Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Maximum Residential Fence Ht Revisions (5/6/2002)
444, Q , ` C o y 0 be ..lam�1 ii .6r ' ®_rat„ 4. k y W I. ai P. �... 'b.t4 . F• _ firyd - a + b.- y or „L. O t-o . !J °!$a r c74• omC a$a tt4 a. ';f m IpØ! ilh W o p 8rA rd,e " 0v ma cyUci co a mas: -I: -§) 7. 4 clg , o d -:G p O'O cl q.�d a -w'�� s O o m o a� o �,� o z` 1 o'U 'N W `ilJi *Wikfl k Qyi7IJJ O (o C C C C .1...• O O co C O 1 C_ C En O co C @ a) � L � � c 46 ° C C p w - c°n N a) aV = m \ 0 ° w C N c m coN 0,-7° m o~i rn J m o U (O ..L_. —>' 0 Y c 3 c � ta) 0 Z m .0 C) C CD C N d 7 M O O C p _ L C Q rn p 0 C C Y w Y Jo0 C C L o co = a) O / :zi I.L a, a. co •-• C m 5 M U Q 0 '- t a) E cY aai a) — o cA OA O C O E ° N ..6 \,O) N ��. 4. C) ° va) E c z ° C y C m \ �' ii c c . o v N,, IIE o CO Is 0 3 p C 00 m � t co ca \ r z O .s ms . rna) = •- m O. o ti aa' co •- c2) ccpS $ 0. rt, › � Y � W Y a) Q� 0) O O O N t+ m ° a) a) w y C �' a) . 3E � � 03c c. -Dal 0 H y O a) o � c v0 0 U d a a) c o 0oz > a o. c cs E � w mU mz m w o 01 m c C cn 4� o ``Illlnningt�. v7ril o o x -c t �� > 1 i 4)zz. O O Y m p a3 C p C co N 0o -c i 2' '., ?. I Q Ch: ` - 0. U N C CO d) G of ..... ° ° p 45 R J) .l✓�. L.•is`�� i. !4 c •— E >. co 0 c p• co 5. Z 0 A� Ip ai _ m 0 O _ 0 o c 3 4- w ° N /IN1111111 '_ O 0 . c) a) w C 'v o_ a) 0 a) rn Q m co rnnc a 0 m F=- Q Fes- co - - r `"" p f-R. Amends ORD 4056 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5 0 08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTIONS 4-1-170.A OF CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, AND 4-4-040.G OF CHAPTER 4, CITY-WIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY REVISING THE SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE FENCE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND ASSOCIATED FEE SCHEDULE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 4-1-170.A, Land Use Review Fees: Application Type, of Chapter 1,Administration and Enforcement, of Title IV(Development Regulations)of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding a new fee, as follows: Fence Permit(special) $100 SECTION II. Chapter 4-4-040.G of Chapter 4, City-Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: G. SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE FENCE PERMITS: 1. Fences Eligible for Administrative Review Process: Persons wishing to have one of the following types of fences may submit a letter of justification, site plan and typical elevation together with the permit fee to the Planning/Building/Public Works Department: 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5 0 0 8 a. Fences exceeding forty-eight inches(48")within front yard or side and/or rear yards along a street setbacks but not within a clear vision area. b. Electric fences. 2. Evaluation Criteria: The Development Services Division may approve the issuance of special fence permits provided that the following objectives can be met: • The proposed fence improves the privacy and security of the adjoining yard space; • The proposed fence does not detract from the quality of the residential environment by being out of scale or creating vast blank walls along public roadways; • The proposed fence compliments the environment they serves in an aesthetically pleasing manner;and • The proposed fence does not present a hazard to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. a. Acceptable Measures to Meet Criteria: Fences located within the front or side and/or rear yard along a street setback may be a maximum of seventy-two inches(72") in height,provided the evaluation criteria are met. Acceptable measures to achieve these criteria include, but are not limited to the following: • Permanent landscaping along the front of the fence; • Quality fence material, such as cedar fencing; • Modulation of the fence; • Similar design and material as other fences in the surrounding neighborhood; • Increased setbacks from the adjacent sidewalk; • Ornamental materials or construction treatment, such as wrought iron; 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5008 • Orientation of the finished face of the fence toward the street;and, • Other comparable construction or design methods. b. Clear Vision Area: The fence proposed for special permits must have no portion in the clear vision area over forty-two inches (42") in height. The location and height of the fence must not obstruct views of oncoming traffic, or views from driveways. SECTION III. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and 30 days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 28th day of April , 2003. V GUa,t Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 2 8 th day of April , 2003. Jes anner, Mayor Approved as to form: Cctir�2v�uP / Lawrence J. Warren, ity Attorney Date of Publication: 5/2/2 0 0 3 (summary) ORD.1033:4/16/03:ma 3 January 27,2003 " Renton City Council Minutes `~ Page 38 Transportation: Puget Sound Transportation Systems Division recommended approval to pay the Puget Energy Street Lighting Back Sound Energy street lighting back bill in the amount of$42,682. Refer to Bill Finance Committee. CAG: 02-161, Seneca Ave Water Utility Division submitted CAG-02-161, Seneca Ave. NW and NW 2nd NW/NW 2nd St Water Main St. Water Main Replacement; and requested approval of the project, Replacement,B&L Utility authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of$12,974.40, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of $8,973.94 to B &L Utility,Inc.,contractor,if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from Sanford E.Webb, 1129 167th St. SW, Citizen Comment: Webb— Lynnwood, 98037,regarding the proposed fence height regulations. He Fence Height Regulations expressed concerns regarding the use of six-foot-high solid board fences,fence screening requirements,and the proposed Special Administrative Fence Permit. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PLANNING& DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Council President Keolker-Wheeler presented a report regarding the pilot Committee of the Whole project with South King County cities to consolidate the human services Human Services: Joint Human application and funding process. The Committee recommended concurrence Services Funding Program, with the staff recommendation that Council approve the resolution authorizing South King County Cities the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the memorandum of understanding for planning, funding, and implementation of a joint human services application and funding program. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 42 for resolution.) WSDOT: SR-167 Springbrook Council President Keolker-Wheeler reported receipt of two letters regarding the Creek Culvert Replacement closure of SR-167 for the replacement of the Springbrook Creek Culvert. One Project is a copy of a letter from the Renton Board of Public Works Acting Chairman, Dave Christensen, addressed to the Laura Musso-Escude at the Washington State Department of Transportation; and the other is from Bjorn Bayley and Anders Berglund, IKEA owners, 600 SW 43rd St.,Renton,98055. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY PERSSON,COUNCIL REFER THESE ITEMS OF CORRESPONDENCE TO THE TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION)COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Council: Workshop Report Council President Keolker-Wheeler presented a report on the four-hour Council (1/21/2003) workshop that occurred on January 21,2003. The goal of the workshop was to work through some issues that require Council discussion in advance of the annual Council/staff retreat, thus allowing staff time to prepare responses to those issues for discussion at the retreat. Ms. Keolker-Wheeler noted that as with all meetings of the City Council,this meeting was open to the public. However,public comment was not allowed,as it was a Council workshop session. Ms. Keolker-Wheeler summarized the issues discussed at the workshop which were as follows: Council electronic mail;communications;historic issues; leasing policies;The Boeing Company and Explore Life project;roles and responsibilities;budget; temporary signage; the West Hill area in relation to 1.00 January 27,2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 39 Renton's Potential Annexation Area; the City's cable channel 21;property taxes; and the Renton Community Marketing Campaign. In addition, she reported that several items pertaining to the way Council interacts with staff were also referred to the upcoming Council/staff retreat. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending that City Finance: Finance Analyst II Council approve filling the regular Finance Analyst II position at Grade 13, Hire at Step D Step D, with the incumbent limited term Finance Analyst II,Dawna Truman. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance: Vouchers Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending approval of Claim Vouchers 211612-211979 and two wire transfers totaling $2,730,112.30; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 42342-42560,one wire transfer and 558 direct deposits totaling$1,787,051.45. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation(Aviation) Transportation(Aviation)Committee Chair Persson presented a report Committee regarding the S. Grady Way westbound concrete approach to Rainier Ave. The Transportation: S Grady westbound approach of S. Grady Way to the intersection of Rainier Ave. has Way/Rainier Ave S Pavement experience serious rutting and shoving of asphalt out of the wheel paths onto Rehab Design,Entranco the adjacent C-curb and sidewalk. As an interim fix,to keep the approach safe and open to the traveling public, and to allow time to design and construct the permanent solution,this intersection was overlaid as part of the 2002 Overlay project. The permanent solution is to construct the final, approximately 550 feet of the westbound approach of S. Grady Way to Rainier Ave. with concrete. Council previously approved the 2003-2008 Transportation Improvement Program(TIP),which budgeted$620,000 for the design and construction of this project. The consultant agreement between the City and Entranco,Inc. is in the amount of$53,504.46 which,when executed,will allow the design of this project to commence. Construction ad is expected in April 2003. The Committee recommended that Council accept the S. Grady Way Westbound Concrete Approach to Rainier Ave.project, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement with Entranco, Inc.,in the amount of$53,504.46. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* In response to Councilman Parker's inquiry regarding the construction schedule, Councilman Persson reported that construction of the project will begin in April and should be completed by this summer. *MOTION CARRIED. Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chair Corman presented a report regarding the request by Utility: Sewer Connection Roderick Williams for sewer connection to his properties located outside the Request for Property Outside City limits. The Committee recommended concurrence in the recommendation City Limits,Williams of staff that Section 4-6-040C of City Code be amended to allow owners of multiple existing legal lots to connect to the City's sewer system,if so authorized by the Renton City Council. The proposed amendment affects only those portions of the City's sewer service area and those portions within its adopted Special Assessment District(SAD)boundaries that lie outside of the City's Potential Annexation Area(PAA). Existing legal lots lying within both the City's PAA and within the City's sewer service area shall still adhere to existing Code Section 4-6-040C.1.d regarding provision of service. ttipead4(441 / 2003 NNW • 1129 - 167th Street S.W. Cln' Lynnwood, WA 98037-9317 OF EON Monday, 13 January 2003 MN152003 Renton City Council Members Renton Hall 1055 South Grady Way C1�yC ERIc p F,CE Renton, WA 98055 Subject: Belated Input on Fence Code Requirements Reference: Minutes of Renton City Council Meeting Held 6 January 2003 Renton City Council Members: My review of pages 6 & 7 of the referenced Minutes made me wonder how in the world I could have missed your consideration of a subject of so much interest to me. Although I was out of the country for ten weeks beginning in September and ending in the middle of November 2002, I read that a Public Hearing was held as long ago as early May 2002. I just hope it is not too late for you to at least consider the points I will try to make. I too have noticed so many solid board fences in Renton (many of them apparently new) that are six-feet in height along front and side yards adjacent to streets that I believed were nonconforming. While I understand the yearning for privacy, this objective often causes home owners to overlook today's need for security. For this reason, I prefer a chain link fence - neighbors and police have much more opportunity to observe threats to a resident's security and, even when tall, they are neighbor friendly. A balance between privacy and security of course can be achieved with a four-foot solid board fence or a six-foot fence with spaces between the pickets. I feel sure that the`Renton Police Department must have been consulted and took the.opportunity to contribute to code revisions. So far as screening is concerned, I would hope that none is required for a chain link fence or for board fences with spaces between the boards, because this would negate the security provided by such fences. Tall solid board fences are sufficiently ugly to require screening without security degradation. You should see the picture of the view out our kitchen window imposed upon us by the Homeowners Declaration. The Homeowners Association first provided incorrect definition for fence location, encouraged early construction of side yard fences, and then refused to consider other types of side yard fences even though the Declarations allowed such consideration. My preference is, of course, for hard and fast rules for all requirements for anything, if it is at all possible to define alternatives that may be applied to achieve the result intended. Unique handling of requirements by using such things as a "Special Administrative Fence Permit" can too easily become tools for special privilege, granted to some but not others. They can also allow those who disregarded requirements to have pre-existing conditions approved that others coming later cannot duplicate, which is obviously inequitable. Ages ago, I missed the opportunity to comment on rolled curbs. Although I don't know whether or not you approved them, I should add that they are a convenience for Contractors during construction, but encourage sloppy driving habits that forever-after endanger children playing on sidewalks. Sincerely, 27 Sanford E Webb (425) 743-1470 January 13,2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 23 maintenance. In conclusion,Mr. Zimmerman reported that the three concerned agencies are close to reaching an agreement on the matter. At the request of Ms. Keolker-Wheeler,Community Services Administrator Jim Shepherd reported that an estimated 11,481 people visited Philip Arnold Park in 2002. Ms. Keolker-Wheeler inquired as to whether the Falcon Ridge and Heritage Hills Homeowners Associations should contribute to the maintenance of the right-of-way since it is the secondary access point for both developments. Mr. Zimmerman explained that the maintenance costs are not high due to the low- quality pavement on the right-of-way,and staff has not addressed the issue of homeowner association maintenance contributions because the costs are marginal. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,SECONDED BY PARKER,COUNCIL REFER THE SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY AGREEMENT TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. CARRIED. Development Services: Fence MOVED BY BRIERE,SECONDED BY PARKER,COUNCIL REFER THE Height Regulations CITY ATTORNEY CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE FENCE i 1 HEIGHT REGULATIONS ORDINANCE TO THE PLANNING& I l DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Planning&Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Committee regarding the downtown core off-street parking requirements. The Committee Planning: Downtown Core recommended that Council set a public hearing on January 27, 2003,for Off-Street Parking consideration of this item. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY Requirements KEOLKER-WHEELER,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMI! hE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending approval of Finance: Vouchers Claim Vouchers 211362-211611 and two wire transfers totaling $1,932,761.66;and approval of Payroll Vouchers 42209-42341 totaling $192,510.01. MOVED BY PARKER,SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Human Resources: Property& Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report on the review of property Liability Claims Review and liability claims. This purpose of the review was to determine how and when the Finance Committee wishes to review property and liability claims activity. As a result of the discussion,the Finance Committee recommended that staff transmit certain semi-annual claims activity reports from the Washington Cities Insurance Authority(WCIA)to the Committee. Staff will provide a detailed expense report with supporting information periodically with WCIA billings. Staff will coordinate a meeting and/or presentation regarding WCIA claims procedures at the Finance Committee's request. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Human Services: CDBG Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending approval to Specialist Hire at Step E fill the Community Development Block Grant Specialist position, in the Human Services Division, at Grade 18, Step E. This would be retroactive to December 3,2002. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Councilman Parker noted that this position was previously a limited term position at the same Step E level. -40 '• CITSc F RENTON Office of the City`Attorney . Lawrence J.Warren Jesse Tanner,Mayor. MEMORANDUM TO: Jason Jordan, PBPW Senior Planner From; Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney. Date: January'. 1Q,2003. Subject Ordinance Concerning Pence Heights in Residential Areas - • . I_have reviewed the proposed :language amending the ordinance .concerning fence heights in residential'areas. . I haVe'.COnternsf about.the legality of that ordinance.-because of the iaok:'of definition and -direction given in that.Ordinance. In proposed;Section G No 2a.(1) is.Used,the •phrase"high quality and durability" That Senn i s lnot-defined, nor am.1 sure what it means. There • is insufficient direction tor.the DevelOprriepteki,CeS Directbr4o decide what is "high quality and • - durability" A somewhat,similar.problem extsls in-Subsection(2). In that section the phrase"drought.tolerant" .is used. Perhaps that is a more recogn ed„aandAnderstoodterm in the- andscaping-industry, and if , so, my concerns about that:phrase` could be assuaged I-Iowever, in -Section G 21), the ,Development: ervices D irector is ivcn the ai thonty, ooteview the fence guidelines if they cannot be achieved due to site constraints on*"Caser by cane pasts" There areto standards to be applied by the Development-ServiceSiiirectOsr iii n'a't irtg that'decision. Perhaps the standards-could be those used for granting a variance or standards could be drafted It is reasonably unlikely that anyone wouldrtehallenge the,legaiity of,the ordinance because of its vagueness. This is:-largely so because the ordinaf ce grants a;right to exceed our drafted fence.. height'regulations. If thus ordinance is illegal, it woulda:just.return theordinance to its current • :status regarding fence heights, leaving little motive for.a challenge Perhaps,th ete could be-a" Challenge by a neighbor who didn't want to"see the fence height exceeded I have drafted the ordinance exactly as proposed. Iloweve , I wish my concerns to be known. The • Council, of course, may choose to pass the ordinance in it urrent form, if it so wishes. Lawrence Warren • LJWtmj cc: Jay Covington Bonnie Walton Council Members Neil Watts T10.37:48 Post Office Box 626-Renton,Washington 98057-(425)255-8678/FAX(425)255-5474 RE N T 0 N AHEAD OF T 1[£ CURVE ®This paper contains 60%recycled material.30%post consumer January 6,2003 Renton City Council Minutes i✓ Page 6 Utility: Apollo Lift Station, Wastewater Utility Division recommended approval of the transfer of Transfer of Ownership to City ownership of the Apollo Lift Station, located within Renton's service area on the East Renton Plateau,from Water District 90 and Issaquah School District to the City of Renton. Refer to Utilities Committee. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Past Planning and Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a Planning &Development report regarding temporary signs obscuring neighborhood signs. The Committee Committee has received an update from the Development Services Division on Development Services: the issue of temporary real estate signs obscuring established neighborhood Temporary Signs Obscuring signs. The real estate directional signs, which were blocking the view of the Neighborhood Signs new Maplewood Glen neighborhood sign on Maple Valley Hwy.,have been moved as requested by staff. The Development Services Division has also instituted an interim policy prohibiting future installation of permitted real estate signs which obscure the view of public signs, including neighborhood entry signs. Staff is working on proposed City Code changes for real estate signs,and will report to the Committee on recommended Code revisions at a later date. The Committee recommended that this item remain in Committee pending further review and possible Code revisions to further address this issue. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Development Services: Fence Past Planning and Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a Height Regulations report regarding the maximum residential fence height regulations. The Committee met to review and discuss potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in City Code Title IV (Development Regulations). Currently,City Code limits the height of residential fences to a maximum of four feet when located adjacent to a public street. The Committee met in April to discuss possible changes to the fence height regulations. The Committee recommended that a public hearing be conducted,which occurred on May 6, 2002. Committee members subsequently toured several residential neighborhoods in November and directed staff to address setback, landscaping and fencing material requirements. Staff has drafted revised fence standards, which would allow residents to apply for a Special Administrative Fence Permit in order to construct six-foot high fences when located within a front yard or side yard along a street setback. The permits would be issued on a case-by-case basis provided the applicant demonstrates the fence is constructed with appropriate fencing material;the fence is sufficiently screened;and the finished side of the fence is oriented toward the streetscape.* At the request of Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler,Associate Planner Jason Jordan provided a briefing on this matter. He explained that there are many different types of fences,both conforming and non-conforming,throughout Renton. He reviewed the current regulations,and stated that in their review of the issue, the Planning and Development Committee considered privacy, safety, fence treatment, and setbacks with and without landscaping. Mr. Jordan concluded by saying that the recommendation is to change the residential fence January 6,2003 Renton CityCouncil Minutes '+w+' Page 7 " height regulations,and allow the Development Services Division to approve Special Administrative Fence Permits. *MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* Responding to Councilman Corman's concerns about sight distance safety,Ms. Keolker-Wheeler emphasized that safety will be taken into account when each individual situation is reviewed. Councilman Parker stressed that these changes do not compromise any existing sight safety standards. Responding to Councilwoman Nelson's inquiry regarding prior non-conforming fences,Mr.Jordan stated that those with non-conforming fences can apply for the Special Administrative Fence Permit. In response to Councilman Clawson's question,Ms. Keolker-Wheeler confirmed that the Committee reviewed existing sight distance standards. She noted that the fence height standard can be changed only if it meets the criteria as required by the Special Administrative Fence Permit. *MOTION CARRIED. Planning: Neighborhood& Past Planning and Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a Business Design Standards report regarding neighborhood and business design standards. In a letter to the City Council on August 14,2001,former Planning Commissioner Rich Wagner outlined issues for discussion in the future. The Committee recommended that these issues be addressed as outlined below: 1) What does Renton want to be in 2020 and 2025? This issue will be addressed during the 2003 Comprehensive Plan update. 2) Urban Design and Streetscape Design. This issue will be addressed through the discussion of the community design policies during the Comprehensive Plan update. The Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department has developed a draft new element for the Comprehensive Plan that will address Citywide design issues. 3) Downtown Pedestrian Frontages. This issue will be addressed during the review of downtown policies and the City Council gave direction to expand the length of the pedestrian corridor. The issue will be taken up during the 2003 Title IV(Development Regulations)docket review. 4) Automall Amenities Package. This issue was to be a future phase of the Automall relying on private investment based on public guidelines. The standards are adopted in City Code. Additional phases will require a new work program. 5) Neighborhood Identify. Several concepts have been suggested during the current Comprehensive Plan amendment process that could lead to incentive programs for reinforcing neighborhood identity. Renton's Neighborhood Program also works with community groups to this end. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. APPROVED BY 1 CITY COUNCIL Date l-6- R003 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT January 6,2003 Maximum Residential Fence Height Regulations (Referred March 18,2002). The Planning and Development Committee met to review and discuss potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV. Currently, City code limits the height of residential fences to a maximum of four feet when located adjacent to a public street. The Planning and Development Committee met in April to discuss possible changes to the fence height regulations. The Committee recommended that a public hearing be conducted, which occurred on May 6, 2002. Committee members subsequently toured several residential neighborhoods in November and directed staff to address setback, landscaping and fencing material requirements. Staff has drafted revised fence standards, which would allow residents to apply for a Special Administrative Fence Permit in order to construct '6-foot high fences when located within a front yard or side yard along a street setback. The permits would be issued on a case-by-case basis provided the applicant demonstrates the fence is: co.nstructed with appropriate fencing material; the fence is sufficiently screened; and,the finished side:of the Fence is oriented towar&the streetscape. k1 Kathy eolker-Wheeler,Chair ix Te B re Vice air King Parker,Member cc: Gregg Zimmerman Neil Watts ?.a4471 96111-1d-4Ut-i PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE fence height report#3\ Rev 01/02 bh . . .... ... • • • � CI) 4 kC (D 'C y o � Gr co c ; E;;• eD 0—) --t c, � O 0-1 Ft CD � �r4 0 CI) : = ') '''' • n o - ) g cI9 g .00 = — • $1., 0 tik,if m=i• _.c • 0 0 cry la., q � �, �r ,‘ L := � 6 0...• Op* u 0 CA emst- er.) iv + 5-'-' ow. : 0 0'.1 © n : rt) o-t crq ci) 0 o Z •-i• PD: 5, crc O CD :. n ,-1- -.Now.411111r (5/ i ...de.i..."."''.... -711" / rrl // n = , ,,........ ,. ,., 01 le -al ,v),J.Noi (Di),INOI,1 °lit !,:,.. ... .,\ I nil) , ...ta.,NO.ri. NI 41 4% / r (1' 1I:,:k':...i l:.:'.:.:•.'.':'. ' / . :)..:H:•:::......:: •:':',..'..':'.'.,...:.,':::.,':•'.::.1....,E.z... : m / • ( i / . i : 104 P:. I/ C e cc K K K E E ,....,-,:-:,:„......:rp.:.1,..„,.:,.......: ....::..,::::::.,::::„.,...:,:,:.:,:. 1.:HT:..:::• ..: :::: :.. .:,:i..:: :::,' ..:-...•.. = .....:-,....:ni.::,:„,,:„..::, ..--.:, * . 0 ..::: . :.',......:...... .: I - •:........... .,. ...,:.....:: ::...............y.........,?...:.....: :,.:.: : ::::. . . , . I.E.......::::-:::,L.i.:-..•.::.::':..:.::::::::: : .:.il.l.::.:':.,...,:::.. ;.,...:.,:::: '--: :.. .....,',..:1',.1 ....:::-.. ...:'.:1....::::.:::::B..... ..:'.::::.:::.M...:;.:..........:.......:....?.40:, ,-.:::,:.,....:::,...:,.....:;:::...ii Oimt imi• (1::) = j... 1,:-..:,..;.......'::::.'.:.::.:-:-..s.: : ...:...:...z..:......:.....:...::::::.:...:,:!.:::::...........: :: ,....--.:::.. .-..-.......:t.. : ....::::::::p,...::::..........x..................: ::: 1 .:..:::::::,...,..:.::. .. • . ....: :::...::•::::,.:':::::.:::.:,...,,..::•E:::. .4iiiortias -• 6° — a \ ;_._: _ _ 4 ,,. , \t„.., _ ,_ , _ ,,_ _ 1 . ..t _ . , ...., . ..; 1 . . , ; _ =-1 4 4,.. , v ,,, ., . . _ _ ... ., . .... ... .. . ! • '' , .. -:., . . .., _ • t •.` eni -....4 = f—p- .,_ . ..._.. •.__ ,.„ . • . . .. .,. mit = , mit •-• 0 ,•___ , .: ..„ ,, ,,.: t .. ,......, . el:), n 1 , .;,..,:.„...„......„, , . . , .,, 4,, . •-- ,= ; (•:,) e) ;•,, , : „''t. C° ,. . . 40.. crcz., filt4 12.d 1/11"1,' rnig 4k .. .. _`_ •R1j CI !' 14 1. . ......„., 4. �W (A 4 0.0) .. . i ,f =.. ,:k . !-I ..--. ; 1 _.„. . , ..„,.,v, ... _.,_ . ..,. 0 4../.4%'1"1111118. 011.14It n , -- ,• , --1--viNW ..,, • i of" -m ` .• .` =I Cl) '�' �r1 � 1 `' . i rD VI , e I..i ..' - rr_ WW1 • , ... _ n . Li _ _ . - . . o1 , :jig . . =I L,1.0 IL_ ri) l', : L, I , ; S 15 -• Ommi f-4- 1,1,,, . . -- - , ,,,,,.....,-.. .... , eiri) = le •" �j{ _ iYYYTTT ,..`a ....% '' = ' , 4--'— 0 IC `r• - r , Pt) . c _____, . -• • . ., :z.. ti,i, . * . .. et et) . .,.. .. : ..., ....„ 0-1 , .,, ...„ e, 7, ,. r rD 1 ; .. , -Mpir.�"- tp C 011 iLMI 1:$ , d � I • a !� d • pf I ., . , .-.41, iii, 4 , m? j C) fillD + 7{I �1tll w � p 41111 X/ e el I • `f` • , rI II 1;'. . w iiv j4 . 1 ...-4_ i . ., . . i ,/, .,,,,.. . ;,.., ,. . . 4 ', -', . . • E �b �Citi f t ' . '''''' 44::-.1... 1' 4111\ dii • s•' .(rs ' 'Cf S ' r • . . i • ... \ 0 cel �, i NOoL r t #::,.-li. • .. 1• i 'k • L. I 1 + i j -.t+a 1 , •e . • ,,-,1•-al.,,, " Irill11111111414. . _ 1,,..I it,I•••••••••••••-.....-- 4. ''''• f.,.i ....,• 40, • ' "41 '-'ilk ..!•7.....11•••••••11W.M1/100.r ...,, ., ..... r ,0,.*' dt „. -1- . _ , -- - ...,... . li, • .or •-,..-, '1,„fir,,— t t°4- •-'•••' - - -. ''. " - • - *Ill -. -• . At.- ,.1'.'..,,,-.,i ..., i , -;Al'A .•r , ,__ 1-.-.-..z.:.TT,,, '.• 1..1%it-4::.;.,,.-- -IR '41;;i1.01*. 4.,,,,,— ,‘,1, r,,, ,,,„.,,, , ..1 * ,., i tl.„.c. ,'.1!..'i'- .:ft ''';‘,4,'-'.• 74' ' „„;* ,„e.,;i7t. • Tr--; =t , -I --,..,-.i, 4 .;,,,.. .?•,*•,"`4 ' : •"-, ' ' 4 ...,, ,;•,;;4.k;.;,'4,1. • ,, ell;•.* ,•-il-,....,,'..... , . 1 . - -77'.: ' '.:' ,•-n''''- - - *-- '•'-' • '--: ''''' !.,.. ‘,"It;. -..„,t-,,,,-:., -..c.,,--7.4. - - ". . ' - -,--,:z.....47- - -.:•.',. '.-,.. _ ;''.' 1 r" - '; '''-. ..-i;tk •---4,,,,i' . , .„,....,....,,,... - • : ;,,,:14,4.:?4:41,4.-e.,4-7- ,•4!- , ''':.- f'7.• ••• •-e,e ' . '•=, / '',".1 . ,Ver'••• .- : •‘:,•--g„,...-.:ri,,....,t).,.:,. fill: • - . , el+ f OF •- • i I f• • •',:. • filiD,-.• . . ....... . .I.:, „ - . ...-miar.. •„ ,. .T., ,__ ..„,....._ ,,, _ .- - •. , . • I . -- - ..: , . \ - i 1-"'T-- ' . r, , . ,, ellialk' .-.' ... 1. ,.. ., '" C.-'' •.t-'7-t-t. : ' 1 .... ,. ....0 '. .L - I . , ... .. - ,.. ..--. :.„:„... ..."• ' t:itit .. „,-.,,...--''• . . ttue ....... .$ '-..'e '`•r 4 4 . -...- . 1, 4 4 r .4. i ti .,,, n _ ,, 4:„, 1 lillit • 1111 41111 .4-Is 4,., „ r v.,,,‘::' ::-: 7 1' -.- t 1,_1'.---4,•..!* - ;; ) .. . ii 1-:.4- 4-• , ,• . .,.,. . . i ., f, cse. - • ., --`,.' ' "+54...:,„ •- . FIP - - -E• ' \ •.. • - •-,.v. /.. ........‘ c 1.,-.• • -.• -.`- • . -,1., ' ',.z. • ' con --' -,;,.., •,.:- - -- _ . :.t.'",.. Ziolk' .... • _ -.:• -.- *11110 _ . 061 . _ ‘ ..,...„:, _ . I W, \ , :--: : I/ / .,., . , t t . .., f ' . , .....:- f..4.'Wt' '''.; '41. .„,) "" .4, ,'''' ,....42;?',4:rAii' ,,,, ' ;, 1" • , ; , , ... . It -• -1. , /4k, '.`• ' , ' , .4‘ - - ' .ti. • ' 4 4 ..... ... 11r1 i 4.e.ir ir ..,;,....,.- \ t--, . .,....,....__ •- ..4 AN.) 4401 • -•4• .- . . -.Cif) .. • 1 ,,., ,_• ___di• sp.., . • ( tip .......,„., . , temp- . . _ .. 141; ...:..... , , , ,.._.,..1 ._,„......... . , ...„. .. ...._,„ ,,„,.,:, , .... . .. _. . .„_mr-..,„.... ,. em) XIIII . „ ... , ,, .,..... , ... 40 •,:iiik *II. eillit' --( i . , Vil .• - „,-- i ,..,.. '. - ,.. • . .. . 01 "010- till. ,, Re ./0....• ---- , =I/I _______ . ••• •._ . _ • rasp mos, . '*----,...„....,... CA , . . • '31,7,011t.',-7!:. .. •:1- .. ••••.•,.,:r_••,.'.••••;11,---4... ..., ..,.;•••-!::•.‘•-•-•-.., '..:,,t --4-'.-..'..,,---t,.'::;;;,.-... '7".'t t', ,... n 4 , \ ,,.....„...s.,\ ..,„ 0-• ir ......, , , . , .. .... ..,.4.,..:. . =, . cra1.... ....... ,,,- . .. .. . t - • ' ' . 1111111111NK t 1:17it, ay 9t . . ` i.4 ' '°. 1 .y• ♦. pm. """ 1-. ` �. �1 q •...; ,, ; T a ! L.' — (F tit T - r i! , ._ $ .., ••-,• - 11:LI R . eilli IIIMI . ' _ ".. ,- - _ = IC .Y,i. .. l ,r Lr ". ,i . - .` i _ Cli 4— . . .. . , . . p� . . 1. . . . tO n 4 ,. 6 1:11$ • a+. 1 3 -* ;-_,.; i __ i # ..,,,,,„,.. ....,',,1 ,'" --,___ — . _ . ... i ..t..,. „i.. . _ • emilit- :mi t. O V)44.1,4110 tr 'r .. '' '' i*. Iiir=-'' ...'' , ...7-- t•- ou n . . f., tfr ,....._ ., .._,:,.._,..,.. : ..;fr...1-. ::. XI _....7..,„.. fr,.k.. - "e"4,--ro—ev------11-*------- 4-- ., ...; ,-- ..., 4t ! aJ +^T�" • • • (— -01-1 P CA --1" ›' CD cl., "—h crQ 0 O ci) "c;) • v CD CD CD 8`; • c4 m 0_, 0.• • t— . ii.r, 0_, • k..< . et k_, " e rir) 0 c,, ci) " g O -, , nf— P 0 oF2) cp ,6-4 O r $1) + 0 n . 0- ~ • CD ,D rai cr4 CIA = 011. CD Cr n �' . AD 2 CD q O0 P n . o • c� O c 1 i — 0 (— 'F ii) • c A c 4 PipO O CD '� • O " EL cc • • 0 Nome ?, , �,,`s„ , Tuj I • • CD <,,'` AYE :aerri ^ ' CD 1..,. CD CD raw ' '�h CD`� CD rs ,_,_ ' + ' C� CD CD C!1 CI) r CA ti - • ,... . ,C) CD i 1 4- ...„,,..,.., -,. - ...,,... • ,.. ,- Av.„:-. . •,: y l n. ...4 ;,,. .„.• .,_ :,-. ..., . ... ....., .., .,:::.•.. ,,_• • .,...t,It•• ' ,r• '• • ' ',1' ',V 43 tr•L•441-'', . , , . - -,-, 1, .. .1 , --e • ;.= .m,-,4 it,... ssyp� #4 ff..t m:i:cr �.ii•f{� �a • C� CD CD \ 0 0 7 =, rr �:., �+ • 1.+ • ( ` '�� CD n = ci) Cr4 a CD CD tow i. g 1.1 • 'f t AAY t t 11 4 y, + I ... g eaaAt.1 _- ----_ __r____.____________________:________:_____:_____:_______________________________________________________-______________________-__- 'QtlUA - 1 1EP Nn _______________________________ �, M __ __ _ __ III grip.W,. in,W G ... ___ _ ____—_ __ gam' 1 a = _ Ill rmk k4 — _-_-:-_-__-_----_-_-_-_-_-_- _- 1 __ /iiv, -- N--1: :et I : 1903 NE 34th Place = -C=_ _ (LaCrosse) . _ ---_-:-:::::-_----_---:::::-:----- --------_--=_::_::-,-..a-----,-,-----:=:,------:-----------_i:=,__:_i_„____=_:_:._=_:-_--:___ _______________ lim - ' 9 _ - , 2115 NE 27th Str Ili __ � kS�F�1 S'E{t NE WIWI 411 111111111 .. . _4 1103 Tacoma Ave. NE_ I 1 ra 4603 NE 7th Place■ der ,= i.lbri-.-,_. _ _ __,. pi ,ti, r., (Orchards). i_ 1.4 .,,.. ........,,,... ,..... - -% ... ..... ... , , ) ._________ ,1 , , 248 Garden Ave. N Y 1 o will lig I <..API°11111S&.111 4- \ , .i.:, I�him: Ihc,a_._. kvi , I , • 011,:::::-(:::,,'..: ` ,iihi,„:s.,11 10, (It NE 5122 NE 4th Place Airport W° III P&VI i� ►�� 1 i isey_lr �, (Windsong) i, S 2 d S 417 a.1*-Z; ..-.1 L' 729 SW Langston Road J 4r0 mi 1 sw Mtn t Illy �, ` ^-J 10 . -1Ift 'io �� ,� Renton Vllf - 261 Camas Ave. SE �� `zz)/(;!/ (Liberty Ridge) iiiprilik, TV0......__ Y ZA. 4, , \ eV --'L-....''"'---.7.-..:------.' N Tukwila Pkwy i I .r 411) 11 ................ �� t l - I ,1' -- cer Blvc view i killf �.4114111 NrIlilk r Y / _._ Q 1008 N Riverside Drive - � 509 S Tobin Street —� z / S Petrovii w I SW 419t St. i -',Lr..........."/ ,d i80th1 ■ SW 43rd $t. S 43 r'i 1 - _�_/ A Q o` ?'._1 1_-- I i 1 1 1 I 8 O'''' ,(j— '----.L_ .__Ej --. 1/ T U a0 ) � > lit 11_,,, T ���PANTHER LAKE ) — __-_ c-\\-_-_-__ 1 ,L-- -))( '-'-- --1 r---\ I n ce FeIdentificationa M 0 3000 6000 Gti/Y 0,{ Economic Development,Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Sue Carlson,Administrator 1 : 36000 \ G.Del Rosario i�- N r0$ 06 September 2002 -1,,,k( ,a,,-d-i ci _5(4001 J i f e4 kAl ',kat C4n')l r -A-t C'-4 le�r�y urine ‘ ,kkioltc heAr{ e) crn 7 9-o Q; - Key Fencing Issues: 1. Should there be 6-foot high fences on side yards, next to the street? 2. Should there be 42-inch high fences on side yards, next to the street? 3. Should there be safety and visibility considerations in fence height, and fence distance, from a driveway? Suggestions; A. Side yard fences next to the street should not be within 60 feet of a driveway. B. Side yard fences next to the street should be no higher than 42-inches. C. Side yard fences next to the street should be at least 20 feet in-bound from the curb. D. If an accident did occur because of a short visibility distance, and not enough response time, then the City of Renton and I would be liable. Deep Pocket Theory. t , Subni, +4tci to ferry &Alvan u ts � o � d o n � N 5 v, u N gKe i ev' per N E. r;i1 s .@ a, Sv vi Ned IajTerry Saihvvo Six Photos — What Each Shows 1. Left-Top Photo: What I see when I look back from the driver's seat, and try to see anyone riding a bike, rollerblading, skate boarding or running down the sidewalk and street, towards my driveway. Look at the upper portion of the stop sign. 2. Right-Top Photo: What a bicycle rider, rollerblader, skate boarder or runner sees of my driveway when they are at the end of the fence. There is a 25-foot distance from the end of the fence to my driveway. A bicyclist or rollerblader traveling 10 mph, covers the 25-feet in 1.7 seconds. 3. Left-Middle Photo: A sidewalk view of the fence. The 6-foot fence blocks out most of the front of my home, my front yard, and driveway. 4. Right— Middle Photo: The distance from the end of the fence, to the edge of my driveway, is 25-feet. A bicyclist or rollerblader traveling 10 mph, covers the 25-feet in 1.7 seconds. 5. Left-Lower Photo: The front of my neighbor's home, across the street and on the N.W. corner of N.E. 7th Street at Bremerton Ave. N.E. 6. Right-Lower Photo: The side yard view of my neighbor's home, showing his fence. This fence location is in violation of the city's fencing code, (a fence being to close to the street). CLEAR VISIL.J AREA: The area mounded by the street property lines of corner lots and a line join- ing points along said street lines twenty feet (20') from their point of intersection. (Ord. 4056, 4-13-1987) I ti (4 I STREET -20' 20' 20' STREET STREET N \ 1 I Q ,.':::,i;:ii ;: ,, \ -1 PROPERTY _ 1 ' ^lJf LJ�1 1 ` ' PRV� LEI 1 -I g LINE [ : LINE {`E % rk, 1 LINE rn NO STRUCTURE OR PLANTING SHALL BE ALLOWED CLEAR VISION AREA BETWEEN THE HEIGHT OF THREE AND TEN FEET G. SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE FENCE PERMITS: 1. Fences Eligible for Administrative Review Process: Persons wishing to have one of the following types of fences may submit a letter of justification, site plan and typical elevation together with the permit fee to the Planning/Building/Public Works Department: a. Fences exceeding forty eight inches (48") within front yard or side and/or rear yards along a street setbacks but not within a clear vision area. b. Solid fences along side property lines abutting arterial streets. c. Electric fences. 2. Evaluation Criteria: The Development Services Division shall may approve the issuance of special fence permits provided that: a. Fences, walls and hedges above forty eight inches (48") when all setback from the street property line four inches (4") for every one inch of increased height sought (over forty eight inches (48"), up to a maximum of seventy two inches (72")). b. Fences along property lines abutting a side street which is an arterial may be a maximum of seventy two inches (72") in height. This fence must be located to the rear of the required front yard. In addition, driveways will not be allowed to access through this fence. The location of the fence exceeding forty two inches (42") in height along property lines, particularly the front and side lot lines along flanking arterial streets, does not obstruct views of oncoming traffic at intersections or driveways. c. Fences located within the front yard or side and/or rear yard along a street setbacks may be a maximum of seventy-two inches (72")provided that no portion of the fence in the clear vision area is over forty-two inches (42") in height. From: Jennifer Henning To: Walton, Bonnie q Ijo i2G Date: 4/10/02 4:25PM ►. o ce nfIcu Subject: Re: Fence Height Regulations Bonnie- I have one address (they may have moved, but the mail should be forwarded): Baijuder Buttar 671 Bremerton Ave NE Renton, WA 98059 I only have telephone numbers for the following interested parties: Renee Bates (425)235-0487 Terry Sullivan (425)254-9000 or(425)391-1800 Paul Baker is going to provide me with addresses for others that may wish to attend the fence public hearing. I'll forward those on this week. From: Jennifer Henning To: Walton, Bonnie Date: 4/11/02 2:35PM t �e man It-4 -1 I i R c Subject: Address for Terry Sullivan Bonnie, Here is a mailing address for the fence height public hearing: Terry Sullivan 1420 NW Gilman Blvd.,#2151 Issaquah, WA 98027 Thanks! Jennifer From: Rita Cornejo To: Henning, Jennifer Date: 4/12/02 10:45AM Subject: Fwd: Re: Fence Height Regulations Hello Jennifer! I've looked in the reverse directory for Renee Bates'address with no luck. Any way you could dig up her address for us? Thanks, Rita x6513 From: Jennifer Henning To: Cornejo, Rita Date: 4/12/02 3:55PM Subject: Fwd: Re: Fence Height Regulations I do not have an address. I've asked Laureen Nicolay to let you know if she has some additional information on this. Thanks. Jennifer 4; wry, CITY JF RENTON. ..LL Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12,2002 Nghia Nguen 4420 NE 6in Court Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Nghia Nguyen: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, OCUALW Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE LJ This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer CITY...JF RENTON NLL Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12,2002 Steven Chaney 4416 NE 7th Street Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Mr. Chaney: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002,at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE 6) This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer 40 CITY )F RENTON- „LL Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12,2002 Alton Dumas 4420 NE 7th Place Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Mr. Dumas: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002,at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, 09aAILMQA- Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE C? This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer db err' CITY- OF RENTON. Ci :.LL Planning/Building/PublicWorksbepartment IMMO Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12, 2002 Tony DeBoldt 4506 NE 7th Place Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Mr. DeBoldt: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002,at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, •Yakte- N(A- Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N AHEAD OF THE CURVE 0 This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer a , - CITY.OF RENTON- _�4(y4 .. . Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department J Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12, 2002 Thomas Hoang 4603 NE 7th Place Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Mr. Hoang: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, /POti/4, b(A k"(A- Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N AHEAD OF THE CURVE �iJ This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer CITY-OF RENTON. PlanningBuilding/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12,2002 Roger Hsu 752 Bremerton Place NE Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Mr. Hsu: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002,at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, Vailit12 Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N AHEAD OF THE CURVE O.J This paper contains 50%recyded material,30%post consumer �• }° CITX ,OF RENTON. try s.z Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12,2002 Satoru Ozeki 759 Bremerton Place NE Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Mr. Ozeki: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, Thhte, b I Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk 1055 South Grad Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer ;; CIT OF RENTON. afit ! ` Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12, 2002 Joe Kinne 802 Bremerton Avenue NE Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Mr. Kinne: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, T/514 NeA' Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk 1055 South Grad Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N � This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE 4; 4.00CITY v)F RENTON. wa. Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 12,2002 Hung Phan 700 Bremerton Place NE Renton,WA 98059 Subject: Corner Lot Fence Height Dear Hung Phan: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002,at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. This public hearing may be of particular interest to you because it has been observed by city staff that your fence exceeds the maximum fence height of 48 inches side yards of corner lots. If you have any further questions you may contact me at 425-430-7386. Sincerely, RUte,&AA" Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Development Services Division cc: Bonnie Walton,City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE t: This paper contains 50%recycled material.30%post consumer CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 6th day of May, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, to consider the following: Potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV of Renton City Code All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. For information, call 425-430-6510. "61444,te.4 Zdattre Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Published South County Journal April 19, 2002 Account No. 50640 • April 8,2002 Renton City Council Minutes %woo Page 125 fund. Further, the debt service for the bonds will be paid from future fire mitigation fees and revenues.* Councilman Parker pointed out that the bonds will be paid,not from the general fund, but from the fire mitigation fund which are funds collected from development. *MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation (Aviation) Transportation (Aviation)Committee Chair Persson presented a report Committee recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation that Council authorize Airport: Bruce Leven Lease the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Addendum#06-02 to LAG-88-001, Addendum#6(LAG-88-001) Renton Airport lease with Bruce J. Leven,to document the existing use of a portion of the West Side Office Property. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL CONCUR 1N THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Airport: A-1 Fuel Services Transportation (Aviation) Committee Chair Persson presented a report Operating Permit& recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation that Council approve a Agreement ten-year operating permit and agreement for A-1 Fuel Services, Inc.,for the continuation of an existing fueling business, and to provide other aviation- related services at the Renton Airport. The Committee further recommended that Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the operating permit and agreement. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY KEOLKER- WHEELER,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation: Transit Signal Transportation (Aviation)Committee Chair Persson presented a report Priority System Contract recommending that Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into Addendum,IBI Group the supplemental agreement with 1BI Group,Inc. for professional consulting services for the Transit Signal Priority System Project(CAG-01-098). The supplemental agreement in the amount of$48,080 is for professional design services, which were not included in the original contract. The funding will come from the approved Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP) Transit Priority Signal System(Fund 317)and $3,965 paid by the Utilities Division. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, _ COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning & Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a Committee report regarding maximum residential fence height regulations. The Committee Development Services:Fence met to review and discuss potential revisions to the maximum residential fence Height Regulations height regulations established in Title 4(Development Regulations). Currently,City Code limits the height of residential fences to a maximum of four feet when located adjacent to a public street. The Committee recommended that staff explore options that would allow for flexibility within the fence height regulations. The options explored should take into consideration visual safety concerns. The Committee also recommended that the Council be directed to schedule a public hearing to discuss the fence code amendments on May 6, 2002. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMIT1 bE REPORT. CARRIED. Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler encouraged citizens who have concerns about the visual safety issues related to fence height to attend the public hearing and express their opinions. APPROVED BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT Date o?DOe2 April 8,2002 Maximum Residential Fence Height Regulations (Referred March 18, 2002) The Planning and Development Committee met to review and discuss potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title IV. Currently, City code limits the height of residential fences to a maximum of four feet when located adjacent to a public street. The Committee recommended that staff explore options that would allow for flexibility within the fence height regulations. The options explored should take into consideration visual safety concerns. The Committee also recommends that the Council be directed to schedule a public hearing to discuss the fence code amendments for May 6,2002. c?(athy eolker-Wheeler, Chair Terri rie e;Vi hair /, King ar er,Member cc: Gregg Zimmerman Neil Watts k/N t�� IMZettAl- PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMIT!hE fence height report#2.doc\ Rev 01/02 bh CITY OF ' \ITON "0-1 JUN 0 5 2002 I Li,' 1-JLt No-h-ticed4thih jot,' WAtte. 12-(44-6 44245 7.775 0407 111311/1(C' re,vivy 11 i'vdri S-614 'loco or Wig' 271. 1 q0 0 ,?rvtrol ( March H,2002 Renton City Council Minutes `"'� Page 94 CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Item 7.k. was deleted due to the recent Supreme Court decision concerning annexations. (See page 92 for information regarding the Supreme Court's decision.) Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of March 11, 2002. Council concur. March 11, 2002 CAG: 02-035,NE 2nd St City Clerk reported bid opening on 3/12/2002 for CAG-02-035,NE 2nd St. Storm Line Extension, Storm Line Extension Project; 16 bids;engineer's estimate$179,585.28; and Scarsella Brothers submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder, Scarsella Brothers,Inc., in the amount of$120,781.06. Council concur. Vacation: Lyons Ave NE City Clerk recommended adoption of an ordinance finalizing the Conner between NE 2nd&4th Sts, Homes street vacation for portions of Lyons Ave. NE between NE 2nd and NE Conner Homes (VAC-01-004) 4th Streets (VAC-01-004). Council approved the vacation request on 2/11/2002 which included waiving compensation in exchange for additional right-of-way to be dedicated in the Johnson-Loken Plat. Council concur. (See page 96 for ordinance.) Community Services: Community Services Department recommended authorization to proceed with Downtown Parking Garage the construction of retail space in the Renton Municipal Downtown Parking Retail Space Construction Garage in an amount not to exceed$500,000. Refer to Finance Committee. Development Services: Fence Development Services Division recommended that the fence height regulations Height Regulations be be amended to address inconsistencies associated with the existing regulations to provide a more equitable, enforceable and understandable maximum fence height regulation. Refer to Planning&Development Committee. Executive: Communities in Executive Department requested approval of a revised agreement in the amount Schools Contract of$35,500 with Communities in Schools in Renton (CISR) which clarifies the financial and in-kind support the City provides to CISR. Refer to Community Services Committee. Human Resources: Probation Human Resources and Risk Management Department recommended that the' Officer,Establish at Grade a 18 new probation Officer position be established at grade a 18 which has an annual salary range of$43,176-$52,584. Refer to Finance Committee. Human Resources: Deputy Human Resources and Risk Management Department recommended approval Chief Compensation Plan to modify the compensation plan for the management positions of Deputy Chief Modification in the Police and Fire Departments. Refer to Finance Committee. Transportation: Railroad Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of agreements with Grade Crossing Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company in the amount of Reconstruction, BNSF $170,700 to reconstruct railroad grade crossings on SW 7th St.,Lind Ave. SW, Railway Agreements Mill Ave. S.and Bronson Way N. Refer to Transportation Committee. Transportation: NE Sunset Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with Blvd Signal Synchronization King County to receive grant funding in the amount of$50,000 for the signal Project,King County Grant synchronization project on NE Sunset Blvd. between N. Park Dr. and Duvall Ave. NE. Refer to Transportation Committee. Outside City Limits, Required Covenant to Annex Forma within the-agreem March 18,2002 Renton City Council Minutes 41110 ,Page 95 MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO DELETE ITEM 7.k. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from Jim and Shawn Curry, 1720 Kirkland Ave. NE, Citizen Comment: Curry— Renton, 98056, asking for response to their questions regarding the City of Property Taxes Renton's property tax figures. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON,COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Bean— An electronic letter was read from Paula Bean, 334 Morris Ave. S.,Renton, Whitworth Ave S Vacation, St. 98055,expressing her opposition to the closing of Whitworth Ave. S. as Anthony Church(VAC-00- proposed by St. Anthony Parish(VAC-00-003). MOVED BY KEOLKER- 003) WHEELER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report concurring with the staff Finance Committee recommendation to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign a lease with Lease: Eoscene,200 Mill Eoscene, Inc. to rent a portion of the 4th floor at the 200 Mill Building. The Building (Suite 400) term of the lease is three years, and the cost to remodel the space is recovered in the rent. MOVED BY PARKER,SECONDED BY CLAWSON,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation(Aviation) Transportation (Aviation)Committee Chair Persson presented a report Committee regarding traffic calming and neighborhood speeding. The Committee Transportation: Speeding recommended that Council authorize the administration to have the proposed Problems in Neighborhoods, Traffic Calming Task Force rolled into and combined with the Street Standards Traffic Calming Committee. This will allow for a comprehensive study of neighborhood street standards to include incorporating appropriate traffic calming strategies into the standards. The result will be a menu of traffic calming options. Implementation of these options will involve citizen input and involvement of neighborhoods. Staff is requested to add the following goal to the Flexible Street Standards Design Team Memorandum of Agreement: "The design team will evaluate available traffic calming measures, and develop a menu of traffic calming options available for use in the City of Renton." Staff is requested to report back to the Transportation(Aviation)Committee within three months (by June 6,2002)with recommendations on a menu of traffic calming options. The Committee requested that this report include traffic calming options considered but not recommended for use,as well as options that are recommended for use. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services Community Services Committee Chair Corman presented a report Committee recommending concurrence with the recommendation of the staff and Park Community Services: Gene Board to approve fee changes for boat launching and parking at Gene Coulon Coulon Park Boat Launch& Memorial Beach Park. The fee changes correspond with the new pay system Parking Fee Changes which eliminates the dispensing of change, reduces fees to Renton residents, and increases fees to non-Renton residents. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CI_'OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA"'ILL AI#: 7. e • Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works Department For Agenda of: March 18, 2002 Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division Staff Contact Jason Jordan, X-7219 Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Modification to maximum fence height regulations in Title Correspondence.. Ordinance IV of the City's Municipal Code. Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper, Red-Lined Version of Code & Color Photos Study Sessions Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Council refer this issue to the Planning & Development Legal Dept X Finance Dept Committee for review and recommendation. Other Fiscal Impact: None Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment N/A Amount Budgeted N/A Revenue Generated N/A Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total Project.. N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: In order to address inconsistencies associated with the existing fence height regulations, the proposed amendments would provide a more equitable, enforceable and understandable maximum fence height regulation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council approve the amendments to the maximum fence height regulations. H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGUej\agenda bills\fence height agenda bill.dot/ CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: March 7,2002 TO: Toni Nelson, Council President Members of the Council VIA: ccoifr Jesse Tanner,Mayor�� FROM: Gregg Zimmerm ; dministrator STAFF CONTACT: Jason E.Jordan(x7219) SUBJECT: Maximum Fence Heights in Residential Zones ISSUE Fences in residential zones are limited to 48-inches (4 feet) in height when they are located directly adjacent to a public street (for example in front yards or side yards along a street). Otherwise, fences in residential zones are allowed to be 72-inches (6 feet) in height. Residents throughout the City have commented that there is substantial inequity with respect to permitted fence heights and that the varying heights are somewhat confusing to interpret. RECOMMENDATION All residential fences should be allowed to be 72-inches (6 feet) in height regardless of their proximity to a public street, with the exception of the area on corner lots where fences can obstruct views for other streets or alleys that may intersect with a public street. This "clear vision area" is defined as the first 20 feet of property on a corner lot that is located directly adjacent to the street intersection. Currently, the maximum fence height in the "clear vision area" is limited to 42-inches (3.5 feet). Staff does not recommend changing the maximum fence height allowed within this area. Staff recommends referring this issue to the Planning & Development Committee, to consider amendments to the fence regulations within Title IV of the City's Municipal Code. The amendment should be structured so that the maximum fence height is 6 feet regardless of the fences proximity to a public street,except for the"clear vision area." BACKGROUND In response to a complaint filed by a neighbor, City staff has initiated a Code Enforcement Action against a property owner who has a 6-foot high fence that was constructed within a side yard along a public street(see attached photos). Current code requirements limit fence heights to 4 feet when they are located directly adjacent to a public street; therefore, the fence in question was determined to be in violation of the code. When the property owner was notified that their fence exceeded the maximum allowed fence height, they in turn, filed a complaint against other H:'DIVISION.SOEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGVej\issue papers\fence issue paper.doc\st property owners in the same area who have also violated the maximum fence height of 4 feet when located directly adjacent to a public street. As a result of these actions, Code Enforcement staff performed multiple site investigations and determined that the fences in question were in violation of the maximum height allowed; however, the fences did not violate the "clear vision area." Nevertheless, Code Enforcement staff is now inundated with fence height enforcement cases. This issue presents staff with several options. The first option is to continue responding to complaints as they are filed with the City. Option Two is to instruct Code Enforcement Officers to proactively pursue property owners who violate the maximum fence height as established by current City Code. The Third option, which is preferred by staff, is to amend the maximum fence height requirements for fences located directly adjacent to a public street. This option would necessitate a code amendment to the regulations establishing the maximum fence height regulations (located within Title IV of the City's Municipal Code). It is staffs opinion that by allowing a 6-foot high fence along all property lines, except for the portions of the fence located within the "clear vision area," a more equitable and understandable fence height regulation would be provided to property owners. Residential fences within the City are not subject to building permit review; therefore, this amendment would also provide residents with a less confusing maximum fence height regulation. Lastly, amending the fence regulations would also provide Code Enforcement staff with a clear directive as to the Council's intent behind the maximum fence height standards as established by code. CONCLUSION If an amendment to the maximum fence height regulations was approved by Council, staff believes this scenario would provide property owners with a more equitable, understandable and enforceable fence height regulation. The amendment would establish a maximum height of 6 feet for all portions of the fence except for "clear vision areas," while maintaining the sight distance needed for safe vehicular and pedestrian maneuvering. cc: Neil Watts Jennifer Henning H:1DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGUej\issue papers\fence issue paper.doc\st *4410 4-4-040FENCES AND HEDGES: A. PURPOSE: These regulations are intended to regulate the material and height of fences and hedges, particularly in front yards and in yards abutting public rights-of-way, in order to promote traffic and public safety and to maintain aesthetically pleasing neighborhoods.The following regulations are intended to provide and maintain adequate sight distance along public rights-of-way at intersections and to encourage safe ingress and egress from individual properties.These regulations also encourage the feeling of spaciousness along neighborhood streets and minimize the closed city atmosphere which tall fences along public rights-of-way can create. B. APPLICABILITY: The provisions and conditions of this Section regulating height are not applicable to fences or barriers required by State law or by the zoning provisions of this Code to surround and enclose public safety installations, school grounds,public playgrounds,private or public swimming pools and similar installations and improvements. C. GENERAL FENCE AND HEDGE REQUIREMENTS: 1.Fence Height—Method of Measurement: The height shall be measured from the top elevation of the top board rail or wire to the ground.In cases where a wall is used instead of a fence,height shall be measured from the top surface of the wall to the ground on the high side of the wall. 2.Berms: A berm may not be constructed with a fence on it unless the total height of the berm plus the fence is less than the maximum height allowable for the fence if the berm were not present. 3. Grade Differences: Where the finished grade is a different elevation on either side of a fence the height may be measured from the side having the highest elevation. 4. City May Require Modification: Where a traffic vision hazard is created,the City may require a modification to the height limitations and location of fences,hedges or walls to the degree necessary to eliminate the hazard. D. STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES: 1. Height Limitations for Interior Lots: a. Front Yard Setbacks: Fences,walls or hedges a m of fort,.eight-"'ches b. Side Lot Line l h.,, to l„t t f.eq ec c .,* " . a. Fences,walls or hedges . t .a , t ii t its red f ont yards__may be a maximum of seventy two inches(72")in height. c. Rear Lot Line: A fence or hedge a maximum of seventy two inches(72")may be located on the rear lot line. 2.Height Limitations for Corner Lots: a. Front Yard SetbackaClear vision area: Fences,walls or hedges a maximum of forty two inches(42")in height may be allowed on any part of the clear vision area. clear vision area e ,,ia lot b. IMaximum Fence Height Lot Line:Fences, walls or hedges a maximum of seventy two inches(72")in height may be located on i -sideall other lot lines to the point where they intersect the required rr ..r setbackclear vision area, in which case they shall be governed by subsection D2a of this Section. Side T of r ; e n b„tting S ally hedges of f rty t..eet: F „ces� ` (18")in height elsewhere. d Re r T of T Fe ccar w ally hed f t y t h � J u n yard of an interior lot 3. Gate Required: Residential fences,walls or hedges along rear lot lines of interior lots abutting alleys shall contain an access gate to the alley. 4.Electric Fences: Electric fences are permitted by special review in all residential zones in cases where large domestic animals are being kept provided additional fencing or other barrier is erected along the property lines. A Activity: CO2-0108 PHOTO# 1 • • 4420 NE 6TH CT ON 2.27-2002 Printed: 03-08.2002 Paul Baker h,.. t ": , `" St`� xq,,� 4e5 1" a { 4. t i „ tktl , 3, iks, s s ', ps`. ys •i ., d 5. , 146 i, 1 i " 'q cgs > ,xi?d-e i , '' � r ,k x � a � � 'i St P. r . 1 r a-. y � > i, i , .r F .,7 1 e i F k 1 ' fir. f FIp,J ' '. -Activity: CO2-0108 PHOTO#2 4416 NE 7TH ST ON 2-27-02 Printed: 03-08-2002 Jason Jordan : _ - .. .,.. I Aa fnC.�. .. R-... Activity: CO2-0108 PHOTO # 3 4420 NE 7TH PL ON 2-27-02 ,, ow Printed: 03-08-2002 Jason Jordan —t x . Activity:CO2.0108 PHOTO#4 4506 NE 7TH PL ON 2.27-02 Now Printed:03.08.2002 Jason Jordan S S • "�IrY.wy4 _... 1 _ __ �„ua..' mow_ Activity: CO2-0108 PHOTO#5 4603 NE 7TH PL ON 2.27-02 Printed: 03-08-2002 Jason Jordan r 1 ":1.:irtt...;;;; w .. ,:t4,. ''' -4.''Ir......::,..*------'-' - ( -' 4 `:i ce ... A- '- • t r . n F _ .._..... ai. - 1 ■ I ,A, t Activity:CO2-0108 PHOTO#6 752 BREMERTON PL NE ON 2-27-02 :,i, ., Printed: 03-08-2002 Jason Jordan * _. 1i -.... i �.>v-.auw���:. i -f i1,.. pi.`.-ii, 'r 4. Activity: CO2-0108 PHOTO#7 . - • 759 BREMERTON PL NE ON 2-27-02 ' Printed: 03-08-2002 Jason Jordan k 1 i4 1". . � t:._ - 17,(a Via" r .J "k . i1,r _, a t .� I ' •,„J.! Ac:-. -I '', iiii.ti. ,,. ,• ypp .; r 4\; \ ,. -,ti :,fi C" � •A q• :i,,,,,1,,,,: ii ; . 9° - � { fit . c,, t& -t ,• 't !i. ��4 ids ' _ i , -, ., . h • 4 - j}. fy Si i November 4,2002 *ow Renton City Council Minutes Page 426 Airport: Runway/Taxiway Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of a contract in the Lighting Signage &Paving, amount of$275,204.64 with W&H Pacific for the design of the Airport W&H Pacific, Fund Transfer Runway Taxiway Lighting, Signage and Paving Project; and requested authorization to transfer $305,204.64 from the Airport Reserve Fund to the Airport 402 account; and authorization to adjust the 2002 Budget for the Airport 402 account in the amount of$57,520.46. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. Utility: Annual Consultant Utility Systems Division requested a two-year extension(to October 2004)of Roster for Telemetry& the annual consultant contract shortlist for telemetry and supervisory control SCADA Services and data acquisition (SCADA)consultant services. The roster lists the following consultants: Casne Engineering, Inc., Reid Instruments, and RH2 Engineering, Inc. Council concur. CAG: 02-151,Higate Lift Utility Systems Division submitted CAG-02-151, Higate Lift Station Station Elimination, Elimination; and requested approval of the project, authorization for final pay Westwater Const Co estimate in the amount of$34,489.60,commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of$15,283.03 to Westwater Construction Company, contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. Utility: Oversizing Request for Water Utility Division recommended approval of the request from HBR Reimbursement,Ridgley,HBR Enterprises for reimbursement in the amount of$26,405.60 for oversizing the Enterprises water main in Duvall Ave. NE for the Ridgely Preliminary Plat (PP-01-045) at the City's request. Refer to Utilities Committee. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CAG: 02-118,Traffic Responding to Councilman Clawson's request for more information regarding Management Center,Fredhoes the Traffic Management Center construction project,Facilities Director Dennis Building Const Co Culp stated that the project will be completed by the end of the year, and entails space modifications on the fifth floor of City Hall. Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman indicated that this project is one portion of the traffic synchronization project, which entails equipment installation in the Traffic Management Center, and installation of a series of signal control boxes at select intersections throughout the City. He noted that staff is working to make sure that the signal control systems are compatible with the State and King County systems. Confirming that the traffic synchronization project includes synchronized signals for buses and emergency vehicles, Mr. Zimmerman added that the project is being funded with Renton,King County, and Federal funds, and will be completed in 2003. OLD BUSINESS MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, Comprehensive Plan: COUNCIL REFER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS TO Amendments THE PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Development Services: Fence Reporting that the Planning &Development Committee discovered a wide Height Restrictions range of fence heights during its tour last week, Councilwoman Keolker- 17 1k Wheeler stated that the Committee is reviewing fence height restriction options including the implementation of standards for new development. Utility: Aquifer Protection Pointing out that Renton is lucky to have clean drinking water, unlike other Ordinance places such as the country of Morocco, Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler commended City staff,current and former elected officials, and businesses for their work in protecting Renton's aquifer. She noted that as of October 14, October 28,2002 %.+. Renton City Council Minutes ,.+' Page 416 Responding to Councilman Persson's inquiry,Mayor Tanner confirmed that King County will pay Renton a fee to hold a King County prisoner in Renton's jail,as Renton pays King County a fee to hold a Renton prisoner in King County's jail. *MOTION CARRIED. (See later this page for resolutions.) Police: Civil Infraction Fines Public Safety Committee Chair Clawson presented a report regarding fines and &Penalties penalties for civil infractions. The Committee reviewed the Renton Municipal Court bail schedule and found that fines have been at present levels for ten years. To make fines and penalties comparable to those in surrounding cities, the Committee recommended an increase in penalties as follows: • Overtime parking from$10 to$20. • Parking on the wrong side of the street, on sidewalks,blocking driveways, etc. from$15 to$25. • All previous violations within Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park from $25 to$35. • Additional penalty for failure to respond to violation from$10 to$15. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PARKER,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT AS AMENDED TO STRIKE THE WORD PREVIOUS FROM THE THIRD BULLET. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution#3593 A resolution was read approving the Heritage Renton Hill Final Plat consisting Plat: Heritage Renton Hill, of approximately 10.39 acres located in the vicinity of SE 8th Pl. and Beacon Beacon Way SE(FP-02-085) Way SE(FP-02-085). MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Resolution#3594 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the Police: Jail Services Contract, King County jail services agreement. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED King County BY BRIERE,COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Resolution#3595 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an Police: Jail Services Contract addendum to the interlocal agreement("long term jail contract")between Addendum, Yakima County, Yakima County and the cities of Algona,Auburn,Town of Beaux Arts Village, CAG-02-099 Bellevue, Black Diamond, Bothell, Burien, Carnation, Clyde Hill, Covington, Des Moines,Duvall,Federal Way, Issaquah, Kenmore, Kirkland,Lake Forest Park,Maple Valley,Medina,Mercer Island,Newcastle,Normandy Park,North Bend,Pacific,Redmond,Renton, Sammamish, SeaTac, Seattle, Shoreline, Skykomish, Snoqualmie,Tukwila,Woodinville, and the Town of Yarrow Point, Washington,for the housing of inmates by Yakima County Department of Corrections(CAG-02-099). MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Responding to Councilman Clawson's inquiry regarding the Planning& Development Services: Fence Development Committee's field trip scheduled for October 30th to look at Height Regulations examples of different fence heights,Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler confirmed that the Committee is currently reviewing the City's fence height {�C regulations including those pertaining to driveways. (A public hearing on the matter was held on May 6, 2002.) #r 1 RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting May 6, 2002 Council Chambers Monday,7:30 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Jesse Tanner led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF TONI NELSON, Council President; DAN CLAWSON;TERRI BRIERE; COUNCILMEMBERS KING PARKER;DON PERSSON; RANDY CORMAN. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILWOMAN KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN JESSE TANNER,Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative Officer; ATTENDANCE LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON,City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; LESLIE BETLACH,Parks Director; JENNIFER TOTH HENNING,Principal Planner;LESLEY NISHIHIRA, Senior Planner; JASON JORDAN, Associate Planner;DEREK TODD, Assistant to the CAO; CYNDIE PARKS, Community Program Coordinator; COMMANDER ROBERT SEELYE,Police Department. PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Tanner was read declaring the month of May, 2002, Mental Health Month—May, to be "Mental Health Month" in the City of Renton, and calling upon all Renton 2002 citizens,government agencies, public and private institutions, businesses, and schools to recommit the community to increasing awareness and understanding of mental illness and the need for appropriate and accessible services for all people with mental illnesses. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION AS READ. CARRIED. Peggy Moll accepted the proclamation on behalf of Valley Cities Counseling and Consultation and other human service organizations. She stated that mental health matters to the health and security of the Renton community and thanked the Mayor and Council for their generous support of human services. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Community Program Coordinator Cyndie Parks presented the Volunteer Police: Volunteer Recognition Excellence Award to Police Department volunteer Larry Yates. Ms. Parks praised Mr. Yates for his 1500 hours of service, and described his contributions as the vacation house check volunteer which entails checking the homes of residents while they are on vacation to ensure that their property is safe and intact. Councilman Persson reported that he has received many positive comments about the vacation house check program, and he commended Mr. Yates for his service. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Development Services: Fence accordance with local and State laws,Mayor Tanner opened the public hearing Height Regulations to consider potential revisions to the maximum residential fence height regulations established in Title 4 of Renton City Code. Jason Jordan,Associate Planner, outlined the current fence height regulations for interior and corner lots, and reviewed the definition of the clear vision area as the area bounded by the street property lines of corner lots and a line joining points along said street lines 20 feet from their point of intersection. He pointed out that the maximum fence height in the clear vision area is 42 inches. lylay 6,2002 — Renton City Council Minutes `"? Page 159 Reporting that the City has received numerous fence height violation complaints,Mr. Jordan stated that residents have asked for clarity and equity within the fence height regulations. Continuing,Mr.Jordan stated that staff recommends amending the maximum residential fence height regulations to allow fences up to a maximum height of 72 inches,except for portions of the fences located within the clear vision area, regardless of their proximity to a public street. He concluded by saying that residential fences are not subject to building permit review;therefore, the revisions would provide residents with regulations that are more equitable and understandable. The revisions would also provide City code enforcement staff with more easily enforceable maximum fence height regulations. Responding to Councilwoman Briere's inquiry,Mr. Jordan confirmed that the proposed 72-inch residential maximum fence height applies everywhere except for clear vision areas. He noted that a special administrative fence permit is needed to allow 72-inch high fences along an arterial street. Mayor Tanner recommended that Council approve revising City Code to allow fence heights up to 72 inches except in the clear vision areas. Audience comment was invited. Terry Sullivan, (mailing address) 1420 NW Gilman Blvd.,#2151,Issaquah, 98027, stated that he lives in the Orchards development in Renton and expressed his concern that nearby 72-inch high fences create a hazard when he backs out of his driveway. He said that he is not against allowing 72-inch high fences; however,care needs to be taken as to where they are allowed and not allowed. Mr. Sullivan reviewed the issues that concern him regarding the fence heights, including the safety and visibility considerations of the fence height and distance from driveways. Mr. Sullivan displayed photographs depicting different views of his driveway and the street showing the limited sight distance as a result of neighboring fences. He expressed his concern for the safety of bicyclists,rollerbladers and others because of the limited sight distances created by high fences. Responding to Mr. Sullivan's comment about enforcement of the clear vision areas,City Attorney Larry Warren stated that the City has police power to enforce clear vision area regulations when public safety is involved. Councilman Corman suggested that the City consider applying clear vision area regulations to driveways as well as to streets. Continuing,Mr. Sullivan showed a diagram of his home and driveway,and his neighbor's fence line. He suggested that the City reconsider the side yard heights, and phrase the ordinance so that clear vision area issues are addressed in order to ensure public safety. Mayor Tanner assured Mr. Sullivan that public safety is the City's primary concern,and reiterated his recommendation to permit 72-inch high fences as long as sight distance is not impaired. Mayor Tanner stated that this matter has been referred to Planning and Development Committee,and he asked that Mr. Sullivan be notified when the Committee is scheduled to discuss it. There being no further audience comment, it was MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON,COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. 11 �e t -;,,,,t4e,„ m'l Y .�_ F �R 4 ���fi az N s{ P CIN O- ION RN 0 T l ay6, 2062 mAyamum FENCE HEIGHT IZEOULATIONS • For additional information,please contact: Jason Jordan,ProjectManager; City of Renton Development Services Division; (425)430-7219 ISSUE: Fences in residential zones are limited to 48-inches (4 feet) in height when they are located directly adjacent to a public street (for example in front yards or side yards along a street). Otherwise, fences in residential zones are allowed to be 72-inches (6 feet) in height. Residents throughout the City have commented that there is substantial inequity with respect to permitted fence heights and that the varying heights are somewhat confusing to interpret. BACKGROUND/OPTIONS SUMMARY: In response to a complaint filed by a neighbor, City staff has initiated a Code Enforcement Action against a property owner who has a 6-foot high fence that was constructed within a side yard along a public street. Current code requirements limit fence heights to 4 feet when they are located directly adjacent to a public street; therefore, the fence in question was determined to be in violation of the code. When the property owner was notified that their fence exceeded the maximum allowed fence height, they in turn, filed a complaint against other property owners in the same area who have also violated the maximum fence height of 4 feet when located directly adjacent to a public street. As a result of these actions, Code Enforcement staff performed multiple site investigations and determined that the fences in question were in violation of the maximum height allowed; however, the fences did not violate the "clear vision area." Nevertheless,Code Enforcement staff is now inundated with fence height enforcement cases. This issue presents staff with several options. The first option is to continue responding to complaints as they are filed with the City. Option Two is to instruct Code Enforcement Officers to proactively pursue property owners who violate the maximum fence height as established by current City Code. The Third option, which is preferred by staff, is to amend the maximum fence height requirements for fences located directly adjacent to a public street. This option would necessitate a code amendment to the regulations establishing the maximum fence height regulations (located within Title IV of the City's Municipal Code). It is staffs opinion that by allowing a 6-foot high fence along all property lines,except for the portions of the fence located within the "clear vision area," a more equitable and understandable fence height regulation would be provided to property owners. Residential fences within the City are not subject to building permit review; therefore, this amendment would also provide residents with a less confusing maximum fence height regulation. Lastly, amending the fence regulations would also provide Code Enforcement staff with a clear directive as to the Council's intent behind the maximum fence height standards as established by code. RECOMMENDATION: The Development Services Division is recommending to amend the maximum fence height regulations to six feet in all locations,except when located within the clear vision area. tJ 0 4) 401,) c E • r4 r=1 an) (1, • >C . . . cz1 1 bA • • - bA N Oct a O N •v• 4 Mr; I a) +.••: utl) •7 !al) CI) • I . .... ( CAo CO , 10 ' 4-4 o o § E -4—) ,-, cs .... • 1--4 . . Z l E .1--) vs c bA a� a) 14 I) CZ: ba0 • - d 11E v It .� tab 5 '- N N ' ,� vd- •Nb t `i C.) to . . O v O cid l -^ - •— .- � N '� o & Q) - O CA N i_jiii,4 E 1) ac .1- ., (1) isl ,_ 4-4 i-4 O O /1 .1110 0 2 ct 111 • H :, E .— •-21 (.4-, i •1. 1 -4..) ; :__ • 0 O ct 44 4 ; O E " E u ct +_,,, E ,,,i c.,.,t 2 •• '' V1 v CI E O O .� 64 o ,• , • ..•:•,!:••,.:::::::.•:.:,..... '....:';:i ...,:.:.:::....:::::::::::::::::1....... .:........:....,...3::i. .i........:....:.....!::......Y;...k.,.:,...........!.....li!iitiiii "'-.• ' ".•...•.-..., ..... .. . • . .... ...... -... . . ........... ... .• •• ••., .....................„.. .. :.:::.:::M:::::::::::::.......:::a..:: ::::. .,....:,........:....:.....::::::::::„.............:::.......1 •:,4::;:::•••••:::.:::::::::::::',.....:.:::','....:'.::11: -.:.i. '•:::.........:....••••::',.......::::..........:.:.,...42.:::'...? -.. • 1..::•-•-••••••''''''.';'....:7.::••••••....:...:,:.i.:.....• '.::.•:-:.:•••....:•..:.•:.:...::...............:........:.......:.:..,...,?•::::: :••:•.•••,:::••.:..•...• '''....•••••.•,.••• •:::::....'•:.!:::..'..:.......•:',.••••.:•.:•..:x:il . , •••••••.:::.:::...•:::::..,',•:'........:••••..:•.:•..::...,: •:::•••:::...::.:::::. ..•:•.:•••••••:::::::::',!:.1 ..::.',.E:•:•;,....::::::':::.::::...•••••'.:::•••:.•:•:::•• •i - *-:'...,..:::,../,•..*•:::••••i::;.•::::.:••1 .....:.:::::::::q::. h::...,:..H...:•..;,:• "•:::::..'::.-y-,.....:,:... 7.,.::€1 (n - :::::.•i•Iiiill.••:•:•:•.'..••:...]:1:;::::::.::, iiiipg E.'- ... 7,...H:.•••'..•::::.:::::5:,..;,:•:.;::H......,:. 1 Z I - :(:).::.::::.:;.........••:.:•4•:.:::-. . ...::. 0 0 - .., - .. .•••.....•:•:•:•:-:-•:•••••.:::,.. , ..:4._.. ..:.:::,......:.:... .::::..... ,.............. 0.1 ..... .1 1 . .. . ...... 2 2 D D - • i:...• :••.•.:..:••....••:....•...•••.......2••:.:...:...:••..:..:.:... ::.,•..::.-:.::..::.::,&.,r..a„.:•.„.1)..•„!:.::...,::..:.:...:::...r:.:.::•::....:....:.::.:..:....:....;•:..........::..,•„.:.g...:..:::.•':::....:.::..::.:.,...:..:..:::.::..:•..:...•:..::„:.:•:.:...:.-;•.•:.:•..:..„.;. .•••......:.•.::.„:•:•..:::•:,.....:....•::..::..::::,..:...:::•.:.:::::.::.:... ...:.......„....-....:....,...:.:.....,'..::....:::.,.•:. :......•...•..t..:.-4.:.,...i... ..:..:.:,...,:::..-..:..,.:.„:::.:::..::,„:::.::,.,:.:..::.':..:.•,.:...;:....,.,..,.:.:..•...„..:;,..:.:..„..,.,.:..•.........:......•:.•: 1, ,I•, 1 r 4 0 / (N. \ / CC) ...„,"!.1...'; ,.. -:.'.................-.. .::.:::...::::::............ ......, -16--. I ,\ 1 4.- "0.-00 .* ,\\, oi r .,,,,,••,:„,„ r . •. 6 4 ., f 0 ^ '75 O 0 STREET-v _ o � 4� Lc)� � I� ►` 0 ro 30ez N cd al L.. i C c U .. 0 - cd N ^vD Q SN � O N � O , cn � � •c • I � bAT� O C � N 51REE1 p k 4� . 0 c.„) —4 iti¢3 cd � 5 8- 0 0., . cc 16. 4Ei .Lz: cr,, < •S 2 o) J T . aF O t 1 . I Q) 0 �-- bA I) - .5 CD •p I.) c4 CD a)Cut • ;.., O 3I) th 4-4 .— iE p 0 I , •� , N •.—a �..� r—, N N '.+:4:Na ›'1 t Jo '� `• f •CA' p.p N C ,_., '� U 0 p '� .74 8 4D lebk ,I) '7a .7:, ��� � U '� N ••- N C to a) I) . i ' ) a) B .O 4-1 • cam.., OF'! O 8 v -, to 71% u i) ct —6_, u v) 4-i' ',-; 0 0 � ,.2 .5 u ° o o ct 5 L) w A. o ,4 . . . -.. ., . ... .. •;...-:14Ar ',i- 1,. .,, .. t ,. , /'... ., , -.... 1 .... , .... „ .. ... ,,..,- \ -- ... \ „ - ‘ k , ,, / ' - I I ik / 7: '-. . . . ___ Iliti , .......... , , , •- . k' i -- 1 ',:,, :::,,., , .., . , 1 , _ '••••_ . . L;.' i ,../ ,.., . • .,....2.:-.i II all '.: . !' . • •-- 7.4 o rzi v7i a) U U 4) N CA C.)C-4--. 7d +, ct co 4C' ' CA E (I) ‹) 0 a) tO = E rm47e i. E • I Q) ° . '-0 O ;-4 v-4 . � U ct � 0 c�3 o Ct C4.C.D (i) E � . I • � • O o a.) W 4 . o -4—) 1.) (I) rao E ct c+_, T4 O c) ° to 5 (-) `-' °A—) . T-4 +-) 1‘74 Il 1, cl L) vTJ .c .' ,. bo ccp 'a) o ago r--q N M d- Ct O • S Q'� 1 v.a) 17 • 54 . 2 o .r1 -+ (L) t_ . 4 Oo . . 4-) ,•--, L E v-c: Tqz' A-) ) • a) a) 1>-' (L) (L) ,—, 00., a) ,_c) c-i- (...) -.4 E riz: ‹) l . E T-4 \ft -w/ ,e=44 ;_4 . O p 4� ." U , O r 01 (;21 ci) 0 c ' 4 p O o U '4_' U' . .:.a4) t:14 4) U I) . . v 04-4 cu c.- i E cA— 4) '7. . E . ,.. Ecct • . e., "" '"C E czt i—c: ct ,.__,cD E rm4 ., „oh 1..) m c) 0 :8 (8 ,_ cit ;._ -ci O vi v, 6- c+, to r_, ct c„ ..0 ,, (i) • ,-. • . • ! -� bz, W W