° o 1i1 b0t,1 C x '• - -- l J
rn.
E PPS
w ^
a y , jIy ;4 Q
0 - 3htl:
rr..F
c
w .
i1.1
uj
s "-
a x • -.T.
r.---
H166K " .''F .a, SJ.i
Q m
1
c
J
yypp4tK
of 5C'—. /!? .
To 'id
s g.7 K x 41(D
g ar8q m cd 1
pV 4 I = , •
p * e 4 y, ,' ' it
4
rYI,.. F..
y
6 I`
g c9
jj
p_ .^--
Ir
GL4 DC7
11
a'
zW1
k?7-T101*i p Fl m K -
F
n -
y
srw:7- ;ruoauoa ldaa
W
LO Y
MO
Z Za
ch 0
N F—
CD
ZZ
Q SE
L)3
id 0
LL Z
W tl
M y
uj
T f y
L
V
O
Z
99O
IL
r :
1_
ElLqkfille
a
oarnc faa nl A,z wlc ri,os
104IC
lq
I
E, &g r3I ------I I
1Gi Fb88 '
Ao'
y
A09C .Po9i -------- AM f
BIZ+Lv enx air Mr'
Jt„8
X41,'
EXHIBIT 3
x arrmr
J I
f a
Y ELS
W
LO Y
MO
Z Za
ch 0
N F—
CD
ZZ
Q SE
L)3
id 0
LL Z
W tl
M y
uj
T f y
L
V
O
Z
99O
IL
r :
1_
ElLqkfille
a
oarnc faa nl A,z wlc ri,os
104IC
lq
I
E, &g r3I ------I I
1Gi Fb88 '
Ao'
y
A09C .Po9i -------- AM f
BIZ+Lv enx air Mr'
Jt„8
X41,'
J I
f°
X41,'
J I
i bmf
w
oro yf ra,.
mljLOx
4
ea BBF 3_f*-8G.Owr
1
V
L-,
E
IilVd HQS'IUYI 'w oH,*'
g}g} If EXHIBIT 4
W1 1 11 6 _
Fq I Rtla
ppj` ySg
b6@ R' 3 2 Affil"cak
i9 fide
x E..
os
v•ah"
f2rmJyolataEt rfit'uns4.-------_'.- --------
n
E
ce r T- ---__ -- - _itm1-=~~~ _-
M.,- 7 Wim. --=-
rcr - _ "•:
i:w
co
jjj "'.SSS -- .tI 1 • R.'8 '.' 1 _ / ,.L i
Fir __C. __ - 'y9j- S ' r • j-M.
Lu o
ar.
TILp .---------- -- - m
J .
as ' pa ii` C r i .e
I
Lu
qkf - -
1- _
cb•^- __# ,•'F J iv_ ice_.--__ _P`l'9,y-- -•WY_ 'I !/
LLT_----_____
fir-
Z+:r±
iz
p ---` -
CyFt -wr
1
b `-. n,ti 't Y—y_•-_--___ _ g a
Y _
oor
r- ___ -,..-_ -serm - _ ---- r^ij.t I •y. .._`$ -, _-`__F Y ____
r. d
f,
pm
a.
cz _ OF -- qtr''' -- ^' Q - - ^ ------
tip
µ-
r T'
r J _w. L12fi[9 dSAI 571 1, 1 y
F_~
74 yo-terat dtl11 1.FidV990dOJ[/
XSVClLlOB
way.)IUVd
NOSIIM
u1r B,R •+rR
EXHIBIT 5
R lilt
I a4pl
EailH
k
oil
r
i `w { `t `w ! i t
j
LO
Z Z— '\'fol'c '1i ! .
Yv-_r. t'.rr,—_...___—:, — o rf`=;•--,r
t— _
J ,
y T_ ''a' a-ti—`------ 1
y`
W = -
IIIJ
ar+----------
V) S 1 1 I'
alc -w x w
911
0 Uri
LL
0,0 ——---7i•yl _ i j i
r N..S
rr
J
r'I
J
I
mc
ri
V=, iU ,.3
I - I t _
IiIi` _
r '- - -__-~" -
r
r
r
0
41
70
as
nlz^
Y _ - ^ \
30 ` r![
i ,logBz 3"BF,B¢OON -.cr
a and elm"os0NYl/Jmiavus r.er 3nm^ Ps
r '
on
ro-cecz 7YN.d33N00/1MH1W0=- {-'I
9 m, 3 YN11lHR 6 2J 1111 man"ap y+4 6 WIWl,T w+RB
ar m
a la- NUVd NOSI M rt==
m w. .c... an WWF w,na.o o-:so-nsCtw\m-rnrmana
LU
C9
z
Z z
C9
v
8
z
w0
W F—
LL z
OW
LL
w0
co
U
LL
z
0
0
a-
rer-w q q p
w
WAL-
RSA
q
t i
i
i
4
4
FT i
EXHIBIT 6
3
I
37fi aaa avoa — -- -_d
MUtld MOS—IM '4 6 4LIOH,RlrB
r or —
C
W
rO
V
Z
B
6
I
J r'
J fJ ,
es¢
JJ JJ
i
it
5
f JJ
7:2
JJJJ
JJ I
JJJJ-IJ
JJ.iJ JJJ
i JJ J J
JJJJ JJJ
C
JJJJ JJJ
JJJJ
JJJ JJJ
JJJJ
JJJJJ._I JJJJJJ
JJJJ JJ
JJ JJJ
JJ4J J'J
JJi J JJJ _
i J 1JJJ_J JJJJJ
JJZJ JJJ
JJJJ JJJ
ysJ JJ JJJ
J JJ JJJ
JJJ JJ_
JJJ
U JJJJJJ
a
g
C
W
rO
V
Z
B
6
I
J r'
J fJ ,
JJ JJ
5
7:2
M
JJJJJJJJJJ JJ I
JJJJ-IJ
JJ.iJ JJJ
JJJJ 'JJJ'
JJJJ JJJ
C
JJJ_i J J
JJJJ JJ
JJJJ _I l
JJJJ
J JJ JJU EJJJJJJ
JJ JJJJJ
LL
O
z
0
O
CL
B
B
z
b
5
M
C b
r
R9
rYRr
5
5
C b
R9
r YRr
5
B B 8
T 6d7fjOi3d l7YM
WVd WDS HM VWAGAMMON. T SPH
g
w
m w wm3x
8
8
C b
B B 8
T 6d7fjOi3d l7YM
WVd WDS HM VWAGAMMON. T SPH
g
w
m w wm3x
8
8
yy yy
I rA EXHIBIT 8
FE E E 3E EEE • t'EEa<arls>`EEF 3EEEE tib
do
a?:2k__:kkSkL_aa•.=eR aa,:,ks.:Rk R aJ'
Gia
zr
e
Qe
EEEEEFF3tom EFEEFEEEF11111glop! IoE o
l \ b y titi ,y•. 1 f 7
fa 7Y.1) •af9LDZ ALifxI.I85
p
1`
t `3 ^-... •` - -----, J
J !
rl-.~ 1 it
A „ a--- - -- • - -' /,
e
LU i..J
n --•r''
Y -
t - - a ryy ---- vim'-Mk --i'-;q. . 'z, G
1
w - '_ -_ #
y . - .
x• -
oma'
5$ I • 8
N eor .,- -
b - *
Y - -
mor aals 3t.wa7' -
i ,'
3{•
W
LL-
SFJ- .Pei
w -
J
4°! ,* _ -_ J- _SSii
EL
qr-
4 ®
r- -_
y,\ _~
CSF _ ^ - •
O{
1'
f -r- _ --__ ^- -- -'- -
fes -_ - _ ---i -^_ `
1-. '-_ -_ -.•', -`- ___.-•
Pi='-- __ --_ -- ^_ `
moi^'
ryp+ - -- T, y^ -- - -_ -'L-rf _- 251_ -_ __.-,-Zi~ ___ •
j4tS , _
r"1
zw
3i' •' -- i - cltrrs ear xtj /1 t - -f. =T - - * - - -- ' -- - - __ -
0'882 3,Br,8t-aaK
c -.
a- _
fir' •
t •. WM yw IAfW i
ao-tasT grnd N0tLN3.L9WABOIN3hM 33UL-- =
mf
m =
5
7ik1Vd HQSIWI ;
W ON•r7,Pg _
H3 - 30 T23N R5E E 1/2
IM --
EXHIBIT 9
co
I
IINftci9 S 1 _ _ .
CO... R-14 iR-:
CO
co
i 1to cE CarIW
co-- 4t/
i
ro j I
CO RM -F !
14
6.vane az __ s,wn0
aawta
B s --
R-4
co COr
C co
CO i
CO c CO
W
R-4 N
x R -S N
g sn a i
R-14
ss,a s,
R 1 '
t,l L
R_4...
3
sw9
R-1 R-4 R-4 4
ZONING MAP.13010K J3 - Ob T22N R5E E 1/2
PW TECHNICAL SERVICES 3PRINTEDON11/13/09 I1
a 200 400
31 T23N R5E E 1/2crtraF.z in Feet
f1 r I D_r .. 1:4.800
5331
EXHIBIT 14
City of
00000
ri 1 U")
Department of Community and Economic Development
Planning Division
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY/ CODE INTERPRETATION
MUNICIPAL
CODE SECTIONS: RMC 4-3-110, Urban Separator Overlay Regulations.
REFERENCE: Wilson Park Preliminary Plat (LUA09-140, PP, ECF)
SUBJECT: Determination regarding dedication of open space requirements for
properties within the Talbot Urban Separator.
BACKGROUND, The City received an application for a development proposal on a 2.5 acre
site in the R-14, R-1, and R -S Zones. The site includes a portion of the
Talbot Urban Separator, which is an overlay intended to create
contiguous open space corridors within and between urban communities,
which provide environmental, visual, recreational and wildlife benefits.
The purpose of the Urban Separator is also to protect resources and
environmentally sensitive areas.
There are two Urban Separator areas: May Valley and Talbot Road. In
the May Valley Urban Separator, entire properties are included in the
Urban Separator designation. However, in the Talbot area, only portions
of properties are within the Urban Separator, and these are generally
portions of the property containing steep slopes. Properties located
within the Urban Separator are required per RMC 4-3-110.E2.a to
dedicate 50% of the gross land area of the parcel or parcels as a non -
revocable open space tract. In May Valley, since the entire property is
designated Urban Separator, the dedication of 50% of the gross site area
is appropriate. However, in the Talbot Urban Separator where only a
very small portion of the site is designated Urban Separator, it is
inequitable to require that 50% of the gross site area be retained.
JUSTIFICATION: Urban Separator regulations require dedication of 50% of designated
properties gross area as open space. For properties in May Valley, where
the entire site is within the Urban Separator, this is appropriate.
However, for properties in the Talbot area, where only a portion of the
site is designated Urban Separator, the requirement for dedication of
H:\CED\Planning\Title IV\Docket\Administrative Policy Code Interpretation\CI-06\Code Interpretation.doc Page 1 of 2
50% of the area as open space is a hardship. By requiring 50% of the area
designated as Urban Separator to be dedicated as open space, there is
uniformity and fairness between the Talbot and May Valley areas.
DECISION: Properties in the Talbot Urban Separator will be required to dedicate 50%
of the gross land area in the Urban Separator as open space, rather than
50% of the gross site area. The area to be dedicated may also include
portions of the site abutting the Urban Separator, in order to create a
contiguous open space corridor.
PLANNING DIRECTOR
APPROVAL:
C. E. "Chip" Vincent
DATE: January 14, 2010
APPEAL
PROCESS: To appeal this determination, a written appeal --accompanied by the
required filing fee --must be filed with the City's Hearing Examiner (1055
S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057) no more than 14 days from the date of
this decision. Your submittal should explain the basis for the appeal.
Section 4-8-110 of the Renton Municipal Code provides further
information on the appeal process.
CODE
AMENDMENTS
NEEDED TO
IMPLEMENT
DETERMINATIONS: RMC 4-3-110.E.2 should be amended to read as shown on Attachment A.
CE -05 Page 2 of 2
Attachment A
RMC 4-3-110.E.
2. Dedication of Open Space Required.
a. Approval of a plat, and/or building permit on an undeveloped legal lot in the May
Valle Urban Separator Overlay shall require dedication of fifty percent (50%) of the gross land
area of the parcel or parcels as a non -revocable open space tract retained by property owner, or
dedicated to a homeowners association or other suitable organization as determined by the
reviewing official. Approval of a 1plat, and/or building permit on an undeveloped le al lot in the
Talbot Urban Separator Overlay shall require dedication of fifly percent 50% of the gross land
area of that portion of the parcel or parcels located within the Urban Separator as a non -
revocable open sace tract retained by the property owner, or dedicated to a homeowners
association or other suitable organization as determined by the reviewinq official. In order to
satis the dedication requirement, some of the area to be dedicated may consist of land
abutting the Urban Separator, as determined b the Planning Director, on a case-by-case basis.
Acreage in tracts may include critical areas and/or critical area buffers._ At a minimum, open
space shall be connected to another contiguous open space parcel by a fifty foot (50') corridor.
b. Existing residences, existing accessory uses and structures, existing above ground
utilities located in the tract at the time of designation and new small and medium utilities shall
not count toward the fifty percent (50%) gross land area calculation for open space except for
storm water ponds designed with less than 3:1 engineered slopes and enhanced per techniques
and landscape requirements set forth in the publication the "Integrated Pond" King County Land
and Water Resources Division.
c. Approval of a building permit for an addition of three hundred (300) square feet for a
primary use structure or five hundred (500) square feet for an accessory structure shall require
recordation of a conservation easement, protective easement or tract and deed restriction on
critical areas and critical area buffers located within the contiguous open space corridor
pursuant to RMC 4-3-0501=4, Native Growth Protection Areas.
d. Land dedicated as open space shall be located within the mapped contiguous open
space corridor unless a modification is approved pursuant to subsection E6 of this Section.
LawLDenis—
F
City of EXHIBIT 11Mayor
Department of Communityand Economic Development
November 10, 2009
Alex Pietsch, Administrator
Tom Redding
Bairna & Holmberg, Inc.
100 Front Street South
Issaquah, WA 98027-3817
Subject: Wilson Park PreliminaryPlat— I_UA09-140
720 South 55a' Street
Street Modification requests
Dear Mr. Redding.:
We have completed our review of your request for modifications to the street standards for the
proposed Wilson Park Preliminary Plat located at 724 South S5`'' Street. The proposed residential
subdivision is for 13 single family building lots and four additional tracts. Tile subdivision will be served
by two access roadways south of the site to South 55th Street, connecting to a rrew street through the -
proposed project.
You have requested modification for the internal roadway, including eliminating the required sidewalk
from one side of the street,'reducing the right-of-way width, and eliminating the requirement far a cul-
de-sac. Clarification of the street improvement requirements for the two off-site access roadways is
also. requested. The proposal continues to be based on a waiver of the required connection to the north
property line.
The request to reduce the internal street right-of-way width to 37.5 feet is denied. However, the
request to delete the sidewalk from one side of the internal street is approved', subject to providing an
eight -foot (8') planting strip between the street and remaining sidewalk. The requirement fora cul-de-
sac is modified to allow for a hammerhead turnaround and gated emergency access for secondary
access. The proposal to waive the requirement to extend the public street to the north property line is
also denied.
tity Cade 4-6-060 (Street Standards) requires full street improvements for all adjacent rights-of-way for,
within, and dedicated by a plat.
The City can modify street improvements for new plats if there are practical difficulties in carrying out
the provisions of the Street Improvement ordinance. The Modification Procedures, as defined in
Section 4-9-250D, clearly states the criteria for approval by the Department Administrator. In order for
a modification to be approved, the Department Administrator must find that a special individual reason
make's the strict letter of this'Ordinance impractical, that the modification is in conformity with the
intent and purpose of this Ordinance; and that such modification:
a) Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and
maintainability intended by this ordinance, based upon sound engineering judgment; and
b) Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinity; and
Renton City Ha[I 9 i o55 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057. • rentonwa.gov
Mr. Torre Redd"ng
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
Page 2of3 ,
c) Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and
d) Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended, and
e) Will not create adverse impacts to other properties in the vicinity.
The request to reduce the right-of-way width to 37.5 feet cannot be approved. The code allows for
consideration of reduction to 42 feet in width in cases where the additional area provides for a more
reasonable lot configuration. The reduction to 42 feet in width is approved, but we fail to find
justification'to reduce the public right-of-way in this new residential neighborhood to a lesser standard.
The request to eliminate the sidewalk along'the southerly side of the new internal roadway can be
supported in this situation, provided there are equivalent value amenities provided in exchange for
these improvements. This request is granted, subject to the provision of an eight- foot (8') wide planting
strip, including landscaping and street trees, on the northerly side of the street with the new sidewalk.
The project site will be accessed by a single public street, which requires a cul-de-sac. The proposed
secondary access will mitigate the dead-end roadway configuration for emergency vehicles, but will not
be available for regular vehicles and delivery trucks. The requirement for a cul-de-sac is hereby waived,
subject to providing a full hammerhead turnaround in public right-of-way and emergency secondary
access through an approved gated system. The function of a hammerhead turnaround will be provided
with the extension of the street to the north property line, as addressed below.
The proposed street design for the plat fails to meet the requirement to extend the public street system
through the plat to the northerly property line. The property north of the site is large enough for future
platting, and will be connected to the public street system approved for this plat. The regbirement far
extension of the public street system through the proposed plat to the north property line remains. This
extension is to be provided'where Lot 8 is proposed, as an extension of the easterly north -south access
roadway.
The street improvements required for this preliminary plat, as modified in this decision, are as follows:
Westerly off-site access roadway between S. 55t St and the development site: This street section shall
be in dedicated public right-of-way. The pavement width can be reduced to 26 feet (26') in width,
allowing for parking on one side of the street. Curb and gutter shall be provided along the westerly edge
of the pavement_ An eight -foot (8') wide planting strip shall be provided along the west side of the
street, with a five-foot (5') wide sidewalk.
New internal street syste.m: This street section shall be in a minimum 42 -foot width right-of-way.
Additional right-of-way is also required at ail the intersections and turns in the roadway configuration.
These radius dedications shall be for a 15 -foot radius. The pavement width can be reduced to 26 feet in
width, allowing for parking on one side of the street. Both sides of the street shall be improved with
curb and gutter. A sidewalk is not required on the southerly side of the new street. The -face of the curb
shall be installed three feet (3') from the southerly edge of the right-of-way. A five-foot (5') wide
sidewalk shall be provided along the northerly and "outside" portion of the new internal street, with an
Mr. Tom Redding
Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
Page 3 of 3
eight -foot (8') planting strip. The planting strip is to be landscaped, including street trees. Street
lighting meeting code with required lighting levels shall be provided on the new internal street system.
Street extension to nbrth property line: A public street is required -in the approximate location -of
proposed Lot B. This street shall include a minimum of 42 feet in right-of-way. The street improvements
for this extension shall include 25 feet of pavement, and curb and gutter along both sides of the street.
Sidewalk's are required along both sides of this street section, both five feet (5') in width. The sidewalk
on the east side of the street can be constructed adjacent to the new curb. The west side of the street
shall include a five-foot (5') planting strip landscaped with street trees.
Easterly off-site access roadway between S. 55th St and the development site: This street Section is
initially to be used for secondary emergency. access through a private roadway easement. The
pavement shall be a minimum of 20 feet in width through this roadway section. An emergency access
gate, approved by the Renton Eire Department, can be installed where this roadway enters the new
plat. If this private easement is replaced in the future with dedicated public right-of-way, the
emergency access gate shall be removed. A note to this effect is to be included on the final plat.
You have x4 days from the date.of this letter to appeal the administrative determination in accordance
with City code. Appeals are to be filed in writing; with the City Clerk, and require a filing fee in the
amount of $250.00. Appeals must be filed with the City Clerk before Tuesday, November 24, 2009, at
5:00 P.M.
You may contact Kayren Kittrick at (425) 430-7299 if you have any questions or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
r
Neil Watts, Director
Development Services Division
cc: Alex Pietsch, Community & Economic Development Administrator
Chip Vincent, Planning Director
Kayren Kittrick, Development Engineering Supervisor
Jerry Wasser, Associate Planner
r"flu.r-, --z S,Er: R WE RCT SCM£: I = POM P.C. r'C4 TA " I . Pl _M2 M 16M
Na. I REVISION I 6Y I DATE I APPR
1--30• I P. -.M...
Balms & Holmberg Inc.
a 1r 018 a 3 a t a u v1l0 Ra
mr raoMr amr nm, w ,..,mmrn, rnn
WILSON PARK
BOUNDARY/TOPOGRAPHY MAP
04/27/09
2697-001
I _ N00 X8'48 "E 2SS.01 ' r
u II
II
U
rn_
Z
4 1I1 q°
nn
e
O
70 1
1 Nf. W. 194, S.E. 114, S.E. r4PER XCSP6742 f 7
c---207.10o - a0~
0
r
G 710
ps-
8
dri4`c `' — - — — — w,• —= _ , - 611
r
25
274- 2&G
f
2.11.. 26,9
Bozo 250 - -;.. --__.'` -
mj _ _- "270
v
hl
5t 27t
260 _ _ n q y \ q I III ` N--A
280
r111 rr'
1r --_____ - - -"
56
q.. ... Ivl a= -'_._ W ?so r1 1 fir`! /} `
crai
W-- -
w , ! f ! r l7 26s - _ - - a _ _„ - .',q5,
a
I -.....
57
66'
z -a
4hL
r
C,,
m
50058'48 W 209^93' = io = o'h p00
a _
bo
cs oo to
couc Fr Bt OCK wau - w v . _ _ _ 3o2
300
MO I
b
o - -'
r Z t
ji0E -y
306
I 3
r O --
II
C$'
a", -..364310
a0.
rn q -v, 3j0nSf2-_c`I312
Ln
a _
x0E-___.'~' -._--314
2 ti _.. N ,•. _ rte:
9i1G
V
r-.
y `
0
w -
320 1
i y_ __ ------ ---- - - -- __
32
a, •_ __
1'A'^ '
O _ ti : o _-.. -"' ___._ 325 _'
I'ttJR!+
f-,-_
y.
a1_" _--_
r73.
174
G)
IR
CCNC MLL 330 4 N'
W
m-
OZ4 / _
y- - "
f -
r gL to t„
En
94F349
350-
b w
La 70
cc OD
n z',,
J .; 1 !1
J!
fT {•
I, m _ _
J . _ -
13
X7"1
oyt3y
YI
SI
S01 7,3'42'W 2676. TO' (CALCD) - \27i 09
viJLL7
eras kf
gyp} O
t13
No
w
TA=T RU. S
z y
a
y
b
r
a
v
10280 AWE S.E.
Ng' PaaX
No
w
TA=T RU. S
z y
a
y
b
r
a
v
10280 AWE S.E.
rw.e - 2ms-0 z xKr: ROT 61R: ttDT SfxE: t01ID WER VXL. Y S &- " NP. Y]l6-902 W. M
C. \76002687-001\Aw9\2687-001-FNG- 047709 dwg O5/q4/C9 02 14 39 PAI PDT
VYIL50N PARK 04/27/09
a 12 *
SH Seim Irr
3 L51 RVSIQNS, AW ROAD TQ NORTH it 3 *8lV R
Ofnc.
GENERALIZED UTILITIES/DRAINAGE
r°
1 T I WALL CONTROLICONCEPTUAL 2587-441A!
NO. REVISION 6Y pAT£ APPR ~ GRADING/LANDSCAPING PLAN 2 's
I
m •`I -
lhr
z
n a't.
A G U v
y
mgti'L ti - - y h ,,;f. ' / q -c
Y r"•'
rL >u^Tl i
1 I
n r
sn+ -
I
t'' ' k'3C3 ' i
g +
n. _ ' - C / 1'y `: -"
1-'+--
i- N 1'N N 9 I Ci T}' W '
794', S.E. 114, SF i ~
NMI
m
t?ti
I
w
7 I
250 - 2I '' .' ' z, _ J - - - -
7R
752
G_ . _. - _.. - . -rte- y1 , \ i __p n'
I+1nor = — 27P
0 I 1
mor0
iG: - - _.. _..... .-. ` ---------- - Baa
266
5.66
o 266
j -4
i
I
302 —
o6ti
cn
3:)oL. I I I I I M rn
LL
Ln i
308 _
rc0
304 4\ .Ln~'•- 310
In
rp,... .. ._ r'n
w '-• v
14Y -
I -ti" _ s. -- 312
I g •' a cn I - m
ls-
r r---- `
ata
O xnb ~ I i ( I i4 F Ns18
rn 20
0----r' -
32'q W
J
728
J zG
1 F
v _ -- 3- 4 _
Z Z3J4
336
c ~ '
ns'
tfi
q
I7
o
I ti3I n T
3A
I S ` '7'f p`'` in l-
o coil ..
IL 1340 O
I' I. n
m ;
I
H
I _y
S""J'42"W 2676.1Q' (c.41_c'o)
z
li
jA
9
r rn l I
I
I
J't
Nb r-yN a
SmTra I ty€
A oO
qvy
H w V - ;
NO.
bb^ -
Nl.? NN*-
Mo.;m
V
Un
o
u02ul
Ll fo
C (NCO I g m O [ SVr (NCO m
O %Q:12 O
m $ g n1y1mpFrl
9R'T
4 n gC' r N Y
a
a
r~
s 1CLL WILLf
sip
e z p AAmro
I P
y
QHS
1
i
n
h Al
4
R• r
a
c' i1 i11
q '' m
µ
y
gL. ,
r q
1 VI
t
V P _
P
Rol y Fy n O n z
o
y
IH ro
y
C -, kr r' u
2r
NoppLV
5:\251)0\2&157-Om\d"\2687--001-ENG-042709, dwq 05/D4/UB 02:44:39 I'M P41
SJR ''
30 .
Reims Holmberg Inc.
WILSON PARK
04/27/09
1 1IJZIQ1 j : X G[ II 1 R a. a a t r a T O H a PRELIMINARY PLAT MAP
1 LOT RE'AWHS. hop WALL GE7l&S JEE I/2J/v uaan _ _ e n 1', :" „' e' "s' 2667-001
N0. REVISION BY 4ATE MPR "m 1 1
J 4 IKI
WO 58 48T 288.01 '
I
n
r
I
o I
v--------
fQ,,
I1 I I
I
i
I
I1I
II
o'
I ;
I
i
1 X q
rb
N
W G 41Ws
u
tion..
N
w
mob;
I a m v
I
E. UNE, W. 794', +S.E- t/4, S.F. ;
1/4 PER !(CSP 644217Fy _________-_-_____.,___
y_
hX70 58 '48 "E 207!81 '_
7.8p' 198.20'
R-14
j '
D ti
N o
I1I
f S Xf• t$
r mss' 66
4
IOd
cs
flOCE- y
I
CSA \
C
1
1 A1
A
rp=
Ali)
Q- - - - -
vi szC i mz XOP21r$n
Z o)'
IIf/ If
I' m vyo'da•3 r'r
c~
q
z
O
L4
W
C C ZL
e
U z yt jnE
I C'y
z
o+'•
50113421V2675.10'
318.01'
Ln ti--- 1CALCDI
fQ,,
I1 I I
I
i
I
I1I
II
o'
I ;
I
i
1
rb
6r
w
mob;
I a m v
I
E. UNE, W. 794', +S.E- t/4, S.F. ;
1/4 PER !(CSP 644217Fy _________-_-_____.,___
y_
hX70 58 '48 "E 207!81 '_
7.8p' 198.20'
R-14
j '
D ti
N o
f S Xf• t$
U 2 —1 fr. Q: 4
En IG m
I m
14~
r1
O Z• v "
m I I # 1 V
v t N I I I p
1 Ln I I a I o
of
w > II
II
U I
I u. m I I a, rn I I •
I
o
e I '
o f I I
y
I I rt I
I .i s.. XI I I
L -75.40` - ;l m
LL
rr------- ti
rn I I "ij
p I
o
oo f f p . 7 o
o I N I I ^a. }
I1 . 0
1
II
L -75.4 - 944'
m I I is I
o ! oCo I I o ter
N I
8n
u=
o I I I ,I IXI! a I
I Na
o
rn
pyr`
V fa
7$.44• _
53
a N5D.00' 54, DO' 50.40•-, 57.
f ----- 41 - ---
r I I
m I I
W A
I
m
I
A I J
n I
I I I
I I Fk-
I r I I I I
1I
L ------ A L ------- ------J `_--____J
50.04• 50.00' 50.04' 57.00•
r
Apy7 R5 a nA.lf
ASA k
x1+
1
6
0
i
rb
0
i
0
r"]N wI 2516-052
I
mr: I R1R plat AMr71 IPML KS M Ae xp M] M CP. M
G'\2 F00 26R7 001\(I-9\2687 dwg US1C41C9 01',11.39 VM Ui
1 N 1W O4E/RENTS
Iu I LEY -325. 0
329.4 J 1
ASH
w .a
WILSON PARK3REASELOT12EF4/7 10
EVC
Balm@ & Holmberg Inc.
318-38
2 LOT REVISIONS A00 ROAD TO NORTH JEF )1111410 ° MSK
E
I'
1I
317.76
II R 6 2 N A! R 5 R I! U R v 17 0 R 6
1,I ROAD PROFILE1LOTftY1SIONSADDWkUQUAILSJEF1yrsry
6.3
T
xon
r+'*oo+Ao
Iml awlW rAi [Mly M-1eY
NO. REV&ON DY DATE APPR
g 11FpB
B 4 O A l
I ELE4= 115.77 S o
323.7
a
F4' v i
315.14
I
D cs: 3+1 92
VCE: 314 69
g
3 1 I
23(1.3 S STA: 0+00 M%E 23x.0 25 0
0
OFCENTERLINE S 102ND 5 T
s
RV
g a x x o
n
m yym7oG
pplA NF=
pCZ o R
VMVm
Io
1ZOn
o
Ig 6gE
W r
a
S
S
STA, 4+73
Y LIN
1 N 1W O4E/RENTS
Iu I LEY -325. 0
329.4 J 1
322.0
w .a
EVC Y •+17.62
318-38E
317.76
6.3
T
xon
STA. 16992 RG g 11FpB
B 4 O A l
I ELE4= 115.77 S o
323.7
I
F4' v i
315.14
I
D cs: 3+1 92
VCE: 314 69
A-4
3 1 I
I
315,070 I
I
s
RV ss
l
VCE: 315.32 a 5
PROP ERTY
4 4x
1310-8
315.42 1 Yi
1
Fn
O N
240.6
VCS 2+23
VGE: 315.24
244.74
1
1
4
314.3
314.91
I
Ls1
314.7
314.25
III EVGS' 1+3
EVCE. 313.
1
r 5 ipso
A
14.13514.1y13.49
243.2
I
I -
f v ++
249.24
OVCS: 0+75 c
fI AVC[- 312.05
f
I
313.0312,11
1
1f
VLS: 2+25
1
G E.OF-. f ER15T1 LEVE -111.1
310.7
1
IVCE: 251.49
g a x x o
n
m yym7oG
pplA NF=
pCZ o R
VMVm
Io
1ZOn
o
Ig 6gE
W r
a
S
S
s
1
5 95 ' 4 P
J j i
N m N
92 ROAD 8-
7+39.24 ROAD A
c o
ELEY-316.77
Tw .a
6.3
2 4 1
Il
I
A-4
I
Il11
240.6
244.74
1Ls1lI5
243.2 I -
249.24
51
VLS: 2+25
L
IVCE: 251.491I
11
245.7
25357
IfIfI s
I x
I v
4 1
239.37
54.
PROPERTY UNE
265.87
s
r o 3+75
le "
E 268.48
oon
36273.24
277.2
B
E
1
6.9
29 .74
11
1
301.8 t
303.24
5
BVCS: 6+25
BVCE: 06.98
581D.
3i0-5
314.58
1I E4G5: 7n 25
1EYCEI31f. 44
323.8 1 1 k STA. 6
s
1
5 95 ' 4 P
J j i
N m N
92 ROAD 8-
7+39.24 ROAD A
c o
ELEY-316.77
FX E, 2566-M V. PLOT MME NOT 90uG MfL4 PMEI 21M 1 rt M M I Sx
G:\2690\2687-901 \dwy\2687-GU1-ENG-342709.4 wg 05;04/09 C2:44:39 PM PCT
ppN sip
vv 1/X
i
O
n.nr m
r-ao•
eW i'
P P
04/27/09
w5H
r
WILSON PARK
7 REVISE LOT 12 EF 10
Z b
N
Balms & Holmberg Inc.
i }
2 LOT REMRONS, ADD ROAD 10 KORIH JEF 01/11/K
e
MSK
0
s N a 1 x E E It e Y e V 11 V E Y o R e
Iln neenn nxvr eanee raven rXnmme. XXX.n Wpl..l. PROFILES &
1
1 LST RENSIOFXS MD Whl,l, pESAILS JEF 1 23 YISM 1 ^ M (4N) M J") W- 2687 - DO 1
NO. REVISION 8Y DATE APPR +'+ 101 r CROSS-SECTIONS
0
N
4
w
4 5
N N N
A
N U LnOOI EA
M x
O
O O O OO
OO
A
O
O O
X I
ox
x
0
0
I
Ry
ppN sip
vv 1/X
i
O
N P P
r
Z b
N
i }
x
0
1
OO4
lr
o
0
0
u
O
X
i
O
z
O
N N • v M1.1 N O
O O O O O
O O O O O O
0
A
p 4
S
O
0
I
In
ppN sip
vv 1/X
i
O
N P P
r
00
N
z
x
0
1
0
N
4
w
mm
000
M x
Eu
n
u
O
X
i
O
z
O
N N • v M1.1 N O
O O O O O
O O O O O O
0
A
p 4
S
O
0
M
W V+ W W W
A O O O O 4
O O O
pO
O O O O
P
a
p 0
X• I
N p
O
V
N
0
I
In
ppN sip
vv 1/X
i
O
N P P
r
N
z
x
0
A
0
N
4
w
mm
000
M x
M
W V+ W W W
A O O O O 4
O O O
pO
O O O O
P
a
p 0
X• I
N p
O
V
N
0
A
I
In
ppN sip
vv 1/X
i
O
N P P
r
N
z
x
0
A
A
L.XwJsO
0 0
0
y In
ppN sip
vv 1/X
L.XwJsO
0 0
WILL,
N
4-0M
tob 0
Das
n=
m
u
Om
M
z -n
I (/)
Om
z0
Y
co
D-
2
z
G)
N
Ow
zZ
z
G)
01
M
i
w
z
x
0
A
N
4
000
M x
WILL,
N
4-0M
tob 0
Das
n=
m
u
Om
M
z -n
I (/)
Om
z0
Y
co
D-
2
z
G)
N
Ow
zZ
z
G)
01
M
ilF}NME: 25etr!-W2 IRE*'_ RD' GIC mm vu s- ITM P P SML. m Sit: CR m
001 7 -001 -ENG -042709 Awq 75/C4/09 02:44',39 PM PDT
J REVISE LOT 12 JEF14/T/10 WSN
30'
I--1
Balms & Holmber Inc. WILSON PARK
TREE INVENTORY/RETENTION PLAN
04/27/09
ram
2 LOT REVISIONS, ADD ROAD TO MORIN JEF JI '"
rI
MSN
1 LOT REVISIONS ADI) WALL OETAM JEF 11/2.3/01 'sN
N0. REVISION By WE I ARPR I .h.oNa J
e H 0 111E 611E ! S U E T i 7 0 1! !
a11 u •
1L 1-M 2687-001
YW 5 5
WA
0'38'48 "E
IU_ _ __
it _,-_.-._'"
I - I..a .. '• '# 756
L - //
A-
47
240 -fir; __... -_
Ocz
F
a-
J`_ . __ - - f 1 tr.
2701
r
ion
250 _... - - - _. _ l f '<- 2 - _ - -- A 27,,,
274
J5a
ib .,r - -- - . _. ,.._—rum~
2J'
t
260 _.. _ ._.--....._......._ n o /.
2808
80
ok-
g
A-5
1, zRa
77 -- -- _
8 0 2
S62j0 .. f - - _ 297 - - -` -•. 29a
V
71
N " -
Im Ho
CDCONCRUEBLOCKWALL
F
aQ,
a- l' 30?
a.
Doc— 1 mCI - 4 N
300 - __
ZDSaDS
i
iH. 1• -]
I,,, -
I'
I F— r -_ - 304 -...-
404
M
o~~~-
3102
Lr
310 /..
31 -N --_.a_ 3r7 V
314 m
a ,
p'' ld... , -• " ,-
l4 i.,3'1 ;L-`.-' " ~ _--
4-_'_ _
316dUc§ Z n
PC
QLD `
4
f
v_
3701.
R F., b 322
r ' + ch 324
I
W b Icy
I`
I p I
i1
go
g54-
I
4-
1
N'
gs4llQ
Mv; T .y m
F ycn^c
p -
N, U
pCm; AOR
NT -T2,2
Oxi
u
Ng mo
o E
N€ up
I S
326
32R
MATER
Z Z
COA'C:. RET, WALL ..... - -----` _ - _ _-_ 3,2
Zjti.l 11 Fr ...- - f_-"' -__ -'-.- -- _ ._ -_.334
1 1 %
J/
r =_
III
9q" ._ _ `\_ _
I --336 0
ZZ
d EA r4 r.5. / / [r" i r -
9 _ 3411 - ` . 340 ~ Ln fi b
u o
a7`•
I'llQ
7 / ' ,'J
c.:, 350
o
o ca r -I4`r I/ I \ I I z ' -
U- cn '
Jif '- --_
cc- lo R.
360 m
50113'42"N 2676.10' (CALC'D) 0f .09
44..N4Z:;. N h;I;) N N N b y-' -'--:. .=._-2i W4uat i atiNti
FPKI V a Lna [.. !+-. p!G4 V AL az
Nra-+raNlu-tubcn__-__yr__.a__drn[arnN aOO>V ah Aam v v. aqm aNah[noln-+
l
VFn wwau u[f n (.,[i uci w%aa-'-'i +u t-r'iu-',.
a N--.O!O tigcni ty !_.4!94 os cna rN _.om 4acni
41%x r.G o.N-amomwrn(,, (gyp[,,,b.-. N...G my COOOOIbmOOaO.i 4 .
mtk.Z7..ril
rqi
0"21 Tl
K25 Z
O wwwww ep m y m 7ii 71 aaa010
vmMIvm I E ,o o mo aw: vtimfl m" 4ao No mm o Na
N0 0'S8'48'E 288.01'
I rI II
I
L L t `, 7 72 I W I I
ch
rv1`i
1 f I',
r 240. — —
E. LINE, W. 794 S.F. 1/4, S.E.
1141/4 PER KCSP 674217
y7, -- 7---- :^ -- -L:- Imo' -g•jo
0'38'48 "E
IU_ _ __
it _,-_.-._'"
I - I..a .. '• '# 756
L - //
A-
47
240 -fir; __... -_
Ocz
F
a-
J`_ . __ - - f 1 tr.
2701
r
ion
250 _... - - - _. _ l f '<- 2 - _ - -- A 27,,,
274
J5a
ib .,r - -- - . _. ,.._—rum~
2J'
t
260 _.. _ ._.--....._......._ n o /.
2808
80
ok-
g
A-5
1, zRa
77 -- -- _
8 0 2
S62j0 .. f - - _ 297 - - -` -•. 29a
V
71
N " -
Im Ho
CDCONCRUEBLOCKWALL
F
aQ,
a- l' 30?
a.
Doc— 1 mCI - 4 N
300 - __
ZDSaDS
i
iH. 1• -]
I,,, -
I'
I F— r -_ - 304 -...-
404
M
o~~~-
3102
Lr
310 /..
31 -N --_.a_ 3r7 V
314 m
a ,
p'' ld... , -• " ,-
l4 i.,3'1 ;L-`.-' " ~ _--
4-_'_ _
316dUc§ Z n
PC
QLD `
4
f
v_
3701.
R F., b 322
r ' + ch 324
I
W b Icy
I`
I p I
i1
go
g54-
I
4-
1
N'
gs4llQ
Mv; T .y m
F ycn^c
p -
N, U
pCm; AOR
NT -T2,2
Oxi
u
Ng mo
o E
N€ up
I S
326
32R
MATER
Z Z
COA'C:. RET, WALL ..... - -----` _ - _ _-_ 3,2
Zjti.l 11 Fr ...- - f_-"' -__ -'-.- -- _ ._ -_.334
1 1 %
J/
r =_
III
9q" ._ _ `\_ _
I --336 0
ZZ
d EA r4 r.5. / / [r" i r -
9 _ 3411 - ` . 340 ~ Ln fi b
u o
a7`•
I'llQ
7 / ' ,'J
c.:, 350
o
o ca r -I4`r I/ I \ I I z ' -
U- cn '
Jif '- --_
cc- lo R.
360 m
50113'42"N 2676.10' (CALC'D) 0f .09
44..N4Z:;. N h;I;) N N N b y-' -'--:. .=._-2i W4uat i atiNti
FPKI V a Lna [.. !+-. p!G4 V AL az
Nra-+raNlu-tubcn__-__yr__.a__drn[arnN aOO>V ah Aam v v. aqm aNah[noln-+
l
VFn wwau u[f n (.,[i uci w%aa-'-'i +u t-r'iu-',.
a N--.O!O tigcni ty !_.4!94 os cna rN _.om 4acni
41%x r.G o.N-amomwrn(,, (gyp[,,,b.-. N...G my COOOOIbmOOaO.i 4 .
mtk.Z7..ril
rqi
0"21 Tl
K25 Z
O wwwww ep m y m 7ii 71 aaa010
vmMIvm I E ,o o mo aw: vtimfl m" 4ao No mm o Na
S TV (iNL01
Ck-
y
S
Z y
N
K
s 'ab• roam
t,
R s g a -
8
8 aw
HIS
lit
IMni moa
66
L-
Udlljj .0;,9zso H,2RfC-Jos
CQ BCE
aF
t £
Ln
ao
y ,
kri C3
ZO
J __ __ i !
J
N
Q i 4azam
a" i °I."
gPE
Z
W g z
az 4 1w
mc"a'us3r
S I I I I
n .man
v
z rr
Kc
Z
a-
cor
b
WZOLC
W
oaf
r l O O rr, V Baa
naM H307e 11a
3p0 a rn . E5-500 M, 91'. 8S-0('15
o y,
LL
L4.J ---------
Bt _ g -+= obi _ - , • _ , -- -
a_ _ - --_-------- cN
rn,, --~- - --N- o
Q',------'__ o9ZT . aaz _ _
3,>_ _ 'rrn llll' _ as-
mm
CGZ
OLE _ _ _ _ - _ `
Y ` .
r:'///i,/- r ' • ^ '. _ _" ~ .
i `'
v ., _ _ "
ti A -
O4
r-__--' -- ~__`-
M• _
inti --'_
Y
n''. _ -__.. '-yam-
S ._ __- _ -- _..o -
LLS - ~`
y -
m~•/1. fit- /' "- ,
ti
a_ _ - LE7 _Saa? _ __ g
LtZ6 9 dSJfll2t d. F
r-
2~`'
Y ILn
j" , Oi
S L ....,.
HddV Rvu A8 NQISV3N ON
100-L84Z ani ,
dM AHdVa90d0.L/AHV(]N[109 ..a. ada..0 imr...Lao. +rn.e G.. G.
W: I : S,fYe7q ll x OqY SLIpIS Aja ,U,
Y a G A i A 0 0 a i a a a i X I a X a Jlr' DWf l Ji' MKI, OL dYOM OOY "Sma SK3a ,Ol Z
so/Lz/
rum )
IHVd NO$11M au1 io IoH 13 uWWe ."
OEL_
a,`
W
m, mo-Ms2 a, a •q aA ar alw. mx0,1 T Ji a0'La 3xN xOL aarc xm-MGA ,mriv
af
t siyy
0 Er
x
3
ppgFP
ZY 7K
oYY ZZ nIJZOFN;J.
m
u
kii F
S
IR,=
u$¢iz
8 W)
o S€ av mum
am Y o
y >
O 1a `
ft
L L i
h
jjz n z JI T
44 4 441YUv"rK iyyl m rp& m•V 4 jd)
t:
j maLi
Nh h hhM1ryhh
N 0Fy .' 'i
W. _ - el?'zAZ` (Q'77VJ) , DF'9L92 d05- '
C g
Ysn
N bl
y
x
V
I ' _
OK
gg-
r'' I ` da
a 8g c
Lion-_-
OYC II -Q 'S' a
35,
4'f w , b • ,A I
htii
OLR yai -1 1 I .-1.r .` ,I __ wu ¢ II w
K 370
17
t1 _
T _
I
l
Z• ,
r
oce
i s x. - %
r - - - - _ - I
o - _ -
la
W 0 00 rn- alrc0 rn In co
LL Z
W
L
z
N-
Doi
VJ `
n
I I I I nm '
L
LL
f
6el
vel- O6
a''e - -1_ J_I$a, I11I
y•
C OBS -- -- -
a
o -9z fPisP
Q
r --
v — i w Si • -+
mN _ - ..__ - - - -
rye
oz
CD
akz P54
j ieq 9 S7N Hyd 7i - - I
A
1I ro asz 3 ec. s aonr
I M
Gaa-ta9z ivnid3ON00/10UH00
3 dNidaa/s ilnun a zi d 3H3
6q/cz/o-o Tadd NOS11M
nin •
aM®w [MI iN . 1-r1. l/•rl it
YNE/ . rNp11 •II
w
9 Oil A a • Yrl>> M 10111
oul BaaquiloH q owleg
I
mw.. llddY 3l70 IH
HSM_
1
M4l1 l 11 S3
a-
17 f
7
X9
f
I
F'!
I I s a 2 Z0
I
1 V yJ
Q
may #
R1 LLIT^ l In
W U
1I ro asz 3 ec. s aonr
I M
Gaa-ta9z ivnid3ON00/10UH00
3 dNidaa/s ilnun a zi d 3H3
6q/cz/o-o Tadd NOS11M
nin •
aM®w [MI iN . 1-r1. l/•rl it
YNE/ . rNp11 •II
w
9 Oil A a • Yrl>> M 10111
oul BaaquiloH q owleg
I
mw.. llddY 3l70 IH
HSM_
1
M4l1 l 11 S3
a-
17 f
7
X9
f
I
U~
2 Z01V yJ
Q
may #
R1 LLIT^ l In
W U Lox
N 10 F
NOISIA38 ON
10d hd K Sr'Z0 60/v0/50 B+p 60l Zr0-[,rr f-ICN-L`d9L\fi'"u\1GU-L99Z1,009Z\'0
o is alrlRz cu Ir Ini W TJVM 1011. saUal 7r Ji lalr YW lu'u hila mo.-n¢u 'rl..gw
Y
a
tl h
tl
N
q X
w
4J
7
l,.,
r/ i.R..
Z Z
Cf)0
N
ZZ
2
Y7
U2
w
V
F
ALLy
Z
V
w
U)
w
2
LL0
Z
a
F It
o f2 $
I
L 014
d'11'3 grx
91;1+ 11
M ?{
4'
i' If 37A31
02 121
YI
SL L 513 I1
1
G9'L l[ 3 aAB IfI
I
9 f
S1+0 'SOA9
Y II
ON
NddY 31V0
z 1.
A8 NOISN3i! ON
d3r SZ3a rnYLM My Si =Lk3H 1.0'1 I100--L89 Z'etl'"'
I
IHVd NOSIIM
i'Yl
I£ MA3
II
II
Jr 1uaa1 OL Lrvaa aw 'se10LSIA311 Lot x
4C -,l
nx
seW i0na
V
I
K11,0/90 5.-P 6;4x Y0-3N3-1110-iPgE%&,\Ia0O
Yl
wr m rm-rea aar Yu . z nx+ aawll alma Ivu yea wa rm cm --.we gnu
sx+ 1snAa
16'YLYl
c c1r 33\ I
n ry IrSL+x S]A
9'1.6c
1
1 a< Z£'SIC DA 1 1
CL+Z S
i
I
YL SSZ
I
5\
1\
e'I
Be Yl£ 77A +
Z6" I+C .519
s
LL'CZ£
1L'SI
Z
1
Y qy
Yi 4
Y
ON 8'L9
e oCL
f
ti\\
WE tic
CL
h '
D,gzc
8£'B1.L 3
x6'LI+Y i D,A3 -
t
9" a
k
t
I
SZ£ -A31
6r a9Z 3
r
SLK ', 3
1
S
b
OY'
S'
1
s
11
41
a•Lsx n 1
1
SZ+Z ZAN\
l
tI1t5
i
5
1
1Illl tZ'OY
4 h
L
l
1
9f'
g -M -A - o' srr
1 s .BI S 31111X31mm
i
I
2 ONF<
gFr$
Fw
o
6-pC
3Fa gm7y
F mFFF cl
0 Wn Go
S 5v'zz
1 r o f2 $
I
L 014
d'11'3 grx
91;1+ 11
M ?{
4
02 121
G9'L l[ 3 aAB IfI
I
9 f
S1+0 'SOA9
Y II
NddY 31V0
z 1.
A8 NOISN3i! ON
d3r SZ3a rnYLM My Si =Lk3H 1.0'1 I100--L89 Z'etl'"'
I
IHVd NOSIIM
i'Yl
I£ MA3
II
II
Jr 1uaa1 OL Lrvaa aw 'se10LSIA311 Lot x
4C -,l
nx
Z+l 'SaA3
I
K11,0/90 5.-P 6;4x Y0-3N3-1110-iPgE%&,\Ia0O
Yl
wr m rm-rea aar Yu . z nx+ aawll alma Ivu yea wa rm cm --.we gnu
Ln
16'YLYl
c c1r 33\ I
n ry IrSL+x S]A
1
1 a< Z£'SIC DA 1 1
CL+Z S
I
I
I e'I
Be Yl£ 77A +
Z6" I+C .519
s
LL'CZ£
1L'SI A3'13 y1
Y qy
Yi 4ON8'L9
f
WE ticD,gzc
8£'B1.L 3
x6'LI+Y i D,A3 -
t
k
t
I
SZ£ -A31 I „ r
L+Y 'YL 1
1 r o f2 $ UWE M-0 an+0 :YLS 0
M ?{
4
9 f
Im1.
weoa nw NddY 31V0
z 1.
A8 NOISN3i! ON
d3r SZ3a rnYLM My Si =Lk3H 1.0'1 I100--L89 Z'etl'"'
IHVd NOSIIM
e a a i a i a no • e >t a a x l a 11
auk Bisg wla}I g eu a8
i
AM of 11 1
saara
Jr 1uaa1 OL Lrvaa aw 'se10LSIA311 Lot x
4C -,l
nx
sopa/
vas
1Gd 11J 15£ 1,1, ZO K11,0/90 5.-P 6;4x Y0-3N3-1110-iPgE%&,\Ia0O
wr m rm-rea aar Yu . z nx+ aawll alma Ivu yea wa rm cm --.we gnu
Z Z
co 0
N
z
W
r—
M
IdEA
LL
0
z
0
0
11
CL—i
0
o S'b5Z 4-
A4
a
n n n n
S Y
I
I
N
Lij
ma..r NddV 31Yo Ag
c
G
s,n,3o „NM u ,o, ,
Us
o t C4
sr claLan a.,. -9. A. ..
o a 1 i I 1 i N 1 9 11 i
sem
15M1 ll k AT HLNM1N Ol OVON 00Y 51gGN351 !O} L
i
0O4
Pao I
out Bjegwloy 1V vwjog
pw
i
4 94Z
NHVd NOSTM
z
0 1
I
I 4 46Z
i0d "d KIe4 ZG
s s s s s
0 0 0
bnG-6,147k6-GN3-IJG-LB9Z\,6MP loG-L89Z\,G092\ J
m m
a
ms ]k my ys0 ,Ov
J_IJJJ
WO -pc - m M
J 9't6L
LL
0
z
0
0
11
CL—i
0
o S'b5Z 4-
A4
a
n n n n
S Y
swoil03s-ssoao
N
Lij
ma..r NddV 31Yo Ag
c
G
s,n,3o „NM u ,o, ,
Us
o t C4
sr claLan a.,. -9. A. ..
o a 1 i I 1 i N 1 9 11 i
sem
15M1 ll k AT HLNM1N Ol OVON 00Y 51gGN351 !O} L
i
0O4
Pao I
out Bjegwloy 1V vwjog
pw
i
NHVd NOSTM
z
0 1
i
i0d "d KIe4 ZG
s s s s s
0 0 0
bnG-6,147k6-GN3-IJG-LB9Z\,6MP loG-L89Z\,G092\ J
m m
a
ms ]k my ys0 ,Ov
II
WO -pc - m M
aoE F
ap 16tga
x¢o zam
n n n n
S Y
swoil03s-ssoao
Lij
ma..r NddV 31Yo Ag
c
G
s,n,3o „NM u ,o, ,
Us
o t C4
sr claLan a.,. -9. A. ..
o a 1 i I 1 i N 1 9 11 i
sem
15M1 ll k AT HLNM1N Ol OVON 00Y 51gGN351 !O} L
i
0O4
Pao
r
I
out Bjegwloy 1V vwjog
i
NHVd NOSTM
0 1
i0d "d KIe4 ZG
s s s s s
0 0 0
bnG-6,147k6-GN3-IJG-LB9Z\,6MP loG-L89Z\,G092\ J
m m
a
ms ]k my ys0 ,Ov WO -pc - m M
O
N
r.
QY\ i
aoE F
ap 16tga
x¢o zam
n
0
n
g
r
rn
o
a
0
s
n n n n
S Y
swoil03s-ssoao
Lij
ma..r NddV 31Yo Ag
c
G
s,n,3o „NM u ,o, ,
Us
o t C4
sr claLan a.,. -9. A. ..
o a 1 i I 1 i N 1 9 11 i
sem
15M1 ll k AT HLNM1N Ol OVON 00Y 51gGN351 !O} L
i
0O4
Pao
r
I
n
0
n
g
r
rn
o
a
0
s
n n n n
S Y
swoil03s-ssoao
ma..r NddV 31Yo Ag
y
G
s,n,3o „NM u ,o, ,
8 S311JO !d IIVM sr claLan a.,. -9. A. ..
o a 1 i I 1 i N 1 9 11 i
sem
15M1 ll k AT HLNM1N Ol OVON 00Y 51gGN351 !O} L
out Bjegwloy 1V vwjog
i
NHVd NOSTM
0 1
i0d "d KIe4 ZG
s s s s s
0 0 0
bnG-6,147k6-GN3-IJG-LB9Z\,6MP loG-L89Z\,G092\ J
m m KGI p` Y1i 6u 1]Ui .0++ ms ]k my ys0 ,Ov WO -pc - m M
O
N
r.
QY\ i
n
0
n
g
r
rn
o
a
0
s
n n n n
S Y
swoil03s-ssoao
ma..r NddV 31Yo Ag
y
G
s,n,3o „NM u ,o, ,
8 S311JO !d IIVM sr claLan a.,. -9. A. ..
o a 1 i I 1 i N 1 9 11 i
sem
15M1 ll k AT HLNM1N Ol OVON 00Y 51gGN351 !O} L
out Bjegwloy 1V vwjog
i
NHVd NOSTM
0 1
i0d "d KIe4 ZG
s s s s s
0 0 0
g
X
X.
a
0
S o S $ o a
n n n n
S Y
swoil03s-ssoao
ma..r NddV 31Yo Ag
y
G
g
X
X.
a
0
S o S $ o a
n n n n
S Y
swoil03s-ssoao
ma..r NddV 31Yo Ag WiSIA3U '0N
goo—ossa s,n,3o „NM u ,o, ,
8 S311JO !d IIVM sr claLan a.,. -9. A. ..
o a 1 i I 1 i N 1 9 11 i 15M1 ll k AT HLNM1N Ol OVON 00Y 51gGN351 !O} L
out Bjegwloy 1V vwjogNHVdNOSTM
i0d "d KIe4 ZG w/kolgo bnG-6,147k6-GN3-IJG-LB9Z\,6MP loG-L89Z\,G092\ J
m m KGI p` Y1i 6u 1]Ui .0++ ms ]k my ys0 ,Ov WO -pc - m M
4`C4 n A
P PE --..O FF -¢1v 41 0Q' F:!.ti tT
V
P_ _'!_`° -
r
s Pa. an
R '
QF
Lt UG UVUI I<iV U Vl i4 UUV ffl Wop
vW top3-
phmi-Noo-
NNNN- hpph-r.--._.- AIhN
FFF`
tiPeg
AI`F n ti n b ^bib
U NoOh`yhN
hv.N NT ryxu w ryc.ry Mc,v
x N
N LLIU
W QW
Q d
LLJ
2 t C)0
Uoaa
j t1i L%
5
C-4 M = 0
o ora
Q=Yff
n
io
Holt°z
T. WNv 22
60 Zoe, . (n J7Y71 .11d 9[ Kok EI loS ' ^
ID'81E ------------- `-- ...w:
n
P±il EAP'Y d ed
117
Pr
i vwM_et11a'_
e _ Sr
i'li
cjg..
o
M
Zolf'
Vlv-----------------
ZUI
12
1LL
0 0
w c z
ti
1'-
tri Yr
4_
4g
I
04Z m tic
300
a
TY•
o
F2 NYmN
P±il EAP'Y d ed
117
Pr
i vwM_et11a'_
e _ Sr
i'li
cjg..
o
M
Zolf'
Vlv-----------------
2W_..1
1LL
0 0
w c z
ti
1'-
tri Yr
4_
4g
I
04Z m tic
300
iY a r_b m
4 '
L" EIZZION :- I
Z I OO
3q0
a
a .
I
n J
n z ro
o aw f
z
l
OOE _
X90
77trAl Y.a'J79 31327ON0,7 p,
i
1 yF i
asj. I
2W_..1
rl ¢
4g
I
04Z m tic
TY•
F2 NYmN
4 '
L" EIZZION :- I
Z I OO
3q0
a
a .
I
n J
n z ro
o aw f
z
l
OOE _
X90
77trAl Y.a'J79 31327ON0,7 p,
i
1 yF i
asj. I
yg
2,a ZiekY9 dSJN/U3d. .;:
3 63 s I
91
1 v 4
1 i iA _—
f—
pp
1c
it
I ` 161 1C — 1` f/
1 3 i I = _ - _ N'
I '' 0.0
tl
Z I
7.10 U
3 Bp.85 ODN-..---- --------- - -- - --- I
a
NV -1d N0liN31321/,kH01N3ANl 33HI—.1 '°
a _Mtl"_
aoAa as r c aaa oaa
I!!'dd NOSIIM •oul BjogwwH it Dull°H
tel. ®i
UOd Yid 6C VV CO i
NOISK36 'ON
ML30 1TYM 00/ IsWiSN3b L01 I
W L,ON of OVOM OOV 'SN015N3tl 101 L
60Ld60-)N3--100-i89ZVP\t00-f uaz`nn9Z\ 9
I
04Z m tic
TY•
F2 NYmN
yg
2,a ZiekY9 dSJN/U3d. .;:
3 63 s I
91
1 v 4
1 i iA _—
f—
pp
1c
it
I ` 161 1C — 1` f/
1 3 i I = _ - _ N'
I '' 0.0
tl
Z I
7.10 U
3 Bp.85 ODN-..---- --------- - -- - --- I
a
NV -1d N0liN31321/,kH01N3ANl 33HI—.1 '°
a _Mtl"_
aoAa as r c aaa oaa
I!!'dd NOSIIM •oul BjogwwH it Dull°H
tel. ®i
UOd Yid 6C VV CO i
NOISK36 'ON
ML30 1TYM 00/ IsWiSN3b L01 I
W L,ON of OVOM OOV 'SN015N3tl 101 L
60Ld60-)N3--100-i89ZVP\t00-f uaz`nn9Z\ 9
KL1 .
t f
Denis Law, Mayor
l
May 18, 2010
Shupe.Hohnberg, PE PLS _
Bairima & Holmberg
165 NE Juniper Street, Ste. 201
Issaquah; WA 98027
Re: ` Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
LUA=09=140, ECF, PP
Dear Mr. I461znberg:
This..office has reviewed your request for reconsideration concerning the elimination of one lot;.
Proposed Lot 12; from the plat.
The original plat would have required substantial regrading and very tall retaining walls along the
western boundary of the plat where Proposed.Lot 12 would.have been established: That plat -
would. haVe
late.
would.have required significantly. altering the terrain of an area designated as an "Urban .
Separator under the Zoning Code. The newproposal would relocate Proposed. Lot 12 to the east
and stairstep up the UrbanSeparator parcel's terrain using two 6 foot to 8 foot ;rockeries.
As noted in the original iecommendation ari Administrative Interpretation regarding the Urban
Separator scope.narrorwed the Code's overlay from 50%a ofthe-entire parcel to 50% of a portion of
the parcel. That interpretation appears to permit .development of Proposed Lot 12.: .
This office has reviewed the' original plat, the proposed modifications as well as the urban
separator, regulations and staffs'- administrative. interpretation. The public use and interest is :not
served by sacrificing the urban separator's purpose. The administrative interpretation, in this
case, overrules a node provisionresulting in a sacrificc of the urban separator's purpose. This
office understan ds what s taffwas trying to accomplish -in its interpretation of the. language
governing urban separators. in this area of -the City.: Butthe. intent in liberalizing the urban
separator limitations" as. they applied to this, property viwas not to neutralize those,regulations. As
implemented by. the applicant, the purposes of the urban separator succumb to the goal.of creating
an extra lot, Proposed Lot "i2, oriv6 - .topographically constrained property.. The extra lot
requires substantial modification of an area"thaf should remain as natural as possible. The attempt
to shoehorn in an additional lot by sacrificing the native state of the topography with engineered
rockeries and terraces remains :inappropriate.
So, .while the proposal -to shift. Proposed Lot 12 to the east does reduce the impact on the
properties to the `nest, it is still inappropriate.. The urban separator provisions should .be observed
and the applicant .should maintain.the natural aspects 4 the northwestern corner ofthis site. In
addition, protecting the natural slope saves more of the significant trees.
I055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 - (425).430-6515 R E lr Q lr
AHL AD 6F THF CURVE
This nanar mntt..inR 5(}%, rvr rxi malarial 3C}°/ neat rrmai imar - - ..
Encompass
ENGMEERING & SURVEYING
A L
Together with
Baima & Holmberg
April 6, 2010
Fred Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
Renton City Hall
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
RE: Wilson Park L UA -09149, PP, EGF
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
RECEIVH)
G-_EEii'S OFFI,' E
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100G of Renton's Municipal code, please
consider this letter a request for reconsideration of the April 0, 2010 recommendation to
the City Council for approval of the Wilson Park subdivision.
The reason for the reconsideration request is that information regarding Lot 12 is
available that was not available at the Hearing. At the Hearing, the possibility of flipping
Lot 12 and making the open space easement on the west side was raised, however, plans
were not available at the Hearing that would show the ramifications of the change. The
conceptual grading, drainage, utility and tree plans have now been revised to reflect the
change to Lot 12 and are hereby submitted with this letter in support of the
reconsideration request.
As it turns out, the revision to lot 12 has the following advantages:
The wall along the east property line of Lots 13 through 16, Geneva Court is
substantially reduced. Instead of a 200 ft long wall along the property lines, we
now have approximately 55 ft of wall.
Two stepped rockeries 6' to 8' in height would follow the alignment of the new
roadway across the westerly portion of Lot 12. The rockeries would then turn
north to allow a 10 ft wide ramp access the open space easement on the westerly
portion of Lot 12. This allows the retention of most of the significant trees in the
open space easement on Lot 12 and substantially reduces the visual impact of a
wall to the Geneva Court neighbors.
Western Washington Division
165 NE Juniper St., Ste 201, Issaquah, WA 98027
Phone: (425) 392-0250 Fax: (425) 391-3055
www_F,ncompassES.net
Eastern Washington Division
108 East 2nd Street, Cie Elum, WA 98922
Phone: (509) 674-7433 Fax: (509) 674-7419
Fred Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
City of Revlon
Page two
With the proposed revision, the number of significant trees that will be retained
onsite is 24, which is only one less than the 25 trees required to be retained. This
is a significant increase from the initial proposal of 15 retained trees and will only
require the planting of 6 two-inch replacement trees.
The grading on Lot 12 will be substantially reduced as well, leaving most of the
proposed open space easement undisturbed native vegetation.
Although the primary reason for non approval of Lot 12 appears to be the impact of the
20 ft wall on the neighbors, it appears that a secondary issue is density. While
elimination of Lot 12 would reduce the density somewhat, it would not provide that much
of an environmental benefit to the site. Lots 8 through 11 are wider than required by
zoning (60 ft vs. 50 ft) as it was the applicants intent to build nicer (wider) homes on the
property than what is the norm by today's standards. By providing wider lots than
required by the zoning code, the intent of Section 4-7-220 c.4, Renton's Hillside
Subdivision code recommending larger lots in steeper parts of the site is met. The
requirement to stub a road to the north in it's present location is one that staff considered
at length, so with the road location established, and lots S through 11 wider than normal,
the elimination of Lot 12 would have little beneficial impact to the site. The proposed
revision of the open space easement location to the west side of Lot 12 accomplishes the
same goal and retains the lot.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. Revised plans showing the proposed
revision are enclosed for your use and have also been sent to staff.
Very truly yours,
BAIMA & HOLMBERG, INC.
Shupe Holmberg, PE PLS
Enclosures
cc: Jennifer Henning
Bob Wilson
Steve Beek
M11 W09542 Fred Kaufman
April, 12'h 2010
Mr. Gerald C. Wasser,
Associate Planner
Dept. of Community and Economic Development
City of Renton
Dear Mr. Wasser,
C'ty of PentonPlanningDivision
APR 15 901d
Our nazue are Khanh Nguyen and Due-Quy Nguyen, owner of the house 616 S. 53`j Pl.
Renton WA 98055 Geneva Court, the house on the west side, right nexi to lot 12 of
Wilson Park. We strongly support the recommendations of the hearing on April I":
1- Lot 12 shall be eliminated.
2- The foundation of the wall need to be strong and the wall should be look artistic.
3- Rain water drain to the west side through Geneva Court should be minimized as
possible.
Thank you for your good work for our community.
Sincerely,
Khanh Nguyen
206) 250-6810
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
STATE OF WASHINGTON
ss.
County of King
Nancy Thompson being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states:
That on the 1" day of April 2010, affiant deposited aria the United States Mail and
Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested a sealed envelope(s) containing a decision or
recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below
entitled application or petition.
Sig ature
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this I day of 2010.
rr
Nolary Public in, and for the State of Washington
Residing at,therein.
Application, Petition or Case No.: Wilson Park Preliminary Plat
LUA 09-140, ECF, PP
The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record