HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil 03/26/2007 AGENDA
RENTON Com'COUNCIL
11611 REGULAR MEETING
March 26, 2007
Monday, 7 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL
3. SPECIAL PRESENTATION: King County Events Center Update
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. Basic (limited) cable service rates,as calculated by Comcast Cable television in its March 1999
and March 2006 rate filings, and proposed settlement of disputed issues
b. Cable equipment and installation rates, as calculated by Comcast Cable in its annual FCC Form
1205 rate filing of 4/1/2006, and proposed settlement of disputed issues
5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
6. AUDIENCE COMMENT (Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting. Each speaker is
allowed five minutes. The comment period will be limited to one-half hour. The second audience
comment period later on in the agenda is unlimited in duration.)
When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to the podium and state your name
and address for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the
recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further
discussion if requested by a Councilmember.
a. Approval of Council meeting minutes of 3/19/2007. Council concur.
b. Mayor Keolker appoints Michael Chen, 6214 NE 5th Ct., Renton, 98059, to the Planning
Commission for a three-year term expiring 1/31/2010. Refer to Community Services Committee.
c. City Clerk submits petition for street vacation for portion of Index Pl. NE, between NE 7th and
NE 8th Streets; petitioner A&D Quality Construction Company, LLC, 220 SW Sunset Blvd.,
Suite E202, Renton, 98057 (VAC-07-001). Refer to Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator; set public hearing on 4/23/2007 to consider the petition. (See 10.c. for resolution
setting public hearing.)
d. Development Services Division recommends acceptance of a deed of dedication for additional
right-of-way in the vicinity of Redmond Ave. NE and NE 19th St. to fulfill a requirement of the
Traverso Short Plat(SHP-06-021). Council concur.
e. Hearing Examiner recommends approval, with conditions, of the Bremerton Townhomes
Preliminary Plat(PP-06-133); 26 attached townhome units on 1.8 acres located at 320 and 330
Bremerton Ave. NE. Council concur.
8. CORRESPONDENCE
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics
marked with an asterisk(*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by
the Chair if further review is necessary.
a. Committee of the Whole: Comcast Cable Television Rates Settlement*
b. Finance Committee: Vouchers; Springbrook Wetlands Bank Fund Creation&Fund Changes*
(CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE)
10. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
Resolutions:
a. Comcast Cable television maximum basic programming service rate (see 9.a.)
b. Comcast Cable television maximum permitted equipment and installation rates(see 9.a.)
c. Setting public hearing on 4/23/2007 for A&D Quality Construction vacation petition(see 7.c.)
Ordinance for first reading:
Springbrook Wetlands Bank Fund creation& Park Memorial Fund change(see 9.b.)
11. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded
information.)
12. AUDIENCE COMMENT
13. ADJOURNMENT
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
(Preceding Council Meeting)
Council Conference Room
5:30 p.m.
Emerging Issues in Community Services
Council Chambers
Approximately 6 p.m.
Utility Rates (Policy, Principle and Application)
• Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk •
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 AND ARE RE-CABLECAST
TUES.&THURS.AT 1 1 AM&9 PM,WED.&FRI.AT 9 AM&7 PM AND SAT.&SUN.AT 1 PM&9 PM
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
March 26, 2007 Council Chambers
Monday, 7 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order
and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
ROLL CALL OF TONI NELSON, Council President; DENIS LAW; MARCI PALMER; DON
COUNCILMEMBERS PERSSON. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL
EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS DAN CLAWSON, TERRI
BRIERE, AND RANDY CORMAN. CARRIED.
CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative
ATTENDANCE Officer; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City
Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator; ALEX PIETSCH, Economic Development Administrator;
SUZANNE DALE ESTEY, Economic Development Director; MARTY WINE,
Assistant CAO; PREETI SHRIDHAR, Communications Director; DEPUTY
CHIEF CHUCK DUFFY, Fire Department; CHIEF KEVIN MILOSEVICH and
COMMANDER DAVID LEIBMAN, Police Department.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION Clay Bennett, Seattle Sonics and Storm owner, gave a presentation on the
Planning: Multipurpose Events proposed King County Events Center in Renton. He reported that his
Center(Sonics& Storm organization is more encouraged and more pleased every day since the decision
Basketball) was made to locate to Renton, and he thanked everyone at the City for their hard
work. Mr. Bennett indicated that the events center will host not only
professional sports, but other types of sports and entertainment as well. Stating
that the building is envisioned to be active 200 days per year with various
events, he pointed out that the vibrant and dynamic regional economy suggests
that the events center will do very well operationally.
Continuing, Mr. Bennett stated that the proposed events center will create many
jobs, increase the tax base, and help build the City of Renton. He noted his
organization's vision of a public and private partnership in the development of
this project, and described the efforts being made towards that end. Mr. Bennett
pointed out that although the Sonics and Storm will only be a tenant in the
building, the building will be a public building and serve the greater good. He
further pointed out that the franchise aspires to be the best in the league, to win
championships, and to reach out and bond with the community.
Mr. Bennett announced that the organization will open an office in Renton this
Wednesday in order to interact with citizens, answer questions, and provide
information. He noted the uniqueness of the whole experience and praised the
Renton community's willingness to find a way to make this significant
economic development happen.
MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE
RULES AND ADVANCE TO AUDIENCE COMMENT. CARRIED.
AUDIENCE COMMENT Ben Simon, 27111 41st Pl. S., Kent, 98032, said he has had a lot of interaction
Citizen Comment: Simon - with the Sonics and Storm teams, and noted the good that the teams bring to the
Multipurpose Events Center community. He indicated that the positive energy and community support that
(Sonics & Storm Basketball) is provided is vital to any major city, and entices corporations to move into the
k
March 26, 2007 Renton City Council Minutes 106
area. Mr. Simon pointed out that the proposed King County Events Center in
Renton will spur new business, clean up neighborhoods, and increase land
values.
Citizen Comment: Taylor- Bill Taylor, Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce President/CEO, 517 Chelan
Multipurpose Events Center Pl. NE, Renton, 98059, stated that one of the strengths of Renton is the unique
(Sonics& Storm Basketball) stakeholder relationship that exists, consisting of Renton Technical College,
Valley Medical Center, Renton School District, City of Renton, and Chamber of
Commerce. He relayed that the stakeholders had written a letter to Clay
Bennett, Seattle Sonics and Storm owner, encouraging him to locate the King
County Events Center in Renton and be part of Renton's transformation. Mr.
Taylor noted the economic development opportunities and community building
prospects the events center will provide to Renton and its residents.
Citizen Comment: Sens- Gene Sens,410 Burnett Ave. S., Renton, 98057, expressed his excitement about
Multipurpose Events Center the prospect of a new King County Events Center in Renton, which will aid in
(Sonics & Storm Basketball) making Renton a world-class city. Speaking as a businessman, he indicated that
the events center is an opportunity that cannot be duplicated. He pointed out
that as long as the process is careful and respectful of the affected
neighborhoods,he does not see why this opportunity cannot come to fruition.
Citizen Comment: Searing- Kimberly Searing, 2100 SE 2nd Pl., Renton, 98056, speaking as a partner in the
Multipurpose Events Center Melrose Grill located in downtown Renton,pointed out that the proposed King
(Sonics& Storm Basketball) County Events Center in Renton will have a positive financial impact on the
community extending to the downtown area. Ms. Searing noted that the City's
past hosting of the Cirque du Soleil significantly increased patronage at her
restaurant. She indicated that the events center will provide the same type of
exposure for local businesses in the Renton community.
Citizen Comment: Sanford - Michael Sanford, Holiday Inn General Manager, One S. Grady Way, Renton,
Multipurpose Events Center 98057,expressed support for the proposed King County Events Center in
(Sonics& Storm Basketball) Renton. He stated that the events center will be a tremendous asset to the City,
and for his hotel alone, he will need to hire 35 new employees if the center is
located in Renton. Mr. Sanford pointed out that the events center will help
attract conferences and conventions, which will benefit from Renton's close
proximity to Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and from lower costs as
compared to downtown Seattle. He also pointed out that the events center will
improve the quality of life by generating additional jobs.
Citizen Comment: Secord - Alan Secord, 375 Union Ave. SE,#152, Renton, 98059, stated that at first he
Multipurpose Events Center opposed the proposed King County Events Center, but after conducting research
(Sonics& Storm Basketball) and asking questions, he now favors the proposal. He suggested that the media
refer to the facility as the King County Events Center rather than the Sonics
Arena,and that people be better informed about the project. Mr. Secord asked
the City to do whatever it takes to get the events center built.
Citizen Comment: Runge- Ryan Runge, 3016 Benson Rd. S.,Renton, 98055, noted the amazing changes
Multipurpose Events Center that the arts and heritage communities have made in Renton over the past couple
(Sonics & Storm Basketball) years. He stated that many people are excited about the opportunities the
proposed events center will provide to Renton, but noted that the funding
(lodging tax) also helps arts committees. He explained that King County's
4Culture receives funding and offers grants to over 200 arts, historical, and
heritage organizations. Mr. Runge emphasized that the Renton community
benefits from these organizations and they should not be forgotten.
March 26,2007 Renton City Council Minutes 107
Citizen Comment: Hanson- Roxanne Hanson, 120 Union Ct. NE, Renton, 98059, representing GSG
Multipurpose Events Center Corporation, owners of Diamond Lil's and Freddie's Clubs, voiced support for
(Sonics & Storm Basketball) the proposed King County Events Center in Renton. She explained that since
smoking was banned in public places, business has decreased, layoffs have
resulted, and now Freddie's Club is unable to sponsor this year's 4th of July
celebration. She pointed out that the additional revenue from the events center
will provide the service industry the added income needed to be able to continue
supporting events in Renton. Ms. Hanson urged Council to do whatever it can
to support bringing the King County Events Center to Renton.
Citizen Comment: Maxwell - Marcie Maxwell, PO Box 2048, Renton, 98056, said she is proud to call Renton
Multipurpose Events Center her home and place of business, and now the rest of the Puget Sound area is
(Sonics & Storm Basketball) learning to appreciate everything Renton has to offer. She noted that new and
diverse businesses and activities are now a reality due to economic development
work and marketing partnerships. Ms. Maxwell stated that although the events
center will benefit Renton and the region, the scheduled events will cause an
increase in traffic from all directions and on all roadways. Pointing out that
solving transportation issues should be given high priority, she asked that
consideration be made for Renton neighborhoods, and for employees and
customers of Renton businesses who will continue to use the roadways.
PUBLIC HEARINGS This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in
City Clerk: Cable Franchise, accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Keolker opened public hearings to
Basic Programming Service consider the following:
Rate& Permitted Equipment • Basic (limited) cable service rates, as calculated by Comcast Cable
& Installation Rates Communications, LLC, in its March 1999 and March 2006 rate filings, and
proposed settlement of disputed issues: FCC (Federal Communications
Commission) Form 1235 filed by Comcast on 3/1/99, and FCC Form 1240
filed by Comcast on 4/1/2006; and
• Cable equipment and installation rates, as calculated by Comcast, in its FCC
Form 1205 rate filing of 4/1/2006, and proposed settlement of disputed
issues.
Assistant Chief Administrative Officer Wine stated that the purpose of the
public hearings is to receive public comment on whether Renton should approve
settlements with Comcast for cable television rates and adopt revised FCC rate
orders. She explained that the City grants Comcast the right to operate and
provide cable television services in Renton. Since the franchise is due to expire
in September 2008, Renton is conducting its due diligence to determine whether
Comcast is in compliance with the City's current cable franchise and applicable
laws and regulations. Included in this process is a review and audit of three rate
forms that Comcast files with the City and the FCC.
Starting with FCC Form 1205, which is used to justify the maximum permitted
rates for installation and equipment, Ms. Wine stated that Comcast is unable to
justify some of their rates. Therefore, Comcast proposes a settlement whereby a
refund plan and rate reduction will be offered to cable subscribers, which
entails: one-time refunds for most types of installation and equipment services,
and in some cases, lower-than-current rates.
Ms. Wine then reviewed FCC Forms 1235 and 1240. Form 1235 focuses on the
cable system's ability to recoup the cost of upgrading the system as it is being
expanded. She explained that the initial form filed in 1999 allowed Comcast to
charge subscribers $1.16 per month for 14 years. However, Comcast failed to
file a final FCC Form 1235. Form 1240 justifies the maximum permitted rates
that Comcast can charge for the basic cable programming. Ms. Wine noted that
March 26,2007 Renton City Council Minutes 108
Comcast improperly included the business and occupation tax in the basic
service rate,and excluded the FCC regulatory fee in its calculation of maximum
permitted rates.
Ms. Wine explained that the settlement proposes the following in regard to FCC
Forms 1235 and 1240: eliminating the FCC Form 1235 fee, eliminating the
business and occupation tax, including the FCC fee in the calculation of the
FCC Form 1240 maximum permitted rates, and providing the requested
advertising revenue information. She noted that with this settlement, Comcast
will not be able to charge subscribers the additional$1.16 per month.
Public comment was invited. There being none, it was MOVED BY NELSON,
SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
CARRIED. (See later this page and 109 for Committee of the Whole reports.)
ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Covington reviewed a written administrative
REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs
adopted as part of its business plan for 2007 and beyond. Items noted included:
* Washington State Department of Transportation will begin construction of
the City/WSDOT Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank
project on April 2. The construction will occur on City-owned property
located south of SW 27th St. between Oakesdale Ave. SW and Lind Ave.
SW and north of SW 41st St. Work on the project will extend over a two-
year period.
CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the
listing.
Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 3/19/2007. Council concur.
3/19/2007
Appointment: Planning Mayor Keolker appointed Michael Chen, 6214 NE 5th Ct., Renton, 98059, to
Commission the Planning Commission for a three-year term expiring 1/31/2010. Refer to
Community Services Committee.
Vacation: Index P1 NE, A&D City Clerk submitted petition for vacation of portion of Index Pl. NE,between
Quality Construction NE 7th and NE 8th Streets; petitioner A&D Quality Construction Company,
Company, VAC-07-001 LLC, 220 SW Sunset Blvd., Suite E202, Renton, 98057. Refer to
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; set public hearing on 4/23/2007
to consider the petition. (See page 110 for resolution setting public hearing.)
Development Services: Development Services Division recommended acceptance of a deed of
Traverso Short Plat, ROW dedication for additional right-of-way in the vicinity of Redmond Ave. NE and
Dedication, Redmond Ave NE, NE 19th St. to fulfill a requirement of the Traverso Short Plat. Council concur.
SHP-06-021
Plat: Bremerton Townhomes, Hearing Examiner recommended approval, with conditions, of the Bremerton
Bremerton Ave NE, PP-06-133 Townhomes Preliminary Plat; 26 attached townhome units on 1.8 acres located
at 320 and 330 Bremerton Ave. NE. Council concur.
MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL APPROVE THE
CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS Council President Nelson presented a Committee of the Whole report regarding
Committee of the Whole the cable franchise renewal basic programming rate regulation and network
City Clerk: Cable Franchise, upgrade add-on calculation and the FCC (Federal Communications
Basic Programming Service Commission) Forms 1235 and 1240 rate review and settlement. The Committee
Rate recommended approval of the revised FCC rate orders and the settlement offer
from Comcast Cable Communications, LLC. The Committee further
recommended that the resolution regarding the matter be presented for reading
r
March 26,2007 Renton City Council Minutes 109
and adoption. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL
CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 110 for
resolution.)
City Clerk: Cable Franchise, Council President Nelson presented a Committee of the Whole report regarding
Permitted Equipment& the cable franchise renewal annual rate review of the equipment and installation
Installation Rates rate regulation and the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) Form 1205
proposed rate settlement. The Committee recommended approval of the revised
FCC rate orders and the settlement offer from Comcast Cable Communications,
LLC. The Committee further recommended that the resolution be presented for
reading and adoption. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY LAW,
COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See
page 110 for resolution.)
Transportation (Aviation) Transportation (Aviation) Committee Chair Palmer presented a report regarding
Committee the Renton Municipal Airport development policy priorities -key governing
Airport: Development Policy policies. The Committee recommended that the following four governing
Priorities, Key Governing policies, first presented at the 3/1/2007 Council workshop, be formally adopted.
Policies Key Governing Policies for the Airport:
1. Airport operations should be sensitive to neighborhood impacts and should
strive to minimize those impacts.
2. The airport should be financially self-sustaining.
3. The mix of uses at the airport should operate within the regulatory
framework set by the Federal Aviation Administration.
4. The mix of uses at the airport should contribute to the City's Business Plan
goals and objectives.
MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR
•
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Airport: Development Policy Transportation(Aviation) Committee Chair Palmer presented a report regarding
Priorities, Options for the Renton Municipal Airport development policy priorities -options for
Proceeding proceeding. The Committee recommended that the following options for
proceeding, first presented at the 3/1/2007 Council workshop,be formally
adopted.
Recommended Options for Proceeding:
1. Review and clarify policies adopted in 2005 as part of the May 2005
Renton Municipal Airport Development Study.
2. Continue with financial analysis of the various layout options.
3. Enter into a memorandum of understanding with the City of Mercer Island,
outlining cooperative actions taken and those to be taken(information
sharing, Renton Airport Advisory Committee involvement, noise study, and
approach alternatives).
4. Continue with the noise study,jointly with Mercer Island.
5. Find a way to satisfy the Federal Aviation Administration's(FAA) direction
to finish the ALP(airport layout plan) work in the near term. This may
suggest that the area currently designated in one option as a corporate
aviation center would be left as a "potential future aviation center" with no
steps taken to implement it; or this area could be more vaguely labeled
"undetermined use"; or the area could be designated for a different aviation
use, and modified in the future.
6. Bring this new information together in very late 2007 or 2008.
7. Continue pursuing the LPV-WAAS (lateral precision approach with vertical
guidance) approach development by the FAA.
March 26,2007 Renton City Council Minutes 110
8. Formally ask the FAA to develop an RNP (required navigational
performance) (resource issue).
9. Include a process for community involvement.
10. Determine the role of the Renton Airport Advisory Committee in this
revised process.
MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval of
Finance: Vouchers Claim Vouchers 257963 - 258458 and two wire transfers totaling
$2,876,205.13; and approval of Payroll Voucher 137, one wire transfer, and 666
direct deposits totaling $2,192,083.35. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED
BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.
CARRIED.
Finance: Springbrook Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending
Wetlands Bank Fund Creation, concurrence in the staff recommendation to amend the Financial Management
Park Memorial Fund Change Policies and approve the ordinance to provide for a new Fund 135 for the
Springbrook Wetlands Bank and to change the Park Memorial Fund(131) to an
internal fund. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance
regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY PERSSON,
SECONDED BY LAW,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE
REPORT. CARRIED. (See later this page for ordinance.)
RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption:
ORDINANCES
Resolution#3867 A resolution was read regarding the basic programming service rate set forth in
City Clerk: Cable Franchise, the Federal Communications Commission Form 1240 filed on or about
Basic Programming Service 4/1/2006, and the network upgrade add-on calculated in the Federal
Rate Communications Commission Form 1235 filed on or about 3/1/99. MOVED
BY LAW, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE
RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED.
Resolution #3868 A resolution was read regarding the maximum permitted equipment and
City Clerk: Cable Franchise, installation rates set forth in the Federal Communications Commission Form
Permitted Equipment& 1205 filed by Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on or about 4/1/2006.
Installation Rates MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE
RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED.
Resolution #3869 A resolution was read setting a public hearing date of 4/23/2007 to vacate the
Vacation: Index P1 NE, A&D portion of Index Pl. NE between NE 7th and NE 8th Streets(Petitioner: A&D
Quality Construction Quality Construction Company). MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY
Company, VAC-07-001 NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED.
The following ordinance was presented for first reading and referred to the
Council meeting of 4/2/2007 for second and final reading:
Finance: Springbrook An ordinance was read creating new Fund 135 titled "Springbrook Wetlands
Wetlands Bank Fund Creation, Bank" and a new subfund under general fund titled "Park Memorial Fund" and
Park Memorial Fund Change closing Fund 131 "Park Memorial Fund" under special revenue fund for the
year 2007. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL
REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON
4/2/2007. CARRIED.
March 26,2007 Renton City Council Minutes 111
AUDIENCE COMMENT Raymond A. Breeden, Sr., 15279 Maple Dr., Renton, 98058, resident of the
Citizen Comment: Breeden- Wonderland Estates Mobile Home Park, expressed appreciation for the City's
Wonderland Estates Mobile support.
Home Park
Citizen Comment: Holman - Steve Holman, 95 S. Tobin St., Renton, 98057, expressed support for the
Airport, Multipurpose Events Renton Municipal Airport and any jet ports that may be placed there,noting that
Center(Sonics& Storm the airport is essential to the economy. On the subject of the proposed King
Basketball) County Events Center in Renton, Mr. Holman indicated that King County
taxpayers will pay $.50 on a $100 restaurant bill. He acknowledged people's
concerns regarding traffic, and pointed out that the event traffic can be managed
very efficiently and without a lot impact to the neighborhoods. Mr. Holman
stated that the benefits of the events center far out weigh the concerns.
Citizen Comment: Pyeatt- Steven Pyeatt, PO Box 2622, Kirkland, 98083, spoke on the subject of the
Multipurpose Events Center proposed King County Events Center in Renton. Mr. Pyeatt said he is the co-
(Sonics & Storm Basketball) founder of Save Our Sonics and Storm, and complimented Renton on figuring
out how to recreate itself. He stated that some are scared by change, but change
is inevitable and Renton is growing and becoming an even better city than it
was before. Mr. Pyeatt indicated that he looks forward to coming to Renton to
attend Sonics games, and offered his assistance towards that end.
ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN.
CARRIED. Time: 8:03 p.m.
Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk
Recorder: Michele Neumann
March 26, 2007
}
RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR
Office of the City Clerk
COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
March 26, 2007
COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON., 4/02 CANCELLED
(Nelson)
COMMUNITY SERVICES MON., 4/02 2007 Neighborhood Grants (1st round);
(Corman) 5:30 p.m. Michael Chen Appointment to Planning
Commission
FINANCE
(Persson)
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
(Briere)
PUBLIC SAFETY
(Law)
TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION)
(Palmer)
UTILITIES
(Clawson)
NOTE: Committee of the Whole meetings are held in the Council Chambers unless otherwise noted. All other committee meetings are held in the Council
Conference Room unless otherwise noted.
.„..: King,.
County
. ,01.,
pi-
..., , Events Center
7: 1 111,
THE FACTS ARE CLEAR
it � ,.�-�__--- .._
• No new taxes or tax increases are needed
�A . - ."--' for this regional public facility.
--.4.
• Taxes would be collected in King County only.
onl .
• Impact on King County taxpayers will be
4 minimal-for example, only 50 cents on a $100
} 1.4"1,000 4 restaurant bill.
., P ! .'- • A significant portion of the revenue will
rcome from visitors via taxes on rentals cars,
�� y ^ hotel/motel rooms and restaurant meals.
'pry Y�..
• More than just a home for the Sonics, this is
truly a multipurpose, regional facility for
business meetings, conventions and
entertainment as well as professional
. basketball, hockey and NCAA events.
. The center has strong support from state and
- i ; ' , . local elected officials, business leaders, labor
- - - _- and many others in addition to sports fans.
1, 4 *- • The King County Events Center will create
" jobs and generate significant tax revenue
for the state, King County, Renton and the
surrounding region.
CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATOR TODAY!
Washington State Legislature Toll-free Hotline: 800-562-6000 or
www.leg.wa.gov/legislature
Get all the details at: www.EventsCenterFacts.com
1Pa•NTO�
CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE RENEWAL
REVIEW OF COMCAST FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
RATE FORMS 1235 & 1240
PUBLIC HEARING
March 26, 2007
Overview. The City of Renton grants Comcast cable television the right to operate and provide
cable television services within the City. The franchise is due to expire in September 2008. As
part of the City's cable franchise renewal process, Renton is conducting its due diligence to
determine whether Comcast is in compliance with the City's current cable franchise and
applicable laws and regulations. Part of this review focuses on the cable operator's performance,
low and includes a review and audit of three rate forms that Comcast files with the City and Federal
Communications Commission. The City initiated rate review on April 1, 2006 and has one year
from initiation to accept a negotiated settlement. The City Council is considering whether to
approve settlements related to these rate forms.
FCC Form 1240. In addition, Comcast files a FCC Form 1240 with the City each year, which is
the form that justifies the maximum permitted rates that Comcast can charge customers on basic
cable programming. To determine whether Comcast's April 1, 2006, Form 1240 complies with
FCC rules and decisions, Renton engaged the services of another nationally known municipal
cable rate consultant.
A preliminary review of all of the basic programming rates in the FCC Form 1240 showed that
Comcast was improperly including the Business & Occupational tax in the basic service rate
(thereby allowing Comcast to receive inflationary increases on the tax) and excluding the FCC
regulatory fee in its calculation of the its maximum permitted rate (contrary to the requirements
of a recent FCC decision).
FCC Form 1235. Finally, a third rate consultant reviewed the FCC Form 1235 rate filing by
Comcast that was filed with Renton in 1999. The FCC Form 1235 was filed when Comcast's
predecessor upgraded the cable system in Renton. It allowed the cable company to recover the
costs of the system upgrade in its rates. The preliminary form allowed Comcast to charge
subscribers an additional $1.16 per month per subscriber for approximately 14 years, based on
projected upgrade costs. Comcast was to have filed a final FCC Form 1235, based on actual
1110, costs, when it fully completed its system upgrade, but has not done so. At the same time, the
City's cable franchise fee review has been underway to determine if Comcast was paying the
C:\DOCUME-1\BWalton\LOCALS—t\Temp\Rate review PH handout 032107_2.doc
appropriate amount of cable franchise fees to the City. Comcast and the City disagree about
whether affiliated advertising revenues should be part of the franchise fee calculation.
vid
Regarding all the above issues, Renton's representatives and Comcast entered into discussions
that resulted in a proposed settlement of outstanding issues. The settlement proposes the
elimination of the FCC Form 1235 fee, the elimination of the B&O tax, the inclusion of the FCC
fee in the calculation of the FCC Form 1240 maximum permitted rates, and Comcast providing
the requested advertising revenue information. The major advantage of this settlement to
subscribers is that Comcast will not be able to charge subscribers up to an additional $1.16 per
month per subscriber for the next several years based upon the FCC Form 1235.
The Administration is recommending approval of the settlement through the Council's adoption
of a resolution enacting a revised rate order. Prior to adopting the rate order, the City is seeking
public comment through tonight's public hearing.
C:\DOCUME-1\BWalton\LOCALS-1\Temp\Rate review PH handout 032107_2.doc
�`� O
CIO `e
•I 4n1
1`1\T c
CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE RENEWAL
REVIEW OF COMCAST FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
RATE FORM 1205
PUBLIC HEARING
March 26, 2007
Overview. The City of Renton grants Comcast cable television the right to operate and provide
cable television services within the City. The franchise is due to expire in September 2008. As
part of the City's cable franchise renewal process, Renton is conducting its due diligence to
determine whether Comcast is in compliance with the City's current cable franchise and
applicable laws and regulations. Part of this review focuses on the cable operator's performance,
and includes a review and audit of three rate forms that Comcast files with the City and Federal
Communications Commission. The City initiated rate review on April 1, 2006 and has one year
'vow from initiation to accept a negotiated settlement. The City Council is considering whether to
approve settlements related to these rate forms.
FCC Form 1205. Every year, Comcast files a(FCC) Form 1205 with the City, which is the form
that justifies the maximum permitted rates that Comcast can charge customers on basic cable
installations and equipment. To determine whether Comcast's Form 1205 complies with FCC
rules and decisions, the City of Renton engaged the services of nationally known municipal cable
rate consultants. Because the FCC Form 1205 is a national rate filing, based on aggregated costs
from sample cable systems around the country, the City saved money in this review by joining
with several other cities.
The consultants have reviewed all of the equipment and installation rates in the FCC Form 1205
and determined that Comcast could not justify many of its maximum permitted rates. Following
this determination, Renton's representatives and Comcast entered into discussions about what the
appropriate maximum permitted rates should be. These discussions resulted in a proposed
settlement that would result in lowered maximum permitted rates on nearly all of Comcast's
equipment and installation activities. In some cases, rates will be lower than Comcast is currently
charging subscribers, so one-time refunds will be provided for some rates. Exhibit 1 provides a
summary of the proposed lower permitted rates as suggested by the settlement.
The Administration is recommending approval of the settlement through the Council's adoption
of a resolution enacting a revised rate order. Prior to adopting the rate order, the City is seeking
public comment through tonight's public hearing.
41110,
C:\DOCUME-1\BWalton\LOCALS--1\Temp\Rate review PH handout 032107_2.doc
2006 Installation and Equipment Rates
NeSitildli d ,- , Current `, :
_ ._ r, x ":, , 'N ' k,
Maximum' ' Maximum , erm ,. Operator ,`
',Permitted' Permitted t tOw,. gin;.;:>,p;;£'°g Selected Re. ' "',s
ate: . ' Rate on FCC - `;:r-�.-" Rate — ::: ,` ,rx -.
Type Of Service , ,,, ,?,,,"; Form 1205 ti,;
44,A,:§, .,d•1,.'..,,... : "
Hourly Service Charge f' '' $34.24 ,6m " ..: . :;-N $ 8.49 .-,,,,,,,; :,,,,,I,,,,.: ..
��:' � �° semt..�
Install-Unwired Home (Aerial within 125 35,35 $45.10 . . .`,'.^,,g""`" 41,,7= $43.99 $1.
feet) °y:, . ` .E:
,.Vi'µ.. tly �,,:; ^'_= �: ,, ""��
'•:r`<=t ai�iA`�Ps. g..i4, ;',- `q gs,°�t G �'6w�mi *r 2 `sa3;r.."` ,„yv „ .;Y
da
Install-Prewired Home (Aerial within 125 `r ?.=;'r-'', $29.35 k 1 . a ° " " '= $27.99 '.$,2:1T- S .•. <
feet) f;gt M -, ;•' :s. ;:,,,,,,g,?,.".: ge f i : , g.'‘..i:
g ;E'
Install Additional Outlet-Connect Initial `° ,a $14.49 irks" ,'`_' $14.25
=gyp' X.i,.
a
Install Additional Outlet-Connect Separate $24.25 ‘;y:.--,. $ . $21.99
&u .jyk'. :—,. ' :%y?"s' ";�';.r'��a.i- Ar u.;b "`,?n +
.."_a, i'' ,:`, fir •=5.a A,'a ,i'S;,n*; "'
Other Install-Relocate Outlet ':$1,8',':412"'':'
> . $19.41 6,$0;99' $18.99 $0.57
,,;,, ,ray -,yn i ;.,
Y
4
(
•
'' ii Filed 6 " QIa w , w
L- - Current "::=: .
� ,l Maximum ' ' " s Operator 'b. "... `'
• f Permitted x r„• ' �
> p° Selected '.t.,::::..01-8 .1:':. ::•'=!.:
d -
l. ,�{�{",y b LL. C'. - Y,. 5,',C'yr� Yr� �,. ,•-:L.-;�.,a?,
R Rate on FCC c ` iii;:t: Rate . w .,. ,,
Type Of Service , '� 4' oz. Form 1205 - .� � z ., - ,„ °':
Other Install-Upgrade (non-addressable) ':$11:','.55P: ::••-.:i:',1, $18.49 - ,tl y`;;';'-""`:` . $15.99 - .
• }•" .r- sai”^':�'- , wae '; 'ba ..`:;,
fir ':`4, ''-''--
;2'.''.h,,,,','''', : .v.1,..
Other Install-Downgrade ''4'..•.;$9.:.•.• 'y p"' " 12.99
a ,u
(non "$14 5 ., i, $15.32 ;`;'': :w::r;..,- $ _'.
addressable) n., ,.:. ,;: .
Other Install Upgrade/Downgrade
X`' » `' ~
'"`$I: 4Y: $1.99 r: ;..�,:•,'w'- ', $1.99
(addressable)
Connected VCR Connect InitialZ6m:' - z""''"' -" $7 29 ( ?' $5.99
Connect VCR Connect Separate } � , ' $15.83
z }?'< u; " """• $12.99 "amu .
a w4io :4
Remote Control(All Units) $0tik .23 t � r � % "' $0.15 � s� ,
fir,-,., :h s y"r My ,'''.
Converter Box (Basic Service Only) $1.14 Rk , i $1.10 4g -,a.'� `
a, ' :, n ,�y,�
Converter Box (All Others Excluding HD) '`
: 3.$ .., $4.01 =` 1 f... 53.80
4,;4,!_,I1.7,4441 .4.:,'
f Via, ; ,,, "
Converter Box (HD) `, el ,, $ T ''''',4-.,;;.°60:1;'::1'Y' ;µ¢l $6.50
' . ,,, , 9.914 ...:,. ,
"6.g -4 N',"YN .1,: "9j�.� "LLQ mYxl'-i" *�R :??d, ,g ^M}:'n" ""ip •+...'.
Cab1eCARD ��° a, $1.91 ? N/C ;rw; °; .. :4` .. .n
Customer Trouble Call $25.34 : , , ' "' ' s. ,"• .. ""
" $: r, $19.99 .
;: c ,. _....._ .'�•. ••,1V•nim`' "'btss w.._ 9.;',1•:;: ."J;: ,,, ,2-'"�•5.,
2
Prepared by Bradley & Guzzetta LLC
•
v.
tk / \ k \ : -
.\ \\ § § t _ <
Q - _ .:7:
_5 L. _ . '& _ \
\\ 7 \ � k - \ -
Q kcd s ° - u \ - § 7
\ \ \ \' � _ " r. \ ^ _
/ \ \ 2: \ \ ` - - ^ � \
§ {� \ \ 7 ^ 7L7 E ƒ 2 \ > \ §
.\ $\ .11 k\ \\ \ \ U \ _ : -\ 2 \ \ \
u § \ 5 m - < « # - ——
C4 f/ --_ _/ - \ ^ q T \ } : \ \ } \ / \ - =
$
,,t,1—, _ _ % ( * ` § \ : 7 \ « : 7 :
_ 2\ \ � - § \ \ _ \ \ ,
± \ \/ . . _
ya . , ; \\ / ---' % j / % }
•
.
: _
,2 \ :
Q \
® §
/ F.
tLA 2 \
'/ 06.4 E :,73 \ : 'cu� \ / \/ \ _
�� % \ \ / \ - \
\ / _ \ \ \ t \ { \
0-)
2 \ \ / \ \ 2 > i � Jt
Z \ \ � � ^ \ \ \ \ \\
CI j / 2 / § « ~
. \ _ -
« . V _ \ \ \
O
z.-_-
2 \ \ \ \ \ \} \ \
.
Compliance: FCC Forms 1235 & 1240 FCC Forms 1235 & 1240
• 1235:Allowed cable company to recoup costs of the • Proposed settlement
system upgrade in its rates 14 years'
I to Elimination of FCC form 1235 fee
a I'iied in 1999.allowed Comcast to charge subscribers
Tu.16/subscriber/month for 14 years:no final tiling •Elimination of B&O tax
■ Comcast refusing to provide information regarding affiliated !ti Inclusion of PCC fee in calculation of 1240
adv a Icing rev cnues
• 1240:Justifies maximum permitted rates that Comcast maximum permitted rates
can charge customers for basic cable programming a Comcast provides information on affiliated revenues
a Gnncastimprnperlp included the Business&Occupational for franchise fee review
tax in basic sen ice sic ■ What it means for subscribers
a Cornetist excluded the I-CC regulator)r fcc in its calculation of
maximum penmucd rates •Comeast cannot charge future$1.16 upgrade fee
Rate Review: Public Hearing Next Steps
If resolutions are approved:
Should the Renton City Council: • Franchise fee review
■ Approve settlements with Cnnicast and adopt revised I'CC •\ ices hrce 1 p;dd
rate orders? •Iteoca-cumplianec.mcludc e iscruring i t coins
■12 11 Perms 1235&1240 Iia_.-r ming,&\21,2,1121 tsrsri°% a Technical review
_Ira s r r a Needs Assessment Report
■:Sun 2.)of 22,1212:21121,1,12'221,1,1 need:2,1111,4,c1
■12 I 1205(7 uuipmoni 8c Insrallruum 12.11cci ■ Pt!C;iC nvcrmncmzi pn ;r.3m planning
■ Draft Cable l ranchise Agreement and Ordinance
.u;r,n�t.,„�, < In��„�»d .,v r.i.n,, , :i .,I„•s a Issue Request for Renewal Proposals(RFRP),leading to
■ Authorize execution of the settlement agreement? formal or informal negotiations
■ Act on formal Renewal Proposal t"Fall 20071
2
%ire Nov
ti`cY Oe ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL, AND
;; ® ♦ LEGAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
• -Nr-ro� MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 26, 2007
TO: Toni Nelson, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
FROM: Kathy Keolker, Mayor
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
SUBJECT: Administrative Report
In addition to our day-to-day activities, the following items are worthy of note for this week:
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
• Celebrate the coming of spring at the Flashlight Egg Hunt on March 30th at 8:00 p.m. at Liberty
Park. Two separate events, one for children ages 7 to 10 and one for youth ages 11 to 15, will take
place in the large field, which will be stocked with loads of candy and prizes. All you need is a
flashlight and a sack to carry home all your goodies. After the Egg Hunt, youth ages 11 to 15 are
invited to the Renton Community Center for the Spring Dance from 9:00 p.m. to midnight. The
Egg Hunts are free but admission to the dance is $5 and Renton School District I.D. is required.
Call 425-430-6700 or visit rentonwa.gov for more information.
• Saturday, March 31st marks the 11th Annual Hip Hoppin' Egg Hunt & Carnival for children ages 6
and under (with parent/guardian) from 10:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at the Renton Community Center.
The Egg Hunt will begin promptly at 10:00 a.m., with a spring carnival complete with crafts,
games, and inflatables immediately following. Admission to the Egg Hunt is free. A Carnival pass
may be purchased at the door for $6. Photos with a Spring Bunny and concessions are available
for a nominal fee. Call 425-430-6700 or visit rentonwa.gov for more information.
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
• WSDOT will begin construction of the City/WSDOT Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat
Mitigation Bank project on April 2nd. The construction will occur on City-owned property located
south of SW 27th Street between Oakesdale Avenue SW and Lind Avenue SW and north of SW
41st Street. Work on the project will extend over a two-year period, with the most significant
construction activities (excavation, hauling, and planting) happening in the summer and late fall
periods. The contractor for the project is Scarsella Brothers, Inc.
Y►
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
AI#:
Submitting Data: For Agenda of: March 26, 2007
Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS/Mayor's Office
Staff Contact Kathy Keolker, Mayor Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing..
Correspondence..
Planning Commission Appointment: Ordinance
Michael Chen Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: New Business
Study Sessions
Community Service Application Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Legal Dept
Refer to Community Services Committee Finance Dept
Other
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Mayor Keolker appoints the following to the Planning Commission for a three-year term,
expiring on January 31, 2010:
Michael Chen, 6214 NE 5th Court, Renton, WA, 98059 (position previously held by Jerrilyn
Hadley)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Confirm the appointment of Michael Chen to the Planning Commission for a three-year term.
Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh
CITY OF RENTON
APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE RECEIVED
If you are interested in participating in local government by membership on any of the following City boaA R . 0 2006
commissions,or committees,please complete this application and return it to:
Office of the Mayor MAYORS OFFICE
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Check the boards/commissions/committees in which you are interested:
❑ AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE*
❑ CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION*
❑ HOUSING AUTHORITY*
® PLANNING COMMISSION*
❑ ADVISORY COMMISSION ON DIVERSITY
❑ SENIOR CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE*
LI HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE*
❑ LIBRARY BOARD
❑ SISTER CITY COMMITTEE-CUAUTLA
❑ SISTER CI'T'Y COMMITTEE-NISHIWAKI
LI
ARTS COMMISSION* LI TRANSIT ADVISORY BOARD
LI COMMISSION*
*Special membership requirements apply. Visit www.ci.renton.wa.us or call 425-430-6500 for details.
Your application will be given every consideration as vacancies occur.
MR.(j MS.❑ NAME Mi rhael (then DATE Apri 1 7, 7006
ADDRESS 6214 NE 5TH CT. Renton, WA ZIP CODE 98059
'`410109 PHONE: DAY425-885-7877 NIGHT 425-687-9898 EMAIL mchen44@hmt-mai1_rnm
RENTON RESIDENT? YES IF SO,SINCE WHEN? March 24, 2005
CITY OF FORMER RESIDENCE Bellevue, WA
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND : - ' . . ' .. „- . - . - . . • .. , .. '
Washington University - Bellingham, W,
OCCUPATION Senior Land Planner EMPLOYER Core lies i gn, Tnc
OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND -I 0 - , p - • . 80 2 " - •.0- . . . ' a.
firm P- viou_ -me • u- 1 .. ' •. • e - OD . .e • u- - sland
COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES(organizations/clubs/service groups,etc.) Spend most of my time me with family
and raising two kids.
REASON FOR APPLYING FOR THIS BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE I would like to be involved in
deci i.n .1 - - 4 . .- 4 - .. . - • a . - stand
there will be a position up for reconsideration June 30, 2006.
CAN ATTEND DAY MEETINGS? YES CAN AtTEND NIGHT MEETINGS? YES
%o,,, Applications will be kept on file for one year.If you have questions about serving on a board,
commission,or committee,please feel free to contact the Mayors-Office-at-425-430-6500. - - -- - --
050305 e ` )01, J^
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
AI#: t.
:Submitting Data: For Agenda of 3/26/2007
Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS/City Clerk
Staff Contact Bonnie Walton, x6502 Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing... X
Street Vacation Petition for a portion of Index Place NE, Correspondence..
between NE 7th and 8th Streets. Petitioner: A&D Quality Ordinance
Construction Co. (File No. VAC-07-001) Resolution .. X
Old Business....
Exhibits: New Business
Petition, legal and map Study Sessions.
Resolution setting public hearing Information.... . .
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Set public hearing date of 4/23/2007, and refer to Legal Dept X
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator for Finance Dept
recommendations Other............
Fiscal Impact
Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment... ..
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated.. . .
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
On March 8, 2007, revision of a petition first received January 5, 2007, was submitted by A&D Quality
Construction Co., 220 SW Sunset Blvd, Ste E202, Renton, 98057, requesting vacation of a portion of
Index Place NE, between NE 7th and 8th Streets. The $250 filing fee has been paid. The
Planning/Building/Public Works Department has verified the petition documents and reports that 100%
of the abutting property owners have signed the petition.
The process regarding street vacation petitions requires that Council, by resolution, fix a time for a public
hearing when the petition will be heard and determined. The date of the public hearing, must occur no
less than 20 days, or more than 60 days, after adoption of the resolution. In accordance with City Code,
the Administration will analyze the street vacation request and provide the Council with a
recommendation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a resolution to set a public hearing on 4/23/2007, and refer the petition to the
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator for determination of advisability of the vacation and need
for retention of easements.
CC Karen McFarland Reference: 35.79 RCW&RMC 9-14
r ,
PETITION FOR STREET VACATION
IN THE CITY OF RENTON
Nose To the Honorable Mayor and Date .
Members of the City Council
City of Renton Circulated By: A&D Quality Construction Co.
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055 Address: 220 SW Sunset Blvd. , Ste. E202
Renton, WA 98057
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
Telephone: 425 . 271 . 7751
We, the undersigned property owners abutting a certain portion of public Right-of-Way,
respectfully request the vacation of the street or alleyway as described on the attached
"Exhibit A"and
commonly known as: Index Place NE Between 7th Si: and NE 8th St.
(Insert closest cross streets and reference the street name,i.e.NE Bog Street from Bicycle Alley to Slalom Avenue NE.)
We request a time and place be fixed when this petition will be heard by the City Council.
Of the property owners abutting the area of this petition % 2i3 or more required of the
lineal frontage have agreed and indicated their joining this petition with their signatures
below:
signature signature
Annette Demps 425. 531 . 0480
print name phone print name phone
2822 NE 7th Ar. Renton, 98056
address address
722780-0920
property identification number property identification number
Instructions:
1. Insert name of street. (i.e. NE 4th, alleyway east of Sunset Blvd.)
2. Attach complete legal description(i.e. metes and bounds, etc.)
3. Have the applicable property owners provide the following:
a) Sign name. (Signatures of owners of 2/3 of lineal frontage must sign.
Spouses do not need to sign. Owners in common must sign.)
b) Print name and phone number.
c) List Property address and King County tax parcel identification number.
4. Attach a map to the petition designating the vacation boundaries.
5. Attach a brief statement of the purpose to be served by the street vacation.
6. Submit $250.00 filing fee with application.
SUBMIT PETITION TO THE CITY CLERK, SEVENTH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL.
PRM-Property Services Administration\Administrative\Forms\StreetVacation\Street Vacation Petition.doc
PET TON FOR STREET T` VACATI�"�� ��� � R
IN THE CITY OF NT'ON
i,r sig o
To the Honorable Mayor and Date " 7 rp Cg {
Members of the City Council l� `A" ° ,� < r J, ,=
City of Renton Circulated By:A&D .0ual ty_ Construction Co.
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055 Address: 220 SW Sunset Blvd. Ste. , E202
Renton, WA 98057
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
Telephone: 425 2425271...775i
We, the undersigned property owners abutting a certain portion of public Right-of-Way,
respectfully request the vacation of the street or alleyway as described on the attached
"Exhibit A"and
commodly knovv-ri as: Index P1 . NE Between 7th St. and NE 8th St.
i ise t closest cross streets and reference the street name,i.e.NE Bog Street from Bicycle Alley to Slalom Avenue NE.)
We request a time and place be fixed when this petition will be heard by the City Council.
-f the property owners abutting the area of this petition % f 2/3 or more required;of the
i t a1 frontage have agreed and indicated their joining this petition with their signatures
be.ove:
✓s
signature
Naid
prim name phone print name phone
t? _ �t (address
address
property identification number property identification number
instructions:
- Insert name of street. (i.e. NE 4th, alleyway east of Sunset Blvd.)
2- Attach complete legal description (i.e. metes and bounds, etc.)
3. Have the applicable property owners provide the following:
a) Sign name. (Signatures of owners of 2/3 of lineal frontage must sign.
Spouses do not need to sign. Owners in common must sign.)
b) Print name and phone number.
c) List Property address and King County tax parcel identification number.
4. Attach a map to the petition designating the vacation boundaries.
5. Attach a brief statement of the purpose to be served by the street vacation.
6. Submit $250.00 filing fee with application.
SUBMIT PETITION TO THE CITY CLERK, SEVENTH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL.
H:V ile Sys\PRM-Property ServicesAdministration'AdministrativeWFormssStreet Vacation Petition.doc
Exhibit A
Legal Description
Street Vacation
Petitioner: A & D Quality Construction Company LLC
Legal Description: An approximate 60 ft right of way on Index Place
NE between NE 7th Street and NE 8th Street
Benefit Explanation: We would like to develop the requested
vacated property to accommodate another single family home to better
achieve zoning density and land use policies which will benefit the public.
'k.r
err
H:\File Sys\PRM-Property Services Administration\AdministrativeWorms\Street Vacation Petition.doc
)
'ORNER
ER CORNER NE 8th ST.
REBARL=2-- —
1----- _ S88'56'15"E _ — -- '_ R:1 y�,5.00
AR W/CAP i 125.53'
30'
25'
25'
a o
S 8718'08' W 131.26a ' l'
u
s.00' 41.25'
\ -
45.00' 0
r-
- - -1 f'- _ - - - -1 1--- - - --1 rn
L ri
I I 1 l N 1
Z I I I I I
I I I I I 11
(-I..1I 1 I 1
1 8I Io OI LOT 1 `1 s
5 LOT 3 I� 1 , ,1 I '.
SE V/PUNCH o i 1 I°' 01 I ' m I 4,945. sq.ft. 1 0 . `
0 4,881 sq.ft. I m 1 4,784. sq.ft. I I 0.11 acres `
14
7 Z I 0.11 acres 1 0.10 acres I 1 (r
"
� � I I 1 I I I -
1
I I j L _ _
() L- - - - - J t___
Z55.11'
CC o . ...,
ns m' L=145.24'
R_1585.0'.
�7tis 90 -',D-
C
•60, -239 o
i0\11
-'4 �J R610.0
------ —
12489' NE7t_
S88'56'15"E o - 0.6h0�cT. f--
�_
1
30'
,voi
C.O.R. MON #
SW. CORNER OF12 SEC 9-23-05 LEGAL DESCR/PTlON
FND COPPER PLUG W/PUNCH LOT 4, BLOCK 29, CORRECTED PLAT, RENTON HIGHLAN
IN CONC MON IN CASE 2, RECORDED IN VOLUME 57 OF PLATS, PAGES 92 to
(01/2005)
N= 181,145.6415 RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
E=1,306,096.085
CITY n. , '
Y Yx.
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
is Kathy Keolker.MayorGreggZimmerman s. .,Administrator
G egg
October 27 2006
.. a,
Keith Demps
220 Southwest Sunset Blvd., Suite E-202
Renton, Washington 98057
Re: Index Short Plat, LUA 05-047, SHPL-A
2822 NE 7th Street
Renton, WA
Dear Mr. Demps:
On October 27, 2006, the Development Services Director denied your application for
a waiver of the installation of approximately 100 lineal feet of sidewalk, curb, and gutter fronting
the site in Index Place Northeast. However, we would like to present to you two options to
consider that would be acceptable to the City of Renton.
The first option is to vacate the section of Index Place Northeast between NE 7th Street and
NE 8th Street. By vacating this portion of the street, the sidewalk, curb, and gutter would not
have to be installed in order for you to record the short plat as this section would not become City
right-of-way. To begin the vacation process, please contact Karen McFarland, Engineering
Specialist, at(425)430-7209.
Your other option is to not vacate the aforementioned section of Index Place Northeast and to pay
the City a fee-in-lieu of installing the sidewalk, curb, and gutter fronting the street. The fee has
been caluulale&i as Zo.iows:
FEE PER
SQUARE YARD #SQUARE
(SY) OR LINEAL YARDS OR
ITEM FOOT LF) LINEAL FEET EXTENDED COST
Sidewalk on
Index Pl.NE 30.00/LF 100 3000.00
Curb and Gutter on
Index Pl. NE 43.00/LF 100 4,300.00
TOTAL FEE-IN-LIEU OF DUE CITY OF RENTON $7,300.00
Nrr
This fee must be received by the City prior to recording of the short plat and can be paid at
Renton City Hall, sixth floor, customer service desk.
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
SETTING A HEARING DATE TO VACATE THE PORTION OF INDEX
PL. NE BETWEEN 7TH STREET AND NE 8TH STREET (A & D QUALITY
CONSTRUCTION CO, VAC-07-001).
WHEREAS, a Petition has been filed with the City Clerk of the City of Renton on
March 8, 2007, pursuant to the requirements of RCW 35.79, petitioning for the vacation of the
portion of Index Pl. NE between 7th Street and NE 8th Street, as hereinafter more particularly
described, and said petition having been signed by the owners of more than two-thirds (2/3) of
the property abutting upon said street sought to be vacated, and same being described as follows:
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein
[Approximately 100 lineal feet of Index Pl. NE between 7th Street and NE 8th
Street].
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, 'god
WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. That April 23, 2007, at the hour of 7:00 P.M. at the City Council
Chambers at City Hall, Renton, King County, Washington, is hereby fixed as the time and place
for a public hearing to consider the aforesaid Petition for vacating the portion of Index Pl. NE
between 7th Street and NE 8th Street, which said hearing date is not more than sixty nor less than
twenty days from the date of passage of this Resolution.
SECTION H. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of
the time and date of this hearing as provided by RCW 35.79.020 and any and/or all persons
interested therein or objecting to this vacation may then appear and be heard thereon, or they
1
RESOLUTION NO.
may file their written objections thereto with the City Clerk at or prior to the time of hearing on
IIor
the vacation.
SECTION III. The City Council shall determine, as provided by RCW 35.79.030,
as to whether an appraisal shall be secured to determine their fair market value of the property
sought to be vacated as provided for in Ordinance No. 4266, and the amount of compensation to
be paid by the Petitioner-Owners to the City for such vacation.
The City likewise reserves the right to retain an easement for public utility and related
purposes.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2007.
Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk
'err
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2007.
Kathy Keolker, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
RES.1255:3/19/07:ma
Nur-
2
**4011101
EXHIBIT A
VACATED RIGHT-OF WAY LEGAL
DESCRIPTION
INDEX PLACE N.E.
A PORTION OF INDEX PLACE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY DESCRIDE AS FOLLLOWS;
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 4, BLOCK 29, OF CORRECTED PLAT RENTON
HIGHLANDS NO. 2,ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 57 OF PLATS, PAGE 92
THROUGH 98, INCUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY,WASHINTGTON BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH11°14'17 WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4 A DISTANCE OF 100.75 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 78°'45'43" EAST A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 11°14'17"WEST A
DISTANCE OF 3.45 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78°45'43" EAST A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 26 A OF CORRECTED PLAT RENTON HIGHLANDS NO. 2,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 57 OF PLATS, PAGE 92 THROUGH 98,
INCUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINTGTON; THENCE SOUTH 11°14'17" EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY
LINE OF SAID LOT 3,A DISTANCE OF 105.30 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE HAVING A RAIDIAL BEARING
OF SOUTH 10°52'38"EAST AND A RADIUS OF 1585.00 FEET BEING THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF NE 7T"
STREET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT
HAVING A RADIUS OF 1585.00 FEET AND CENTERAL ANGLE OF 01°48'29" AND A LENGTH OF 50.01 FEET
' TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
AREA CONTAINING 5,158 sq ft
SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON;
U. i
i
J*4 38992 ••p
AL LAS ♦•
e EXPIRES 7/02/07
*row Map Exhibit
z 00.CZ 00-5Z
w V80---08Z w
.1- 0��8 �07 oo
, Q Ivo
f 10� 1 0 Po I _
U) Q O�p N
(r1 V) O
O 5,11-topto
09 N
,
INDEX PL NE 6 II
" 11 g L
S11 .1 4 17„E 105.30 \ cr _”-
o
--1-11
\ \ \ \ \ \
0
M \ \ \O
N \ \ \ \ \ \d \ \ N
- \ \ \ �\
°° 1
r \ \ \ W
W _ � \ \ \ o
�ao
E0 N 100.75'
z N11 °14'17 W -_C
-CO
I
W
N z
d 800-SZ 00-SZ
N
0Z6o_oBCZ dam- 00 1
-CO
O sIn Z �a078 ` 107 Xbl TI II
00 10 7 cy
r\ 444.1•4444.4%
CO
(f) i * I
A«O L,-12Z. OS ,C'r601 L I
Nosy .
Barbee Mill-15- Page 6
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
AI#:
Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of: March 26, 2007
Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division
Staff Contact Carrie K. Olson x7235 Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing..
Acceptance of additional right-of-way to comply with Correspondence.. Ordinance
City of Renton code for new short plats and the Resolution
Traverso Short Plat (LUA06-021). Old Business
Exhibits: New Business
Deed of Dedication Study Sessions
Exhibit Map
Vicinity Map Information
Administrative Report and Decision
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Council concur Legal Dept X
Finance Dept X
Other
Fiscal Impact: N/A
Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The area to be dedicated is a 15' strip of land along the westerly portion of Lots 1 and 3 fronting
Redmond Ave NE and a 7' strip of land along the southerly portion of Lots 1 and 2 fronting NE 19t11
St for additional right-of-way to insure proper street widening. This dedication is to comply with City
of Renton code for new short plats and the Traverso Short Plat (LUA06-021). Council acceptance
of said right-of-way should be completed prior to recording the deed with the short plat.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept the additional right-of-way and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign and record the Deed of
Dedication.
C:\DOCUME--1\BWalton\LOCALS-1\Temp\Traverso SHPL 03m AGNBILL_1.doc
Return Address:
New . City Clerk's Office
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, SVA 98055
DEED OF DEDICATION Property Tax Parcel Number: 042305-9136
Project File#: Street Intersection: REDMOND AVE NE/NE 19TH ST
Reference Number(s)of Documents assigned or released:Additional reference numbers are on page .
Grantor(s): Grantee(s):
1. Mark and Beth Traverso 1. City of Renton,.a Municipal Corporation
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (Abbreviated or full legal must go here. Additional legal on page3)
A 15.00 FOOT WIDE AREA OF LAND FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR REDMOND AVENUE NE AND A
7.00 FOOT WIDE AREA OF LAND FOR RIGHT-OF-,WAY FOR NE 19TH STREET,TOGETHER
WITH A TURNING RADIUS AREA FOR SAID INTERSECTION. ALL BEING LOCATED IN THE
NE QUARTER OF THE SE QUARTER OF SECTION 4,TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST,
W.M.,CITY OF RENTON,KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
The Grantor,for and in consideration of mutual benefits conveys,quit claims,dedicates and donates to the Grantee(s)as
named above,the above described real estate situated in the County of King,State of Washington.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year as written below.
Approved and Accepted By:
Grantor(s): Grantee(s): City of Renton
Mayor
City Clerk
INDIVIDUAL FORM OF STATE OF WASHINGTON )ss
ACKNOWLEDGMENT COUNTY OF KING )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
Notary Seal must be within box
signed this instrument and
acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary(Print)
My appointment expires:
Dated:
deed Page 1
INDIVIDUAL FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON )SS
COUNTY OF KING
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
signed this instrument and
acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary(Print)
My appointment expires:
Dated:
REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON )SS
COUNTY OF KING
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
signed this instrument,on oath
stated that he/she/they' was/were authorized to execute the instrument and
acknowledged it as the and
of to be the free and voluntary act of such
party/parties for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary(Print)
My appointment expires:
Dated:
CORPORATE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON )SS
COUNTY OF KING
On this day of , 19 ,before me personally appeared
to me known to
be of the corporation that
executed the within instrument,and acknowledge the said instrument to be the free
and voluntary act and deed of said corporation,for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned,and each on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said
instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary(Print)
My appointment expires:
Dated:
4.400
deed
Page 2
ROAD DEDICATION
"err LEGAL DESCRIPTION
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 150 FEET OF THE
WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4,
TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF
RENTON, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON;
THENCE N 88° 14' 29" W 156.42 FEET TO THE EXISTING EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY
MARGIN OF REDMOND AVE NE AND TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE S 01° 05' 20" W 135.00 FEET TO THE EXISTING NORTH RIGHT-OF—
WAY MARGIN OF NE 19TH STREET;
THENCE S 88° 14' 37" E 156.46 FEET;
THENCE N 01° 04' 16"E 7.00 FEET;
THENCE N 88° 14' 37" W 116.75 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE TO
THE RIGHT, CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00
FEET, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS N 01° 45' 23" E;
,4400,
THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 38.98 FEET THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89° 19' 57";
THENCE N 01°05' 20" E 103.29 FEET;
THENCE N 88° 14' 29" W 15.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
wA 1.400,
i to9�\
11332
°NAL LAH
• EXPIRES 11/30/08
huumuumw,,w,wow,en'
rr+'
Page 3
GRANTORS PARCEL
TAX LOT NO. 042305-9136
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE SOUTH 150 FEET OF THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF NORTHWEST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING
COUNTY, WASHINGTON;
EXCEPT THE SOUTH 15 FEET FOR ROAD, SECOND;
EXCEPT THE WEST 7 FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON, IN KING
COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
•
mem.izemv.,.♦♦♦♦♦♦�♦�♦♦•♦♦1I
•
cKUPE
p� w. �
Nesse
11332 ••
' • /
NAL LAS
♦
4 EXPIRES 11/30/08
41
I
Page 4
( ( 1 I
I I S 881 4'/9:..K.__ 18,,,4 ____,,.____. ,
..,_
. I 1i , 15.o04' — ---' — — :--- :.:. .4.)a,88 '-,--,- ------ -: ' l'-------------iS ,
SITE
111
1904 — F L.
.
.A., —
ok :!..,,,,.„.\ 44
173 1,5' DEDICATED 5001 SQ. FT. ...3:' I
I CY — TO CITY OF RENTON A? ,'1) SHED TO{BE
1 _ cip
co ev.
:i v.:,
b .1" '. ', co "-REMOVED
--' 10 --
ILI I 0. 'r;:; LOT 2 -.,
• ' -rE- 57 •
(.4 S 8814 29 9.96 0 GROSS 7876 SQ. FT. c,
Lri
it. 188761.-0100 < I .." ,--7
,'--,--10.751-177671926' ..,r,---, ------ 12,0 NET 6596 SQ. Flii
Icri 1§' 2 ,,,,,}.17).65i_
Z H 3804 C,1 •
0 b .< - r: 5095 S -FT 3804
(31.1 'i _ to
I 2 Pi u csi EI-E-V-r'134 C7 , „...... '--1 GARAGE TO --a-
P
1 FR I rD r.,., tr) .2.':-".-4-..<L/zzz-', — 20, BE REMOVED a
,r,I.--,'• —I
,v!,.• ..... 3 -..-4 MALL '-- <c;(` t L./
• 7' DEDICATED
••• . I CC (r) C: HOUSE TO ' -';
- TO CITY OF RENkON
‘-
c„.._
}Jo 0 REMAIN_3-iq P -
) I vc . la
, PROPOSED 17)
ircs01) < '--,RL==3285190807,. ,, 0
' c R.O.W. i
5 I .‹ 3.24' - • 73.51' ci
Z z
ill
7.0D—
_ __.
I
0 10 20 40
1 in S8814'37"E 156.46'
— 1....
"in
- _
—. — — — —
1.271 —
I
SCALE 1" = 40' N.E. 19TH ST. 1 _ -
_ _
-.riffivizrowize.•••••••••••••••1
'V
,•
.• syl.UP E ii. P', CITY OF RENTON
N.E. 1/4 OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 4, TWN. 23 N., RGE 5 E., W.M.
$ A-I ,,c' '.*•',A .. •
Baima & Holmberg Inc.
ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS B & HJOBNO. 413-011
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027 (425) 392 — 0250
• •p
4 ON
AL 1 EXLIRES 11/30/o& TRAVERSO SHORT PLAT Page 5
\4h.........m.......,•••••••••••eiik'
-
.3111w.. ........--_.
! 1 - •., /
- II
SE 95th PI. I ;
c\21
,-- _
co , I t
.----4 I
Z`- I
ff-il
- C\2 II:I
,---1
_____
-
1 VPs17th Pl.\
SE 98th,St. - R—8
1 --
SE 99tli
NE 25th Pl.
• . . \St.
8
1 .LE 100th' Ot.
•-,9}- ,g(5.
_ ..,,...e5 • —, .
T25 S .
R-8 • 1 \
/._,,Ji, N., s•,-
0 -•., ,
R C ° " P -• a 1 1"" ,... •...
N.,NSE 101st St.
R-1 5,-,--"1' \ '1\D
,, .,.,.-,- 'I
wi-
cflI I NE 102nd
----,:=- _
,, -'
' ----- 4,-1 -L.)
. . 1 ,-
C4 1.4
\\ '-- ---"181: --- -
''''i R-8
_ _ •
NF, 22nd pi NE 22n• St: ch
R-8'/ ''" . - \,7f) NE 22nd St.- R-..-8:
-1R-7
______, ______I , Nt,21st St.' '-r- - - -14 ts•"3
c4 —
i 4 •' LT.,1
‘ i ,- ,
- tl- --4----•- t'z' -N 4.
E-1 16 c--- ,
•P /-/
R—1 ... -
r--- 1 (•::7:,.. i ..., ,z, R—8--- - L".."- ' ' .----
›. • '•g .
u.) /
... '-'7/ - : -. --- ---: , '--. 2 ;- ‘,.c•-)." ''''' N..
'C
R-8 R-8 •• ' t.)i 9
R+13- ATI E' 19t t.'--: ---- :\il`z6
_ 1
ce 1
! : :W
NE 17th - -,---,--:-. -- - ' i
Siiiat,
—8 , : : . R
-1 --_ 7.8::- li :--i s\-111iitinan-
! Q.) R—: •/ /'‘>•, ! R N17th- --,
R
-.17t i , / ' ,s,'• E
__M—F
-, S-.., t„,,• , --,.,..: kr170- -:
- - -
RM—F
Q)
.,.. p ‘,0,-....,. ZRLia • ,-
Blv. - R- -10 -. R A I)
•
:NE 14th St: • c4' .. x
..<
C A
0
-- '
: A..
- • a) - R. -::8- i
& NE:,_
, „ ,_12h. -
' FRP)
.
It R-'-10NE'.- -- --1 "- ' . IR'
: , ( 027.-p /'
, x : •:•. L-1-th' 1: . :(''1.5 --E3--- R M—F
NINO
7/c;g ---, . ----441-:! r— ii.
1 - '7'' 11.--z- R<'7-77.8 L-- - - `1
E5 - 9 T23N R5E E I/2
? ....z,0 4,..,
D5
1.A.A.'CY
ZONING ———— Renton City Limit", 1:4800
P/B/PW TECHNICAL SERVICES
4 T23N R5E E 1/2
•PUl+
,,,,,rto 12/28/04
5304
-RECEIVED
,
i i PR 1 20(0F,
, . AltilA& 110i, f €R INr-
Nisioe REPORT City of Renton
Department of Planning/Building/Public Works
DECISION ADMINISTRATIVE SHORT PLAT AND VARIANCE
REPORT & DECISION
A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
REPORT DATE: April 14, 2006
Project Name Traverso Short Plat
Owners: Beth E. & Mark T. Traverso, 11025 SE 60th, Bellevue, WA 98006
Applicant: Shupe Holmberg, Baima & Holmberg, Inc., 100 Front Street S, Issaquah, WA 98027
File Number: LUA-06-021, SHPL-A,V-A Project Manager: Valerie Kinast, Associate Planner
Project Description Administrative Land Use Action (Short Plat Review) for the subdivision of one existing
parcel, totaling 21,118 square feet (0.48 acres), zoned Residential — 8 dwelling units per
acre, into 3 lots. The short plat would result in a residential density of 7.75 units per acre.
The applicant proposes to retain one existing house on Lot 1. An attached garage and
detached shed would be removed. The area of proposed Lot 1 would be 5,248 square feet,
Lot 2 would be 7,980 square feet, and Lot 3 would be 5,000 square feet. Lots 1 and 2
would be accessed from NE 19th Street. Lot 3 would be accessed from Redmond Ave.
341•200NE.
The applicant is also requesting a variance to reduce the required 15-foot front yard
setback for the primary structure to 10.75 feet for the existing home. The variance would
make it possible for the owners to retain the existing house as is after dedicating 15-feet of
their lot frontage to Redmond Ave. NE public right-of-way.
Project Location 3802 NE 19th Street, Renton, WA 98056
.. � � �v ,. �0..jr .1ir.=., am, SIZE
s t� sr �r> ss� °��'
� c �` ' ter.
194,
am
�,-....-,,-; .7 , ....
,. f „.7./..... ,,,...„
is
'',.,-', rr
_ , 1
,.,..,,,„; .
liNfa
. , `,' ta il,:^_,: . ' , ,�`
itA
Iliii:i_ ,
r ± x
-`£
N
11111, �
�
Project Location Map Adele)Report Traverso doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006; PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 2
B. GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Owners of Record: Beth E. & Mark T. Traverso, 11025 SE 60th, Bellevue, WA 98006
2. Zoning Designation: Residential—8 du/ac(R-8)
3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Residential Single Family(RSF)
4. Existing Site Use: There is currently one existing single-family residence with an attached
garage, and a detached shed on the site. The house would be retained and
the garage and shed would be removed.
5. Neighborhood Characteristics:
North: Single Family Residential(R-8 zone)
East: Single Family Residential (R-8 zone)
South: Single Family Residential (R-8 zone)
West: Single Family Residential (R-8 zone)
6. Access: Lots 1 and 2 -via single-family residential driveways from NE 19th St.
Lot 3—via single-family residential driveway from Redmond Ave. NE.
7. Site Area: 21,118 square feet/0.48 acres
C. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND:
Action Land Use File No. Ordinance No. Date
Comprehensive Plan N/A 5099 11/01/2004
Zoning N/A 5100 11/01/2004
Annexation N/A 4070 06/01/1987
D. PUBLIC SERVICES:
1. Utilities
Water: There is an existing 8-inch water main fronting the property in NE 19th St. and an 8-inch water
main in Redmond Ave. NE. Derated fire flow in the vicinity is approximately 2,500 gpm. Static
water pressure in the area is approximately 70 psi. The proposed project is located in the 565
Water Pressure Zone and is inside Aquifer Protection Zone 2.
Sewer: There is an existing 8-inch sewer main fronting the site in NE 19th St. and an 8-inch sewer
main in Redmond Ave. NE.
Surface Water/Storm Water: There are storm drainage improvements in NE 19th St. and Redmond
Ave. NE.
2. Streets: There are no sidewalk, curb, and gutter fronting the site in NE 19th St. or Redmond Ave. NE.
3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department
E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE:
1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts
Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts
Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table
Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards
2. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards
Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations
3. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards
Section 4-6-060: Street Standards
4. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations
Admin Report Traverso.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006; PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 3
Section 4-7-070: Detailed Procedures for Short Subdivisions
Noisy Section 4-7-120: Compatibility with Existing Land Use and Plan-General Requirements and
Minimum Standards
Section 4-7-150: Streets-General Requirements and Minimum Standards
Section 4-7-170: Residential Lots-General Requirements and Minimum Standards
5. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria
Section 4-9-250: Variances, Waivers, Modifications, and Alternatives
6. Chapter 11 Definitions
F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
1. Land Use Element— Residential Single Family
2. Community Design Element
G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS:
1. Project Description/Background
The applicants, Beth and Mark Traverso, are proposing to subdivide an existing parcel totaling 0.48 acres
(21,118 square feet) in area, zoned Residential —8 dwelling units per acre (R-8), into three lots. The property
is located on the east side of Redmond Ave. NE, north of NE 19th St. at 3802 NE 19th St.. The property is
currently developed with a 1,860 square foot single-family residence, a 430 square foot attached garage and a
detached shed. The house is proposed to remain on Lot 1. The garage and shed would be demolished.
Proposed lot sizes are: Lot 1 - 5,248 square feet, Lot 2 - 7,980 square feet, Lot 3 - 5,000 square feet. The
%OW proposal for the eventual development of two new single-family residences would arrive at a density of 7.75
dwelling units per net acre (du/ac). The allowed density range in the R-8 zone is a minimum of 4.0 to a
maximum of 8.0 dwelling units per acre.
Access to proposed Lots 1 and 2 would be provided directly from NE 19th St.. Access to Lot 3 would be directly
from Redmond Ave. NE.
The subject site is relatively flat, except for steeper slopes along a small portion of the lot along Redmond Ave.
NE. There are no significant trees on the site.
The applicant has also requested an administrative setback variance for a reduced front yard setback of the
existing single family residence, which is proposed to be located on new Lot 1. The variance is necessary
because the existing single family residence cannot maintain the required 15-foot front yard setback once a 15-
foot strip of their frontage is dedicated to the Redmond Ave. NE right-of-way, as required by the City for short
platting. The applicant requests to reduce the 15-foot front yard setback for the existing house by 4.25 feet to
10.75 feet. Without the variance, the house would be required to be demolished or the short plat would not be
possible.
2. Environmental Review
Except when located on lands covered by water or with sensitive areas, short plats are exempt from SEPA
Environmental Review pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(6)(a).
3. Compliance with ERC Conditions
N/A
4. Staff Review Comments
Representatives from various City departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address
issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence
of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental
Recommendation at the end of the report.
Admin Report Traverso.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006; PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 4
5. Consistency with Short Plat Criteria
Nod
Approval of a short plat is based on an evaluation using the following short plat criteria:
a) Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Designation
The site is designated Residential Single Family (RSF) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map. Lands in the RSF designation are intended to be used for quality residential detached
development organized into neighborhoods at urban densities. It is intended that larger
subdivision, infill development, and rehabilitation of existing housing be carefully designed to
enhance and improve the quality of single-family living environments. The proposal is consistent
with the following Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Community Design Element policies:
Policy LU-147. Net development densities should fall within a range of 4.0 to 8.0 dwelling units
per acre in Residential Single Family neighborhoods.
The proposed project for three lots would arrive at a net density of 7.75 dwelling units per net acre,
which is within the allowable density range.
Policy LU-148. A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet should be allowed on in-fill parcels of less
than one acre (43,560 sq. ft.) in single-family designations. Allow a reduction on lot size to 4,500
square feet on parcels greater than one acre to create an incentive for aggregation of land. The
minimum lot size is not intended to set the standard for density in the designation, but to provide
flexibility in subdivision/plat design and facilitate development within the allowed density range.
All of the proposed lots equal or exceed the minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet.
Policy LU-152. Single-family lot size, lot width, setbacks, and impervious surface should be
sufficient to allow private open space, landscaping to provide buffers/privacy without extensive
fencing, and sufficient area for maintenance activities.
The proposed new lots would meet the required lot size,width, and depth requirements necessary
to create sufficient front, rear, and side yard areas. The existing house on proposed Lot 1 would
not meet its 15-foot front yard setback and the short plat cannot be approved unless the house is
moved, removed, or a variance can be obtained to resolve this deficiency. The house would meet
all other setback requirements. The attached garage and detached shed are rightly proposed for
demolition, because they would not meet setback requirements.
Policy LU-154. Interpret development standards to support new plats and infill project designs
incorporating street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes that address privacy and
quality of life for existing residents.
The proposed lots are oriented at right angles to the public streets. All lots would have direct
access to a public right-of-way.
Policy CD-12. infill development, defined as new short plats of nine or fewer lots, should be
encouraged in order to add variety, updated housing stock, and new vitality to neighborhoods.
The proposal is to subdivide one existing parcels into three lots. Two new residences would be
constructed on the new lots, increasing the housing stock of newer homes in the neighborhood.
b) Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation
The subject site is designated Residential — 8 Dwelling Units per Acre (R-8) on the City of Renton
Zoning Map. The proposed development would allow for the future construction of two new single-
family dwelling units and retain one existing home.
The R-8 zone permits one home per lot. It allows accessory structures only when associated with
a primary structure located on the same parcel. There is one existing shed that is spanning the lot
line of proposed Lots 2 and 3 that would not be able to be retained. Staff recommends as
condition of approval that the applicant be required to obtain a demolition permit and complete Aliw
inspections and approvals for removing the shed prior to the recording of the final short plat.
The allowed density range in the R-8 zone is a minimum of 4.0 to a maximum of 8.0 dwelling units
per acre. Net density is calculated after the deduction of sensitive areas, areas intended for public
Admin Report Traverso.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006;PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 5
right-of-way, and private access easements. The property does not contain any sensitive areas.
fir► There is a 10-foot wide access easement along the east property that must be deducted. Also, the
areas being dedicated to Redmond Ave. NE and NE 19th St. must be deducted. The density
calculation supplied by the applicant is not accurate because the proposal only includes 13 feet of
dedication to Redmond Ave. NE and not the 15 feet that will be required. After adjusting the
calculation, the net acreage of the site is 16,844.78, and the net residential density of the proposed
three-lot short plat would be 7.75 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowed density range
for the R-8 zone.
The allowed building lot coverage in the R-8 zone is 35 percent or 2,500 square feet, whichever is
greater for lots over 5,000 square feet in size. The existing house would meet the lot coverage
requirement. The lot coverage requirement for the proposed lots would be verified at the time of
building permit review.
The required minimum setbacks in the R-8 zone are as follows: Front yard - 15 feet for the primary
structure and 20 feet for a garage; side yard - 5 feet; side yard along a street or access easement-
15 feet for the primary structure and 20 feet for a garage; and rear yard -20 feet. The setbacks for
the new houses would be verified at the time of building permit review. The existing house on
proposed Lot 1 would meet the minimum required setbacks, except the front yard setback for the
primary structure of 15 feet. The applicant has requested a variance concurrently with this short
plat to reduce the minimum 15-foot front yard setback for the existing house by 4.75 feet to 10.75
feet in order to resolve this deficiency.
The parking regulations require that detached or semi-attached dwellings provide a minimum of 2
off-street parking spaces. As proposed, each lot would have adequate area to provide two off-
street parking spaces. Compliance with the parking requirements will be verified at the time of
building permit review.
The landscaping requirements for short plats in the R-8 zone include a landscape strip along the
frontage of the site, and 2 trees in the front yard area of all lots in the short plat. Existing
vegetation may count toward this requirement. The minimum amount of landscaping required for
sites abutting a non-arterial public street (Redmond Ave. NE and NE 19th St.) is 5 feet provided
that if there is additional undeveloped right-of-way in excess of 5 feet, this shall also be
landscaped. A determination has been made that if no additional area is available within the public
right-of-way due to required improvements, the 5-foot landscaped strip may be located within
private property abutting the public right-of-way. The landscaping proposed shall either consist of
drought resistant vegetation or shall be irrigated appropriately. The two trees must be installed in
the 15-foot front yard setback area for the proposed lots. They must have a minimum caliper of 1-
1/2 inches (deciduous)or be 6—8 feet in height(coniferous).
Presently the site is landscaped in the manner of other lots in the neighborhood. There are no
significant trees on the site.
A conceptual landscape plan was submitted with the application. The landscape plan proposes
plantings in a 5-foot strip on the frontage of the lots, and two trees per lot. Detailed landscape
plans should be submitted with the application for final short plat review.
c) Compliance with Subdivision Regulations
Streets: The Renton Municipal Code requires dedication of land for public right-of-way in order to
achieve adequate street width to ensure access to new development. Corner lots at intersections
must dedicate a minimum radius of 15 feet. The applicant requested a modification for street width
reduction, which was partially approved on November 30, 2005 by Kayren Kittrich of Development
Services. The owners of the Traverso Short Plat will be required to dedicate 15 feet of their lot
frontage to Redmond Ave. NE and 7 feet of the frontage of their lot to NE 19th St..
The subdivision regulations require the installation of public improvements prior to recording of the
short plat, including but not limited to street paving, and signage. The Traverso Short Plat fronts
%a'' on NE 19th St. and Redmond Ave. NE, which are classified as residential streets on the City's
Arterial Street Map. There are no curbs, gutters or sidewalks along the frontages of the site. The
applicant will be required to install half street improvements, including sidewalk, curb, gutter, and
storm drainage along the frontage of the short plat. Street lighting is not required. The applicant
will be required to comply with the City of Renton's Trench Restoration and Street Overlay
Admin Report Traverso.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006;PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 6
Requirements. A traffic control plan, approved by the City will be required for any construe'
impacting the City's right of way. ,,,d
The proposed short plat is anticipated to generate additional traffic on the City's street system. In
order to mitigate transportation impacts, staff recommends a condition of approval be placed on
the project requiring a Transportation Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per net new average daily
trip attributed to the project. Two new lots (credit given for the existing residence) are expected to
generate approximately 9.57 new average weekday trips per lot. The fee for the proposed short
plat is estimated at $1,435.50 ($75.00 x 9.57 trips x 2 lots = $1,435.50) and is payable prior to the
recording of the short plat.
Blocks: The Traverso Short Plat proposal does not create blocks.
Lot Standards: The size, shape, orientation, and arrangement of the proposed lots must comply
with the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations and the development standards of the R-8
zone. The proposed lots of the Traverso Short Plat meet the lot size and orientation requirements.
Each lot is rectangular in shape, except that the rear lot line between Lots 2 and 3 is diagonal in
order to allow each lot enough buildable area and usable space. Lots 1 and 2 front on NE 19th St.
and Lot 3 fronts on Redmond Ave. NE.
The minimum lot size in the R-8 zone is 5,000 square feet net for parcels less than 1 acre in area.
The area of access easements must be subtracted from the gross lot area to ascertain the net lot
area. The lot sizes of the submitted proposal are: Lot 1 — 5,248 square feet, Lot 2—7,980 square
feet gross, Lot 3 — 5,000 square feet. Because the proposal only includes 13 feet of right-of-way
dedication to Redmond Ave. NE, and a total of 15 feet will be required to be dedicated, the lot lines
will need to be adjusted so that Lot 3 does not fall below the 5,000 square foot minimum. Also, the
net lot area of Lot 2, after deduction of the square footage of the access easement, was not listed,
but must not fall below 5,000 square feet when the lot lines are adjusted. Staff recommends as a
condition of plat approval, that the lot lines be adjusted prior to submittal for final short plat review
such that each lot meets its minimum lot size requirement after deduction of right-of-way
access easements.
The minimum lot width in the R-8 zone is 60 feet for corner lots and 50 feet for interior lots.
Proposed Lot 1 has a lot width of 69.92 feet, Lot 2 has a lot width of 73.51 feet, and Lot 3 has a lot
width of 51.08 feet. Lots 2 and 3 do have narrower segments toward the rear of the lots, but this is
beyond a depth of 75 feet so the lots would meet the lot width requirement. The minimum lot
depth in the R-8 zone is 65 feet. The depth of the proposed lots would be: Lot 1 —76.92 feet, Lot 2
—approximately 112 feet, and Lot 3—approximately 95 feet.
The dimensions of the proposed lots meet the minimum width and depth requirements and are
compatible with other existing lots in this area under the same R-8 zoning classification. In
addition, the lots appear to contain adequate buildable areas for the construction of suitable single-
family residences when taking setbacks and lot coverage requirements into consideration. These
requirements will be reviewed at the time of building permit application.
e) Reasonableness of Proposed Boundaries
Access: All lots in a short plat must have access to a public street. Lots 1 and 2 would access
directly from NE 19th St. and Lots 3 would access directly from Redmond Ave. NE.
Topography: The topography of the subject site is relatively flat, with one area of steeper slopes
along the lot line to Redmond Ave. NE.
Relationship to Existing Uses: The properties surrounding the subject site are single-family
residences and are designated Residential — 8 Dwelling Units Per Acre (R-8) on the City's zoning
map. The proposal is similar to existing development patterns in the area and is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, which encourage residential infill development.
Availability and Impact on Public Services(Timeliness)
Nor
Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish
services to the proposed development, subject to the condition that the applicant provide Code
required improvements and fees. Street addresses shall be visible from a public street. A fire
Admin Report Traverso.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006;PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 7
hydrant with 1,000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If
the building square footage of the house, including the garage, exceeds 3,600 sq. ft. in area, the
minimum fire flow increases to 1,500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the
structures. A Fire Mitigation Fee, based on $488.00 per new single-family lot with credit given for
the existing single-family residence, is recommended in order to mitigate the proposal's potential
impacts to City emergency services. The fee is estimated at $488.00 ($488.00 x 2 new lots =
$976.00)and is payable prior to the recording of the short plat.
Schools: According to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Land Use
Element (January 16, 1992), the City of Renton has a student generation factor of 0.44 students
per single-family residential dwelling. Based on the student generation factor, the proposed short
plat would result in one additional student (0.44 X 2 lots = 0.88 rounded up to 1) to the local
schools. It is anticipated that the Renton School District can accommodate any additional students
generated by this proposal.
Surface Water. There are storm drainage improvements in NE 19th Street and Redmond Ave NE.
A surface water drainage report prepared as part of the Technical Information Report by Baima &
Holmberg, Inc. and dated February 22, 2006 was submitted with the application. According to the
report, the storm drainage runoff as a result of the project development will increase by 0.19 cfs,
which is less than 0.5 cfs, the threshold for a stormwater detention. Less than 5,000 square feet of
new paving would be added, so water quality control would not be required. The City's Plan
Review Section has reviewed the report and determined that the site is required to comply with the
1990 KCSWM. Detention is not required for this three-lot short plat. The applicant will be required
to tightline all roof drains to the existing storm sytem. A temporary erosion control plan will be
required and the erosion control measures shall be installed and maintained to the satisfaction of
the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project. The
Surface Water System Development Charges are based on a rate of $759.00 x 2 new single-
family homes. Estimated fees based on the entire site plan is $1,518.00. Payment of these fees
will be required prior to issuance of a utility construction permit.
Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities: There is an existing 8-inch water main fronting the property
in NE 19th Street and an 8-inch water main in Redmond Ave NE. Derated fire flow in the vicinity is
approximately 2,500 gpm. Static water pressure in the area is approximately 70 psi. The
proposed project is located in the 565 Water Pressure Zone and is inside Aquifer Protection Zone
2. Fire flow requirement for single-family residences under 3,600 square feet is 1,000 gpm. One
hydrant is required within 300 feet of the all structures. If houses exceed 3,600 square feet,
including the garage, fire flow increases to 1,500 gpm and two hydrants will be required. A 5-inch
quick-disconnect fitting will be required to be installed on existing hydrants counted as fire
protection if not already in place. All short plats shall provide separate water service stubs to each
building lot prior to recording of the short plat. Separate permits will be required. A water main
extension is not required. The Water System Development Charges are based on a rate of
$1,956.00 x 2 new single-family lots. Estimated fees based on the entire site plan is $3,912.00.
Credit is given for the existing home. Payment of these fees will be required prior to issuance of
utility construction permit. The applicant has included the required Aquifer Protection Notice on the
face of the short plat.
There is an existing 8-inch sewer main fronting the site in NE 19th Street and an 8-inch sewer main
in Redmond Ave NE. Separate sewer stubs are required to be provided to each lot prior to
recording of the short plat. A separate permit is required for this. Minimum slope for side sewers
shall be 2%. Dual side sewers are not allowed. The Sanitary Sewer System Development
Charges are based on a rate of$1,017.00 times two new single-family lots for this short plat. The
estimated fee for the short plat is $2,034.00. Credit is given for the existing home if it is currently
connected to sewer. Payment of this fees will be required prior to issuance of utility construction
permit. This parcel is also subject to two Special Assessment Districts, Sierra Heights 9205, and
Honey Creek 8611. Honey Creek assessment will be a flat fee of $250 per new single family
Now home and Sierra Heights is $1,016.89 per new single-family residence. Total fees owing for these
special assessments are estimated at$2,533.78.
Admin Report Traverso.doc
•
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006;PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 8
g) Consistency With Variance Criteria
The Administrator shall have authority to grant an administrative variance upon making a
determination, in writing, that the conditions specified below have been found to exist. Section 4-9-
250B.5.a. lists 4 criteria that the Administrator is asked to consider, along with all other relevant
information, in making a decision on an Administrative Variance application. These include the
following:
1. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of
special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography,
location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning
Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other
property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification:
The applicant contends that special circumstances do exist in that the lot is large enough to
subdivide into three lots, but the existing house would not meet its front yard setback once the
necessary 15 feet of frontage to Redmond Ave. NE are dedicated. While the size of the property
and the R-8 zoning of the property permits the subdivision of the property, the requirement for the
primary structure to be at least 15-feet from the front lot line would either preclude the subdivision
of the property or require the removal of a portion of the existing residence. The applicant is
requesting a variance to permit the existing residence to remain at its present location 10.75 feet
from what will be the front lot line of the property. The house would meet all other setbacks, and
the height and lot coverage requirements.
Staff recognizes that special circumstances do exist with respect to this variance application and
denying the variance would prohibit infill development on this lot and other similar lots in the City.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welf, +
or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subjate
property is situated:
The granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare. Instead, the
granting of the variance would allow for infill development as prescribed by the Comprehensive
Plan, while retaining an existing home. As proposed, the short plat would create a situation where
the existing structure meets all required setback and lot coverage requirements except for the
required 15-foot minimum front yard setback. Granting a variance so that the existing residence
on Lot 1 could remain would not create a situation that is detrimental or injurious to the owners of
the home in question, or the properties in the vicinity.
3. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject
property is situated:
Approval of the variance may be considered a grant of special privilege because it would provide
an exception from a zoning standard that limits most properties under the same zoning
designation. However, the same variance would be supported under identical circumstances
where a property would be short platted to obtain maximum density and an existing house would
remain on one of the new lots, provided the conditions of approval are met.
Staff recommends that a restrictive covenant be placed on proposed Lot 1 stating that in the event
the existing residence is destroyed, removed or demolished, the construction of a new single
family residence on Lot 1 shall comply with all development standards of the underlying zoning
designation at the time of building permit review. This restrictive covenant shall be recorded with
King County.
4. That the approval as determined by the Zoning Administrator is a minimum variank.
that will accomplish the desired purpose:
The applicant is proposing a 10.75-foot front yard setback for an existing single family residence in
the R-8 zone. At present the house is 25.75 feet from the right-of-way of Redmond Ave. NE. After
Admin Report Traverso.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006;PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 9
15 feet of the owners' lot is dedicated to that right-of-way, the house would be closer to the street
ern►' than the 15 feet allowed by the R-8 development standards. Dedication of 15 feet of right-of-way is
the least acceptable amount required by the city at this location. Without the dedication, the City
would not allow the applicant to subdivide. In order to subdivide and still retain the existing home,
the 4.25-foot variance is thus the least necessary.
H. Findings:
Having reviewed the written record in the matter, the City now enters the following:
1. Request: The applicant has requested Administrative Short Plat Approval for the Traverso Short Plat,
File No. LUA-06-021, SHPL-A, V-A.
2. Application: The applicant's short plat application complies with the requirements for information for
short plat and variance review. The applicant's short plat plan and other project drawings are contained
within the official land use file.
3. Comprehensive Plan: The subject proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designations
of the Residential Single Family(RSF)land use designation.
4. Zoning: The proposal as presented complies with the zoning requirements and development
standards of the Residential Single Family-8 (R-8)zoning designation, provided all advisory notes and
conditions of approval are complied with.
5. Subdivision Regulations: The proposal complies with the requirements established by the City's
Subdivision Regulations provided all advisory notes and conditions are complied with.
6. . Existing Land Uses: Land uses surrounding the subject site include: North: Residential Single
Family (zoned R-8); East: Residential Single Family (zoned R-8); South: Residential Single Family
(zoned R-8); and West: Residential Single Family(zoned R-8).
°arrr
7. Setbacks: The front yard setbacks of the proposed lots would be at the street frontage of each lot.
The setbacks for new houses on the proposed lots would be verified at the time of building permit
review. All but the front yard setback would be met for the existing house. A setback variance would
be required for the sub-standard 10.75-foot front yard setback of the home, or the house would have to
be removed prior to short plat recording.
8. System Development Charges: A Water System Development Charge, a Surface Water System
Development Charge, and Sewer System Development Charge, at the current applicable rates, will be
required for the each new single-family residence as part of the construction permit. Payment of the
Special Assessment District fees owing on the lots will also be required.
9. Public Utilities/Improvements: The applicant will be required to install street improvements along the
frontages of the site along Redmond Ave. NE and NE 19th St.. Individual sewer and water stubs must
be installed to serve the new lots. Adequate fire hydrants must be installed, and any existing and new
fire hydrants must be fitted with 5" quick disconnect Storz fittings.
Conclusions:
1. The subject site is located in the Residential Single Family(RSF) comprehensive plan designation and
complies with the goals and policies established with this designation.
2. The subject site is located in the Residential — 8 Dwelling Units Per Acre zoning designation and
complies with the zoning and development standards established with this designation provided all
advisory notes and conditions are complied with.
3. The proposed three lot short plat complies with the subdivision regulations as established by city code
and state law provided all advisory notes and conditions are complied with.
Noow
4. The proposed three lot short plat complies with the street standards as established by City Code,
provided the project complies with all advisory notes and conditions of approval contained herein.
5. The requested variance meets the criteria set forth for the granting of a variance as set forth in the
department analysis of this report.
Admin Report Traverso.doc
ASIIMMIIIIIM
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006; PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 10
J. DECISION:
The Traverso Short Plat and Variance, File No. LUA-06-021, SHPL-A, V-A are approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for the
attached garage and detached shed located on the property prior to the recording of the final short plat.
2. The applicant shall pay the required Transportation Mitigation Fee at the rate of $75.00 per net new
average daily trip associated with the project. The Transportation Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to
the recording of the short plat.
3. Prior to submittal for final short plat review, the plat drawing must be adjusted such that each lot meets
its minimum lot size requirement after deduction of right-of-way and access easements.
4. The applicant shall pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on a rate of$488.00 per new single-family lot with
credit given for the existing residence. The fee for this short plat is estimated at$488.00 (1 new single
family lot x$488.00 =$488.00)and shall be paid prior to the recording of the short plat.
5. Temporary Erosion Control shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the Department of
Ecology Standards and staff review.
6. The variance reducing the minimum front yard setback is granted only for the existing house on Lot 1
of the Traverso Short Plat. A restrictive covenant shall be placed on Lot 1, and a note shall be placed
on the face of the plat, requiring that when the house is destroyed, removed or demolished, new
structures on the lot must meet the setback requirements in effect at the time of new construction. The
covenant must be recorded with King County.
DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION:
SIGNATURES:
/)01,,e7
Gregg A.Zimmer a ,P/13/1,41Administrator Decision date
t
TRANSMITTED this 14th day of April, 2006 to the Owners/Applicant:
Beth E. & Mark T. Traverso
11025 SE 60th
Bellevue, WA 98006
TRANSMITTED this 14th day of April, 2006 to the Contact:
Shupe Holmberg
Baima& Holmberg, Inc.
100 Front Street S
Issaquah, WA 98027
TRANSMITTED this 14th day of February, 2006 to the Parties of Record:
Paul Barfknecht
3807 NE 19th Street
Renton,WA 98056
Niii
TRANSMITTED this 14t"day of April, 2006 to the following:
Admin Report Traverso.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006; PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 11
arty Meckling,Building Official
NorStan Engler,Fire Marshal
Neil Watts,Development Services Director
Jennifer Henning
Kayren Kittrick
Jan Conklin
Carrie Olson
Lawrence J.Warren,City Attorney
King County Journal
Land Use Action Appeals & Requests for Reconsideration
The administrative land use decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within 14 days of the effective date of
decision. An appeal of the decision must be filed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3);WAC 197-11-680).
RECONSIDERATION. Within 14 days of the effective date of the decision, any party may request that a decision on a short plat
be reopened by the Administrator. The Administrator may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to
the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the
Administrator finds insufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any
person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the following appeal timeframe.
APPEAL. This administrative land use decision will become final if not appealed in writing to the
Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 PM on April 28, 2006. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of
Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton
City Clerk's Office, (425)430-6510. Appeals must be filed in writing,together with the required$75.00 application fee, to: Hearing
Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055.
EXPIRATION DATE: The Short Plat approval will expire two (2)years from the date of approval. An extension may be requested
pursuant to RMC section 4-7-080.M.
ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT
ie following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action.
Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions.
Planning
1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise
approved by the Development Services Division. The Development Services Division reserves the right to rescind
the approved extended haul hours at any time if complaints are received.
2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the
hours between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours
between 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays.
3. The minimum amount of landscaping required for sites abutting a non-arterial public street is 5 feet provided that if
there is additional undeveloped right-of-way in excess of 5 feet, this shall also be landscaped. A determination has
been made that if no additional area is available within the public right-of-way due to required improvements, the 5-
foot landscaped strip may be located within private property abutting the public right-of-way. The landscaping
proposed shall either consist of drought resistant vegetation or shall be irrigated appropriately.
4. Two ornamental trees, a minimum caliper of 1-1/2 inches (deciduous)or 6—8 feet in height(conifer), shall be
planted or retained within the 15-foot front yard setback area for the proposed lots.
5. A detailed landscape plan must be submitted at the time of application for final short plat review.
Property Services
1. Please see attached comments from Property Services.
Fire
1. A fire hydrant with 1,000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If the building
square footage exceeds 3,600 sq. ft. in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1,500 GPM and requires two
hydrants within 300 feet of the structures.
2. Street addresses shall be visible from a public street.
Plan Review—Storm/Surface Water
1. A Surface Water System Development Charge of $759.00 per single-family lot is payable at the time of
issuance of the utility construction permit.
`4'/0!' A conceptual drainage plan and drainage narrative has been submitted with the site plan application. This site is
required to comply with the 1990 KCSWM. Detention is not required for this 3 - lot short plat.Applicant will be
required to tightline all roof drains to the storm system.
3. A temporary erosion control plan will be required and the measures shall be installed and maintained to the
satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project.
Admin Report Traverso.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Administrative Land Use Action
REPORT AND DECISION DATED April 14,2006; PROJECT LUA-06-021,SHPL-A,V-A Page 12
Plan Review—Water
1. The Water System Development Charges are based on a rate of $1,956.00 x 2 new single-family
Estimated fees based on the entire site plan is $3,912.00. Credit is given for the existing home. Payment of
these fees will be required prior to issuance of utility construction permit.
2. Fire flow requirement for single-family residences under 3,600 square feet is 1,000 gpm. One hydrant is required
within 300 feet of the all structures. If houses exceed 3,600 square feet, fire flow increases to 1,500 gpm and two
hydrants will be required.
3. A 5-inch quick-disconnect fitting will be required to be installed on existing hydrants counted as fire protection if not
already in place.
4. All short plats shall provide separate water service stubs to each building lot prior to recording of the short plat.
Separate permits will be required.
5. A water main extension is not required.
Plan Review—Sewer
6. A Sewer System Development Charge of $1,017.00 per new building lot is payable at the time of issuance
of utility construction permit.
7. This parcel is subject to two Special Assessment Districts, Sierra Heights 9205, and Honey Creek 8611.
Honey Creek assessment will be a flat fee of $250 per new single family home and Sierra Heights is
$1,016.89 per new single-family residence.Total fees owing is$2,533.78.
8. Minimum slope for side sewers shall be 2%. Dual side sewers are not allowed.
9. A sewer main extension is not required.
Transportation
1. Seven feet of right of way is required to be dedicated to the City to meet minimum roadway width of 50 feet
in NE 19th Street and. A modification to ten feet has been approved. Fifteen feet of right of way is required
to be dedicated to the City to meet minimum right of way width of 42 feet in Redmond Ave. NE.
2. Corner lots at intersections shall dedicate a minimum radius of 15 feet.
3. Half street improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutter,and storm drainage are required to be installed
fronting the site in Redmond Ave NE and in NE 19th Street. ,01000
4. Street lighting is not required.
5. A traffic control plan, approved by the City will be required for any construction impacting the City's right of way.
Plan Review—General
1. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards.
2. Applicant shall be responsible for securing all necessary easements for utilities.
3. All new rockeries or retaining walls to be constructed that are greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate
building permit for structural review. A geotechnical report is required with submittal.
4. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Under Grounding Ordinance. If three or more
poles are required to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed
underground.
5. Separate permits for the side sewer connections,water meters and storm drainage connections are required.
*6119
Admin Report Traverso.doc
Y OF RENTON TRA ASO
SHORT PLAT # LND- SHORT PLAT
x w
�SI TE
TAX PARCEL; 042305-9138 2 I �"
1 C4
EXiSITNGS ZONING R8 1 I 0 t0 .1;
q f
PROPOSED ZONING RB (��
TOTAL SITE AREA-21,178 sq. ft h- , n 141910,0040 SCALE 1' >• 40' 4
AREA OF INTERNAL ROADWAY-0 ;i
IL 0E2305.9297
AREA OF DEDICATION•0,890 sq. ft, IL 199781.0070
VICINITY MAP
PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS 3
TOTAL PARCEL AREA- 21,118 sq ft I-
-1
( F' 'I" SCALE: 1"..400'
I
AREA BY LOT; / Ex 5514H
IINV.42 7 a8
LOT 1 AREA-5,248 sq.ft. It 168764.008n Ex Cs - e 3a ,
LOT 2 AREA-7,980 sq.ft. RIu•42704 •iN..Ie JJ ! f " -.FD 1 4'RON RCl�l 04
LOT 3 AREA-5,000 sq.ft iN-42404(1z'ADs-N)-N S'P9c-SEI A c6Nc.Posr MON m CASE
e UNI INT NE 24TH aT
�, v.41404(12"
ADS-.: �INv_41828 •• •-1 I k UNION AVE NE
PROPOSED OF LOTS 3 L 10 ,r••••'-''.)n 7E19400050 N t90,o82.5825
M -j Ex CB I E 1,311,439.1127
Ex CB R4.42739 EL.456.6329
R14.429 12 1 V.42359 Ce"CONC-x0 I w
MAX ALLOWABLE DENSITY 8 DU/ACRE v.423 a(2'ADS-2 N 4'CYCLONE N
4.42347 OrADS-u ALT -42359(+e'CONC-E' NCE g4Y g
PROPOSED DENSITY .-oleo N SHED To 9
7.14 DU/ACRE TL 156764-0090 1'; :I 10 ��NpN�AGE RE REMOVED �I'M j i
TOTAL AREA Ex SSMH - Y 'W o1 E h o
0.48 ACRE 21,118 s0. fl. RIM-azo 32 �- - �.
ROW AREA 16 -41872 03,9E-5) fl ,iE 6 W
B/0617E015,a rI EEx C6r `ff," -2936(TI-----� 1 500 50 T uv.z22s(e-1)5042 ACRE 18228 sq.ft . • vN0W116/0UTTER 7EDICATED ^b I ,,NI
fff TO CITY Of RENTW W EP 20'JOINT DRIVEWAY 1�CI 2OBRASs 01SNIW%x-
9NNERlDEVELOPER: EMSRNO s + <,. q�
CONCRETE SIOEWAIXV ONCE REWESTED SFTGDr,-10'•-',EASEMENT REC NO 10000630002393 IN CONC.
TL 199Y61.OlO0 t1,','.,'
\ y Y429 f 79.92 61 i'7 3 I • •THE INT NE 22740 ST
MARK TRAVERSO O / 2 •f. '5 0 UNION AVE NE
I e OLSL s--- I LOT 2 9
g I 'I i'1 E 1311,425.2530
L • }981 S0.FT A EL.-4540B70
ENGINEER/SURVEYOR: 7761-0120 w 'll LI`Fv.SZ43 ' 'y 'GAR TO --�� I B
BAIMA HOLMBERG, INC. 1e6j6.o Ex sDMH ';,,i 7, - ,,BE R[MOVF/D
100 FRONT STREET T�N Rm.S-A r CB �I 0
L.423 z1(2 nos-Nl ,,,,,SE 70 aM.42'37
ISSAOUAH, WA. 98027 w9-42291 UrQS ) ° �'-EMUN YNv.4221 2 655 1D • 4R
1.4Z39t 112'655 E) ! I Ip NV.422 (+2 ADS Ey 7 TO BE DEDICATED t „e
Ex CB /' 36.96 ( • TO CITY OF RENTON h^
CITY OF RENTON CONTROL 89.43480 d.�0,0p67„ PR SED / PROPOSED 5' Ex CB _,1
CITY OF RENTON CONTROL MON.0716 19.420 45(2'•655-1)-'� 4o Np p,y(p R O�O R114.42364 o,j�v
INV.42845L2 AOS-W) 1 X81N� � 4If11i09� 8._ T W^ .41989(IECONC W) Z^y
FD BRASS DISK IN CASE ` ��1�l: 'i�;.TQ(p�Wgy�•e1914�„- -4 968(18'609-E) I N
O 111E INT.NE 19TH ST -- -' ��ww' �}.•.., .�. _ ter- .4+989(IB-CONC-5) I g
UNION AVE NE
9 Nv -- _ _r`
N 183,279.2429 �- '
E 1,31,399.0436 S 33'143) E 2t19..5.4
Ex 32 - v.420 JJ(6-PYC-w)
CITY OF RENTON CONTROL NON.Y1833 RIu.434 79 �� � �
FO 1 4"IRON ROD ON N1'2610"E 493' CITY Of RENTONDISKX is
CA
// .419 49(e-PVC E) E SSUH • .Tan EX ;B T FD BRASS DISK IN CASE
A C6NC.POST MON IN CASE .419 49(e'PVC-E) RIu.434.49 v RIM. 75 M.23 471 0 THE INT.NE 1901 ST
O THE INT.NE 94TH ST INv.4193 (6'PVC-N) w78 I INv.41964(e'PVO-5) IN.4te 95(n.....'DS-0- E%C 0 W v.420)> I _ k UNION AVE NE
e UNION AVE NE pN1��- .419.79(3"PVC-E) Mv.41e 95(16"405-5) / TIER .41997 J(+8'ADS CW)) N 138,279.2428
N 190,009.3325 % E,,337.269 56
E...456419.0 INV
.0 (B"PVC-WJ iNv.419 B7(16-ADS-it EL.{37.289
EL•433,3320 I IL 042303-9032 Y it 442305-9447
1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
BASIS OF SEARING LEGENQ NOTE:
MONUMENTED CENTERUNE OF UNION AVENUE NE A THE SOUTH 150 FEET OF THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF NORTHWEST B FOUND AS NOTED PROPOSED ROADWAY WIDTHS
BEARING OF NO1'26'10"E QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF -REDMOND AVE NE- 2BFT. CURB TO CURB
SECTION 4,TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING • WATER METER -NE 19TH ST- 32FT. CURB TO CURB
BENCHMARK: COUNTY,WASHINGTON; 1 WATER VALVE
TOP 1"BRASS DISK SET IN CONCRETE MONUMENT IN
CASE AT INTERSECTION OF EASTERLY PORTION OF NE EXCEPT THE SOUTH 15 FEET FOR ROAD, SECOND; a FIRE HYDRANT
19TH STREET AND UNION AVENUE NE 0 CATCH BASIS
EXCEPT THE WEST 7 FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON, IN KING
ELEVATION - 437,27 COUNTY,WASHINGTON, a STORM MANHOLE
e SEWER MANHOLE N.E. 1/4 OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 4, TWN. 23 N., RGE 5 E., W.M.
CITY OFF RENTON ° MAILBOX CITY OF RENTON
NAVD 88
4,c)43 NOTE" DSPA71TMENT OF PSJ LEC WO PULS
G, ALL LOTS ARE TO BE DETACHED
INSTRUMENTATION rg R SEAIATTACNED SINGLE FAMILY
INSTRUMENT USED:3 SECOND TOTAL 574,00N 4478 RESIDENTIAL TRAVER8O SHORT PLAT
FIELD SURVEY CONTROL WAS BY CLOSED TRAVERSE LOOPS.MINIMUM . 14 44 N JOA NO 411-011
CLOSURE OF LOOPS WAS 1:22,000.IN ACCORDANCE WIN WAC
332-130-090. 0®41m DESIGNER vn 1-23_08 _ y
pM�JEF/MM
,B1VDI0 14/50/094, cases W.S.H. ,,A,,1'440' marw_.
NM MT. .011, A7••••b
.. ... ...= _
07 1
0:V...\41,,,,,\..\.......2 y1/41/1006 8040.7 AN KT
, -- -•
— !
, SE 95th P1. c...21
L.-- 1 1 '41111101
:W „ - C\.2
ti—
____
•
1 f NE-?7th P1
i ,SE 98th,--St. R—8
NE 25
I 1 SE 99th 1Stth Pl.
.
81i (-----
._• ,
1
I E 25 S .
, , 1 R-8
70
R-8, 0 , t -.., . ,
RC c6\ R---41 1‘) -,.;-2,„ E 101st St. R-8,
- , ! i 1 CP
:S.'3,- „ • , te-- WI L
' & ,--.19•7 \ 11' -' CI)1 I NE 102nd 1 I
\\ CV ---,J
-0-.6 , 4
„ , ,0
"%1 -----181----R-8 . —NE-22n d P1 ' CI
NE 22n1 St. oN
A - - ‘
. R'bi-' / 4 , (J-1 .-d NE 22nd St. R--'8
, 1r
ct,'i ; 1
. . . ,
w Ni I . ,
tc, - r'i_,,,' \ __Tj . RiNE 21st St.'
CdIn
; Z
e-, 1
7j
NI C?). N 40 44
•It '''
R—1
• ' (
, t•J
Ln /
A Q
, i
ce R-8 i
gx..1
f I mek:
Siam .z
NE 17th :,6—;--- - R—;8
NE17t
8 .
Et
R7 Zo NE -17th Sti (-"-..-
' ' ' ,' '‘; i-'17th
R—8 R-8
R—1 0 a)
10
,. .
R 7'
...... 9 1214-,, .---- R,_10 Blvi.
up
ve
z _ :
, x
i_.5 cp NE, 14th St.' t - ry
-- .,---i -C------ C A
-/-''
o.
.,k
NE:-12,h itt19 ' ' - C A
R•--10 R. /
R-8 R78 r----, f
CV LI- • NE R7
_ail) 1. _ :,.,6 - RM—F
. ,
, --
1,-
R--,..---87-i -
.. _ 8_ z,:‘,, , / '
E5 - 9 T23N R5E E 1/2
1 ....20 410
D 5
<SY
———— Renton Gitty Ltnittei 14000
my. ZpONIwTECWICAL NG SERVICES
4 T23N R5E E 1/2
A117
,..N.ro 12/24/04
5304
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
AI#: t
`4116r►', Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 3/26/07
Dept/Div/Board.. Hearing Examiner
Staff Contact Fred J. Kaufman, ext. 6515 Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing..
Correspondence..
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat Ordinance
File No. LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: New Business
Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation Study Sessions
Legal Description and Vicinity Map Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Legal Dept
Council Concur Finance Dept
Other
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated
Novi Total Project Budget City Share Total Project
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The hearing was held on December 19, 2006. The Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation on
the Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat was published on January 8, 2007. The Examiner requested
more information from Staff. That information was provided on February 13, 2007. On February 26,
2007 the Examiner sent a letter to the applicant and parties of record stating that the information received
appeared to be in order and that the parties would have 14 days to appeal the decision. The appeal period
ended on March 12, 2007. No appeals were filed. The Examiner recommends approval of the proposed
preliminary plat subject to the conditions outlined on pages 13 and 14 of the Examiner's Report and
Recommendation. Conditions placed on this project are to be met at later stages of the platting process.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat with conditions as outlined in the Examiner's
Report and Recommendation.
Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh
January 8, 2007
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF RENTON
Minutes
APPLICANT: Mark Rousso
Seattle Redevelopment, LLC
Box 2566
Renton, WA 98056
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA 06-133. 1'I', CU-A, SA-A, ECF
LOCATION: 320 & 330 Bremerton Avcnue NE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Preliminary Plat approval, site Plan approval, and Conditional
Use Permit approval to subdivide a 1.8-acre site into 26 lots for
the future development of attached townhome units.
SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to
conditions
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the
Examiner on December 12, 2006.
Noisy
PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining
available information on tile with the application, field
checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner
conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
MINUTES
The following minutes are a summary of the December 19, 2006 hearing.
The legal record is recorded on CD.
The hearing opened on Tuesday, December 19, 2006, at approximately 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on
the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner.
The following exhibits were entered into the record:
Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Neighborhood Detail Map
application, proof of posting, proof of publication and
other documentation pertinent to this request.
Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Plat Map Exhibit No. 4: Conceptual Drainage and Utility Plan
Exhibit No. 5: Grading and Tree Plan Exhibit No. 6: Conceptual Landscape Plan
' +'` Exhibit No. 7: Elevations Bldg A& B-F Exhibit No. 8: Elevations Bldg G-H, I&L, and J&K
41111111.
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP,CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 2
Exhibit No. 9: Zoning Map Exhibit No. 10: ERC Mitigation Measures
Exhibit No. 11: Revised Landscape Plan Exhibit No. 12: By Reference, Laurelhurst Division 3
Preliminary Plat
The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Jill Ding, Senior Planner, Development Services,
City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The property is located north of the Laurelhurst
Division 3 development, east side of Bremerton Avenue NE and south of NE 4th Street. The site is located
within the Commercial Arterial Zoning designation and within the Commercial Corridor Comprehensive Plan
designation. The site is approximately 1.8 acres.
The proposal is to divide the property into 26 lots for the construction of 26 attached townhome units. There
would be two 3-unit structures located on the southeast portion of the property and ten 2-unit structures. There
are no critical areas or wetlands on the project site.
The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-significance—Mitigated with 6
mitigation measures. No appeals were filed.
The proposed plat is consistent with the Commercial Corridor Land Use and Community Design elements. The
proposal for 26 lots resulted in a net density of 19.85 swelling units per acre, which complies with the density
requirements for the CA zoning designation.
To have standalone residential in a commercial zone, the applicant has to justify that there is no other
commercially viable use of the property that is available. The property does not have any frontage along NE 4`'' „vied
and that would hinder any commercial use of the property. The only commercial use that would be viable
would be an auto repair shop. Staff does concur that without frontage on NE 4th, the site is severely restricted
for commercial use. Further, the site is essentially surrounded on 3 sides by residential uses.
The net density would be 19.85 dwelling units per acre, which does comply with density requirements for the
CA zoning designation.
The proposal is located in both the CA zone and the NE 4th Street Corridor Business District overlay. The CA
zone does not mandate a minimum lot size, width or depth, the NE 4th Street Corridor Business District does
mandate a minimum lot size of 1,200 square feet. The proposed lots appear to have sufficient building area for
the development of townhomes.
Access to the site is proposed via a new internal access, NE 3"'Court, off of Bremerton Avenue NE. Full street
improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lighting are required. A 15-foot radius would be
required at all intersections.
Fire,Traffic and Parks Mitigations Fees would be imposed on this project.
There currently is a 26-foot wide proposed private street which provides primary access to Lots 15 and 16, that
private street should extend to the southern property line. There will be a water line within that easement and
will extend all the way to the south property line.
The topography is relatively flat. The applicant would be required to mitigate for any erosion or off-site
sedimentation by complying with the Department of Ecology Manual for Erosion Control. There are a total of 'INS
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 3
Ntriv
44 significant trees on the site,requiring the applicant to retain or replace a total of 11 trees. They plan to retain
5 trees and so will be replacing 6 trees.
The site is located within the Renton School District and they have indicated that they would be able to handle
the proposed 11 additional students.
A drainage report was submitted, the existing drainage from the north half of the site sheet flows into the
existing depression area. The drainage from the south half sheet flows to the southwest corner of the project
site. A detention and wet vault will provide drainage control, these will be located in the southeast portion of
the project site under the private paved street.
An existing 8-inch water main is located in Bremerton Avenue NE, in addition an 8-inch water main would he
required to be connected to the main in Bremerton and iooped through the site. The main would he extended to
the south in a 15-foot easement to the City of Renton. All of the units would be required to be sprinklered
Bremerton Avenue NE also has an 8-inch sewer main as well as an existing 8-inch sewer main on the north and
east side of the site. A sewer main would be required to be installed with this project.
Conditional Use Criteria:
Staff feels that this type of development is compatible with the surrounding uses, the residential twnhomes
would serve as a transition from the higher intensity uses of the commercial area to the lower intensity single-
family residential uses to the south. The development would further provide pedestrian connections to the
— surrounding uses along the north, south, east, and west sides of the property.
Site Plan Criteria:
The proposed building lot coverages range from 17% to 43%, which is well below the maximum 75% permitted
in the zone. The setbacks can be reduced down to zero feet providing there are no blank walls located within the
reduced setback. Front yard maximum is 10-feet, side and rear require a 15-foot setback when the property is
adjacent to a residential zone.
The structures on Lots 12-15 would not have blank walls located in the front yard and would qualify for a
reduced setback. Lots 19, 21, and 22 have front facades that have blank walls and so would not qualify for a
reduced setback unless the elevations were to be revised. Lots 9, 10, 20, 23 and 24 would have setbacks that are
greater than 15-feet, 15-feet is the maximum unless a variance is applied for. A revised site plan will be
submitted at the time of building permit application. Almost all lots require some change in facades or
placements and so Staff has recommended that the building elevations be revised showing additional
architectural detailing on the side yard along a street facade of specific buildings.
The applicant submitted a conceptual landscape plan that provides a 10-foot landscape strip along all street
frontages except where the front and side yard along a street setbacks are proposed to be reduced.
The sidewalks required along the new NE 3`d Court would connect pedestrians out towards Bremerton Avenue
NE, a 5-foot pedestrian access easement on the northeast portion of the site would connect pedestrians to the
north and east property lines, and a pedestrian connection located on the southeast portion of the site would
connect pedestrians to the Laurelhurst Division 3 Preliminary Plat to the south. However, after looking at the
*kw approved site plan, it appears that a pedestrian connection to the east would terminate in someone's backyard.
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 4
The Examiner mentioned the earlier hearing and the concerns for the pedestrian connection being proposed
through the property to the south.
Each proposed townhome has proposed 2 parking spaces each within a private garage. Since compact parking
stalls are required it would be required for the applicant to submit a revised site plan showing a maximum of 1
compact parking stall within the private garages proposed for Lots 1-6.
Regarding refuse and recycle areas, the duplex structures are exempt from having common collection points,
however, code does not exempt the triplex structures. Staff recommends that if Waste Management agrees, the
applicant would be required to request a modification from the standard.
A request by Staff has asked that there he some modifications to some of the buildings. All elevations be
revised to provide weather protection over all secondary entrances as well as the primary entrances, some
additional modulation and detailing or change of materials be provided on some of the facades that have less
detailing. It was also asked that the weather protection over the entrances to the two triplex buildings (G-11) be
revised to mimic the materials and shape of the roof.
James Jaeger, 9419 S 204`h Place, Kent, WA 98031 stated that they were in agreement with all conditions. In
some cases they will revise the building locations for setbacks, in other cases they will revise the elevations. A
lot of the areas that are requiring additional details are on the first floor on the back of the garages. There is
flexibility to add windows and other things to the back of the garage.
On the east side of the plat is the Hillcrest Townhomes, they were permitted with a different owner as a multi-
family apartment. To the west is the Ridgeview Court subdivision, detached single-family housing located in
the CA zone. To the north is the US Bank and to the south is the Laurelhurst Division 3 application, single-
family detached.
The depression that runs along the north side of the property has existed on the property for many years. When
Bremerton Avenue was constructed any outlet to the west was blocked off. There is no culvert under Bremerton
Avenue. When the apartment project was approved, they were issued a grading permit and the site work was
done. The grade was raised and the overflow was blocked off and it then flowed to the east onto Duvall. Last
winter a small lake was created along the property line. The soils are very pervious, and once the rain stopped
the lake was gone within a couple of weeks, leaving behind a depression. All the drainage from the US Bank
site drams into that depression. A solution has been worked out with an offsite pipe to Duvall Avenue that will
accommodate both this project an US Bank. The depression will then be filled.
He did not feel that a through roadway would be beneficial. There is a definite use change between Laurelhurst
Division 3 and this project. It would be better for both developments if the pedestrian access were to remain but
a road did not go through.
Rob Stevens, Core Design, 14711 NE 29th Place, Ste. 101, Bellevue, WA 98007 stated that they were in strong
opposition to the walkway heading south on this proposed project. The code does state that pedestrian access is
required on each property line, however, the Code 4-3-040F actually states that"a minimum of one pedestrian
connection shall be provided from each side of a property or development." There seems to be room for
interpretation.
There is a 15-foot building setback line and a 15-foot landscape buffer required between zones and densities of
such varying differences. This is to provide separation.
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 5
Additionally, there is an issue with the recreation open space being used by multiple parties outside of the
homeowners association of the Laurelhurst project. The staff report for the Bremerton Townhomes, it states that
the proposal does not provide on-site recreation areas for future residents of the proposed plat. I-Iowever,
pedestrian trail easements would connect to properties to the north, east and south. There are no existing
recreational facilities in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
The Examiner stated that the report should state that, "there are no public recreational uses in the immediate
vicinity of the subject property."
Kayren Kittrick, Development Services stated that a pedestrian access at this location on the south end also
allows the property owners from the south access to the 4th Street corridor to the shopping and other
neighborhoods in this area.
Regarding the waterline, there needs to be provisions for all connections, it currently goes to the south property
line and if necessary there would be a connection for the twnhomes to the east. It does not have to go south for
the Laurelhurst Division 3 development.
The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and
no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 10:48 am.
FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION
Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following:
fire
FINDINGS:
1. The applicant, Mark Rousso, Seattle Redevelopment, filed a request for a Preliminary Plat, Conditional
Use Permit and Site Plan for a 26-lot townhome project.
2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation
and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit#1.
3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of
Non-Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M).
4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter.
5. The subject site is located at 320 and 330 Bremerton Avenue NE. The subject site is located on the east
side of Bremerton and just south of NE 4th Street.
6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as
suitable for the development of commercial uses associated with commercial corridors, but does not
mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan.
7. The subject site is currently zoned CA(Commercial Arterial).
8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 4470 enacted in August 1994.
°irr
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A. SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 6
9. The subject site is approximately 76,466 square feet or 1.8 acres. The subject site is an L-shaped parcel `rrri
that is approximately 294 feet deep(east to west)by 329 feet long. The site has approximately 215 feet
of frontage along Bremerton.
10. There are two homes and some outbuildings located on the subject site. These structures would be
removed if the proposal were approved.
11. The subject site is essentially level with a depression located along the northern portion of the subject
site. Although the City's critical areas maps show a stream on or near the subject site, a stream
assessment determined that the depression is not a stream but is the result of grading in the area.
12. There are 44 significant trees located on the subject site. It has been determined that 25% or eleven (11)
of those trees should be retained or replaced. The applicant proposes retaining 5 trees. which would
mean that 6 trees would need to be replaced.
13. The applicant would subdivide the existing property into 26 lots that will accommodate attached
townhomes in two 3-unit clusters and 10 2-unit clusters. The development of residential uses without a
commercial component in the CA Zone requires a Conditional Use Permit. The development also
requires Site Plan review.
14. There will he a new public street that runs east from Bremerton and ends in a modified T-intersection.
Townhome lots vv ould be located north and south of the road and east of the f-intersection. The two 3-
unit townhomes would be located in the southeast panhandle while the remaining 2-unit homes would
occupy the rest of the property. The townhomes would be oriented toward the street and toward each
other. The proposed lots would range in size from approximately 1,316 square feet to 4,333 square
feet. Most of the lots would be rectangular but street curves would define some of the lots
15. The applicant and staff analyzed a number of road and alley configurations but safety considerations
generally dictated the location of NE 3rd Court. Transportation staff preferred that NE 3rd Court
generally line up with its counterpart west of Bremerton. There will be easements into some of the
properties and direct access to NE 3rd Court. Development within the NE 4th Street District is required
to provide links to and through property abutting its property lines to connect residential and
commercial development. Those connections are provided along the north and northeast corner of the
site. Staff has recommended that the applicant provide an extension of NE 3rd Court to the south
property line to provide access through the site to property to the south being proposed for subdivision
at this time. The developer of that southerly abutting property objects to that extension.
16. There are additional criteria for stand-alone residential uses in the NE 4th Street Business District. The
housing must be at least 150 feet from an arterial street, there is a mix of commercial, residential and
service uses within 150 feet of the proposed use, commercial use of the property is not feasible due to
configuration or commercial frontage, residential uses are connected to the commercial sectors and there
is a transition between the commercial and R-8 districts. The proposed use is located more than 150
feet from NE 4th Street. The site is located within 150 feet of commercial uses. The applicant contends
that the site and frontage of the site is unsuitable for commercial uses and staff has recommended a
pedestrian connection to the R-8 property to the south of the subject site.
17. The CA zone coupled with the NE 4th Street Corridor regulations permit a front yard between 10 feet
and 15 feet although it may be reduced as long as there are no blank walls (6 feet high and 15 feet long) Nviirit
presented to passersby. Similarly, the side yard is required to be 10 feet along a street but may be
reduced under similar limitations. A 15 foot rear or side yard is required abutting residential zoning
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 7
'Name such as that found south of the site. The front yard depth may not be exceeded. Staff noted that
Proposed Lots 1 to 8, 11, 16 to 18. 25 and 26 all have the required 10 to 15 foot setbacks. Proposed
Lots 12 to 15, 19, 21 and 22 have front yards of less than 10 feet but of those lots, Lots 19, 21 and 22
have blank walls that will need modifications to meet code. Proposed Lots 9, 10, 20, 23 and 24 have
front yards that exceed the maximum 15-foot setback permitted. They will have to be modified to meet
code. Proposed Lots 1, 3 to 11, 13, 15, 19, 21 to 24 and 26 have side yards along a street or easement.
Of those Proposed Lots 13, and 21 to 23 have blank walls and their exterior will have to be modified to
meet code. Proposed Lots 15 and 16 abut a residential zone and must be have a 15-foot setback.
18. The applicant had proposed a pedestrian connection to the east near the south corner of the site. This
easement would abruptly end at a third party property and not serve any purpose. Staff recommended
that it be merged with required landscaping to provide appropriate screening for the abutting R-8
property.
19. The CA zone permits 35-1oot tall residential buildings and those proposed for the subject site will be 29
feet tall.
20. The applicant has proposed providing compact parking stalls for Proposed Lots 1 to 6 but code w ould
not permit more than one compact stall per unit. The plans will have to be modified to meet code.
21. The density permitted for residential uses in the CA Zone ranges from 10 to 20 units per acre. The
density for the 26 lots would be 19.85 dwelling units per acre after subtracting private easements and
public roadways.
Nitre
22. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate
approximately 11 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and 1\ould be
assigned on a space available basis.
23. The development will increase traffic approximately 5.86 trips per multifamily unit or approximately
133 trips for this plat. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 13 additional peak hour
trips will be generated in the morning and evening.
24. Stormwater would be handled by a detention vault and wet vault that would be located near the
southeast corner of the property.
25. Sewer and water service will be provided by the City. Fire flow requirements, hydrant placement and
utility line placements will be determined by the various units and their placement.
26. The applicants testified that the site would not be suitable for commercial uses due to the location of the
property.
CONCLUSIONS:
First, before considering the various aspects of this proposal, this office has to note that it reluctantly supports
the proposal after some modifications are submitted back to staff for review and then this office. The City
specifically reclassified the zoning of this site to Commercial Arterial zoning. The site is part of a CA district
that lies both north and south of NE 4th Street. The zone was primarily intended for commercial uses but
permits residential uses although generally when combined in a mixed-use development. It does permit solely
residential use to usurp the land when there are substantial obstacles, that is, as the code suggests when
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 8
Nod
"Commercial use of the property is not feasible for reasons including, but not limited to: lack of
commercial frontage, lack of access, critical areas and/or critical area buffers, or property
configuration." (Section 4-9-030.K).
The site is almost two acres in size, almost level and generally rectangular. Granted this site is not directly on
NE 4th Street but many other parcels in the areas north and south of NE 4th Street do not lie directly on that
street. Not all business requires "commercial frontage." While many businesses attract patronage from mere
passersby, many other businesses attract a different patronage. Accountants, lawyers, doctors, general offices
and similar uses do not necessarily need commercial exposure. In addition, while the City encourages density.
the applicant has pushed the property to its limit by achieving a density of 19.85 units per acre but with that they
have arranged lots and the dwellings such that many of the lots do not currently meet the standards of the CA
/one and the overlay district. In many cases they have reduced the front yards or street side yards substantially
Staff has had to recommend that a number of lots or the location or style of the housing be redesigned to comply
with the platting standards and the design criteria of the CA Zone and the Business Corridor standards. It
clearly is a judgment call as to whether the applicant has pushed the standards too far for this project. In order
to forward the plat aspect of this proposal to the City Council this office will have to be shown that the
modifications requested by Staff can be accommodated.
Plat
I. If one presumes that the existing property is not suitable for commercial use then it might be reasonable
to subdivide the property for residential use. Following that presumption, the proposed plat appears to
serve the public use and interest. The redevelopment of the subject site will increase the tax base of the
City and provide opportunities for ownership of small. actually, very small lots by individuals.
Nod
2. The lots are in the main rectangular and they meet code requirements for size. The lot sizes should also
reflect the design standards for residential uses in the CA Zone and Proposed Lots 21 and 22 place
homes on those lots too close to the street. It appears that the lot lines between Proposed Lots 21 and 22
and 23 and 24 could be shifted to provide additional street setbacks for Lots 21 and 22. If that is not
possible, then one or both of those lots should be eliminated providing larger lots for the remaining
homes in the cluster of Lots 19 to 26. The applicant will have to modify some of the proposed layouts
to provide code mandated parking, setbacks and as noted below, design features as a tradeoff for
developing small lot townhomes.
3. The access appears reasonable and has been designed to create a more regular intersection with
Bremerton. Sidewalks as well as the mandated connections to surrounding property have been
provided. This office will not hesitate to suggest that a regular width public street to serve these small
townhomes seems like overkill and reducing the street width could free land for more substantial
setbacks.
4. The applicant will have to meet landscaping requirement for the lots including landscaping on each lot
and along street fronts.
5. Public services are available to serve the site and the ERC imposed conditions to offset some of the
additional impacts related to redevelopment of the site.
6. In conclusion, once the applicant has submitted appropriate modifications for review by staff and this
office, the City Council should approve the proposed Preliminary Plat subject to conditions noted
below.
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 9
Conditional Use Pei mit
7. The applicant for a Conditional Use Permit must demonstrate that the use is in the public interest, will
not impair the health, safety or welfare of the general public and is in compliance with the criteria found
in Section 4-31-36 (C) which provides in part that:
a. The proposal generally conforms to the Comprehensive Plan;
b. There is a general community need for the proposed use at the proposed location;
c. There will be no undue impacts on adjacent property:
d. The proposed use is compatible in scale with the adjacent residential uses, if any;
e. Parking, unless otherwise permitted, will not occur in the required yards;
f. Traffic and pedestrian circulation will be safe and adequate for the proposed project;
g. Noise, light and glare will not cause an adverse affect on neighboring property;
h. Landscaping shall be sufficient to buffer the use from rights-of-way and neighboring property
.o,, where appropriate; and
i. Adequate public services are available to serve the proposal.
Subject to the reservations outlined in the opening conclusion, the requested conditional use appears
justified.
8. The comprehensive plan suggests that the site be developed with commercial uses although the CA zone
does permit residential development both as part of a mixed use development and, after meeting certain
specifications, as stand-alone residential. This office has already noted the issues related to this
criterion.
9. There always seems to be a need for housing. There also appears to be a demand for small lot and
townhome layouts either for those looking for their first opportunity for homeownership or those
looking to shrink their households. Of course, usurping land that could serve commercial development
might not always be the best way to satisfy this need. Housing at this location makes access to
commercial uses easier and walking to community shopping is possible.
10. There should not be any undue impacts on adjacent uses. Hopefully, the adjacent commercial uses do
not generate too much noise as residents might complain placing pressure on those commercial uses.
11. The townhomes are low-scale and should not adversely affect adjacent residential uses. They are
generally no taller than single-family homes.
'"err' 12. Parking, once the applicant meets the required complement of compact/regular stalls, will be
appropriate.
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP,CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 10
13. The applicant redesigned the access street to create a more regular four-way intersection with
Bremerton. The applicant has created an appropriate grid system for pedestrians to the south of the
project in lieu of an unneeded vehicular connection to the south. Such a connection will allow both
adults and minors to walk north and south from residential areas to commercial areas without having to
walk along a larger street.
14. The applicant will he meeting the landscaping requirements of Code. Staff recommended that the
landscaping along the south margin of the site meet the code requirements to buffer the single family
zoning south of the site.
15. There are adequate utilities to serve the subject site.
Site Plan and Business Corridor Requirements
16. The site plan ordinance provides a number of specific criteria for reviewing a site plan. Those criteria
are generally represented in part by the following enumeration:
a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
b. Conformance with the Building and Zoning Codes:
c. Mitigation of impacts on surrounding properties and uses:
d. Mitigation of the impacts of the proposal on the subject site itself:
e. Conservation of property values;
f. Provision for safe and efficient vehicle and pedestrian circulation;
g. Provision of adequate light and air;
h. Adequacy of public services to accommodate the proposed use;
hi addition, as discussed above there are additional criteria for stand-alone residential uses in the NE 4th
Street Business District. The housing must be at least 150 feet from an arterial street, there is a mix of
commercial,residential and service uses within 150 feet of the proposed use, commercial use of the
property is not feasible due to configuration or commercial frontage, residential uses are connected to
the commercial sectors and there is a transition between the commercial and R-8 districts.
The proposed use, subject to conditions recommended by staff, satisfies these and other particulars of
the ordinance.
17. The proposal's compatibility with the comprehensive plan and the Zoning Code have been discussed
above. Compliance with the Building Code and Fire Code will be determined when formal applications
are submitted.
18. The development of the subject site should not have any adverse impacts on adjacent property outside of
the short-term impacts of construction.
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A. ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 11
19. The proposed plat does appear to push the density of the plat by achieving almost its maximum, which
leads to smaller yards and potential crowding. The modifications suggested by this office and staff to
provide the required design elements should help offset some of those impacts, as should the addition of
landscaping along the streets. All lots shall provide street landscaping as well as landscaping in the
front yards. The applicant shall either increase the street setback for Proposed Lots 21 and 22 as
proposed above or eliminate one or both of those lots. Those homes are located too close to the street
and design elements alone will not afford appropriate relief to provide quiet residential living to homes
located that close to a public street. Even easement access requires reasonable setbacks of homes from
the easements. The CA zoning is not an excuse for substandard setbacks and substandard residential
amenities.
20. The redevelopment of the subject site should not adversely affect property values.
21. The access and pedestrian connections appear to provide reasonable circulation to and within the subject
site. The link to the south appears reasonable and is required by code.
22. The two-story townhomes are close to one another but their limited height should not impair air or light.
23. The subject site appears to have reasonable access to sewer and water services.
24. The proposed use appears to satisfy the criteria for residential use in the NE 4th Street Business
Corridor subject to the conditions recommended by staff. The applicant will have to submit plans ghat
show that the site can meet all of those requirements including new elevations that meet the criteria
% r, specified by staff. The proposed use is located more than 150 feet from NE 4th Street. The site is
located within 150 feet of commercial uses. As already noted the suitability of the site for residential
uses as opposed to commercial uses could be considered problematic. Staff has recommended a
pedestrian connection to the R-8 property to the south of the subject site.
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council should approve the Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated
that was issued by the Environmental Review Committee on November 20, 2006.
2. Demolition permits shall be obtained and all inspections completed on the demolition of the existing
residences and detached accessory structures prior to final plat approval.
3. "No Parking" signage shall be placed along the private access easement that extends off of the southern
terminus of NE 3rd Court and serves the two triplex structures.
4. A homeowner's association shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to
establish maintenance responsibilities for shared roadway, stormwater and utility improvements. A
draft of the document(s) shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for
review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the recording of the
final plat.
Akire 5. The preliminary plat map shall be revised to extend the private access easement located off of the
southern terminus of NE 3rd Court to the southern property line. A revised preliminary plat map shall
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8,2007
Page 12
Ned
be submitted with the Utility Construction Permit application to the Development Services Division
project manager for review and approval.
6. A Tree Retention and Replacement Plan shall be submitted with the Utility Construction Permit
Application to the Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The plan
shall detail tree protection measures to be implemented to ensure survival of retained trees and shall
include a planting plan showing the species and location of replacement trees.
7. Either the building elevations shall be revised showing additional architectural detailing on the front
facades of the buildings proposed to be located on Lots 19, 21, and 22 such that the facades would no
longer qualify as blank walls, or the site plan shall be revised to provide a minimum 10-foot front yard
setback for the structures proposed on Lots 19, 21, and 22. The revised elevations or site plan shall be
submitted to the Development Services Division project manager and the Hearing Examiner befoic
reviewing by the City Council.
8. A revised site plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager and
Hearing Examiner providing a 15-foot maximum front yard setback for the structures proposed on Lots
9, 10, 20, 23, and 24.
9. Either the building elevations shall he revised showing additional architectural detailing on the side yard
along a street facades of the buildings proposed to be located on Lots 13, and 21-23 such that the
facades would no longer qualify as blank walls, or the site plan shall be revised to provide a minimum
10-foot front yard setback for the structures proposed on Lots 13, and 21-23. The revised elevations or
site plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager and Hearing
Examiner for Lots 13, and 21-23.
10. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted with the building permit application for Lot 15 to the
Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The revised landscape plan
shall replace the proposed 10-foot sight-obscuring landscape strip with a 15-foot wide landscaped visual
barrier along the southern property line.
11. A revised preliminary plat map shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project
manager and Hearing Examiner for review and approval prior to the approval of the plat. The revised
preliminary plat shall show the removal of the proposed 5-foot pedestrian access easement along the
southern property line connecting to the property to the east.
12. The site plan shall be revised to include a maximum of 1 compact parking stall within the private
garages of proposed Lots 1-6. The revised site plan shall be submitted to the Development Services
Division project manager and Hearing Examiner for review and approval for Lots 1-6.
13. A modification to the Refuse and Recyclable Deposit Area regulations shall be submitted with the
building permit applications for the triplex structures. The modification shall request the exemption of
these structures from the common collection area requirements of this section if Waste Management
determines that common collection areas would not be required. The modification request shall address
the criteria outlined in RMC 4-9-250D.
14. Revised building elevations shall be submitted at the time of building permit application to the
Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The revised building ,,
elevations shall show a minimum of 4 '/2 feet of weather protection over each side and rear secondary
pedestrian entry, additional plane changes or material variation along the base of the front facade of
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8. 2007
Page 13
r
Building A and the rear facades of Buildings B-F. The weather protection proposed over the primary
entrances to Buildings G-H shall be revised to mimic the pitch and materials used on the roofs, and the
rear facade of Buildings J& K require additional modulation and articulation.
DECISION:
The Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan are approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated
that was issued by the Environmental Review Committee on November 20, 2006.
2. Demolition permits shall be obtained and all inspections completed on the demolition of the existing
residences and detached accessory structures prior to final plat approval.
3. "No Parking" signage shall be placed along the private access easement that extends off of the southern
terminus of NE 3rd Court and serves the two triplex structures.
4. A homeowner's association shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to
establish maintenance responsibilities for shared roadway, stormwater and utility improvements. A
draft of the document(s) shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for
review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the recording of the
final plat.
fire
5. The preliminary plat map shall be revised to extend the private access easement located off of the
southern terminus of NE 3rd Court to the southern property line. A revised preliminary plat map shall
be submitted with the Utility Construction Permit application to the Development Services Division
project manager for review and approval.
6. A Tree Retention and Replacement Plan shall be submitted with the Utility Construction Pei mit
Application to the Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The plan
shall detail tree protection measures to be implemented to ensure survival of retained trees and shall
include a planting plan showing the species and location of replacement trees.
7. Either the building elevations shall be revised showing additional architectural detailing on the front
facades of the buildings proposed to be located on Lots 19, 21, and 22 such that the facades would no
longer qualify as blank walls, or the site plan shall be revised to provide a minimum 10-foot front yard
setback for the structures proposed on Lots 19, 21, and 22. The revised elevations or site plan shall be
submitted to the Development Services Division project manager and the Hearing Examiner before
reviewing by the City Council.
8. A revised site plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager and
Hearing Examiner providing a 15-foot maximum front yard setback for the structures proposed on Lots
9, 10, 20, 23, and 24.
9. Either the building elevations shall be revised showing additional architectural detailing on the side yard
along a street facades of the buildings proposed to be located on Lots 13, and 21-23 such that the
Noise facades would no longer qualify as blank walls, or the site plan shall be revised to provide a minimum
10-foot front yard setback for the structures proposed on Lots 13, and 21-23. The revised elevations or
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP. CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 14
site plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager and Hearing
Examiner for Lots 13, and 21-23.
10. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted with the building permit application for Lot 15 to the
Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The revised landscape plan
shall replace the proposed 10-foot sight-obscuring landscape strip with a 15-foot wide landscaped visual
barrier along the southern property line.
11. A revised preliminary plat map shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project
manager and Hearing Examiner for review and approval prior to the approval of the plat. The revised
preliminary plat shall show the removal of the proposed 5-foot pedestrian access easement along the
southern property line connecting to the property to the east.
12. The site plan shall be revised to include a maximum of 1 compact parking stall within the private
garages of proposed Lots 1-6. The revised site plan shall be submitted to the Development Services
Division project manager and Hearing Examiner for review and approval for Lots 1-6.
13. A modification to the Refuse and Recyclable Deposit Area regulations shall be submitted with the
building permit applications for the triplex structures. The modification shall request the exemption of
these structures from the common collection area requirements of this section if Waste Management
determines that common collection areas would not be required. The modification request shall address
the criteria outlined in RMC 4-9-250D.
14. Revised building elevations shall be submitted at the time of building permit application to the
Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The revised building
elevations shall show a minimum of 4 '/z feet of weather protection over each side and rear secondary
pedestrian entry, additional plane changes or material variation along the base of the front facade of
Building A and the rear facades of Buildings B-F. The weather protection proposed over the primary
entrances to Buildings G-H shall be revised to mimic the pitch and materials used on the roofs, and the
rear facade of Buildings J & K require additional modulation and articulation.
15. The lot lines between Proposed Lots 21 and 22 and 23 and 24 could be shifted to provide additional
street setbacks for Lots 21 and 22. If that is not possible, then one or both of those lots should be
eliminated providing larger lots for the remaining homes in the cluster of Lots 19 to 26.
16. The applicant shall submit modified plans that satisfy the conditions imposed by staff and staff shall
review those plans and make a final recommendation on their suitability to the Hearing Examiner.
ORDERED THIS 8th day of January 2007.
FRED J. KAUF
NINS
HEARING EXAMINER
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 15
TRANSMITTED THIS 8th day of January 2007 to the parties of record:
Jill Ding Kayren Kittrick James Jaeger
1055 S Grady Way Development Services Division 9419 S 204th Place
Renton, WA 98055 City of Renton Kent, WA 98031
Rob Stevens Eric LaBrie Marc Rousso
Core Design ESM Consulting Engineers Seattle Redevelopment LLC
14711 NE 29th Place. Ste. 101 33915 1 s' Way S., Ste. 200 PO Box 2566
Bellevue, WA 98007 Federal Way, WA 98003 Renton, SVA 98056
Alice Knight Charles Ratzsch
Trustee for Violet Bliss Estate 320 Bremerton Avenue NE
330 Bremerton Avenue NE Renton, WA 98059
Renton, WA 98059
TRANSMITTED THIS 8th day of January 2007 to the following:
Mayor Kathy Keolker Stan Engler, Fire
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Meckling, Building Official
Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Planning Commission
Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Transportation Division
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Utilities Division
'fir Jennifer Henning, Development Services Neil Watts, Development Services
Stacy Tucker, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services
King County Journal
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100(G) of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed
in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,January 22, 2007. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the
Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the
discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written
request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This
request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may,
after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper.
An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal
be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements.
Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City
Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,January 22, 2007.
If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the
executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You
may contact this office for information on formatting covenants.
The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one) communications may occur
concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in
private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both
*se the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council.
Bremerton Townhomes Preliminary Plat
File No.:LUA-06-133, PP, CU-A, SA-A, ECF
January 8, 2007
Page 16
All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all
interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the
evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court.
The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all requests for Reconsideration as well as
Appeals to the City Council.
Project Location: 320 & 330 Bremerton Avenue NE
=im . xi Y` ',o } M1` \ 3 3 .
,,,,„..,,,,,• .!2•744,..
t -
"�
ij 1K
ja,
ate ' // 1
i a - Arg i� r' --f---,-5"--,----- ' �- a"1 —T """'•"'s.
1 l
.':-.2.:-4,-47:::(7.:--''',v.iii 1--:: ::::EL, , ...=.:,- . i I—7-71 k..."„„ :'::
• E -. ,
(
(
A PORTION of the N.E. 1/4 & N.W, 1/4, SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 N., RANGE 5 E. W.M. 1.••••`y 11__ fir,
•I1, 1 DODNN ANI SINGING �� t 4 e
I ,V 4. 41%K"',KS MK r eve. e
�.NI 1{::,tl:.':C,t , "�a•''' 4...,a wn..t r Duct.wok
Mr. /172..”%. 1 , O.O.AM.X?Ott MC,r(PM .,
1' •
1 l „� 'R. ..,. y�
�dl:: F t —� I UIQ t;r a+[wt c U
_ -- - _ •- x.K`P CtwoYQ Kot f Z
»i SI'IV. '---. -- 'Ttt Yt.eere.a srt [CCMa AvnA I`
�� '1 I � �,•,... kyr•aa L 4115L,cL � _. �' ,a?fir caul.," '�F'ti. ���--�s � a q
"V--7:'".
,_ 1 r_stAyeue auw.a M. 1111... .�._le 4,i7;_7":"_-.7 •�•' ,l ecQ'-r,'?^c:g^'??'K1.,, •4^ .v'''` 7i
3R�' I rt." — t '� i ,r•er..�rt .of w wortYr •sw'Va.orr 0"..vrta W $¢
II/I, 1 I gI L -i I - I 1 rall ' r CIUM,01.7.(A. Z x 7i
1 V'"i♦ g
EI
-_, 3 1 1 8°w Car..Oe.M CxAtt b°AlM.lt CdOtR 2 S■
II �� 1 _"lig i i I ''��a ...............•au.ao AWM1,r a~ft .otc4 n..r 1i1 2.r
lit
It ' , 1��1' e°w cau.r .. u.. c...n®.►r r*Art1r)Y..Or rtwry re.rr raa eorr+.^ --�{.t � � �jV__ j3
1 "",• TYP. INTERIOR PLATROADi 'PJ 6\'\ u1\ M )t ' oar tO Q
1.
x..K.Y,t e,•�F""IAj— i�_ - PVBUc STRCET 10 •' DRAINAGE DETENTION: VAULT
`--��' # - "°°— 4�� .., 'F �� , t niwc.e n• LEVEL 2 OETDET STANDARD
IT
R /—:-
. I I. .i0: � '. Y I f 1
_ _i X51#II — /-:- ''�6��►""�"'�""�'""�"'"�1"��s > '
SUBSURFACE CONC. VAULT
+�-' "" 1 VAULT DIMENSIONS' 88' x 42' x 7.0' DEEP s'� ,
NE Std CT. , I aA �� 5 6 - �Mill � Ba_ti_ TOP IID ELEV; 408,0 �i' �,
m ". Art.wow DESIGN 50 YR. WATER LEVEL 404.5 ! •;I
Curry YO r` ` J , 0° Kc"c '► BOTTOM WATER LEVEL/OUTLET: 397.5 ia— `
r.Ata YAM 1 . rie 1im % �11Q NAM("•YAM VOLUME PROVIDED; 25872 CF
Mina \� ti ""• ----- �Y vOLUME REQUIRED: 25620 CF
J�6 �� I ,.,n,,t E/ WIN ";HPIssilmmosom
J I WATER QUALITY; WETVAULT
O n0.ne ,n
G I AI 1 18. J I wETVAULT BELOW DETENTION STORAGE
�f4, hit 111 1 u w ‘,,,,,0"" TOP WETVAULT £L 397.5
� II.� I BOTTOM WETPOND ELEV 293.5 R ;i
1I I" A 7 I_ y VOLUME PROVIDED: 7J92 CF
1 j I < I VOLUME REWIRED: 6780 CF s
3.{� ill �i R –J '� i I VETVAULT DIMENSIONS: 88' x 21' x 4.0' DEEP <
1• I q GRAPHIC SCALA m A
Fir.—.-7,----11....
� ',• �I / a _®,� ' --,� ,. M
II�t SL-0}LCL... ' ,_�---'-- 7 Y 7� ` 'a.� I0.
F-OrnAls: ~• ena•no, vi eA 1St)�u1'1411QQj
1 PfPCKft O.A..Aot
I artut.c.vAultrActv.At
1 UR O.Lv O K Y4/Mt
I } x1vNAt.
h 11 y` 412 m__meI♦�_im �m�—�m�ans 412 '. ~
I I �m//�1• mi.l„�t1i�u�!!tiirt �
'< ' ZNAIRreit �/� 1� >•Iii�!/gm. miiiiimmula 410 Ili
�...) 408 $���E ��� ������� 408 DEVE-'F,,�.l(-�mf. T e 3
il li 40611IIII111111111111
06LAN 404r , 17417 404♦ 402 r Q(1 ... ava"
Oo.uMx Aro•GLOOMY WRAY 1H . ) _ �II-I�—■■—�•
�n� «.;-. ; : 400 - 6 m� o oaa� : _ 400 L- . .�
o_ Point° ""-„Ali,.
ase '�oo �1♦�t♦�00 3+00 4+00
00 396 •. _,.,,
h' �� "°" PROFILE — IN7}[''°,RNAL yLOOP ROAD ._"""
}�,k[: MOarS: 1 . yam° �'-i—�
'ARS: 1° . 9' w 1L'
D
-,,
cil
•,;-: 1-
1-1
1.-
.14-11-1==-. .
E i
. , it I, 41 11111h.... tint i 1, ift lik ,-.__-.......
..../1114.
,-............... ...alai.
......44116.
a• ' ' :1 ugt, 1-,N., • _
< 4 I
,• ,..... ,i, ; , , 1- ,
; ,.,, , . , min, 7_, 1, =-2_:-__•_ ,, • , 1 1 --........„..._,1:1,11_:11:11:::_:_kIII-----TTTF-r-'--- TLlr . __rn,.HL,I,:,.,hal, Hd_Mily if; -
A I 'j I '
"
1 ' ' 'rr I .'r 1It J lb, wi liai 1,,,11r'I,,
II 'it ,::, , ,„„, ,,-,:, 1r, ,, , , ,,, rr_.,,,_„_,,
,, ,,, ,,, ,, ,.,,_,,,,,, ,,i,• ,--,,,1 , ., 1,,, , i_ffill11 11':If n,:,,i,E;.11111 rEl', ,Fj ti-IJI:,
1
.. ,,J.. J . I'am,, :1 , •
-.. 0
-,------_-----___--r.„- J__-_,L----____-_____---------,--i----_---- —_____--L_:_-___-4-7-.--- ---- ----•• •"'Lit.s. ,E2
1 is rr, _„rim_1.1._. ......„,_„-_=.____ 7---_-_;,-,_;-_-_,-,---=_-:-.,--., • c)
:_•.-7;;;_irtialliEt.td±----f-J-7'-_ -___n-_,--__Ttn-y: [..,+.j----TritAgT------f_iik-1
i .
..-.-..
1,
. 1
;,-----1 !• 7 --717-v,""!!!",-----if...!- ---=' ..,,.. -
, __.-m-=--- 111 =--_.... ,
=-_-___1 . .1 E. it - ...-
. :,II '! -, --- v---
------1 1 __i__ ----...- , ,
..,. ,
,....-..-... , ;_____
__________ „--
c-H SIDE - --__
Elevation: BUILDING G-H REAR
Eletr''l BUILDING C--1-1 .TRr-
ifi "----' ----- - --7-71 LET: -- - - - '';--j ; •. -'''''''''''';'4 rii.
I 1,
,!r !
=
, .. ..4. ..L.11111ilay. .4114114„...
.114112.81.
1 I'ir
- "Il 4 ..".....
_ _. -•",r ":„._,,,,_,-j. '.t-rj'r2:.:._'!' 'Irihrl.,.--.77•11i-Zeirealiatt.111.
?Ilk.=,,,,A :.I.t ii Ow....41,M,319 I 7,71 1441114101ein 11111111141.714.141--- -- .,-,_-______ .4.. ltifigrEritrEaraill...4 4 aledittlf''. - 4
1!
F, ,. ,• . er011 1-1111g104141611.1,1411,111•11 111111 I It -.51
11111, 1711,1
,,,-,,,,y,, n_ pa -,;; .1-147 1.4-ViLign 3 tardiFigigiain(531
, ...
1 A
I tar.. A..Milit 111111 Illi444 44114‘11.11144014111.111firitaan. H "1.1 2 -,
qi''&11Pi".11 i 1 :31'.1 j , '.,/ I Walt pinilikR4 Ifiagelinglibt VithaiNWPRORP1 J544 li,Pra.."11
_
. _
-
_=2,-----.iii-.. ._. Ni
-
---
____ ,,,_,,,•F--;--=•_=.--,-_=-_._--_,--___-----=__„_ _----_--_.-___---_-.._____ tiiiif
-:,
•'••II,1
0azc,
,--
De.,,ct,an BUILDING , & L REAR El,.; -- ,-&-. L SI L.IL- - ,- ' -,- 1l_n:IIN, I &
i...., •dd g
, . ..
..,..
0 -
,..1
..,.
alb 'III
- - •7---
__ It • III 1111 Ili ', ___._..,..,
,.,.
!,H ; ,, III,,I i I (71 II 1,i! il,i 1 I Ili:, li um , ,,I,,, , ii.,
I II II il 1 ; i 4 II;ill ,Ii 1I, 1
, , ,,,„ „..,„„, , , ,, ,,,,
„, ,,„„„ i,„,,, , „. „„
,, „ , „11 II 1 1 1 I II'11 il, .11 1 1 :,,1.111111 1
1 1„ I 1 li 1 I I!11 A,'1 i II ' 1 1 11 11 t---M-it
i 1', : ) H HI' 1 '! 1 '1' 11;!1 1-177-'j ‘,1
/Imiamii
- --
_ :IMEI E-9:1- 7.=:5•0 7,-___:1:_l___=_ 11 la--1. - ... -rnmerial --
--=-_-_--.-..--.-__-:-._=-_-.--_,•_. . _ _ _ ,--H-_,---_-_-_--=-------------— _ .,....,-- - - --- ---- -
--1._, . ....-- ,
I,
'-a.._,= i _33nr-A.
• , =
. V)
=13if.- , i.- y,-1 •= = . -
5 ,
Z I
1•.--- 11. 616.111=
....._ .
_ _____.
2_1
ue,,,,,iior BUILDING J & K REAR E.; ;. • j -1&': K SIDE •E• !::. ;-.:',.:,,; BLHLDING . & ST
K
. ;
Li CCI.
• n , ,
...,
IL
•
E6 - 10 T23N R5E W 1/2
fit. (--A L H — NE 4th St
:CA _______T b_a NE, 1i�S
CA CA o CA CA R
W 1
*ca "` NE 3rd Ct. �
-- CAS C R-10
CA
R-10(P) �� R-8
R-10
R-8
R-10 . 8 0
R-8 NE 2d8S
R-8 R-8
R-8 R-g
NE i "le f----- _____
R-8
kSsw Pi
R -8 � R-8
6 R-8 a
SE1stRPP ( -
RMH
.21
—
41
R-8 u
R-8 -8 SE 2nd Pl. R-a � f R-8
w
NR--8 x R-8 --
CO
so
w
RMH -
R-8 R-8
S_21E v4 t
SE 142nd St. up
cu
RC(P) /
oic'41 C4' Sl
441
CP) . AIL
A' ZoONING
4, _ 6u�tcet ssxvicsaG6 . 22 T23N R5E W 112
---- Renton City rte,,
.,
p
o F6
15 T23N R5E W 1/2
5315
Marrir�rr�rrrrrrr
*4004
2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on
November 20, 2006, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -
Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Bremerton Townhomes project. The DNS-M included 6 mitigation measures. A 14-day
appeal period commenced on November 27, 2006 and ended on December 11, 2006. No appeals of the
threshold determination were filed.
3. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES
Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued
the following mitigation measures with the Determination of Non-Significance—Mitigated:
1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Earth
Solutions NE, LLC, dated July 19, 2006.
2. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TES'
designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outline
Volume II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior
to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Division.
3. The detention system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King
County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (Conservation Flow control—a.k.a. Level 2) and
water quality improvements.
4. The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot.
5. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 for each new net daily trip prior to the
recording of the final plat. It is anticipated that the proposed project would result in the payment of$9,991.50
(152 net new daily trips x$75 =$9,991.50).
6. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $388.00 per new single family lot
prior to the recording of the final plat. The fee is estimated at $9,312 ($388 x 24 = $9,312).
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Lots 2 and 3, King County Short Plat Number 675015, recorded under recording number
7509050645, in King County, Washington.
r_7.4.7_) l
C:7117 CCUs Cil.
Date 3- g6- aoo7
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
COMMITTEE REPORT
March 26, 2007
Cable Franchise Renewal
Basic Programming Rate Regulation and Network Upgrade Add-On Calculation
FCC Forms 1235 and 1240 Proposed Rate Review and Settlement
(March 12, 2007)
The Committee of the Whole recommends approval of revised FCC rate orders and approval
of the settlement offer from Comcast; and
Further recommends that the resolution regarding this matter be adopted.
- .� -�
Toni Nelson, Council President
cc: Bonnie Walton
George McBride
Neil Watts
cable cte reports 031907.doc\ rev 01/05 bh
lir7 BY
C:717 CCZNCiL
Date 3- - &7
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
COMMITTEE REPORT
March 26, 2007
Cable Franchise Renewal Annual Rate Review
Equipment and Installation Rate Regulation
FCC 1205 Proposed Rate Settlement
(March 12, 2007)
The Committee of the Whole recommends approval of revised FCC rate orders and approval
of the settlement offer from Comcast; and
Further recommends that the resolution regarding this matter be adopted.
Toni Nelson, Coun ' President
cc: Bonnie Walton
George McBride
Neil Watts
cable cte reports 031907.doc\ rev 01/05 bh
P7,7 $"AYE n BY
TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE h sii
"` "' �L
COMMITTEE REPORT Date S-026-AGG 7
March 26, 2007
Airport Development Policy Priorities
Key Governing Policies
The Transportation/Aviation Committee recommends that the following four governing
policies, first presented at the March 1, 2007 Council Workshop, be formally adopted:
Key Governing Policies for the Airport:
1. Airport operations should be sensitive to neighborhood impacts and should strive to
minimize those impacts.
2. The Airport should be financially self-sustaining.
3. The mix of uses at the Airport should operate within the regulatory framework set by
FAA.
4. The mix of uses at the Airport should contribute to the City's Business Plan goals and
objectives.
Actio.0- , (guovv04,
Marcie Palmer, Chair
(7a-idiAn
Randy Corman, Vice-Chair
-,e,614-Q1
Don Persson, Member
cc: Gregg Zimmerman,PBPW Administrator
Alex Pietsch,EDNSP Administrator
Peter Hahn,Deputy PBPW Administrator-Transportation
Connie Brundage,Transportation Administrative Secretary
TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE /4'7-- ED B
COMMITTEE REPORT
C:77 OU CIL
March 26, 2007 Date 3"Rt- a(Jd 7
Airport Development Policy Priorities
Options for Proceeding
- -. -• 1/ . . . ..
The Transportation/Aviation Committee recommends that the following options for proceeding, first
presented at the March 1, 2007 Council Workshop, be formally adopted:
Recommended Options for Proceeding:
1. Review and clarify policies adopted in 2005 as part of the May 2005 Renton Municipal Airport
Development Study.
2. Continue with financial analysis of the various layout options.
3. Enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Mercer Island, outlining cooperative
actions taken and those to be taken (information sharing,RAAC involvement, noise study,
approach alternatives).
4. Continue with noise study,jointly with Mercer Island.
5. Find a way to satisfy FAA's direction to finish the ALP work in the near term. This may suggest
that the area currently designated in one option as a corporate aviation center would be left as a
"potential future aviation center"with no steps taken to implement it, or this area could be more
vaguely labeled"undetermined use"; or the area could be designated for a different aviation use,
and modified in the future;
6. Bring this new information together in very late 2007 or 2008.
7. Continue pursuing the LPV-WAAS approach development by FAA.
8. Formally ask FAA to develop and RNP (resource issue).
9. Include a process for community involvement.
10. Determine the role of the RAAC in this revised process.
VIZ' , /2 / '
Marcie Pa Chair
Randy an -Chair
�U
on Persson, Member
cc: Gregg Zimmerman,PBPW Administrator
Alex Pietsch,EDNSP Administrator
Peter Hahn,Deputy PBPW Administrator-Transportation
Connie Brundage,Transportation Administrative Secretary
FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT
March 26, 2007
D t �-v?/p- a7Q7
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS
The Finance Committee approves for payment on March 26, 2007, claim vouchers 257963-258458
and 2 wire transfers, totaling $2,876,205.13 , and 666 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 137, and
1 wire transfer,totaling $2,192,083.35 .
Don Persson, Chair
Denis Law, Vice-Chair
:s404- L t 'Cada 6C._-
Dan Clawson, Member
LTV CX.VUNCiL
FINANCE COMMITTEE Date S-02 4--eWe 7
COMMITTEE REPORT
March 26, 2007
NEW FUND CREATION AND FUND CHANGE
Referred March 19, 2007
The Finance Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to amend the
Financial Management Policies and approve the ordinance to provide for a new fund 135 for
the Springbrook Wetlands Bank and to change the Parks Memorial Fund (131) to an internal
fund.
The Committee further recommends that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for
first reading.
G-r\.
Don Persson, Chair
.,•ea7- 4/ '1/46641.----
nis W. Law, Vice Chair
--P'4 O4- l.A"1 71+1.-Ci 11("i..i 1(L
Dan Clawson, Member
MEB/dlf
cc: Michael E.Bailey,Finance&IS Administrator
Linda Parks,Fiscal Services Director
Bang Parkinson,Finance Analyst Supervisor
&/o,ded 3-016_01067
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. 37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
REGARDING THE BASIC PROGRAMMING SERVICE RATE SET
FORTH IN THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FORM
1240 FILED ON OR ABOUT APRIL 1, 2006, AND THE NETWORK
UPGRADE ADD-ON CALCULATED IN THE FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FORM 1235 FILED ON OR
ABOUT MARCH 1, 1999.
WHEREAS,the City of Renton, Washington(hereinafter the"City") is a municipal
corporation organized pursuant to Washington law; and
WHEREAS, Section 623 of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, 47 U.S.C.
§ 543, as amended, and applicable rules authorize local franchising authorities, such as the City, to
regulate rates for basic service programming and the amount of any network upgrade add-on
allocated to basic service subscribers; and
WHEREAS,the City is certified as a rate regulation authority pursuant to rules of the
Federal Communications Commission(hereinafter"FCC"); and
WHEREAS, Comcast of Washington IV, Inc. (hereinafter"Comcast") filed with the City
a preliminary FCC Form 1235 with the City on or about March 1, 1999, purporting to set forth
and justify a $1.16 network upgrade add-on to recover the costs of a network upgrade for the
City that was completed in June 1999 (the"Preliminary FCC Form 1235"); and
WHEREAS,the $1.16 network upgrade add-on is based on projected cost data; and
WHEREAS, Comcast has not filed a final FCC Form 1235 with the City that includes
actual network upgrade cost data; and
1
RESOLUTION NO.
WHEREAS, Comcast could attempt to add the $1.16 network upgrade add-on to the
basic service rate each month through the year 2014; and
WHEREAS, Comcast filed with the City an FCC Form 1240 on or about April 1, 2006,
purporting to set forth and justify the rate it could charge to subscribers in the City for basic
service programming (hereinafter the"2006 FCC Form 1240"); and
WHEREAS,the City retained Front Range Consulting, Inc. ("FRC")to review the 2006
FCC Form 1240 and Warren O'Hearn to review the Preliminary FCC Form 1235 and any final
FCC Form 1235. Front Range Consulting, Inc. and Warren O'Hearn are collectively referred to
in this Resolution as the"Consultants;" and
WHEREAS,based on its review of the 2006 FCC Form 1240, FRC prepared a final
report concerning the 2006 FCC Form 1240, which report contains various findings, conclusions
and recommendations, and submitted that final report to the City in October 2006 (hereinafter the
"FRC Report"), which report is attached hereto; and
WHEREAS,the FRC Report recommends that the Business& Occupational tax be
excluded from the basic service rate beginning with the FCC Form 1240 to be filed on or about
April 1, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the FRC Report further recommends that, beginning with the April 1, 2007,
FCC Form 1240 (the"2007 FCC Form 1240"), Comcast be required to include its actual total
payment of FCC regulatory fees on line 708 of Worksheet 7 and the actual recoveries from
subscribers on Worksheet 8; and
WHEREAS, Comcast and the Consultants have discussed the 2006 FCC Form 1240 and
the Preliminary FCC Form 1235 and have reached a proposed settlement of outstanding issues;
and
2
RESOLUTION NO.
WHEREAS,the terms of the proposed settlement offered by Comcast are set forth in a
January 23, 2007, letter from Comcast to the City, and a proposed Settlement Agreement (the
"Settlement Agreement"), both of which are attached hereto (collectively, the"Settlement
Documents"); and
WHEREAS, the Consultants recommend that the City approve the Settlement
Agreement; and
WHEREAS,the City believes it is in the public interest to avoid the delay, uncertainty
and costs associated with the continued review of the 2006 FCC Form 1240 and the Preliminary
FCC Form 1235, and any subsequent litigation before the FCC;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects.
SECTION H. The City hereby adopts the Settlement Documents, and approves
the settlement terms contained therein. The Settlement Documents and the FRC Report
addressing the 2006 FCC Form 1240 are incorporated into this Resolution by reference. The City
reserves all of its rights and remedies with respect to issues, rates and calculations not expressly
addressed in the Settlement Documents.
SECTION III. Comcast's maximum permitted rate for basic programming service
is hereby set at $14.3566, exclusive of franchise fees and FCC regulatory fees, upon the expiration
of the applicable review period. Comcast shall maintain a basic programming service rate of
$12.48, exclusive of franchise fees and FCC regulatory fees, through and including July 1, 2007.
In the FCC Form 1240 to be filed with the City on or about April 1, 2007, Comcast shall utilize a
rate of$13.4066 on Module A, Line Al. FCC regulatory fees will be included in the 2007 FCC
3
RESOLUTION NO.
Form 1240, and in all future FCC Forms 1240 filed with the City, as specified in the Settlement
Documents, and the Business and Occupational Tax shall be excluded from the 2007 FCC Form
1240, and all future FCC Forms 1240 filed with the City, as provided in the Settlement
Documents.
SECTION IV. The City and Comcast shall treat the Preliminary FCC Form 1235
as the"final" FCC Form 1235 for purposes of complying with FCC rules and precedent. In
accordance with the Settlement Documents, Comcast shall at no time charge the network upgrade
add-on calculated in the Preliminary FCC Form 1235.
SECTION V. The rates set herein will govern Comcast's basic programming
service rate until Comcast lawfully implements a further rate change pursuant to applicable law.
SECTION VI. Comcast may charge basic programming rates less than $12.48,
exclusive of franchise fees and FCC regulatory fees, as long as such rates are consistent with
applicable law and are applied in a uniform and nondiscriminatory way, pursuant to applicable
federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
SECTION VII. Comcast shall not charge any rate higher than $12.48, exclusive of
franchise fees and FCC regulatory fees, unless such rate is first filed with and approved by the
City, in accordance with applicable law and regulations, including but not limited to the notice
requirements imposed by 47 C.F.R. § 76.1603, or as otherwise expressly permitted under
applicable law and regulations.
SECTION VIII. This Resolution constitutes the written decision required by 47
C.F.R. § 76.936(a).
4
RESOLUTION NO.
SECTION IX. This Resolution shall be released to the public and to Comcast, and
a public notice shall be published stating that this Resolution has been issued and is available for
review, pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 76.936(b).
SECTION X. The City's staff and elected and appointed officials are authorized
to take all actions necessary or desired to approve and execute the Settlement Agreement.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2007.
Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2007.
Kathy Keolker, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
RES.1249:3/6/07:ma
5
Final Report
To
The City of Renton, Washington
Regarding the
FCC Forms 1240 filed by
Comcast of Washington IV, Inc.
On or About
April 1, 2006
Front Range Consulting, Inc. ("FRC")is pleased to provide the City of Renton, Washington
(the"City"),this final report regarding the FCC Form 1240 rate filing made by Comcast of
Washington IV, Inc. ("Comcast") on or about April 1, 2006 ("1240 Filing").
The Form 1240 is filed annually and is used to calculate the maximum permitted rate for
basic cable service. Under the rate regulations promulgated by the Federal Communications
Commission("FCC"), the City may review Comcast's Form 1240 to determine whether the
calculated maximum permitted rate comports with FCC rules, decisions and orders. If the
City wishes to take any action concerning Comcast's 2006 Form 1240 it must do so prior to
March 31, 2007.
I. Report Synopsis
FRC has reviewed the 1240 Filing. As detailed below, the City has several options with
regards to this filing. Those options are:
1. The City could accept the 1240 Filing as submitted by Comcast, without making any
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
changes;
2. The City could accept the 1240 Filing with a requirement for Comcast to modify its
next FCC Form 1240 filing with respect to the treatment of the FCC regulatory fee
and the exclusion of the Business and Occupational ("B&O")tax from the Basic
Service Rate; or
3. The City could proceed with the Phase II investigation of the current Form 1240
filing and prepare a revised FCC Form 1240 correcting the FCC Regulatory Fee
treatment and excluding the B&O tax from the Basic Service Maximum Permitted
Rate("MPR").1
FRC believes that all of these options are consistent with the FCC rules but considering the
least disruptive customer approach,FRC recommends that the City consider adopting Option
2. Before having the City adopt a rate order based on Option 2, FRC recommends that the
City authorize FRC and Bradley & Guzzetta to open informal settlement discussions with
Comcast to see if a settlement could be reached on Option 2 without having the City issue a
rate order. Option 2 would benefit consumers by requiring Comcast, instead of the City, to
make the necessary adjustments for the B&O tax and the FCC Regulatory in its next Form
1240 filing.
•
II. Scope of Report
FRC was retained by the City to perform a review of the 1240 Filing by Comcast and to
report to the City any adjustments which could be made to this filings. FRC was requested to
prepare this report based on material filed with the City and other publicly available
information.2 FRC prepared one data request(dated September 15, 2006)and Comcast
responded to that request on September 29, 2006. In addition, FRC had a conference call
with Ms. Robbin Pepper and Mr. Jim Waechter of Comcast prior to the submission of the
data request to discuss the treatment of the business and operations ("B&O")tax in the filing.
III. Summary of Form 1240 Filing
Comcast filed the 1240 Filing on or about April 1, 2006 as required by the FCC rules.
Comcast's 1240 Filing contains a proposed maximum permitted basic service rate of$14.36,
which is a $0.96(7.16%)increase over last year's filed maximum permitted basic service
rate of$13.40. The $14.36 maximum permitted rate suggested by the 1240 Filing includes
' To the extent the City adopts Option 3,the City would also be entitled to lower the inflation factor to the most
current inflation rate released by the FCC. Currently,this would be 3.12%compared to the 3.31%included in
the 1240 Filing.
2 This review was limited to an analysis of the 1240 Filing. The Form 1205 submitted by Comcast will be
reviewed as part of the ongoing national review project. The Form 1235 is also being reviewed and will the
subject of a separate report. The City should also preserve its rights to modify the Form 1240 depending on the
outcome of the Form 1235 review,as the results of that review may affect the rates shown on Worksheet 8 of
the Form 1240.
October 25, 2006 Page 2 of 6
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
the recovery of the B&O tax on the Basic Service rate. For example, in the July to
November 2005 period covered by the prior Form 1240 filing, Comcast was only charging a
Basic Service rate of$12.48 but added the B&O tax of$0.83 to the subscriber's bill resulting
in a total bill for Basic Service of$13.31. The resulting $13.31 is just below the filed MPR
in last year's filing of$13.40
IV. Issues Identified
FRC investigated three areas with respect to the 1240 Filing:
• Identification of Franchise-Related costs;
• Treatment of the FCC Regulatory fee in the Form 1240; and
• Treatment of the B&O tax in the Form 1240.
From these investigations, FRC has concluded:
• Comcast has incorrectly treated the FCC Regulatory fee outside of the Form
1240, which is contrary to the Form instructions and a recent FCC Order; and
• Comcast has improperly included the B&O tax in the Form 1240.
In both cases, FRC believes that these improper treatments have resulted in Comcast over-
recovering its costs associated with the regulated Basic Service tier.
IV(a) Franchise-Related Costs
FRC was initially concerned that Comcast had failed to include franchise-related costs in its
Form 1240 and was including these costs in the"base rate." This treatment would be
contrary to the FCC Form instructions for handling franchise-related costs. Comcast was
asked to provide the franchise-related costs for the City of Renton at three intervals: (1)
August 1994; (2)each month of the true-up period (the current true-up period is December
2004 to November 2005) and (3) each month of the projected period(the current projected
period in July 2006 to June 2007). Comcast, in its September 29, 2006, respond to FRC's
data request, refused to provide the amount of the franchise-related costs as of August 1994
by suggesting that"August 1994 is outside the scope of the current Form 1240 ..." FRC
disagrees that the amount of the franchise-related costs as of August 1994 is irrelevant. To
the extent Comcast was incurring franchise-related costs pursuant to the City's franchise, the
amount is embedded in the basic service rate and must be separately identified on the rate
filings submitted by Comcast since 1994 in order to prevent the FCC's forms and basic
service rate regulation process from increasing the amount of embedded franchise-related
costs by the inflation factor used on the"base rate." FRC has not been able to determine
based on the Comcast response and the current franchise agreement if there are any
franchise-related costs that Comcast is entitled to recover. In any event, FRC has concluded
that Comcast is not including any such costs in the 1240 Filing. Consequently, no
adjustment to the Form 1240 Filing appears to be necessary with respect to franchise-related
costs. FRC would like to remind the City during the ongoing franchise re-negotiations, that
if Comcast is required to provide any new franchise requirements that only those costs in
October 25, 2006 Page 3 of 6
•
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
excess of the costs currently being incurred by Comcast can be included in a subsequent rate
filing. Comcast should be directed to provide the original FCC 1200 where such franchise-
related costs were supposed to be identified.
IV(b) FCC Regulatory Fee
The 1240 Filing does not include the FCC regulatory fee on line 708 of Worksheet 7 for the
true-up and projected periods, as required by the Form 1240 instructions.3 This omission is
inconsistent with a recent FCC decision which addressed the proper treatment of FCC
regulatory fees when a cable operator files a Form 1240 and utilizes the annual rate
adjustment methodology. See In the Matter of Comcast of Minnesota, Inc.: Order Setting
Basic Service and Equipment Rates(Arden Hills, et al.), Order, 20 FCC Rcd 20157 (Rel.
Dec. 21, 2005)In the Comcast of Minnesota decision, the FCC concluded that it was not
appropriate for a cable operator to exclude the FCC regulatory fee from the Form 1240 and
then to recover these costs as a separate bill itemization, as Comcast is doing in the City. As
importantly, the FCC specifically determined that the FCC regulatory should be included on
line 708 of Worksheet 7 of the Form 1240.4
With respect to the FCC regulatory fee issue, FRC asked Comcast in data request 2 b):
Concerning Line 708 of the Projected Period, please explain why Comcast has not
included any amounts for the project FCC regulatory fee consistent with the FCC's
determination in Comcast of Minnesota, Inc.: Order Setting Basic Service and
Equipment Rates, 20 FCC Rcd 20157 (Rel. Dec. 21, 2005).
Comcast responded:
The FCC regulatory fees change year over year to an amount not always evenly divided
by 12 months. This creates an unnecessary amount of confusion from an operational
and subscriber standpoint,especially when you consider the net effect of leaving the fees
in the form or removing them from the form has no impact on the net Maximum
Permitted Rate. Therefore, Comcast has not included any amounts online 708 of the
Projected Period.
FRC disagrees with Comcast's response and treatment of the FCC regulatory fee. First,the
FCC has made clear(in a case dealing with a Comcast entity, no less)that FCC regulatory fees
must be included in the Form 1240. Comcast's 1240 Filing therefore plainly violates Comcast
ofMinnesota Order. Such a violation may constitute a breach of the City's franchise. FRC also
disagrees with Comcast's assertion that this treatment of the FCC regulatory fee has"no
impact" on the basic service rate. Comcast currently pays the regulatory fee based on the
number of subscribers as of December of each year in September of the next year. It does not
pay based on the number of subscribers each month. Looking at the situation in the City,
Comcast has suggested that the number of subscribers for December 2004 was 16,475. That
number grows to approximately 17,000 by December 2005 and is projected to be 18,077 for
3 The instruction for line 708 clearly and explicitly directs a cable operator to"[e]nter the total Commission
regulatory fee for the period"on line 708.
4 See Comcast ofMinnesota,20 FCC Rcd.at 20165-66.
October 25, 2006 Page 4 of 6
•
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
December 2006. As shown on the hypothetical example attached to this Report, Comcast will
be over-recovering its costs associated with the FCC regulatory fee. The hypothetical example
assumes that the$0.72 per year amount for the FCC regulatory fee remains the same for
illustrative purposes. Based on the assumed 0.5%assumed growth in subscribers, for the period
from September to August in a hypothetical year, Comcast is over-recovering the cost by a total
of$148.47 for the rate period. While the amount is fairly small in comparison to the overall
revenues received by Comcast,the over-recovery will be eliminated if Comcast adheres to the
FCC instructions and the Comcast ofMinnesota Order. FRC recommends that Comcast be
required to include the actual payment made each September to the federal government for the
FCC regulatory fee on line 708 of Worksheet 7 of FCC Form 1240 and to include the amount if
separately itemized on subscriber's bill as part of the rates shown on Worksheet 8 of the Form
1240. Doing so will eliminate any potential over-or under-recovery of the FCC regulatory fee.
IV(c)Inclusion of B&O Tax
According to Comcast,the MPR for basic service determined by the 1240 Filing includes the
recovery of the Washington State B&O tax. Comcast determines the B&O tax included in
the MPR and removes that amount from the MPR in order to determine the amount for the
Basic Service rate exclusive of the B&O tax. For example, last year's MPR was $13.31
which when divided by the B&O tax rate of 6.66% (1.06667)yields a basic rate without the
B&O tax of$12.48.5 The B&O tax is shown as a separate line item on the subscriber's bill
under the Fees and Taxes section of the bill. FRC does not believe that the B&O tax should
be embedded in the MPR determined by the Form 1240. Inclusion of the B&O tax in the
Form 1240 (with no separate identification on worksheet 7) allows the"base rate" which
includes the embedded B&O tax to be increased by the inflation factor in the Form 1240. In
this way, Comcast is increasing the inflation adjustment as inflation is applied to the
embedded B&O tax. This is incorrect and must be corrected or else Comcast will be over-
recovering its costs during the rate period (because it will be over-recovering the tax amount,
which has been increased by the inflation factor used by Comcast). More importantly, FRC
does not believe that the B&O tax should have ever been included in the Form 1240 .
According to Comcast, this B&O tax was included in the Form 1200 filed by Viacom in
August 1994 and Comcast and its predecessors have maintained that original treatment.
Irrespective of the initial treatment of the B&O tax in the Form 1200, Comcast must be
required to eliminate this B&O tax from the current Form 1240 in order to prevent the Form
from including inflation on the B&O tax . The correct way to reverse this inclusion would
be for Comcast to re-do each of the Forms 1200, 1210 and 1240 from 1994 to the present.
According to Comcast, they do not have these historical forms in which to make the
necessary corrections. Moreover, Comcast claims that they have not been fully recovering
the increases in the B&O tax but FRC cannot verify that"claim" without a complete review
of all of the intervening rate forms which Comcast apparently does not have.
FRC recommends that, at a minimum, Comcast be required to remove the B&O tax amount
embedded in the current proposed maximum permitted basic service rate by removing that
5 The Rate Card therefore shows the$12.48 and a B&O tax is applied at the 6.667%rate($0.83)resulting in a
combined rate of$13.31 that is equal to the MPR.
October 25, 2006 Page 5 of 6
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
amount from the beginning"Al"rate used on the next Form 1240 submitted to the City on or
about April 2007.6 In this way any over or under recoveries of past B&O taxes will be
eliminated and going forward, the Form 1240 will not include as part of the"base rate"the
B&O tax.
V. Conclusion
FRC recommends, as identified in Section I above, that the City issue a rate order addressing
the 1240 Filing unless a settlement can be achieved with Comcast essentially following
Option 2. The Order should follow the Option 2 recommendation which requires Comcast to
revise the methodology that it uses with regards to the treatment of the FCC regulatory fee
and also requires Comcast to exclude the B&O tax from the Basic Service MPR. These
modifications should be required in Comcast's next annual rate filing made with the City on
or about April 1, 2007.
6 FRC recommends that this be done by multiplying the current B&O tax rate times the MPR shown in the
current 1240 Form of$14.36.
October 25, 2006 Page 6 of 6
Comcast® 1 Street
Philadelphia,PA 19102
Peter H.Feinberg
Associate General Counsel
215.320.7934 Tel
215.320.3572 Fax
FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY
INADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE
January 23, 2007
VIA OVERNIGHT MAIL
Marty Wine
Renton City Hall—7th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Resolution of Comcast's FCC Form 1235 and 2006 FCC Form 1240 Rates for City
of Renton, WA
Dear Ms. Wine:
I am writing on behalf of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, and its affiliate
Comcast of Washington IV, Inc. (collectively,"Comcast"or the"Company")to propose the
resolution of issues identified during a review of Comcast's FCC Form 1235 and FCC Form
1240 for 2006 for the City of Renton, WA(the "City"), by City's consultant Front Range
Consulting, Inc. (the "Consultant"). Comcast believes that the following proposal as set forth
herein, which reflects recent discussions between Comcast and City's Consultant,would
minimize the substantial administrative burdens, costs,uncertainty, and delay otherwise
associated with the rate review process.
TERMS OF AGREEMENT RE 2006 RATE REVIEW:
FCC Form 1235
1. The"pre-approval"version FCC Form 1235 filed March 1, 1999 and its calculated$1.16
network upgrade add-on shall be considered the"Final"version FCC Form 1235 for
purposes of complying with FCC rules and the instructions for FCC Form 1235, and the
Company agrees that it is barred from filing any additional FCC Forms 1235 addressing
costs incurred with respect to the network upgrade identified in the March 1, 1999,FCC
Form 1235. The settlement agreement shall state that the upgrade costs for the Renton
system have been fully recovered for the applicable period represented in the form, and
that Comcast shall at no time charge the network upgrade add-on set forth in the March 1,
Marty Wine
January 23,2007
Page 2
1999,FCC Form 1235. The agreement shall release the Company from any future refund
liability arising out of the March 1, 1999 filing of the FCC Form 1235 for Renton.
FCC Form 1240
2. City approves by default the FCC Form 1240 filed on April 1,2006,which derived a
maximum permitted rate of$14.3566,which includes the Business&Occupational
("B&O")taxes but excludes the FCC Regulatory Fees and FCC Form 1235 add-on
amount. The settlement agreement shall release Comcast from any refund liability
attributable to its treatment of the B&O tax in prior rate filings and in the April 1,2006,
FCC Form 1240. The City reserves all of its rights with respect to the April 1,2006,
FCC Form 1240, except those rights that are explicitly waived in the settlement
agreement.
3. Comcast shall maintain its current Basic Service Rate of$12.48 until at least July 1,
2007.
4. The Company agrees to modify the 2007 FCC Form 1240,to be filed with City on or
about April 1, 2007, as follows:
a. Module A,Line Al,Current Maximum Permitted Rate will be reduced to
$13.4066.
b. Worksheet 7,External Costs for the True-up and Project Period,Line 708,
Commission Regulatory Fees for Period,will be completed with the FCC
Commission Regulatory Fees appropriate for each period in the 2007 FCC Form
1240,and all subsequent FCC Forms 1240 shall reflect,subject to applicable FCC
regulations then in effect,the actual total FCC Regulatory Fee payment made by
Comcast for the applicable true up period and Comcast's projection of the total
FCC Regulatory Fee payment in the applicable projected period.
c. Worksheet 8,True-Up Rate Charged,Lines 801-812,will include the current
basic service rate and FCC Regulatory Fees. The B&O tax amount of$0.95
included in the April 1,2006,FCC Form 1240 will be excluded from the April 1,
2007,FCC Form 1240. B&O taxes will be excluded from all future FCC Forms
1240 filed with the City.
5. The City reserves all of its rights and remedies with respect to the April 1, 2007,FCC
Form 1240, except those rights that are explicitly waived in the settlement agreement.
Marty Wine
January 23,2007
Page 3
Franchise Fee Audit Document Request
6. The Company shall agree pursuant to a separate side letter that, upon City execution of
the settlement agreement,it will provide to the Consultant by close-of-business on
January 26, 2007, or no later than two business days after City execution of the
settlement agreement,in the event City execution occurs after January 26,2007,the gross
monthly amount of the advertising revenues(advertising revenue plus advertising sales
commissions)for the audit period where Comcast Corporation and/or the Company is
affiliated with an advertising agency that receives commissions, such as National Cable
Communications(NCC)and the applicable regional advertising entity,and the net
amount(advertising revenue)where Comcast Corporation and/or the Company does not
have such an affiliated interest. The provision of this information to City's Consultant
shall be without prejudice to the Company's right to dispute any audit findings,or the
requirement of Comcast to pay franchise fess based on the provision of such information
provided to the Consultant.
7. The foregoing terms are subject to the approval of City.
•'1'T erely,
(ter
.Fe' berg
cc: Mr.Richard Treich
Michael Bradley,Esq.
Stephen Guzzetta,Esq.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This Settlement Agreement is entered into this day of , 2007,
between the City of Renton, Washington ("City"), Comcast Cable Communications, LLC
and Comcast of Washington IV, Inc. (collectively, "Comcast" or the"Company"). The
City and Comcast are collectively referred to herein as the"Parties."
Recitals
WHEREAS, the City is certified as a rate regulation authority pursuant to rules of
the Federal Communications Commission(hereinafter"FCC"); and
WHEREAS, Comcast filed with the City a "pre-approval" FCC Form 1235 with
the City on or about March 1, 1999, purporting to set forth and justify a $1.16 network
upgrade add-on to recover the costs of a network upgrade for the City that was completed
in June 1999 (the"Preliminary FCC Form 1235"); and
WHEREAS, the $1.16 network upgrade add-on is based on projected cost data;
and
WHEREAS, Comcast has not filed a final FCC Form 1235 with the City that •
includes actual network upgrade cost data; and
WHEREAS, Comcast could attempt to add the $1.16 network upgrade add-on to
the basic service rate each month through the year 2014; and
WHEREAS, Comcast filed with the City an FCC Form 1240 on or about April 1,
2006, purporting to set forth and justify the rate it could charge to subscribers in the City
for basic service programming (hereinafter the"2006 FCC Form 1240"); and
WHEREAS, the City retained rate analysts to review the Preliminary FCC Form
1235 and the 2006 FCC Form 1240; and
WHEREAS, the rate analysts identified certain disputed issues concerning the
Preliminary FCC Form 1235 and the 2006 FCC Form 1240; and
WHEREAS, Comcast has proposed to settle the outstanding issues identified by
the rate analysts, as set forth in a January 23, 2007, letter from Comcast to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City believes it is in the public interest to avoid the delay,
uncertainty and costs associated with the continued review of the 2006 FCC Form 1240
and the Preliminary FCC Form 1235, and any subsequent litigation before the FCC.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of premises, promises, undertakings and
mutual covenants of the Parties and other good and sufficient consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree to the terms
below:
Agreement
FCC Form 1235
1. The Preliminary FCC Form 1235 and its calculated $1.16 network upgrade add-
on shall be considered the"Final" FCC Form 1235 for purposes of complying
with FCC rules and the instructions for FCC Form 1235, and the Company agrees
that it is barred from filing any additional FCC Forms 1235 addressing costs
incurred with respect to the network upgrade identified in the Preliminary FCC
Form 1235. Comcast represents and agrees that the upgrade costs for the Renton,
Washington cable system have been fully recovered for the applicable period
represented in the Preliminary FCC Form 1235. Comcast also agrees that it shall
at no time charge the network upgrade add-on set forth in the Preliminary FCC
Form 1235. The City hereby releases Comcast from any and all future refund
liability arising out of the Preliminary FCC Form 1235.
FCC Form 1240
2. The City approves by default the 2006 FCC Form 1240 that derived a maximum
permitted rate of$14.3566, which rate includes the Business & Occupational
("B&O") taxes but excludes the FCC Regulatory Fees and Preliminary FCC Form
1235 add-on amount. The City hereby releases Comcast from any and all refund
liability attributable to its treatment of the B&O tax in prior rate filings and in the
2006 FCC Form 1240.
3. Comcast shall maintain its current Basic Service Rate of$12.48, exclusive of
franchise fees and the FCC Regulatory Fees, until at least July 1, 2007. Comcast
may charge basic programming rates less than $12.48, exclusive of franchise fees
and FCC Regulatory Fees, as long as such rates are consistent with applicable law
and are applied in a uniform and nondiscriminatory way, pursuant to applicable
federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
4. The Company agrees to modify the FCC Form 1240 to be filed with City on or
about April 1, 2007 (the"2007 FCC Form 1240") as follows:
a. Module A, Line Al, Current Maximum Permitted Rate shall be reduced to
$13.4066.
b. Worksheet 7, External Costs for the True-up and Projected Period, Line
708, Commission Regulatory Fees for Period, shall be completed with the
FCC Regulatory Fees appropriate for each period in the 2007 FCC Form
1240, and all subsequent FCC Forms 1240 shall reflect, subject to
applicable FCC regulations then in effect, the actual total FCC Regulatory
2
Fee payment made by Comcast for the applicable true up period and
Comcast's projection of the total FCC Regulatory Fee payment in the
applicable projected period.
c. Worksheet 8, True-Up Rate Charged, Lines 801-812, shall include the
current basic service rate and FCC Regulatory Fees. The B&O tax
amount of$0.95 included in the 2006 FCC Form 1240 shall be excluded
from the 2007 FCC Form 1240. B&O taxes shall be excluded from all
future FCC Forms 1240 filed with the City.
5. The City reserves all of its rights and remedies with respect to the 2007 FCC
Form 1240, except those rights that are explicitly waived in this Settlement
Agreement.
Franchise Fee Audit Document Request
6. The Company shall agree pursuant to a separate side letter that, upon City
execution of this Settlement Agreement, it shall provide to Front Range
Consulting, Inc., no later than two business days after the date of said execution,
the gross monthly amount of the advertising revenues (advertising revenue plus
advertising sales commissions) for the audit period where Comcast Corporation
and/or the Company is affiliated with an advertising agency that receives
commissions, such as National Cable Communications(NCC) and the applicable
regional advertising entity, and the net amount (advertising revenue) where
Comcast Corporation and/or the Company does not have such an affiliated
interest. The provision of this information to Front Range Consulting, Inc. shall
be without prejudice to the Company's right to dispute any audit findings, or the
requirement of Comcast to pay franchise fees based on the provision of such
information provided to Front Range Consulting, Inc. The City, however,
reserves all of its rights and remedies with respect to Comcast's compliance with
franchise provisions and applicable laws and decisions pertaining to the payment
of franchise fees.
General Terms and Conditions
7. Neither Comcast nor any of its affiliates or subsidiaries will take any action to
challenge any provision of this Settlement Agreement as contrary to or
unenforceable under applicable laws or regulations, nor will they participate with
any other person in any such challenge.
8. The Parties agree that this Settlement Agreement does not constitute an admission
of error on the part of either party and shall not be deemed to be an admission of
any such error by either party in any civil or administrative proceeding.
3
9. This Settlement Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of
the Parties hereto, and their successors in interest, assigns, personal
representatives and heirs.
10. This Settlement Agreement is freely and voluntarily entered into by the Parties,
without any duress or coercion, and after each party has consulted with its
counsel. Each party hereto has carefully and completely read all of the terms
and provisions of this Settlement Agreement.
11. This Settlement Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of Washington.
12. The Parties further agree that this Settlement Agreement may be executed in
multiple counterparts.
COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
By:
Its:
COMCAST OF WASHINGTON IV, INC.
By:
Its:
CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON
By:
Its:
Attest:
4
19dopied g-24 -aad7
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. ,WB
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
REGARDING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED EQUIPMENT AND
INSTALLATION RATES SET FORTH IN THE FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FORM 1205 FILED BY COMCAST
CABLE COMMUNICATIONS,LLC, ON OR ABOUT APRIL 1,2006.
WHEREAS,the City of Renton, Washington(hereinafter the"City"), is a municipal
corporation organized pursuant to Washington law; and
WHEREAS, Section 623 of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, 47 U.S.C.
§ 543, as amended, authorizes local franchising authorities, such as the City, to regulate rates for
equipment and installations; and
WHEREAS, the City is certified as a rate regulation authority pursuant to rules of the
Federal Communications Commission(hereinafter"FCC"); and
WHEREAS, Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (hereinafter"Comcast"), filed with
the City an FCC Form 1205 on or about April 1, 2006, to set forth and justify the rates it could
charge to subscribers in the City for equipment and installations for the period from July 1, 2006,
through June 30, 2007, (hereinafter the"2006 FCC Form 1205"); and
WHEREAS,the 2006 FCC Form 1205 is based on aggregated data that was used
nationwide; and
WHEREAS,the City retained Ashpaugh& Sculco, CPAs, PLC, and Front Range
Consulting, Inc. (hereinafter the"Consultants")to review the 2006 FCC Form 1205; and
WHEREAS, Comcast and the Consultants have discussed the 2006 FCC Form 1205 and
have reached a settlement of outstanding issues; and
1
RESOLUTION NO.
WHEREAS,based on their review of the 2006 FCC Form 1205 and settlement
discussions with Comcast, the Consultants prepared a final report concerning the 2006 FCC Form
1205, which report contains various findings, conclusions, recommendations and settlement rates,
and submitted that final report to the City in January 2007 (hereinafter the"Consultant Report"),
and the Consultant Report is attached hereto; and
WHEREAS,the Consultants recommend that the City approve the settlement equipment
and installation rates agreed to by Comcast and the Consultants; and
WHEREAS,the terms of the settlement agreed to by the Consultants and Comcast,
including the settlement equipment and installation rates, are set forth in a January 22, 2007, letter
from Comcast to the City, which letter(including appendices)is attached hereto(the"Settlement
Letter"); and
WHEREAS,the City believes it is in the public interest to avoid the delay, uncertainty
and costs associated with the continued review of the 2006 FCC Form 1205 and any subsequent
litigation before the FCC;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects.
SECTION II. To the extent that there is"Final Approval" of the Settlement
Letter, as that term is defined in the Settlement Letter, or the substantive proposal set forth in the
Settlement Letter is otherwise offered to the City in the event there is no Final Approval, the City
hereby adopts the Settlement Letter, and approves the settlement terms contained therein relative
to the 2006 FCC Form 1205, including(but not limited to)the equipment and installation rates set
forth in Appendix B of the Settlement Letter. The Settlement Letter and the Consultant Report
2
RESOLUTION NO.
supporting the Settlement Letter are incorporated into this Resolution by reference. The City
reserves all of its rights and remedies with respect to issues and calculations not expressly
addressed in the Settlement Letter.
SECTION IIIc Subject to Final Approval of the Settlement Letter or the individual
approval of the Settlement Letter by the City and Comcast, Comcast's 2006 FCC Form 1205 is
rejected in its entirety and maximum permitted rates for equipment and installations are hereby set
in accordance with the rates delineated in Appendix B of the Settlement Letter. The rates set
herein will govern Comcast's equipment and installation rates until Comcast lawfully implements a
further rate change pursuant to applicable law. If the Settlement Letter does not receive Final
Approval or is not individually approved by the City and Comcast, the 2006 FCC Form 1205 shall
not be rejected by operation of this Resolution and the City continues to reserve all of its rights
with respect to the 2006 FCC Form 1205, including (but not limited to)the right to require
refunds and prospective rate reductions.
SECTION IV, Comcast shall file a refund plan with the City within forty-five(45)
days of Final Approval, as that term is defined in the Settlement Letter, or such other date as may
be agreed upon by Comcast and the City, setting forth the refund amounts, by category, for the
2006 FCC Form 1205. The refund plan shall contain information sufficient to permit the City to
verify whether Comcast's refunds comply with the requirements of this Resolution, the Settlement
Letter, and applicable laws and regulations.
SECTION V. Within sixty(60)days of Final Approval, as that term is defined in
the Settlement Letter, or such other date as may be agreed upon by Comcast and the City,
Comcast shall make all rate reductions and refunds that are necessary based on the equipment and
installation rates calculated in Appendix B of the Settlement Letter for the 2006 FCC Form 1205.
3
RESOLUTION NO.
Comcast shall refund all amounts charged to subscribers for equipment or installations that exceed
the maximum permitted amounts specified in Appendix B of the Settlement Letter in accordance
with 47 C.F.R. § 76.942(d).
SECTION VI. Comcast shall file with the City within ninety(90)days of Final
Approval, as that term is defined in the Settlement Letter, or such other date as may be agreed
upon by Comcast and the City, a certification, signed by an authorized representative of Comcast,
stating whether Comcast has complied fully with all provisions of this Resolution and the
Settlement Letter, describing in detail the measures taken to implement this Resolution and the
Settlement Letter, and the total amount of the credits applied to subscribers' bills with respect to
the 2006 FCC Form 1205.
SECTION VII. Comcast may charge rates less than the maximum rates set herein
for equipment and installation, as long as such rates are consistent with applicable law and are
applied in a uniform and nondiscriminatory way, pursuant to applicable federal, state, and local
laws and regulations.
SECTION VDI. This Resolution constitutes the written decision required by 47
C.F.R. § 76.936(a).
SECTION IX. This Resolution shall be released to the public and to Comcast, and
a public notice shall be published stating that this Resolution has been issued and is available for
review, pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 76.936(b).
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2007.
Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk
4
•
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2007.
Kathy Keolker, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
RES.1248:3/6/07:ma
5
Final Report
Regarding
the
2006 FCC Form 1205
filed by
Comcast Cable Communications, LLC
January,2007
ITN
ASHPAUGH & SCULCO, CPAs, PLC
Certified FabJic Arcaunants and C onsalterts
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
Ashpaugh& Sculco, CPAs,PLC ("A&S")and Front Range Consulting, Inc.. ("FRC")
(collectively"Consultants")are pleased to provide the 2006 Comcast Form 1205 Participating
Communities' ("Participants")this Final Report regarding the FCC Form 1205 rate filing made
by Comcast Cable Communications, LLC("Comcast")during 2006.
L REPORT SYNOPSIS
The Consultants recommend that each participant adopt the proposed resolution of the identified
Form 1205 issues.. During the review of the Comcast Form 1205,the Consultants have identified
three major issues with the Form 1205 as filed by Comcast. Those issues are:
• Contract Labor;
• Asset Depreciation Expense and Reserve; and
• Installation Activities Outside the Customer Demarcation Point.
As the Consultants identified each of these issues,the Consultants informed Comcast as to the
potential problems and requested that Comcast provide supporting information to support
Comcast's position. With respect to the Customer Demarcation Point issue, Comcast revised the
installation times..•For the other two issues,Comcast does not agree with the Consultants that
these potential issues impact the Form 1205 as filed.
Based on the identification of these issues, Comcast began discussions with the Consultants to
resolve these issues without having to have the participating LFA issue contested rate orders and
facing a long appeal process before the FCC. Comcast has proposed to address these issues by
reducing the Maximum Permitted Rates(MPR)for many of the installation and equipment
categories.. While Comcast specifically does not agree with these identified issues,the
Consultants believe that resolving these issues in the manner set forth in Comcast's proposal is
reasonable and administratively efficient The Consultants also anticipate that Comcast will
attempt to address the concerned raised by the Consultants in their next filing but this proposed
resolution does not require them to do so.
The proposed resolution requires Comcast to provide a refund plan and to reduce rates to each
community on a community by community basis.. Comcast is also agreeing to not appeal any
Rate Order issued by a Participant that is consistent with the proposed resolution. A generic
copy of'the proposed Comcast resolution is attached to this Report.
`Arlington County,VA,Detroit,MI,Metropolitan Area Communications Commission,OR,Montgomery County,
MD,Mountain View,CA,Renton,WA,and West Central Cable Agency,IL
Page 1 of 5 January, 2007
Rail /
ASHPAUGH}� & 5CULCO. CPAs , PLC
rErti'c i r)bi!c At:Quriaais;rd Ccnsultar.ts
Front Range Consulting, Inc.
H.
SCOPE OF REPORT
The Consultants were retained by the Participants to review the FCC Form 1205 submitted by
Comcast to the Participants in 2005.. As this is the third complete review of the national Comcast
FCC Form 1205 by the Consultants,many of the issues that have been identified in the past
review at
also incorporated in this filing making the impact of the continued review of'the filing
cumulative.. The Consultants based this review of'the 2006 filing on Comcast's responses to data
requests and numerous informal discussions with Comcast regarding the supporting
documentation provided by Comcast. The Consultants appreciate Comcast's willingness to have
these informal discussions in lieu of preparing numerous detailed follow-up data requests..
III. SUMMARY OF FORM 1205 FILING
the rates were:
1005 ?!rob SCIticmi�nt
Item
�il'It N1Pll 111'K Chat�,c
INSTALLATION CHARGES _.,_,.' -
Hourly Service Charge 1 124 _
Unwired installations:IT $ �`
I
.--Y.� 1i. : - - iiT-^ ,._ 1 1_':: 1.-:.:i':.
Prewired Installation ' - :4.777.,,;:
Addition Outlet(Same Trip) $14 ($0 74
.. _,,,,..77;_
Addition Outlet(Separate Trip) 4• • ,>
�. 777__:
Relocate Outlet, 1 41
u 7444:__ -
:..:._::.k;-!..1..:,,-.--:-,:i.:':...- :.
7777-7777. .
Wz
Upgrade t $1849.;. ($0 94)
:,..-77. - , � i;.:
Downgrade
y _
Change of Service(Addressable) SI,,99--
VCR/DVD(Same Trip} �.: jf.-.':;.!:':::;,:::$7.-29,:.*:-: °s z =: 7 7 7:::`
VCR/DVD(Separate Trip) 4 .3‘,,,:".4i5:41,41:..4 _ T ! 0 p
- ..c.. a.,..s._. =- -a.__ —�.� _Cil Q��_ ,
Customer.Trouble Call
a 525.34 ' y - $1
EQUIPMENT RENTAL � � _
1:1-1S
Remote -$i- � ' 4 $0.23 ,
�$Q QZ)
Basic-only Converter $1.14 x ' ,:.($0:�}4}7777
.._ T- 7777. •
Converter(Digital/—
Analog)
_ y $4 01,:-: t -. _ .($0.21)
HD/DVR/13D-DVR Converter .__ :: �Y
-,..,:.,::::,.$9,9A--.;
77 . � ..
f��{A� �. j. 777..
$3:41
Page 2 of 5 Ianuary,2007
ki
ASHPAUGH & SCULCO, CPAs, PLC
Ce;tided Public Accc-cruors and Censultarts
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
IV. FCC FORM 1205 ISSUES IDENTIFIED
the Consultants have identified three issues with the Comcast filing.. The three issues are:
• Contract Labor;
• Asset Depreciation Expense and Reserve; and
• Installation Activities Outside the Customer Demarcation Point..
IV(A). CONTRACT LABOR
The Consultants investigated the actual contract labor invoices incurred by Comcast for the
sample systems.. The review of the invoices found that the number of specific installation
activities included on the actual invoices differed significantly from the number of activities
shown on the Form 1205 supporting materials supplied by Comcast.. The Consultants were
concerned that the number of installations performed and billed by the contractors was
inconsistent with the number of installations contained in the operational data base. Comcast in
preparing the Form 1205 used the internal operational data base as support for the number of
contractor installation and not the amounts shown on the contractor invoices., Comcast did use
the prices for the individual contractor installations form the actual invoices but applied its
internal number of installations to the prices to determine the amount of contractor labor dollars
to include in the Form 1205
If the installation activities are taken from the contractor actual invoices,the number of
installation activities would change dramatically and would generally reduce the number of
installations and hours associated with installation activities As a result,the Consultants believe
that the installation rates as filed are overstated as it uses an inflated Hourly Service Charge.
In the proposed resolution, Comcast has agreed to lower the Hourly service Charge from$34 24
to$32.50 which should capture a large portion of the issue identified.
IV(B),. ASSET DEPRECIATION EXPENSE AND RESERVE
The Consultants investigated the computations by Comcast of the asset depreciation expense and
reserve calculation for Schedules A and C the primary concerns were(1)continuation of'
calculating depreciation expense after the asset has been frilly depreciated, (2)errors in the
amount of depreciation and(3)errors in the amount of the reserve.. Comcast disagrees with the
identified concerns. The Consultants provided Comcast with a variety of'examples of'each of
these issues In a few cases, Comcast was able to show that asset retirements were causing the
apparent conflicts. However,in other cases, Comcast was not able to provide sufficient details to
support the depreciation expense and reserve included in the filing For example, Comcast
continued to record depreciation past the depreciable life of the asset and continued to show a net
book value even though the depreciable life had expired
The principal impact of these issues is related to the converter category of assets. Comcast has
as part of this proposed resolution agreed to reduce the converter rate from$4.01 to $3.80 for the
most common converter category. The Consultants believe that this reduction is reasonable
Page 3 of 5 January, 2007
ffil ....
ASHPAUGH & SCULCO, CPAs. PLC
Certified Public Arcuntents and Ccnsuit;nts
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
compromise and will cover most of the unexplained variations in the depreciation expense and
reserve items identified..
IV(C).. INSTALLAIION ACTIVITIES OUTSIDE THE CUSTOMER
DEMARCAIION POINI
The Consultants investigated the potential that Comcast has included installation times outside of
the customer demarcation point. The FCC rules allow for a cable operator to only include
installation costs associated with those activities from within twelve inches(12")from the point
of connection of the cable to the residence.. In reviewing the activities associated with the
contract labor costs described above,it was very clear that the contractors routinely included
activities related to a drop and drop replacement as part of the activities associated with an
installation. The activities and associated costs outside o.f the 12"from the point of connection
are part of the basic service rate and cannot be included in the installation rates unless all of the
hours associated with that outside installations ate included in the installation and maintenance
hours.. Comcast provided an analysis of the"outside"activities that it routinely prepares for
another regulatory agency.. Ihis anAlysis showed the amount of time associated with these
outside drop activities..
•
Comcast's resolution incorporates these revised installation hours.. The revised hours are
summarized below.
ltem ?111h Pilin. ctticmcnt ( han�e
. ..........
Unwired Installation ::T.0877,.'_ 2.
Prewiled Installation -, ifhM -tt _
Addition Outlet(Same Trip)
Addition Outlet(Separate Trip) - __.
r
Relocate Outlet = :.. ..........
.5GIi9`:::
Upgrade .5398 ,z.„:------.-.._-,!..,77_2,,,,
_ '
Downgrade _ .44 .
Change of Service(Addressable) T" 5398
V'CR/DVD(Same Trip) ft
. .213
VCR/DVD(Separate Tri i -" -: .46� • ,.
Customer Trouble Call y T3 `� •7401 i3`L+
In several of these categories,the Consultants do not believe that Comcast has reduced the times
enough associated with these outside activities but at least Comcast in this resolution has agreed
to remove these outside activities. The Consultant hope that Comcast will continue to review
Page 4 of 5 January, 2007
ASHPAUGH & SCULCO, CPAs, PLC
Certified PJbiic Arccuntnits and Censadt*nts
Front Range Consulting,Inc.
these installation times to ensure that all times associated with outside activities are eliminated
from the filing
V. POTENTIAL RATE IMPACTS
The potential rate impacts for the FCC Form 1205 issues identified above are difficult to
quantify because the Consultants cannot estimate them without significantly more information
from Comcast. the Consultants believe that the proposed resolution offered by Comcast at least
addresses these identified issues and removes a reasonable amount of these issues from the
resulting rates..
Comcast has agreed to provide refund plans to each participant an individual refund plan
detailing the amount of refunds by category.. Comcast has proposed to refund the total dollars to
each cable subscriber as a one time bill credit. The Consultants believe that is reasonable..
VI. CONCLUSION
The Consultants recommend that the Participants issue a Rate Order consistent with the
Settlement MPRs identified in Appendix B of the generic settlement letter attached to this Final
Report..
Report Presented By:
Garth T.Ashpaugh, CPA Richard D. Treich
Ashpaugh& Sculco,CPAs,PLC Front Range Consulting,Inc..
1133 Louisiana Avenue, Suite 106 4152 Bell Mountain Drive
Winter Park,FL 32789 Castle Rock, CO 80104
Page 5 of 5 January, 2007
FOR SET ILEMENT PURPOSES ONLY
INADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE
Addressee
Re: RESOLUTION ofCOMCAST'S FCC FORM 1205 RATES for 2006
Dear:
I am writing on behalf of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, and its affiliates
(collectively, "Comcast"or the"Company")to resolve issues related to Comcast's FCC
Form 1205 for 2006 which have been identified by your consultants Ashpaugh& Sculco,
CPAs,PLC and Front Range Consulting, Inc.. (the "Consultants"). Comcast believes that
its proposal as set forth herein,which reflects recent discussions between Comcast and
the Consultants,if accepted, would minimize the substantial administrative burdens,
uncertainty, and delay otherwise associated with the rate review process.
This proposal is being made to each of the franchise communities that participated
in the consolidated review of Comcast's 2006 FCC Form 1205 conducted by the
Consultants. The affected communities(the"Communities")are identified in Appendix
A hereto..
TERMS OF AGREEMENT RE 2006 RATE REVIEW:
1 . the maximum permitted equipment and installation rates for the applicable period
of'the 2006 FCC Form 1205(based upon costs for the fiscal year ending
December 31,2005)will be those listed in Appendix B
2.. Based on Appendix B, if an actual rate in a particular Community exceeds a
revised "maximum permitted"rate, Comcast shall lower that rate to the maximum
permitted rate and issue credits to local customers without claiming the benefit of
any potential refund"offsetting"in calculating the amount of refunds owed..
Comcast will provide each Community a refund plan detailing the refund amounts
within 45 days of the acceptance of this proposed resolution by each Community.
Rate changes and credits shall be issued within 60 days of the issuance of a rate
order approving Comcast's FCC Form 1205 for 2006..
3.. the credits will be paid in the form of a one-time bill credit,which will be
identified on customer bills as "Rate Credit."
FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY
INADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE
Conditions
1 Comcast shall issue the credits described above regardless of a finding of
effective competition in any of the Communities subject to a rate order approving
equipment and installation rates consistent with those listed on Appendix B
2 By extending this proposal, Comcast does not admit any error in the Company's
established approach to the FCC Form 1205,and this offer shall not be deemed to
be an admission of any such error in any civil or administrative proceeding.
3. Comcast agrees to not appeal to the FCC any Communities Rate Order that is
consistent with the Terms, Conditions and rates set forth in this proposed
settlement..
4. Because the Communities pursued a consolidated 2006 rate review, Comcast
must proceed on a consolidated basis in extending this proposal. the proposal is
therefore contingent on 90%of the Communities(as measured by customer
count)adopting rate orders within twelve(12)months from the filing of the Form
1205 ("Final Approval") If more than 10%of the Communities (as measured by
customer count) fail to adopt the rate orders, Comcast reserves its right to
withdraw the proposal,notwithstanding any intervening approval action in any
particular Community..
Sincerely,
Name
Title
Comcast Cable Communications,LCC
cc: Mr. Richard Treich
Mr.. Garth Ashpaugh
2
Appendix A
Participating Communities
Local Franchise Authority Community Unit Identification Number
Montgomery County,MD MD0236
Arlington County,VA VA0108
West Central Cable Agency, IL IL0847, IL0848, IL0849, IL0666, IL0871
Detroit, MI MI1039
Mountain View, CA CA0906
Renton, WA WA0068
Metropolitan Area Communications OR0325,OR0283,OR0318,OR0326,
Commission, OR OR0289,OR0442, OR0290, OR0317,
OR0064, OR0304, OR0341,OR0330,
OR0288, OR0328, OR0333, OR0242
3
Appendix B
Maximum Permitted Rates for the Applicable Period Related to FCC Form 1205
for 2006 (based upon costs for the fiscal year ending December 31,2005)
Installation Activity Maximum Permitted Rate
Hourly Service Charge $32.50
Unwired $35.35
Prewired $25.68
Additional Outlet—Same Trip $13.75
Additional Outlet—Separate Trip $22.42
Relocate Outlet $18.42
Upgrade $17.55
Downgrade $14.55
Change of Service(Addressable) $1.99
VCR/DVD—Same Trip $6.92
VCR/DVD-- Separate Trp $15.02
Customer Trouble Call $24.06
Equipment Rental Maximum Permitted Rate
Remote Control $0.22
Basic-Only Converter $1.10
FID/DVR I HD-DVR Converter $6.50
Converter (All Others) $3.80
CableCARD $1.89
4
f c®m ca st Comcast Cable
1500 Matesⅇ
Philadelphia.PA 19102
FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY
INADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE
January 22, 2007
Bonnie I. Walton
City Clerk/Cable Manager
City of Renton
City Clerk Div., 7th Floor
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: RESOLUTION of COMCAST'S FCC FORM 1205 RATES for 2006
Dear Ms. Walton:
I am writing on behalf of Comcast Cable Communications. LLC, and its affiliates
(collectively, "Comcast"or the"Company") to resolve issues related to Comcast's FCC
Form 1205 for 2.006 which have been identified by your consultants Ashpaugh & Sculco,
CFAs, PLC and Front Range Consulting. Inc. (the "Consultants"). Comcast believes that
its proposal as set forth herein, which reflects recent discussions between Comcast and
the Consultants, if accepted, would minimize the substantial administrative burdens,
uncertainty, and delay otherwise associated with the rate review process.
This proposal is being made to each of the franchise communities that participated
in the consolidated review of Comcast's 2006 FCC Form 1205 conducted by the
Consultants. The affected communities (the "Communities") are identified in Appendix
A hereto.
TERMS OF AGREEMENT RE 2006 RATE REVIEW:
1. The maximum permitted equipment and installation rates for the applicable period
of the 2006 FCC Form 1205 (based upon costs for the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2005)will be those listed in Appendix B.
2. Based on Appendix B, if an actual rate in a particular Community exceeds a
revised"maximum permitted"rate, Comcast shall lower that rate to the maximum
permitted rate and issue credits to local customers without claiming the benefit of
any potential refund"offsetting" in calculating the amount of refunds owed.
Comcast will provide each Community a refund plan detailing the refund amounts
Page 2
January 22, 2007
within 45 days of the acceptance of this proposed resolution by each Community.
Rate changes and credits shall be issued within 60 days of the issuance of a rate
order approving Comcast's FCC Form 1205 for 2006.
3. The credits will be paid in the form of a one-time bill credit,which will be
identified on customer bills as "Rate Credit."
Conditions
1. Comcast shall issue the credits described above regardless of a finding of
effective competition in any of the Communities subject to a rate order approving
equipment and installation rates consistent with those listed on Appendix B.
2. By extending this proposal, Comcast does not admit any error in the Company's
established approach to the FCC Form 1205, and this offer shall not be deemed to
be an admission of any such error in any civil or administrative proceeding.
3. Comcast agrees to not appeal to the FCC any Communities Rate Order that is
consistent with the Terms, Conditions and rates set forth in this proposed
settlement.
4. Because the Communities pursued a consolidated 2006 rate review, Comcast
must proceed on a consolidated basis in extending this proposal. The proposal is
therefore contingent on 90%of the Communities(as measured by customer
count)adopting rate orders within twelve(12)months from the filing of the Form
1205 ("Final Approval"). If more than 10%of the Communities (as measured by
customer count)fail to adopt the rate orders, Comcast reserves its right to
withdraw the proposal,notwithstanding any intervening approval action in any
particular Community.
It ee
1114
'e er . ' ber:
sociate Gener.1 ounsel
Comcast Cable C k 4 munications, LCC
cc: Mr. Richard Treich
Mr. Garth Ashpaugh
•
Appendix A
Participating Communities
Local Franchise Authority Community Unit Identification Number
Montgomery County, MD MD0236
Arlington County, VA VA0108
West Central Cable Agency, IL IL0847, IL0848, IL0849, IL0666, IL0871
Mountain View, CA CA0906
Renton, WA WA0068
Metropolitan Area Communications OR0325,OR0283, OR0318,OR0326,
Commission, OR OR0289,OR0442, OR0290, OR0317,
OR0064, OR0304, OR0341, OR0330,
OR0288, OR0328, OR0333, OR0242
Appendix B
Maximum Permitted Rates for the Applicable Period Related to FCC Form 1205
for 2006 (based upon costs for the fiscal year ending December 31. 2005)
Installation Activity Maximum Permitted Rate
Hourly Service Charge 1 $32.50
Unwired $35.35
Prewired $25.68
Additional Outlet—Same Trip $13.75
Additional Outlet—Separate Trip $22.42
Relocate Outlet $18.42
Upgrade $17.55
Downgrade $14.55
Change of Service (Addressable) $1.99
VCR/DVD—Same Trip $6.92
VCR/DVD -- Separate Trip $15.02
Customer Trouble Call $24.06
Equipment Rental 1 •Maximum Permitted Rate
Remote Control $0.22
Basic - Only Converter ? $1.10
HD/DVR/HD-DVR Converter i $6.50
Converter(All Others) $3.80
Cab1eCARD $1.89
coped 3-016-aoo 7
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. S86 9
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
SETTING A HEARING DATE TO VACATE THE PORTION OF INDEX
PL. NE BETWEEN 7TH STREET AND NE 8TH STREET(A & D QUALITY
CONSTRUCTION CO, VAC-07-001).
WHEREAS, a Petition has been filed with the City Clerk of the City of Renton on
March 8, 2007, pursuant to the requirements of RCW 35.79, petitioning for the vacation of the
portion of Index Pl. NE between 7th Street and NE 8th Street, as hereinafter more particularly
described, and said petition having been signed by the owners of more than two-thirds (2/3) of
the property abutting upon said street sought to be vacated, and same being described as follows:
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein
[Approximately 100 lineal feet of Index Pl. NE between 7th Street and NE 8th
Street].
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. That April 23, 2007, at the hour of 7:00 P.M. at the City Council
Chambers at City Hall, Renton, King County, Washington, is hereby fixed as the time and place
for a public hearing to consider the aforesaid Petition for vacating the portion of Index Pl. NE
between 7th Street and NE 8th Street, which said hearing date is not more than sixty nor less than
twenty days from the date of passage of this Resolution.
SECTION H. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of
the time and date of this hearing as provided by RCW 35.79.020 and any and/or all persons
interested therein or objecting to this vacation may then appear and be heard thereon, or they
1
RESOLUTION NO.
may file their written objections thereto with the City Clerk at or prior to the time of hearing on
the vacation.
SECTION III. The City Council shall determine, as provided by RCW 35.79.030,
as to whether an appraisal shall be secured to determine their fair market value of the property
sought to be vacated as provided for in Ordinance No. 4266, and the amount of compensation to
be paid by the Petitioner-Owners to the City for such vacation.
The City likewise reserves the right to retain an easement for public utility and related
purposes.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2007.
Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2007.
Kathy Keolker, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
RES.1255:3/19/07:ma
2
EXHIBIT A
VACATED RIGHT-OF WAY LEGAL
DESCRIPTION
INDEX PLACE N.E.
A PORTION OF INDEX PLACE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY DESCRIDE AS FOLLLOWS;
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 4, BLOCK 29, OF CORRECTED PLAT RENTON
HIGHLANDS NO. 2,ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 57 OF PLATS, PAGE 92
THROUGH 98, INCUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINTGTON BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH11°14'17 WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4 A DISTANCE OF 100.75 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 78°'45'43" EAST A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 11°14'17"WEST A
DISTANCE OF 3.45 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78°45'43" EAST A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 26 A OF CORRECTED PLAT RENTON HIGHLANDS NO. 2,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 57 OF PLATS, PAGE 92 THROUGH 98,
INCUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINTGTON;THENCE SOUTH 11°14'17" EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY
LINE OF SAID LOT 3,A DISTANCE OF 105.30 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE HAVING A RAIDIAL BEARING
OF SOUTH 10°52'38"EAST AND A RADIUS OF 1585.00 FEET BEING THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF NE 71"
STREET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT
HAVING A RADIUS OF 1585.00 FEET AND CENTERAL ANGLE OF 01°48'29"AND A LENGTH OF 50.01 FEET
TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
AREA CONTAINING 5,158 sq ft
SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON;
n
0 ::
rO 1
i
i
i ,.
0
át /
` " •
ALLAS s
EXPIRES 7/02/07
Map Exhibit
0 °"Zz oo'SZ
CE
w 1„ 08�Z m w
9Z �0o,g �1O, Xb <��
\ I -2
t ao
o
\ (7)f-i •—..v),...
a oo 0 oar
rn
N
l
L
DEX PL N30
11V g
.
S1N°14 '17"E 105 `mo
Ii 0
ai
\ \ i N
r v �7 \ \ \ N I OL N
LA \ \ \ \ u,\ \ \ \ \ --
"to
� o
N100.75'
Z N11 °14'17"W (�
I
W
N z
c\N 000'Sz oo.5z
oe60` co 1
6 OgLeZC .,J-. 10
o Z 0078 t.- 07Xbl if
00 e.$ l07EK
00okiiiiiii&
M 1
3«O L,17ZSOS X1:601 I
Barbee Mill-15- Page 6