HomeMy WebLinkAboutUC-92-004 i
��% �- '"�'` CITY`�F R i'NTON
"�' Administrative Services
._
Earl Clymer, tv�ayor Uan Clements, Director
July 9, 1992
Mr. Leslie D. Allen
North Pacific Rim Realty, lnc.
9451 35th Avenue Sw
Seattle, WA 98126
Re: Request for Sewer Connection, Lots J and 2, Block 5, Sunset Highway (Leslie Allen), North Pacific
Rim Realty
Dear Mr. Allen:
At the regular Council meeting of July 6, 1992, the Renton City Council approved your request to
connect to the City of Renton's sanitary sewer system following completion of one of the two following
conditions:
1) The proponent's prop��rty ��articipate in an annexatio❑ to the City of Renton. To meet this goal,
you should contact City staff to discuss potential annexation guidelines and boundaries. Kay
Shoudy, Planninp, and Technical Services Director, may be reached at 235-2552.
2) a. Conipliance witF� a cc�mpleted interlocal agreement that the City will negotiate with King �
C'ounty allowing inf'ill development to occur within Renton's potential annexation area and
specifying at a mininiurn: zoning, development standards, impact mitigation, and future
annexalion. "I'his a�;reement will be consistent with Policy LU-21 of the Countywide Planning
Policies as adopted by the King County Council on July 6, 1992, and pending ratification by
Suburb,in Cities Asso::iation. An excerpt of the policy reflecting Policy LiJ-21 is attached.
b. 1'his conditic�n also requires that properties being served execute a restrictive covenant
agreeing to support and participate in an annexation. The covenant shall �e recorded with
King (.'ounty by the City.
Please contact Mike 13enoit, ?"17-6206, regarding compliance with the conditions outlined above. If I
can provide <idditional assistan�e or information, please feel free to call.
Sincerely, �
. �
C��• ' .Grt.�
Manlyn P t sen, C'MC
City Clerk '
235-2501
cc: Mayor Farl CI}�mer
Council President Kathy Keolker-Wheeler
Gregg Zimmenn�n, Utilit�,� Systems Manager •
Mike Benoit, Engineering Specialist
200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055
. _ „ ��,
. , � •
,� �
LU-19 In coliabo�ation with adjacent counties and cities and Kinfl County, and in co�sultation with
residential �roups in affected areas, each city shal! desiflnate a potential a�nexation area.
Each potential a�nexation area shall be specific to each city, Potential annexation areas
shall not ove�lap. wthin tfie pote�tial annexatio� area the city shall adopt criteria for
annexation, includinfl conformance with Countywide Plannin� Policies, and a schedule for
providin� urban services and fac;lities within the potential annexation area. This process
shall ensure that unincorporated urban islands of Kin� County are not created between
cities and strive to eliminate existin� islands between cities.
LU-20 A city may annex territory only within its desipnated potential annexaiion area. All cities
shall phase annexat;ons to coincide with the ability for the city to coordinate the provision
of a full ran�e of urban services to a�eas to be annexed. -
LU-21 Land withi� a city's potential annexation a�ea shall be developed accordinfl to that citys
and Kin� County's �rowih phasinp plans. Undeveloped lands adjacent to that city should
be annexed at the time development is p�oposed.to �eceive a full ranfle of urban services.
Subsequent to establishin� a patential annexation area, in�ll lands within the potential
annexation area which are not adjace�t or which a�e not p�acti�al to annex shall be
deveioped pursuant to interiocal a�reements between the Cou�ty and the affected city.
The inte�local aqreement shall establish the type of development allowed in the potential
annexation area and standards for that development so that the area is developed in a
manner consistent witfi its future annexation potential. The i�teriocal aflreement shall
specify�at a�minimum the applicable zo�in�, development standards, impact mitiflation, and
futu�e annexatian wiihin the potential annexatia� area.
LU-22 Several unincorporated areas a�e currently consideriny Ixat flovemance options.
Unincorporated urban areas that are already urbani2ed and are within a citys potential
annexation area are encou�a�ed to an�ex to that city in order to�receive urban services.
Whe�e a�nexation is inapp�opriate, incorpa�ation may be considered.
Deve%pment within the potentia/ennexation aree of one jurisdiction may have impacts on adjacent
juiisdictions. • .
LU-23 A jurisdiction may desiflnate a potential impact area beyond its potential annexation area in
collaboration_with adjacent jurisdictions. As pait of the desi�nation process the jurisdiction
shall establish criteria for the review of developmant proposals unde� consideration by other
jurisdictions in the impact area.
The GMA has e p�ovision prantinp counties the discietion to disband the Boundary Review Boards
after comprehensive p/ans end development repu/ations a�e adopted. The fo/lowin�po/icy provides
direction for considerinp whether to disband the Boundary Review Board for Kinp County.
LU-24 Upon tfie adoption and �atification of the Cou�tywide Policies, tfie Kinfl County Council
shall co�vene a meetinp wiih municipal elecied officials ta determine a p�ocess for
disbandin� the WashinQton State Boundary Review Board for Kinfl County and establishinq
criteria to oversee municipal and special district annexatio�s, mer�ers, and incorporations in
Kin� County. Un6! the Washinqton State Boundary Review Board for Kinp County is
disbanded, it_should be flovemed in its decisions by the interim urban prowth area boundary
and the adopted and ratified countywide planninfl policies. The criteria shall inciude, but
not be limited to:
a• Confo�mance with Countywide_Planninp Policies;
b. The ability of tfie annexinfl jurisdictio� to demonstrate a capability to provide urban
services at standards equal�to�or.better than the current service providers; and
GMA:pol -, �r Pafle 18
06/10/1992
, � �
Tulv 6• 1992 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa¢e 297
lots on the corner of North 2nd and Factory to residential, and
supported a mized-use commercial zoning for the properties.
5) Letter from Ms. Ann Nichols, M. A. Segale, Inc., 18010 Southcenter
Parkway, Tukwila, 98138, requested a definition of
commercial/industrial/office zoning for its properties at the
intersection of NE 3rd Street and Edmonds Ave, and on Monroe
Avenue NE across from Greenwood Cemetery.
MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,
COUNCIL REFER THESE LETTERS TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE
WH LE. CARRIED.
Citizen Comment Wright Conespondence was read from Lora Wright, 301 Union Avenue,
- Boeing/Longacres, Snohomish, WA 98290, requesting Council support for horseracing in
(SM;V;SA-006-92) Western Washington. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED
BY MATHEWS, THAT THE ADMINISTRATION SEND MS. WRIGHT
A COPY OF A LETTER TO GOVERNOR GARDNER FROM MAYOR
CLYMER REQUESTING ASSISTANCE FROM THE STATE IN
CONTINUING THE HORSERACING INDUSTRY IN ANOTHER
LOCATION IN THIS AREA. CARRIED.
Fire: 4th of July Correspondence was read from Marilyn Rogers, 1709 Jones Drive SE,
Fireworks Renton, 98055, commenting that July 4th was very quiet this year, and
supporting the City's law regarding the use and sale of fireworks.
OLD BUSINESS Referred 6/22/92 - Public Safety Committee Chairman Schlitzer
Public Safetv Committee presented a Committee report recommending concurrence in the staff
Building: Uniform recommendation to approve the adoption of the 1991 Uniform Building;
Bldg., Mechanical, Mechanical; Plumbing; Housing; and Swimming Pool, Hot Tub, and Spa
Plumbing, Housing, Codes.
Swimming Pool-Spa-
Hot Tub Codes The Committee further recommends the ordinance on this matter be
presented for reading and adoption. MOYED BY SCHLITZER,
SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL APPROVE THE COMMITTEE
REPORT AND PLACE 'THE ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING.
CARRIED. (See Page 299 for first reading of the ordinance.)
Fire: Uniform Fire Referred 6/22/92 - Public Safety Committee Chairman Schlitzer
Code, 1991 presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff
recommendation to approve the adoption of the Uniform Fire Code 1991
Edition and amendments.
The Committee further recommends that the ordinance regarding this
matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY SCHLITZER,
SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL APPROVE THE COMMITTEE
REPORT AND PLACE THE ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING.
CARRIED. (See Page 299 for first reading of ordinance.)
Utilities Committee Referred 3/16/92 - Utilities Committee Vice-Chairman Edwards
Utility: Sewer presented a report on a sewer connection request for Lots 1 and 2, Block
Connection, Sunset S, Sunset Highway. The Committee recommends concurrence in the staff
Hwy., Lo recommendation that the proponent, Mr. Leslie Allen, broker, North
Block UC-004-92) Pacific Rim Realty, Inc., 94151 35th Avenue SW, Seattle, 98126, be
allowed to connect to the City of Renton's sanitary sewer system
following completion of one of the two following conditions:
�
, � �
,�ulY 6.. 1992 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa�e 298
1) The proponent's property in Block 5, Sunset Highway (Lots 1 & 2)
participate in an annexation to the City of Renton. Toward this
means, it is recommended that City staff ineet with Mr. Allen and
discuss the potential of annexing, provide him with some guidelines
in developing and successful annexation, and suggest annexation
boundaries that would be appropriate.
2) a. The City has an interlocal agreement with King County that will
allow infill development to occur within Renton's potential
annexation area and specify at a minimum: zoning,
development standards, impact mitigation, and future .
anneaation. This agreement is consistent with Policy LU-21 of
the Countywide Planning Policies (June, 1992) as recommended
by the County's Growth Management Planning Council.
b. Properties being served execute and have recorded a covenant
agreeing to support and participate in an annezation.
MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL
CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.*
Councilman Stredicke asked the following questions:
1) Would a restrictive covenant be required?
2) Why is the Committee reporting on this issue before the process has
begun?
3) Since this is in a County infill area and would assume City
regulations, where will sewer and water lines be located? Will the
developer meet City standards for fire protection?
Mr. Edwards responded as follows:
1) Restrictive covenants will be recorded and attached to the property.
2) The Committee is informing the property owner of the procedure to
be followed, and initiating action to form an interlocal agreement
with King County in a potential annexation area.
3) Standards and requirements would be detailed in the interlocal
agreement with King County which will be presented to Council for
approval.
Responding to Councilman Tanner's inquiry, Mr. Edwards assured that
this property is ad jacent to the City's western boundary and is not part of
the sewer moratorium area. *MOTION CARRIED.
CAG: 90-015, Referred 6/15/92 - Utilities Committee Vice-Chairman Edwards
Aquifer Awareness, presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff
Browne Assoc. recommendation that Council authorize the Mavor and Citv Clerk to
execute an addendum to the contract for the Aquifer Awareness Program
(CAG-015-90) with Carolyn Browne Associates in the amount of
$19,650.00. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER,
COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
�� r��_..� ,,� :.. � y� ���� ��J V �D ..-.
UTILITIES COMMITTEE ��� � �a L��'.�•C-�����
COMMITTEE REPORT
July 6, 1992
SEWER CONNECTION FOR LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 5, SUNSET HIGHWAY
(LESLIE ALLEN) NORTH PACIFIC RIM REALTY
(Referred March 16, 1992)
The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation that the
proponent, Mr. Leslie Allen, be allowed to connect to the City of Renton's sanitary sewer
system following completion of one of the two following conditions:
1) The proponent's property participate in an annexation to the City of Renton. Toward
this means, it is recommended that City staff ineet with Mr. Allen and discuss the
potential of annexing, provide him with some guidelines in developing a successful
annexation, and suggest annexation boundaries that would be appropriate.
2) a) The City has an interlocal agreement with King County that will allow infill
development to occur within Renton's potential annexation area and specify at a
minimum: zoning, development standards, impact mitigation, and future
annexation. This agreement is consistent with Policy LU-21 of the Countywide
Planning Policies (June, 1992) as recommended by the County's Growth
Management Planning Council (see attached copy).
and
b) Properties being served execute and have recorded a covenant agreeing to
support and participate in an annexation.
(absent)
Jesse Tanner, Chair
�����������-
._� L V
Bob Edwards, Vice Chair
�
Timothy J. c itzer, Membe
UCR-ALLN/MAB:If �
cc: Gregg Zimmerman
Mike Benoit
. �
�
:.
� � ..r � ,+ �� �.�v .
LU-19 In collaboration with adjacent counties and cities and Kinfl Coun
�esidential �roups in affected areas, each city shall desiflnate a potent al'a nexation'a ea'th
Each potential annexation area shall be specific to each city. Potential annexation areas
shall not overlap. V1rthin the potential annexation a�ea the city shall adopt criteria for
annexation, includin9 conformance with Countywide Plan�infl Policies, and a schedule for
providin� u�ban services and facilities within the potential annexation area. This process
shall ensure that unincorporated urban isla�ds of Kin� County are not created between
cities and strive to eliminate existin� islands between cities,
LU-20 A city may annex territory only within its desi�nated patential annexation
shall phase annexations to coincide with ihe ability for the city to coordinate the p,rovision
of a full ranqe of urban services to areas to be annexed. -
LU-21 land withi� a city's potential an�exation area shall be developed accordinfl to that citys
and Kin� Countys �rowth phasinp plans. Undeveloped lands adjacent to that city should
be annexed at the time development is proposed.to receive a full ranfle of u�ban services.
Subsequent to esiablishinfl a potential annexation area, infill lands witt�in the potential
annexation area which are not adjacent or which a�e not practiCal to annex shall be
developed pursuant to,i�terlocal�aflreements between the County and ihe affected city.
The inte�local a�reement shall establish the type of development allowed in the potential
annexation area �nd standards for that development so tfiat the area is developed in a
manner consistent with its tuture annexation potential. The interiocal aflreement shall
specify at �minimum the applicable zonin�, development standa�ds, impact mitipation, and
future annexation within the potential annexation area.
LU-22 Several unincorporated a�eas are currently considerinfl local �ovemance options.
Unincorporated urban areas that are already urbanized and are within a city's potential
annexavon area are encou�afled to annex to that city in orde�to��eceive urban services.
Where annexation is inappropriate, incorpo�ation may be considered,
Deve%pment within the potentie/ennexation area of one juiisdiction may have impacts on adjacent
jurisdictions. ,
LU-23 A ju�isdiction may desiflnate a patential impaci area beyond its potential annex '
collabo�ation with adjacent jurisd�ctions. As,pai�t of the desi�nation process thetjurisdiction
shall establish criterie for the review of development proposals under consideration by other
jurisdictions in the impact area.
The GMA hes a p�ovision prantinp counties the discretion to disband the Bounda Rev'
eher compiehensive p/ens end development�epu/ations a�e adopted. The fo/%win
�Y iew Boards
direction for considerinp whether to disbend the Boundary Review Boaid foi Kinp o���ty,Y p����des
LU-24 Upon tfie adoption and ratification of the Cou�
shall convene a meetin� with municipal elecied offic als t'o det rme e� a�proc ss fa�uncil
disbandin� tha WashinQton State Boundary Review Board for Kinfl County and establishinq
criteria to ove�see municipal and special district annexationa, merfle�s, a�d inco�po�ations in
Kinq County. Unbl the Washinpton State Boundary Review Board fo� Kin4 County is
disbanded, it,should be qovemed in its decisions by the interim urban prowth area boundary
and the adopted and ratified countywide planninp policies. The criteria shall inciude, but
not be limited to:
-�� :,FT:.
a• Conforinance with Countywide_Pfanninq Policies;
b• The ability of the annexinp jurisdiction to demanstrate a capability to provide urban
services at standards equal�to�or�better than the current service providers; and
GMA:po1
. -, ,'� Paqe 18
06/�0/1992
, � .
� �
CITY OF RENTON
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 20, 1992
T0: Jesse Tanner, Chair
Members of Utili ies Committee
VIA: Mayor Cly r G`"—`�
FROM: L �G mann, Administrator
- lannin / uilding/Public Works Department
STAFF CONTACT: Mike Benoit, Wastewater Uti(ity
SUBJECT: Request for Sewer Service Outside Renton's City Limits
Re: Lots 1 & 2, Block 5, Haddock R.L. Add. to Earlington
(Tax Lot #298880-0145)
BACKGROUND:
Leslie Allen, one of the owners of the above-mentioned property, has requested the
Council's approval to connect their proposed new single-family home to the City's
sewer system. The property in question is a 20,000 square foot parcel along Sunset
Boulevard (Empire Way So.) and across 80th Ave. So. adjacent to the existing City
Limits.
The City has existing sewer mains in the south side of Sunset Blvd. serving the Empire
Estates Apartments. A second main is located in the north side of Sunset Blvd.
approximately 220 feet east of the site. By City Code, a main must be extended
across the frontage of the subject property along Sunset Blvd. Because of the
roadway's concrete panel construction and level of service provided as a state
highway, neither the State nor the City of Renton will allow individual stubs across
Sunset Boulevard; therefore, the property owner/developer would be required to
extend the main which lies 220 feet east of the site (see attached site map).
This parcel is not currently developed and, therefore, does not have a failed or failing
septic system nor is this lot in the City's aquifer protection area. The property is in an
area that is logically served by the City of Renton and in fact is within an area
designated "City of Renton Sewer Service Area - Annexation Required" by an
interlocal agreement with the adjacent sewer district lSkyway Water and Sewer
District).
� �r
May 20, 1992
Page 2
The City's proposed Urban Growth Boundary indicates that the West Hill area would
be within our urban growth and active annexation areas.
The State's Growth Management legislation (Section 1 1) asserts that urban growth
should be located in areas characterized by urban growth that have existing public
facilities (i.e. sewer, water, and storm) and areas characterized by urban growth that
will be served by a combination of both existing and future public facilities. The
State's legislation further says it is appropriate that urban government services be
provided by cities. The policies do not provide any new legal mechanisms regarding
annexation or incorporation of primarily developed urban areas in unincorporated King
County, such as Skyway, into cities. Annexation remains a cumbersome and highly
political process.
The proposed county-wide policies identify the Skyway area as urban and there is no
indication that this area will be revised.
DISCUSSION:
Staff is of the opinion that Mr. Allen does make some valid points in his letter and that
there is a larger issue to consider. The State Growth Management Act requirements
have made this a regional issue.
The alternatives for providing service to the portion of Skyway designated "Renton
Service Area - Annexation Required" are:
Alternate 1 : Service bv Annexation Onlv
If the City is the entity to provide service onlv after annexation, the infill growth in
that area may be delayed for years as the residents debate over annexation. This
will encourage sprawl. In addition, some development may likely occur on septic
systems, due to the new technology that is now permitted by the Seattle-King
County Health Dept.
Alternate 2: Service Without Annexation
If the City is to provide service without annexation, it should be with the following
conditions:
a) Properties being served execute and have recorded a covenant agreeing to
support and participate in an annexation.
b) The City develop an agreement with King County requiring that all
development within Renton's sphere of influence (active annexation area)
meet Renton's Land Use, Subdivision and Building Codes. We have to
develop the logical assumption that the urban areas within our sphere of
influence will annex to the City in the future. These areas should not be
allowed to develop below our standards. An agreement of this sort will not
be easy to negotiate with the county, but there is a history of similar
agreement in other jurisdictions such as Kent.
The City of Renton has recommended, through the Suburban Cities
Association, that the proposed countywide policies be amended to include a
� �
May 20, 1992
Page 3
policy that states: "Undeve%ped /and within a city's potentia/ annexation
area that is not yet served by a fu/l range of urban services shal/ be annexed
io thaf city when deve%pment is proposed to receive a fu/l range of urban
services. lnfill deve%pment may occur without annexation only if agreed to
by the city and if permitted pursuant to an inferlocal agreement between that
city and King Counfy. The inter/ocal agreement shall specify at a minimum:
zoning, deve%pment standards, impact mitigation and future annexation.
Alternate 3: Skvwav Water and Sewer District Pravides Sewer Service
We could allow Skyway to serve the basin with an agreement that Renton would
take over (purchase) the system as we annex. If Skyway provides the sewer
service, we may lose all incentive for the area to annex to Renton. We would
have minimum (if any) control over the development in that area which is a
. negative if we assume that it will annex someday. Additionally, we will
potentially assume Skyway's debt service on the sewer lines we take over
without receiving the benefit of the connection fees aiready collected.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on this criteria, staff's recommendation would be to hold current City policy of
denying requests for sewer service for new construction outside the City and require
the proponent to annex to the City to acquire sewer service.
�P-NOPAC/MAB:If
� ` '�` �
�% >-; CITY OF RENTUN
'� Administrative Services
Earl Clymer, Mayor Dan Clements, Director
� �
March 17, 1992
Mr. Leslie D. Allen
North Pacific Rim Realty, Inc.
9451 35th Avenue SW
Seattle, WA 98126
Re: Request for Sewer Connection
Dear Mr. Allen:
Your letter, dated March 6, 1992, requesting approval to connect to the City sewer
system was read at the Renton City Council meeting of March 16, 1992, and referred to
the Council's Utilities Committee for review. Please contact the Council secretary at
235-2586 any weekday after 1:00 p.m. for information regarding the date and time of
the committee meeting.
If I can provide further information, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
` .,�C��r✓
Marilyn J. er en, CMC
City Clerk
235-2501
cc: Mayor Eari Clymer
Council President Kathy Keolker-Wheeler
Dick Anderson, Utility Systems Manager
200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055
.* ' `i�"�' �„
March 16, 1992 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa�e 134
8) CAG-091-90 - Alpha Engineers for bridge inspection
9) CAG-092-90 - H. W. Lochner, Inc. for bridge inspection
Refer to Tr�nsnortation (Aviation) Committee.
CAG: 91-066, Airport Transportation Division submitted consultant contract Task Orders 9 & 10
Improvement Project, with TRA (CAG-066-91) for Airport runway pavement overlay design
TRA and construction supervision; required expenditure $117,260. Refer to
Tr�nsnortation (Aviation) Committee.
Public Works: Transportation Division submitted Park/Lake Washington Boulevard
Park/Lk. Washington intersection improvement 70 percent final design for consideration;
Bl. Intersection required expenditure undetermined at this time. Refer to Transnortation
Improvement (Aviation) Committee.
Public Works: Transportation Division requested authorization for installation of a new
Pedestrian Signal, pedestrian traffic signal on Houser Way to connect Liberty Park with the
Houser Way, Cedar River Park; required expenditure $60,000. Refer to Transnortation
Liberty/Cedar River (Aviationl Committee.
Parks
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY TANNER,
COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from Leslie D. Allen, broker, North Pacific
Utility: Sewer Rim Realty, Inc., 94151 35th Avenue SW, Seattle, 98126, requesting
Connection, Sunset approval to connect to City sewer for lots 1 & 2, Block 5, on Sunset
Hwy., Lots 1&2, � Highway. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY
Block 5 � SCHLITZER, COUNCIL REFER THIS MATTER TO THE UTILITIES
COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
OLD BUSINESS Referred 3/9/92 - Planning and Development Committee Vice-Chairman
Planning & Stredicke reported that the Committee received notice from the executive
Develoument board of the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) regarding two
Committee amendments to the bylaws of that assembly. The bylaws are being
Planning: Puget Sound amended in two ways:
Regional Council
Bylaws Amendments
1) The previous language provided "that if the President or Executive
Board determined that an emergency exists, they may make a written
finding to that effect." The new language will clarify that either the
president or the executive board may make that determination.
2) The second proposed amendment relates to the first. In the event
either the president or the executive board determines that an
emergency exists, a special meeting may be held on telephonic or
written notice delivered to each representative at least three days in
advance. This has been changed from five days notice.
The Committee recommended that the City's representative to the
assembly vote to approve these amendments. MOVED BY STREDICKE,
SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE
COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
lp C.�
: � • '�"'`' �v„r�
Quali��t �ervice '
� 1-- '
NORTH PACIFIC RIM REALTY, INC.
9451 35th Avenue S.W.
Seattle, Washington 98126
(206) 932-6990 • 1-800-243-3212
Fax (206) 935-3479
March 6 , 1992
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler
Renton City Council
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, Washington 98055
Dear Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler:
I am a joint owner in a parcel of land lying on the City of
Renton border with the following legal description:
Haddock R. L. Add to Earlington Sly 100 ft. Meas
PLW Sunset Hwy-Lots 1 & 2 Block 5 .
The City of Renton installed a sewer system on King County
property; now State Department of Transportation right-of-
way. What we need is the approval from the City of Renton to
connect up to this sewer.
During the 1970 's I was a member of the King County Forward
Thrust Committee before it was submitted to the voters of
King County. The selling points for the Metro System were ( 1)
to minimize sprawl , ( 2) minimize territorial boundaries , ( 3 )
offer affordable housing near cente�s of employment, and ( 4)
assure a cleaner environment; e.g. clean up Lake Washington,
Lake Union and other lakes and streams in King County, and
replace the failing septic tank systems with a coordinated
sewer system.
The issue we now personally face has become an issue between
governmental entities , each of whom feel it is not their
problem, and we are stymied in all attempts to resolve the
issue. Had the Forward Thrust Committee presented this kind
of problem to the voters, I believe there might have been a
question as the resolution's passing. It seems that everyone
asks the wrong question. There would be less sprawl and more
affordable housing if everyone were to ask the question what
can we do to make this project work instead of what can we
do/find that will not allow this project to work. This
approach might maximize the use of our intra-structure
currently in place instead of dealing with the cost of the on
going expansion. There are hundreds of acres undeveloped in
� : ��Q��� ,
- , , • f� �rrr"
PAGE -2-
Seattle, Renton, Kent, Auburn, Bellevue, Redmond, etc. , etc. .
But the tax payers are asked to pay for more roads , buses ,
sewers , schools, etc. , etc. , and at the same time we destroy
more and more of our natural beauty that makes this area so
wonderful and the reason that most of us stay.
I want to thank you for taking the time to read my letter and
respectfully request your review of this problem. I look
forward to your early reply.
Sincerely,
�' � -. ,
------
�--------------- .
-�` _......_. �
_ ..._..
Leslie D. Allen
Designated Broker
i
I