Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA77-114v i .1;7- T. e.,: _ / T.: ' ''r'.• . 3 ..',; YOUR ' I, , - Q - bC tp EARL' N,.. GTO N v L 36-•4-s e> i C. / a .1 f......_ ' • lo i. cp L.,„.,....,„ 0,,, • .„, , . 46 ,,,, 4 an. l-f l' 0' ,Ili10111\ 6:0 ,j- ------ , ----OC)k 6'13)...9 2 c n,' 7 ,9 - 9- r- 4. L..)(....„ • J • ' 4 0 t/ > .., ... I cn r: o V h O O. ,,, 6-;) ' -- 1/; k• 73•F1 12)4 0 1 NN%9ti , • 4:.. r0 2 1ypFRFS .; W , co 1DE C. A.NN1 .t.' j.. 0 9 95 o \ v\ 0 / ' t•) N -.. s'kt," / i N\'''''b Cat. p,...,.,,,, P c.,..„ 4,17:7e,v' el._ 'I-0.mA- ”"'I'' j 0-4211.0P"--4-4114:•-....)1 Id Q 144,1 "L%--0-11..t.e.._ ,c-% -.-t.A.)--:fts,..‘",„?.._ i a a i.„0_01. --- (3 • __ Id c A-0 ... ,.r..n.... _0)„,, tA, ..Lo.,,,1s..._. 4.. 4 jp-Ce.4.-_,A,•.....,k_e otfiAtilt A.A.,,,...,. 5p14.,%.e 31:::!Q1 ii ANi r4 1 ` I I 9I- 4,1_,4...5..!'\_.6)*,...91i..,...4), 0.-q...... ..A..A.N.... '41r, P• , 0 r'/ j•-• -La,>`3?- 1-1 ki:. k C.- at •L •' I' l ta e # ;PLO, ..97e_O-rvk.v+.t.1% ' , A Cl°"" 4-1) ...t...Ndi 4. 1\0*k.,PG i;17)A. d,6•nA •iLOL-1\ L_ tPi---At .4.4., ‘ N-L", . a 6 7..1.,4 0,1?,,i..... .st IID 3.1.5x4„._ 6 ...; .0. „.04,..11_,4„.0 Iva.• o,.....,),,R, CLA Q 3:1—Ft34t c:(icA1 'On.- 1.C-A4 ek.ur.frIP,.. e, N.0.14 11 4W1...c.t.W.1!(1- - A piAt .6 r.C..Lri.,)-c._. ..-,:..41i: t1,,,,t.)1.11,;...a..,„---'''-N., 1 -I ci. ) i .# , , e..el?tAll,c- -, t.c.---tA... ri.10.2, .a, .4..t..t•-c.R&D__ I 4' 46'''' •\.$:).,t. hel,..4'-'1A--"Vt' • 44)0•-4k-t,q.) d: ,..r.1......,.N 4.3\14.. c.it ,.).i:.(\0 • .,_.<, A...A 1 . 1 c. v, • o c• 61)-0,Q_tet*.t_crk i, 41,0•A!toA)..01.-N mk1 0,i.k. , 0\44AP-44A-..0-1,6 , t-k. i 0 hi) 1 S. I lit 014 .4-4_,-.1/411 . rt-4).44 t„,‘.. ..k."j, a...Y1-;,..,t-....,..tro,A•, 3,. fitt---4 4, 0..,,,,,A-- )-Jt%il d - All\i'l- Ak- 1 i f 4. . . , /.,_, di 0 6.A t43—h01 -4-,,-- ..p,......,.t._,,,.., ,....„:...12.L_. :,t,P,„ 0 e..D.R....,6._., ......0-4--C4-•4j,,;;:i,c2,, e`-ti•-•V"..-<34 6 f\2_4‘ AR,. A.r_:•,u_ a.,111..i'.‘.i; . '.`z 1 '1-4!"• • 0 p C-1 CLAIL•ei " — ct6;..- a c'lCi 4,1) L.. 47-„--c_.1 1 6 SLiu c(!! 6=1 i 1 1? -I) - -t:•:, 6 overk_ -4-,4-4.:4,t0-10.1 likt.n.,,,,,_,,,,,„,ii„,, .- .. .7,4,;„„ ._-,..„.......,„,t.,„„,,..„L.., at 4 t. - ' ..--- • - i - IA) . f O--^-.-. ,'Q-A...ti- J,1_ `e,' .,,.,;:,/' s'k 3, 0-1..1q°\0-- I- -:-.,-4-.Z1: :V ex\ • c)C40-0 A\ -elitc4:Yo ,. -A- c iI LLB11-e-, i 1 it•••e,n k,".. el /A....1-000''Nebitt„, ..4.51)-- '144 C.,iito,, .,...0 Nr• ,-s.''-% 7..0 (1)..1/4,I es 1-,,r.vi. ,) Ls.-3\4)0,tcp,d i. -4,ii,J.';').4.";-,j,i,i - 7\.•c.:.t*. ik C; 4,..11.,14 J 6 y,.'6 ,`7 ' ' h O , k i jP 6) \1 0..a-,.ti_Q_ :'' 0-1,-- b‘y v-1-'-' t7Nz434),11 --ter e r i p O- s n . It q a s_ „%_,L A..,) .,t ..)\._1 a jo cL. ,Leitt dit-)e•c-0.- 1,...,' e—t-N,r—,0,.___ 11 o 4LL . 6,a^L egg 1 it Ag.,..0. j`y >"•"•t. 4.,to. +.Cs e.^,t. f 111 l, C"..„,,,, k_rj r a '1;41 f‘'‘'L'Ill-'443 ""4‘..-"' 6.-"A...-- 4t4-4.14...9.„..53.0t.A.A.S.Vtto•Aolort CN i'` - 1j „t...,,,,,,, A.,,,.L_ CAL. °'t.,..;..s.;,-- P. ,, ..L it 1 p tL .0.,1eP 12,e,C.11-14/Lks.'S" 6.114.. 41/44• 41` tAZT.0.01A.: 04.0PARtkoket)1/4._. 04,1 44::-..„A,L41-7 (,-f,,, -44- 0...6, ._4,11-,-,... 0.-tx."1-6- tXt._--- 01A.4,,t4AA..,44,tili(b-0 46 ECENED CITY OF RENTOI NEARING EXAMINER Fre 7 ,Ist IMl A EXHIBIT ITEM NO. RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER F E B 71978 AM PM 71819;101)Ll2 l 1213141516 1124 SW Sunset Blvd. Renton, Washington 98055 February 7, 1978 EXHIBIT NO. ,/ . .___.... . .. . City ofRenton ITEM NO. R - `/,7"/- 7PlanningDepartmentDepartment 200 Mill Avenue S. Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Sirs: In regard to Kohl Excavating's application for a rezone on property it owns at Sw 3rd Place and SW Sunset Blvd, file number R-114-77: I protest on the following grounds: 1) I see no feasible means for safe access/egress to the property via SW Sunset Blvd. , other than a major revision of the existing traffic patterns, this posing an additional burden on taxpayers. 2) I am concerned that there will be traffic exiting the proposed "parking lot" area onto SW 3rd Place, thus congesting an already narrow, no-shoulder street. I use this street to exit my own property, and am familiar with the dangers involved, including the blind curve in SW 3rd Place just north of my driveway. 3) I am concerned that the devlopers are unaware of the major noise problem causea by the railroad yard south of SW Sunset Blvd. , and that this very disconcerting reverberating noise will cause occupants of the proposed fourplexes to move, thus setting the tone for a very transient population at that location, leading to a down- grading, rather than upgrading, of theneighborhood. 4) I am also concerned that the developers are using so-called advantages of the neighborhood as selling points for their request, when some of the advantages do not exist. As a mother of small diildren, I do not feel the 3/4 mile walking distance to Earlington School, at this time, is an advantage. The children in this area walk on a narrow shoulder of the road for a major portion of the route to school---there are no existing sidewalks and the little ones must look out for themselves. I will not allow my children to walk or ride their bikes on SW 3rd Place, due to the blind corner andlack of shoulder on the road. Although I have other reservations about this rezone request, I feel that the above considerations are uppermost in my mind, and ask that you consider them carefully in making your decision. Since/rely, King County •Department of Community State of Washington 25 .i and Environmental Development John D. Spellman, County Executive 4Y Thomas M. Ryan, Director s,4y 11 Building Division Robert L. Krueger, Director 450 Administration Building Seattle, Washington 93104 . 208-344-4141 January 20, 19.76 City of Renton Building Division Public Works Department City Hall Renton, WA 98055 Attention: Jim Hanson Subject: Grading Permits Nos. 1836-35 and 1628-18 issued under King County Ordinance No. 1488 in the area annexed to the City of Renton, July 16, 1975, by Ordinance No. 2945 Gentlemen: As discussed with you, I am enclosing copies of two grading permits along with Ordinance No. 1488. which shows the general conditions required for all grading permits. You will note Cash Operating Bonds have been posted for each permit. These .bonds can only be released by the Manager of the King County Division of Building and Land Development. These releases will be held up until such time as you advise this division of the City of Renton's disposition of these permits. Please advise if we can be of assistance. Very truly yours, RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON Edward EL Sand, HEARING EXAMINER Manager FEB 71gig by: AM PMi 18'a94.11:r:l2i.1 r i31415ier M_ K. Lechelt EBS:MKL:mo cc: Russell Collinsr-r 13706 Renton-Issaquah. Rd. , Renton, WA 98F5 I s , T Kohl Excavating, Inc. ITEM NO. - //V_ 7 7 3330 East Valley Rd. , Renton, WA 98055 Enclosures i `' _ RECEIVEE - CITY OF RI'vIors]4_ r--Fmt. -t, KI COUNTY DIVISION OF BUILDING HEARING_;ExAMINER ROBERT L.KRUEGER DIRECTOR : FEBI J__. IrE B .. ?1978 N—isis. 0 KING COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING r a 71519,101IIII21112131415®6APPLICATIONFORPERMIT --- - - -: -- -- -- -- - DATE aY..3s 1974 _ i PERMIT NUMBER WHEN VALIDATED TOTAL FEE Q1H36 - ONE YEAR FROM JOB NUMBER. EXPIRES VALIDATION trA __j + 2 3 _ _00 ft^J I c:A 1 -... -- - T RES COM PL-R MECH DEM F.C. GRAD H/Z BOND S/M MH Nohl_ Excavatin PX OW ERS NAME _. g E I l•rAi/SE 2C-ur`oct-7sAakVI On SR 900 btwn 80th S & 81 st S. )8bow-- SwT3 a 3-- Dunlap -Canyon Project . __._.._._.._-- P ADDRESS OF PROPERTY." - _-. r: OWNERS MAILING ADDRESS 3330 Bast Valley Road:.,; Fenton 1!a 98055 PHONE 226-6620 i p1 Northerly- 240 ft 3ctract 9 of the Joseph-Marshll Tracts • -- - .- - -. --.LEGAL DESCRIPTION_ TAX PARCEL NUMBER 1:257000 Cu yds 11 acres uc Puc USE Filling (for -a building site) TYPE OF CONST. OCC.GROUP R E 1ST FL OR 2ND FLOOR BASEMENT GARAGE/ DECK . COVERED COM. *OF COM.TOTAL- . A CARPORT PATIO STORIES AREA VALUATION ORD '.S rF H Z BP BOND MECH MECHANICAL FEE DISTRIBUTION FEES BUILDING _ _. PARKMG STALLS PERMIT FEE 3.00 PLAN REVIEW 200•00 REQUIRED SHOWN FURNACE MECHANICAL PLAN TCPUB.WORKS - . .FIRE PLACE - R SENT RETURNED GAS PIPING C.EMOLITION2UU.00rV •PLAN TO{EALTH BOIV SENT RETURNED Grading. 400.00 E f= TOT TOTAL BOND,* Cash 0peratinli- Bond = of 7000.00 for 1835 & 1836 to lab=,-•TaciYt.d O PUBLIC WORKS LAND USE MANAGEMENT STATE T ACCESS .. H PARKING LOT AREA PERMIT # E ' DRAINAG:. R NO. OF UNITS CURBING HEALTH4ASCHOOLDISTRICT APPROACIS CENSUS TRACT E BOND TOTAL N GRID NUMBER C FC2D (SW/Wi SAMA) BY I PLAT, PUD, VARIANCE #APPROVED E HYDRAULIC :ONDITIONS: S OTHER i ir 6--e a c.•` (,/ice+..as o1/4c/17jfCONTRACTORSNAMEREGISTRATIONKPHONE - 7 /• -- /'• ,i` _ ADDRESS KING/COUNTY DIVISI N OF BUILDING I CER IFY THAT THE I FORMATION FURNISHED BY ME IS TRUE AND CORRECT ROBERT L.KRUEGER DIRECTOR AN THAT THE APP CABLE KING COUNTY REQUIREMENTS WILL BE MET. k j `-"":• 1 EY iAdikAik.'t_.." -0OWNER/AGENT IG TURE --" l F 142 5/73 15-M i:`3 f.-:2.3 1A t1,1111 1.U.LA:1:10_4 LIT 11NI b L 11N UU i i in effect on date of this certificate by UUurdsm Qaona ef_g_t Ed9 [Inc. 1200 westlake ave. no. seattle, washington 98109 This is to certify that the insurance described below has been arranged for the Insured designated in this certificate.Any requirements or provisions in any contract or agreement between the Insured and any other person,firm or corporation will not be construed as enlarging,altering or amending the definition of insured or any other terms or conditions of this certificate or the insurance designated.Such insurance,subject to the limits of liability,coverages,hazards,exclusions,provisions, conditions and other terms thereof,is in full force and effect as of the date this certificate was issued. Insured: Kohl Excavating, Inc. 3330 East Valley Road Address: Renton, Washington Bodily Injury Liability Insurance—Other Than Automobile Primary Insurer U.S .F. &G. InS . Comnanv Expires 4/11/79 Pol.No. CIP15974 Limits 5 Included Each Person$ 300 ,000 . Each Occurrence$ 300 ,000 .Aggregate Bodily Injury Liability Insurance—Automobile Primary Insurer U. S.F. &G. Ins . Company Expires 4/11/79 Pol.No. CIP15974 Limits a 300 , 000 . Each person$ 300 ,000 . Each Occurrence Property Damage Liability Insurance—Other Than Automobile Primary Insurer Lloyds of London Expires 4/11/77 Pol.No._ UL1430 Limits 5 100 ,000 . Each Occurrence 100 ,000 . Aggregate Property Damage Liability Insurance—Automobile Primary Insurer U.S .F. &G. Ins . Company Expires 4/11/79 Pol.No. CIP15974 Limits 5 100 ,000 . Each Occurrence Workmens Compensation Insurer Expires Pol.No. Emp Liability Limit Each Accident Excess Liability Insurance Insurer StoneWall Insurance Company Expires 4/11/77 Pol.No. 31.000491- Limit IA)5 - - - - - ' combined single limit in excess of above described underlying limits. B)Up to$ 1-r 000 , 000 . combined single limit in excess of above described underlying limits. In accoroance with the above,the insurance covers the operations and locations described as follows: Any and All Operations In the event of cancellation of said Policies, 19) days notice of such cancellation will be given the party named below at the address shown herein. The policy provides.under the Insuring Agreements,contractual liability coverage with respect to any contract or agreement wholly in writing,subject to all the ex- clusions,conditions and other provisions of the policy. This certificate is not a policy and does not afford any insurance coverage. Nothing contained in this certificate shall be construed as extending coverage not af- forded by the designated insurances or by endorsement thereto. Except as specifically provided for in this certificate,the Insurers shall have no duty to notify the party to whom this certificate is addressed as to any change in,or cancellation of,the insurances and shall not be responsible for any failure to do so. Date May 25 , 1976 AMENDED To City of Renton Address 200 Mill Ave. S. BY4ldR. P1rtRenton, WA 98055 z o/77ec : TRTIFICATE OF INSt ANCE in effect on date of this certificate arranged by C11ur0m9 GYIrdm Bilamarit9 1200 westlake ave. no. seattle, washington 98109 This is to certify that the insurance described below has been arranged for the Insured designated in this certificate.Any requirements or provisions in any contract or agreement between the Insured and any other person,firm or corporation will not be construed as enlarging,altering or amending the definition of insured or any other terms or conditions of this certificate or the insurance designated.Such insurance,subject to the limits of liability,coverages,hazards,exclusions,provisions. conditions and other terms thereof,is in full force and effect as of the date this certificate was issued. Insured: KOHL EXCAVATING Address: 3330 East Valley Highway Renton, Washington 98055 Bodily Injury Liability Insurance—Other Than Automobile Primary Insurer USF&G Expires 04-11-78 Pol.No.11P 32674 Limits$ Incl. Each Person$300,000 Each Occurrence$ 300,000 Aggregate Bodily Injury Liability Insurance—Automobile Primary Insurer USF&G Expires 04-11-78 Pol.No.'MP 32674 Limits$ 300,000 Each person$ 300,000 Each Occurrence Property Damage Liability Insurance—Other Than Automobile Primary Insurer LLOYDS OF LONDON Expires 04-11-78 Pol.No. UL 1769 LimitsS 100,000 Each Occurrence 100,000 Aggregate Property Damage Liability Insurance—Automobile Primary Insurer USF&G Expires 04-11-78 Pol.No. MP 32674 Limits$ 100,000 Each Occurrence Workmens Compensation Insurer Expires Pol.No. Emp.Liability Limit_ Each Accident Excess Liability Insurance Insurer HARBOR INSURANCE COMPANY Expires 04-11-78 Pol.No. 126540 Limit(A)S 1,000,000 combined single limit in excess of above described underlying limits. B)Up to$ combined single limit in excess of above described underlying limits. In accordance with the above.the insurance covers the operations and locations described as follows: Any and all operations performed on behalf of the above named insured. In the event of cancellation of said Policies, 10 days notice of such cancellation will be given the party named below at the address shown herein. The policy provides,under the Insuring Agreements,contractual liability coverage with respect to any contract or agreement wholly in writing,subject to all the ex- clusions,cdriditions and other provisions of the policy. This certificate is not a policy and does not afford any insurance coverage. Nothing contained in this certificate shall be construed as extending coverage not af- forded by the designated insurances or by endorsement thereto.Except as specifically provided for in this certificate,the Insurers shall have no duty to notify the party to whom this certificate is addressed as to any change in,or cancellation of,the insurances and shall not be responsible for any failure to do so. Date 9 77 City of Renton Hmiyhm Onc. To 200 Mill Ave. South Address Renton, Wash. 98055 na ed kia,„BY Rf1WAT T1 A UART7 h if . r- 33 1 OF RF 2, .\ o 0,\‘ Affidavit of Pu , 'catio prrip# r,; LI STATE OF WASHINGTON NOTICE OF , COUNTY OF KING ss. •‘: 9 PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing will be t N' held by the Renton Land b I_D QFZ' Use Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the coun- . Margaret Ha r b a ug h being first duly sworn on cil chambers, city hall, Re- nton, Washington, on Feb- ruary 7,1978,at 9:00 A.M.to oath,deposes and says that She is the C h.i e C 1 e r k of consider the following peti- tions:THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4) 1.KOHL.EXCAVATING,times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and InC71VA71—tr:—CHRISThasbeenformorethansixmonthspriortothedateofpublicationreferredIANSON, APPLICA-to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- TION FOR REZONEpaperpublishedfour(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington, FRO G,.Z R-2, Fileanditisnowandduringallofsaidtimewasprintedinanofficemaintained o. R-114-77• propertyattheaforesaidplaceofpublicationofsaidnewspaper.That the Renton on Sunset 'Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Boulevard S.W.betweenSuperiorCourtoftheCountyinwhichitispublished,to-wit,King County, 80th Avenue South and S.W.3rd Place. Washington.That the annexed is a Public Hearing 2. MOBIL OIL CORPO- RATION,APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT TO INSTALL ONE ADDI- TIONAL 50,000 BAR- REL GASOLINE STOR- as it was published in regular issues(and AGE TANK,File No.SP-not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period 066-77;property located within the existing Mobil Oil Tank Farm area of 1 consecutive issues,commencing on the situated approximately 1,000 feet south.of the • day of J a.7.. t a r intersection of the future, 19 78 ,and ending the S.W. 23rd Street and Und Avenue S.W.direct- ly south of the Olympic Pipe Une facility. day of 19 both dates 3. S AND M INVEST- inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- MENTS, APPUCATION . . scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee FOR SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT CON- DOMINIUMS IN R-2chargedfortheforegoingpublicationisthesumof $.2.7.•.7,2which AND R-3ZONE,File No.has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the SP-123-78;.property lo-first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent cated at the northeastinsertion. corner of Grant Avenue South,and South Puget Legal descriptions of files Chief Clerk noted above on file in the Renton Planning Depart- ment.. All Interested persons to Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27 day of said petitions are invited to be present at the public January 1978 hearing on February 7,1978 L at 9:00 a.m.to express their opinions. J /3(24 Published in the Renton Notary Public ' and for the State of Washington, Record-Chronicle January 27, 1978.R4771residingatKent, King CounXS. Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9th, 1955. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. L i tion thereto, NOWITHERE- enue) as shown on the FORE i plat of Earlington,as per THE CITY COUNCIL OF plat recorded in Volume THE CITY OFF\NTC1N 14 of Plats page 7,in said Affidavit of 'Publication DAIN AS FOLD N CITY OF , the City ofrNTON,WASHINGTONSECTIONI: .ORDINANCE NO. 3206 aunty of King, described pr AN ORDINANCE OF •ashington. STATE OF WASHINGTON City of Ren THE CITY OF RENTON, located bet- COUNTY OF KING ss. rezoned to F WASHINGTON , Avenue South trict (R-1) a CHANGING THE rd PI.,north of specified;out ZONINGCLASSIFICA- et Blvd.) I ings, conclut TION OF CERTAIN II: This Ordi- T r-;`. r E 1 sion dated PROPERTIES WITHIN be effective. t '' ` ilr h being first duly sworn on 11978 of the THE CITY OF RENTON sage, approval I Examiner; tl FROM GENERAL ' days after its S E]O 7_C Clerk i rector is heri CLASSIFICATION DIS-oath,deposes and says that is the of I and directed TRICT (G) TO RESI- BY THE CITY THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4)maps of th DENCE DISTRICT(R-1) his 7th day of times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and Hance, as a{ (KOHL EXCAVATING, has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred :dence said r, INC.—R-114-77) elores A.•Mead 1 to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- I That portii' . WHEREAS under Chant City Clerk paper published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington, 13, Towns er 7,Title,IV(Building Regu- ED 'BY THEanditisnowandduringallofsaidtimewasprintedinanofficemaintainedRange4 ,' lations) of Ordinance No. 27th day of at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Renton King Cou1 1628 known as the"Code ofRecord-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the ton', lying' General Ordinances of the s J. DelaurentiSuperiorCourtoftheCountyinwhichitispublished,to-wit,King County, West line 1 City of Renton,— as Mayor • Addition to to form: Washington.That the annexed is a r 1 erplat re amended,and the maps and Warrenl" C` p reports adopted in conjunc- ume 34 of tion therewith, the propertyrecordso' •hereinbelow described has in The Renton i and East c heretofore been zoned as nicle March 31, of R.L.Hal General Classification Dis- to Earlingt trict(G);and r recorded iasitwaspublishedinregularissues(and Plats, a WHEREAS ag proper peti- 1notinsupplementformofsaidnewspaper) once each issue for a periodcoun P g,tion for change of zone North lin®classification of said proper-o State High{ ty has been filed with the1orofconsecutiveissues,commencing on the conveyed PlanningDecemberb 16, 19on 7,Washington about 16, 1977, which petition Was duly re- '21 I Te r C h 7 corded url ferred to the Hearing Exa-day of 19 and ending the File No.'1 miner for investigation, South of study and public hearing,production and a'public hearing having day of 19 both dates line of Si been held thereon on or inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- I Place; (fo about January 24,1978 and scribers duringall of said 138th Stre continued to February7,period. That the full amount of the fee 1978, and said matter hay- A ing been duly considered by charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ ° .%`- which the Hearing Examiner and has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the said zoning request being in first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent conformity with the City'sinsertion. Comprehensive Plan, as amended, •and the City16/ t 12= /J 6 Council having duly consi- d 1 t.x' i f dered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties hay- GI-Y.1 o f clerk ing been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposi- Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31 day of i; 33 C.}.73 19....7 8 Notary Publ c • and for the State of Washing n, residing at Kent, King Co nty. Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9th, 1955. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, , adopted by the newspapers of the State. V.P.C.Form No.87 Cn TIFICATE OF INSURANCE , - n in effect on date of this certificate arranged by Apr) •', ., ':t'. IL A. n r,`s: , ..J Al Imo/. n . r, bu\L'J:^-; _ ,6 c-?\i\i'. :Sri ,L L.' :'n c\j i' E 1. 1200 westlake ave. no. seattle, washington 98109` y_ c• O CLL,z;, s p F;/+ ,,v This is to certify that the insurance described below has been arranged for the Insured designated in this certificate.Any regw dents or provisions- rt5 ontract or agreement between the Insured and any other person.firm or corporation will not be construed as enlarging,altering or amend c',t'e ffefinitioq fir Fred or any other terms or conditions of this certificate or the insurance designated Such insurance,subject to the limits of liability.coverages. azaards' xdu ip s,provisions. conditions and other terms thereof.is in full force and effect as of the date this certificate was issued. 1 Insured' KOHL EXCAVATING, INC. 3330 East Valley Highway Address' Renton, Washington 98055 Bodily Injury Liability Insurance—Other Than Automobile Primary Insurer Consolidated American Ins. Co. Expires 04-11-79 Pol.No. CAP 181769 Limits$ Incl. Each Persons 500,000 Each Occurrence$ 500,000 Aggregate Bodily Injury Liability Insurance—Automobile Primary Insurer Consolidated American Ins. Co. Expires 04-11-79 Pol.No.CAP 181769 Limits s 300,000* Each person 5 300,000* Each Occurrence combined single limit Property Damage Liability Insurance—Other Than Automobile Primary Insurer Lloyds of London Ins. Co. Expires 04-11-79 Pol.No. UL 2616 Limits$ 100,000 Each Occurrence 100,000 Aggregate Property Damage Liability Insurance—Automobile Primary Insurer Consolidated American Ins. Co. Expires04-11-79 Pot.No CAP 181769 Limits$ 300,000* Each Occurrence Combined single limit • Workmens Compensation Insurer Expires Pol.No. Emp Liability Limit Each Accident Excess Liability Insurance Insurer The Harbor Insurance Co. Expires 04-11-79 Pol.No. 131271 1,000,000 Limit(Al$combined single limit in excess of above described underlying limits. B)Up to$ combined single limit in excess of above described underlying limits. In accordance with the above,the insurance covers the operations and locations described as follows: Any and all operations performed on behalf of the above named insured. 10 In the event of cancellation of said Policies, days notice of such cancellation will be given the party named below at the address shown herein. The policy provides.under the Insuring Agreements,contractual liability coverage with respect to any contract or agreement wholly in writing,subject to all the ex- clusions conditions and other provisions of the policy This certificate is not a policy and does not afford any insurance coverage Nothing contained in this certificate shall be construed as extending coverage not af- forded by the designated insurances or by endorsement thereto.Except as specifically provided for in this certificate,the Insurers shall have no duty to notify the party to v,hrripthi iortjO77rte i.a f1i sled as to any change in.or cancellation of.the insurances and shall not be responsible for any failure to do so Date ACity offf Renton Ti 200 Mill Ave. South Renton, Washington 98055 BY___Ll; L8l l Address Ronald R. Hartz c Koh' Excva±IrlgcA R-0-77 eXp;res i 41/11/7? CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 3206 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON FROM GENERAL CLASSIFICATIONDISTRICT (G) TO RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-l) (KOHL EXCAVATING, INC. - R-114-77) WHEREAS under Chapter 7 , Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 known as the "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" , as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has heretofore been zoned as General .Classification District (G) ; and WHEREAS a proper petition for change of zone classification of said property has been filed with the Planning Department on or about December 16 , 1977 , which petition was 'duly referred to the Hearing Examiner for investigation, study and public hearing, and a public hearing having been held thereon on or about January .24 , 1978 and continued to February 7 , 1978 , and said matter having been duly considered by the Hearing Examiner and said zoning request being in conformity with the City' s Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council having duly considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties having been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto, NOW THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I : . The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residence District (R-l)as hereinbelow specified; subject to the findings, conclusions and decision dated February 15 , 1978 of the City' s Hearing Examiner;the Planning Director is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance , as amended, • to evidence said rezoning, to-wit : See Exhibit "A" .attached hereto and made a part hereof as if f u1V set forth. Property located betw;een. 80th, Avenue South and S .W. ;3rd Pl. , north of S .W. Sunset Blvd. ) r '-/ . SECTION II : This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five (5 ) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 27th day of March, 1978 . Delores A. Mead , City lerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 27th day of March, 1978 . Charles (J. Delaurenti, Mayor II Approved as to form: 6711:0, Lawrence J. Wa4... en, City Attorney Date of Publication: March 31 , 1978 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION That portion of Section 13 , Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W. M. in King County , Washington, lying West of the West line of Ryan ' s First Addition to Earlington, as per plat recorded in Volume 34 of Plats , page 3 , records of said county and East of the East line of R. L. Haddock Addition to Earlington, as per plat recorded in Volume 38 of Plats , page 4 , in said county , North of the North line of Primary State Highway No . 2 , as conveyed to the State of Washington by deed recorded under Auditor ' s File No. 2565554 and South of, the Westerly production of the center line of Southwest 3rd Place ; ( formerly South 138th Street and 5th Avenue) as shown on the plat of Earlington, as per plat recorded in Volume 14 of Plats page 7 , in said county; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King , State of Washington. ii nt---i; 1 ---1--:‘,-*••--i--l'N- 11 1 1-i,b1, .131,/54' &1, 1.f3111.-1-....---,...i 0, . 1. ..... :',:,5 Ai 4'5 i;1 . e.li 1 1 1 I ?L'I' ' ''' -Li' I\' 1\ , J I 1 1 I i„,/' __ I ... .-_ <, s.,,,,.. .. , l_ _ . .•., li.,1 ! 1- 144l' / ... ‘•W:!&,, ;.-'3 r;..;1 r- 1-77. r--1 --t- ' «6 0 , atiY:::::,-:' t _..; i ---:-.4t,:d 4_ji, . f‘- A- -i ,-.--i- i 1 T ! I' '---1.'1"1 5 I 1j/1 L 1 " J 1, ,, r ,.. .,,,, . „ „,....,„ , , „ILL 1_,_,•,.;_,.._, 4,, 4! ,,z , 13 1•, ; I 51'5 A13 2 : 1:16 :15,..‘.5,5 a hi 1 1". <T) . .2- f - 1.--!`'.;. T4?••L: 1-) t----1.-- i-,-- -q--21--;..../Fri _.......___L...1 . \..., •-• k_i_ •;__i _l_i___,4_\_•.\ I- ',,,,,,..,1 --k, ', --,,f .•,' — • _, , 1 , k j------F- , ,, 1 i i .4 1,,,,','•\ ,,,,,: 1 ii5 ! , , ,i, ,-- i , t-,7-9 ---,- • •/,,tt 1431 ,, •.0 . I5It : 5.1.,1,, 1,..25.25 '3 • 51Li : L:---1_ L - L ._j _L.,. 11 I I 1________(*t•_1 \ ' Li_ _ _i_l__E 1_1 Id. A ll • 's -, s - 7, FI213T-1 7:717 I1„:, , , •.: .1 1, • -3---,.T.--,-i 7 11.1., 1: 11-7.— 1----17-=1 -11 --j -1----24.---1__.j L ' I i:. , . 1.: ,I„,3,t I,ri_ ,, i 1• s\s- ir , i.,,,4, \ i , , ,1 , , , i f---,_,...„,„ ,,1-, -.--Li -,, , sr- . 3; ;-- 1-;- -f -1 " 1- 1111 10 1 ''''j 1 IS'i11\ 1 6-1 '600( 1' 1' 1"i' 1 1 11 1 11.1-1-'-7.-.,•5,e,4?-r,..;;--.- 2 z15 % I 3 ,.Isl. j I j ' li,1 'i 4 , .1• 1. 1,i, , I i - ' 4,,,, E. ' ,'O. I -- i ' - -,.-c•:-.._ :7,_ ,./.:- i___ i 1----1--1 1.-11,11:11:4--1--t,----„Ll d 1 i 1.I, ..f, ;• i.1:\A:__I-Z • 11. . . 5 111 1 ; 1 1 r--1 f1;- - 1.,, C4..:, `--2•1_,j 7,---i-.1-. i,--..7,:''1,---7:-7r--- 1- 3-----!-,.._,- --I-,.._...1, :::.I I •1-2 -..,,,, 2„,, , INN ' ,........— ----!!i_. I I : I i ! e....„....... 1 *•:..1. , . I I I 41:-127,..1 .71----„•----L 1 7--- ir ---t-..-......,„I ,,,,.___L__Li r . i- I, - it .-..—.. ------• .,.._ ---,--________ ,::: .. , 1 ! ....j, 1,..• 1 ,i_ s_p_ , 47-0‘,:-,-, TLf./7:7",:?,•,,,, _....:•,_ :,,,_1 i ILI 1 li ,_,,.. L,: i I i Li._, 1--- _r--Lf.:1 7 7-17-7-,:-JA:1 j : I 2 .,.[,. i' Y' 'L ii•-- rir kv. -- .:'-:-', 4-4,,,,..--', ., uit -- -R 7/17 r - I 4 , , , , 1 L--,-------- 4% •• 7:,,,ww ' - . ...4. ii, if --:,,-,---;,/ 4,/ .„, •H ,, 7 I 1-,3. 1 1 7,, // ,'/4.„::. LVD t• C:VStii;4... -..- • II Al.i-, -- 7' -oaf(11 I rrn, S •I S . ' ..,,...4.7],i yi-7, ' 'v."Pi• ,Tdiavi 1. , ivr X ' ..:00cfr ;`, '' 1 I;:' r 77-;.:_ . '' - ' ' ..' I • ,.., 14*/141Y. :kia -4"/ ' " "';rs I .11 , ' I ...'....:.,':::, •-).•1..501.340or 1 .:, .'. .:. s:a /,?- 4,..47,,,thi.:.,0,,,..,4c,_fit/ k' zni, - i.,v-.-i.' .------.. 1 ') \', ''':-::-----:,-.,-.--,-,--,,--,,---7--f.--,; :-.,-,- .---.. .--,'.---:- 4 ' .7. i 1, 4_ r, - - ;1'1: 5 `• .--'6-(f':---'' 11 L \____ ___ _ 5. Ly___, 7721 :-___ '-, - 7-._:-:: 1 \ j P• 1 1.---- L - 1 M P u iol MIMI i Z i M C* T D A , f' ' A REZONE : IVAN C . CHRISTIANSON , APPLICATION •FOR „REZONE FROM G , GENERAL CLASSIFI- CAITUN DISTRICT , T.0 R-2 ,: MULTI -FAMILY- .RESIDENCI0ISTRTcr, • File N . R:114- 77 ; property located :between B4Oth Avenue Soutfland S . W . 3rd Place , north of S . W. Sunset Boulevard,• 14:1 . 3 acres APPLICANT ' kOHL. EXCAVATING, ' INC:: : • -' TOTAI... AREA IVAN ,C ;;, CHRISTIANS.ON ) . . - : ..: , • W .: Sunset' Blvd . PRINCIPAL ACCESS EXISTING ZONING • : G , General Classification District EXISTING USE Undeveloped - , PROPOSED USE To rezone the site to allow the development of four plexPs COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Low ..Densi ty. Multi -family COMMENTS S. A . " -2.4 ,4r.• , : , g ./ /.. ,,, -T.:.. .-,...cr,i, , : -..,o7-7` "‘A:34A i' 3','W i: c,,,_.•';.';'-',.x,.ii, Reritop;City:.0014n.c.! • 2 ,,, •.•„,, . . I: 3/13/78' r'Page 4 -, .. . - .' • • ' ' ' .. '; - - - , ' :. , : .• - ' : ' . ' d .interloca1 • ,,• Agenda,:,-Consent ted. .a 'propose Renton and. Continued Kent,.f'-'Auburn,County,-. Cities; or- :.,• ,,.. . ... with Executivealong Plan .and,,•-'...‘,•..i..;4';',''':': Interl oca. ',., ' - ,,--,-., , 7, • , i. i:.:...:.;: .'• • '. Lettei',.:#).-01 agreement., . between. .K17 .• , • ,.: Mayor-.beilaUr.ehti•!-presen I ' -and 'Regulatory- . . . d Agreement,‘•.,-.,,, .';": • -. ..„ Tulaiiii-aregardi ,..9... , Interim:-..P..01.9.,.. • •:. River Valley,.: d' the history an r:, of the.:','.- n RiverGren),.•;; „.„ The'.,1etter-;:outloutlined ended' ‹'•'.:::2-'6'-.;.::., ',' Green%River ', •.:'! , • ,. .- ,.„..• ,:, i„..,. Sualm.arY,,, ; .:.., ••, , the Green,,:RiV t PrognaT!:,„ .„ ,.. ,. date.' .''''"The', letter recommended c. f.;,..,,'- :•:‘'; 7.•:-'4.-:',,,,,,..:f.--:!•::Basin Wide::' , Management,,,,.,,• - t'i'oris:'",,-;to,':":• , , ,',',--,-,'_;.••,:•.:.,, the. Community'.-aer-,-,..;,,.t.,-.?•,),,... ,..:,• 1 -..,“..,:,,,,..; 1.-.-,,, •-•-. background of-,' various vi ac ri,to .f"the..Whole:!.an--, , .'• of the propoed:';,-. .:',,,,q;',.... t.,-,,,,,-.:-.-y...%:,•,.....,. . Committee 0 ..- .. -... ...,...... ' ration i:-.,•••,:•-•.,,f,•'• ;.:.',.,,,', 1'f'1:,-,,:ej,",';V,'.,.;-11.!",:'..:. 'referral"'-tto the. ' t - expedite -conside..order- 0Committee' 1 n , ,., , I. 'concur. -2,'- •'-.,.',. •.program. T Counci, . :.• ,„.. ., -,:-.,-,., ,-;-:, , •2,--,..-..i.:,',.. ,. , ,':, ag-reenient, and !•• : ., z , . ,..; . „ ...,:.,--.-. .;,...-.,.. -• . .; • _ Farris vs. r '.-..,--;'-.:-, .:• • •.'...,. .•'":-- C.,:,,,-'s.'''., . -,• ' '- ,,.--':-• ,''''. • - - '' " ' •' ' ' filed" .by Lois Joan . f, 841875 Court 0 .:. ,. ,,•,,,,.,,,, . and Complaint No. , , .,, , .,. , , with• the Superior . 6 at 2 .Summons -.a The Boeing Company ., . Building 47 And ' ' • ' •-. . --.. ' . from ns 'and,''--- SumM0.. . . . ...‘,..: . , -•,' --.,„, , City: of Renton- . , . ,,:. all When walking, ffrom"..f. of Complaint. - forpersonal injuries:: , ., ,. N.e300ft.:.west ' Logan „..; . ,,.:. ,,... .,.•;:. ::, „:,,,,.,•:•„," - ,,.,:,., •-,,,,,.: :,.:;, J •' •Farris,,,, ,,,,.. . , , Boeing;-'-.plant:,..approximately, Refer, ,,to,., .,C.71City Attorney..,, 3•„,,,..,1;.:::,,i,:;,..,,';';,. 'i,%h, the' gt H ''' 1 i nt claimed' negligence... ..„.„,.,:•,''-',.:-•;,..,,.'-, k.,•..‘p,:':,.•--,,,,,,s:,,,,--.. ; -..-,.- k ••joati',.•34,iv-,':'„,',-,,o?.',',,,, s.,•:-,A,-,-',,L,..,:.'4,:f,.", ,,,•:,,,,,,,,:,',,'-',-,.,,:comp, 4,..,,,,....- ... : ..:.',... • ;,:„':;"-,-.,:" 1.,,,', :...-,.;,',,::,-,,,,.-.•-•.,,-,‘„,,,,,-,-..,:,,,,,;,,,..,,, r,-,--, d1 tycj 1)00 by Lo i s „,.„ :1•,-,...,.:-..,....!„.01,477,,, v.,,,..,,-.,•;',-,..,,•••,..:„:',-'.. f.•' -.",,--...,i..,-,k'•!',Y.1,,N.',:';', :. :::•., .,:.'„,,,,':,,,,‘„.„:,-;•, ,•'::'''.';-' .-`'•'' '':, thrikititit-,:sof.,,l'', ...., . ..i. ,.. ' injuries!,..,•i•ivz" ..1v1,rj,,,10"41 JC'''.-• '::;C'il,"S;::-.=::.V';,4'nr•-j1-..;,:,: -,,',.'': ..! , '', '''' Damages' ,::Was.g•-..fi l' 171.-',.19 ..„•t.,,, , c'J,:f:6i':.-iiir,5'on al. . , .- '. e. ii,'::,cl'Aqii-M,,I., 4,,;40,PF`;:z.,', . .l'. ..,'I',',-,t-cla‘,1nLY..,fpri?...:.- icrl ; :,...federati'0Y.'i.';,,,.:.:' 1 ,::.ii.i6 City.to maintain . .A1....Lw,,,,m,.&i:A.;,,,, 1,,, Claims for '.,:.''',.' , ' h.`kt:".,-Fiai.*Shi'j'390,...0.‘,!'.:4:',7!".q911„.., . T.,,:::-,'-' 44.:4itn.41-',Ifolo:417.,p--„ ..:7 -,,-,-- 2,, ,,-,-,r.,..,,,,, A,-.,-4,1•;,.: v,P•P;';',,,,',Y.%••''tiainiges(A1457 ;:';I',4.,, , ,.. ,,...i.,,Ezki.:6-6:14.,,.H.gnt::.'etY(Mr:i,- i Carrier.. 0,,,?,, y,,,r.".',,L'Ah••?-;',';'_•,•,,,, 17a'1:.11"1)1}1 ,,,.:•,,',..•.. ,::_,,:-.- .: City Attorney :,and. Insurance.- " .•,,:',.. 'Rofee-'to N,-:,',.-!;?.--..,:-',•••':•,',-;'.':'-'• .• ..'•• • " ' • Pacific North- west ea-ii.,kfur••:,,.,,,:,,,,-',-(. .,streets;...,;.,. ,..,••••.",,-,.,,,,,,,:•.: '.''' ,','''-'-' ' ,.-•••''''•-:-`','-- -.% '''''.:- '''''''' -.'-$ 11.4.12 -by . v,,,.. Cols' ,-,“,:.),.!..:,,,, •;„,4,,,. . filed, i-in- amount of ,.., • ..,,, .. . , a t 1244 ,'. ..‘•,....,,,,,, ,•;',,4. ip. ,;,-;,-,''.;',,':.,,..,.-,. ",':.:•.. i,.,,i..z-!"''.;%..: :\.:...7';,:.-.'',..,. ''..:,*::'' 1''% , Damages' was'- 7r. '' - ..'•. ,- -• . '• buried cable. ci-th,..,:;!--,54.,;'-az v.....:: ',,:, , w.:- .,;,Claim-for' cost •to., repair. , Refer •to ..,_,L4/. !,.4,,,,:•ty,..,,,,, parCif.,NW Bell ,,'','„,' .„:.• .•-, - 6.,.....11 Telephonei:,Co. 8 5 C by„ _,,, 4:1; „,f,..‘,.,i.,,,:i 119/.78..:•....... • . 7.-''-',:''''-''..',.',1::'.:',.,...:!'';:_,:-.'''*:. --.'''', damage • .;',Wic,99.7,-.I..r,.i 1y..;,;,-Benson Hwy. . alleging. .! „. i., ,,,;31::•7..,,•:::,,,., • ,..,• . . ...:,,.. ,,,.., !,,,,,,,,,,,..:•,:, ,,, i ,T'fi:,,,-„Al l4,. Aild...4nStieance','1,Carrier. . . R.,„,,,,,9:•., ,...: i,„,,,,,iz:.,,,',„•,,y..,,,..,;, .: ,,,,';,.. ,••T ,.:'," A ri 0 r:f::asg'k,4:,a IA.10t.cyri:ley-, ..,,,,;:,.,,,,..,,,,,'„ ,-„,, 4,,,,,, ,,:;,-,:?*.•,,n, 2,:,•:‘:,-.,.,• ••,,f,;:?.,',",'4,,,,!•:::,..,!:k ,, ,-",•••m•!,,, -6.art 6,..,-.12 to 19:.;."‘i''7'; i.:.',1-.1':',:,,,'--.'4,',,,i,''':??J,:4,;,'4, 4'XkO'fit,•VkAeg* :,,,4;':-;;;litiqie-Tati-i'en-VIff, !!,1,:rg:4,t,"'; ' ,-.."''',.-,-'2,*::'',:'-',,•,'t, k.:"6"'",;',P1P l'',•],;-:-:.)„•1‘,.,:,;,,,,"4,..,',,:,-!.,,e,:,:::,",), :::',..:.'.,&,',.!.1.ii,.:',N4-''U-i-.$4146elimatyP..11`,--.'9,•1„'-'',', .7 ,:' t,i- ,k,.1,:',''.=--,i4,2.;,.!:',Q.4.i?.. ,, ,:)?a-qt‘41`.,f,'''..V-t.-; ,'2.,..---,•- .,'•:. ,..,' i...-;,, ..'.;,-,;:',,..-,.,, ,,,:q.'4.'"4,;:','N', P1e6C1'4,11?01PPW'''' ' In'i4niti.:Otikr'''.'Der.nc,Orj,,,..t collected: i-:.,‘,,,,Wy•'.':',.'". .a.,,./.,,:;,4,':,„•,', „.,.4.:;„.,',.:-. ,..q.y. ..,,, .„'..p, .,,-,,,,,:,[,,,,,,,-,„„-.Its„,,,•::;,,',=;:.,.;.,-,--;;;,vp.„':.,,,,,,,,,.,-,,,:,,,r,,*,.:e-:,,,*,,,,,,z•.,.,;., „;?..,,,.,•,•-,•„.,'•,:-,„ ,,i,,..e.a,eisil.fave, been,, , .,.• ,, ..: ,„ v4,v,,,,of,i, lit,:,'3,'',. ,''.',,,'.-.,,,4',4t.I.tr'W!,,i"i',;',.:','.#;Wi;V•‘!:1:1M-1:4:'''''''.:,(:...4.', .*F-9:!.-';',,',',.• ..., .' Clerk Mead;,,,.'.0 port,e92:,.:',..a...4,•,.!'-',•,•!:;•••,-...,:•§-,-',., c•'plat'e.',v a c at?,0!..!1,1::.t.',c',;:-,•:''.-..„,.,:•:',,,-,',,::-,.4,:;,: t.,,, ,i:,..,••;,, ,,,t,w:.:;,.,..;.,*,n,-,-.,;:,-.,, k. !,Lktd,,!•e.feotri -.cl.;'0, -.,..' 7„.1. 1,!!,': ' T.---, .'- ttie,:.5.1i.k.",1-,0..r/r)., ,..1 -Of the ordinance i„i•,-,;!fta,i,ttsr;:..,P,.-1.#CP;(,'::' ','-.'-',,, 6iifti iiq.:::-Or°Pqr-Y:'''owners-on' -----;,- 4- - 6ii,iiiiiefided,' referral- , ,. • d io .:,-,,,,,,2,-,-ef,„!,rwet,i,pbi,..,t1prt:'f.Yi,01,11..,./P .. ' f .:$2.2.'8'465 ,•.‘•The;;1.etr ,P.";,..,!.. ,--,•••• and,".adoption-•a9 ..,,,-,; ,,.,:,.,..,',,,;;;;; sti, T,,t- vu.,.....,„.,'...z.,,4•,,,:,..'...;•;-si&.,,,•: .;,-. ...:::.etie':!siiirn'-':.0.,‘., „..k ••• :,%•-, Committee: ' fors;,,reading,•,.: , , „ distribution,ano-c01.7-. .,,,m, a':''',:sti3eet1",.:',.11',-:'. '',- '''''K'„•''',.,-- - •;•-' 1;--.0: Ways,,'and'-'Means, w, ,,i-0,11,-, 12041 -'. '',.'-'-•:.i,.-'-'::.,'„-,,,,, I • „: `,. . '',: King.• County`'.:,, ' ' ' s,,' , i."1..:'::tax..'.......,.J,, . , • 1,-f... -:,,.. .t0.; with f.,_,,,, See Ord. It_ , . . . ,.,•. ...,-„„..,>, 4 ','''' . '':f..1::%1:.'., e'';',(7. 6.64,i•i'eto rde a'Wi -..•-- , -,.•v,,;:' Council. concur.-:-. 4.:•‘,, ,. ., '. .. ,.. ,..'• i:,.."..'.," ;.'..'-‘,:-. ".:% i,,,, to, •...4i,•,..',. .- ''. ., -', owners;.:•::,,: .0„,;.,:•:=,,v,,..,•- f;i. ,,,,:,);.;.:,:,.•,',..,:, -,-,., ,, . , . • ,..;•.: ', ,.,,,,..--,,,, p,..‘,..A, IieSiante-',:to- abutting •.„,.,,,,., ,.,,,,:.:;44.',.,„:,,,:;,...„.r.;-[,,,, ,,,....I,,,,,.- -,,,,,!,-.,..,'.,..,•,-,,-,_.','"T.-,,-..'. '- ,G'-‘-to. .;;;,-.!.,;•• ,-ts"•;.-ogy i, r',:m''',',Fir:.•::',-•: r','•'• 4,'''''',‘/ 4-',•-,, :'-'.:"•'.-=':''''',,,,,-,!,,,3T,,,i,':,...•,',',. Y ,-onim'e-ritied.• rezone..;from.....•• :,., :,,,.....!• 90..,,,,K c4',:itiathiii0-141Begri7FTAd,:ibetwePrf.,,j440.A04Wp 13''.,':';',11Ct,i'41";. :'-':i'•,:5;,1, ,,W,gie'.:‘,g'':,,,?:,:t;i6-itoi.L.D.,:p-0'- :Heav71 , ' ,,,,• ••ieaps'for3"...Pii.VPrO-A,R ,„ f ..:.0.ed,,:,-,'•:.-Ref er.7:;::, ;-,01,zo K:dhlt. 'Excoya ,r1 .,,' rz,:::: reii, (7k4!f.,,had''',,be.er.tr:-.,r-gq „, ,,,,,,.,:;., e-,:.- --1,,-,oid1PPP,c.?,,,,:.,.- ti ,e,,, , wa,,,,,',--- ,- ...- ,'. ,.. ..-. ,,, -; ., * woryi'1',,un..,-, ,,,,,•-,•:,,, s1,-,;,:c„y..,r,:,,,-,,, i,,,,,,rc,:.„. .,,,,..,,,,,,,.,....,,,,...•.,,,,,,,,,.,,„( 4.„,,,,,,,,,,,, 4,1 ReZO.,n, 4TTiK,tACTPO 44I ;iridz,s 1)1,d,i r.•1-2,,i,: , „,,.:',', . i-..i,..4:Flo-e.,,,01,4411An4.-..,, ,,-',7,','•-,,:;,...,',.i',•3.-,'.,,,y,'.,.".',,,,ii.;..;,v,.-;;T-,';',,,,:•:-:!.. ::,:W,',.i.kK k..,jr ;.. '4 ,*2 4,;;:4Aig& nclAElean$:,,,I, L; OMT1.-6 ' 1 n N.S blt';AGENDA,!,;',t1' i,u.Y:'.:' -.. ''-' ',---, .-,,,,,, mk,- -,-.'-':,,' ,',,,,!,,: 7,' W,Y:•ili :-', ...,: albOpTTHE,',.,C- ...:.";• 7,,, ,,,,,,I,---,-,,.,,•-;.-:•:,,,A.,,,I,E.T.(i.:,,„wiiii,x,•,,Tk,i‘',, ',,:',-;•.Q.-.,•,i,,,.,,i7, v,,,„ `,i+..-,:,2.--,,`,-:„.•,,,:,,,,,,,•••„ .. 4:‘,.;••••+drA•D ar ;,`,:co uN ul,,ti:% ,, (,.,. , .. L ..., •, .„,,,,.,.,,,,,,,,,,,•„,,,,„,,,,,,,,,, 15,,w6,,.,,,v,7 s-,...,.. .-,,,..i,rir;::,,'4„-•,,,,w46:',,!im'ei?, ,,,-•",,,.:.iv v.',',-...-•.,'z,r„„•i':,..i,i‘` fviaeiti.Y',..-SECuNVAutv!I`vyn,f ,..),.`C-.InQ,•:-,V,';•:4•',.,r.4.',::,,Ii,-,(' ,;,:',; -.'..,' e -'..i ',`' ,-.';.,,.:;,'!...-;',,,, n,,,,,--,g,";,01;,.., 4-VA:-': MOVED-A 0 Ti .T 71,‘it'% ,:'= ',i::7,'-::e,i4V'.:'rj.1.A.- 6:-',4 .1'..'::: ::.APA.::,ii .:'"-..' :.. . 4. •' . ,-'i-. ,,--, r,, 4',V,:,4:-:,, ,';,=',,Al, .. Consenti-/Aoeny e.,.'1.,,v.' .....,,...,, ' PREPARED.",..".- CARRIED;•i:.:;',i''',','',.:',-;,,V;'-',';=1.k.:•-14:!,,r, ..4,•,;„:' 4:e'''..W:''''.vg.'."':4',- ':' -,:. , - '. ','. ,,,,,','; .,',',"„?.,:,- 14',%1`-'iltel' i:','1,,,V r.16:.,7,''.. ., ,,'.,s,;f;,-i.. -,.As„,,,: , ,. , ?.:,,,:,....,,,,,,,,,,‘, T,,,,,,-:',..-?',,,,,,e,;,,,,,,..,,,.,--;y,;.,4y,,,,,,,L.,!„,:,,,,,;;;,, s,„,.1,..;,,,,,. ,.,,,,,,,.,:,,,,,,,,...kq,..,..4,..:,..,...‘; .. :, , • 1,,,,p0,,,,i.„ 4toptcrya.1uIni4,w,-0' ..;' T,. A-:''.,,-.,;-„(,!',,:'., i'•.:. v,'-.-:...;•'.'-•.,',.:, Y,',., p'.',- y„!- r'•...'',': A.;.,,:.-'_,,:.,.,:.''' 1•,;,,-:,'',,,•,''- 1:.-,'.,:_,',,.',,--','„',,-.-•'' N,':-- W,-,,,' i;,-.,...'-!'-- L.::;.•.-',,-.-.: m',,•:'''-,.,..?,,•,--•.::.,.,,'.,',„',,,:,,::'',--', l'',',: i:,,,, i,,,, 5,'"-,,' i,`-!,' 4'., V'.:.,,.,;,::.,',' i', f,;:,,,,,,• i: v,,-',..,.,.,":,„,''-':,' 7'.,,,iipr,',''',,,.',',''4' (,';.'.-.,,,,,', f,, i',,:,:,,"'.,.';,',.,.,.:'?: i,,., t,..:,•, A,,:Al,.•'.., y,: q',:,, T',," l,:,.-:..',' fA.4;, 1,'kiy'—,`• h•.„ I-, e..:', 1: 4A:. z'. q,. tm-.',,,,, 1' A!,, 4,,, 2'',,•'., 4, 5,,:,,._,:,,;:; v.,.-.'',, p-•?,•.,,.,•,,.,•',.,'.•vP:'',;'-,.".,,•:,00„,`, I. n, 1: k-'•',' n:':.:'',,-?,.:,. e1',*''h•'.,,',,,',.,,•''‘.,:',:,,. 1,i7*• R.•„ y',.;'':, 7,,:.';'::, 4.''',;.,';:',''-:':,,- i•-,.,,,, T;•,.!' i,,:',, L.,,-,*•„,,V.',,.'.;,' 2:,:, m,• i' 4;.',,, i',';,'',•,,,?',.'•, t: 1: s,'',,;, o;,',- 7! V, A,' 4,1t," i.•.,',':.,/ Y' 4, i1:. 1'&,-' 6,,,..4i7a:,.,,,:,, t•;,. 6.' n,,, W.,:".'-.;:-',„ 2'!-.±-... e,:,` iz:.:,• s, t„ O.' t:'.%:.,,' Ne„, U" A,',~.':,;)''•'.., 4.' 0ti:;-'-e. i-?.-,.ftt!':'1,,,..[4N;.:, W,',-,. i!. 4i,: x'. 4;. f:? n,;: 14;,,,-, a• T;',, 5, Ctj- tAt,•,'',,.., t', Yi*s'-;'',..( 4':' 1,. 5,, a' Y,:',,,'., P,'•',, 4.,,:,-;,•`. 1wF,4.,. AND, 4' 1,,. i0,",.:,, i-,..,,'' 1:'ij.'.,!".,.z.? i,:-',,;,',, r,,, i,''•.,,-.,:.- 4-:. b.',, i', r„ i--. 7' r,,' 7,.'•Al':., i,' 7.„!-,.,',' n. A''...,':.'- 4''.",.. E' Y' 1.:.--:-.. 7'.,,, 4( c4-:' 1' a_.: i'':'..'',- t'., r',, t?',-,•, i.';''-.':;.l,!:;• 4.,. 1,,,,:- t;,, 7:-,- 7• I":`.' 4:--_'.',,..,:, t-' 4i:.': i''.ii7,1,''-•.,'..- 2•' i I„!-,;,,,.''* n,-'•'-; N' j,-.,,,,T•.. 4, E".-,'•'., l. s,,-.•;,:,',,",,,-..,,''.‘-',•,,.'; 0' f%., s,,:.:•' i,-'•..:-'-,'.-,..:._:, 4, f--.-:,,.':'..'.' 2-!,. 2n4•., k•.. i,•.. e:•,-:;::,,','',,:-.'.:,•,;+.,,'.,',:';';'?. i,,,,,' 4:;'''',';,"'..:-:' 4.:: 4, l,.;,''.- n. i,:'•- 4,,,''.'. 4.Xi,'Y";,.''.';,-',:'..,•' 1!',:,:-,-'',,; 7':',,''.',, 0'„„ c,;; 1: 4,.' Y;.',-,„:,; N, i! 7';!-.'-.!...,,40,'.;,'-.. 4-,' n.,•'` f,;,''`..-).;,',.;,','..','•',:.-';':-',.'.'„,',•,'',„ T.,:.,.',*'''.''m,•-;..„,.,'7n,,.,':-*;..,,'•-"' n?.,,"',„ 4,•.,',-,,.'.',.,.,)-':';'','; a'•''.. Ii,, 4 r,*''.,'.'•, P..:;+,,,,'.:'. e:,-=;.,. 4,:'.,-.-. i,,„'.,,,..-',:.,.',, 1','' 2., y„,,;. o',,,.' 4f,' s'','., 1,,,,„ 1,. Y..: ft-, M. i,.'.;:,.;•,,,.-•,':.,:',,. Jg-.4.,::::,,:'.,:,:,,,,,-0,:,:',':,-„.,,, t,:,. p: J?,,,.•.;.'.,?. i,'' 4,,;-,.;,;',:,.,-,,,,::-,,-,::,, k,- 0':: k.,. i.',,,,-,, g-', N;.,;,,-.:. t,, 5.',,-',:'::,„,'',-,•,,'.,,.•,: 4‘,',, i•::' 5w*,. t•,,,-. 14J'.,' k,,-• t),.':,.),, r,:,"•,.--'...,.,,.:4:,,--`',.:•,“ 7,,.•.,,.:' 4*, 6:',,::,';,., r.-,, L..•; r,'.•!';'i:.' iv,.•'' 1., f'.:!.,-'.;.,:;. SW4. f"..,..,•',,', V; 4,..,.- 4'',.-,',' y,!.. 1'.,: 1.,?=,,';, W., 4,.'.:..,--=,' x. 1..,',iM•'.;l? n.•.,,'.: 4:';-' 4,:!,,.',.!,,::-..-';Ni'.'' s':-,,,„ ft•'.,:', 0•; 7.:';, w„ T., 0,„ r•-,•. 1:,',,:,.' 47,... r Traffic, PatternLtevter from Public .0r-‘ explainedcfrettor" 491s‘eci " f-,:,'.::.,,i„.,.',,,,,,,'-,•, '''''..-(.,'.-', v'','',. W,'.,',',:'•.--:,' i..' i,-...,,•:•', 0',:'-,'-jY,.,:,,',„'-'-,4-,:.. 4'' i:..•'.,:'.,?.,,',,-.,. t.','.---.',..- 1.;'.-•...,.:,.','-.;-•.-',,..•,.,,',,..4,,'.,::,.--.,,: i.-'-- 1.',,,-..-.'::.:.•',-: t-, t.!•::,:; y.. 7,:.,.,.-.:-- i..,,..'-e,-- t,,,-•'.. . existing.:,.„.,,..,,•.,,,.,,,,.- f47,, v,.;;,, c,,,-• Change for % 0ee4way'we5tbOund traffid'Titw „-y $42ierStPbtNP1-miII-Ave. ? 4t4q3100P : Vanu11a4 .nAve% s ' wi111 ,e7u "ea'tiang0 ,to &tanuaAd-two-waj iiiy44 9y il$60141§0A44iteill044; i, Afee)ioss„tng1q,, :ifithe 'lew'4kie• StatIon419t444i,p0..,,kA,',,44:,.-,, i.: v:,,,,;.-;,,, 00W-,%,',,,,'•, t• 0,, Alk:.i, c,-. O,„,,,,, w: Ar45rWticrW9ifi0444f: 711499!1eIitY1/4C01 • Section :IO2oi MOVED Ati01:15K44itiCeYMWLF6Nit,t0114XUPNOYOibrtiktfieTHEIRPCPM"i4bAtIOT Diafgt0Ua4WWYK'hiitttfANDREFP: , ,Agi4tpWAYS„ AND MEANS - I* 4IT iVACARRIED inwan #, vlettqt, r9 Karol Durham, 3 1 'Vtemont,Pikg, it ?: asked the City to Atiitcs119tpass46: nral1pcg prohibitingAlio/ R;rn „ldf: aeverL1SI - -...--'ie doors. merchants 19,14, , dvertasiuw,, iiii6606$0t ,,g :Plcieni:of. latprkON at:11V1taVIP9jto burg,arpATieklerLer , v, attd ,att=, ri to keep M0rjli -f4iebeingAe11ietIndlpoA 0eceparineiteArs . ucL19, to have services tWantf010 , 4 # 4onVViCation "40VEDJBl Sii406qI St, . 1i4‘vmtr 'AIEttioiENittvlaiAlt;P0aitXAttPCCOMMITTEE , 11t ;,. 7-, y'cA, t- W• 4,.:6I..'.:,,,,.'',.,.:awU,M,,,, 7%.:,', 1i-,:; t, 4.„,,,, y3: q.'% v 5, t: 3. t, 4, l5ltArf34- i1O0. 0- i' P,AA-;,,,,, kic. 4; t, t.-,v4fA1,: 4f4.:,4g1 R, 4-.0A.i5, VAA0':, K, 05, 110'0t1,.,,14 MOTION CARRIED t1',..:-,1:,-,V,';':-IR;;;;V: i.,=',YP,',',-':','1,.a:.;'ddlindIV conur.i:',e7,AxtV:74 6," .,t';',,,...1.,5,:poig,07.... ,', .'YCA'4.'11,4r,:''-i- . .':,'IfUt-,''''':•,:i-r::*ttlC :'-': ::''..72;-: 4:•':::`aiiiiierl-ilet.';•'rgq,mf acceptance of v,r::, iff.,:";-..'.;t::,'i.'&,?q:olim-,,:,g..:z:.:'0,,,,,,,,,!•:„,,‘,,:.:4,-,4,.., iiiiiii,,,Att tn.q,;g0t117,.-w -'oprimsd4r41407: ceP . c,..t6totiViWtt Rv,,..,:,,,i„,-;,f.,3,•:'•:;,,,,, ,,,,-,,,,:!.. :.,:.,,,•,-e...,.,,,,,,w,,,v,w-,-,..,,,w,,,...-:,,,....--LeL. F.,rx A.-1-,- -x thennimericia'LliAM;v10,:',1•: .;.A.,.. .:,: rz.;iii.,4,,,,iiiito'unt,.-0,..,..,. ,, .,,,..,. cv.,,,,4,•t,kw Demolition Letter,,,',.N -,..c.,;-:vym,..,,v;-., -:-‘01-qtythe-,:reC777,7 ,-,•-.,••,,'''.','''' ,; 644,4p:',:lhp,.,;..,'.11I-.4,--,,,::,.....,,, , ,•-•--.•- retain ,byt:tc,o-J.,Siolai,%\,, 1-,J- :.;?.w.:.,wA::;.&i, -.!'-,T1.5 : 6.4-iti,:ov[centgrq „..1.‘ ,,„ },iiip:‘,,ta,ty 4--t.0',;,, , : ,-•,.,.-,,.~..- .•'• ‘','• A',.,t,',:•',1,4•0 i;,'„--:: ':.Award• ,,',,AN,-,,, low r.yAingtop„....,, o, *„,,,... . . iC INJAt'i44,15 Bid„, , ', alternate4,1 1;,,,i.;,!,,,,,::hito,biliaci a.: 4-,,,,viiive ,i,:,-,00uNc- ,_.'.. .,.CONCUR 4',,Fs.,,,:;-?4,'",,,,,.-•tl,".-!;'3ai,,,,;,,3,Apvi,;-,,Y4,,. ...:,','..1'.'t,h4.,:,:•;:idoottlptv.,..2...9.,44,,,,,,„.c.y..„,,.. ,,c,j.P!r-- e.voigm.,x,s;EcONvi-:',4p11”,, 0-,,,;...,(-.)•,:-,: -.•-:-i,.. •'`:_i-,z4.•,-:t;i•:i;i,',.,•:','•iv;;';',..'.:''-f,,:i..c.iig,05,9 4,,4•;,,,,,,,,q,,, ,-* I•,,; i:,14zt:,1040-4;m7is_-,',g;,..,,..,p-:::7'1-3: , , 4'-'44.1i!':".cAftioveu,:,;11p4,;), ...7:-!,;„•,- ,a;lizaitio.,..,,,,,w„,,,0.7v.,,:.„,,,,:,,.:, ,,.„,,.,,.:,And:Ap4,4;q 7k',,J,,,,,,?,.,,„, - f-i,,r!4,,oc-.r.,,!.%,:r,o„,.,,;,,i.,„„v„,r5.,,.:, r,„.,-,:,-.,-,,,.„_7„ 1 THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 2 o pp ® CHARLES J. DELAURENTIat MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER cci O Q,L. RICK BEELER , 235-2593D, Q4TED SEPS ` O February 22, 1978 Members, Renton City Council Renton, Washington RE: R-114-77, Kohl Excavating, Inc. Dear Members of Council: Attached is the Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the referenced rezone request, dated February 15, 1978. The appeal period for the application expires on March 1, 1978, and the report is being forwarded to you for review by the Planning and Development Committee following the seven day period from the date of publication. The complete file will be transmitted to the City Clerk on March 2, 1978, and will be placed on the Council agenda on March 13, 1978. If you require additional assistance or information regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Sin -- :- Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner cc: Planning Department City Clerk Attachment RECEIVED FEB 2 21978 CITY COUNCIL RENTON, WA February 15, 1978 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: Kohl Excavating, Inc. FILE NO. R-114-77 LOCATION: Property is located between 80th Avenue South and S.W. 3rd Place; north of S.W. Sunset Boulevard. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests a rezone from G,' General Classification District; to R-2, Residence District in anticipation of future development of the site with four-plexes. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval with conditions and restrictive RECOMMENDATION:covenants. Hearing Examiner: Approval of rezone to R-1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received by the REPORT:Examiner on January 17, 1978. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on January 24, 1978 at 9:55 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1, and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #2: King County Assessor's Map Exhibit #3: Site Map In response to several requests from parties in attendance for continuance of the hearing because proper, timely notification of the hearing was not received, the Examiner advised that he would proceed with the testimony of the applicant and parties of record and consider the matter of continuance later in the hearing. He then called for a recess at 10:10 a.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:30 a.m. The Examiner submitted the following exhibits which he summarized for the record: Exhibit #4: Affidavit of Publication, dated January 10 and January 13, 1978. Exhibit #5: Letter from Planning Department regarding Notice ,of Application Acceptance and Public Hearing Date, dated January 10, 1978. Mr. Smith advised that proper notice of the public hearing had been posted and published according to legal requirements. The Examiner asked the applicant if he concurred in Exhibit #1. Responding was: Ivan Christianson 3330 East Valley Road Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Christianson indicated his concurrence in the report. He advised that because of a previous fill operation on the site, construction of apartment houses was the only feasible development for the proposal. He submitted site maps including grading plan and topography which the Examiner labeled as Exhibit #6. R-114-77 Page Two Mr. Christianson designated on Exhibit #6 the location of the buildable portion of the site and proposed parking areas. The Examiner asked for further testimony in support of the application. Responding was: Robert Kenkman Benton McCarthy Realty Co. 924 Bronson Way South Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Kenkman reported that because of the proximity of the site to S.W. Sunset Boulevard, a state highway, construction and sale of single family residences was not feasible, and reported that the subject property had been improved by removal of blackberry bushes through clearing and filling operations. He restated Mr. Christianson's concern regarding location of buildings on the site in relationship to the existing filled canyon, and requested assistance from the city in negotiating a reduced speed limit on Sunset Boulevard with the State Highway Department as well as water pressure readings for fire flow by the Fire Department. He advised that the site would accommodate seven residential units, and felt that the request for 11 to 13 townhouse units would not increase density excessively in creating significant negative impact to the surrounding residential areas. U The Examiner asked for further testimony in support of the application. There was no response. The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition to the request. Responding was: Virginia Shinn 1124 S.W. Sunset Boulevard Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Shinn reported that she is an adjacent resident to the east of the site, and requested continuance of the hearing due to lack of receipt'of proper notification of the public hearing on the subject application. Responding was: S. E. Eastman 317 Powell Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Eastman reported residing directly across the street from the proposed development. He objected to increased density of an apartment-type building visually impacting his view because of the elevation of the land. Responding was: Pat Texeira 1013 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Texeira requested continuance of the public hearing for a period of two weeks due to lack of proper notice. The Examiner explained legal procedures for publication of public hearings, noting that the law does not require individual notification, but posting and publishing required. In response to Mr. Texeira's inquiry regarding requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement upon commencement of fill operations on the site, Mr. Kenkman reported that EIS review was accomplished and a bond posted by the owner. Mr. Texeira also inquired about installation of drainage on the site. The Examiner deferred the inquiry to Mr. Smith for response later in the hearing. Responding was: Wayne Kappenman 1004 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 Referring to Item G of Exhibit #1, Mr. Kappenman noted certain discrepancies in designation of distances to the site from existing schools and inquired about Traffic Engineering staff review of the rezone on the routing schedule attached to Exhibit #1. He felt that additional traffic from the proposal would have definite impact upon existing residential areas and also objected to lack of receipt of notification for the public hearing. Responding was: Mrs. Nielson 13475 81st South Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Nielson reported that she was aware of notification posted on the property one week prior to the hearing but objected that proper notice had not been received by mail. R-114-77 Page Three She objected to construction of apartments because of potential increased vandalism and visual impact, and indicated preference for construction of mini-storage units on the site. In response to •the Examiner's inquiry.regarding completion of drainage plan review, Mr. Smith reported that•plans are not required for submittal of the rezone request, but that complete review would be made by the Building Division and the Planning Department at the time of construction. The Examiner inquired of parties in attendance for an estimate of time required to prepare testimony for a subsequent continued public hearing. Following discussion, it was agreed that a two-week period would be sufficient, and the hearing was continued by the Examiner to February 7, 1978 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers. The Examiner advised participants of procedures for the public hearing, encouraging unrepetitious testimony. given by appointed representatives of the residential area and submittal of letters and petitions signed by residents who may not be able to attend. In response to Mr. Eastman's inquiry regarding availability of meeting rooms for the purpose of organizing input from residents, the Examiner suggested contacting either the Renton Public Library or elementary schools in the vicinity of the neighborhood for utilization of conference rooms. Mr. Smith noted the receipt of a long-distance telephone call this date from Mike R. Struznik, 318 Powell Avenue S.W. , Renton, WA, indicating his opposition to the request for rezone and stating his preference for maintaining the area for single-family residences. The report from Willis Roberts, secretary, containing this information was labeled Exhibit #7 by the Examiner. The Examiner invited all parties of record to contact the Public Works and Planning Departments to acquire additional information or review maps or drainage plans. The Examiner asked for additional comments. Since there were none, the hearing on Item #R-114-77 was continued until February 7, 1978 at 9:00 a.m. Time: 11:05 a.m. CONTINUATION HEARING OF ITEM #R-114-77: The hearing on Item #R-114-77 which was continued from January 24, 1978 was reopened bytheExamineronFebruary7, 1978 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. The Examiner asked the applicant if he wished to make additions• to the record. The applicant, Mr. Christianson, declined to•comment until further testimony from partiesinattendancewasreceived. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for revisions or modifications to Exhibit #1. Mr. Smithindicatedthatbasedupontestimonyreceivedattheprevioushearing, comments would be submitted following further input from the residents in attendance. The Examiner asked for testimony in support of the application. There was no response.The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition to the application. Mr. Pat Texeira responded with a petition containing 115 signatures and a Kroll map designating existingresidencesofeachpetitionerinrelationshiptothesubjectsite. The petition, which was read by Mr. Texeira, and the map were labeled .Exhibit.#8 and #9; respectively, bytheExaminer. The petition expressed opposition to the rezone by adjacent residentsbecauseofincompatibilityoftheproposedzonetosurroundingzoning; creation of aspot" zone; increase of existing heavy traffic on S.W. Sunset Boulevard and unsafe access onto that highway; and the possibility of costs of installation of additional utility services being incurred by existing residents. The Examiner asked for additional testimony in opposition to the request. Mr. S. E. Eastman expressed .concern that the proposed site would be unsuitable for prospective renters because of noise pollution from heavy traffic on S.W. Sunset Boulevards {would create an unsafe environment for children because of heavy traffic and,existence of transient element near railroad tracks; and the development wou]fd increase noise impact to Mr. Eastman's residence. He submitted a tape cassette which recorded the noise from • Sunset Highway traffic at various times of the day and evening to demonstrate existingnoisepollutioninthearea. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding thelocationfromwhichtherecordingwasmade, Mr. Eastman designated a position near the center of the subject site. The tape cassette was labeled Exhibit #10 and a copy ofMr. Eastman's testimony was ,labeled Exhibit #11 by the Examiner. The Examiner asked for additional testimony in'opposition to the request. Mr. Wayne Kappenman entered a letter from Mrs. Virginia Shinn. The letter, labeled Exhibit #12 R-114-77 Page Four by the Examiner and subsequently read by Mr. Kappenman, contained objections to the application based upon unsafe access from Sunset Boulevard to the site; revision of existing traffic patterns at taxpayers' expense; possible access from the proposed development onto S.W. 3rd Place, an inadequate, dangerous street; existing and future noise pollution; and unsafe conditions for children. Mr. Kappenman questioned fill permit applications and environmental review relating to the property and advised that King County had no record of such review. He questioned the location of a previously existing creek on the site and expressed concerns regarding drainage and settling of the land. The Examiner advised that the fill permit and environmental review of the site by King County was a moot point and that discussion at the public hearing should be restricted to aspects of the rezone only. He also noted that subjects of drainage and settling of the land would be reviewed during the application for a building permit, and proposed density on the site reviewed during the special permit process. Mr. Eastman reported that S.W. Sunset Boulevard was originally constructed on filled property and has a history of settling, moving and causing further expenditure of highway department monies for repairs because of its unstable condition. In response to Mr. Texeira's inquiries relating to county permits and subsequent annexation of the subject site into the city, the Examiner advised that discussion at the hearing should be restricted to the subject of the rezone. Mr. Texeira then reviewed the Planning Department analysis, Exhibit #1, and expressed objections to statements relating to consistency of the rezone to R-2 with existing areas in the vicinity of the subject site; criteria for rezone based upon location of the site in an area surrounded by three streets and extension of the site between twoSexisting streets; the unsuitability of the site for R-2 zoning if the same conditions exist for R-1 zoning; existence of R-2 and B-1 zoning a distance of 1/4 mile from the subject site not being applicable to the request; and statements regarding the probability of the development upgrading the surrounding area and increasing opportunity for social interaction were not proper judgments for the Planning Department to make. The Examiner asked for further tesimony in opposition. Responding was: William Nielson 13475 81st South Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Nielson was sworn by the Examiner. He objected'to the proposed rezone because of negative visual impact; possible depreciation of his home; additional traffic noise; potential vandalism and possible lack of maintenance of the proposed multiple dwelling units. The Examiner explained the procedure for special permit application if the rezone were approved which would provide residents an opportunity to participate in site plan reivew, landscaping, buffers and screening provisions. Responding was: Velma L. Donahue 1085 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Donahue was sworn by the Examiner. She reported objections to the proposal because of potential requirement for improvements in the streets, installation of sidewalks and curbs, and increased utility services which would be the tax responsibility of the existing residents. Responding was: Rudy Seppi 1036 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Seppi was sworn by the Examiner. He indicated an increase of traffic in recent years and objected to the rezone as not being in the best interest of the residents of the City of Renton or Earlington Hill. The Examiner asked for further testimony in opposition. There was no response. The Examiner then asked the applicant for response to comments relating to issues raised by parties in opposition. Mr. Christianson indicated that the application was for a rezone at the present time and plans for construction had not yet been formulated. He emphasized that conformance to all requirements of governmental applications and permits had been properly met, although he indicated that he was not aware of the existence of a creek on the property. Mr. Robert Kenkman advised that he possessed a seven-page King County Environmental Impact Statement in response to Mr. Kappenman's previous testimony. He stated his opinion that contrary to comments made by residents, the proposed rezone R-114-77 Page Five would benefit the existing surrounding area in providing a buffer for noise with effective landscaping and buffering, and stressed that the subject of the hearing wastherezonerequestandnotpotentialstructuresonthesite. Mr. Kappenman submitted a copy of the King County fill permit, dated May 3, 1974, for the subject site. The permit was labeled Exhibit #13 by the Examiner. The Examiner asked for further testimony. Mrs. Linda Texeira questioned Mr. Kenkman's financial interest in the property, and advised that the existence of the creek on the site was documented on the applicant's fill permit, Exhibit #13. Mr. Kappenman asked Mr. Smith for the allowable density on the subject site if the rezone were approved. Mr. Smith requested reservation of his response until summation by the department at the conclusion of the hearing. The Examiner advised that the allowable density in an R-2 zone is 11 units per acre, but density is dependent upon various factors and considerations during the special permit process. Mr. Texeira requested a copy of the Environmental Impact Statement referenced by Mr. Kenkman. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding specific review of the subject property during the last area-wide zoning and land use analysis, Mr. Smith reported that the last analysis was accomplished prior to annexation of the subject property into the City of Renton, and that certain physical improvements had occurred in- the area since the subject analysis. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith to comment regarding the timing of the proposal in relationship to development occurring on either side of the site. Mr. Smith responded that because of certain elements in the area such as the proximity of the site to S.W. Sunset Boulevard, recent multiple family development along S.W. Sunset Boulevard in the city and the county, and installation of sewer and water utilities, the rezone was appropriately timed. He reported alternatives such as lessening density between the single family residences and low density multiple family proposal, platting the property into 5 or 6 single family residence lots, or rezoning the property to SR-2 which would control lot size. He noted that the question of proper fire flow should be reviewed prior to any development, and explained impacts of traffic and access proposals for all alternatives. He reported that because of the physical constraints of the property due to the previous fill operation, the buildable portion of the site would be limited to the west 150 feet which would seriously hamper development to the full potential of the R-2 zone and recommended placement of 6 to 8 dwelling units on the subject site in that zoning category. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding environmental review of fill content and operation and noise studies on the site by the department, Mr. Smith advised that the. applicant possessed a valid fill permit which required compliance by the county although the city would review specific details of that process during application for building permit, and that noise studies had not occurred. Mrs. Texeira submitted a memorandum from the King County Building Division to Jim. Hanson, Renton Building Division, dated January 20, 1976, regarding release of bonds for the subject property. The memorandum was labeled Exhibit #14 by the Examiner. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding release of the bonds, Mr. Christianson indicated that a release had been requested of the city, but he was uncertain if the bonds had been released to date. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for a final recommendation from the Planning Department on the subject application. Mr. Smith reiterated previous comments regarding alternatives for zoning, i.e. R-2, SR-2, or residential platting, which would affect density, access', noise control, landscaping, height control and fencing. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding maximum building height, Mr. Smith indicated a standard residential height of 35 feet. The Examiner commended the parties in attendance for an organized presentation. Mr. Texeira encouraged the Examiner to consider the impact to the human element from the proposed rezone during his review. The Examiner asked for further comments. Since there were none, the hearing on Item #R-114-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10:30 a.m. R-114-77 Page Six FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The request is for approval of a rezone of 1.3 acres from G to R-2. 2. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter and is hereby attached as Exhibit #1 and incorporated in this report by reference as set forth in full therein. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended by R.C.W. 43.21.C. , a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required lot area and dimension requirements of Section 4-708 of Title IV, Ordinance No. 1628, Code of General Ordinances. 7. The site was annexed into the city in 1975. This site was apparently not specifically considered in preceding land use or area zoning analysis (Section 4-3014. (A) ) . Possibly in 1971 some consideration was given to the general area during review of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. 8. Since the last area zoning and land use analysis the site was filled to the approximate level of S.W. Sunset Boulevard, and some storm drainage provisions were made on the site. Utilities have existed on the site for several years prior to annexation of the site. (Section 4-3014. (C) ) . 9. At the northwest corner of the site exists a substantial ground elevation difference from the remainder of the site which possesses a gradual, slight slope. At this corner the ground creates a bank which forms the ground elevation for the house immediately northwest of the site. 10. Access to the site is available on S.W. Sunset Boulevard or S.W. 3rd Place (81st Avenue South) . No testimony from the Traffic Engineering Division was given regarding either of these access points. 11. The existing single family residence north of and at the approximate middle of the site is at the approximate same ground elevation as the subject site. Other homes in the immediate vicinity lie above the elevation of the site. 12. No multifamily zoning exists adjacent to the site or in close proximity to the site. The nearest multifamily zones are around 1/4 mile westerly and easterly of the site. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates only the southwesterly approximate 25% of the site as low density multifamily and the remainder is designated as single family. 13. Land fill that was recently completed exists over all but the westerly approximate one-half of the site. Testimony was given that the easterly one-half of the site would be suitable for only parking but not for structures. The applicant intends to locate the dwelling units on the westerly one-half of the site. Per Exhibit #4 the King County Department of Community and Environmental Development in January of 19.76 requested from the City of Renton final review of the landfill prior to release of performance bonds associated with the landfill permit, Exhibit #13. It was not shown that the City of Renton had provided King County with this final review at the time of the hearing nor was it shown that the applicant had received the released performance bonds from King County. The site area totals around 1.3 acres. If approximately one-half of the site will not support structures, then perhaps 0.65 acres would remain for buildings. The existing G (single family) zoning would allow one single family home. The requested R-2 (duplex) zoning would permit a maximum of 14 multifamily units under a Special Permit. The Special Permit process of Section 4-708 might allow common-wall structures on this portion of the site, depending on the decision of the Hearing Examiner. R-114-77 Page Seven CONCLUSIONS:. 1. The Comprehensive Plan provides limited specific guidance regarding this site. Only about 25% of the site is indicated on the Land Use Map as potentially being suited for low density multifamily as opposed to the existing single family use. But the map is only a general guide to land use decisions (Section 2, Ordinance No. 2142) . The goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan take precedence over the map. The purpose of the plan is to promote ". . .orderly and well-planned use of the land within and adjacent to the City. " (Page 1, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area, July, 1965) Neighborhoods are to be as much as possible ". . .free of overcrowding influences, arterial traffic, and the unwarranted encroachment of commercial and industrial uses. . . " (Ibid, Page 4) . Within single family areas the density should not exceed six units per acre (Ibid, Page 5) . The ". . .coordinated development of undeveloped areas" is to be promoted (Ibid, Page 9) . In the Land Use Report, Comprehensive Plan, July, 1965, the following objectives apply: 1. Prevent blight by protecting residential and other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would contribute to premature decay and obsolescence, and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns (Page 17) . 4. Protect property values within the community for the benefit of its residents and property owners, through the effective control of land use and the enforcement and application of building and construction codes (Page 17) . 6. Encourage the development and utilization of land to its highest and best use in such a way as to promote the best interest of the community and contribute to its overall attractiveness and desirability as a place in which to work, shop, live and play (Page 18) . " 2. It seems appropriate and timely for the existing zoning of G (35,000 square foot minimum lot size) to change to a more appropriate zoning classification. The topography of the site has been drastically altered through the landfill operation Section 4-3014. (C) ) . Utilities common to the neighboring R-1 zoned properties are available. The property was probably not specifically considered in an area zoning and land use analysis (Section 4-3014. (A) ) . The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates that the property is potentially zoned for some low density multifamily but mostly single family uses (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . Goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan indicate the possibility of a change in the zoning (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . 3. No zoning district similar to the proposal or of more intensity than the proposal exist contiguous to or near the site, except for some King County zoning of ML on the south side of S.W. Sunset Boulevard. But a substantial slope exists on this ML property which is owned by some railroad companies. It is a reasonable assumption that any development within the ML zone would not be visible to or impact the subject site sufficiently to produce pressure for a change in land use or zoning. Therefore, the proposal on the surface implies a "spot zone" of only this island of property that is completely surrounded on three sides by several blocks of single family zoned properties. 4. The fact that, the site has not been given specific consideration in a land use or area zoning analysis implies that the Comprehensive. Plan Land Use Map designation of low density multifamily may be inapplicable in this instance. It can be assumed that the many factors considered in review of the Comprehensive Plan have not been applied to this specific property. Therefore, justification of the requested reclassification rests in the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives which were mentioned in the aforementioned Conclusion No. 1. 5. Two considerations of the Comprehensive Plan would indicate that the proposed rezone which constitues an island within a single family area should receive the area zoning and land use analysis.. The change in land use should be an " :. .orderly and well planned use of the land within and adjacent to the City." (Page 1, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area, July, 1965) . The proposal should represent ". . .coordinated development of undeveloped area. " (Ibid, Page 9) . It is difficult to find that the proposal meets these two guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan. R-114-77 Page Eight 6. A reclassification to R-1 would meet the density guideline of six units per acre Ibid, Page 5) and be more compatible with the existing residential neighborhood Objective No. 1, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, July, 1965, Page 17) . The R-2 would be less protective of the property values within the community, but would be of disproportionate benefit solely to the applicant (Ibid, Page 17, Objective No. 4) . On the other hand, R-1 would be preserving and continuing the residential community. The rezone to R-2 represents a "higher" use of the property than currently allowed under G zoning; however, it was not shown that this would be in the best interest of or contributary to the community (Ibid, Page 18, Objective No. 6) . Clearly the interest of the individual property owner/applicant has been demonstrated, but the best interests of the community in general would seem to be served by a reclassification to R-1. 7. Based upon the aforementioned conclusions, it seems that the Comprehensive Plan and existing conditions would justify a reclassification, of the property to R-1, the same zoning category of the surrounding single family properties. These surrounding properties encompass the site on three sides and interrelate directly with the proposal. Land uses of any greater intensity are quite removed from the property or, as in the case of the King County Ml zoned property across S.W. Sunset Boulevard, separated by a severe slope difference and the arterial. Any more intensive land use than R-1 would create an island in the midst of the existing R-1 neighborhood, thereby creating the distinct possibility of spot zoning. Sufficient legal precedence regarding spot zoning has occurred to justify avoiding such implications. At some time in the future the land use considerations affecting this site may change sufficiently to justify a more intense zoning category. The record established in this specific application did not justify the more intensive land use change. 8. With respect to the physical limitations of the site, a Planned Unit Development approach would be appropriate. Section 4-2708.1 (PUD) requires a minimum four- acre site in instances of undeveloped property; however, Section 4-2714 provides for exceptions to be requested. The effect of the PUD could be to achieve more development than possible under G zoning (approximately five additional units which is five times the density) without being penalized by the "unbuildable" landfill area. A traditional single family plat would be unable to allow for the landfill area. 9. Access is an important consideration in this application because of the heavy traffic on S.W. Sunset Boulevard and the limited capacity adjacent residential streets. It seems appropriate to limit access from the site. Testimony was not entered into the record by the Traffic Engineering Division as to whether access should or should not be limited.. During review of the specific PUD or plat of the site, the analysis and recommendation of the Division would be critical. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the record, testimony, findings and conclusions, it is the recommendation of the Examiner that the City Council approve a reclassification of the subject property from G to R-1. Such reclassification would be in the best interests of the community and public health, safety and welfare and in the most conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. ORDERED THIS 15th day of February, 1978. Or ma. mon 17 L.L. R'ck Be- er Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 15th day of February, 1978 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Ivan Christianson, 3230 E. Valley Rd. , Renton, WA 98055 Robert Kenkman, 924 Bronson Way S. , Renton, WA 98055 Virginia Shinn, 1124 S.W. Sunset Blvd. , Renton, WA 98055 S. E. Eastman, 317 Powell Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Mr. & Mrs. Pat Texeira, 1013 S.W. 3rd P1. , Renton, WA 98055 Wayne Kappenman, 1004 S.W. 4th Place, Renton, MA 98055 Mr. & Mrs. Wm. Nielsen, 13475 81st S. , Renton, WA 98055 R-114-77 Page Nine George Johnson, 316 Earlington Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Helen Williams, 314 Earlington Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Harold Edmunds, 285 Earlington Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Nancy Brown, 301 Earlington Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Albert Boechler, 1001 S.W. 3rd P1. , Renton, WA 98055 Mildred A. Jayne, 304 Powell Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 TRANSMITTED THIS 15th day of February, 1978 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Councilman George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before March 1, 1978. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen 14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as'he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the City Clerk's office, first floor of City Hall, or same may be purchased at cost in said office. i i a I A3i ,-- 4 - ,! e. a t a , L T 1 i"i IZ1ea a A.eY ,t .-, I ^'l _r tics` •t :, 1 F''_T r.g -.. w 0. o , U.* ; r— Y I ', i 'I t r y a-' 'i--11 -L_ -- :ril 5 1 t 11 IR tiIzI . ''• 1I;I,ia I jr,, :. 1 La - F+g T I 9: 1_ 1,, t I '- ; g .I I 1%;';'V' 17` ac !.e; cl , t'-,-1 ! I,I q I aka .L- r I _ i 1 l c------ TI I 1. . .I,Te , ,1 T r p pq T 1 `r.rt`__1-- I'I' f I I.;,! 1 Iz l \\4 'i I i ,r -, j `.`, L 211 I • l l`L\ ,.Y PCC99 I ; j of `-+,1.t_1 - - \, t i \ tJ] Fi T— I r--SE47r ,z a pp4 . a i,•, I.s ..._.- ' 6OO(1 1. I. I i l L e. . 2,5 rO L 'h3. PlP 21°1°6 - ---', 5- 1-L i''..--;.....--; ---- iirv`--I---Li I is i'1`• ' L51,C Y. '.7-; Q9-19"; ril;1-- '' ' . 1 '''. ' --\--"T''' 17 .1j- I •I 1 1 4,•. X',.~ ram'- i : / / 1'*'- 1'I i i -'fitl -- -/-' T.' ,,i ,:'n ', T 7L.... ,./,./.,,tir --- 1 L .•, Mef I 8 w 5-, I., i rr • Lr d 1' T :_ r _ 1 a t7 rr1 p,R, _ i•; 11 8 I. j. _ Lair Lr. i f` v3 T BL VD cyl? I A• A ° 500 r ,parr,, r C9r j y ?l ty r , I I e t IQ.r F• " 1 u io!1 LL. , 7Mi-TP\ 0.,,. , ‘.. , . . . ,,- REZONE : IVAN C . CHRISTIANSON, APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM G , GENERAL CLASSIFI- CATION DISTRICT, TO R-2 , MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE D STRICT , File No . R- 114-77 ; property located between, Avenue South and S. W. 3rd Place , north of S . W. Sunset Boulevard . N '51) MA? FIZOM R.Y.:4-irti5IT 4* i 1 LLLYSTK 471kJG l N.1 G COUNT O 031 LL -• // -' •op/ Vnfo741 a1v/ 'L. V, t15)(-1 'Vol I`0.l1s 119r9nS t :i eooz,I VVd25 Tircnlittri 14 OM gm, 7nt'd '1s VInVM-nri oioPviNv of 5 0 L.,.., 0 13 t.-3.„.., AC) g 127 slrwii 1410 0 b fn 4 , l7dcJ CPQbF - 1 m is tast#yof W v y 9 fi,7:se yv es s >4 Y"" S . 4,7 QueIP ti 0 Ms jfti r2i 0 II: ED UZ t' m 0 C3 AC ll_e b Ai a 41 7 .. 1 -,- 1!'" 1 may/ L` b M. j , y 0` MW. . . 4$"".4,,,r+Y., .,6z.-I.y,1:, a Soya-: _" Renton City Council 3/27/78 Page 3 OLD BUSINESS - Continued - ,Ways and Means Committee Report - Continued Fire Station portion of the Utility Tax set aside for fire equipment. MOVED BY . • Funding PERRY, SECOND SHANE, COUNCIL CONCUR. Councilman Clymer noted for clarification that funds are on hand, when fire equipment arrives . sufficient funds will have again accumulated. MOTION CARRIED. Renton Eagle' s At the request of Transportation Committee Chairwoman Shinpoch, it Letter re was MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND PERRY, THAT THE "LETTER FROM RENTON EAGLES Street Closure RE CLOSURE OF S. 3rd IN CONNECTION WITH RENTON LOOP TRAFFIC, BE TAKEN for Loop FROM THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AND REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. ROLL CALL.:4-AYE: CLYMER, SHINPOCH, STREDICKE, PERRY; 3-NO': .,. TRIMM, SHANE' AND THORPE. CARRIED. Utilities ' The Utilities Committee Chairman Shane presented committee report Committee Report noting review of request of Michael R. Mastro for a late-comer Latecomers' agreement in connection with the water main installed along N. 7th Agreement St. between Park Ave. N. and Garden Ave. N. The report recommended M. R. Mastro the Council concur in the late-comers' agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Olerl< to execute the agreement. MOVED BY SHANE.;-SECOND Water Plain TRIMM, COUNCIL CONCUR IN,.,REPORT. CARRIED. Public Safety Public Safety Committee Chairman Trim submitted committee report Committee Report recommending that the City' s policy of not providing funeral service , Funeral Escort remain unchanged. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND SHINPOCH, COUNCIL CONCUR Services IN THE COMMITTEE .RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. Automatic The committee report recommended adoption of the proposed resolution,;' .. Response between re King County Fire Protection. District No.. -40 and the City of • FD#40 & City Renton automatic response agreement. MOVED BY TRIMM, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMITTEE. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS • Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke submitted committee report;., Committee Report recommending second and final reading of an ordinance (first reading . , ,; ZIdinance #3206 3/20/78) rezoning property from.G to R-1 located 'north of SW Sunset , o^hl Rezone Blvd. between 80th Ave. S and SW 3rd Pl , known as the Kohl Excavating'. .'; , . R-114-77 Rezone. Following reading, MOVED BY STREDICKE , SECOND SHINPOCH, COUN- CIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES . CARRIED. Ordinance #32U7 The committee report reconnnended first, second and final readings Traffic Pattern of an ordinance changing the traffic pattern on $: 2nd St. from • S. 2nd, Main S to Mill Ave. S. to Main Ave. S. from one-way to two-way traffic. Follow- Rainier Ave. S. ing first reading, it was Moved by Stredicke, second Perry, advance. .:`,` 5 . ', o,. Westbound Only; ordinance for second and finaLreadings to accommodate building of S. 2nd, Mill S the downtown fire station. Council President Clymer requested two to Main Ave. S. lanes west bound to accommodate Renton Hill peak hour traffic. SUB- ' ' Two-Way Traffic STITUTE MOTION BY CLYMER, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL REFER ORDINANCE With BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK: ROLL CALL: 5-AYE: CLYMER, TRIMM, Two Westbound SHANE, STREDICKE, THORPE; 2-NO: SHINPOCH AND PERRY. CARRIED. MOVED ' Lanes BY SHANE, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL RECONSIDER AND NOT REFER TO COMMITTEE. - . Discussion ensued regarding legal free-left turn onto one-way street, MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND' PERRY, ADVANCE ORDINANCE •.,; .. TO SECOND AND FINAL READING. . CARRIED. Following readings of the the ordinance, it was MOVED BY .PERRY, SECOND SHANE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: 6-AYES: TRIMM, SHANE, ,SHINPOCH, STREDICKE, THORPE, PERRY; ONE-NO: CLYMER. MOTION CARRIED ADOPTING ORDINANCE. MOVED BY PERRY,. SECOND THORPE, ESTABLISH TRAFFIC PATTERN ON SOUTH SECOND STREET BETWEEN, MILL AVE. S. AND MAIN AVE. S. WITH AT LEAST TWO WESTBOUND LANES. CARRIED. First Reading The Ways and Means Committee report recommended first readings for . ; Richards & the following ordinances: Ordinance was read rezoning property from' ' Holmes Rezone G to MP located on Raymond St. SW between I-405 and SW 16th St. , known as the Richards and Holmes Rezone 122-78. MOVED BY. STREDICKE,.BY. STREDICKE„ O, R. R . SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL REFER ORDINANCE BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS . '. ;;.., 4. COMMITTEE . CARRIED. (Restrictive' Covenants filed. ) Ordinance #3208 Ordinance was read relating .to .Committees of the City Council and Council establishing procedure for standing committees for each calendar Committees year. Following reading,' MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL: • 2 ' ADVANCE ORDINANCE TO SECOND AND FINAL READINGS. CARRIED. Following readings, MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL ADOPT 'THE ORDI- NANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Pl eti 1 ©. z THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 z o op CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR ® LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER Ap C,+ L. RICK BEELER . 235-2593 P TED SEPI O February 22, 1978 Members, Renton City Council Renton, Washington RE: R-114-77, Kohl Excavating, Inc. Dear Members of Council: Attached is the Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the referenced rezone request, dated February 15, 1978. The appeal period for the application expires on March 1, 1978, and the report is being forwarded to you for review by the Planning and Development Committee following the seven day period from the date of publication. The complete file will be transmitted to the City Clerk on March 2, 1978, and will be placed on the Council agenda on March 13, 1978. If you require additional assistance or information regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Sinc -y, _____, 111 sin==gar .rrr •:wr-_.,,.,...t_....,_....,._......._.__ Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner cc: Planning Department City Clerk Attachment 4Z3455)\ t\j1, [n t 1978 1 RECEtoI 1N., - i r`. CITY of REN-.J— ? ce. v •, CLERK'S OFFICE 7 i THE CITY OF RENTON0CPZ MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 8 op CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER kr p L. RICK BEELER • 235-2593 4tED SEPS4O March 2, 1978 Mr. Ivan Christianson 3330 East Valley Road Renton, WA 98055 RE: R-114-77, Kohl Excavating, Inc. Dear Mr. Christianson: This is to notify you that the, above referenced request, which was approved to R-1 zoning as noted oh the Examiner's report of February 15, 1978, has not been appealed within the time period set by ordinance, and therefore, this application is being submitted to the City Clerk for transmittal to the City Council for final approval. You will receive notification of final approval upon adoption of an ordinance by the City Council. S' - Air , L. Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner cc: ,,,C •ity Clerk Planning Department 4 ° f I vA.i z THE CITY OF RENTON al ., MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 0 mm. CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR ® LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER O Q L. RICK BEELER . 235-25930" Fql. SE PS 0 February 22, 1978 Members, Renton City Council Renton, Washington RE: R-114-77, Kohl Excavating, Inc. Dear Members of Council: Attached is the Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the referenced rezone request, dated February 15, 1978. The appeal period for the application expires on March 1, 1978, and the report is being forwarded to you for review by the Planning arid Development Committee following the seven day period from the date of publication. The complete file will be transmitted to the City Clerk on March 2, 1978, and will be placed on the Council agenda on March 13, 1978. If you require additional assistance or information regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Si0 n .-' - ,. Ai Iw'°. Imo- aav+•c ..,.......___..........._.._.._ ....._, Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner cc: Planning Department City Clerk Attachment AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING State of Washington) County of King Marilyn J. Petersen being first duly sworn, upon oath disposes and states: That on the 15th day of February 19 78 , affiant deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below-entitled application or petition. Subscribed and sworn this \5- day of \&k-vav-,( 19 7 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Renton Application, Petition or Case: Kohl Excavating, Inc. , R-114-77 The m-inwtea contain a £Lot of the pantLea of necotd) y _ February 15, 1978 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE DARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: Kohl Excavating, Inc. FILE NO. R-114-77 LOCATION: Property is located between 80th Avenue South and S.W. 3rd Place; north of S.W. Sunset Boulevard. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests a rezone from G, General Classification District; to R-2, Residence District in anticipation of future development of the site with four-plexes. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval with conditions and restrictive RECOMMENDATION:covenants. Hearing Examiner: Approval of rezone to R-1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received by the REPORT:Examiner on January 17, 1978. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on January 24, 1978 at 9:55 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1, and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #2: King County Assessor's Map Exhibit #3: Site Map In response to several requests from parties in attendance for continuance of the hearing because proper, timely notification of the hearing was not received, the Examiner advised that he would proceed with the testimony of the applicant and parties of record and consider the matter of continuance later in the hearing. He ,then called for a recess at 10:10 a.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:30 a.m. The Examiner submitted the following exhibits which he summarized for the record: Exhibit #4: Affidavit of Publication, dated January 10 and January 13, 1978. Exhibit #5: Letter from Planning Department regarding Notice of Application Acceptance and Public Hearing Date, dated January 10, 1978. Mr. Smith advised that proper notice of the public hearing had been posted and published according to legal requirements. The Examiner asked the applicant if he concurred in Exhibit #1. Responding was: Ivan Christianson 3330 East Valley Road Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Christianson indicated his concurrence in the report. He advised that because of a previous fill operation on the site, construction of apartment houses was the only feasible development for the proposal. He submitted site maps including grading plan and topography which the Examiner labeled as Exhibit #6. R-114-77 Page Two Mr. Christianson designated on Exhibit #6 the location of the buildable portion of the site and proposed parking areas. The Examiner asked for further testimony in support of the application. Responding was: Robert Kenkman Benton McCarthy Realty Co. 924 Bronson Way South Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Kenkman reported that because of the proximity of the site to S.W.- Sunset Boulevard, a state highway, construction and sale of single family residences was not feasible, and reported that the subject property had been improved by removal of blackberry bushes through clearing and filling operations. He restated Mr. Christianson's concern regarding location of buildings on the site in relationship to the existing filled canyon, and requested assistance from the city in negotiating a reduced' speed limit on Sunset Boulevard with the State Highway Department as well as water pressure readings for fire flow by the Fire Department. He advised that the site would accommodate seven residential units, and felt that the request for 11 to 13 townhouse units would not increase density excessively in creating significant negative impact to the surrounding residential areas. The Examiner asked for further testimony in support of the application. There was no response. The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition to the request. Responding was: Virginia Shinn 1124 S.W. Sunset Boulevard Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Shinn reported that she is an adjacent resident to the east of the site, and requested continuance of the hearing due to lack of receipt of proper notification of the public hearing on the subject application. Responding was: S. E. Eastman 317 Powell Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Eastman reported residing directly across the street from the proposed development. He objected to increased density of an apartment-type building visually impacting his view because of the elevation of the land. Responding was: Pat Texeira 1013 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Texeira requested continuance of the public hearing for a period of two weeks due to lack of proper notice. The Examiner explained legal procedures for publication of public hearings, noting that the law does not require individual notification, but posting and publishing required. In response to Mr. Texeira's inquiry regarding requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement upon commencement of fill operations on the site, Mr. Kenkman reported that EIS review was accomplished and a bond posted by the owner. Mr. Texeira also inquired about installation of drainage on the site. The Examiner deferred the inquiry to Mr. Smith for response later in the hearing. Responding was: Wayne Kappenman 1004 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 Referring to Item G of Exhibit #1, Mr. Kappenman noted certain discrepancies in designation of distances to the site from existing schools and inquired about Traffic Engineering staff review of the rezone on the routing schedule attached to Exhibit #1. He felt that additional traffic from the proposal would have definite impact upon existing residential areas and also objected to lack of receipt of notification for the public hearing. Responding was: Mrs. Nielson 13475 81st South Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Nielson reported that she was aware of notification posted on the property one week prior to the hearing but objected that proper notice had not been received by mail. R-114-77 Page Three She objected to construction of apartments because of potential increased vandalism and visual impact, and indicated preference for construction of mini-storage units on the site. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding completion of drainage plan review, Mr. Smith reported that plans are not required for submittal of the rezone request, but that complete review would be made by the Building Division and the Planning Department at the time of construction. The Examiner inquired of parties in attendance for an estimate of time required to prepare testimony for a subsequent continued public hearing. Following discussion, it was agreed that a two-week period would be sufficient, and the hearing was continued by the Examiner to February 7, 1978 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers. The Examiner advised participants of procedures for the public hearing, encouraging unrepetitious testimony given by appointed representatives of the residential area and submittal of letters and petitions signed by residents who may not be able to attend. In response to Mr. Eastman's inquiry regarding availability of meeting rooms for the purpose of organizing input from residents, the Examiner suggested contacting either the Renton Public Library or elementary schools in the vicinity of the neighborhood for utilization of conference rooms. Mr. Smith noted the receipt of a long-distance telephone call this date from Mike R. Struznik, 318 Powell Avenue S.W. , Renton, WA, indicating his opposition to the request for rezone and stating his preference for maintaining the area for single-family residences. The report from Willis Roberts, secretary, containing this information was labeled Exhibit #7 by the Examiner. The Examiner invited all parties of record to contact the Public Works and Planning Departments to acquire additional information or review maps or drainage plans. The Examiner asked for additional comments. Since there were none, the hearing on Item#R-114-77 was continued until February 7, 1978 at 9:00 a.m. Time: 11:05 a.m. CONTINUATION HEARING OF ITEM #R-114-77: The hearing on Item #R-114-77 which was continued from January 24, 1978 was reopened by the Examiner on February 7, 1978 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. The Examiner asked the applicant if he wished to make additions to the record. The applicant, Mr. Christianson, declined to comment until further testimony from parties in attendance was received. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for revisions or modifications to Exhibit #1. Mr. Smith indicated that based upon testimony received at the previous hearing, comments would be submitted following further input from the residents in attendance. The Examiner asked for testimony in support of the application. There was no response. The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition to the application. Mr. Pat Texeira responded with a petition containing 115 signatures and a Kroll map designating existing residences of each petitioner in relationship to the subject site. The petition, which was read by Mr. Texeira, and the map were labeled Exhibit #8 and #9, respectively, by the Examiner. The petition expressed opposition to the rezone by adjacent residents because of incompatibility of the proposed zone to surrounding zoning; creation of a spot" zone; increase of existing heavy traffic on S.W. Sunset Boulevard and unsafe access onto that highway; and the possibility of costs of installation of additional utility services being incurred by existing residents. The Examiner asked for additional testimony in opposition to the request. Mr. S. E. Eastman expressed concern that the proposed site would be unsuitable for prospective renters because of noise pollution from heavy traffic on S.W. Sunset Boulevard; ;would create an unsafe environment for children because of heavy traffic and existence of transient element near railroad tracks; and the development would increase noise impact to Mr. Eastman's residence. He submitted a tape cassette which recorded the noise from Sunset Highway traffic at various times of the day and evening to demonstrate existing noise pollution in the area. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding the location from which the recording was made, Mr. Eastman designated a position near the center of the subject site. The tape cassette was labeled Exhibit #10 and a copy of Mr. Eastman's testimony was labeled Exhibit #11 by the Examiner. The Examiner asked for additional testimony in opposition to the request. Mr. Wayne Kappernman entered a letter from Mrs. Virginia Shinn. The letter, labeled Exhibit #12 R-114-77 Page Four by the Examiner and subsequently read by Mr. Kappenman, contained objections to the application based upon unsafe access from Sunset Boulevard to the site; revision of existing traffic patterns at taxpayers' expense; possible access from the proposed development onto S.W. 3rd Place, an inadequate, dangerous street; existing and future noise pollution; and unsafe conditions for children. Mr. Kappenman questioned fill permit applications and environmental review relating to the property and advised that King County had no record of such review. He questioned the location of a previously existing creek on the site and expressed concerns regarding drainage and settling of the land. The Examiner advised that the fill permit and environmental review of the . site by King County was a moot point and that discussion at the public hearing should be restricted to aspects of the rezone only. He also noted that subjects of drainage and settling of the land would be reviewed during the application for a building permit, and proposed density on the site reviewed during the special permit process. Mr. Eastman reported that S.W. Sunset Boulevard was originally constructed on filled property and has a history of settling, moving and causing further expenditure of highway department monies for repairs because of its unstable condition. In response to Mr. Texeira's inquiries relating to county permits and subsequent ,annexation of the subject site into the city, the Examiner advised that discussion at the hearing should be restricted to the subject of the rezone. Mr. Texeira then reviewed the Planning Department analysis, Exhibit #1, and expressed objections to statements relating to consistency of the rezone to R-2 with existing areas in the vicinity of the subject site; criteria for rezone based upon location of the site in an area surrounded by three streets and extension of the site between two existing streets; the unsuitability of the site for R-2 zoning if the same conditions exist for R-1 zoning; existence of R-2 and B-1 zoning a distance of 1/4 mile from the subject site not being applicable to the request; and statements regarding the probability of the development upgrading the surrounding area, and increasing opportunity for social interaction were not proper judgments for the Planning Department to make. The Examiner asked for further tesimony in opposition. Responding was: William Nielson 13475 81st South Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Nielson was sworn by the Examiner. He objected'to the proposed rezone because of negative visual impact; possible depreciation of his home; additional traffic noise; potential vandalism and possible lack of maintenance of the proposed multiple dwelling units. The Examiner explained the procedure for special permit application if the rezone were approved which would provide residents an opportunity to participate in site plan reivew, landscaping, buffers and screening provisions. Responding was: Velma L. Donahue 1085 S.W. 3rd Place Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Donahue was sworn by the Examiner. She reported objections to the proposal because of potential requirement for improvements in the streets, installation of sidewalks and curbs, and increased utility services which would be the tax responsibility of the existing residents. Responding was: Rudy Seppi 1036 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Seppi was sworn by the Examiner. He indicated an increase of traffic in recent years and objected to the rezone as not being in the best interest of the residents of the City of Renton or Earlington Hill. The Examiner asked for further testimony in opposition. There was no response. The Examiner then asked the applicant for response to comments relating to issues raised by parties in opposition. Mr. Christianson indicated that the application was for a rezone at the present time and plans for construction had not yet been formulated. He emphasized that conformance to all requirements of governmental applications and permits had been properly met, although he indicated that he was not aware of the existence of a creek on the property. Mr. Robert Kenkman advised that he possessed a seven-page King County Environmental Impact Statement in response to Mr. Kappenman's previous testimony. He stated his opinion that contrary to comments made by residents, the proposed rezone R-114-77 Page Five would benefit the existing surrounding area in providing a buffer for noise with effective landscaping and buffering, and stressed that the subject of the hearing wastherezonerequestandnotpotentialstructuresonthesite. Mr. Kappenman submitted a copy of the• King County fill permit, dated May 3, 1974, for the subject site. The permit was labeled Exhibit #13 by the Examiner. The Examiner asked for further testimony. Mrs. Linda Texeira questioned Mr. Kenkman's financial interest in the property, and advised that the existence of the creek on the site was documented on the applicant's fill permit, Exhibit #13. Mr. Kappenman asked Mr. Smith for the allowable density on the subject site if the rezone were approved. Mr. Smith requested reservation of his response until summation by the department at the conclusion of the hearing. The Examiner advised that the allowable density in an R-2 zone is 11 units per acre, but density is dependent upon various factors and considerations during the special permit process. Mr. Texeira requested a copy of the Environmental Impact Statement referenced by Mr. Kenkman. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding specific review of the subject propertyduringthelastarea-wide zoning and land use analysis, Mr. Smith reported that the last analysis was accomplished prior to annexation of the subject property into the City of Renton, and that certain physical improvements had occurred in the area since the subject analysis. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith to comment regarding the timing of the proposal in relationship to development occurring on either side of the site. Mr. Smith responded that because of certain elements in the area such as the proximity of the site to S.W. Sunset Boulevard, recent multiple family development along S.W. Sunset Boulevard in the city and the county, and installation of sewer and water utilities, the rezone was appropriately timed. He reported alternatives such as lessening density between the single family residences and low density multiple family proposal, platting the property into 5 or 6 single family residence lots, or rezoning the property to SR-2 which would control lot size. He noted that the question of proper fire flow should be reviewed prior to any development, and explained impacts of traffic and access proposals for all alternatives. He reported that because of the physical constraints of the property due to the previous fill operation, the buildable portion of the site would be limited to the west 150 feet which would seriously hamper development to the full potential of the R-2 zone and recommended placement of 6 to 8 dwelling units on the subject site in that zoning category. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding environmental review of fill content and operation and noise studies on the site by the department, Mr. Smith advised that the applicant possessed a valid fill permit which required compliance by the county although the city would review specific details of that process during application for building permit, and that noise studies had not occurred. Mrs. Texeira submitted a memorandum from the King County Building.Division to Jim Hanson, Renton Building Division, dated January 20, 1976, regarding release of bonds for the subject property. The memorandum was labeled Exhibit #14 by the Examiner. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding release of the bonds, Mr. Christianson indicated that a. release had been requested of the city, but he was uncertain if the bonds had been released to date. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for a final recommendation from the Planning Department on the subject application. Mr. Smith, reiterated previous comments regarding alternatives for zoning, i.e. R-2, SR-2, or residential platting, which would affect density, access, noise control, landscaping, height control and fencing. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding maximum building height, Mr. Smith indicated a standard residential height of 35 feet. The Examiner commended the parties in attendance for an organized presentation. Mr. Texeira encouraged the Examiner to consider the impact to the human element from the proposed rezone during his review. The Examiner asked for further comments. Since there were none, the hearing on Item #R-114-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10:30 a.m. R-114-77 Page Six FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The request is for approval of a rezone of 1.3 acres from G to R-2. 2. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter and is hereby attached as Exhibit #1 and incorporated in this report by reference as set forth in full therein: 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended by R.C.W. 43.21.C. , a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required lot area and dimension requirements of Section 4-708 of Title IV, Ordinance No. 1628, Code of General Ordinances. 7 7. The site was annexed into the city in 1975. This site was '.apparently not specifically considered in preceding land use or area zoning analysis (Section 4-3014. (A) ) . Possibly in 1971 some consideration was given to the general area during review of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. 8. Since the last area zoning and land use analysis the site was filled to the approximate level of S.W. Sunset Boulevard, and some storm drainage provisions were made on the site. Utilities have existed on the site for several years prior to annexation of the site. (Section 4-3014. (C) ) . 9. At .the northwest corner of the site exists a substantial ground elevation difference from the remainder of the site which possesses a gradual, slight slope. At this corner the ground creates a bank which forms the ground elevation for the house immediately northwest of the site. 10. Access to the site is available on S.W._ Sunset Boulevard or. S.W. 3rd Place (81st Avenue South) . No testimony from the Traffic Engineering Division was given regarding either of these access points. 11. The existing single family residence north of and at the approximate middle of the site is at ,the approximate same ground elevation as the subject site. Other homes in the immediate vicinity lie above the elevation of the site. 12. No multifamily zoning exists adjacent to the site or in close proximity to the site. The nearest multifamily zones are around 1/4 mile westerly and easterly of the site. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates only the southwesterly approximate 25% of the site as low density multifamily and the remainder is designated as single family. 13. Land fill that was recently completed exists over all but the westerly approximate one-half of the site. Testimony was given that the easterly one-half of the site would be suitable for only parking but not for structures. The applicant intends to locate the dwelling units on the westerly one-half of the site. Per Exhibit #4 the King County Department of Community and Environmental Development in January of 1976 requested from the City of Renton final review of the landfill prior to release of performance bonds associated with the landfill permit, Exhibit #13. It was not shown that the City of Renton had provided King County with this final review at the time of the hearing nor was it shown that the applicant had received the released performance bonds from King County. The site area totals around 1.3 acres. If approximately one-half of the site will not support structures, then perhaps 0.65 acres would remain for buildings. The existing G (single family) zoning would allow one single family home. The requested R-2 (duplex) zoning would permit a maximum of 14 multifamily units under a Special Permit. The Special Permit process of Section 4-708 might allow common-wall structures on this portion of the site, depending on the decision of the Hearing Examiner. R-114-77 Page Seven CONCLUSIONS: 1. The Comprehensive Plan provides limited specific guidance regarding this site. Only about 25% of the site is indicated on the Land Use Map as potentially being suited for low density multifamily as opposed to the existing single family use.But the map is only a general guide to land use decisions (Section 2, Ordinance No.2142) . The goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan take precedence over the map. The purpose of the plan is to promote ". . .orderly and well-planned use of the land within and adjacent to the City." (Page 1, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area, July, 1965) Neighborhoods are to be as much as possible ". . .free of overcrowdinginfluences, arterial traffic, and the unwarranted encroachment of commercial and industrial uses. . . " (Ibid, Page 4) . Within single family areas the density shouldnotexceedsixunitsperacre (Ibid, Page 5) . The ". . .coordinated development of undeveloped areas" is to be promoted (Ibid, Page 9) . In the Land Use Report, Comprehensive Plan, July, 1965, the following objectives apply: 1. Prevent blight by protecting residential and other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would contribute to premature decay and obsolescence, and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns (Page 17) . 4. Protect property values within the community for the benefit of its residents and property owners, through the effective control of land use and the enforcement and application of building and construction codes (Page 17) . 6. Encourage the development and utilization of land to its highest and best use in such a way as to promote the best interest of the community and contribute to its overall attractiveness and desirability as a place in which to work, shop, live and play (Page 18) ." 2. It seems appropriate and timely for the existing zoning of' G (35,000 square foot minimum lot size) to change to a more appropriate zoning classification. The topography of the site has been drastically altered through the landfill operation Section 4-3014. (C) ) . Utilities common to the neighboring R-1 zoned properties are available. The property was probably not specifically considered in an area zoning and land use analysis (Section 4-3014. (A) ) . The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates that the property is potentially zoned for some low density multifamily but mostly single family uses (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . Goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan indicate the possibility of a change in the zoning (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . 3. No zoning district similar to the proposal or of more intensity than the proposal exist contiguous to or near the site, except for some King County zoning of ML on - the south side of S.W. Sunset Boulevard. But a substantial slope exists on this ML property which is owned by some railroad companies. It is a reasonable assumption that any development within the ML zone would not be visible to or impact the subject site sufficiently to produce pressure for a change in land use or zoning. Therefore, the proposal on the surface implies a "spot zone" of only this island of property that is completely surrounded on three sides by several blocks of single family zoned properties. 4. The fact that the site has not been given specific consideration in a land use or area zoning analysis implies that the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation of low density multifamily may be inapplicable in this instance. It can be assumed that the many factors considered in review of the Comprehensive Plan have not been applied to this specific property. Therefore, justification of the requested reclassification rests in the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives which were mentioned in the aforementioned Conclusion No. 1. 5. Two considerations of the Comprehensive Plan would indicate that the proposed rezone which constitues an island within a single family area should receive the area zoning and land use analysis. The change in land use should be an ". . .orderly and well planned use of the land within and adjacent to the City." (Page 1, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area, July, 1965) . The proposal should represent ". . .coordinated development of undeveloped area." (Ibid, Page 9) . It is difficult to find that the proposal meets these two guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan. R-114-77 Page Eight 6. A reclassification to R-1 would meet the density guideline of six units per acre Ibid, Page 5) and be more compatible with the existing residential neighborhood Objective No. 1, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, July, 1965, Page 17) . The R-2 would be less protective of the property values within the community, but would be of disproportionate benefit solely to the applicant (Ibid, Page 17, Objective No. 4) . On the other hand, R-1 would be preserving and continuing the residential community. The rezone to R-2 represents a "higher" use of the property than currently allowed under G zoning; however, it was not shown that this would be in the best interest of or contributary to the community (Ibid, Page 18, Objective No. 6) . Clearly the interest of the individual property owner/applicant has been demonstrated, but the best interests of the community in general would seem to be served by a reclassification to R-1. 7. Based upon the aforementioned conclusions, it seems that the Comprehensive Plan and existing conditions would justify a reclassification of the property to R-1, the same zoning category of the surrounding single family properties. These surrounding properties encompass the site on three sides and interrelate directly with the proposal. Land uses of any greater intensity are quite removed from the property or, as in the case of the King County M1 zoned property across S.W. Sunset Boulevard, separated by a severe slope difference and the arterial. Any more intensive land use than R-1 would create an island in the midst of the existing R-1 neighborhood, thereby creating the distinct possibility of spot zoning. Sufficient legal precedence regarding spot zoning has occurred to justify avoiding such implications. At some time in the future the land use considerations affecting this site may change sufficiently to justify a more intense zoning category. The record established in this specific application did not justify the more intensive land use change. 8. With respect to the physical limitations of the site, a Planned Unit Development approach would be appropriate. Section 4-2708.1 (PUD) requires a minimum four- acre site in instances of undeveloped property; however, Section 4-2714 provides for exceptions to be requested. The effect of the PUD could be to achieve more development than possible under G zoning (approximately five additional units which is five times the density) without being penalized by the "unbuildable" landfill area. A traditional single family plat would be unable to allow for the landfill area. 9. Access is an important consideration in this application because of the heavy traffic on S.W. Sunset Boulevard and the limited capacity adjacent residential streets. It seems appropriate to limit access from the site. Testimony was not entered into the record by the Traffic Engineering Division as to whether access should or should not be limited. During review of the specific PUD or plat of the site, the analysis and recommendation of the Division would be critical. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the record, testimony, findings and conclusions, it is the recommendation of the Examiner that the City Council approve a reclassification of the subject property from G to R-1. Such reclassification would be in the best interests of the community and public health, safety and welfare and in the most conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. IllirORDERED THIS 15th day of February, 1978. 010,ill R ck Be- er Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 15th day of February, 1978 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Ivan Christianson, 3230 E. Valley Rd. , Renton, WA 98055 Robert Kenkman, 924 Bronson Way S. , Renton, WA 98055 Virginia Shinn, 1124 S.W. Sunset Blvd. , Renton, WA 98055 S. E. Eastman, 317 Powell Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Mr. & Mrs. Pat Texeira, 1013 S.W. 3rd P1. , Renton, WA 98055 Wayne Kappenman, 1004 S.W. 4th Place, Renton, MA 98055 Mr. & Mrs. Wm. Nielsen, 13475 81st S. , Renton, WA 98055 R-114-77 Page Nine George Johnson, 316 Earlington Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Helen Williams, 314 Earlington Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Harold Edmunds, 285 Earlington Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Nancy Brown., 301 Earlington Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Albert Boechler, 1001 S.W. 3rd Pl. , Renton, WA 98055 Mildred A. Jayne, 304 Powell Ave. S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 TRANSMITTED THIS 15th day of February, 1978 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Councilman George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before March 1, 1978. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen 14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the City Clerk's office, first floor of City Hall, or same may be purchased at cost in said office. 5 ti r ,. l' r 1, '`-• r r. n rr..'• -, 6 3 .•" mil w e r -.CL ? i. s . . . .,,.., ..,.. . . , !..t i -----7. 1 0 s 41. ;IA — r- 1 , ...3 f - L., 1 f 794. 1 y i 2'2 v I lS e ,1 , s '.l• 1 ---_T- rr' o-l' i,- s - s pl •7_, . - . .' 1 .. ' 24 1 k" o" L.G-600( Mt 9 II• . ,• i r i',aE' NE ' eq /`h/\/7 p, ` Z L jfO l5 L_I_ I . • . _ _-L ' 3 • II t . I 1 1I { 1,12_yi.K/l )6_ __y( O/ I 1- I ii- Ii a`t.-' • 9 7i14 I II •L1.L _ . ram. 7 . • I. I. / T FrT i r-pi'`• L. OA ; 8 0 M14.- ir : V li.,r0-2 - /4 , ' M i ; 1-- N. , .„ , 4/ III I sUn/5ET BLVD PS' 1 1 7 Ki il. 4,,-.-7,-,,-; s t i y o cf liy r w fW 1 l I A r '! 1 7) 1/J 1 I. 5 w 7rH — mf I t, rpL. .I M F• T D REZONE: IVAN C . CHRISTIANSON , APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM G, GENERAL CLASSIFI - CATTON DISTRICT , TO R-2 , MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT, File No . R- 114- 77 ; property located between 80th Avenue South and S . W. 3rd Place , north of S. W. Sunset Boulevard . MAP FCz®M ILU T X liJ 6 IKICI COU/U i ZOJU' 36 f Nri- Q u icif•-----7 . Li Li e ---1 ) . co a* s , AC/ ' 4:7 cif Q Q STH D Q sr L---J v/ C=Z7 i itille a hitt123E3Z. 0 ft,o Q NZ 0 oiDir3Slyiiitriti0114fsSvN2(24,3n l. Gaza 084 0 6pe 447 y° 0 4147 j$ l sVV31(3 4:-.7 1.1 v 1otr0N N 1 5cityLimsr Q Q Cleq QC6rS .. 1 plicityo $H W4uxec gr. pwt. ss,vD ?AG,fIG l tw¢o°4D ci? 5GAL$ /:2OO ' Sue J6cr sire.Em Ko//L e,xestimpac, /Arc. gzoNE /Jo. g-//4 77 PETITION AGAINST REZONE Reference: Preliminary Report To Hearing Examiner File No. R-114-77 Rezone We, the adjacent and surrounding property owners are opposed to this land being rezoned to R-2. Rezoning to R-2 would adversely affect the property values of single family residences in the surrounding area. The adjacent and surrounding properties are zoned R-1 , SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, and this property, like-wise, should be zoned in consistency with the existing zoning, or retain its present status of "G" zoning, in-as-much as it is a very minor portion of the surrounding area. It does not have character separate and distinct that would justify an R-2 zoning. There are other parcels of vacant land near this site zoned R-1. Were this rezoning to come about for a "spot" area, additional applications may be expected and will , in turn, lead to the breaking down of the single family resident character this area has maintained for many years. The fact that the site is near a PROPOSED low density multiple residential belt along Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) on the Comprehensive Plan does not add to the validity to rezone to R-2. Rezoning to R-2 would create a SPOT ZONE within an already existing R-1 zoning. It may be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan use element, which designates area in the VICINITY of the subject site along Sun- set Boulevard as a low density multi-family residential area, BUT we want it consistent with the surrounding property, or retain the present zoning of "G". Sunset. Boulevard (SR 900) is a very heavily travelled highway. Bearing in mind if this situation is NOT considered desireable for construction of new SINGLE family residences, R-1, IT most certainly would be a worse situation for mul- tiple units , R-2. Vehicular traffic generated by the purposed development will add to the already hazardous condition at the intersection of SR 900 and S.W. 3rd PL. Two (2) knowndeaths and many serious accidents , and near accidents have already occurred at this location. Access to the site from Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) is unrealistic. During peak traffic hours it is already impossible to cross the highway and enter Renton-bound traffic patter without great risk, as a result of the volume and speed of the traffic in both directions, and the blind nature of the area due to the curve on SR 900, 600 feet Southeast of S.W. 3rd PL. Safe access to Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) to the proposed site would require a traffic device and "storage lane". This may note be possible because of the East and West curves adjacent to this site. If this is possible, it would then place a severe traffice burden on S.W. 3rd PL. , and Powell Ave. S.W. and other adjacent streets to the site. This would provide an over-the-hill route and creat another arterial similar to S. 132nd St. We do NOT want such an arterial , a steady flow of traffics, marring the peace and tranquility of our existing single family residence neighborhood, and jepordizing the safety of our children, who must walk .5 mile to the nearest elementary school , and over a mile to the Middle School , and High School . If means of safe access are not pro- vided on Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) , the adjacent.streets will have to accomodate the increased traffic due to the multiple family residence as opposed to single family residence. Bus service is NOT adequate, or near adequate, and exists only on Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) between Renton and Seattle. Again this necessitates people crossing a heavily traveled highway. Service is also limited to early morning and evening industrial shift changes, and even then the bus must be "flagged" by any individual wanting it to stop. Both Utility and Fire Departments INDICATE water mains will require extension and size increases , due to R-2 rezoning. Nothing is stated about sewers , although the same may apply. The re-zone proposal does not spell out who would be paying for these items, so it is assumed that it will be another additional burden on the Renton taxpayers , in the site vicinity, which we do not desire. Because of the reasons stated above, we are opposed to the purposed R-2 zoning, Multiple Family Residence, and recommend that it be zone R-1 , consistent with the zoning of the SURROUNDING properties, or retain the present zoning of "G". RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINEREXT-TTRTTO 0 F E Q 71978 AM PMJTEJ\ . O. 1' /i'/- 7 i 71819110o11i12i i 1213141516 PETITION AGAINST REZONING REFERENCE: Preliminary Report to Hearing Examiner File No. R-114-7 PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. n-e gib J4i J/7 1,1,,,o4 /dire 14.), q ,c-s -,5 v-6,3 o a,5 - 3 /1 Pb--1.4,N,44 0-o_e_ -1, 4.7 5."--s'zi es 3 Zeman_ f 10 gZt. 6c0 .3S dav? e% / S 4J .. t'. 7 s--_g-6, A r C' 411- , :nn!, A asR „ay6 V . -,,_ 7. 2--2- / a-e-ei atai?kg,,--4_,, 2.5-5- - d-43 7 y 174.• ., . r/apalop- 2,-e'42/ ,80,,,,,,eee,,ie, ,,,,,,,, ,-,,_, Zi-5- 6e3P 9 cotArt ,4 2/6 gri-cd,u0 deg4 leg, 11 (tfryt*----,i)-- Acs'5"-=-,, "6f -- t F6-7°'(--(1-e`ee0)(fr:&-27i .0 ,6-6.7\0-7 A0ecie. 7)(J P15 ,--t.t .e.e a4m., ,t/ 7 , i&ts `i-k c;,2 5-5-557f LIL-: e io aJ - J 915 cerer 4=-117- .j -2-.6 -467'2.P j 6262 S v..1 ` SSA' f 16 t2.4.49''49_,,,-, 90 F57.1_,/oe41,-k f_,4 V4,I7K2 p.....,. .„ Dcs---/i.--(, yyt:ifz,7 ,-,:),&_,/,,, fa/4- 7 ,40-4---/t:Z, L,_ z., - , ,--e -9eiv-r-f4if 1.6<..z___ /D b'S-1 Ce) 3 ..dcP;:e. `Iff.,yr_ro-,,L.) e2,,??-5--• ?4 0.- e) r6;- 5g<70,4 Dot 7-4. o2 a ,F--sue, , j1-3 6 , Z.5.6- v 5 5 (J 8 rN1 Trat-c.. 0 .7:.e a?C) ex,,Z-e--1 75 A a/1A 4:• S e- /Hal Zap ?WS - f 3raw& &<e_ S z 1-7 /9'77 e 2 de, t,e 5e r 1 -z- -:._ esue17111.- ,`"1--A/4.v 4.--e ,„are,,), ci _ ,f7/_-"e ,,_______,-y(2--4,--f,k%6' //7, 1, -6-74-----761-7, X 7 ZV t7` _-7- ., 6 T-. F 7 "7. 6 .,_I_ /r . , e..t___ _ 30 ,- foktr,, // /e. rye. `3 jci-e-/-e-,,--- - c,2 6 r ...„2-z„....„, a., , s . (--t) r".•-• 0. g 1 1 LIqe-Stkoe'd 17.a :7(ij ilLe'06) 1,a2 7 . 3 ii 12 PETITION AGAINST REZONING REFERENCE: Preliminary Report to Hearing Examiner File No. R-114-77 PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. 944,--,.. 13518 Eo .L.Le S.p,• 2 zS' co v70 4lP.nu ',. **"As_1J 4:: 4 F i.'3 v/4%. S,'4 a4 ,Scr_e --/7/ 8 2 . nt e:Ge J W;,2 eFo '_. :7,„,_, tY I.,z e-/7/d'' eli.#4.--P1 a-74Z / 35---- :7?--,71",.6-:-4-1,,--je.:-:1-77t 2.2 --5-2-6' '' c, ci CZc= -7 k 4 i s 575- Sl7 S. e.,(46 e- -%(r a.k7.7.f Y-4 /`3 )—L.5 0"3 7 P f2,, -,.•_ ,__ , '),4,:.j 7 f 3 0 .40 / 4' 2 S' , d .,4 . A-14--z4- lal,t4„,4,tt A-e- -71 77/(A-AA-V-V-) ---/5-3 ? -. -- X.;'-C iji' 7 V-2-e9103C— ii/P,,,t-taL J 1 r 111/// dL - / 42 s r c-PPVe i) , . . (, ) 7- 6e . /<7) ism 7U gg lt,.... 4,14(/'or i 7e,(-c -/5e, 1 77 6-7-S----- • 2 -..(-1,7/ A _ j 1 Y /. 7 NI 5, I ' c-. -- I i 76 V 3 Q Ia.; r L. dig. /- .5 _ . 2.z9,) y leare,4\-,...,k, P F . 7 Is 4). 13: r ;tom air k- zc- i ') I OIL/IX 76, .". cd ./,_. 2a6- 2,-±- /2-a _X 7:6&e)- .z i_3. - 1/- ee/---.Ae t f Y 6 2/ _ f-- -` --- > c 7-77, P 4-2/Y I u . 6 7 PETITION AGAINST REZONING REFERENCE:. Preliminary Report to Hearing Examiner File No. R-114-77 PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. 26,//u_,c ,4 u ,,J--6,L...14-,;4 - 6/.3 0,. 6c., -3'.•-c,/ / C/. K..1/,(1. e i.c?r_;/1 le I 3 •44-/ .-i-L'el!:, /Y. 4 A 4 --4,32S- 6ii_e,,,,/ii)pi .A to .:5- 1.5,)./Le: rii,2 ha - S5 3 3 eV 2:-51-4ice-c-If.7'1‘';•i )47i a.--:ctic27_4 .49-,. C ri 14.," L,‘ t :S 14 7.2 9 --).-i_ bf3i-i- i •,-Ts-7) - d..., 47.„-"! '',),.-,-=',,:.,,,,- Z-- .,c;;;:3-----;-- -s2. e-e.) , _r,.,,,,:• ..,Z.. 7_2.-,,,_c, _ .,-_,,-..•.... •-.- VIKA;le. ittle)L- --i,\ 96/-- 5 w 344 a_ S-3-* --9 •12-27- ek Liee;f7,-214) 34-0e- 55--- 7177 Cils _ 3 1 N . OS q (,0 .Q . 2CAPAr491a/ri-- '72 0 '' Ail• 41 /....e._ 7Z7- $ 7 / o .4yi 3. 0. • lee AV z,3 a._ 4'7 i7 at9 g&-.6-2--(--c/4.07,-- 7d iti SL012/7 - 67)- 4c,?6, -s-5- ji,i,--e,71-- Zee- 24,41, I 2_5( $.a, 1/ 6-4-r--• 0, 29 2.65--° 411,4,11, LAU4 • 'Im.....[A4.d4:m b 0 6-glk. q'at- 0 s3 . A fiti. fir r, • et ' ,-. / 3/a -Pot.,4-LL 5--,-..s'.0_2_3,5--V /3 9 7--- te iC- a, ,--- 9 _. a S 11/ 41 ee 2,-i5--‘/3 S ft4 &24lc/co/atee 6‘.3-Irp-v-rio f f_. zr; 3 2S--S--‘ / ii- y PeceiAt q,,s-- 3 ic.c} gAze ital 26 - /397 40 I u) I W 4 id, 3R1.) :12. 1(aa."2_dee4A-fi/ i 000 .1 i UJ. .- S r 4-• A--4- 6-13-Vi''1"° . 0 PETITION AGAINST REZONING REFERENCE: Preliminary Report to Hearing Examiner File No. R-114-77 PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. L l77 -. .r ems- 22 C.,-3d/ cep d{ /w ) ate 77/.29P1 a(i 20 S/5 o 66-k)led .6 -- 19q . 4.,e, S s=3-7sr Gam. PV 6- -(126 / Ci9D' PETITION AGAINST REZONING REFERENCE: Preliminary Report to Hearing Examiner File No. R-114-77 PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. L.70-ayyza4.)3C Jwvl/ %de, 5,W. 255-964Z 7e 3 J - ,F(1 417 7 y?s PETITION AGAINST REZONING REFERENCE: Preliminary Report to Hearing Examiner File No. R-114-77 PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. 22 7 3576 ,F/a-el -5; _1,4ei-PLY; 1(_?-76 05 - 083/Z. 34/3.7 Vs 4 7711, .4(//1/ gp7e i(f/ 7 .Y jaA'A 311k. dhrs cf d 3 Li' 5'6 ,,{ kiX-7-7 4, Ygire c?e) 3 7 c? goo ht S 61 PAE-(4, wike,a-e 9P/7r 3y 7,5-- 9"OP/70P PETITION AGAINST REZONING REFERENCE: Preliminary Report to Hearing Examiner File No. R-114-77 PROPERTY OWNER y ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. L r'7)(,),3 rr S'3.,/ "(.5 2e)• g/1-) 1, a' s i- 417Y 7 4/ -_51-0/ 3 ,/f--5.d, 0:35 -/7.73- 111A 2 `"Y lA at- l',i A.P-.CIA ay `).2 1 `-1 SLU `)‘( %Q AL J Aiq c/y),. 6,9 E-‘°----D RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAN2 41978 PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER AM PM 7,81911011111211'213141516 PUBLIC HEARING JANUARY 24 , 197 ' y H BAT NO. APPLICANT : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . ( IiA1V 1` Si/ SON ) FILE NO . : R-114-77 , REZONE A. SUMMARY : . Applicant requests a rezone from G , General Classification District ; to R-2 , Residence District in anticipation of future development of the site with four-plexes . B . GENERAL INFORMATION : 1 . Owner of Record : Ivan C . Christianson 2 . Applicant : Kohl Excavating , Inc . 3 . Location :Property is located between 80th Avenue South and S . W . 3rd P1 ; north of S . W . Sunset Blvd . 4 . Legal Description : A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department . 5 . Size of the Property : Approximately ±1 . 3 acres 6 . Access : Via S . W . Sunset Blvd . 7 . Existing Zoning : G , General Classification District 8 . Existing Zoning in the Area : R-1 , Single Family Residence District 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan : Low Density Multi -Family 10. Notification :The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date . Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three ( 3 ) places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance . Notice was also mailed to surrounding property owners . C . PURPOSE OF REQUEST : r,,'` To rezone the site to allow the development of four-plexes . D. HISTORY/BACKGROUND : The subject site and the surrounding area was annexed into the City of Renton by Ordinance #2913 dated February 10 , 1975 . E . PHYSICAL BACKGROUND : 1 . Topography : The site has a gentle slope of approximately one 1 ) to two (2 ) percent from the north to the south . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 24, 1978 PAGE TWO RE : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC .', R- 114-77 , REZONE 2 . Soils : The site consists of Beausite gravelly sandy loam BeC ) . Permeability is moderately rapid . Available water capacity is low. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate . This soil is used for timber and pasture and for urban development. 3 . Vegetation : The majority of the site consists of light brush and grass . Minor amounts of scrub brush and bushes are also evidenced on the site. 4. Wildlife : The existing vegetation of the site is sufficient to provide a suitable habitat for birds and small mammals . 5. Water : Prior to filling the site it appears that an intermittent stream crossed from north to south near the easterly one third of the site . It appears that surface drainage has been controlled as part of the fill operation . There is no sign of a stream or surface water on the site at the present time . 6. Land Use :' The site is currently in an undeveloped state . To the southwest , it abuts S . W. Sunset Boulevard , an extremely busy arterial . The surrounding area consists primarily of older single family residences . F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS : The subject site is located in a marginal older single family residence neighborhood . The development of the site may have potential . spill -over effects in helping to upgrade the surrounding area . G. PUBLIC SERVICES : 1 . Water and Sewer : An existing 6 inch water main is located along N . W. 3rd Place near the northeast corner of the subject site . An 8 inch sewer main exists along S .W . Sunset Boulevard . 2 . Fire Protection : Fire protection is provided by the Renton Fire Department as per ordinance requirements . Any future develop- ment of the site will be subject to the City of Renton standards . 3 . Transit : Metro Transit Route No . 107 operates along S .W . Sunset Boulevard within one block of the subject site . 4 . Schools : The site is within one-half (2) mile of Earlington Elementary School , three-quarters ( 3/4) of a mile of Dimmitt Junior High School , and within one ( 1 ) mile of Renton High School . 5. Parks : Although currently there are not recreational parks in the area , the completion of the proposed Earlington Park is slated for sometime in 1978 . This park site would be within one quarter (4) of a mile of the subject site . H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE : 1 . 'Section 4-708 , R-2 Low Density Multi -Family Residence District i 2 . Section 4-729, G , General Classification District 3 . Chapter 22 , Parking and Loading 4. Section 4-725 , Ammendments PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 24 , 1978 PAGE THREE RE : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . , R- 114-77 , REZONE I . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS : 1 . Land Use Report , 1965 , Residential , page 11 , and objectives pages 17 and 18 . J . IMPACT UPON NATURAL SYSTEMS : The rezoning of the property will not have a direct impact on the natural systems . However , the proposed development of the site will disturb present soil and vegetation conditions , increase storm water runoff, and add—to - the .noise and traffic level , . These conditions may be minimized by the application of. proper development controls . K. SOCIAL IMPACTS : The development of the site for residential use will increase opportunity for social interaction . L . ENVIRONMENTAL' ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION : . Pursuant to the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended ( RCW 43. 21C ) , a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal . M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION : A vicinity map and a site map are attached . N . AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED : 1 . City of Renton Building Division 2 . City of Renton Engineering Division 3 . City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division 4 . City of Renton Utilities Division 5. City of Renton Fire Department 0 . PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS : 1 . The proposed rezone to R-2 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use element which designates the area in the vicinity of the subject site along Sunset Boulevard as low density multiple family residential . 2 . Existing zoning around the subject site is R- 1 Single Family Residence within the City of Renton and RS-7200 Single Family residence within King County. However , the subject site is bounded by streets on three sides and a substantial elevation change (approximately 25 feet ) near the northwesterly corner adjacent to one of the single family residences. These circumstances together with other elements appear to establish a site character separate and distinct from surrounding properties . Comprehensive Plan , 1965 , objective 1 , page 17 ) 3 . The fact that the site extends the entire distance between S . W. 3rd Place (formerly 81st Avenue South ) and 80th Avenue South , and is near one end of a proposed low density multiple residential belt along Sunset Boulevard on the Comprehensive Plan add validity to the rezone and alleviate the problem of creating a ' spot ' zone . (Comprehensive Plan , 1965 , objective 2 , page 17 ) . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 24 , 1978 PAGE FOUR RE : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . , R- 114-77 , REZONE 4. The site is directly adjacent to Sunset Boulevard (State Road No . 2 ) , a very heavily travelled state highway . This situation is not considered desirable for construction of new single family residences , especially when there are no other site amenities such as view or material ( Comprehensive Plan 1965 , objective 6 ) character which might off-set the undesirable aspects of the adjacent highway . (Comprehensive Plan ;L965 , objective 6 , page 18 ) . The R-2 zone would allow duplexes on minimum 7200 square foot lots , or townhouses by Special Permit to a maximum of eleven ( 11 ) dwelling units per acre . 5 . Existing R-2 and B- 1 zoning is located along Sunset Boulevard approximately one-quarter (4) mile east of the subject site , the existing Empire Estates apartment complex is located along Sunset Boulevard approximately one-quarter (4) mile west of the subject site . 6 . Utilities are available in the vicinity of the subject site . The Utilities Division indicates that water mains in the area will require extension and size increase to provide proper fire flow- as part of site development . 7 . Although there is an elevation difference or intervening streets between the subject site and most of the adjacent single family land uses , additional setbacks and landscape buffer areas should be established to protect adjacent properties and provide a more compatible aesthetically pleasing development for the site . The existing single family residence directly north of the subject site is at approximately the same grade as the subject site and will be affected by any development of the site . Comprehensive Plan 1965 , Land Use Report , Objective 1 , 2 , 4 , and 6 . ) 8 . The location of the site adjacent to Sunset Boulevard with its heavy traffic volumes will necessitate additional setbacks and landscaping along this street for buffering and separation of uses . 9 . The subject site has been previously graded prior to annexation into the City . P . PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION : Recommend approval of rezone based on the above analysis subject to the following conditions to be established as restrictive covenants running with the land : 1 . Any development of the site shall be subject to special permit approval of the Hearing Examiner due to the proximity to the single family residences . 2 . Setbacks - No building or structures shall be permitted within a ) forty (40) feet from S . W . Sunset Boulevard (State Road #2 ) b ) within thirty (30 ) feet of the northerly property line ; within thirty (30 ) feet of S . W . 3rd Place ; and within thirty 30 ) feet of 80th Avenue South . 3 . Landscaping/Buffer Areas - The first thirty (30 ) feet adjacent to the northerly property line shall be appropriately landscaped to provide a dense evergreen screen . The first fifteen ( 15 ) feet adjacent to S .W . Sunset Boulevard , and the first ten ( 10) feet adjacent to S . W . 3rd Place and 80th Avenue South shall be appropriately landscaped . Detailed landscape plans for the PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 24 , 1978 PAGE FIVE RE : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . , R-114-77 , REZONE entire site, development shall be submitted to and approved by the Renton Planning Department at the time of site development review. . 4 . Height Limitation - Building or structure shall exceed a height of twenty-five (25 ) feet . 5 . Access to the site shall be controlled with signed traffic safety along Sunset Boulevard and potential impacts to the adjacent residential streets . f kJib'.+,L'..$ i<', rat y}8:r?„ - It 1 I. L D: 6 11 I` T.Ir; 1ii ' ^ 144. I I '{ I b' I 41 I I 45 C,I .rlt.u.` I.' . S- 1 1 i0,. T ,\ T '•6 ,, i--1= csj', I'l~',r .• 111' I 1 sf 3h: 1t`ar; z a ,• l;: V '{1 ' s,Ji, ,x t V 7 li r•. eri° I ra -. S T r,,q;.tiJS.;,^n.t;. er--=T T...,\r- .Tyy I 23 }.(,-.;\ I' •`a,a:l'• s . T- I or s •I n t 1 I f. 1HiR waft I I';': - i1.\''''ram„ ,.yt_ r_ fit,«: I .i'. I fiC .ZI' I. 1 ZO I 1 1 t ati !i mil~ c` T Gtt-T'is tJ .I. F, 1 ,'• Isi , ^%"•Y-.[ ,i ° '' _ T "'d rr Z • Z 5 4' 0 'e' ' I•• •I• s..•_ V At+tr,.,?r.111; i", r., ;,g..r- I LJ I I. f , \ ,9 rli,:tif• '$t;:•''7:tit:+; a `'I:''•' yE' o• -,F 7' I F--- I Q }I It 1;_ t:. 5: ';,,,T r...r ii Ir , i! r e firt r w 't' Jam-'--' •_'.:',`s<' y. S,I %• _ i s it v -', ry Ni';,I v;4.,.y,` 7`///tea/ r'I„1 c f' 3,, r ri2,y Yi 5i '.=:•`'. h L. Nyr. ' V r i , III nlllfra I...'rr.r ..t'7"' i;;ti ,c, t,i 1;, j2+rift.- y'Fi`;'"..-,.'tile; ';i`;If.`1 ',t.: ' t .1' A 1VGt'rl': 7 rr' 1'l'S Qi'r>_i'e LtSvnHs•vhELDiC.1,T etl^ r II4r,, t7"c 4. 9 DQ I-y r 1 R 41'Tr1 ryrr pia: r' Y,d I,:rr.,Y,I:CaaII ltilLYSI.:• V l Sd 1'A 1+E F.rI.a{ ert 1 l:fl'•' .-.yam r,• x' 7r: cr.a r ti 2,1 rr.{'1J 1 1I L •Rj) r S Y I 21x: L A G • p, p < 11 t,-, y rj t wl ry.;4, 7 TS. 4 i}'ySri. l:f t,tp ,1 t L,3 WrI rllI • r I I.IW --r r!-' Ty.+J n• _ I M-.v I sue. y r, rs 71' JIH F I N' d i Z N E'.RE 0 ONR: Z NE ;FR`OM : G GENERAL CLASSIFIT;V,AN, C. C.HR I'ST'IAN;SON: '°'ASPPL`ICAT''I ON',„FO Rw`rt',R,E 0 w; • :..CATION •DISTRICT;'' TO:. R 2 ,r_'MULT'I :FAMILY,'.R,ESI.DENCE, DISTRICT, File N1 : R=1114-7.7,;,' `p,rop.e.r.ty.:'•l;ocate.d ' betw.e.en ,, 80,;tfi''.Ave.n:u_ e. Sou•th `a.nd S . W. 3rd p l.a c'e" north o:f .5,•:,:W,;. .,:S u n's:e..t , Boulevard ;`_.`,' i=•`y KOHL:-' EXCAVTIN:G, INC TOTAL •AREAi"1 . 3. -ac'res_APPL.LCANT u:' ;: I V'A N C , :.CH'R=I ST I A N S ON;:),: '. `W Sanset Blvd .U° Sy. . CE'S.SP'R.I NC I PAL AC. G';. "G"en e r a:l -.C:1•a_s s'`t i c a t i'o n +:D"i stri ct Undeve o ed , 'EXIST.ING :USE': p, iF '< elo ment' "of four- PROROSED' USE":' `To"':rezone. . 4, 4s.i-te , t.o =a,l-1ow the. dev p D en`s'i t Mu1 ti fa milMPREHENSI'VE`':'LAND` U SE: P,:LAN':. . • . .,-. COMMEN S' tile - t'. r d y ire ti art;^a. i I'd'::.c.";,.,, .` r':::: :r1'..`, ; t,:',:.. :,. i.:i...:: X, i,q,"sf:' 3 .:'_ l^l- I I,d?s t t t, f:fry.; inn''.,".:..::... .:.._.,. r. i. .... t''' 5 , iss- riv 147 L2'.7 sr 6 1:::7 4' • 1 fj23vlc-z4 I f:Cfn 1.1 Citu ii,IIt41111111'''' i i-r 4: 4011 ZZ 4.11111111%, L 51,v 0 CS 111660$ 661616 441, 0 CUED6114/ S''....!.,es. 19 k • i Iser. 4\64 .••••.::.::i.:',..,:,•,.....:7':".4'- ,-* , 84 7_,,Fitvb 4e 7 1,1 dit,.. s'..:.:.''.'.•'.i....:..::::::.:...‘........:....:::.. s'' ...11" ,• ' a s i....'....:::.....:*:•:::: ::**.:**::.':: r-i'''' t 11.0 qt• ,--; f:3 0 0 0 1:1 t:3 8e Dr, ,,,,,, El c... I es, I ' .clacticip 1,411-Wiiu iCieik' '''''';•• 6r. ?Aka AO FACIfIC, 144 il-go4b if 6 CAI-0 / °ZOO ' cip ,u$J6cr $ira I= acorn.. gxeAvArpq& ,Ald. gozoNg /Jo. g-/14- 77 ROUTE SCHEDULE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE ROUTED / Z Z 3/77 PLEASE REVIEW THIS APPLICATION FOR: R' ZONEvv nk(- Iti MAJOR PLAT SITE APPROVAL 77 SHORT PLAT SPECIAL PERMIT WAIVER SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT OR EXEMPTION AND RETURN• TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE , BEFORE Vy77 SIGNATURE OR INITAL DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL DATE BUILDIN 2-a'-7? TRAFFIC e 1Z-2?-77 ENGINEERING Z - ?j ? I FIRE 1 /S /a? HEALTH 1- TI TfL i2-2 i•77 REVIEWER ' S COM APPROVAL CONDITIONS : PLEASE SIGN THE E . I ,W . : F ROUTING FOR REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORMS TO : Finance Department Fire Department Library Department OPark Department Police Department Public Works Department 8( Building Div . Traffic Engineering Div . Engineering Div . r Utilities Engineering Div . FROM : Planning Department , (signed by responsible official cr his designee ) VIA Ik.4AGL }.A )TO SUBJECT : Review of ECF- 4--j7 Application No . : /0 -7;7 Action Name : 'OO}._kt< U-XGAVA 1kuir )r ) -. (tIAM C-g12AST144, $o,,)l Please review the attached . Review requested by ( date ) : REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : O77L ,F-,/{5 Comments : T X'rr i.,c., Lk,AA- ru. ,/-,i£s r/-t rr-F,41 zi r7-• Lk;I.L L hl O T wit-O,-e( I)1 rc I et,/£ ( u w t, r U:--- }-t,--+L..-C-1 Yv i z( /-6 11.r/-+-(. 4-71 2- zi-7? Si gnature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : /_.:- /2 fig,,,,?-'r, t /f Comments : Pra/1t ei,,ye,:, 574'c4 r ram,,, .,i:;•^4- i ic:t- Ate 1 I....-),e.F?e-?a : : 6 4<:;:, e,,i) 1: 9,---/c ) 7 „.,12:,..„, ,. , A ii... Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 6-76 OVER) t REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : d/eg Comments : --t/,e( 444-//14‘) i /37 %//i f T'C if7 Ss/ 'Lc/- 4,4auL J4 9 4 /77 Signature of Director or A orized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature. of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date PROPOSED/FINAL LL‘,LARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No . R- 114-77 0 PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . X® FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Rezone request from G (General Classification District ) .to R-2 (Duplex Residence District) . Proponent Kohl Excavating ( Ivan Christianson ) Location of Proposal Property located between 80th Avenue South and S . W . 3rd Place (formerly 81st Avenue South) along S . W . Sunset Bouevard . Lead Agency Renton Planning Department This proposal has been determined to ® have ® not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS El is is not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 ( 2 ) ( c ) . This decision was mane after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . Reasons for declaration of environmentalnRYgnificance : This negative declaration only applies to the rezone of the subject site . Additional environmental review will be required as part of specific site development review. Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a ( proposed/final ) declaration of non-significance : Responsible Official Gordon Y . Ericksen Title Planni -'• ec or /Date January 16 , 1978 Signature City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 January 24 , 1978 The following man called long distance from Spokane , Washington , at 10 : 20 a .m. , on this date to indl'cate his opposition to the Kohl Excavating , Inc . rezone request : Mike R . Struznik 318 Powell Ave . S . W . Renton , WA 98055 He believes the neighborhood should remain single family residential . Lie-et "/- e-1-16-1 RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER JAN241978 AM PM 7I8I9,I0,11hI2l14213,415,6 EXHIBIT NO. 7 ITEM NO. 1 'i / 7 7 A RECEIVEb fa ffii a vit of Public-=tion Jt N 17 i;i i 8 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. c 9, A. Margaret Harbaugh being first duly sworn on oath,deposes and says that S he is the Chief Clerk of THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4) times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and 1-` .-; has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- paper published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington, and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Renton Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, Washington.That the annexed is a Notice .Of Public NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Hearing RENTON LAND USE : HEARING,EXAMINER i RENTON.••,,'.'•, ' 1 i as it was published in regular issues(and WASHINGTON'.::L,••• not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period ' ..,,A.: PUBLIC` HEARING! , • . '; - . WILL BE HELD;By..THE; .p M RENTON .LAND• USE'. 6—,uoIuIC N®t9C6S of 1 consecutive issues,commencingon the HEARING 'EXAMINER AT'; APPLICATION FOR'HIS•REGULAR MEETING • l ;'IN'THE.COUNCILCHAM PFIELIMINARY 13....day of January 19 78 ,and ending the HERS', CITY HALL, RE-.!; ,' V EL O ED UNIT DE-l. NTON,WASHINGTON,ON : • 'VELOPMENT AP-, JANUARY 24, 1978,at9;0011 PRGVAL, File••No. A.M. TO CONSIDER THE , PPUD-116-77; prop- dayof 19 both dates FOLLOWING PETITIONS: e y located in• tho' 1.VALLIS INVESTORS, vicinity of 1817 Grantinclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- Avenue South. scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee APPLICATION FOR FOUR LOT SHORT •,9 ! r Legul descriptions of PLAT APPROVAL,;,•;; files noted above on charged for the foregoing 1•68which File No. 113 77; prop-' file !n the Renton g g g publication is the sum of $.3 p p has beenpaid in full at the rate of Planning Depart-,per folio of one hundred words for the i• • erty located in the vic ment',' ;first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent inity of 3713 Talbot insertion. Road South. ALL INTERESTED-PER- SO S T SAID PETITIONS2. KOHL EXCAVATING,. ,•, N O D IANSOFdR REZONE ARE INVITED TO BE PUBLIC1INC./IVAN C.CHRIST- VCLI.Cfi.CR .. ... 4 (x .... SENT AT, THE PUBLIC TION HEARING• ON JANUARY , Chief Clerk FROM G TO R-2, File 24i"1978 1T 9:00 A.M. TO No.R-114-77;property ' :EXPRESS •THEIR OPI- located on Sunset ' I.NIONS. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3 day of Boulevard S.W. bet-GORDON Y. ERICKSEN ' vdeen SOth Avenue,,; ..RENTON PLANNING ' South and S.W. 3rd ' . ; . DIRECTOR' January , 19..7.Q. Place. i - Published in The Renton 3. RICHARD Ivi. MOE, ;; Record-Chronicle January 1 7 47513,.19 8. R Notary Publ'c1 and for the State of Washin= on, residing at Kent, King Co nty. m. . Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9th, 1955. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON V.P.C.Form No.87 HEARING EXAMINER JAN 2 4. 1978 AP P"A 6 c i a I8 9,10,11 I I I 1 12 t 314151'J I t'; . I I iti' V u 0 EXHIBIT NO ITEM NO. 1-- // - 7 I 41 A/ e a4 1 -r-- .,. • 0 THE CITY OF RENTONc.) i h. 4--ix z z -o MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 o CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENTA 41-235-255004541-4'oSEPIt January 10, 1978 Kohl Excavating, Inc. 3330 East Valley Road Renton, Washington 98055 RE : NOTICE OF APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR REZONE FROM G , GENERAL CLASSIFICATION DISTRICT , TO R-2 , MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ; File No . R- 114-77 ; property located on Sunset Boulevard S . W. between 80th Avenue South and S . W. 3rd Place . Dear Sirs : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on January 3 , 1978 A publichearingbeforetheCityofRentonHearingExaminerhasbeen set for January 24 , 1978 at 9 : 00 a .m. Representatives of the applicant are asked to be present .All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing .If you have any further questions , please call the Renton Planning Department , 235-2550 . Very truly yours , Gordon Y . Ericksen RECEIVED Planning Director CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER r, l JAN241979 AM PM B 'J Gy • 1%ram :718a9g10g11112i .i`2ir t5 Michael L / Smi Associate Planner MLS :wr cc : Iv/an C.. Christiansson V til Ln c G L GV (r G<li d G /LQ1' //ALL d Go //7 J EXHIBI ITEM I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 77 RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON, ON FEBRUARY 7 19 78 , AT 9 : 00 A. M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1. KOHL EXCAVATING, INC./IVAN C. CHRISTIANSON , APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM G TO R-2 , File No. R-114-77; property located on Sunset Boulevard S. W. between 80th Avenue South and S. W. 3rd Place. 2. MOBIL OIL CORPORATION , APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT TO INSTALL ONE ADDITIONAL 50,000 BARREL GASOLINE STORAGE TANK, File No. SP-066-77; property located within the existing Mobil Oil Tank Farm area situated approximately 1 ,000 feet south of the inter- section of the future S . W. 23rd Street and Lind Avenue S. W. directly south of the Olympic Pipe Line facility. 3. S AND M INVESTMENTS, APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT CONDOMINIUMS IN R-2 AND R-3 ZONE , File No. SP-123-78; property located at the northeast corner of Grant Avenue South and South Puget Drive . Legal descriptions of files noted above on file in the Renton Planning Department. 1 I II ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY 7 , 1978 AT 9 : 00 A. M. TO EXPRESSjTHEIR OPINIONS . GORDON Y . ERICKSEN PUBLISHED January 27, 1978 RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I , STEVE MUNSON HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW . ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public , on the 25th day of January 19 78 SIGNED_ •1 1•, CITY OF RENTON U .:r.. DEC 16 1911 REZONE APP L I CAT I 0 a FOR OFFICE USE ONLY B - v LAND USE lipING APPLICATION NO. h' `77 EXAMINER 'S Are APPLICATION FEE $ APPEAL FILED RECEIPT NO. . 5R6 CITY COUNCIL ACTION FILING DATE V/6/77 ORDINANCE NO. AND DATE HEARING DATE APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 : ONL eXGAVh1 J6 irJG 1 . Name IVAN C. CHRISTIANSON Phone 226-6620 Address 3330 East Valley Road, Renton, Washington. 98055 State Highway No . 2 3. Property petitioned for rezoning is located on (Dunlap Canynn Rnad) between 80th AVPntle South and 81st Avenue Sonrh 4 . Square 'footage or acreage of property 1. 3 ac ;--_approximately 5 . Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a separate sheet) See attached sheet 6 . Existing Zoning C Zoning Requested R-3U- NOTE TO APPLICANT : The following factors are considered in reclassifying property. Evidence or additional information to substantiate your request may be attached to this sheet. (See Application Procedure Sheet for specific requirements . ) Submit this form in duplicate . 7. Proposed use of site Four-plexes 8. List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area. This will definitely be an improvement . 9 . How soon after the rezone is granted do you intend to develop the site? Undetermined . 10 . Two ,copies of plot plan and affidavit of ownership are required. Planning Dept. 1-77 May 24 , 1974 0: r No. 423003 DESCRIPTION That portion of Section 13 , Township 23 North , Range 4 East, W.M. in King County , v,'ashngton , lying West of the WestlineofRyan ' s First Addition to Earlington , as perplatrocord,:d iri Voluria 34 of Plats , ;:age 3 , records of said county and East of the flat lino of R. L. I1addL,_k ddi do% to Earlington , as per plat rccoruud in Volume 38 of Plats , page 4 , in said county, North of th,l North line of Primary State Ii i.t:,.way No.. 2 , as conveyed to the State of i;ra.;h inizten by record3 d under Auditor' s File No. 2S6S5S4 :•fid South of the i':c'terIy production. of the center l.Yja.; of Soui ucst 3 d Place ; formerly South i3:nth StrJet and S•th Av ;nue) as shown on thW plat of Iic:lington, as per plat recorcd. •d in Vo3.uwa 14 of Plats page 7 , in said county; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. OF REN, ebo osc 19/1 ,,' w AFFIDAVIT I,'.' „',.:' ;IVAN C. CHRISTIANSON being duly:' sworn, declare that I : . arti'' theowner of the property involved in this application and that the for'.egoing statements and answers herein contained "and the information !; herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my44owledge and belief-, Subscribed and sworn before me V'. this,. 1'6,th day of Decemb:'et; ', 19 77 , p No:tar.y,;ti Public in and for' :the` .State of Wa'shjngto'n, ' residing at.,Mercer., Island t 4. e y''it'' J,: Z.. Na'ive,`otary Public)- Signaiture of Owner) 4:51Vt;To'4 r.e®t Avenue S. E.,;',,,,:::'..,:...'. , 3330,'';;E'ast Valley Road Me`rc'er'-PIaland. Washinctton 98040 Renton' We hington 9805:5 Add *ss) Address:) r ': Renton Was;hingt'on I'':` Cit. .)_.,.';'. State) '. i'r;.'226-6620 Telephone) FOR:.OFFICE USE ONLY) I CERTIFICATION t_ t This,''is' to certify,.: hat _ehe. foregoing application has, been inspected by. lire .. and 'has been fourtd 'oe:,t'o ,ough and complete in ,.ev„ery particular and , to conform ` to the ` r les``ag `d regu 'ations of the Renton P1'anning Department governing the 1.( ZircLuchpPlication . cw Date 'Received 7- ' 19 By: t fc j Renton Planning Dept . 2-7,3 3- 2) Air. Will the proposal result in: a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? YES TOTE' NO b) The creation of objectionable odors? MAYBE NO c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, Goranychangeinclimate, either locally or regionally? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 3) Water. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents , or the course of direction of 1/ e- water movements , in either marine or fresh waters? YES MAYBE NO b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? YES MAYBE ` NQ„f 7J11 c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? YES MAYBE NO d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? YES MAYBE NO e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to 1.0 temperature , dissolved oxygen or turbidity? YES MAYBE NO f) Alteration of the direction or rate of 4low of 1 '- r ground waters? YES MAYBE NO g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? YES MAYBE NO h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates , detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? YES MAYBE NO i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 4) Fldra. Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass , crops , microflora and aquatic plants)? YES MAYBE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique , rare or endangered species of flora? YES, MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? YES MAYBE NO d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Vim- RKTET NO Explanation: 4- 5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: a)' Changes in the diversity of species , or- numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles', fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , 400,insects or microfauna)? YES MAYBE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? , YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? YES MAYBE NO d) - Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the eei present or planned land use of an area? i/ YES MAYBE NO Explanation: _41614j A51p " rD Q^— LO h///t,l Li,. 4 -Rft 4,5 1 PAP,QM. - L7aS SWin/-r' 9) Natural Resource's., Will the proposal resultnin: a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? AV YES MAYBE NO/ b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? V YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 10) Risk of Upset. Does the. proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, • but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 11) Popul'ation. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? YES- MAYBE N Explanation: P w q1 . 5- 12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? YES MAYBE NO r`.' b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking? YES MAYBE (NO' c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? r YES MAYBE NO d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? YES MAYBE NO e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? YES, MAYBE NO f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , w-' bicyclists or pedestrians? 1 Y S MAYBE ;NO' Explanation: 14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any ofjthe following areas : a) Fire protection? YES MAYBE NO b) Police protection? v YES MAYBE NO c) Schools? YES MAYBE N0 d) Parks or other recreational facilities? YES MAYBE NO e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? YES MAYBE NO f) Other governmental services? I/ II Jl YES M NO Explanation: VLSw 61. ., /GL,0 1 is Lll IT `` G idVc 45 a c.ct 44.001A 4 12 L4 c 15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? YES MAYBE NO b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? YES MAYBE NIT Explanation: 16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities : a) Power or natural gas? YES MAYBE NO b) Communications systems? YES MAYBE NO c) Water? YES MAYBE NO a. 41 6- d) Sewer or septic tanks? YES MAYBE NO e) Storm water drainage? a YES MA B ff f) Solid waste and disposal? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? f ES MAYBE N Explanation: 18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public , or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? Y YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 20) Archeological/Histori'cal . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? YES MAYBE WU— Explanation: III . SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any decla- ration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: C',i C.C ate' t",` f ' signed) name printed) - City of Renton Planning .Department 5-76 Y PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING JANUARY 24 , 1978 APPLICANT : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . ( IVAN CHRISTIANSON ) FILE NO . : R-114-77 , REZONE A. SUMMARY : Applicant requests a rezone from G , General Classification District ; to R-2 , Residence District in anticipation of future development of the site with four-plexes . B . GENERAL INFORMATION : 1 . Owner of Record : Ivan C . Christianson 2 . Applicant : Kohl Excavating , Inc . 3 . Location :Property is located between 80th Avenue South and S . W . 3rd P1 : ; north of S . W . Sunset Blvd . 4. Legal Description : A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department . 5 . Size of the Property : Approximately ±1 . 3 acres 6 . Access : Via S . W . Sunset Blvd . 7 . Existing Zoning : G , General Classification District 8 . Existing Zoning in the Area : R- 1 , Single Family Residence District 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan : Low Density Multi -Family 10. Notification :The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date . Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three (3 ) places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance . Notice was also mailed to surrounding property owners . C . PURPOSE OF REQUEST : To rezone the site to allow the development of four-plexes . D . HISTORY/BACKGROUND : The subject site and the surrounding area was annexed into the City of Renton by Ordinance #2913 dated February 10 , 1975 . E . PHYSICAL BACKGROUND : 1 . Topography : The site has a gentle slope of approximately one 1 ) to two ( 2 ) percent from the north to the south . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 24 , 1978 PAGE TWO RE : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . , R- 114-77 , REZONE 2 . Soils : The site consists of Beausite gravelly sandy loam BeC ) . Permeability is moderately rapid . Available water capacity is low. Runoff is medium , and the hazard of erosion is moderate . This soil is used for timber and pasture and for urban development. 3 . Vegetation : The majority of the site consists of light brush and grass . Minor amounts of scrub brush and bushes are also evidenced on the site. 4. Wildlife : The existing vegetation of the site is sufficient to provide a suitable habitat for birds and small mammals . 5. Water : Prior to filling the site it appears that an intermittent stream crossed from north to south near the easterly one third of the site . It appears that surface drainage has been controlled as part of the fill operation . There is no sign of a stream or surface water on the site at the present time . . 6 . Land Use :' The site is currently in an undeveloped state . To the southwest , it abuts S . W. Sunset Boulevard , an extremely busy arterial . The surrounding area consists primarily of older single family residences . F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS ; The subject site is located in a marginal older single family residence neighborhood . The development of the site may have potential . spill -over effects in helping to upgrade the surrounding area . G . PUBLIC SERVICES : 1 . Water and Sewer : An existing 6 inch water main is located along N .W . 3rd Place near the northeast corner of the subject site . An 8 inch sewer main exists along S .W . Sunset Boulevard . 2 . Fire Protection : Fire protection is provided by the Renton Fire Department as per ordinance requirements . Any future develop- ment of the site will be subject to the City of Renton standards . 3 . Transit : Metro Transit Route No . 107 operates along S . W . Sunset Boulevard within one block of the subject site. 4 . Schools : The site is within one-half (2) mile of Earlington Elementary School , three-quarters ( 3/4 ) of a mile of Dimmitt Junior High School , and within one ( 1 ) mile of Renton High School . 5 . Parks : Although currently there are not recreational parks in the area , the completion of the proposed Earlington Park is slated for sometime in 1978 . This park site would be within one quarter (4) of a mile of the subject site . H . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE : 1 . Section 4-708 , R-2 Low Density Multi -Family Residence District 2 . Section 4-729 , G , General Classification District 3 . Chapter 22 , Parking and Loading 4. Section 4-725 , Ammendments PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 24 , 1978 PAGE THREE RE : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . , R- 114-77 , REZONE I . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS : 1 . Land Use Report , 1965 , Residential , page 11 , and objectives pages 17 And 18 . J . IMPACT UPON NATURAL SYSTEMS : The rezoning of the property will not have a direct impact on the natural systems . However , the proposed development of the site will disturb present soil and vegetation conditions , increase storm water runoff , and add' to - the noise and traffic levels . These conditions may be minimized by the application of proper development controls . K. SOCIAL IMPACTS : The development of the site for residential use will increase opportunity for social interaction . L . ENVIRONMENTAL' ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION : Pursuant to the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended ( RCW 43. 21C ) , a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal . M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION : A vicinity map and a site map are attached . N . AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED : 1 . City of Renton Building Division 2 . City of Renton Engineering Division 3 . City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division 4 . City of Renton Utilities Division 5 . City of Renton Fire Department 0 . PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS : 1 . The proposed rezone to R-2 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use element which designates the area in the vicinity of the subject site along Sunset Boulevard as low density multiple family residential . 2 . Existing zoning around the subject site is R-1 Single Family Residence within the City of Renton and RS-7200 Single Family residence within King County. However , the subject site is bounded by streets on three sides and a substantial elevation change (approximately 25 feet ) near the northwesterly corner adjacent to one of the single family residences. These circumstances together with other elements appear to establish a site character separate and distinct from surrounding properties . Comprehensive Plan , 1965 , objective 1 , page 17 ) 3 . The fact that the site extends the entire distance between S . W. 3rd Place ( formerly 81st Avenue South ) and 80th Avenue South , and is near one end of a proposed low density multiple residential belt along Sunset Boulevard on the Comprehensive Plan add validity to the rezone and alleviate the problem of creating a ' spot ' zone,. (Comprehensive Plan , 1965 , objective 2 , page 17 ) . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 24 , 1978 PAGE FOUR RE : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . , R- 114-77 , REZONE 4 . The site is directly adjacent to Sunset Boulevard (State Road No . 2 ) , a very heavily travelled state highway. This situation is not considered desirable for construction of new single family residences , especially when there are no other site amenities such as view or material ( Comprehensive Plan 1965 , objective 6 ) character which might off-set the undesirable aspects of the adjacent highway . ( Comprehensive Plan 1965 , objective 6 , page 18 ) . The R-2 zone would allow duplexes on minimum 7200 square foot lots , or townhouses by Special Permit to a maximum of eleven ( 11 ) dwelling units per acre . 5 . Existing R-2 and B- 1 zoning is located along Sunset Boulevard approximately one-quarter (1) mile east of the subject site , the existing Empire Estates apartment complex is located along Sunset Boulevard approximately one-quarter (4) mile west of the subject site . 6 . Utilities are available in the vicinity of the subject site . The Utilities Division indicates that water mains in the area will require extension and size increase to provide proper fire flow- as part of site development . 7 . Although there is an elevation difference or intervening streets between the subject site and most of the adjacent single family land uses , -additional setbacks and landscape buffer areas should be established to protect adjacent properties and provide a more compatible aesthetically pleasing development for the site . The existing single family residence directly north of the subject site is at approximately the same grade as the subject site and will be affected by any development of the site . Comprehensive Plan 1965 , Land Use Report , Objective 1 , 2 , 4 , and 6 . ) 8. The location of the site adjacent to Sunset Boulevard with its heavy traffic volumes will necessitate additional setbacks and landscaping along this street for buffering and separation of uses . 9 . The subject site has been previously graded prior to annexation into the City . P . PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION : Recommend approval of rezone based on the above analysis subject to the following conditions to be established as restrictive covenants running with the land : 1 . Any development of the site shall be subject to special permit approval of the Hearing Examiner due to the proximity to the single family residences . 2 . Setbacks - No building or structures shall be permitted within a ) forty (40) feet from S . W . Sunset Boulevard ( State Road #2 ) b ) within thirty (30) feet of the northerly property line ; within thirty (30 ) feet of S . W . 3rd Place ; and within thirty 30 ) feet of 80th Avenue South . 3 . Landscaping/Buffer Areas - The first thirty (30 ) feet adjacent to the northerly property line shall be appropriately landscaped to provide a dense evergreen screen . The first fifteen ( 15 ) feet adjacent to S . W . Sunset Boulevard , and the first ten ( 10) feet adjacent to S . W . 3rd Place and 80th Avenue South shall be appropriately landscaped . Detailed landscape plans for the PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 24 , 1978 PAGE FIVE RE : KOHL EXCAVATING , INC . , R- 114-77 , REZONE entire site development shall be submitted to and approved by the Renton Planning Department at the time of site development review. 4. Height Limitation - Building or structure shall exceed a height of twenty-five (25 ) feet . 5 . Access to the site shall be controlled with signed traffic safety along Sunset Boulevard and potential impacts to the adjacent residential streets . 6 9 ! z .`;' g, z e -`off- G 1G; 3 4jJ5 o a .•J` x=ihilliriirliu3-5mFLciiiriii,41,I S` t.`\ Z \ Z ( • ii LoN `IN LAN6ST 5 13Zwn 5T 23 s s x G s P\ C/Ty OF 5 a z p x s s G i 5.c TT 2 2 °9a t J s G • e b \ e r • . . z L/NE eh#' IP O 7 Pi\ - \ _ Ja•w i TL_z Q,,, '- - 7 41.4.‘171611.7gUel a 1 1 ,..,,,,lw 2„,,,,,... ift 7 ____ c-_-'-I ii 3.!°171? .1. II 11141741 ''01/411 44 i 7 7 11.Ii, "It leg- - 7 III// /y' j , • i r i I I a ONSET BLVD 4111111111::::::::17:: 414:-\'' r crwAmmroopie. nos: #. M till ' e n ie F> igivia 0 4 G I e0R i G ti 3 S. W- 7TH 1;‘'- 0 L------- ----------••- W Qx r' 3-' 7.R . , \-. ., , : -. ..K F T D j REZONE : IVAN C. CHRISTIANSON , APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM G, GENERAL CLA.SSIFI- CATION DISTRICT, TO R-2 , MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT , File No . R- 114-77 ; property located between 80th Avenue South and S . W . 3rd Place , north of S . W. Sunset Boulevard . r. APPLICANT KOHL EXCAVATING, INC. TOTAL AREA ±1 . 3 acres IVAN C . CHRISTIANSON ) S . W . Sunset Blvd . PRINCIPAL ACCESS EXISTING ZONING G , General Classification District EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE To rezone the site to allow the development of four_-_. plexes . COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Low Density Multi -family COMMENTS tbi 1 LIUda°3 C4, d a 43° 3, s/ j4 044r, t:2, al NI C:::z 4 a 14*,vc., e3 0 4 til t.;,, IP 0,, coo co W ° teit5 41 If} ker st,A, 6 ..,....::::.:.:.:.....:.:.:::....:,.,::4-.:,::,... .,t . d h• f. Q 1.7io i. t. F oN rk cs? c.IM,rs C?r, Y Q a cz4 w 3 Gh11GAC v 0114,4u/Cge AO ?AV fiC tudLpub CALE /s 200 ' u8 J64r slra L I torn. tigCA00/114c ,*:. i getoNE ?Jo. R- /14 77 ROUTE SCHEDULE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE ROUTED jZ 2 3/77 PLEASE REVIEW THIS APPLICATION FOR: R• ZONE kr L Tim{- Ky_!,. MAJOR PLAT SITE APPROVAL4 Y-77I SHORT PLAT SPECIAL PERMIT WAIVER SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT OR EXEMPTION AND RETURN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE , BEFORE / 3/7 7 SIGNATURE OR INITAL DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL DATE BUILDIN l Z- 9-27 TRAFFIC 12-26?--77 j r' ENGINEERING j< FIRE I / s /-7? HEALTH C1L--ITTL i2-Z 7•77 REVIEWER ' S COM APPROVAL CONDITIONS : PLEASE SIGN THE E . I .W . : J- ROUTING FOR REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORMS TO : Finance Department Fire Department Library Department 0 Park Department 2 Police Department Public Works Department 0 Building Div . a Traffic Engineering Div . Engineering Div . 6 Utilities Engineering Div . FROM : Planning Department , ( signed by responsible official or his designee ) VIA 9G)= A0, }..,i )11- SUBJECT : Review of ECF- 4—/7 Application No . : /2i0¢-77 Action Name : c91-1L Xr-- v[L-t-ti ,f )r)C. (o N, c(-t2ecTJAr,)$Drs.).) Please review the attached . Review requested by ( date) : REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Opt. rr rii3 Comments : lzx--ri,6... wperan, L., ,-,i=s ei-i 7`14,r. 41ziFt. W t L_(_ N O T' 11'i 4 t -c:,A. O- F{u L.T4.Y,U'F YtO4 'c l f= 0)-4/3-,f—,-G iz- z-7-77 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : ' Department : -h7/4 id, he 7 Comments . Vr:r1 c,f:a c.-:. , 4 re v,.,,,,rt:«` eri;:_)r /7 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 6-76 OVER) REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : d/e Comm e n t s : - ',e / - _ Ui„,/e..vo i /3' i//i s T•4to 4i/9. 6-,17/ -' G/d 4,z/i .t/4, yip oo-i, ., 9 6:22f i4/S 77 Si gna ure of Director or A -CFiori zed Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date PROPOSED/FINAL DELLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/N T -SIGNIFICANCE Application No . R- 114-77 PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . X FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Rezone request from G (General Classification District) to R-2 ( Duplex Residence District ) . Proponent Kohl Excavating ( Ivan Christianson ) Location of Proposal Property located between 80th Avenue South and S . W . 3rd Place (formerly 81st Avenue South ) along S . W . Sunset Boulevard . Lead Agency Renton Planning Department This proposal has been determined to 0 have ® not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS ID is is not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 ( 2 ) ( c ) . This decision was ma-de after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . Reasons for declaration of environmentalnspIgnificance : This negative declaration only applies to the rezone of the subject site . Additional environmental review will be required as part of specific site development review. Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an exteiii: that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a ( proposed/final ) declaration of non-significance : Responsible Official Gordon Y . Ericksen Title Planni, g ec or -. 0 Date January 16 , 1978 Signature B I City of Renton Planning Department 5 -76 RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER FEB 71978 AM PM 74809A.1112i11234t5,6 EXHIBIT ITEM NO: