Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA80-100 BEGINNING OF FILE FILE wrin5AN/t Ix "-wet) . . 8FILMED )\'v (‘\)\)\)\;1 RENTON CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF: ) Appeal of The Vehicle Trip- ) NO. Systems Development Fee ) Which Has Been Imposed ) as a Condition for Granting ) r 111781 FIL %t - File . No. ) ' drk ,, ,, Sh . P1. 100-80 E-122-80 . MED ) , Puget Sound Power & Light ) r Company , ) Appellant. ) TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB Memorandum on Appeal A Rezone: Report and Recommendation by the Land Use HearingExaminer to the Renton City Council Rezone: Planning Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner and Departmental Findings • Short Plat: Report and Decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner to the Renton City Council Short Plat: Planning Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner and Departmental Findings Request for Reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner ' s Decision Regarding Puget Sound Power & Light Company Short Plat, File No. SH.PL. 100-80E-122-80 . . F The Hearing Examiner 's Refusal of the Request for Reconsideration Notice of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner ' s Decisions Regarding Puget Sound Power & Light. Company Short Plat , File No. SH.PL. 100-80E-122-80 H • Puget Sound Power & Light Company 's Letter to Members of the Renton City Council Planning and Development Committee RENTON CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF: ) Appeal of the Roadway System ) Development Charge Which Has ) Been Imposed as a Condition ) for Granting a. Short Plat, ) File No. Sh. Pl. 100-80, ) E-122-80. ) ) Puget Sound Power & Light ) Company , ) Appellant. ) TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB Memorandum on Appeal A Rezone: Hearing Examiner ' s Report and Recommendation. . B Rezone: Planning Department Preliminary Report and Findings C Short Plat: Hearing Examiner 's Report and Decision. . . D Short Plat : Planning Department Preliminary Report and Findings E PSPL Request for Reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner 's Short Plat Decision F The Hearing Examiner 's Refusal of Request for Reconsideration G Notice of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner ' s Short Plat Decision H Puget Sound Power & Light Company 's Letter to City Council Planning and Development Committee I RENTON CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF: ) Appeal of the roadway system ) PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT development, charge which has . ) COMPANY' S MEMORANDUM ON been Imposed as a Condition for) APPEAL Granting a Short Plat, File No. ) Sh. P1. 100-80, E-122-80. ) ) ' Puget Sound Power & Light ) Company , ) Appellant. ) I. INTRODUCTION On November 24 , 1980 , the Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner (hereinafter the "Hearing Examiner") granted Puget Sound Power & Light Company (hereinafter "Puget Power") a rezone for the north side of Southwest Grady Way between Lind Avenue Southwest and Rainier Avenue South (hereinafter the "Site") . Upon ap- proving the rezone , the Hearing Examiner refused to recommend a roadway system development charge based only on a rough esti- mate of the future, projected vehicle trips that would be generated from the Site. The Hearing Examiner stated "that it may be inappropriate to impose a trip generation fee during the rezone process since no development is proposed. " (Report and Recommendation by the Land Use . Hearing Examiner , November 24 , 1980 , at page 1; See TAB B) The Hearing. Examiner further stated as follows : 6 . The applicant has proposed a zoning change only, and therefore until the ultimate use is subm- itted to the city as a formal proposal specifying density and purpose, it is premature to assess fees to mitigate .the impacts of the proposal on the adjacent streets. . The number of vehicle trips currently is based on conceptual site plans. Similarly, the con- figuration of driveways and the location of fire hydrants and utilities should be based upon formally submitted plans. The site plan review process is the proper forum to make these and similar recommenda- tions. Therefore, no specific conditions should be imposed at this time since the zoning proposed is compatible with both surrounding zoning and surround- ing uses. On December 30, 1980, at the short plat hearing, the same Hearing . Examiner took the diametrically opposite position and now recommends a twenty dollar ($20 .00) roadway system develop- ment charge. Puget Power 's request for reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner 's opinion was refused on January 15 , 1981. The Renton City Council 's Planning and Development Com- mittee rejected Puget Power 's appeal by a two-to-one vote on February 19 , 1981. Mr. Rockhill, dissenting , indicated that it would be premature to impose the roadway system _ development charge at the short plat stage of the development process. The relevant facts concerning the roadway system develop- ment charge are as follows : -2- 022781/3/3581G A. Records and sources indicate that the roadway system development charge has been imposed -on some development sites and 'not on others, and this is the first time that the fee has been imposed at the short plat stage: of the development pro- cess, rather than at the later site approval stage. No written departmental rules or regulations whatsoever' exist explaining any aspect of this newly created roadway system development charge. B. The funds generated by this assessment will be used for development of the roadway system throughout the City of Renton and not merely for roadway improvements to the short plat site or to contiguous areas or even to areas impacted by:. the short plat approval. Further , the Hearing Examiner is recommending this roadway roadway system development charge even though the City Council has not yet enacted the Systems Development Charge Ordinance. C. The amount of the fee being imposed bears no relation- ship to the meas'ur.eable impact of the proposed development on the immediately surrounding roadways . Indeed, the short plat approval itself generates no traffic impact.. . The recordcon- tains no documentation whatsoever which calculates the impact of this particular short plat on the contiguous roadways. The fee is instead recommended solely according to the projected roadway system development needs of the entire City. D. The roadway system development charge recommended by the Hearing Examiner is to be deposited in an escrow. account -3- 022781/3/3581G • • pending the City Council 's- adoption of the Systems Development Charge Ordinance. Apparently the opinion of the Hearing Ex- aminer is that the City Council 's adoption of that ordinance is . required to use the_ roadway system development charge, even though the .Examiner has . sufficient authority to accomplish the same result... • II:. ARGUMENT A. THE HEARING EXAMINER HAS ILLEGALLY IMPOSED . A' ROADWAY SYSTEM- DEVELOPMENT CHARGE . PRIOR TO THE ' CITY COUNCIL HAVING- ADOPTED A SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT 'CHARGE ORDINANCE. The City- of Renton currently has under. consideration the future imposition of. a' roadway system' development charge to . defray the' general . cost • of roadway .and ' other development. The . City • Council has not yet enacted any ordinance, however, which • authorizes the imposition of such ' a roadway . charge where_ the revenues will be placed into a general roadway system develop:- ! • ment fund. - The Hearing. Examiner , however ,. has unilaterally determined to illegally impose the .fee without the enactment of an authorizing ordinance; the Examiner has' exceeded- his legally delegated authority. ' The Hearing Examiner 'is surely' correct' in, his assertion that the Hearing Examiner is empowered to impose, "appropriate" conditions, require dedications, establish setback require- ments, and the like on a short plat ' development site. See generally RCW' 58.17 .020 and RCW 58 . 17 .110 . The Hearing Ex- aminer , however, has not been delegated the power to' . impose -4- 022781/3/3581G conditions or fees that are not reasonably related to the actual, physical short .plat site, the immediately contiguous area or in mitigation of impacts. of the plat.. See generally Pioneer Trust & Savings Bank v. Village of Mount Prospect, 176 N.E.2d 799 , 22 Ill. 2d 375 (1961) . - If the Hearing Examiner - decides, for example, , that' Liberty • Park should have more parking stalls , or for that matter more tennis courts, the . Hearing . Examiner . clearly possesses no authority to impose vehicle taxes. on development proposals which do not create a current need for more parking stalls or tennis courts at Liberty Park.. That, of course, raises an addi.tional. question. Conditions imposed.. must be reasonably calculated to reduce or compensate' for specific and . identified impacts of a-project. Approval of a building permit, for example., requires identifying the number of trips .to be generated from a particular site, and thus pro- vides the basis for identifying impacts 'and conditions. designed and .tailored to mitigate those impacts'. Pioneer Trust. & Sav- ings Bank.. v. Village of Mount Prospect, supra. See generally Rosen v. Village, of Downers Grove ,. 167 N.E.2d 230 (Ill. 1960) . Approval of a short plat, however , provides no certainty of impact on roads or traffic -- as a result, neither impacts, nor conditions tailored to mitigate impacts, can be identified. One fundamental question need only be answered to clearly understand" the import of the Hearing Examiner 's recommenda- tion: . If we assume purely for discussion purposes that the -5- 022781/3/3581G I I • • City Council ultimately rejects. the roadway system development .charge -proposal, -can the Hearing Examiner nevertheless continue to unilaterally impose the roadway system development . charge • without. 'the City Council 's consent? .The-- answer ,• of. course, is that the Hearing Examiner would .not. have such . power , just as • the Hearing - Examiner currently ' lacks the power to ' charge a roadway system development charge without authorization. by • the City Council. • • B. .THE ROADWAY SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE -IS BEING PRE- MATURELY IMPOSED AT THE SHORT PLAT STAGE OF THE DEVELOPMENT • PROCESS. . Even if ' we . assume that.. the. Hearing Examiner. .can unilater ally impose . a roadway .,'system development',• charge ..without City Council • authorization, the' fee is .being imposed. at an .inappro- priate stage in. 'the `.development process. • Developing a •. site is obviously ' a multistage process, re- quiring 'different permits and assessments at ' each stage. The appropriate. time for imposing' - a roadway system development • charge is during the actual building development phase, not - when a: short plat of 'raw land is • being. obtained: , . The reason for distinguishing - among the development stages and the appro- priate assessments at- each stage becomes clear if the short plat site at issue is for some reason, , such as high interest ' rates, never developed. In that case , it would be absurd for an applicant to pay a' roadway system development charge based on projected vehicle trips from a building- which' is never- -6- 022781/3/3581G I , built. At the time a building permit. •is sought, however , actual use is 'contemplated,. the extent of the use is known, and fees reasonably related to the impact of the proposal can be determined. The Hearing . Examiner . .appears . to. agree with- our contention, that it is currently premature to impose a roadway 'system. development.. charge.• The Examiner stated at the rezone hearing. "that.- it may be inappropriate to impose ,a trip generation fee during the rezone, process since no development is proposed.. (Report and Recommendation by the Land Use Hearing Examiner , at page 1. ) The Hearing Examiner further stated, as follows : 6 The applicant has proposed a' zoning change only, and therefore until, the ultimate use is sub- mitted to 'the city: as a formal. proposal 'specifying'- density and: purpose , it is premature to assess fees to mitigate the impacts of, the proposal, on the adjacent streets. The number of vehicle, trips currently i's' based on conceptual site plans.' . Th'e :site plan review process is the proper forum to make these and similar recommendations. The Examiner therefore refused to levy the roadway system development charge - recommended for future imposition by the building division of the public works department. The en- gineering department of the.. Public Works Department was in agreement with the Hearing Examiner , stating in its "Develop- , ment Application Review Sheet" that the department approved the Site "subject to approved utility and roadway improvement plans at th'e time of development. " (Emphasis added. ). -7- 022781/3/3581G • • Despite these comments, at the short .plat .hearing. the Hear- ing Examiner imposed the roadway system development charge indicating that he would have no subsequent. opportunity to do I so. . We believe . that 'the. Hearing Examiner 's previous position was correct:.. During a multistage development process, a road- way system development charge should not . be imposed until the . actual building permit, phase at that -stage; the ' facts are known,. and. the, authority exists to, mitigate identified impacts. • • C. NO DOCUMENTATION EXISTS . DESCRIBING THE- MEASURABLE i IMPACT ON ROADWAYS AND TRAFFIC ' WHICH WILL BE' CAUSED BY THIS PARTICULAR SHORT... PLAT. The City ' has :conducted no. research and - has. provided- . no documentation concerning .the following, points : " (a) The cost of necessary roadway improvements.' in the area; (b) The portion of use related to the proposed project;' (c): The equitable share in total costs which should be assessed on either a "per trip" or project basis. The. selection- of a $20 .00 fee as. compared .- with -any other dollar 'figure was apparently ' arbitrary and consequently ' un- fair . The Hearing Examiner could--indeed should--have asked for documentation of the. actual, measurable roadway impact resulting. : from . the short plat. . A court summarized .the . rule that specific impact documentation must be produced:. • -8- 022781/3/3581G • • • . The , developer .of . a subdivision may be required to assume those costs which are specifically and uniquely attributable to his activity . . it does not follow [however] that communities may use this • point of con trol to solve all of its problems that they can foresee. (emphasis added. ) • • Until documentation, is produced demonstrating why $20 .00 is the appropriate fee, the imposition of the -fee is i'mperm'issable. • III. : CONCLUSION. Upon granting this. appeal and deleting. the fee from this short plat, the .City of,-. Renton can - still: 'obtain the needed • roadway system_ development funds ..by- pursuing. either .of two - . courses of action. First, , the. . City . Council can approve ..the short. plat but provide in . its opinion that. a' fee• will ..be imposed at the site development approval stage upon appropriate documentation of the measureable roadway impact resulting from the proposed I future development. Second, the City can collect the necessary roadway system development charge by approving the . short plat without the roadway . system development charge, pending: action on the Roadway Systems Development. Charge Ordinance. • Respectfully submitted, PERKINS, COIE, STONE, OLSEN. & WILLIAMS Attorneys for Puget Sound Power & Light Company • • By / / LPL• G, • Kenneth B. Shellan • -9- 022781/3/3581G • Ri=C—IVED OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON NOV 2 51980 GACRritS OESIiN L PROPERTY DEVP`MEW REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CIT'1 COUNCIL, APPLICANT: Duane Wells and Puget Power FILE NO. R-101-80 LOCATION: North side of S.W. Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue South. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks a rezone of the subject site from G to B-1 for the'purpose of future commercial development. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval subject to conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner: Approval. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was received by the ' REPORT: Examiner on November 10, 1980. 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 November 18, 1980 at 9:06 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department preliminary report. Steve Munson, Planning Department, presented the report, and entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #1: Application File containing Planning Department report and other pertinent dec..ment., Exhibit v2: King County Assessor's Map designating the subject site Exhibit G'3: Conceptual Site Plan The Examiner advised that due to its conceptual nature, the site plan is not: binding upon either the applicant or the city. The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Dick Causey • Manager, Land Planning Puget Sound Power & Light Company Puget Power Building Bellevue, WA 98009 Referencing Section L.5 of the Planning Department report, which pertains to submission of water and sewer main extension plans and requirement cf an e,.,scnent to extend the 12-inch water main located to the north of thc.subject site, Mr. Causey requested that submission of such plans occur at the time of building aermit application. The issue of the requirement of the casement was discussed and resolved by Roger Blcylock, Associate Planner, and tire applicant. Referencing Se- ion L.8 of the Planning Department report, regarding the proposed fec for dell.. vel, al r s, Mr. Causey o jyeted to impdsition of the fee prior to a determination by the rrccenLly hc,rmed citizens advic ry conmittee as to whether ncc.h a fee should be rrsquired or en air,, 'nt established. As rt member of that cowmittee, he noted that the first meeting is sc.t,einied for early December . )The rni , nstat d Li:d it ma be fire • IJJJ � "Y > lOcr'r2;Ne7to imaose a Crap generation fee Burin;. the alone r,rocesJ sinee DO development is proposed. He also noted that a traffic study SUb$1111.Led by the till;.r i rca,c is Inel c in t::aribi: ill 4/, The Examiner re,ieas .c"J further comments in ,oppui t or opposition to the a;,l,l i l",t ic:n. Since: no further L :,rSimeny w;,:, offered, Lh,• tearing rl•g .rding File Ho. R-•IOC-;;; was _.limed • by the I_-:,minc:r al ri:1P a.m. • • • R-101-80 Page Two FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the - Examiner now makes and enters the following: • • FINDINGS: • • I. The request is for approval of a reclassification, of +4.96 acres of property from G (General; Single Family Residential ; Minimum Lol Size - 35,000 square feet) to B-I • (Business/Commercial). • 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the Planning Department report, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as • Exhibit #1. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, R.C.W. 43.21 .C., as amended, a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by the Environmental Review Committee, • r responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. • 5. There was no opposition to the proposal expressed. 6. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. • • 7. The subject property is located on the north side of S.W. Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue S. 8. The subject site was annexed into the city in 1959 and the current zoning was applied at that time. A special permit to fill and grade the site was approved by the Hearing Examiner in September, 1980. No-grading or filling has been done on the site • to date. • • 9. The Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of commercial and/or manufacturing park types of uses. 10. The surrounding uses on Grady Way and in the vicinity are office park •type uses, • light commercial and some light industrial uses. • Some of the facilities which have developed or are being developed in the area are • office buildings at 550 and 800 S.W. 7th and at S.W. 10th and Lind Avenue S.W., and • at 301 and 313 S.W. Grady Way. There are industrial uses in the Earlington industrial Park just east and the Orillia Industrial Park just south. 11. The Puget Power Transmission Line runs along the southern edge of the property adjacent to S.W. Grady Way. Conceptual site plans indicate that this portion of the subject property would be used for landscaping. (12- 'The Traffic Engineering Division has indicated that a fee of $20.00 per vehicle trip be imposed to mitigate the traffic impact generated by the applicant's development of the subject site. • 13• Traffic Engineering has also indicated that the driveway location be relocated to simplify ingress and egress for the subject site. In a similar vain the Fire Department has indicated that fire hydrants must be • installed prior to construction and the Utility Division has indicated that utility extensions and easements may be required. 14. Findings 12 and 13 are based on the applicant's submitted conceptual site plans, • • Exhibit #3, which were admitted for illustrative purposes and are not binding on the applicant or the City of Renton. These plans show a proposal to construct an office building and restaurant on the site. • 15. The special permit to eI:nw the fill and grade of the subject property requires site review by the Hearing Examiner after submission of formal development piens. • CONCLUSIONS: I. The proponent of a rezone must demonstrate that the request is in the public interest and will not impair the public health, safely and welfare in addition to compliance • with at least one of the three criteria listed in Section 4-3010 which provides in part that: R-101-80 Page Three a. The subject site has not been considered in a previous area-wide rezone or land • use analysis; or b. The subject site is potentially designated for the new classification per the I. i Comprehensive Plan; or c. There has been material and substantial change in the circumstances in the area in which the subject site is located since the last rezoning of the property or - area. The applicant has demonstrated that the necessary criteria have been met to pernit 1 the reclassification of the subject property. I ` 2. The proposed reclassification to B-1 complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation of the area in which the subject property is located for commercial purposes. The applicant submitted conceptual site plans which are not binding upon either the applicant or the city but which indicate plans to construct an office building and restaurant on the subject site. 3. The reclassification will permit utilization of an abandoned railroad right-of-way and a functioning power line transmission corridor for commercial ventures and add to the tax base of the city. Under terms of the special permit issued for the subject property, a site plan review will be required and the project will be reviewed for compatibility with the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan and the city's Habitat Mitigation Resolution. 4. There have been a number of changes in the area in the recent past and there is continuing development of both commercial, light industrial uses and larger manufacturing type uses along both Grady Way and the secondary streets in this area west of Rainier Avenue S. The proposed reclassification will allow compatible development of the subject site. ' I 5. There has been no study of the specific zoning of the subject site since the G zoning was applied at annexation in 1959. The Comprehensive Plan and the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan both indicate that the proposed B-I zoning is appropriate for the area, and in light of the recent changes and growth of the area the proposed reclassification appears to be the highest and best use of the subject site and compatible with the surrounding uses. 6. The applicant has PP proposed a zoning change only, and therefore until the ultimarP, use is submitted to the city as a formal proposal s "pn ensit�ani oiro , it is premature to assess fees to mitigate the impacts of the proposal on the adiacent stre The number of vehicle trips currently is based on conceptual site plans. is milarly t e-configuration of driveways and the-location of fire hydrants and utilities show d be based upon formally submitted plans. The site plan review 74. process is the proper forum to d similar recommendations. Therefore, no specific con itions should be imposed at this time since the zoning proposed is compatible with both surrounding zoning and surrounding uses. RECOMMENDATION: • The City Council should approve the requested reclassification of the subject property from'G to B-:1, ORDERED THIS 24th day of November, 1980. • Fred J. fman 1 • Land Use Baring Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 24th day of November , 1980 by Affidavi.t of Mailing to the party of record: Dick Causey, Manager, Land Planning, Puget Sound Power & Light Co., Puget Power Building, Bellevue, WA 98009 • . • I 9] � I . • - R-101-80 Page Four TRANSMITTED THIS 24th day of November, 1980 to the following: I • Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoc•h Councilman Richard M. Stredicke • Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Michael Porter, Planning Comnission Chairman • Barbara Schellert, Planning Commissioner !' Ron Nelson, Building Official Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney i I Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City' Code, request for reconsideration must ' be filed in writing on or before December 8, 1980. Any decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous l a geriorsd person feeling ro tir procedure, errors of law or fact,, error ino I judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the j 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 Finance Department, first floor of City Hall, or same may be purchased at cost in ' said department. • i -- t I I i j t l l I 1 • • �1 I. ! • II • • I. I. a a 1 . • • ' '-.4441;1'44;‘,„„.4434..c..;.•ti.:.',117qi,. '(7:;i:,) 0 (='-a `• ..-?%;'). ol ' ;ri,r-: •. s 7 ._.._ .�.,J- L- - --- --• _ --1� c) IW7- I , ` — _ isI; ' • v i F __ i r i � . I o ip l,1 � cu P, } i . I }' I F ^ I - �r"".�pr' `CY;' •I J '_ . i 7 ' ' iI - } .' 4' • iV"*I \-_ '....:•.. ...r'- f ,aJ«,t9-1 QM .. iLl'i . {1:I11} 1 ,F ,':.:211ilitsT". i• r ' , s_fLR(`At:(qt.1:'Ai`'}•%,V•}J� 1;j,'I.� tifil i1i-l " I \l LR—.3i...i.,, 1 = i I �t. !ij1 42, t{ ` a 4 111li } I` p?�. .-s ,1y1T Frr %"yf� 41° ;,1Ili';Dl ;I �- •• • '1,;le ii,. i ; .. - •. t lliIilli t � :' +" 0 I \ r ('L,•-• r / ..fll'1 y %.y.. . • . •- �''� mas;;"^�.'il,t_-1ltiigitl. �:� 'I:'`y�-- _ , ''" .,ti.-_-1.- .' j� 1' �'''-n.-a4,JgJ'„`` ni t� i If l 1' i 4�y1�1.; ----, :.-- ���,•, , � r'I)?A. • IYI�w.• ___ .. ,, -a�/� 1'1 ' ' },I; c _ .J n:•\J�me_ _1-- . G 1 ' 1..r-..ii- !lif''''.11-:,-i,J...'..1.-:--..-k-,_i !.i: -i. • .4.... •-. .. ;-- -'.( : 2,,,c, : •:. . . ::: .,7: fir .` 1• 6�II ii,i .._1 rd,•=.__a ', I ', is= ,—_:I . 1 1.I` i ;1 ' 1 0, I I I 1' I I l 1 _ r• _� I �!mo . Duane Wells, Puget Sound Power & Light Company E-101-80 i . ii . • il i APPLICANT DUANE WELLS/PUGET SOUND POWER • TOTAL AREA ±4.96 acres 1, & L1 UHT 1 PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Grady Way and Lind'Avenue S.W. 1 . ' EXISTING ZoN,ING "G' , General Classification District 1 EXISTING USE Undeveloped ,I PROPOSED USE Future commercial development If COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial, Manufacturing Parkii COMMENTS `R• • li • A '-�A • C ''''''''''''"""."" ........."''''''"`"`"''''""• ••.......J. if F • '- •• •- ' n '•• " . .• , ..,.. . :. . ''.''''- '4,.-••" ' , ,_.,..,... . . • 4- .,4•4/ ' '••;.I - ! •;I ' •-•:1 4. 11‘.1.3129 t'47.1),VO• /71.:'..S •••..?.. . . /k>4.L C Pe-)111 Al\\/ 1-1... 1 TI 79>i )11/1\IV,d .)'11-71A/ -V-Icrl.VO /119/14 - .cri-1 1 191141-1 sv p /-9riciriel - d 'SO gliNd "IlfilAt 10-1 /Va1 '091A1-.QIN • '--E" !-•!i A0r16 )in j-ji911 ... .11 r•i t: . 'IVI'D?:401CINO -'D . )VV .1C1tc ‘21 Al V11V 91'21-1)5 - • .I ggri atwl )._. \ dr:lif-) . „,..; . • :.! • 4 ;I; • , . , - ..-...:7,...,:..v. ••-- - -..,!:-;•!. tt:•i f.....17.k..!.! : 'r:0•ii.(.1?..Y . .;! e:•...........3., .-l• A-4.0••1!•';• ' ' •;P'! `:!,,:i- •• .:•,3r. •'- 0;1; .i '.ik: • . .., z:.-.. Q - 4c:1,....„. , . I .. 1.,...4, . 4-..,.,...tr.,4•,,,y,..1 . 1,,,.A.r... ..,...., . i. ..-..t,, :1r I .....f.u.........-........ .rr•rr.i-i' ?'if.C.:'.1';',.'. . . '.3'i' . l. .,..?:-.• • •••• •,. ...., . . _.,.}..C.- :,,..<\.,,:t:1).1,?1,,0 •.. 'Sf., . i X::r'...?1,4A:;:tctt:....:,;.1.,,i.i...,....1.,.;:::::5:1:.:7,:.isr Lci::,:,.:,,t' • • 41-C4 1'. .'ilt1154:-.:,L,:.t414,-..4:1.4,-;1•••;.i';'.i*.41 . -....1\ 1....12•:,.. . . . .:,•./,- •-•-•1•';:-..*.f .. :,,' ••:,,,e,41.; - .,,... .:::.,'.::: . 4.4 ..ti.11 . . . r 1.1...lif,14:,..iie.:.•:.:21:::...i.,.1:•,•;1:.:.•'•,--5.•r..Y.'.7:,;,:. •:• . ., • , .• /<:•:,:1::.:: '''(;,.. i I tir:3:,,,.V.;4 4;714..,,4, '..!4'•) •I.v.....cfir\r::::.,.:, , ..-1, •I .44 • , .. . • • k‘rfte,..,, ...,.k!'5..).`‘) • - • ,....,0\..,..., -; • -1 • • i ". './..1;9•Pitt••••!•,..•'.1..!w,,.- ..•.- • , 1 ..1, . •• , ,t.,•••-,."1,::•,1i.,-c ••-jt'•'!'..lid••t1r • . c .• . . . . •f•'..,--; ', '•,11, .4:,,17,.....0.0..,i..-e...:-,1..iivi...;,../,.r, •'-'"/......'' ''''.. ' 41' :4-,,';;;'•• •fP'4'I:,.12••-•44?•'1...4'0;41'• ' I .,; 7.!:'$•%• . .;;•••/•••••444'...-'1'.'Ll...';'.;•'1,034;,t.).'q •1• • •r 1. C V it'. 1...:.'..-.1-,/ •''"..1 . . ' •, . 'X..•;;C 1:1,r C.1..k. .1...'..•-•4..• "• ;,.,,4*-•( [ 14 viit C.2.1-1"AS ----------1:-- \ a.,‘*"-..,,-:.ef,,,,n. [ .,...":-.5...r,i-i),,, , •i :,.. ! ,......4,....:-..!i,.:-:::.'F:-. iii,i;,i'.411' :::t.r.,';,•16,-. f''.: ,:::' .. '..;1•Y•1,-i';;.(..PI: • . _ ,.!? 4• . l•-•‘..?;•.1:••••.% 1 ,,?.',' j -r).....Rn f..1:1:..--fr-',.;','4•1....'1"1:i', 1 .----":.,.\k-24,%,,..',.i..',.:•..;•• S.;:f 1 : ..,;!:...1.,•.•'," :v,,.;.•.•",",..bi••.P.11 .' ':-..1.,.,••••t• ::•.:.:•Y.:1'‘''',:.". .ti - • . :1'1 et,• 1 ....":•.: "t ii..):11] ••- ...(-.1:. .:-,.e's• . it....'it••• `:.N.:,. .• • .1'- *.l.ii i ;. .1..,•4:•,i:;:n.:,-,$'4 ...., "..:-.:1','!'.:),, ...'-.::,--2::',°:.:4..t.'''.: " •7!:;ik:i.:471 , i . ...i. 1 ! S - . I . T-:..i•(:;:.,c1..'-....;:: •''( :-..:!;11' •'.;'::'.•:.7.1 r. .1...'441 ."-...'7"'--''''7 11 7.."..-r.-,....-."?-r-7) .1111ref"' .•izra.....H.a.41:I.k.;•.,..v.;‘,.*:.:.1 IS i r., i':',.;;•I,'; . . -.. ; •,,. c.....,..1..........----.. ••• -% • n.'n's• = , . 3.,, (t.,.._. r.'4..:4•::::•;.k ___2_,_ :, _____:...4:)v.\,..t.?.....,;...H. '1,\',..1 ji..rvli.,1 gls. :.0.,,,:'.'..4':,.•t-44....____' P.-,••,•••c" •i.<1 --,,_--„..;:.-.:-.---- . _ ,..----• z.p.-• ..-.7,------ 1'))::,1$',-,1 n .--p-' i , ---r----.------ , ,, .--....,,, ...i. ..._•r, • t\g"-e.y 1<;d‘7,...,,....,..) m r.,7 . ,. . .- -.`a,,,Nf.'6 urc [ ------):iir;:r -s, :....,-1 c____,,c,'`',:lt_H,...., (,-3‘5-1C21 ririi-c-',,',11___.k. `'.. .--- :.•-•-e,%.-,1 ,_4 411-i'v' .••....,j, 1 ',k.":1',1 ...:?.,+,- - „,-- r.o....r-Sy,,,.,0 ,.,. • •.,- .. I.. ... i 1,..,:., •.:11, >',,..,....,•cf- i ...,......---- • ..7 , .t, -1 rVil" li'i;iii iff:-,f..r.....z.!.:.-41-',:‘ •-.,-....„•,i.: .ili. :.,.,,,,..-....osi,f. -,.. '9 b - •• • r,- 5 '.; • - -- .43'-• :' ; . 0 ,.::•;7(;,::',-:Z^.•,',,\ • . !' 1:;) ..„:0:0-!(6 / .,_,1-7.;_., --: .l_c,„-T.•,•!:,•.: .,:: A,c.,A • ,.,-.. [,,,:.,>,.....- - '.',1•••,,--,..4'-.... ••,,,, r• .•:,;.•••.',.,•,...i:.4:V ', • 1 , ,.'.•',•.1..i t.k: .. II e.. t's'''iY.. ••;`,);;40', <') r,_ . .:.„_.v...az.v....k...1,7 . ,> .• .,• ,.!:. -„,••••••,, , , ,,,,...,••:‘,„ , , s sp.„,,.k-i--- #44..:,.'........1 -.-. 1.. 3-'-• , •:1-7 ,N±Sil e 'i.i...,.. .. ;,:...a.,•••.,. .,..,-;.•-'7.-,.. 'i.,s-,..; . . • if 7 • i;-',....0,'''4.;•:,•-•,.••.:,..;"••...-P . . . •-..• Anpgr7,.,• :!. •,,... . : 17,p . .i .1-1:;0•00101,,taziv5, ... •. :. .y-. jf..% ‘.''.;:•,,,- '-',:i.f;',.7-V.-•.:'-'1.^.Pi s'i . ' ! ':: ).07;',..',3 ..-.il..., '.. • . • i pl.' r • • h.•I• .' :47-7 ..;.''.'"1 ',•: ;......-i.,1:•,,..,j'...' ,`,•:.,•,'O.,,...' • i 1 'i '•••;:'.. •t--:••••.. ii:: .••:.•• • 1 .r.).,- ,t,r •i "Le.. ;-..L.21.:-• :-, .:•1.):,4 )? t-T i: ' " i• n''. • 7% . . II •, :• • 1 - •I••‘••,',t• ' ...• 'k'..4,..:i.`, ;•• .'"1.'"'• i :I '• - t. 1.4.,•`.•c"-^ I - . ,I,.`'•i•-•••'"t' • i iii.:: -,'.....0,-F.,e,....,1 . •4 ,.,,.. ,.,,.,,.,. , I! i".••''.''-.••f Z..• ...,17:•.2.:t ql.,.'..,.- ..... ?„':11j;.;:i• .th:s..-7.-,1.: 1 - -•;Z•r• .•-:',. 1 C•4`'. ••••i`i:: . ,1"::,-,.:::;',,,,v,;.... • . . •••••••".1:f4:;i74,''':1't 4.'/V:r•... i....--.4'•::- 1;'•••":::.l'.•••,•';.?'''''F' -,..1 ii?A47;.11;f:!::1:•••;•51'...-,•'..4-;:%,1'-'•.,i7,; tr: '---.'••,':-.•''.•••••• • . , .,.• ,...-,,..:.i?,`,,p z..1.',;),i t,11 ;;;,.: ii,•:. r.:,...t;;,..J. ,..,.:1,r-:,..,:er:•rrAr.....,,.,•-:., Iil,s1,N,•,;S;:••77)1%;/,,,,, .,1-„, lo.'•,.•,..,•, i . , • 7./I ./.0'' L';'‘..... 5:::!;.1...',,:,...1i...,,44:-.t%.,,.,.,..,..7;F:j,...,, ,,',-.;....). .,„,c1.1;:-.. ...i.;,:;,.,,;;;.:-Fol 16'.....:y.-...'.:4,.,..-:.i,..:?,,,:..r.,),1t r.:,-i,4; ,• -- .v..!;..11,,i , ) - -.i!,,,,r9-., , ,.'..;,. .-;F.......1....i.,;.-.,,p,.„.L.s......,...,;,.„,t,:•,.,...),•ac.....,.,.,;,;...,,...,..,..1 •;,...s.:::4;,1,3,...,..;.:,-,,,.,-.,...it:!...-.--.., .: .1 ,'....,..,;: ,-.,...,/t..,..,-=',.r.'.......::.T• • ....•...!4 C••':..“..1-.i.•-••••=-,!I.' -...••.1,,,,!....:!.:.....,..,:,.,_:,....,,:,....7,,t7::.......„........,44‹:•:',V,:::;:•!,':::,'4 ff • .,••• t/ i'..:...!:-.X1.9.".;•,.-i17-4,,!!.-.1.17.- -ik.:54:11.3,4W.,,,":::4.4.".1..:e:474::.12•.:1::::.7:1f.V?!!„...L.2.4.1,--::.`t.e. . .r.,.......-,:-.: .......-:;.,.:..-::: ..4%-.„-,,,......,.i,i.,..z.1,-,..,•,,,,,.,..,-4:.,,i;.;•-.,..,,,iri •. .•\t•• - :.e...:,..!,,,,,.; ...?,4-t-.--".....,,,r.:::::);i.,..'F.:-.....,-s...,...:.:1,?,..,,...,,.,-,,,t,,,...,.ter 1.4.' ,,.,../.,..,f-.•;•.-:::::-..,..,..A1,,,..,...*,,:-.....Y..:.•',..1,i:4,:4..:(,. , • •,''• ;',...;':ri.,',4i.... •.•44....p.4.....1. '.t•;•-• •/2.1 ',..""°••• ,• .." 'ti;. -'•..•.'. , r'• ..-4.1. •I. )4-• 4.41,7...m. +.!.)--',..44•1•'',..tr...`•0.- ,,,,g4. ;1"-',-:: Y•)„ :., ..2.'•ci ''' :5',4.* 0*.n"...;'..:.'. ' F.1'..,;!..1:!..'.•-•''. ,s•.:••••••;.'',,)••:1:vv"."......i::.• ''.•,f.;••••1,',..p.'c,r. ,1.•-•:.,-- ..N ' t'.f.,,,/174 .? ., 0;4,4. ... ',.••...r..•.••,•• -,. ••,t. ,,.,.•,....;,I+, •Cr.:;PP...":4•''./.1r.:03*•/!1•,•'..••;."',1; -1 - '.1 ii:.--, r.•••• '.. •;•'1•::,,,,,,:::•::•..•••••••'..:...'-.',,•••:"!',.,_ ...:rt.',,-;:;-:•••',.1.--...1,••,• . , 1 1: • '...i.'".2..1.:.:../.; :.':•••. •'.*• ••••'i..'- $ •-77.;:.' ....'" 1 .•": • .., ,' .......I. ....• 4•,..:4••I,......- •,....•4.....1, . f...t....... 4, . . 1 . . • • NOVEMBER 18, 1980 APPLICANT: DOk4ME'=FJE444W3GtM ` FILE NUMBER: R-101-80 A. SQliMARY 2 PQ RPUSE OF REQUEST: • The applicant seeks a -rezone of the subject site from "G" to B-1 for purposes of future commercial development. B. GENERAL INFQD'RMATIQD:U: 1. Owner of Record: DUANE WELLS, INC. . 2. Applicant: PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY . 3. Location: (Vicinity Map Attached) North side of S.W. Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue South 4. Legal Description: A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. . • 5. Size of Property: ±4.96 acres 6. Access: Via Grady Way and Lind Avenue S.W. 7. Existing Zoning: "C", General Classification District; minimum lot size 35,000 sq. ft . 8. Existing Zoning in the Area: "G", B-1 , Business Use; M-P, Manufacturing Park 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial, Manufacturing Park 10. :Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Seattle Times on ' November5, 1980 and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City ordinance on November 7, 1900. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ' 1 PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: DUANE WELLS, R-101-80 NOVEMBER 18, 1980 PAGE TWO • C. HISTORY/BAC9CGROU D: , The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance #1745 of April 14, 1959 at which time the present zoning classification was applied. A special permit for fill 1 and grade of approximately 32,200 cubic yards on the site was approved by the Hearing Examiner on September • 22, 1980. D. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1. Topography: The subject site was utilized for • a railroad in the past. A built up roadbed extends parallel to S.W. Grady Way. The two scales create present storm water drainage pattern. • 2. Soils: Urban land (Ur) is soil that has been modified by disturbance of the natural layers with additions of fill material serveral feet thick to accommodate large industrial and housing in- stallations. The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. 3. Vegetation: The site has been cleared in the past. Second growth scrub vegetation covers the subject site. • 4. Wildlife: Existing vegetation on the site may • ' provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. Water: 6. Land. Use: The site itself is undeveloped at this I - time. In the past it was occupied by railroad . • tracks. E. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: The surrounding properties are developing into light commercial and office park type uses. The older residential area on the south side of S.W. Grady Way is gradually being replaced by commercial and office uses. F. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Water and Sewer: A 12" water main runs parellel . to S.W. Grady Way approximately 50 feet north of the subject site. A second 12" water line runing north and south bisects the property. The primary 108" Metro gravity sewer line is located on the northern property line. Access will have to be via ant established manhole. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department as per Ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route #161 operates along S.W. Grady Way adjacent to the subject site. 4. Schools: Not Applicable • 5. Recreation: Not Applicable F • I 1 I, PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: DUANE WELLS, R-101-80 NOVEMBER 18, 1980 PAGE THREE G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: : 1. Section 4-729; "G", General Classification District. 2. Section 4-711 ; B-1, Business District. H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANT OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: 1. Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan, June 1976, Objectives pages. 5-7. 2. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, 1965, Commercial, page 11. I. IMPACT OR THE NATURAL OR HODMAN ENVIRONMENT: 1. Natural Systems: Rezoning the subject site sill not directly affect the subject site. Future development though will remove the vegetation, disturb the soils, increase storm water runoff and have an. effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. Through proper development controls and procedures, however, many of these impacts can be mitigated. 2. Population/Employment: Rezoning will have no direct impact on population or employment. However, future use of the site will have to be addressed upon specific development. 3. Schools:• Not applicable. 4. Social: Not applicable. Traffic) The proposed office use will generate approximately gag additional vehicle trips per day. J. EDs;VIRONO7ENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance • ' and- the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended, RCW 43-21C, a declaration of non-significance was issued for the subject proposal by the ERC on October 29, 1980. The appeal period expired on November 12, 1980, K. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: 1. City of Renton Building Division. 2. City of Renton Engineering Division. 0 �' 3. City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division. 4. City of Renton Utilities Division. 5. City of Renton Fire Department. L. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The proposed office and restaurant uses would be consistent with the requested B-1 zoning and also • compatible with the existing and developing land uses of surrounding properties. 2. The subject property was generally considered in the adoptions of the Comprehensive Plan in 1965 and the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan in 1976. Planning Department records do not indicate that an area-wide zoning review of this site has been undertaken. These facts would appear to substantiate Section 4-3014A-1 of the Hearing Examiner Ordinance. y`: PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: DUANE WELLS, R-101-80 • NOVEMBER 18, 1980 PAGE FOUR 3. The proposed rezone to B-1 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation of commercial and manufacturing park for the subject site and surrounding area. It is also generally consistent with the following goals of the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan: -Promote high quality development that will enhance the image of the City of Renton. -Enhance the tax base of the City of Renton so all the citizen6 of Renton are able to benefit. -Minimize noise, air and water pollutants, transportation difficulties; glare, heat, vibration, and other detrimental effects. -Provide a high quality working environment for employees. -Provide a viable economic climate for industrial firms. -Promote a diversified economic base. And these Valley objectives: • Land Use: -Light Industrial, office, and warehouses and those heavy industrial uses that can be made compatible with the goals of the Valley are the types of ' 'developmental land uses intended for the valley. Circulation: . -Access should be limited to controlled ingress and egress-points to avoid conflicts and congestion. The proposed use would appear then to conform with Section 4-3014A-2. • 4. Since the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan was adopted in1976, the following development has occurred or is proposed in the vicinity of the site: 550 S.W. 7th - Office Building • 800 S.W. 7th - Office Building S.W. 10th and Lind, Office Building • Grady Way, 0/W Properties - Offices 500 S.W. 7th, Second Floor - Office space 301 S.W. Grady Way, Office Building (Proposed) 313 S.W. Grady Way, Office Building (Proposed) Together with the steady developments occurring in the Earlington Industrial Park (north of S.W. ' Grady Way) and the Orillia Industrial Park (south of S.W. 16th Street), the subject request would- seem to address the criteria outlined in Section 4-3014A-3. The Engineering Division advises that water and • sewer main extension plans must be submitted for approval and that an easement will be necessary to extend the 12" water main located to the north of the subject site. Standard hookup fees for water and sewer will apply. ' I I • • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: DUANE WELLS, R-101-80 NOVEMBER 18, 1980 PAGE FIVE Roadway and utility improvement plans will require approval prior to development of the site as per Engineering Division comment. Fire hydrants and access roadways shall be installed and serviceable prior to building construction. A pre-construction conference with the Fire Marshall will also be required. See other Fire Department comments. { 8. The Traffic Engineering Division indicates that if the proposed easterly access were relocated 100 feet to the west, it could be complemented in the future by a two-way left turn lane from Grady Way. It is also advised that the maximum driveway width is 30 feet unless a variance is sought. As calculated by Traffic, the department is also requesting $20/per daily vehicle trip end to cover the cost of oTr-srte traffic improvements (10.111111.1110 x $20 = $S_3,000). 09. As part of the special permit approval for fill and. grade (SP-072-80), site plan review by the Hearing Examiner for future building construction is required.. 10. Additional comments of other departments are attached for consideration. n. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Based upon the foregoing analysis, it is recommended -that the applicant's request, File Number R-101-80, to rezone the subject site from "G" to 8-1, Business Use, be approved conditioned upon satisfaction of items L-5 through L-9- as stated. • • ®�yyy,d L..7 "-C -�� - a • 4 • {JIli L—I. cti . a l �1 _ i 1i plJ i • �1 1 ,, , ass ; i I. ,,v.r• �.,4- 1 y+ ,, - • . . r- � P s ....... ... ,,, a,w> nninnlr ii 1 - j I £QN 'F tpiiiilNEll gIlU,l� ,,,. '..�� II y, I \ No0. t ,•'ipllilll i, `i 11}Iu •!1.9iik3"�;Wes •- - R� - ` . Iple ;I[ :. r,•q 14,4 i 1411h1II" Ip0 I 1 we tIG•"�I� 111...;w it It %IIId IIIIIIII: to 1 c�4 _1-: "" —laid III��II� ' _/N � V y 2� � -y ,_ ,' , y -� GB r > I •w, :•1M '.4; } O - .RAir : 11 11 .av ;— 3 : ova ool..�-.ow C — _ --1[ L- • •.I 11{` • lifinflik . i t '. 1 I :. Duane Wells, Puget Sound Power & Light Company R-101-80 • APPLICANT DUANE WELLS/PUGET SOUND POWER TOTAL AREA +4.96 acres ' s L1lrH'P PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Grady Way and Lind Avenue S.W. EXISTING ZONING "G' , General Classification District • EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE Future commercial development ' COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial, Manufacturing Park COMMENTS 1 • ,, • 1 , - , I 1 _. . • . .. ---•----- v . 1 : . • S5NVef bioi.tAt•5 '721 -''' S 1 , ,I.Nj_SP.0111 ,k/wai-r- TH c.. 1 xi i v\i'd '111-7Vi ,INJ-19rig,0 ti-L2/1-1- . . 1 . , 1 . .21,19pd-isvp?9/-7risi pa - d .501 ,Il I tA/V, . 1(11^4 1,1-) /40 '09N Aw)-spairli )-1-1-911- .11 51 All i",lv 'xifitiV /9-151,,10 ,e<\01- 01 i • 1 . -iv/0)=101/11/10V-'J 1V1).1•/ 014G`zi ),'I 1 vve 91'21-11 - *9 ggP a , s \Vfl no 1 -_ . . - . . . . . , * .......=......Itd ''07'...fe-M ,:.•:::,,,,..i.V. ,--- - • ' •-..• •,,,,,ts • •,. : ''''. • 0,f1.'z.r.,5V-. • • • -,?.....•,,,,,. , . ‘, ,,...• •t.4./• ..r..::"Z.1...; . ,,,;,.,),...;:t. , fr-' ,': • • • -, , 1 •;.,:i,-7-,...,e;',-t4;--eit • " i I ifia-FV z...._,,, ... •Asg-...,„ ; .•, - - • i . • .-- Li '4 .. i i .i‘C:14...'.:.• . . i t. t I %.••,..:tt . s tttt•A••Fis‘.7. ..1*:),,,,..Lni • #•.1.1. ,.,g'qr.;'47!ntt' t!!„..h,:if:'::. .1 '4..1' •.-.4.rflt.'S.Vi -::*. e.,:...,..,'41-,i*•'•3Ve. . • .. 1 • ',-,A '...1., • - ..,k,I.-.1:-;•.' :.•••,- -7, . f . -•*YA.;• ,-i•.?•r i',.,-',..$7,1 1 . - , 1 i4 .. . 1 ../: :.• i .,---.1..-„," ‘;'4. ).--",-,..:,-".,;'.Y........trett,''i . / ..- ,....,......,, ,4:. . . 4..- "4, ,...:3...,..,;,=ii„ • , „. -,. ....:;:4, ...,., •..,....••=4,1i.t.s, . , ,.,,,.... ''.4, 351. 4"'''13•A'97'.:,:4'1:,; .... ' '-';1°4'...e- '''ft.•;1•7'r7;t4,1:1.1 . • 1 i ..• , , • .. •..••A`-'',..03.•• ••-1,;1:4-e, -,z, 1 1.....4•'. '.. . C.;-:.tr..:1-!::- . .3;221f.14..i.,...--s,...-• 1 1.., t ,,,••:-....,....,• , .,,-...,.o...;-. t..--- ,,, ,...t......4,3 -.1:,;..71-.‘,. :,.;I.-._.;•-::...k,Pw.i.-.... . „wet,-;;;,-.4 ..; . ; .•...•:)-'4:-44!".st,..... :..-4-.-4..• . -,;...., ...T...,;:i., ... .: j•:•..2.,......, i. . I • ...r!'....,.. d ..,:- .:.;,;.,. . '-+r•-i-1:.; : . • •'-C70'- `'.‹:-:+11-;;';-•i., i .,.I.,"•.:::,. '.'•'1.::z S: ' '3 .C*.,.,,,‘•,.., ..,....4444,,,Pr .-X#1.,,,, - ''14''' • : '• i: ',"- ' ,"Al :., , '-.. . ,e; 1 1 i .'"c.:'.-,'•-7. ''.*.`1,'• •-- I • . ,., -.. .: ,t,.-?%),.§( i gr-tiii.) .,•,.!ii..;t1/44-,,,,I.k.0:8 1 . -,r_7.•-•• ----,..hr.?;.-R, . 'at,•:• ........4* .mrt,% • . i ' ,/,.•:; ,t '';-;,.:-.4-A ' , .:".... ,i, i '!...te...-iii•-•v,-,• • ff 1.'•-•' :t,• ;,,,. t...471- -........,.......1,I i:...' it;,,.... • ''ver.f:,1 • 1 •• . i) c . .:.•r ; ; -....,- i:J -1-:t..i..1... I I. 1494"-';'• -t' ...-... .;.-4.;,..3.,., . .t „‹,,,,, ;,..... ,,,..7„.lic ,E!,,....4A.... 1.iii .r.i---: r- .„,_ ,-. .Ls . H1.9 11.; ... ..•in . . ••- ----III. 1 .. 'E -.....: ,. trtt , • ,'' 0---,., -_,„ 1 ,,,--., .,.., :• ..t. mi.-. .;.wt,...., iiil li i ,..,m.. ,i.,..,.;.. ,.: t-)y.11111 , . .4 4.I ,.'•?• -.1:•' \ k., ':r'.1 N i I.-,,,5(1 7',. -,... .*--All - - - _ . - . :• ---------' ..... . i 1 , , 1 • - ' - - '4:-L-S--T- ...,.........441. ... • 11;:e.,:... .-..,..;*--•'.--•-•:::::, '..,', ..- , r4.., . ,,,_ „ , . . ,..•. ... ..•....,.,.k ..„;A,•.:..4•.. 0--••--‘).0tAi-riir,0i,o.s-I iifi -#‘N il'ia,(-\I..,..•s.,.........„-..Vp.-.-sr..i.P.:e›.t.-., l:ii.:r •,i,.><M_._u..-,__-- q r _ .j.. _•-.._•r....a••l-.•tr•r.", .,- 1:7:z,.:•i,,,.-0 .`.-. "---X-' • 1 P6)---i- :013 ..4211.1....;•!.....1.?,D,'i\ ' : -- . .. . ..,,. .. -•ktr.,'....g.'..•. N . II 1 isl •- „.9,..1.'':<,t..7,,•i,-'.,', ..'':'.''w'.'''-.4-.' •3D4 ..-. 1 H i!r*i •:a::,.-.,. .-.....•::.,1,.-.,_• . '!1••=. -. !r • ..,. --., - 1- , . •--1644.1(1-t,S lal I .:-.. .. -)io .•.i.• ',.. '• ..- •-• .1,-,..L..,, . --SlialA'.. ' . • is 1."mmi." II'6Itrintstsi• :' .... .., 0, 4; . .''. Illtadil ' • • - . ..,d r.ri..*: ti.,•••a••••••,,.4,41-2.:.4„7*••fekk?••r5i. , , nop7' 1 ....,' •:.-.L..'• L.; .' i . . -:is ID N___H V : ..: i, •':.,• . ,•i-1:1. •-.0st'ii- itc-'10 #1.,0791 - A,•••• •..c:•"• •• . • . ':r.:(• : i . IL -.11:;t13','.1 •-.• it : . ?' - .. - ••,.. ., ,..,.„.,....,...,,. ,t,i.,4,,?%,•.47.7.;.,,,,.4',..,.*..,:-....1:44-.,,,w..-..,...thi-:,,, .....,.. ...,;:. .•-,• , .:.,. .:41,...„...,..?..i,•=4e.,,,,7.1„...a,;r...1 • --it ..• - • • ..„,,‘ ? -- . , ;...i.......,':.,1: '.'4.; ?..... s -.: 6'-;:i'•:'''1....;'.• ..1.'a).a.... ' .f 1 - t..,*4-:o,:•.....•:711. . ,7'''f.:11'•it."=;.:;?...P•il'•''.;:. :1.:-...; '. '••• I , ..-• - `''1",-"• lil o' ' ..%•• ,IZA',..:,.• i •foi git I...,',.''...::11?-s,st 4.,:.,: 3. ••,;;;:g.,:...-, a.- .1-9`'.- . • '-'127. lb C-1'A'-yzit 1,P, '; ...- ..- it.,. .,, , ,...==.,4,-- -t• 1.?:.:.1...'4 ... . i ;','; ' '''''9'-. ..4.`• , , ....::-.' .{6.,..• /),V,. i ' , - " , • r..4.2.._1-•-4s.,i- 1 • 7••••;.-•••••-• .-•.. T.4,'"•,•„ r • c•-t....., rikiraq.rt • .' '1-.1.1 t .•.. .• e.t.-4•`. II:'111. • '' . *•„, ' ..„,ff.,..A. 1, '....6.4 .ti...r ... . . 1 ' ir.z.' .1.4 -•ii.4 ':4,71W " '''A V...'7.241r.S.0... .-;.'\..ry .4. '4,,, ,2-..•'',.4.-.*:-Z,.' ,.1.4:,'V.$ A . 1 ..e., .. -c•;:',.. • ','''Ii. ---•'- , ' -'• .54;-s'"-T.171,-146"..'..1..--- 4:';',•••:Sr."0,‘ . .,..,..._, . •. .. .... ,.....:: .-. ..,,. .., ... .,,,,,...-..„,,,,„ ,......,,- , - :.,,e,.4 0,,irr • C.r.",,M.,.44••••. -.4:7,,,,,., ,.0,3.,,,,n: ,..,I -tr'•17';‘.•1;;7.-'..”.1, ..,• 'f'-:P'''.... .aef f'..,•;',:cf*l'-' -4"••,.••, n.• • ., ., , .,_ ''''''''''''''' ''''-'':il'''....;-r12.::‘,-;;91-',H.'...''''.:1".. J.44trPt0 -.1-' '-...‘•91' '• -.... ---'71-1.-'-'- ' cr7a*.ttEgg• - :7. 1 iror? !.., .4*_1,- Ati.)-er,' .- • 1,,Z.1- . ' •'' '1 .44, ," fr ....4,i TT f . ."... 44,,tiL,,,I;.-..:''''''.....1.1r„-...4.11."., '' ;t4"-- 4.7.- II. 1 ' , =4.4'€•:. - -..5. c''''14••'• . .' 1' ---;.' • •'. ••••••• :•,•••• k- -) i 4011 1•4.2W.. ..:'-'7::''.:r•-:.....01...4-4.4 711.-'4'.' 4.-...,• 1 • 'i• 'II ilib 4 © P1'anni f1c . . ,ss..r 12-1979 • RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: 'Da,> iye fla.)izLkS�Pu T ?tees RGt ' 11�— E0(- Re7uesi: l . -to !,�osP�PSS L�Sc _LL'-' i ..1 Location: he wed' '.S. $;e,ov # � o:0 Applicant: ' a. Weds) I d f—®...pa TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: Nov. 03_ . Police Department A.R,C. MEETING DATE: O GT 30 I . Public Works Department E.e.c. eiEg72AA Engineering Division • b 're: oar '• Traffic Engineering 0 • Building Division , . .. (.. . ilities Engineering: . itFire Department* . ' ' • (Other): • COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS 'REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN • WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON PILTDOA-Ra 3O P so AT 9:00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. ' IF YOUR DEPARTMENT DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE ARC, PLEASE PROVIDE THE gpTENTs TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON • OC.70a CA' Si'a k `�O . • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION �d ' • '*'//C i ' Approved ,i Approved with Conditions Not Approved / '`L--( i,u 7K'aC 7iG ti L''✓.ti`G7C tiCG XL�!C.,,,CYO Cui;/71 fl EG . 7/ii2.S///iL.7-7,,72 ff /..7C VC`G&'i" -!�ti i ,.3%�/.UGC �1G G:. /.2 /}/%L,C,ii . c-GPt.=5 /1,.. -) 4-% .2.-).s../•?.t —5 C✓77-7 -/"..% T//C C,-t-y <C6//-7-7.vC.. l~,/.0 6:•2iar- 7 /,:c.-,`5s /:c.,74x),,.nYS. /y/7 .2/c- ', i'/�%...%/it.:_! ,S'.a 2.- , . .. /A, S:�eGC 9/./-;2'l�! SG': •/CL i-9/JLG` /��-C"l/.✓._rs uu i[/iL'_�//✓G • L..` ,,' Signature of Director or Auha�ize.d Representative Date • ,/ • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Lin ur,&S I Approved . Approved with Conditions Not Approved -- i j7 J. 00). FeeS _ NIL 4- W/1[V�� Mobil L�J 3{+ PAO I f 1 { /w 4PPnoJG-'D L✓Qztr1.f-fuN CtrCNLc.ofl �pu A wvSr w Gt6•...rrr, ✓( f . . . /0/24)/gc)P21--- - - 1 y Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date s 'lam r (, t1/411, yr n. Jn„ RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: 1Da'91 f_i 9.a.'ast-LS/ r:7 --Powa REzwe (R10( ' u( Location: PJ ,+ G,rn CA..)0v 461'w i96) S. Applicant: "Do weds0241 owe TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: IiD V. 1B Police Department . A,R,C, MEETING DATE: O .T 3 0 ve'public Works Department Engineering Division D frr a O =2 Traffic Engineering Building Division Utilities Engineering Fire Department . f (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED' IN WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON OG.7 e-ia _ $7 €3O AT 9:00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOUR DEPARTMENT DIVISIOP' REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TQ ATTEND THE ARC PLEASE PROVIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY :00 P.M, ON 0GrnSPA qg e 9 `moo • REVIEWIPiG DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: • Approved X Approved with Conditions Not Approved Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: POLICE DEPT. XXX Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved LT:'D'R,• PERSSON ].0/21/80 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date • '�f� Plannin �`4 , © 12-1979 ' • RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT • DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: 1D49AVA ��--ALSO �C—� rPowaa R ~ zDoe i IT " Re7tle 1 6' it ff 1, v3ra o Location: A ilk Wca.i,� r aade°s�d►� S.P", Lv av¢k n;eJe Applicant: � � c•. �i �As..) 'tom TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: Police Department A,R,C, MEETING DATE: O C.T �C Ru n't 87WdJe7 Engineering Division DtYre par 22 • Traffic Engineering ' ' IV Building Division Utilities Engineering • Fire Department (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON Or.70 .`sue Ici 78t7 AT 9:00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOUR DEPA'RTM?NTIDIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE ARC, PLEASE PROVIDE THE cO;;MENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved Approved with Conditions - Not Approved %/i /� �' /% !, Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: RTI.IENT/DIVISION: Approved X Approved with Conditions Not Approved s } c /SO 3 , rvdi� er/ ger:,'df5 �`°}+oo6r _ � �3Njs • i 0 • FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE • 1 j Application No(s): • R-101-80 -- Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-610-80 ' 1 "i Description of Proposal: Rezone from "G" to 8-1 for future office • and restaurant uses. Proponent: Duane Wells, Inc./ Puget Sound Power and Light Company . I • Location of Proposal: North side of S.W. . . . Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue II! South Lead Agency:• Planning Department This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on October 22, 1980, following a presentation by Steve Munson of the Planning Department. Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-610-80 are.the following: • 1) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: • Roger J. Blaylock DATED: October 22, 1980 • 2) Applications.: R-101-80 Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does not have significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43. 21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on rile with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: No adverse impacts upon adjacent properties. Signatures: ' ohn E. Webie Ye Pa and 'o on '. : '' � ' J4111.111. . `Recreation Di c€or P.anning,4 actor • , . -'D -i Warren C. Gonnason Public Works Director • DATE OF PUBLICATION: /0-z9-Fr.• EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: //-/2-ff) IIIF • • • • OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RECEIVED . CITY OF RENTON DEC 311980 PROPERTY DEVOELOPM Nr REPORT AND DECISION, APPLICANT: Puget Sound Power & Light Company FILE NO. SH. PL. 100-80, E-122-80 LOCATION: Northwest corner of Rainier Avenue South and S.W. Grady Way. • SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks approval of a proposed four-lot short plat together with an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to permit access to Lots 2 and 3 by a joint easement. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions. Hearing Examiner Decision: Approval with conditions. • PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on December , 1980. 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 Eearing)was opened on December 23, 1980 at 10:20 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Bui ing. ' Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report. _ an. cr ment, presented the report, and entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #1 : Application File containing Planning Department report and other pertinent documents Exhibit #2: Short Plat as submitted Exhibit #3: Short Plat with staff comments The Examiner indicated that further research would be required to determine whether or not a variance should be requested from the Parking and Loading Ordinance in lieu of an • exception to the Subdivision Ordinance. The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Dick Causey Manager, Land Planning Puget Sound Power & Light Co. Puget Power Building Bellevue, WA 98009 Mr. Causey indicated concurrence in the recommendations of the Planning Department. He • clarified that during rezone review Puget Power had agreed to provide the city with an easement for an existing water line which crosses the property, and during special permit review, storm drainage plans had been coordinated. Mr. Causey advised that an exception had been requested to allow for a single driveway between Lots 2 and 3 which would eliminate one driveway along Grady Way, provide for landscape screening and reduce the number of potential accidents. The Examiner indicated that the short plat car be approved without an exception, but in the event a variance application is determine, necessary, reapplication will be required. Since there were no further comments, the hearing regarding File No. Short Plat 100-80 and E-122-80 was closed by the Examiner at 10:25 a.m. • I I • i • • • • Sh. P1. 100-80 Page Two • FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: • 1. The request is for approval of a four-lot short plat of +4.96 acres together with an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance for a shared easement access for proposed Lots 2 and 3. 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the Planning i • Department report, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental • Policy Act of 1971, R.C.W. 43.21.C., as amended, the subject proposal has been determined exempt from the threshold determination by members of the Environmental Review Committee, responsible officials. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. There was no opposition to the proposal expressed. I 6. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. The water main crossing • the property must be extended to the property line and an easement granted to the city for access. 7. The subject property is located on the north side of Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue S. The property was rezoned from G (General ; Single Family Residential ; Minimum lot size - 35,000 square feet) to B-1 (Business/Commercial) in late 1930. A special permit to grade and fill the site was issued in September, 1980. 8. The proposal would create four lots and each lot would have frontage along Grady Way. In addition, Lots 1 and 4 would have frontage along Rainier Avenue and Lind Avenue, respectively. 9. Access to Lot I would be via Grady Way approximately adjacent to its western boundary and away from the Grady Way/Rainier intersection. Lot 4 would have access onto Lind Avenue S.W. 10. The applicant proposes access for the two central lots, Lots 2 and 3, via a joint driveway. The applicant has proposed this method to lessen the number of curb cuts and driveways intersecting Grady Way, a heavily used arterial . The proposed driveway will create an easement driveway between Lot 2 and Lot 3 and straddle the common property line. Such driveway will violate Section 4-2204(2) (A) which requires that driveways be no closer than five feet to the property line. The applicant has applied for an exception to the Subdivision Code. Instead, a variance is required from the provision which is in :the Parking and Loading Ordinance. Notice of the exception fully disclosed the nature of the relief requested, that is, modification of the provision prohibiting a driveway from abutting a property line. 11. The development on the subject site will generate approximately 470 ehicl;)trips per day. The Traffic Engineering Division has determined that-1raftic rested improvements in this area will cost in excess of $20 per trip generated. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The four-lot short plat proposed by the applicant appears to serve the public use and interest. The division and subsequent development of each of the lots of the short subdivision will help increase the tax base of the City of Renton. 2. The access to Lots 1 and 4 will minimize interference with Grady Way and Rainier Avenue which are both heavily traveled arterials. The proposed joint driveway would help additionally decrease the effective curb cuts and areas of turning along Grady Way. The notice of the public hearing this matter was sufficient to encompass the necessary variance request, and therefore, a variance may be granted. The elimination of an extra driveway will lessen interference with the arterial traffic on Grady Way and improve public safety. The variance will not prove detrimental to neighboring properties nor harmful to the general public. The • location of the subject property fronting three heavily used arterials, Lind, Grady and Rainier, justifies granting the variance for a public safety aspect as indicated above. • E l . 4 • • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO TEE BEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 23, 1980 ', I j [ APPLICANT: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY i FILE NUMBER: SHORT PLAT 100-80; E-122-80 A. SUMMARY S PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks approval of a proposed 4-lot short plat together with an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to permit access to lots 2 and 3 by a joint easement. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: • 1 . Owner of Record: DUANE WELLS, INC. 2.. Applicant: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 3. Location: I (Vicinity Map Attached) N.W. corner of Rainier • Avenue South and S.W. Grady Way 4. Legal_Description: A detailed legal description is available • on file in the Renton • Planning Department. 5. Size of Property: +4.96 acres 6. Access: , Via Grady Way and Lind Avenue S.W. • • 7. Existing Zoning: "G", General Classification District; minimum lot size 35,000 sq. • ft. 3. Existing Zoning in the Area: "G", B-1 , Business Use; M-P, Manufacturing Park • 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial, Manufacturing Park 10. Notification: The applicant was • notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice • • was properly published in the Seattle Times on December 10, 1980 ' and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City ordinance on December 5, 1980. C. EISTORY/BACRGROUJD: II The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance I { 41745 of April 14, 1959 at which time the present zoning classification was applied. A special permit for fill and grade of approximately 32,200 cubic yards on the site was approved by the Hearing Examiner on September 22, 1980 and a rezone from "G" to B-i was also approved by the Hearing Examiner on November 24, 1980. � u • . MII .jp' '." :--*. �' PLANNING DEPARTMENT y_ sL PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER& LIGHT CO. ; SHORT PLAT 100-80 DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE TWO D. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: • i' 1. Topography: The subject site was utilized for .1 a railroad in the past. A built up roadbed extends parallel to S.W. Grady Way. The two swales create • • present storm water drainage pattern. 1 2. Soils: Urban land (Ur) is soil that has been modified' ' ' by disturbance of the natural layers.with additions 1. . ' of fill material several feet thick to accommodate ' large industrial and housing installations. The • erosion hazard is slight to moderate. 3. Vegetation: The site has been cleared in the past. • Second growth scrub vegetation covers the subject site. 1 • 4. Wildlife: Existing vegetation on the site may provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. 5._ Water: • 6_ Land Use,: The site itself is undeveloped .at this • time_ In the past it was. occupied by railroad tracks. ' E. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: . The surrounding properties are developing into light ," commercial and office park' type uses. The older re- . • sidential area on the south side of S.W. Grady Way. is gradually being replaced by commercial and office uses. F. -PUBLIC SERv10ES: I. Water and Sewer: A 12" water. main runs parallel to S.W. Grady Way approximately 50 feet north of the subject site. A second 12' water line running north and south bisects the property. The primary • 108" Metro gravity sewer line is located on the northern property line. Access will have to be via an established manhole_ 2.. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire • . Department as per Ordinance requirements. • 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route #161 operates along S.W. Grady Way adjacent to the subject site. • • 4. Schools: Not Applicable ' 5. Recreation: Not Applicable • • G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-729; "G", General Classification District. 2. Section 4-71i ; B-1 , Business District. • H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: . 1. Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan, June 1976, Objective pages 5-7. 1 2. Comprehensive Plan, Land. Use Report, 1965, Commercial, I- page 11. . 3. Subdivision Ordinance, Section 9-1105; Short Sub- division. 4. Subdivision Ordinance, Section 9-1109; Exceptions. 410 , I PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT, CO. SHORT PLAT 100-80; DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE THREE I. IMPACT OF THE NATURAL OR HUMAN E vIE81D 7T: 1. Natural Systems: Minor • 2. Population/Employment: The requested short plat will have no direct impact on population or employment. Future site development will, however, and will need to be addressed at that time. 3. Schools: Not Applicable • I 4. Social: Not Applicable 5. Traffic: The proposed office use will generate approximately 470 additional vehicle trips per day. J. • ENVIEONMIENITAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended, RCW 43-2.1C., the subject proposal is exempt from the Threshold Determination of Environmental Significance. K. t'-.rGFArIES/BDEPA TS 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. L. PIS'°i I''IIG'DE.PART 'T ANALYSIS 1. The proposed short plat is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of commercial ' ' and manufacturing park for the site and surrounding areas. 2. The proposal is compatible with the existing commercial and office uses to the north and west of the subject site. 3. All of the proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance for the size and frontage. 4. Although each lot does front on a public street, the applicant is requesting an exception to Section 4-2204-2A of the Parking and Loading Ordinance to permit access to lots 2 and 3 by a joint access easement and common driveway. This would be necessary • in order to comply with the 5' standard of this section. The existing street pattern and topography do not provide for access to the rear'. In addition, the requirement for separate driveways per individual lots would necessitate the removal of substantial amounts of existing curbing on Grady Way. Approval of this request would not only reduce the number • of driveways and potential circulation conflicts but also lower substantially the expense of curbing removal. A somewhat similar request was approved • by the Hearing Examiner in the Doug Weston Short Plat #2 (Short Plat 061-80) on August 1, 1980. Given this and a related exception approved in the Cecelia Wooten Short Plat (Short Plat 375-79) , • • j _ 410 • PLANNING DEPARTMENT • PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT CO.: SHORT PLAT 100-80 • DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE FOUR it would appear that there is some Pp precedent for {{ • such a request and that justification has been. j supplied (See 9-1109) . 5. Suitable utilities are available to the subje site, although a water main extension plan a ong Grady Way will be required as well as an eas.ment( for extending the existing 12" water main. U" itie Engineering also notes that standard hookup fees • will apply. • 6. The Engineering Division advises that all off-s • improvements and storm drainage across th • e ; cns=} in an east-west direction will be requir 7.. Proper ingress and (agress must be provided and all future buildingvconstruction shall meet fire codes as per Fire Department comment. M. DEP d'AL R Df IO1 S: Based upon the above analysis it is recommended that approval of the' short plat and exception requests be granted subject to the satisfaction of the requirements • outlined in L-5- and L-6. • • • • • • _ I fk { a fiJ1pu t c . -- . ti9 1,1 1. .l • 1 1 I. ' . �'. .Z .• I` i I.. . 1 I 1. .F�;• �. .._ .li : 1 —_ i ' �dt16%t'„' I 1 .• :".4.-.V.---19.--)6.:ligt.-littO,"' t r.- I t •• il il it Hi k•._4: ' I n fI I �ai l° ph u : IP:nl ,- IIIIuII • I -=.1 ri ; • 0...,,,,,,m• • ..,=i------...,. _.,fjj ---- ..•i ..v...,_ -..,. il. - iiitit . -11. :i --� n. \. • ,' ....4 _ .. _ 8�~ _. 1;� �p Y a I'uY4� V' '.+ _.l 1�pew.��wy(7+ 1 r - '.• r4 • S �' - I.a �i*` 1A�l1 cCs[i�-........................ *.i= .;i�i•' A/2s�'id. .. I •ill�i u y .l "+m • .�: •.• yjM T.rw�'j'.•: .1--; =.1 •....... •..� . I.S. D , • ''v '1,•'l \ • � ' . i -'«f` °i I. } . 4 :1,..mot. - 1 li r! _. `.,.p`ey ' •tl • ''' !( • x r f 1 ` 1 H .1 871 i `� I. . j L. Apr ,. PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY • • SHORT PLAT 100-80; -E-122-80 APPLICANT Puget Sound Power & Light Co. TOTAL AREA +4.96 acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Grady Way'and Lind Ave. S.W. . • EXISTING ZONING G, General Classification District . . l EXISTING USE Undeveloped _ gPROPOSED USE Commercial Use COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial, Manufacturing Park COMMENTS - i I • • i i 1 • .. , . • • . .-. , • . ... . •.•••:"; . • • -. . • -,, - .. .A. -.1..• ...-*••sh., . • - -r...:...• •--.• :•,".. - % i d,d - 101).?,/-3 ,)2s - •-) N ' • ,--IA", • . ...:-.1;••*.;-; . •••••0 41.4 I -1,N,I•S(7,01`11 Aiwati- 11-1 -..41:,•,4 C•g ! A-111^Pv 'J1171"1 ),1-1911.6,0 hu9IM • 'ail . , ?-;•-, , -2nerki-iSvfl22/i)rigild - d •501 xliv " n-1141 ALlyt‘iva "ciehi•-•avq , 1 ' 1 : AI:0406N )-1-14-211- 1,1 .55i All VPot ,1,111IN 1.)-14/saa "107- 'al '1'6 • . ..-,•,', • 1\/10301/1tAto-,- lviAvsems‘zi si INV 91T-1-125 - * t. .. . 1 . . . • . • ggi-1 dWci )--N dei no •. . . • . _ , , • , . , --....a.....1.3131:35 -'ett.1.3-t-TA .-..73;;...3,:s. ••-- — •••-n•!mt•tr.. . - j -\-•:..;..:•';' -4'ilitigii17,.. 1 - ' • •;,..1 1 '.:::::.....(i., g LOAiss*.eit. , I1!.‘1:;,•!rie:.. Itin:i".. ' b:•..'%.'..:....p.!....1..., 17;.' r,•',1-ei.,' ,___ Val I i•i'.1i -• ... ... • Tit' .';•,:-1 1. II - •;•••.:,;.0i. .;, - • : . •• ..., • •t's;rt.•>''.A14.,. - Iii I A007.5,4S i •1!;•.•,„...?, . . , 1 ';•:•:•••;.,....., 41. ,'''''.7.•;: l.V... 1'1,N: ' ' • I i....t.'r.:z..; giegt.;.6k,f,;.: ,.: ••,, i . :,%vt••••• .. - 1 • r 4i• 1 t. /:4.:• 11,.,.,at71 g0$.:,1...4t „ ..„4,..;..;k..0i.4 1/ •0 1.:Zstfi•;.•..•.':•:.• '4;ryk;S::.1!IA.CA111 • ' • . j :1 .•• . . lit;e4A.trh;•1111%1:. • 4:4•At,4,,,. ...r •••''• ... .I . If.)i.,:i 1 ,pet . , • , 0-:4 " ...'.: 1 • :.r..j t'Lle41,2F C4ti...34-ipir,I. 1 ..r % • .....1.4r- e'l?II,i . .• . 1 ' 1 lsic.t.t,.. i,Ii.• ...ZS, .1te• ...' .. e;.,°••.'7,..,:i ! -\'•\..1::11:"e,.`....'41.1•'•:'..:.0''''•'''''FrPT.I'' 11....,...-,114.,:.4tit,',. .•'''• ...V lie I . . !'--..----F-C ------------- 1. I., . . ii. ji:i!':•''Zi:''',a.' . . 140•IN;' 1 II '.;.6.%11::',3','4.c.'."41.0,4.1.3r;q ' '/' .C . '.... ,:',45.;!;11 • . 7,-. ; . ....,:;:,:!`. , ',',!•!-7,.!47iq:! , . clislt t. • -v. VI- ! : . - '4..444 • • • • 1 -."-F.P' 10 C ‘4('Ir•... %. .'"..4.Q.&• . 1 ,..,,\. ! i)",i6•:i:i!.-.--40',41;40Vall. . . . 4!.','.••.- 4.:'..',ON. .i.i.1...Ac:k••'•e 1•••,!,.. ..,,_ -,b•fi 1 - A•s•f)11,, ..-... ,..u.v,..,„,;,.„,.... "4..'"). ..:I.,),44 . :at A; ....',•• .• •:..ie.Rf11,‘ I .. c3Z... .':,'..',.. - a.''t 1 ;-.!:e,'1,,''.t.,::`ir.:':03e;.•%.1.:.. - 0•• I >.:',T.:''''.04;-;:i ' .-ii., ; ! 'En 40-:•:%•41 , 1 • '10 t i 1,Ai-• 3 •.;.17::::.1.611.;•4, , I ,•53. /0 \ ..... ..._.2 i?t..._.7 1 M .... ._. . 79 re- z - .., i ___,.•,'t• i .- . . ' ftwor-.111C-.47/'VP. ...all•-P........: .2 if — Is H-7. _ -.-:-.. . I., . . ii ..-7.,i...t -- „, ,..: ,..., ,,r. 3....0 •t' • ''' y i •az-, , eVi 4R.I.4 ... ..' 1 . .,,....) I OV,.. _ •13 ..t.......- . . jifil P11 .-• II ' ...:,••l't t•.R1'3.c.,t._.' _...._„,„,_---.-.-••-•-••-•-•-•-----• •••••••• •'-"---'. i-1-1111. . .4..): . " .1 9.'"f41711. •.:- .- , .-.. -, .... .''''' ..,---77, ,.;.: ..e.i.,vi •'' .i ' • 'e.,,. ,.. tel.. ..........• .' Y -—1 to 21t.ie r-•". '-'''' —.--:- "'..--ok:. ....• \1 liiii-,.-. ..- 0f....„r2.p, ....f rrro.r"a illu>, • - ,.',i ...•.:•=•..:.-,*--,:--,-,„,,..)..s,..,e..,-„, .,- .. . el • . \ • r •-.._....-_, r...- - '.01Vi< . '-:.---' . _-•--- ,t- ..}..171.__.----- lella Ilk' ------),t__--NN-- -'-"-----4-- . , 3•:. ,• ..•1 ,..-,.-..-,,0 53- _. • ,..-------- 3_ .----" •,er- 1 ,,,,.. WO .......-• . ...,....V.----. !•••4i;,-;7 .. 40? I'‘P l "". I . ..----- ......._.....--- . • h c."0 •.4,14;.P..04 • 1 0 -;:i.,5.1 oe ft., ' , !I...4.es. i ,,,,, •..•• .i.. , • ,,*•:i, . „„,„11,111111,,..r44.„",/_,444, ...A1 ......, 1 . H 1 1. ........,...z?.:00•241i14-4.powl..t- •:-- . 52., .....,:,.... •.•:,...h. ,1-,• . • i m - 4.A...4.14110,....,..;•• ..-- ..,,, .4•,.••-• , ..--.-- :. ,—V-111- r• 4i ' .• •• ‘' • '' ••Irk\‘`'it:4 • • ...- . - c go/1,1 •.e;.."Exiim •.• U - . f •itl •: .•• . i u±s n 1,?9rgIS :.s 3....i.., .: ' . . F7-) • . • .1•:...,'7 . •..'.t4 i ION V ..: 1 • ..... ,:e,..,.,.:. ,-. .....,_,. • ... .. .4 •, :.,-•:,.,:i ••,v ve--....u..iy,..; . ..„,::. /...:46,,, ...... ..-, .,,.: 4i,• •,',..:03i... -•.;-.. 3'.f•':'•:.•••1 fe. . 4,/•-' . -'31.;''''Ck.• '•':•- t A'' — .. •.r .,,.t..e,A. 1,t•.:,.; %•!J .!,•,.•,, t.•' :I".,ti .....li •;:;,J;t1.•4:1,,,04-': , .. ,t• '... 1..t.1:.eirt :...f.V. . , • . .1,-,,f`'.'4' (1...e,•(:. '..,.`Al c•--A.-1'''''.''''• ' .''it t•'•f'S'1-;7',':. . • . . .3t: • X;*.ta;41...1., ,it, .4;, ';Ez.1,-;1. .••• t•i;• • t.tt•i'y',': 0,•11 r skr:. ' •••t's;'-f .44.1.:N•Lii • ••'• . . , ..,,At•i'' p;‘,;;;;,:1..11 •/••••t ..., •• •,,• . ...: ....-;.. 1 if f..11 •:ko.•,../.i•=4:-. :1.1f:. • li,J -1 ,../: I • k•-,• •,c‘• - -- - tiAlic,••• t,;40'I t,,,zif.,.,..,1. Cr) , V.,. ,2 at';*,1:itiv ;A 1 • ._. j::%4 gf;''; !...;t.-1-..bg'13Z • i '......Z...:. : r.,..,.. ,...2,„ 1 ,..: . . '1•• •,'1,1t4 '"'k '‘'' •'''.4 1%t• :•:•••,•• '`Ft• . ' IVO t •• '', ''''''t>,"4;41Tht/"W..ii. ' . ....i.:;.••••:• •',.1..ti,„.2-;.P...1::i; • „.. ' v 4^4,?•••• ,, e „7A, • ••IS Nit.I' 6 . ., .M.Iprtir.i,. . !..; .,. _-. • . ! • 44 .•, , . __ • .•:,:6,.-. .... ..45_•- • .,4, • I:- `,. e''' '41...:j•. . ./S3=4:'•I . .....a4a...14....4:.....t•:-4..,. 1 •. .• 1. Y..'t ••.. •V iz..! I . .... •,:. :',1 '. :, . .. , 1 . _ • RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEI'I SHEET . APplication:S ®ro7P TOf30—g,o) q/ Location: raymQr© ilehtt eIP v..5. i,S4A5 ' �tol � Applicant: � � �p s�l�ci� � �ef�9°. 0 . { TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: 447/94 Police Department . A.R.C. MEETING DATE: 11124y84 Public Works Department Engineering Division • Traffic Engineering Bull 'ng'Division J Utilities. Engineering Fire Department (Other): COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS- REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING��FO THE:APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON AT 9:UO A.M. IN •THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOU DE V ARTMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE ARC, PLEAS V,I EP.M.HE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P. . ON I �° S I 1'ICIYIJUli1J1 U11. Approved 1/, Approved with Conditions Not Approved /J G/iG<)//.6- (b.L,S' e r 'C i 0/u `91.71/7L c ,,..‹'cei ./9i _ i/4G �c„„jeT:f(- • . z- -c_.),--;:::7- . )-- . '--..........-C--i /((V. , L/�iV Signature of Director or Au horized Representative ate • • Approved '�Approved with Conditions Not Approved S343.JGLT Tb warc*+S..mfi..e 6 re,usto,y P&.e^-f 4wnrc, C,0_c0y ,,,.„4,./ . 1 II II e4.Sv-►'�..Z Ft$IL TX. a.: ..0r +e>..V fy- �Z~ Z t~ � I i t� SYS�-+-Y 06'✓ Ct�,cwye�5 .o�/fir w.aic2' ' --.....--------Z.) (702_, . 0 v f.../.2_ se.ide4-. u/7)€'') • Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rtvltw>,n_o u y1- • Approved X .Approved with Conditions Not Approved [� At fk.r i1: .r. . -s.ke a‘ ,�..,( -ill-- t�,rll t,� s�� ._.-t- ,Y s r2ZT I �Y.''�. ,._a :_�y r{.. GLLC.o�•t40 4 G L',t.e�� dy _�G1 . -I ,: -1„.... l/ b t l��'t- :,-. .tt• c.":-1 ate ✓itz' c"-ales! /:14 ;Jtti1 LJt r. L 6 r .sr"-a . ,,-.l-j Y _/ ,, ict.‘'-2 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Dats f/ . Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved • 7;7 ' . ./i:rriis ( /r, mot."7 t--•-t..�l Signnaa;,tf of Director or horized Representative // 4e_1 J . . -Date .... • / / • Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved ? S..it� � ..i/ e,�- = fl -�-- �__ . . wc�%a3o 4Z•�-.�,;c,.� et.....- .e..,-f' - w o � . ! (ii• • • Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 4�nT1ACN�t, I 1 iIC nc O t 1 -a.,.; pproved Approved with Conditions Not Approved I 1 • I . • ---- ' /• /-,I ,•_,._-- 1 -..?-e'er ilignature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved .1 ti_. , ..•..-.. ,-... ..-7 l ",e.. ...�::f4•iei�.... . ..•... .. .... .4'i::.'.:•.'=t.r•-v* .t--�iy%,'� _._ '•sk.:.: l:; -N, i^f: PERKINS, COI E, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS I TOM A.ALSERG DONALO G.KARI 1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING JOHN DANIEL BALLBACH JENNIFER SUE MORGAN BURROUGHS B.ANOERSON EDWARD W.KUHRAU WILFRED D.BENNETT CLARK REED NICHOLS J.DAVID ANOREWS DOUGLAS S.LITTLE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 RONALD L.BERENSTAIN JANE NOLAND ' JOHN F.ASLIN TIMOTHY A.MARRING DAVID J.BURMAN RUSSELL L.PERISHO DOUGLAS P.BEIGHLE STEVEN C.MARSHALL TELEPHONE:2O8.682.8770 BRUCE D.CORKER THOMAS E.PLATT DENNIS L.BEKEM EVER STEPHEN A.MCK EON RICHARD C.COYLE RICHARD OTTES EN PRENTKE STEVEN SCOTT BELL ROBERT S.MUCKLESTONE TELECOPIER:206.682-8784 SUSAN K.DONALDSON LAWRENCE B.RANSOM JOHN H.BINNS,JR. J.SHAN MULLIN ROBERT C.GILES RICHARD R.ROHOE WAYNE C.BOOTH,JR. HAROLD F.OLSEN TELEX:32-0319 PAUL B.000DRICH MARK A.ROWLEY J.PAUL COIL OMAR S.PARKER,JR. RONALD M.GOULD HARRY H.SCHNEIDER,JR. THEODORE J.COLLINS CHARLES I.STONE STEPHEN M.GRAHAM JAMES H.SIMON BRUCE MICHAEL CROSS F.THEODORE THOMSEN HEATHER S.HOWARD PETER D.SLOANE • CALHOUN DICKINSON RICHARD S.TWISS ANCHORAGE OFFICE WAS HINGTO N,D.C. FFICE MARY ROSE HUGHES EVELYN SROUFE JOHN D.DILLOW DAVID E.WAGONER BARRY M.KAPLAN EDWIN B.STERNER WALTER W.EYER RICHARD E.WALKER 420"L^STREET 1300-19TM STREET N.W. CHARLES J.KATZ,JR. ROBERT STOKES,JR. GRAHAM H.FERNALD WILLIAM S.WEAVER OTTO G.KLEIN III C.JAIRUS STRATTON,III H.WESTON FOSS ANDREW M.WILLIAMS ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 WASHINGTON.O.C.20038 RICHARD ALAN KLOBUCHER BART WALDMAN KEITH GERRARD RICHARD E.WILLIAMS CHERYL A.LEANER VERNON LWOOLSTON,JR. ' CHARLES C.GORDON DAVID LIEBERWORTH JIMMY WU WILLIAM A.GOULD CHRISTOPHER T.BAYLEY JAMES R.LISBAKKEN LAWRENCE B.HANNAH JOHN R.PRICE - - - RICHARD E.McCANN WENDELL W.BLACK JAMES M.HILTON OF COUNSEL JANET M.MMKAY LUCIEN F.MARION RAMER B.HOLTAN.J R. PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE M.MARGARET MCKEOWN LOWELL P.MICKELWAIT THOMAS J.MCLAUGHLIN D.FOREST PERKINS LEE E.MILLER COUNSEL January 13, 1981 Office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner City of Renton • Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Request for Reconsideration of the Hearing • Examiner' s Decision regarding Puget Sound Power & Light Company' s Short Plat, File No. SH.PL. 100-80, E-122-80 Dear Mr. Kaufman: Pursuant to title 4 , §3015 of the Renton City Code and other relevant Code sections, and on behalf of Puget Sound I Power & Light Company, we hereby request reconsideration of the report and decision of the Renton City hearing examiner regarding the short platting petition, file no. SH.PL. 100-80, E-122-80. This request for reconsideration is based on the following grounds: 1. The Findings are based on errors of fact; 2. Conclusions are based on errors of law; 3. The imposition of a fee for vehicle trips is not authorized by law; y 4. The vehicle trip fee imposed is excessive; ,, 5. The need for vehicle trip fee is unsupported by the evidence; Office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner January 13, 1981 Page two 6. The vehicle trip fee imposed is not reasonably related to the impacts of the short plat applied for; 7. Such other grounds as shall be presented at the hearing. Oral argument and an opportunity to offer additional testimony and evidence are requested. Sincerely, PERKINS, COIE, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS Attorneys for Puget Sound Power & Light Compant By Kenneth B. Shellan KBS/vc cc: City Clerk, Renton Planning Department OF R4,, u ° THE CITY OF RENTON t$ C> z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 o rn BARBARA'. Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER co' FRED J. KAUFMAN, 235-2593 094 7. sO SEP1E���P January 15, 1981 Mr. Kenneth B. Shellan Perkins, Coie, Stone, Olsen & Williams 1900 Washington Building Seattle, WA 98101 RE: File No. Short Plat 100-80, E-122-80; Puget Sound Power & Light Company; Request for Reconsideration. Dear Mr. Shellan: I have had an opportunity to review your request for reconsideration and find that there is no justification in your request to change the decision. The Hearing Examiner Ordinance, Section 4-3014(D) and the Subdivision Ordinance, particularly Subsections 9-1105(4) and 9-1106(2) (E) , respectively, permit the imposition of conditions and require a determination that the public roadways are or must be provided for by the applicant. It should be noted that there is no procedure entitling the applicant to an oral argument on reconsideration. Reconsideration is based on the existing record, that is, the testimony previously received into evidence along with the various exhibits. The applicant is still entitled to appeal this matter to the City Council within a second 14-day appeal period to expire on January 29, 1981 . Very truly yours, Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc: Parties of Record __. PERKINS, COTE, STONE, OLSEN - & WILLIAMS . ' TOM A.AI.BERG DONALD G.KARI 1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING JOHN DANIEL 0ALLRACI. JENNIFER SUC MORGAN BURROUOMS B.ANOCRSON ' COWARD w.KUHRAU • WILFRED D.BENNETT CLARK REED MICHOLS J.CAVID ANDREWS DOUGLAS S.LITTLE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 96101 RONALD L.BCRCNSTAIN JANE NOLANO JOMN A.ASLIM TIMOTHY A.MANNING OAVIO J.BUPMAH RU SS ELL LPCRISHO OOUGLAS P.BEIGNLC STEVEN C.MARSHALL BRUCE CI.CORNER TMOMAS E.PLATT DENNIS L.B[KCMEYCR STEPHEN A.NeKfON TELEPHONE:206.6E12.8770 RICHARD C.COYLE RICHARD OTTESEN PRCNTIC _I. STEVEN SCOTT BOLL ROBERT S.MUCKL ESTONC TELECOPIER:206.682-8784 SUSAN K.DONALDSON LAWRENCE S.RANSOM JOHN N.BINBS.JR. J.SHAN MULLIN ROBERT E.GILES RICHARD R.ROHOE WAYNE C.BOOTH,JR. HAROLD F.OLSEN TELEX:32-0319 PAWL S.GOODRICH HARK A.ROWLEY J.PAUL COIE OMAR S.PARKER.JR. RONALD M.GOULD • HARRY H.SCHNEIDER,JR. , THEODORE J.COLLINS ' CHARLES I.STONE - STEPHEN M.GRAHAM JAMES M.SIMON 1 1 BRUCE MICHAEL CROSS F.TME000 RC THOMSEN HEATHER S.HOWARD PETER D.SLOANC • CALHOUN DICKINSON RICHARD S.TWISS MARY ROSE HUGHES - EVELYN SPOUFE JOHN D.DILLOW DAVIO E.WAGONER ANCHORAGE OFFICE WASHINGTON.O.C.OFFICE BARRY M.KAPLAN EDWIN B.STERNER WAITER W.ETU: RICHARD E.WALKER. CHARLES J.KATZ.JR. ROBERT STOKES.JR. GAAMAM H.FERNAID WILL.AM S.WEAVER 420 L'STREET 1300-19TM STREET N.W. OTTO G.KLEIN III C.JAIRUS STRATTON,III H.WESTON FOSS ANDREW M.WILLIAMS RICHARD ALAN KLOBUCHER BART WALOMAN KEITM GERRARD RICHARD C.WILLIAMS ANCHORAGE.ALA$KA 99501 WA$HINGTON,D.C.20038 CHERYL.A.LEANER VERNON LWOOLSTON.JR. CHARLES C.GORDON •-- OAVID UCBERWOATM JIMMY WU WILL.AM A.GOULD CMRISTOPNER T.BAYLCY JAMES R.LISBAKKEN LAY/PENCE B.MANNA,. JOHN R.PRICE RICHARD C.McGNN WENDELL W.BLACK - L JAMES M.HILTON OF COUNSEL JANET M.MCKAY LUCIEN P.MARION RAM ER B.HOLTAN,JR. • PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE M.MARGARET MCKEOWN LOWELL P.MICKELWAIT THOMAS J.MBLAUGMLIN D.FOR£ST PERKINS -- LEE C.MILLER COUNSEL January 22, 1981 �Qs3�31. 1234 S. •�%1. 6'' _ Renton City Council_ c��co 0 �*"" c The. City-. of Rentx�n _ � o�SOF4� -- Municipal Buidi� h- 200 .Mill Avenue. South Renton, -Washington 98055. s�8LL19� Re- Notice- of=Appeal of the Hearing Examiner' s • Decision -Regarding Puget Sound Power' & Light I Company's. Short Plat, File No. SH.PL. 100-80, ' E-122--80 • Dear Renton City .Council Members: Pursuant to. Title 4, .§ 3016 of the Renton City Code • and other relevant Code sections, and on behalf of Puget Sound Power & Light Company, we hereby appeal the report and decision of- the- Renton City Hearing Examiner regard- ing the short platting' petition, file no. SH.PL. 100-80, E-12 2-8.0. The Hearing Examiner refused our Request for Recon- sideration on January 15, 1981 (please see Exhibit A . attached) . • This Notice of Appeal is based on the following grounds : • • 1.. The Findings are based on errors of fact;' • 2. Conclusions are based on errors of law; 3. The imposition of a fee. for vehicle trips is not authorized by law; 4. - 'The. Renton -Ordinances (-4-3014 (D) , 9-1105 (4) and 9-1106 (2) (E) ) cited by the Hearing Examiner do not authorize the imposition of the vehicle , trip fee; N r • Renton City Council January 22, 1981 Page Two 5. The vehicle trip fee imposed is excessive; 6. The need for vehicle trip fee is unsupported by the evidence; 7. The vehicle trip fee will not be used to improve - public roads and facilities contiguous with . the short plat site, as required by law; 8-_ The vehicle trip fee imposed is not reasonably related to the impacts of the short plat applied for;. 9. Such other grounds as shall be presented at the hearing.. -Oral. argument and an opportunity to offer additional testimony and evidence are requested. Reasonable prior notice o_f--the- appeals hearing date is requested to enable appellant--to .prepare and submit an appeal' s brief. Sincerely, PERKINS, .COIE, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS Attorneys for Puget Sound Power & Light Company • !fir By Kenneth B. Shellan KBS/kc _ .. . ' cc: City -Clerk Renton Planning Department lrir.. .Fred J. Kaufman PERKINS, COIE, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS ANCHORAGE OFFICE 1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING WASHINGTON,D.C.OFFICE 420"L" STREET SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 1920 N STREET N.W. SUITE 403 ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 TELEPHONE:208-682-6770 WASHINGTON,D.C.20036 TELEPHONE:907-279-8561 TELECOPI ER:206-662.8784 TELEPHONE:202-687-9030 TELECOPIER:907-276-3108 TELEX:89•448 CABLE"PERKINS SEATE�TL TELEX:32-0319 PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE February 17, 1981 Mr. Earl Clymer 526 Cedar South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Mr. Clymer : We represent Puget Sound Power & Light Company. As you know, a- $20 vehicle trip fee has been imposed as a condition of their short plat, File No. Sh-. . Pl. 100-80, E-122- 80 . Prior to our scheduled meeting with the Renton City Coun- . cil's Planning and Development Committee on Thursday, Febru- ary 19 , we thought it would be helpful to identify what we perceive to be the three important issues in this appeal. First, the Renton City Council has not passed any ordinance which authorizes the imposition of a vehicle trip fee where the fee revenues will be placed into a general system's development fund. In the absence of an authorizing ordinance, the Hearing Examiner has exceeded his delegated authority by imposing the vehicle trip fee as a condition of the short plat. The Hearing Examiner is surely correct in his assertion that the Hearing Examiner is empowered to impose conditions, require. dedications, establish setback requirements, and the like on the short plat development site. The Hearing Examiner , however , has not been delegated power to impose conditions or fees that are not reasonably related to the actual, physical short plat site or the immediately contiguous area. If the Hearing Examiner decides, for example, that Liberty Park should have more parking stalls, or for that matter more tennis courts, the Hearing Examiner clearly possesses no authority, to impose vehicle taxes on development proposals which do not create a current need for more parking stalls or tennis courts February 17 , 1981 Page 2 at Liberty Park. That., of course, raises an additional ques- tion. Conditions imposed must be reasonably calculated to reduce or compensate for specific and identified impacts of a project. Approval of a building permit, for example, requires identifying the number of trips to be generated from a particu- lar site, and thus provides the basis for identifying impacts and conditions designed and tailored to mitigate those impacts. Approval of a short plat, however , provides no certainty of impact on roads or traffic--as a result-, neither can conditions tailored to mitigate impacts be identified. The second important issue to be discussed in the Thursday Committee meeting is the timing of imposition of the fee. Even if we assume that the hearing examiner can impose a vehicle trip- fee, the fee. is being imposed at an inappropriate stage of the development process. Developing a site is obviously a multi-stage process., requiring different permits and assess- ments at each stage. The appropriate time for imposing a vehicle' trip fee is the actual building development phase, .not when .a short plat for raw land is being obtained. 'The. reason for distinguishing among the development stages ' and the' appro- priate . assessments at each stage becomes clear if the short plat site at issue is for some reason, such as high interest rates, never developed. In that case, it would be absurd for an applicant to pay a vehicle trip fee based on projected vehicle trips from a building which is never built. At the time a building permit is sought, however, actual use is con- templated, the extent of the use is known, and fees reasonably related to the impact of the proposal could be determined. The Hearing Examiner appears to agree with our contention that it is currently premature to impose the vehicle trip fee. The Examiner stated at the rezone hearing "that it may be inap- propriate to. impose a trip generation fee during the rezone process since no development is proposed. " (Hearing Examin- er 's rezone written report, November 24, 1980. ) The Examiner therefore refused to levy the vehicle trip fee recommended for future imposition by the Building Division of the Public Works Department. The Engineering Department of the Public Works Department was in agreement with the Hearing Examiner, stating in their "Development Application Review Sheet" that the February 17 , 1981 Page 2 at Liberty Park. That, of course, raises an additional ques- tion. Conditions imposed must be reasonably calculated to reduce or compensate for specific and identified impacts of a project. Approval of a building permit, for example, requires identifying the number of trips to be generated from a particu- lar site, and thus provides the basis for identifying impacts and conditions designed and tailored to mitigate those impacts. Approval of a short plat, however , provides no certainty of impact on roads or traffic--as a result, neither can conditions tailored to mitigate impacts be identified. The second important issue to be discussed in the Thursday Committee meeting is the timing of imposition of the fee. Even if we assume that the hearing examiner can impose a vehicle trip fee, the fee is being imposed at an inappropriate stage of the development process. Developing a site is obviously a multi-stage process, requiring different permits and assess- ments at each stage . The appropriate time for imposing a vehicle trip fee is the actual building development phase , not when a short plat for raw land is being obtained. The reason for distinguishing among the development stages and the appro- priate assessments at each stage becomes clear if the short plat site at issue is •for ' some reason, such as high interest rates, never developed. In that case , it would be absurd for an applicant to pay a vehicle trip fee based on projected vehicle trips from a building which is never built. At the time a building permit is sought, however, actual use is con- templated, the extent of the use is known, and fees reasonably related to the impact of the proposal could be determined. The Hearing Examiner appears to agree with our contention that it is currently premature to impose the vehicle trip fee. The Examiner stated at the rezone hearing "that it may be inap- propriate to impose a trip generation fee during the rezone process since no development is proposed. " (Hearing Examin- er 's rezone written report, November 24, 1980. ) The Examiner therefore refused to levy the vehicle trip fee recommended for future imposition by the Building Division of the Public Works Department. The Engineering Department of the Public Works Department was in agreement with the Hearing Examiner , stating in their "Development Application Review Sheet" that the February 17, 1981 Page 3 Department approves the site "subject to approved utility and roadway improvement plans at time of development. " (Emphasis added.) Even so, at the short plat hearing, the Examiner imposed the fees. We believe the Hearing Examiner 's previous state- ments were correct: during a multi-stage development process, a vehicle tax should not be imposed until the actual building permit phase . The final important issue to be addressed is . the absence of documentation supporting the $20 fee. We are unable to deter- mine that the necessary research was conducted to. determine: (a) the cost of necessary roadway improvements in the area; (b) the portion of use related to the proposed proj- ect; or (c) the equitable share in total costs which should be assessed on either a "per trip" or project basis.. The selection of a $20 fee as compared with any other dol- lar figure was apparently arbitrary and consequently unfair . Until documentation is produced demonstrating why $20 is the appropriate fee, the imposition of the fee. should not be per- missible. We appreciate your having taken the time to review our comments. We look forward to personally meeting you this Thursday and discussing these matters in more. detail. Very truly yours, Kenneth B. Shellan i r-1 , I RENTON CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) Appeal of The Vehicle Trip- ) NO. Systems Development Fee ) Which Has Been Imposed ) as a Condition for Granting ) a Short Plat, File No. ) Sh. P1. 100-80, E-122-80. ) _ Puget Sound Power & Light ) Company , ) Appellant. ) ) TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB Memorandum on Appeal A Rezone: Report and Recommendation by the Land Use HearingExaminer to the Renton City Council Rezone: Planning Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner and Departmental Findings ' i Short Plat: Report and Decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner to the Renton City Council Short Plat: Planning Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner and Departmental Findings Request for Reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner 's Decision Regarding Puget Sound Power & Light Company Short Plat, File No. SH.PL.100-80E-122-80• . F The Hearing Examiner 's Refusal of the Request for Reconsideration 1 ' Notice of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner 's Decisions Regarding Puget Sound Power & Light Company Short Plat, File No. SH.PL.100-80E-122-80 Puget Sound Power & Light Company 's Letter to Members of the Renton City Council Planning and Development Committee RENTON CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF: ) Appeal of the Roadway System ) Development Charge Which Has ) Been Imposed as a Condition ) for Granting a Short Plat, ) File No. Sh. Pl. 100-80 , ) E-122-80 . ) ) Puget Sound Power & Light ) Company , ) Appellant. ) ) TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB Memorandum on Appeal A Rezone : Hearing Examiner 's Report and Recommendation. . B Rezone: Planning Department Preliminary Report and Findings C Short Plat: Hearing Examiner 's Report and Decision. . . D Short Plat : Planning Department Preliminary Report and Findings E PSPL Request for Reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner 's Short Plat Decision F The Hearing Examiner 's Refusal of Request for Reconsideration G Notice of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner ' s Short Plat Decision J H Puget Sound Power & Light Company 's Letter to City Council Planning and Development Committee I RENTON CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF: ) Appeal of the roadway system ) PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT development charge which has ) COMPANY' S. MEMORANDUM ON been Imposed as a Condition for) APPEAL Granting a Short Plat, File No. ) Sh. P1. 10.0-80, E-122-80. ) Puget Sound Power & Light. . ) Company , ) Appellant. ) I. INTRODUCTION On November 24 , 1980 , the Renton Land Use. Hearing Examiner (hereinafter the "Hearing Examiner") granted Puget Sound Power & Light Company (hereinafter "Puget Power") a rezone for the north side of Southwest Grady Way between Lind Avenue Southwest and Rainier Avenue South (hereinafter the "Site") . Upon ap- proving the rezone, the Hearing Examiner refused to recommend a roadway system development charge based only on a rough esti- mate of the future, projected vehicle trips that would be generated from. the. Site. The Hearing. Examiner stated "that it may be inappropriate to impose'- a trip generation fee- during the rezone process since no development is proposed. " (Report and Recommendation by the Land- Use Hearing Examiner , November 24 , 1980 , at page 1; See TAB B) The Hearing Examiner further stated as follows : 6 . The - applicant has proposed a zoning_ change . only, and therefore until the ultimate use . is subm- itted to . the city as a formal proposal specifying-. density and purpose, it is premature to assess fees to mitigate the impacts of the proposal on the adjacent streets. The number of ' vehicle trips currently is based on conceptual site plans . Similarly, the con- figuration of driveways and the location of fire hydrants and utilities. should be based upon formally submitted plans. The site plan review process is the proper forum to make . these and similar recommenda- tions. Therefore, no specific conditions 'should be imposed at this' time since . the zoning proposed' is compatible- with both surrounding zoning and. surround- ing uses . On December 30, 1980, ' at the short plat hearing , the same Hearing Examiner took the diametrically opposite position and now recommends a twenty dollar ($20 .0 0) roadway system develop- men.t charge. Puget Power 's request for reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner 's opinion was refused on January 15 , 1981. The Renton City Council 's Planning, and Development Com- mittee rejected Puget Power 's appeal by a two-to-one vote on February 19 , 1981. Mr . Rockhill, dissenting , indicated that it would be premature to impose the roadway system development charge at the short plat stage of the development process. The relevant facts concerning the roadway system develop- ment charge are as follows : -2- 022781/3/3581G A. Records and sources indicate that the roadway system development charge has been imposed on some development sites and not on others, and this is the first time that the fee has been imposed at the short plat stage of the development pro- cess, rather than at the later site approval stage. No written departmental rules or regulations whatsoever exist explaining any aspect of this newly created roadway system development charge. B. The funds generated by this assessment will be used for development of the roadway system throughout the City of Renton and not merely for roadway improvements to the short plat site or to contiguous areas or even to areas impacted by the short plat approval. Further , the Hearing Examiner is recommending this roadway roadway system development charge even though the City Council has not yet enacted the Systems Development Charge Ordinance. C. The amount of the fee being imposed bears no relation- ship to the measureable impact of the proposed development on the immediately surrounding roadways . Indeed, the short plat approval itself generates no traffic impact. The record con- tains no documentation whatsoever which calculates the impact of this particular short plat on the contiguous roadways. The fee is instead recommended solely according to the projected roadway system development needs of the entire City. D. The roadway system development charge recommended by the Hearing Examiner is to be deposited in an escrow account -3- 022781/3/3581G pending the City Council 's adoption of the Systems Development Charge Ordinance. Apparently the opinion of the Hearing Ex- aminer is that the City Council 's adoption of that ordinance is s required to use the roadway system development charge, even though the Examiner has sufficient 'authority to accomplish . the same result. II . ARGUMENT' A. THE' HEARING EXAMINER HAS ILLEGALLY IMPOSED A ROADWAY SYSTEM: DEVELOPMENT . CHARGE PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL HAVING ADOPTED A .SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE ORDINANCE. The City of Renton currently has under consideration .the future imposition of a roadway system development charge to defray the general cost of roadway and other development. The City. Council has not yet enacted any ordinance, however , which authorizes the imposition of such a roadway charge where the. revenues will be placed into a general roadway system develop- ment fund. The Hearing Examiner , however , has unilaterally determined to illegally - impose the fee without the enactment of an authorizing ordinance; the Examiner has exceeded his legally delegated authority. The Hearing. Examiner is , surely correc.t in his assertion that the Hearing Examiner is empowered to impose "appropriate" conditions, require dedications, establish setback: require- ments, and the like on a short plat development site. See generally RCW 58. 17 .020 and .RCW 58 . 17 .110 .. The Hearing .Ex- aminer , however, ha's not been delegated the power to impose -4- 022781/3/3581G • conditions or fees that. are not reasonably .related to the actual, ' physical short plat site, . the immediately contiguous ' area or in mitigation of impacts of the plat. See generally • Pioneer Trust & Savings. Bank v . Village of Mount Prospect, 176 N.E.2d 799 , 22. Ill. 2d 37.5 (1961) . - • If .the Hearing . Examiner decides, for example, that. Liberty • . Park should .have more parking' stalls, or for that. matter more tennis courts, the Hearing Examiner clearly possesses no .authority .. to impose vehicle taxes on development- proposals . which_ do not create- a current need for more parking stalls, or tennis courts at Liberty Park. That,.. of course , raises an-additional. question. .Conditions imposed: must be reasonably calculated to reduce' or compensate • _ for specific and. identified impacts -of of a project..- Approval' of a building' permit,.. for .example, requires identifying the number i" of trips to' be generated from a particular site , and thus pro- vides . the basis' for identifying impacts and conditions designed and tailored to mitigate those impacts. Pioneer ' Trust & Sav- • ings Bank' v. Village of Mount Prospect, supra. See generally' Rosen. v'. Village of Downers Grove , .. 167' N:.E. 2d 230 '(I11. 1960) . ' Approval of a short plat, however, provides no certainty of • impact on' roads or- traffic -- as a result, neither' impacts, nor conditions tailored to mitigate impacts, can be- identified. One fundamental question need only be answered to clearly understand the import of the Hearing, Examiner 's recommenda- tion: If we assume purely for discussion purposes that the -5- 022781/3/3581G City Council ultimately rejects the roadway system development charge proposal, can the Hearing Examiner nevertheless continue. to unilaterally impose the roadway system development charge without the City Council 's consent? The answer , of course, is that the Hearing Examiner would not have such power , just as. the . Hearing Examiner currently lacks the power to charge a roadway system development charge without authorization by the City Council. B. THE ROADWAY SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE IS BEING PRE- MATURELY IMPOSED AT THE SHORT PLAT STAGE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. Even if we assume that the Hearing Examiner can unilater- ally impose a roadway system development charge without City Council authorization, the fee is being imposed at an inappro- priate stage in the development process. Developing a site is obviously a multistage process, re- quiring different permits and assessments at each stage. The appropriate time for imposing a roadway system development charge is during the actual building development phase, not when a short plat of raw land is being obtained. The reason for distinguishing among the development stages and the appro- priate assessments at each stage becomes clear if the short plat site at issue is for some reason, such as high interest rates, never developed. In that 'case , it would be absurd for an applicant to pay a roadway system development charge based on projected vehicle trips from a building which is never -6- 022781/3/3581G • • built. At the time -a building, permit is sought, however , actual use is contemplated, the extent- of the use is known, and . fees reasonably related to the impact , of the proposal can be determined. . The Hearing . Examiner appears to agree with our contention . that it is currently premature.. to- impose a roadway system development charge.. The . Examiner stated at the rezone hearing "that it. may be.. inappropr.iate .to impose. a trip generation- ' fee during ' the. rezone process since no • development. . is proposed. (Report and..Recommendation. by the Land •Use Hearing Examiner , at page 1. ) . The Hearing Examiner further stated as follows : . 6 . The- applicant has proposed : a zoning,. change . • only,:. and. therefore... .until the . ultimate use is - sub- mitted to- ' the city as' a formal proposal - specifying . • density -and purpose , it is premature to assess fees to mitigate the -impacts.. of- the proposal on the adjacent streets. The. number' of vehicle -trips currently is . _based. .on conceptual . site. plans. .. . . . The: site .plan review- process is the- proper forum to make these and similar . recommendations. The Examiner therefore refused to levy the roadway` system development charge • recommended for future,: imposition . by the building division of . the public. works department. . The en- gineering.- department of the Public Works '- Department was; in agreement with the Hearing - Examiner , stating, in its . "Develop- ment- Application Review Sheet" that. 'the department approved the Site "subject to approved utility and roadway improvement plans at the time of development. • (Emphasis. added.) • • -7- ' 022781/3/3581G I • • Despite . these comments, at the 'short plat hearing the Hear- ing Examiner imposed the roadway system development charge indicating . that . he would have no 'subsequent opportunity . to do so. We believe . that the Hearing. Examiner 's ' previous position was. correct-:: During a. multistage development ' process,. a. road- way system .development charge, should not be imposed . .until the actual' . building • permit phase at that stage, the: facts are known, and• the. authority' exists' to mitigate identified: impacts. C. NO DOCUMENTATION EXISTS 'DESCRIBING. THE' MEASURABLE. IMPACT ' ON ' ROADWAYS ' AND TRAFFIC . WHICH WILL BE CAUSED BY THIS • PARTICULAR SHORT. PLAT. The . .City ; has: .conducted no, ' research ' and ' has ' provided ' no-. . documentation concerning: the following .points: (a) The ', cost- of necessary _roadway , improvements in the area; ' (b) The portion of use related 'to the proposed- project; . i (c) The equitable share in total. costs which should be assessed on either a "per trip or project • basis. • The selection of - a $20.00 . fee as compared with any other dollar figure was - apparently arbitrary and consequently un- fair . The Hearing Examiner could--indeed should--have asked for documentation of the actual, measurable , roadway ' impact resulting from the short plat. A court summarized the rule that specific impact documentation must be produced: - -8- 022781/3/3581G • • • • The developer of a subdivision may be required' to - assume those - costs which' are specifically 'and uniquely attributable to his - ` activity . . it does not follow [however] that communities. may use this point . of con- . • trol to . solve all of its problems that they . can foresee. (emphasis, added. ) Until documentation is produced . demonstrating: why $20 .00 is . the appropriate fee, the imposition of the fee is impermissable. . • • III. CONCLUSION . Upon granting this appeal „and deleting the • fee from this • short . pl'at, . . the City of Renton can • still . obtain the needed • . roadway system . development funds: by pursuing. either of' two courses of action. First,, the. City . 'Council' can. approve the short :plat but • provide ' in its opinion that a. fee will • 'be imposed at . the site - development approval stage upon • appropriate ' documentation of the measureable• roadway impact resulting ' from the proposed future development. . Second, the. City can collect the necessary roadway system. development charge by- approving - the short plat without the roadway system development charge, pending •action on the- Roadway Systems Development Charge Ordinance. • • Respectfully submitted , PERKINS, • COIE, STONE, OLSEN &. WILLIAMS Attorneys for Puget Sound Power Light Company • By e Kenneth -B. Shel7lan -9- . 022781/3/3581G • ' • • REC—IVED OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON NOV 2 51980 FACIU ritS DE S,UN PDOPERe/DEV•F''PKIFNT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CIT'r COUNCIL, APPLICANT: Duane Wells end Puget Power FILE NO. R-101-80 LOCATION: North side of S.W. Grady Wary between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue South. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks a rezone of the subject site from G to B-1 for the•purpose of future commercial development. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval subject to conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner: Approval. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on November 10, 1980. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department- report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and sun ounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on November 18, 1980 at 9:06 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department preliminary report. Steve Munson, Planning Department, presented the report, end entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #1: Application File containing Planning Department report and Other pertinent d icurscnte Exhibit /f2: King County Assessor's Map designating the subject site Exhibit #°3: Conceptual Site Plan The Examiner advised that due to its conceptual nature, the site plan is not; binding upon either the applicant or the city. • The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Dick ausey 1lanager, Land Planning Puget Sound Power & Light Company Puget Power Building • Bellevue, WA 98009 Referencing Section L.5 of the Planning Department report, which pertains to submission of water and sewer main extension plans and requirement ,;,f an eeaement to c .tend the e, 12-inch , ter rein located to the north of the subject site, I•ir. Ca uscy requested lht:t submission of such plans occur at the time of building permit application. The issue of the requirement of the casemelt was discussed and resolved by Roger Blaylock, Associate Planner, and the applicant. Referencing SeS,iion L.8 cf the Planning Department report, regarding the proposed fee for dai l. v�c:li e1 rcLs, Mr. Causer ee obj- tcd to im;,risition of the fee prior Lo a • determination by the recently Formed citizens advisrry cor,.,lr t L i 1.t�:r'. 45 Co 'r;,i.' ham:I" a fee sleetId be required or an aneent established. As it r:anber of that committee, he noted that the first meeting is schatieled for early Deu:etber. Thu l am ,gr,st'atedth-:at it may be faas+}ocWrtarte/to impose a Lrip generation fee during I the rezone process since no development is proposed. He also noted that a traffic study submitted by the appli .ent is inciOded in i_xeibit: Ili 6/•, Ut,: Exalr:irer re,iu•::,L c: furtht•r colrrnents iu >u ,i,i,rt „t opposition Lu tile: apl,l on. Since h0 further I.c ti,rcny wua r,f erptt, tir_ haring regarding 1 -I01- tei • by the I: 011inC:r at `J:I6 a.m. I File Ito. R ?ii was •..los S • • • - R-101-80 Page Two FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS 6 RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the ' Examiner now makes and enters the following: • • FINDINGS: • 1. The request is for approval of a reclassification, of +4.96 acres of property from G (General ; Single Family Residential ; Minimum LcL Size - 35,000 square feet) to B-I • (Business/Commercial). • j 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the Planning Department report, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit ill. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental' 1 Policy Act of 1971, R.C.W. 43.2I.C., as amended, a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by the Environmental Review Committee, responsible official. ' 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the • impact of this development. 5. There was no opposition to the proposal expressed. • 6. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. • 7. The subject property is located on the north side of S.W. Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue S. 8. The subject site was annexed into the city in 1959 and the current zoning was applied at that time. A special permit to fill and grade the site was approved by the • Hearing Examiner in September, 1980. No.grading or filling has been done on the site to date. '• 9. The Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of commercial and/or manufacturing park types of uses. 10. The surrounding uses on Grady Way and in the vicinity are office park type uses, light commercial and some light industrial uses. • Some of the facilities which have developed or are being developed in the area are office buildings at 550 and 800 S.W. 7th and at S.W. 10th and Lind Avenue S.W., and ' at 301 and 313 S.W. Grady Way. There are industrial uses in the Earlington Industrial Park just east and the Orillia Industrial Park just south. • 11. The Puget Power Transmission Line runs along the southern edge of the propertj• adjacent to S.W. Grady Way. Conceptual site plans indicate that this portion of the subject property would be used for landscaping. • (12••' The Traffic Engineering Division has indicated that a fee of $20.00 per vehicle trip be imposed to mitigate the traffic impact generated by the applicant's development of the subject site. • . . 13. Traffic Engineering has also indicated that the driveway location be relocated to simplify ingress and egress for the subject site. In a similar vain the Fire Department has indicated that fire hydrants must be - installed prior to construction and the Utility Division has indicated that utility extensions and easements may be required. 14. Findings 12 and 13 are based on the applicant's submitted conceptual site plans, ' : Exhibit #3, •which were admitted for illustrative purposes and are not binding on the • applicant or the City of Renton. These plans show a proposal to construct an office building and restaurant on the site. ' , 15. The special permit to CI:-w the fill and grade of the subject property requires site review by the Hearing Examiner after submission of formal development plans. • - • CONCLUSIONS: . 1 . The proponent of a rezone must demonstrate that the request is in the public interest and will not Impair the public health, safety and welfare in addition to compliance with at least one of the three criteria listed in Section 4-3010 which provides in • • 7 part that: • • • • • R-101-80 Page Three fi a. The subject site has not been considered in a previous area-wide rezone or land use analysis; or b. The subject site is potentially designated for the new classification per the Comprehensive Plan; or c. There has been material and substantial change in the circumstances in the area ;j in which the subject site is located since the last rezoning of the property or - area. The applicant has demonstrated that the necessary criteria have been met to permit the reclassification of the subject property. 2. The proposed reclassification to B-1 complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation of the area in which the subject property is located for commercial purposes. • The applicant submitted conceptual site plans which are not binding upon either the applican¢ or the city but which indicate plans to construct an office building and restaurant on the subject site. 3. The reclassification will permit utilization of an abandoned railroad right-of-way and a functioning power line transmission corridor for commercial ventures and add to the tax base of the city. Under terms of the special permit issued for the subject property, a site plan review will be required and the project will be reviewed for compatibility with the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan and the city's Habitat Mitigation Resolution. 4. There have been a number of changes in the area in the recent past and there is continuing development of both commercial, light industrial uses and larger manufacturing type uses along both Grady Way and the secondary streets in this area west of Rainier Avenue S. The proposed reclassification will allow compatible development of the subject site. 5. There has been no study. of the specific zoning of the subject site since the G zoning was applied at annexation in 1959. The Comprehensive Plan and the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan both indicate that the proposed B-I zoning is appropriate for the area, and in light of the recent changes and growth of the area the reclassification appears to be the highest and best use of the subject site and compatible with the surrounding uses. 6. The applicant has pp proposed a zoning change only, and therefore until the ultimate_ u is submitted to the city as a formaLrproposal sgecifyin i d_enn;,iry and_ o -D , it pis premature to assess fees to mitigate the impacts of the proposal on the adiacent_ stre c• The number of vehicle trips currently is based on conceptual site plans. imilarly, e-configuration of driveways and the-location of fire hydrants and utilities should be based upon formally submitte pans. a site plan review process is the proper forum to make these and similar recommendations. Therefore, no specific conditions should be imposed at this time since the zoning' proposed is compatible with both surrounding zoning and surrounding uses. RECOMMENDATION: _ • i The City Council should approve the requested reclassification of the subject property from G to B-J. ORDERED THIS 24th day of November, 1980. • Fred J. Y ufman Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 24th day of November , 1980 by Affidavi.t of Mailing to the party of record: Dick Causey, Manager, Land Planning, Puget Sound Power & Light Co., Puget Power Building, Bellevue, WA 98009 • 1 • k R-101-80 Page Four • TRANSMITTED THIS 24th day of November, 1980 to the following: • Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke • Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director • Michael Porter, Planning Connission Chairman • Barbara Schellert, Planning Commissioner _ Ron Nelson, Building Official Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney 1 Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City' Code, request for reconsideration must { be filed in writing on or before December 8, 1980. 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) 1 days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific I errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. IAn 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 Finance Department, first floor of City Hall , or same may be purchased at cost in ' said department. i I • I I i I . i 1 t i I t 1 I . t • 1 t • • • I I - S I i 1 :i 1 . _ - • . •, -. - ' * '-'.--7 El'''. (;'•'----L-I 4:2--,,,-(..„'". ..7.57','-'-iIiii,si.:'•:'..-727.7,-: -71-7— '•' .. ' -'t s. .'• •-,:"..., 9' 4.4/1 61-.Y',:..-, `.i::`-1,):./41.P.2•1...' k , ..: if . i 1..',,.4.,,,tv.i.r.... 7..,..4' ..•• .. . .. . .,,,7....`;')X,'r„,::. '..1?qt, :•..,... ,•:.!i•- . ' `- ;••!:-.\ g 04 ' '0.- .,.... .....,11 f3..„.„ . . , "4-,.= 3:,-z.V.t..filivi.:....i..,.',' -i, 0 cb-', .:_.--z-•• , -bts,1-4•°:',1'.7i • .• ' "- '• .• --",ri P-i hi I./ • • . .....- . . \a- , ,: I i -• •'',( k.; .6••••-4s/.,._,.t....._,),L,,i/LLIL.,,... - . . .... . ... .. 4 - T''.4.51 1.. . , •.... • . • "/ '• ' , :I •,;'4, •• . . • 1 • ' • „is s iw, , 1::i. • i <.•• 1 _ , . . I $ w 77,4 • •'. .I .........s_ .. . .'' .. . . en.....a ii .:•,- * ' 'II ... ...... -...s...-. )1 [ ___ . • .. '.. I.-I - ,; ,........ vs. ...."- ••• oll Vil 4 I t 1 ;......................2.....;,... '. :1:1 l'.......1.. if.... • . . (: l.) 01 a.% I 1 • 1. tts,, mijir54-4TI,.'0•!L. - --...:.-------- ----:'. , ; •t. :h.,. ... :.,.—,* •,,_ ,_,—,-..4,..-,:;:4',.:-.1._. -----.A,r-„,r; i, 1 1 W, - • 1 .:‘• ,, ii..-1 4 -,,, - -",-..R'_,'..,,_)si:-.._:-_-,-==;,1,,,rxa'24-.trri.!11 ,.f3-1 1 ... " ' 7--- . —7---- ."*-- . •T-.---4.. --ii_a:z7r:•-=-7--:---,..rona-Kila115.4 t'..:1.•.yit.!I; 1 •-• .__, I, I ..,"°'''.!5'. ',1--111-3'. ,.ils?,"‘"‘,..c.•‘W,11,,1;1)Pi t•":-:t LlIltIrkiic i I Viiii'Il -,q•n..:l,i'Mili /' ii•iI Inu !l ? 1ta # „ -• .,'It; •%:-..-4\ .... • s . _. I.. ...... ct_- It , .:ki:A.:,t•rli:,•:,_,,,..,• 5 .,,••,1 rt,i,ii;.• / •1 .. \ ' • LR-ZI:Li.,,,...- -f----" 1..---<-tN, ',":11,..,[1:!... --__.;;PAY„/Itcf1{7,111V.:/:' b.1111huillifillIV - 1,jil ii,,, & Ir3t;.'1.:.:Tivq!..4'ricl,,,;;;Iin,!..,,,,111.+ avg.!: .,.e .ill ._,.. ''..-f---•-•-_,---":" ..- :-.- ". '4 ' ; V--;-•!•-7:;.,:;04..1.1-: --, !. , . T_„ •,.„; , J.'.;,1,1i1.:1„,!1,0.\-1.1.11,,,,,: „....,,,-k---7 - :---'- =-1.v•- --.•:;1.... .--.... '.1i if`-' ''' t .if." • ' 111-: " . •:,':',:_t•:=;'-:-.4 ,,,,..•,-,; ---..cg,..r.;:,27 •.\\ ;I:, . , , ' '• i V.L., ....7_ ..,.,'"'.;• -- ,,...„...--.,-.-,------ .K--,‘---_,... ____- --. .. ,,cg..,-_-__-_-,t< -. •r--?:-.::::-:7,• ;1._--14;14:...1",-.L. 1 :^.1..i.:.=.A• •• \-... .1 • -.....!.....--..---- • s '....:(..r. J.ia.. g.4,(1_,,,-1.-.1f,.;•!-_,:—..ti'....7t-ta:. •Iall*: ,i I,..:•.',114::- ...:',..,... I.. % . ,:7"'....,4.-1 1. '.....•. ,,;..-:.":,: Q.J.rt117.44; g•,,,iiiir• 1:11.,-_--4,,,.t..,i...-_,_:-.1.• • vi - ,7.,-;-••• •:-., -..., ;: /. „ ••,' .. r;;•:•:',:r,•:Ig a i ', TII,„ • I if:if oai 6.s?ATIIIIIt i tte.ff,1., ,____",: •i''',1-....y:z:IY• ..--,4 41.44,../.1.- ftt) '''')• , ',,, ,,, __ ,MoVS Nr.1, A ' . 1fl'is'-•:‘..-•, -,--,1i,:--..-rA.:, r•:-.'.:7: ;..,:•... '..•. ; ' 11: A j4,,.., rii.,.., „ .;...% •.\. \ ..; '1' _ ,...,. , ' , • _ _.- --9 i.....,....}1.41.,,Tri.,;;;,.;, :„:“.....,1...:I.i; -i; --/..,3. .....f.‘ -.1.:-::- •1 - '4,4%,:,:i..-1.:.:..,1:,1 i .,., -„; ,, '.0.4.•.4-' . 13-4 .16*"".-:-.--.:II' CAP-1 .-.7--,..5----9',V ?.?.: ,P.;r:: ::040.bott_._4,----.1',i!,/ r. .,:..., "....'... ••••. :':,'12 ' • v, ,• .. .,.,.... ,..{:-..-:,--,,,.:-,.-.:,:t.i::•,t'.,._:.-..z.... Ar• ... .,-....., ., ,..1 g .• .‘. tii, > ----.. G1 - ',°'-'.';' :4;•"...Tr:,::i -.... -.--:. :,:-:-...; ':i: - ... -i i . .--: . . 21!Ii., 1 -A ...4. ••t'.1 \) J — '1,`t1 Ni4. *2':-:\ Vi ,. .r • _ -1 i.- i:-.1. i I: , , — ---.71_,;,...q1,_ 1,.• ,: i (.. iy. ,i-. - i-...'!.-... li',. . *ii. : il\A' i -it. 4.,-11, \_-_At 4i • . \ , * l'.. :.2:i....-.:4.! ! ,s•—•.:..1;>. :t,.. ' . =_0,6,..r.,, - _,. IL' -E, 1‘,±4141';.1." ''— 1\11 •- ''-''''''-' 71-. '9 .1• ''-11[ ‘. 7 I. f.1 vi 114.....:_i_x-4,..,4: 1 ; 1 !t1 i 1 I ••.' 1 ----1-- • ' ' i : • [ : - i- . ; . : _i:. I •_:•-_, — :n I 1 .,,, • , i, i , ii -...---.......q :, • . . . r- MUane Wells, Puget Sound Power & Light Company aloi-80 , 1 • • 'E ' It. . •E, . . . • 3 .APPLICANT DUANE WELLS/PUGET SOUND POWER TOTAL AREA -1-4.96 acres • & 1.4(.1111: • PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Grady Way and Lind Avenue S.W. I EXISTING ZONING "G", General Classification District • . 1.: EXISTING USE Undeveloped . . PROPOSED USE Future commercial development , . ..a'• COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial, Manufacturing- Park • COMMENTS • . : • . ;. . • . ., . • I f! . 1 P.! 'A • it ,,.. ,..................----............-„„....-...-............---_. I!•-•.• • 1 r, . •-- • • • . . •-- •-• •---•--• -_-•••--•---__ ....,.._-_ .•• • •..... .,.......... . , _._ ,.. ..:. .„___,.... ._,.........,,..•••_,,....;„_, . .-......,....... . .....•... - ..'.r. , • : 1 .. . . . . • .. . ... . . . . I i i . . . . - "..'. i .:•.:•.;••:.':.,;•:.1...,...c.....,..:•,.''....:::•;.1.-,,.,4,... • 1 : •,••7 L 7,•••'I.',,1'.,".:",'..i...:?...f..,:1;,''.i.',./,'7.';.:,.',.•.....:;.....::;,';.,*". ,'.ks''' "'.C,•'i'i•.•'.1 /ft ;I... --•!c:.,\‘.1 f..,',?'...r;•I:,..L.,.••. 1;•. 'c.11.•i-li!•i-i.I,' .-.1'.:rir..;;;„*.-.:.si...4::',/,,,:,..,"•;..• 12;'',.t,,,,','ni,i,...;i:4L,.:',"!...,.•-•..,;:,',,.'",,,f'','''*'. ;-/Yr.II'.*t,4(- :, I.,.:. II. r-,-,-..,:?,1'..;17.,- ,..4.ikt,........ , • (,.„_.,,' ..,,,...,:!,,•,,,,;' '....24.,11,4....•?;%,.2'......i.f.',".! , .,..ier-•_:.,......v.,-:;::,.:„ ,....,..:'fe,...,.i,,;.':,,,,,,-,i.,,:.!, .,.y.,,..,. , ." ' ''':'4Yr,h.t,...,J_ ...,.;;,;:,,3 6 te.....::-.::'-'.. ,, •7...•tki. .-.1.. ,,-.•?. . Yr_'*:..",it'ri",..!:/"4.',1•,•,,,••„‘•••:•,::r...L.:.',,;.1°4t:*.• 7..:.;*;1::k...).; ?,..'.'r, `i T. ......1,:•.177-7,) P•'•• •-:,:,(, •-•,,'•-•,-...,•,3,57.1.).^.1.'..s.,`-•" .:.‘:- ..,4` i.5.-,A,Ii=c;,:•.i'.;-,,,,:i.:1':::::'...:,,,....2..,..:!-•;,•4,-...,..i.„.3:..;..".-•,. ",:.4: .. 2 -- ••;•••••;.i•.....f...:.,.,.....r...1.,,-. .--,....,,,,,_-..tr.,...LW:M.10MT=...-4-1.r...;!..t.•71.2.....).,I 4 0. J.): .: • 4',:•1'' 1 :1:;,',;;;!,...&''.,:..-:-.•' 0-.r.....'-il r:,,---;,,.;',..-;.:;..t.....,..,,1 •1:7:::17Z:':*.'7'...7t•‘'' 16.•-•'•,'....:••4:-.0'G..,),111;';',C;•• •4-1:'‘''''''''.• :13.e:'::;•,• p •. '-',•:••••4••• ,t1;••:.••'..•,'•••,•,•b.!, .••••••...4,:r.'1''.....',..!•.:,....C.'I:,,...., ...V.,...y ' • , A,.•';';):;..._ ,. ' 1,i!'F•'...1 A I).,:•:',(."r.k.1.),i :".:;?;:.. il it l'..iti.`‘;:'2.1 ' :-,1:;2.•*;f •'::;4•:.:c.'::.•1•"'' 'I*,t7zini..11;.•0 •Pi•..,`.1 ":i.t' 't Y-,':`'.-• . c--.„ -,/,`,-: 1 ti-:-. --•*,,,3,':. '1:7•'r,,i.',./..,,,,7,,,‘..4....41,,,--%vr.--- ;',';.f. ;f:•.'.1 ,t',,,z . .., ,..i....1 .;,, i ::-.:.::".1"0•:!,.....--•,•,t;-)*,..ti,:::?,i07.1, -.,. :.•,,,,; .....):-. -,..:F. •••••/!.`ibi 1.:f.:"..r.il'.,(..-;1•'.:1 .0? i • . •,.•';..,;.s..,:•!..,...-;,--;..i.: 1 .;•, ',7'1 i•:`1.•1 1!'.`.•.:',..1 if(s.....,1:.!:\'1 ''.""S•li.) .....:F.E.:.‘':'',.);' C.D!*;..;; ....'..--:.,t-...,- , ....4,2.0 ..•`•C;;;.•• •1.••?q , ' '''''71T'Zjti:t`I'..1'.'..i`•?'4i.•,•,.:.,7''''7 .1' ' . il::',•••1.1i.'1. i• '• .• . ''..• 1....:':•.••( '••t,'•": ,',,:i, , .;',•• - .e,',.,t•••• • '%':1'..•,-t.i•;••••"'•4 0,7'•••••-?•*'•'•,:';• ‘1•••••• ' •••-• ' •t• ,„___, • +' ...-0 . • I" , •q•„:•.',....:.:'•''•• •••':':tl,,,•.:••,,:/:. ••••.,•'-',..' •;••‹t '•• rj..1 t • • . li . t :* •• 1 i -. Jex'' ',- I; 4,•........,...,,,i.:-.t.,t.,',.1,,,,!......•1 ...r..r. ,... • . i-‘IAD N GTo,,!..•1_3• . 1,,,,, „.,;,.. , 1,13,,., •t:';-.. 4.: '... ,• • — ''''' '• • -,---T. - 4-71-.-- -,-.R'',i‘i...1!••!•:Q: .-•4•k.,,,,;',;?-•;•?'.i,.. "''."..ii'-' •• :1.1q D U ST IR I Al '''' ;. - c . . ••L.,......w...., y, r.,...Al Q.' or„c:',.!•,:i:, •,...7:.•••...0 " ,•4.: --,v I ' 1•• :'-••,.',L- •:.., -43...' .-., . • 5 . 4.. ."-Arit-Al. ._...p. 14..1 i .. .--, ;,-,7--5i-1..' . •,•1 - II i '.;1:1^..i.,i•,..,t7V:'L. 11 \l'•'4 iNcro;i.ki -1 .....%!-1 „ LtJ i.'...:-.t.::'. '••::,'..".... ,,..2 ' , .,.....rir..--Wiy (V,?.) f•-J.:-•.1 '",' 4: •. •••,/).„,. _IJ i•V'liii-,&//40` 4.4.-.'-'"Wil......3.)i-. ••••'' i • \1.4,,;;Z:Z1-.. .;',. .' g 14 .. i *,--7, •::;!...ci,14-1 .:: . • - ''.415f:."7,/..••;-,',"'. 5 iii ,fr..' I\ ...... ,..P....'7,. O. • . .I., • C. ‘',"„.{.1/2-)."p;•-..re.'il 57,I,l .. 4\11 ; i --:',-.2:;.:r,',.'......::' • .,1'• • . .......„....---'''- ,....'.?. .;.e i7±11,-••-•.......7) _.. ......_,t .6. 1 : '-'••;Onif e . -......›..,A,. r-....-4 ‘,_/-iy, •- \ts,i,' i • ar..............4 ....,_____„ . r , _ , _riol .. ; ; -- Gv'.'•--,,5i..?: .-,.....„. tu ‘•• . _.........,..— ! irsillOMP ss•-•-..„.„4—). —....,•-i;•----- 1 ! ....e„... u,..y,p7,,Ec.-., - . -.:..: ...4,i• -,,--...-•-•...-----.•-"-----....-•••••-... i• • '',. . • P.' •••••••• ••••• . q, -..'".'.-\• i -,-,4,•••,•!,:.•, 44:4 -----,------••• •( . • '; i •F;;;-•....,'' •• .r':, . i.' , . -• --.----r-.• - J 1\ -•••• •4?7,f., )) ‘ ! • --- --.--.----.--.2.----:------------------'-r__..... . `7-77.7;,--<:••flit :74:? I A 1'tir'.. .•''',. .,,. . . LL111 ‘i . ,e-. \-,:r., 3z•• • ...Li i t•cf".1"f,.,J-4",„•••••• '''.:4'Li.:'''2•.112v .-:,,>':......-:., .... p.f: c:, 1:1. ..‘. LP; . 8 ‘!. . ."..? i• 5 - -7,1 11-1,....,..z,,,II,,,-. q7, ,,,,•••=.',.:.`.'1,•'.,7.•.x.',.,`-, .fi; I s'eL%:".'il • ‘;.:..i' • • tli U.'. e‘. ' ';''''''.1'.i.:.•'. ..1,,,:,',,!i\\oi'''..::::', / 6T 1-1 . ST .:-..- z.•'. • 3W,,,e--.7rz... ' , 4.- Ls.7/r •....q. C. ; . . p::-.,:‘,.w:1:•.i..t174: ' .7.• 6),Y:',134,!IP!'1;1'- .• . i .1e.1,-,Q •••',1 _ .t.$)7.1.'•:o;:•:-:- ;• ,•4''1•1;'.;,:,;-2i,;';'';'1'.a .,,•=::f ..• . , • , 1 rtt ,„z,,,....!:::,•-.k•f!.... f..,1\ . lq.1 •:•••:“:: 4. ,. m,:y.....„,•„...re ....• cs,„;„,,..1k4; . ' I:= ,....t, ir:•,:-.6-47.;.,,p,.- ..,•:,,4.4.4:• ••,,`.. .:f0'.i?!,:."-r.,.. ..;•'4.k.;.\\I ,;<;:,,,::.,..;,,.; .-%.,.1:,c., • 1 ii.:, !.. .."''rt;•.% •::A=••••.:i , •GooTt......• •-,••,, •V•ir....it.,-:.. . . • ,t•t•• ... '..1.. • 4 ii:1: 1 I lit.):T.Y.‘':e./•:..li 1 .. . • '•':''....3. )ti.:46..i.C....‘• ' .,:.,'1 4,•..,:;... • i . ,;.1.!....!,!,',;,?.i...f{::,::',.• -,:: . ,1477 ,f4,-,.-0::i:•' '•:•';'.•':'.,,IL:,.••:-. . ' ; I !L. !"••.* • .. •1 F=t;14•,.-":7•' : • "• 'et`•:'1,1e,'';:ii•ti • ; ...;-..., '„i 4'&•••:- • -s••••-••-..7...._,....___,______.5Y1LI;;41.7,1..1 V;'i I- Z::,5?-•:••,'",.ti.k. .' k.:. ..*:••.`•.i..!.%\ • i. '.•' aP.:.P•rLT 1ifd ::.4c.•'.A1..-;.'Pi.l.;.:iT,.o•f•i4:i;,,1,';;.,e.i-.:.1•4.:'k...:,'•.‘A1'',':!;,4,. :.;.t''.,,11„!.,..'.•'1•,,:,.•„!•\.',,,1-t,;,:!ri...•;•-':.•':•,:'.••.::.!if,.•-• . ... • /1 11. L':YI't.•;*:*3,'-,,i•-,.!i .A1,,•':.:•.,.. . i1?iii1 •.I • , 111 ‘•!II, . ••:;,,..;:t,,t..',..;Y'-'..F.4..:.'Pq7,.:(11 . . . • .7'..:..\ glef kV"ill:i.,,..,'.?:;.'';Ili::',..i'l,,,q 1 •• ..,i;_.........;.1.:.. ., .t.';. 1 1 . '.%.• •Of'1,,•1n..1..',..:,Yor.0qt e.;',.%.••:.i, . ,r. • : :•Li 1..,',I'tjt,::••Nr,'14:tPi:ts•••7,•:' ' . ' .. • .•. • , •, • :••,'."..•01..i?..,•,,c1:::,:l....ilA .,:iLls ' ';.44...„-,14i•4•.N.:;',;4:,%:}L.1-1. . 1..•• . , • 1 • ,!;,, • , '• 'i•l.•,:1•4.1.17::1•,,t•-7-'1"'" '" ••' • • ::.:( I 4.1 11 sliiit..<4;3;Ii• •:•e.`ti-Z,t.Y..i5,;• 1 'clz'•••,,F.,..ii„.1,•r•.;,,,::, ../.C.qi,.. -::•"•t'.;',:. t„ • ,(,‘.. ;1• ' ..(‘'' ,.,.-it.1.`it-:. . ...-P.)•,...,,, F• - ! qN,,,.,..,01.rd '0•1,:is,,•;,-i i . 'tk i..,:...,1••,:.::.,--, i• . ,-...t.c•::-,,,,Az.4 . : N,,,,,.••.,,,,,./ • ' 6Z.:4•44:4;., . .. .....• ".."•ms. .1••••... 1:;i-...•••../•••?! Fa miry•-•• - • 1.1: . I i 1 • . . , • • CL/RR.r;k4r LAP Li5 „..„, .... ) , . i,. .1: Sr--5 l 4&L6 ?'A 1\4 itY Rair214-0/1,t,.. • cd.-c,otAkito-Fc.tAL ii' . . Go -to / pe,Nii-ry Mil l;r. FAM It,Y R55. Li. -1,i 'F-1-f .."APLJ -rRy i!.... . N.0.-meo. uet\l‘31-011 Mall;: rAM I LY R05. P - . • !D. •1416TI4 G' 1--1,51-1\s' mti()T. F-114\411:1' Fce--"; 1-1.1.. -/-ic-A\A( it,i C 7 J:5-r-Ry it. I,,,..„ . , • I.: • ,-7.7 .. • . i . : , . .. . . . . NOVEM[3ER 18, 1900 APPLICANT: E(;}*. ( ;@t;'IO2i FILE NUMBER: R-101-80 A. SUliil!"n1.AP.Y a PUIBPT SE EDF R[UUEST: The applicant seeks a •rezone of the subject site From "G" to B-1 for purposes of future commercial development. B. GC EPAL IMFURHATIB : 1. Ovner of Record: DUANE WELLS, INC. . 2. Applicant: PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY . 3. Location: (Vicinity Map Attached) North side of S.W. Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue South 4. Legal Description: A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. • 5. Size of Property: ±4.96 acres • 6. Access: Via Grady Way and Lind Avenue S.W. 7. Existing Zoning: "G", General Classification District; minimum lot size 35,000 sq. ft. • 8. Existing Zoning in the Area: "G", 0-1 , Business Use; M-P, Manufacturing Park 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial, Manufacturing Park • 10. Notification: The applicant was • notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Seattle Times on ' November 5, 1980 • and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City ordinance on November 7, 1980. • ti • • • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: DUANE WELLS, R-101-80 NOVEMBER 18, 1980 PAGE TWO I C. HISTORY/BACKGROUND: The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance #1745 of April 14, 1959 at which time the present zoning classification was applied. A special permit for fill and grade of approximately 32,200 cubic yards on the site was approved by the Hearing Examiner on September 22, 1980. D. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1. Topography: The subject site was utilized for a railroad in the past. A built up roadbed extends parallel to S.W. Grady Wry. The two swales create present storm water drainage pattern. 2. Soils:. Urban land (Ur) is soil that has been modified by disturbance of the natural layers with additions of fill material serveral feet thick to accommodate large industrial and housing in- stallations. The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. 3. Vegetation: The site has been cleared in the past. Second growth scrub vegetation covers the subject site. 4. Wildlife: Existing vegetation on the site may • provide- some habitat for birds and small mammals. E; Water: 6. Land. Use: The site itself is undeveloped at this time. In the past it was occupied by railroad tracks. E. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: The surrounding properties are developing into light commercial and office park type uses. The older residential area on the south side of S.W. Grady Way • is gradually being replaced by commercial and office uses. F. PUBLIC SERlICES: 1. Water and Sewer: A 12" water main runs parellel to S.W. Grady Way approximately 50 feet north of the subject site. A second 12" water line runing north and south bisects the property. The primary 108" Metro gravity sewer line is located on the northern property line. Access will have to be via an, established manhole. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department as per Ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route #161 operates along S.W. Grady Way adjacent to the subject site. 4. Schools: Not Applicable 5. Recreation: Not Applicable, 1 k n PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: DUANE WELLS, R-101-80 NOVEMBER 18, 1980 PAGE THREE li G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-729; "G", General Classification District. 2. Section 4-711 ; B-1, Business District. H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL C]LTY DOCUMENT: 1. Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan, June 1976, Objectives pages. 5-7. 2. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, 1965, Commercial, page 11. I. IMPACT ON THE *NATURAL OR HUMAN ENVIRONMENT: • 1 1. Natural Systems: Rezoning the subject site will not directly affect the subject site. Future development though will remove the vegetation, disturb the soils, increase storm water runoff and have an. effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. Through proper development controls and procedures, however, many of these impacts can be mitigated. 2. Population/Employment: Rezoning will have no direct impact on population or employment. However, future use of the site will have to be addressed upon specific development. 3. Schools:• Not applicable. 4. Social: Not applicable. (Traffi) The roposed office use will generate approximately NW additional vehicle trips per day. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance . and- the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended, RCW 43-21C, a declaration of non-significance was issued for the subject proposal by the ERC on October 29, 1980. The appeal period expired on November 12, 1980., K. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: 1. City of Renton Building Division. 2. City of Renton Engineering Division. • o�7 , 3. City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division. 4. City of Renton Utilities Division. 5. City of Renton Fire Department. L. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The proposed office and restaurant uses would be consistent with the requested 8-1 zoning and also compatible with the existing and developing land • uses of surrounding properties. 2. The subject property was generally considered in the adoptions of the Comprehensive Plan in 1965 and the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan in 1976. Planning Department records do not indicate that an area-wide zoning review of this site has { been undertaken. These facts would appear to substantiate Section 4-3014A-1• of the Hearing Examiner Ordinance. • 4'. • • PLANNING DEPARTMENT • PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: DUANE WELLS, R-101-80 NOVEMBER 18, 1980 PAGE FOUR 3. The proposed rezone to 8-1 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation of commercial and manufacturing park for the subject site and surrounding area. It is also generally consistent • with the following goals of the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan: -Promote high quality development that will enhance the image of the City of Renton. -Enhance the tax base of the City of Renton so . all the citizens of Renton are able to benefit. -Minimize noise, air and water pollutants, transportation difficulties; glare, heat, vibration, and other detrimental effects. -Provide a high quality working environment for employees. -Provide a viable economic climate for industrial firms. -Promote a diversified economic base. And these Valley objectives: • Land Use: -Light Industrial, office, and warehouses and those heavy industrial uses that can be made compatible with the- goals of the Valley are the types of developmental land uses intended for the valley. Circulation: -Access should be limited to controlled ingress and egress-points to avoid conflicts and congestion. The proposed use would appear then to conform with Section 4-3014A-2. • 4. Since the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1976, the following development has occurred or is proposed in the vicinity of • the site: - 550 S.W. 7th - Office Building • 800 S.W. 7th - Office Building S.W. 10th and Lind, Office Building Grady Way, 0/W Properties - Offices 500 S.W. 7th, Second Floor - Office space 301 S.W. Grady Way, Office Building (Proposed) 313 S.W. Grady Way, Office Building (Proposed) Together with the steady developments occurring in the Earlington Industrial Park (north of S.W. Grady Way) and the Orillia Industrial Park (south of S.W. 16th Street), the subject request would- seem to address the criteria outlined in Section • 4-3014A-3. The Engineering Division advises that water and sewer main extension plans must be submitted for approval and that an easement will be necessary to extend the 12" water main located to the north of the subject site. Standard hookup fees for water and sewer will apply. . 'mmi E - m t • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: DUANE WELLS, R-101-80 NOVEMBER 18, 1980 PAGE FIVE 0 Roadway and utility improvement plans will require approval prior to development of the site as per Engineering Division comment. Fire hydrants and access roadways shall be installed and serviceable prior to building construction., A pre-construction conference with the Fire Marshall will also be required. See other Fire Department comments. 8. The Traffic Engineering Division indicates that if the proposed easterly access were relocated 100 feet to the west, it could be complemented , in the future by a two-way left turn lane from Grady Way. It is also advised that the maximum • driveway width is 30 feet unless a variance is sought. As calculated by Traffic, the department is also requesting $20/per daily vehicle trip end to cover the cost of orr-site tratric improvements ( 0 x $20 = $3_,000). 09. As part of the special permit approval for fill and grade (SP-072-80), site plan review by the Hearing Examiner for future building construction is required.. 10. Additional comments of other departments are attached for consideration. PEANMIC1G DEPARTMENT RECDMMEl DATIONS: Based- upon the foregoing analysis, it is recommended -that the applicant's request, File Number R-101-80, to rezone the subject site from "G" to 8-1, Business Use, be approved conditioned upon satisfaction of items L-5 through L-9- as stated. 7 r j . . .--. .....ttu cv_ir. 1-0 c." i)11). . . "I y9ti l.- ICI a,,; I Y I ,i:. i l) of 1 _ Z CBS r tl I a I ` i I 'r .- H l p�, ,ii,ul l_IIl!':t -��� •T I -- ---- ! to tV`4111U i,r, I� llgil I -t tN g11111: 21•7•iii 1i1•tl 1. I• 1' .\;, oil ." i-otl. al' �I.-••_ i / III I I LL �� IWI• wl tri - N; Illd I, •ll , u Z_r:.''--. � µul :I DID- Ill puu�•- dllt>I? �'SIIIIIIII � ram.. -_-.�-�"P` lik G __ • • ,i_ ;1►.�'I U'r�r �1HnQlll: _I :a•-• == °' ra • -- •- „ o• s,. )d {, a 1. -I,? ' • , .rim •i." ;i �:��;;1:1;-:-- _ -_ - • +r .y; .141:1 -'' 'aye — \ ' IM i\ i3kF.:.? ,r�_•�--___ jj1 '.. '_7 .:i.j=^ ' R - +i a ft ; 1,•! p. ----:-.4- :g. . 'l' ..:,, ., ., ts .....:\ \ I - i - 0.4 00 • , F Y :i _ . 1 I • r•• A j� .. .. BI; ; , gI f -_r Duane Wells, Puget Sound Power & Light Company R-101-80 - • • APPLICANT DUANE WELLS/PUGET SOUND POWER TOTAL AREA _+4.96 acres St L.I.Uh • PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Grady Way and Lind Avenue S.W. • • EXISTING ZONING I'G' , General Classification District • EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE Future commercial development COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial, Manufacturing Park COMMENTS { 1 i . -..tx rt a.tn `Y.•'r r''+ a: 2►.,; i i1 pr i�.�f . g' r';r- rtN<•4'j �-1.�,g {, . • �•;'.i+ w � .2� • �Yf: • �. i`l r+ � ._ Ali "..`'.t''.',+' ..S�Etr�: •.:::.!c'4` 1 ': '`., '.>.Cat..• i174 i/. I'y+�;(' ,:�,� ••1._ I w*;.; ; ; ;.. . 2. ± • pl-rTR. N GT c: L I , ,; ` .... ;r. �� _ • • • ..,.. .,.......„.„....„, T.. „,,,,,.., ••••••• • ..„.,tair-. „ ... i • 1a K tH ::,,,,,.. „‘,3„ ! ...I. ..• 4 y r�±;., %%j%s;�rF:� • . }" .'•�� -= ;` _- �P� hap,-cD= •F it -._- �� s C9 Y 9� .` i s "�ll� ,,- j\ _cllt'r_ - • - • rfr2- �e111111111.itQ�. • l'" r.. ..1�I. •J F•. : •t '- , ter•. y y • -t. (W7' ,.'i t It t ';:,..':.C� `El 6TH ST 4:(.-off ,�w r th aw, ,.1*..'�� `'A /,• ma J!!L1 a i•t 7 rI r• „, .rl ti...*. P-%:$F.-*. '.i!" t • / l i lt, . . 2l r!au:�",.„t. r .ri7 s��t! •:',••tip , .; w;, ','��t.�?,[,yS WAS , L �D �J5,-;,...........34 1 I tt,u RR I { Sr- 5(I.1.GI,6- IrAMIIX RE.5J0E '1IA(, G-GeMMIERGtAC. 1 1 Lo.. -1,0'' Dr,,lydY Mv7IJL'. ts ILY RES. LI. —Liw-I-( IIavt i .' IE M,-D.-MED. pSNSIYY M1)(.T rAJvillx RK P - Pt.1 Cil,1G/gLiASr-PUBUL ND. -FlIGI O'1,1511'Y MLl(if. FAMILY Ke ' I-I.I. -t-IEAW olvi15-1RY REC.=- gr.LG orl 4 PARKS , r q•F �X = P1'anni r1( ® 4 ' ® 12_1979 + RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT , DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET = . App1i cation: "DeOlive i+1.315J.L.S/ lsr�T 7°OW44e. Re 7 upsf: G 'to '6- Togo PST OSc Location: ► �A 11._112114(titafei24.1 S. '. L:eock a �ea; ° Applicant: 'IX,n Wedgy u it Powe . TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: NOV. IS Police Department A.R.C. MEETING DATE: O GT 3 O { Public Works Department rizS72wer Engineering Division 'DATE oar 22 , 1 , Traffic Engineering Building Division . Utilities Engineering nFire Department • (Other): COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS 'REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON 0t.7� 3 ?O f 8O AT 9:U0 A.M. IN THE THIRD,.FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. . IF YOUR DEPARTMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL. NOT ABLE T •ATTEND THE ARC, PLEASE PRROVVIDE THE c-7012 `COI1ME TS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: i�� Approved ,i Approved with Conditions Not Approved rOiL�C7A-' AL-Q c :/1 //EG A2J!//��. r '22-tff /-7CViL ,.3%//.14t. N/G.G:- /?ZG }7%c_r'i'i , (' PS /) 77/C Ci 7"/ kL=C/i'r/,vC' /C ,s i 2/5 '• '. � �'�j /, "9/),,,,)Y;S At-73 f/ c./..), ii' jC�: ./C���/JLL` !i'L��. J�iS l cJ %C// /�'✓ •� `' , Signature of Director or Au�hoI'ized Representative Date '/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Urlu r.G- Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved J.:' w (3..' PAD A.AA p/Iv:.lao wi rtovwN at�sws.o,.. �p,�„c ....vs: aea•».r=.-7) ✓f CA-561+ "T r IZY ti.ilt;a Iit2.2 !Z" l✓ftiSA .+1anti( . poiL A1/4070 . �q Signature of or or Authorized Representative Date • is RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT • DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: 'DQ. 19g: 1.1rgl~-4-1.1/406-1= 1T -Pot a/;. RE Zfl'z CR- 1Q1- Location: P0044-1 G r, 4? ,Uttapeg2E19 •,'• o� e1�L Applicant: e-Dt..1nu" LMj b owe TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: W tf. � Police Department A,R,C, MEETING DATE: ®'i:T �O Public Works Department p Engineering Division DAM: ®G=2 Traffic Engineering Building Division • Utilities Engineering Fire Department • (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON o G.7e4a so _ !7 0 o AT 9:00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM, IF YOUR DEPARTMENT DIVISIOV REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TO TEND THE ARC, PLEASE PROVIDE THE O1^.MENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:AT00 P.M. ON ®7o4as REVIEWING DEPARTI'IENT/DIVISION: Approved )<' Approved with Conditions Not Approved - /' C 4 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: POLICE DEPT. XXX Approved Approved with Conditions _ Not Approved • /7 LT/D C'R/PERSSON 1.0/21/80 Signature of Director or authorized Representative Date I ' 1 .. Planni- ® 12-1979 • RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET • Appli cation: -0 nh)r. b4-M51.C/• -P F-4 SAWS- OtAI2 Re_zD (R— /Of- Location: ) (4)e3 Bw eau S.P,A.,. L;.r Re,74.t Applicant: ���dd � �6 A �� TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: X/01.i. ( Police Department A,R.C. MEETING DATE: O c.7 3C fieP u li�: 'c:9tEsr k f)tp a t�rir rt4t ,.yy ap s & Engineering Division DAYre oar 22 • Traffic Engineering . Building Division Utilities Engineering Fire Department • (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE .(ARC) TO BE HELD ON Ot-Te7 3a— :its 't3O AT 9:00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOUR DEPARTMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE ARC, PLEASE PROVIDE THE rOI' MENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON 30 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: 1C 1.-)6.; J - Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved Sig ur-e of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved X Approved with Conditions Not Approved • • F .7 ; 2• r , , �ry 2r1 per si}� g�e,,•,��<!•�/v.1-71da = 1-6-0 d V� C% - /14 S • • 411 FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s): - ( )' R-101 80 - Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-610-80 aDescription of Proposal : Rezone from "G" to 8-1 for future office i and restaurant uses. Proponent: Duane Wells, Inc./ • Puget Sound Power and Light .Company • Location of Proposal: North side of S.W. Grady Way between ="_ Lind Avenue S.W. Ems.; and Rainier Avenue South = Lead Agency: Planning Department - _- 4 This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on October 22, 1980, following a presentation by Steve Munson of the Planning Department. Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-610-80 are.the following: 1) Envi• ronmental -Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Roger 3. .Blaylock DATED: October 22, 1980 2) Applications: R-101-80 Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does not have significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS. is not required under RCW 43. 21C.030(2,)(c). This decision was made after review by the . lead agency of a camplete environmental checklist and other information on rile with the lead agency. • Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: No adverse impacts upon adjacent properties. • • Signatures: • • , \ '' ' i ; ' .--411111!:::if.......-...: 'John E. Webley, Pak and so .on Y. . : 7'''n vR'ecreation Di cEor, P.anning,-0 ector Warren C. Gonnason Public Works Director DATE OF PUBLICATION: Al-z9-p(.: • 1 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: //-/.z-ea 1 1 f 1 • . , • • • OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RECEIVED _- • CITY OF RENTON DEC 811080 PROPERTY OE�EigUr REPORT AND DECISION, APPLICANT: Puget Sound Power & Light Company FILE NO. SH. PL. 100-•80, ' E-122-80 LOCATION: Northwest corner of Rainier Avenue South and S.W. Grady Way. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks approval of a proposed four-lot short plat together with an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to permit access to Lots 2 and 3 by a joint easement. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions. Hearing Examiner Decision: Approval with conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning-TO elanning-TO preliminary report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on December 6, 1980. 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 Garing)was opened on December 23, 1980 at 10:20 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. It was reported tha+. the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed.the Planning Department report. 1Vm Ma-mon--A1annIny mpar ment, presented the report, and entered the following exhibits into the record:• Exhibit #1 : Application File containing Planning Department report and other pertinent documents Exhibit rr2: Short Plat as submitted Exhibit #3: Short Plat with staff comments • The Examiner indicated that further research would be required to determine whether or not a variance should be requested from the Parking and Loading Ordinance in lieu of an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance. The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Dick Causey Manager, Land Planning Puget Sound Power & Light Co. Puget Power Building Bellevue, WA 98009 . Mr. Causey indicated concurrence in the recommendations of the Planning Department. He clarified that during rezone review Puget Power had agreed to provide the city with an easement for an existing water line which crosses the property, and during special permit review, storm drainage plans had been coordinated. Mr. Causey advised that an exception • had been requested to allow for a single driveway between Lots 2 and 3 which would eliminate one driveway along Grady Way, provide for landscape sdreening and reduce the number of potential accidents. The Examiner indicated that the short plat car be approved without an exception, but in the event a variance application is determinec necessary, reapplication will be required. Since there were no further comments, the hearing regarding File No. Short Plat 100-80 and E-122-80 was closed by the Examiner at 10:25 a.m. r • 1 t • • Sh. Pl . 100-80 Page Two FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: • FINDINGS: • 1. The request is for approval of a four-lot short plat of +4.96 acres together with an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance for a shared easement access for proposed Lots 2 and 3. - 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the Planning • Department report, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit U1 . 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, R.C.W. 43.21.C., as amended, the subject proposal has been determined exempt from the threshold determination by members of the Environmental Review Committee, responsible officials. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. There was no opposition to the proposal expressed. • 6. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. The water main crossing the property must be extended to the property line and an easement granted to the city for access. 7. The subject property is located on the north side of Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue S. The property was rezoned from G (General ; Single Family Residential ; Minimum lot size - 35,000 square feet) to B-1 (Business/Commercial) in late 1980. A special permit to grade and fill the site was issued in September, 1980. 8. The proposal would create four lots and each lot would have frontage along Grady Way. In addition, Lots 1 and 4 would have frontage along Rainier Avenue and Lind Avenue, respectively. 9. Access to Lot 1 would be via Grady Way approximately adjacent to its western boundary • and away from the Grady Way/Rainier intersection. Lot 4 would have access onto Lind Avenue S.W. 10. The applicant proposes access for the two central lots, Lots 2 and 3, via a joint driveway. The applicant has proposed this method to lessen the number of curb cuts and driveways intersecting Grady Way, a heavily used arterial . The proposed driveway • will create an easement driveway between Lot 2 and Lot 3 and straddle the common property line. Such driveway will violate Section 4-2204(2) (A) which requires that driveways be no closer than five feet to the property line. The applicant has applied • • for an exception to the Subdivision Code. Instead, a variance is required from the provision which is in .the Parking and Loading Ordinance. Notice of the exception fully disclosed the nature of the relief requested, that is, modification of the provision prohibiting a driveway from abutting a property line. 11. The development on the subject site will generate approximately 470 vehicle trips per day. The Traffic Engineering Division has determined that �a lc re -a_ee improvements in this area will cost in excess of $20 per trip generated. CONCLUSIONS: I. The four-lot short plat proposed by the applicant appears to serve the public use and interest. The division and subsequent development of each of the lots of the short subdivision will help increase the tax base of the City of Renton. 2. The access to Lots 1 and 4 will minimize interference with Grady Way and Rainier Avenue which are both heavily traveled arterials. The proposed joint driveway would help additionally decrease the effective curb cuts and areas of turning along Grady Way. The notice of the public hearing this matter was sufficient to encompass the necessary variance request, and therefore, a variance may be granted. The elimination of an extra driveway will lessen interference with the arterial traffic on Grady Way and improve public safety. The variance will not prove detrimental to neighboring properties nor harmful to the general public. The location of the subject property fronting three heavily used arterials, Lind, Grady and Rainier, justifies granting the variance for a public safety aspect as indicated above. 1 ' • • Sh. PI. 100-80 Page Three 3. The proposed development of the subject site will generate approximately 470 vehirle trips per day in the vicinity of the Grady Way/Lind Avenue intersection and the Grady Way and Rainier intersection. To defer the costs of various city required traffic improvements in the areas surrounding the subject site, a fee of $20 per-vehicle trip is is eqrequi •ed to assure that the project makes appropriate provisions for traffic ways pursuant to Sections 9-1105(4) and 9-1106(2)(E). Since the Hearing Examiner does not have the authority to impose traffic related fees at the site ap royal sta e, but has the authority to assure that the short subdi Dion provides for the the pu lc use _ • and interest and specifically provides for public services such as traffic ways, it is appropriate to impose that fee at this time. a DECISION: Exhibit #3 is approved with the variance for the shared driveway and subject to the payment of a fee of $9,400 for traffic ways in the vicinity of the subject site. ORDERED THIS 30th day of December, 1980. • • A _ Fred J. keE irman 0 Land Use He`ering Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 30th day of December, 1980 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Dick Causey, Manager, Land Planning, Puget Sound Power E Light Co., Puget Power Building, Bellevue, WA 98009 TRANSMITTED THIS 30th day of December, 1980 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch • Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Michael Porter, Planning Commission Chairman "uerbara Scr,eiiert, Planning Commissioner Ron Nelson, Building Official Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney ' Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be il -d in writing on or before January 13, 1980. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the examiner is based on(erroneous procedure, errors of law or fac4, 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 data 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 rcord, take rurtr.er action as he deems proper. An appeal to tha City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be flied 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 Finance Department, first floor of City Hall , or same may be purchased at cost in said department. • • • • • • • • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO TEE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 23, 1980 i APPLICANT: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY • FILE NUMBER: SHORT PLAT 100-80; E-122-80 • • j A. SUMMARY & PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks approval of a proposed 4-lot short plat together with an exception to the Subdivision ' Ordinance to permit access to lots 2 and 3 by a joint easement. • B. GETIERAL INFORMATION : • 1. Owner of Record: • DUANE WELLS, INC. 2.. , Applicant: PUGET SOUND POWER • & LIGHT COMPANY 3. Location: (Vicinity Map Attached) N.W. corner of Rainier Avenue South and S.W. Grady Way • 4. Lega1_Description: A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. 5. Size of Property: +4.96 acres 6. Access: Via Grady Way and Lind Avenue S.W. 7. Existing Zoning: "G", General Classification District; minimum lot size 35,000 sq. ft. 8. Existing Zoning in the Area: "G", B-1 , Business Use; M-P, Manufacturing Park 1 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial, Manufacturing Park 10. Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice • was properly published in the Seattle Times on December 10, 1980 and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance on December 5, 1980. C. RIS'Ti+DRtY/EACXGRO'3 ]D: The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance 01745 of April 14, 1959 at which time the present zoning j classification was applied. A special permit for fill and grade of approximately 32,200 cubic yards on the site was approved by the Hearing Examiner on September 22, 1980 and a rezone from "G" to B-1 was also approved f q by the Hearing Examiner on November 24, 1980. tl 4 ` , • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT CO.; SHORT PLAT 100-80 DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE TWO • D. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: -- _ 1. Topography: The subject site was utilized for a railroad in the past. A built up roadbed extends parallel to S.W. Grady Way. The two swales create present storm water drainage pattern. 2. Soils: Urban land (Ur) is soil that has been modified by disturbance of the natural layers with additions { of fill material several feet thick to accommodate large industrial and housing installations. The • erosion hazard is slight to moderate. 3. Vegetation: The site has been cleared in the past. Second growth scrub vegetation covers the subject site. 4. Wildlife: Existing vegetation on the site may provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. 5- Water: • 6.. Land Use: The site itself is undeveloped at this time.. In the past it was occupied by railroad tracks. E. NEIGEMORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: The surrounding properties are developing into light commercial and office park type uses. The older re- sidential area on the south side of S.W. Grady Way is gradually being replaced by commercial and office uses. F. PUBLIC SERviCES: • • 1. Water and Sewer: A 12" water main runs parallel to S.W. Grady Way approximately 50 feet north of the subject site. A second 12" water line running north and south bisects the property. The primary 108" Metro gravity sewer line is located on the • northern property line. Access will have to be via an established manhole_ 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire • Department as per Ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route #161 operates along S.W. Grady Way adjacent to the subject site. 4. Schools: Not Applicable • 5. Recreation: Not Applicable G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: • 1. Section 4-729; "G", General Classification District. 2. Section 4-711; B-1 , Business District. H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COHPREBE-'"1SIVE PLAN OR OTHER • OFFICIAL CITY DOCUT: 1. Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan, June 1976, Objective pages 5-7. { ! 2. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, 1965, Commercial, page 11. 3. Subdivision Ordinance, Section 9-1105; Short Sub- . � division. 4. Subdivision Ordinance, Section 9-1109; Exceptions. • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT, CO. SHORT PLAT 100-80; DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE THREE I. IMPACT OF THE NATURAL OR HUMAN ENVIRONMENT: - i 1 . Natural Systems: Minor 2. Population/Employment: The requested short plat will have no direct impact on population or employment. Future site development will, however, and will need to be addressed at that time. 3. Schools: Not Applicable 4. Social: Not Applicable 5. Traffic: The proposed office use will generate • approximately 470 additional vehicle trips per day. J. • A ASSESSIF /TRESDOLD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended, RCW 43-21C, the subject proposal is exempt from the • Threshold Determination of Environmental Significance. K. A.G CIES/DEP. TTS 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. L. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The proposed short plat is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of commercial - ' .and manufacturing park for the site and surrounding areas. 2. The proposal is compatible with the existing commercial and office uses to the north and west of the subject • site. 3. All of the proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance for the size and frontage. 4. Although each lot does front on a public street, the applicant is requesting an exception to Section 4-2204-2A of the Parking and Loading Ordinance to permit access to lots 2 and 3 by a joint access easement and common driveway. This would be necessary 4 in order to comply with the 5' standard of this section. The existing street pattern and topography do not provide for access to the rear. In addition, the requirement for separate driveways per individual lots would necessitate the removal of substantial amounts of existing curbing on Grady Way. Approval of this request would not only reduce the number of driveways and potential circulation conflicts but also lower substantially the expense of curbing removal. A somewhat similar request was approved by the Hearing Examiner in the Doug Weston Short Plat #2 (Short Plat 061-80) on August 1, 1980. • Given this and a related exception approved in the Cecelia Wooten Short Plat (Short Plat 375-79) , a • ^. .`Yr • • PLANNING DEPARTMENT P. PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER • PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT CO.: SHORT PLAT 100-80 DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE FOUR - !i i . it would appear that there is some precedent for such a request and that justification has been- supplied (See 9-1109) . 5. Suitable utilities are available to the subje site, although a water main extension plan a ong Grady Way will be required.as well as an eas=menu for .extending the existing 12" water main. U" ities Engineering also notes that standard hookup fees will apply. 6. The Engineering Division advises that all off-s' improvements and storm drainage across th in an east-west direction will be requir .�lw h 7.' Proper ingress and Egress must be provided and all future building construction shall meet fire codes as per Fire Department comment. M. DEPARTMEUTAL IDATIO S: Based upon the above analysis it is recommended that approval of the short plat and exception requests be • granted subject to the satisfaction of the requirements • outlined in L-5- and L-6. • • • • • • • • r 4 i ,. -.414.6ea -tn't1 .4 Is:.41r . y... 'it• .3 \ ' ‘_.... '.=-•-..')-L. 1 ' -k!''"i'-, - .. •, ;,., 11,i,- . ..-ri— t.�•- I I t I I E.,...1 I .• ,. • ; , ..,..,. , .1; ,z.,,,,,.,,..,,,...,.4. 1,;,11 ..1 ,g.ure,13 ,.........,-----::::...:..___-'--...._-•-: . , LGa: i ,.,� y�i*i• I I 1 ryq: yll I I i 1 I i `,i 1 L0 I I. `-"r ...r'Ilt►4-11i ,f -`."'9 1 I . • I .`4N -A �', r.I (II�i is Ili . Ill, L r • j µ1�- I .. 41 X qqqqq _ .:'Llta•. il•1ji1NF''FA..., J1C- .t. ,• ' 1 I !I „Law `� t.1 *01laOr":ill: atUll154;114 it �,-� E "a. •:110, Illik . - - ---,i. _4.'•±1.7 15mitt;‘,m-:Li-.A". .11 . 'M..,.1•Mik, 11. - ..4_,A . ,.....:A: y•Lk••4,,r•-•:. •,1.. ,-,,,_ _,.; ,k a• - - k "1, *-:e°." - Js .:_ t f� • ..1 i�.t �jr- ��� ^_ _"_''a- :.75,1;. �►/ ..^I •lI a ,, S1l > • jtTt s ,. 8 1. It. • ; ) k ., t. \ ._...._..- - • •1 I • N • 1 I i T t -� t i a 1 I . l• —1-- d ? PUGET SOUND POWER Sz LIGHT COMPANY • SHORT PLAT 100-80; -E-122-80 • • • I , • APPLICANT Puget Sound Power & Light Co. TOTAL. AREA +4.96 acres • PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Grady Way and Lind Ave. S.W. • EXISTING ZONING G, General Classification District Ir - 1 EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE Commercial Use COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial, Manufacturing Park r I ' COMMENTS I 1 . • 44 • • . - . i ry 'a c ,: I '• SSiV'd 140 -2 ,-)as _1•7y ' .3,2ys04Ni Mva/1- '1'i-1 c ,-1w'o� •»nw AI-1571'a h!'91h- 'aH 4 4 ��snd-'�vnb/��ifl(�d - d •see X R"Tv i • fiN Ali Nad 'ovw-•a�o z • • . j Aw)s(�a�; -}i�11- r('� ill Sad Aiiwv4 J-1(�w z}►SNaa /o7- o-� 1V1' avIw0"7-'J . -)v1..14aar4ab X71wt/f 9 )VV)S - s 1 • • gcp m v . )..`N ni i 'z'L.�M 4Y•,. ' I..7;Alle, • t '•y • t� •4'K• 1` 11{Kf ' 1 ! tavh'iti:tn ' 4 ter. u Y v 'irk• 4pA. l7i,Z. '4.'11.:"44c t{i -. � , 4r �µv� . . ./ s:. 1 )%:(0."g!:.4:..-47• i1.2.ral14''•:4'.;'.0.'..-. & '' ;iv..,!...4. .....,,:i'il;iii:;;;;;;.tviii , . . 1 , ; , . . . , , . . . . . . . . ,. i.- .-rt., i. ,.., •, 1, .1, ;•; •._...., gi,,,...,. 0,4 s to ..T1'. 1.4 IITI: * : ' �'. •.,, - 6 e!• ,:II .• • fin.t/ ` • •{pia � 1 .. ' .'f:••! 4t•,1 - f�.,�. Fey!. _ f t C. ii. 1. t #<rS / " ,.: \,,,1441"..,.., . ri LI:vim,..;-. .-..t..;.tiC''''-'.10..._..iiii _,,:--.6_,.4..,,...„...; is . H 19 71; ..,.., .,...1-'1". . . 3. ' ` ie. i 1 , t "F' ..1.I" Y Y• •;rr'.-.1 10? :.'- ----^"- -...'irJ- • 1 :t4(. . .,k . / sti/531 .- 43 • ate_ .t.:4i.1, ;< A---4' t = sN\ '.-„ '- r'` . • k y,A ...�,,.c• I •ham r J - --y" - j J,y _ at' fv"!-/I%#4,t /ift,'e i, , ''• .r•'. ;el, ICI s E� .� ' ' •i±snatm.,. :•.! 4'• :, i `...ramb ;r t. . C .. f .1 �N,;1 4 ''�+i` I,•lz4 (',/:• Ir.t�' a';•, •;,3, 'F--;,.•I' .s!'� 51� 1 p1,-'{.�- 4,.;' ram:! 'f{'�'•14 p.•.•' R 4,, �••• ''1.:*. i• 1 �• t.. ',i r' .r. .F7�.laTyFM f. :k,..fm :t� ciw':. • •)L "1,,,L • , i-i t' tilt, •1 4, PY • • .: .. n • 't 1 . • - . ' - /111 ® Planning , 12-1479 . i RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Appli cation:SH® rP e)0.41 ,) 4// Location:A ge • m I • Applicant: .Gii�s�cJG3� Y � �6' �P dr' �f�9- . i TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: talq194 j Police Department A.R,C, MEETING DATE: II! 41 d , . Public Works Department Engineering Division - . Traffic Engineering Buil 'ng Division - • C/Utilities Engineering Fire Department (Other): COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE. PROVIDED IN . WRITIN FOR T;-IE::APPLICP.TION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON 14 /�O AT 9:UO A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. ' IF YOU DE?ARTMENT/DIVIS.ION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE ARC, PLEA!SL � THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON • .&. . 4os K 1'IC,91Ju1i131v11. __AI,Twilip Approved _ ,/ Approved with Conditions Not Approved �G'i("C SSA F-C/L 4::/-�C/4G}2C:7' G�e-/// itirG/Li:. / 4•)(-,i I--C'4 jE'Lc /J t//L 4)/A..l (G.L'.S'7 Z e./C f C,L, ,9///7L L N'C'L- f1LL- f%/� CCif..JG:.s • .�i ‘ /1Z(, / �Yo Signature of Director or Au horized Representative ate • Approved '"Approved with Conditions Not Approved I Su3J6ct Tb WATLti "f.t FC'�60vIke 'f 4W146 C 2dQY -.wag . u ,, egeYv,WL Ng- M W. Q." f...O:e4 .0/0.0_ _ • 1 • ..��5e7--....a"__SYsm--, 0cr^J, Cy tres 01/Fr2- pZcfi:`�"`� ! ��- o r� r Z S�"'C2 /0-• II ,7 J Signature 4 Director or Authorized Representative Date — , • i - __---,. , . , '• , Rviti,,..• , uridwilim, • ' • • • 1 • .1 - , • Approved ( Approved with Conditions Not Approved — A I i-t, 1,I.‘.c. d i :5; e . , . .„17.----77= —a is. acc.0,1.6. 4.1e. P;c..,...) d•-• - -:•:,/--`7;17-7-f*, ; , • 2-----'-+ 1-.61. :"‘..- .-.—C-7i,___ e___ _..:i.._:.,,--re. ":-... ca -/L.12:41_. 210112111-‘ '-' — 711.- ' I i'.i- -3..,..ti-sh,C.. C4-1.1-id ;Pcr--" ea re 4 . 1 ccr,:4,;. .L._.e, its::,'1, s7.....q.:::.....;......,,,,:,/j... ..:,• .„ ;1„: • ,4.:L,,..zi...fr-1...., Lj,-7/7 ,•,,,. : - ' /— ;.•-• • 1 • . j/.....„: ie.. . c''. .-1-1-ft '1 -) )2'16 //// 1-94) • 7-;. . ' . Signature of Director. or Authorized Representative Datq . .. . .._ , , , • •------------ . "41111.1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"111111111 . . ! , : X Approved _. Approved with Condi tions Not Approved • , I , . . 1. . . 1 . ,7-7 • . /7-- ..• -.7 . . SI gnapt of Director or ethozed Representative /1—Date . Z. . ...._ ......_. _ .... e ' 4.11144.11111811"1"1411"""aradd • „ . . , . . . 1 . , Approved Approved with Conditions Not-Approved . . . . ,___r....,........_› . 4 p s-,....1, ,/ .... / 97,,,,...7"-- p j, • . et,c. ...-2.0744...„...4..,.. . ,...._...- 41-,e- ..e-s.d. - I p4,1.42e=f: 1... 7 .'• . I . 1 . I . Signature of Director or Authorized. Representative Date ! • • ._...._ .._......._____. . _ . . . 11,01/WAKW,- n""TmcmTiiii0031t.- .7Ai3proved Approved with Conditions Not Approved . / i . i • i . , -.-- . if ,'.,......4.....______ , Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date . i , 1 _ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: . i Approved Approved with Condi tions Not Approved . & .t.,, . • .-e :-. -• ..:,7r.r.71:•- , ., ..,,,,, .:. .::. . .:•.,_ .,.... . .. .. .: . ., . - r,::. 'e:,-,- .•::' --,, 04- 1,*..,A440 ' aeg'g0 -k8 , ., . - • , ••,, , .. : . - 1 . . , . • • • • • PERKINS, COI E, STONE,-OLSEN & WILLIAMS • TOM A.ALBERG DONALD G.KARI 1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING JOHN DANIEL BALLBACH JENNIFER SUE MORGAN BURROUGHS B.ANDERSON EDWARD W.KUN RAU WILFRED D.BENNETT CLARK REED NICHOLS J.DAVID ANDREWS DOUGLAS S.LITTLE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 RONALD L.BERENSTAIN JANE NOLAND JOHN F.ASLIN TIMOTHY A.MANRINO DAVID J.BURMAN RUSSELL L.PERISHO DOUGLAS P.BEIGHLE STEVEN C.MARSHALL BRUCE D.CORKER THOMAS E.PLATT DENNIS L.BEKEM EVER STEPHEN A.~EON TELEPHONE:206-6E12-8770 RICHARD C.COYLE RICHARD OTTESEN PRENTKE STEVEN SCOTT BELL ROBERT S.MUCKLESTONE TELECOPIER:206-682-87E14 SUSAN K.OONALDSON LAWRENCE B.RANSOM JOHN H.BINNS,JR. J.SHAN MULLIN ROBERT E.OILES. RICHARD R.ROHOE WAYNE C.BOOTH,JR. HAROLD F.OLSEN TELEX:32-0319 PAUL B.GOODRICH MARK A.ROWLEY J.PAUL COIE OMAR S.PARKER,JR. RONALD.M.GOULD HARRY H:SCH NEIOER,JR. THEODORE J.COLLINS CHARLES I.STONE STEPHEN M.GRAHAM JAMES H.SIMON BRUCE MICHAEL CROSS F.THC000 RE THOMS EN' HEATHER S.HOWARD PETER D.SLOANE CALHOUN DICKINSON RICHARD S.TWIS9 ANCHORAGE OFFICE WASHINGTON,D.C.,OFFICE MARY ROSE HUGHES EVELYN SROUFE • JOHN O.DILLOW DAVID E.WAGONERBARRY M.KAPLAN EDWIN S.STERNER WALTER W.ETER RICHARD E.WALKER CHARLES J.KATZ,JR. ROBERT STOKES,JR. GRAHAM H.FERNALD WILLIAM S.WEAVER •420"L"STREET 1300-19TM STREET H.W. OTTO G.KLEIN III C.JAIRUS STRATTON,III H.WESTON FOSS ANOREW M.WILLIAMS ANON ORAL E,ALASKA 99501 WASHINGTON.D.C.20036 RICHARD ALAN KLOBUCHER BART WALDMAN KEITH GERRARD RICHARD E.WILLIAMS CHERYL A.LEANER VERNON L.WOOLSTON,JR. CHARLES C.GORDON DAVID LIEBERWORTH JIMMY WU WILLIAM A.GOULD CHRISTOPHER T.BAYLEY JAMES R.LISBAKKEN • LAWRENCE B.HANNAH JOHN R.PRICE • RICHARD E.MCCANN WENDELL W.BUCK JAMES M.HILTON OF COUNSEL • JANET M.MCKAY LUCIEN F.MARION • RAMER B.HOLTAN,JR. PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE M.MARGARET MCKEOWN LOWELL P.MICKELWAIT THOMAS J.MCLAUGHLIN D.FOREST PERKINS LEE E.MILLER . COUNSEL January 13, 1981 Office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner • City of Renton • . Renton, Washington 98055 • Re: Request' for Reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner' s Decision regarding Puget Sound Power & . Light Company' s Short Plat, File No. . SH.PL. 100-80, E-122-80 • Dear Mr. Kaufman: • Pursuant to title 4, 53015 of the Renton City Code and 1 other relevant Code sections, and on behalf of Puget Sound ' Power & Light Company, we hereby request reconsideration of the report and decision of the Renton City hearing examiner regarding the short platting petition, file no. SH.PL. 100-80, E-122-80. ' This request for reconsideration is based on the following grounds: • 1. The Findings are based on errors of fact; 2. Conclusions are based on errors of law; 3. The imposition of a fee for vehicle trips is not authorized by law; 4. The vehicle trip fee imposed is excessive; ,T • 5. The need for vehicle trip fee is unsupported by the •. evidence; . --1 Office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner January 13, 1981 Page two 6. The vehicle trip fee imposed is not reasonably related to the impacts of the short plat applied for; 7. Such other grounds as shall be presented at the hearing. Oral argument and an opportunity to offer additional testimony and evidence are requested. Sincerely, PERKINS; COIE, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS Attorneys for Puget Sound Power & Light Compant By Kenneth B. . Shellan' KBS/vc cc: City Clerk, . Renton Planning Department OF J I• THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILLAVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 3, ail o BARBARA' Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 9O `O FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235-2593 O 4/TFO SEPIS January 15, 198.1 Mr. Kenneth B. Shellan Perkins, .Coie, Stone, Olsen & Williams 1900 Washington Building Seattle, WA 98101 RE: File No. Short Plat 100-80, E-122-80; Puget Sound Power & Light Company; Request for Reconsideration. Dear Mr. Shellan: I. have had an opportunity to review your request for reconsideration and find that there is, no justification in your request to change the decision. The Hearing Examiner Ordinance, Section' 4-3014 (D) and the Subdivision Ordinance, particularly Subsections 9-1105(4) and 9-1106(2) (E) , respectively, permit the imposition of conditions and require a determination that the public roadways are or must be provided for by the appl i cant. It should be noted that there is no procedure entitling the applicant to an oral argument on reconsideration. Reconsideration is based on the existing record, that is, the testimony previously received into evidence along with the various exhibits. The applicant is still entitled to appeal this matter to the City Council within a second 14-day appeal period to expire on January 29, 1981 . Very truly yours, Fred J . Kaufman Hearing Examiner • cc: Parties of Record • • i 1 4 • PERKINS, COTE, STONE, OLSEN &. WILLIAMS • TOM A.ALBERG DONALD G.KARI 1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING JOHN DANIEL BALLBACM JENNIFER SUE MORGAN BYRROUGHS B.ANDERSON EDWARD W.KUHRAU WILFRED D.BENNETT - CLARK REED NICHOLS ' J.DAVID ANDREWS DOUGLAS S.LITTLE SEATTLE,WAS HINGTON 98101 RONALD L.BCAENSTAIN JANE NOLANO JOHN .A$LIN TIMOTHY A.NANRING DAVIO J.BURMAn BUSS ELL L.PERISHO DOUGLAS P.BEIGHI.L STEVEN C.MARSHALL BRUCE D.CORKER THOMAS E.PLATT DENNIS L.BEK[MEYER STEPHEN A.MeK EON TELEPHONE:208-682.6770 RICHARD C.COYLE RICHARD OTTESEN PRLNTKE STEVEN SCOTT BELL ROBERT S.MUCKLESTONE TELECOPIER:206.682-G784 SUSAN II.DONALDSON .LAWRENCE B.RANSOM — JOHN M.BINN$,JR. J.SHAN MYELIN ROBERT E.G I LES RICMARD R.ROHOE WAYNE C.BOOTH.JR. HAROLD F.OLSEN • TELEX:32-0319 PAUL B.GOODRICH MARK A.AOW LLT J.PAUL COIL OMAR S.PARKER.JR. RONALD M.GOULD MARRY M.SCHNLIOCR,JR. 1 THE000RE J.COLLINS CHARLES I.STONE STEPHEN M. JAMES N.SIMON BRUCE MICHAEL CROSS - F.THEODORE THOMSEN HEATHER S.HOWARD PETER O.SLOANL - . CALHOUN DICKINSON RICHARD S.HAMS ANCHORAGE OFFICE WASHINGTON,D.C.OFFICE MARY ROSE HUGHES EVELYN SPOUFE JOHN D.DILLOW OAVID E.WAGONER PARRY M.KAPLAN EDWIN B.STERNER - CHARLES J.KATE.JR. ROBERT STOKES.JR. - WALTER W.EVER RICHARD E.WALKER 420"L"STREET 1300-19w.STREET N.W. GRAHAM H.FCRNALD WILLIAM S.WEAVER OTTO G.KLEIN III C.JAIRUS STRATTON.III ' M.WESTON FOSS ...WREN M.WILLIAHS ANCMORAGE.ALASKA 99501 WASHINGTON,D.C.20036 RICHARO ALAN KLOBUCHCR KART WALDMAN • KEITM GERRARD RICHARD E.WILLIAMS CM ERYL A.LEANER VERNON L.wOOLSTON.JR. _- CHARLES C.GORDON -- OAVIO LIEBERWORTN JIMMY WV WILL.AM A.GOULD CHRISTOPHER T.BAILEY JAMES R.LISBAKKEN LAWRENCE B.MANNAH JOHN R.PRICE RICHARD C.MYCANN WENDELL W.BLACK JAMES M.MILTON OF COUNSEL I JANET M.MCKAT • LUCIEN F.MARION ` RAMER B.MOLTAN.JR. . PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE . M.MARGARET MCKEOWN LOWELL P.MICIIELWAIT TMOMAS.J.MCLAUGMLIN O.FORCST PERKINS LEE C.MILLER COUNSEL January 22, 1981 :511. 1234 cco co s., ,��s rD Renton City- Council_ - % 4i�\-) tikgc �c�J The City- of Renton v' o LSO`s• tii Municipal Buidin� •, 4� iJ •- 200 Mill Avenue. South � sl8l g\.°\ Renton, -Washington 98055 . • Ret: . Notice-.of:Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Decision -Regarding Puget Sound Power & Light Company}s Short Plat, File No. SH.PL. 100-80., -- E-122--80 • Dear .Re:Trton .City .Council Members: -Pursuant to. Title 4, § 3016 of the Renton City Code and other -relevant Code sections, and on behalf of Puget Sound Power &- Light Company, we hereby appeal the report and decision of the- Renton City Hearing Examiner regard- ing the short platting petition, file no. - SH.PL. 100-80, E-122-80 . The Hearing Examiner refused our Request for Recon- sideration on January 15, 1981 (please see Exhibit A attached).. This Notice of Appeal is based on the following grounds: • 1.. The Findings are based on errors of fact; 2. Conclusions are based on errors of law; • 3. The imposition of a fee. for vehicle trips is not authorized by law; . 4. .The Renton Ordinances. (41-3014(D) , 9-1105 (4) and - 9-1106 (2) (E) ) cited by the Hearing -Examiner do not. authorize the imposition of the vehicle 1i trip fee; • Renton City Council January 22, 1981 Page Two 1 5. The vehicle trip fee imposed is excessive; 6. The need for vehicle trip fee is- unsupported by the evidence; • • 7. The vehicle trip fee will not be used to improve public- roads and facilities contiguous with . the short plat site,. as required. by law; 8_ The• vehicle trip fee imposed. is not reasonably related to the impacts of the short plat applied for; 9R. . .Such other. grounds as shall be presented at the hearia.g_ . - =Or.aL.-argument and an opportunity to offer additional testimony and evidence are requested. Reasonable prior notice o:f-:the appeals hearing date is requested ,to enable appellant--to prepare and submit- an appeal' s brief. : " Sincerely, • • PERKINS, COIF, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS • • Attorneys for Puget Sound - Power & Light Company ... .. By • • Kenneth B. .Sheilan KBS/kc .. cc: City -Cl.erk • Renton- Planning Department :Mr.. .Fred J. Kaufman PERKINS, COTE, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS ANCHORAGE OFFICE 1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING WASHINGTON,D.C.OFFICE 420"L" STREET SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 192o N STREET N.W. SUITE 403 ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 TELEPHONE:206-682-8770 WASHINGTON,D.C.20036 _ -- TELEPHONE:907-279-6561 TELECOPIER:206-682-8784 TELEPHONE:202-887-9030 TELECOPIER:907-276-3108 TELE%:69-a49 CABLE"PERKINS SEATTLE'. TELEX:32-0319 PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE February 17 , 1981 Mr. Earl Clymer 526. Cedar South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Mr. Clymer: We represent Puget Sound. Power & Light Company. As you know, a $20 vehicle trip fee has been imposed as a condition of their short plat, File No. Sh. P1. 100-80, E-122- 80 . Prior to our scheduled meeting with the Renton City Coun- cil 's Planning and Development Committee on Thursday, Febru- ary 19 , ' we thought it would be helpful to identify what we perceive to be the three important issues in this appeal. First, the Renton City Council has not passed any ordinance which authorizes the imposition of a vehicle trip fee where the fee revenues will be placed into a general system's development fund. In the absence of an: authorizing ordinance, the Hearing Examiner has exceeded his delegated authority by imposing the vehicle trip fee as a' condition of the short plat. The Hearing Examiner is surely correct in his assertion that the Hearing Examiner is empowered to impose conditions, require dedications, establish setback requirements, and the like on the short plat development site. The Hearing Examiner , however, has not been delegated power to impose conditions or fees that are not reasonably related to the actual, physical short plat site or the immediately contiguous . area. If the Hearing Examiner decides, for example, that Liberty Park should have more parking stalls, or for that matter more tennis courts, the Hearing Examiner clearly possesses no authority to impose vehicle taxes on development proposals which do not create a current need for more parking stalls or tennis courts 1 ' February 17 , 1981 Page 2 at Liberty Park. That, of course, raises an additional ques- tion. Conditions imposed must be reasonably calculated to reduce or compensate for specific and identified impacts of a project. Approval of a building permit, for example, requires identifying the number of trips to be generated from a particu- lar site, and thus provides the basis for identifying impacts and conditions designed and tailored to mitigate those impacts. Approval of a short plat, however , provides no certainty of impact on roads or traffic--as a result, neither can conditions tailored to mitigate impacts be identified. The second important issue to be discussed in the Thursday Committee meeting is the timing of imposition of the fee. Even if we assume that the hearing examiner can impose a vehicle trip fee, the fee is being imposed at an inappropriate stage of the development process. Developing a site is obviously a multi-stage process, requiring different permits and assess- ments at each stage. The appropriate time for imposing a vehicle trip fee is the actual building development phase, not when a short plat for raw land is being obtained. The reason for distinguishing among the development stages and the appro- priate assessments at each stage becomes clear if the short plat site at issue is for some reason, such as high interest rates, never developed. In that case , it would be absurd for an applicant to pay a vehicle trip fee based on projected vehicle trips from a building which is never built. At the time a building permit is sought, however, actual use is con- templated, the extent of the use is known, and fees reasonably related to the impact of the proposal could be determined. The Hearing Examiner appears to agree with our, contention that it is currently premature to impose the vehicle trip fee. The Examiner stated at the rezone hearing "that it may be inap- propriate to impose a trip generation fee during the rezone process since no development is proposed. " (Hearing Examin- er 's rezone written report, November 24 , 1980. ) The Examiner therefore refused to levy the vehicle trip fee recommended for future imposition by the Building Division of the Public Works Department. The Engineering Department of the Public Works Department was in agreement with the Hearing Examiner, stating in their "Development Application Review Sheet" that the 1 , I February 17, 1981 Page 3 Department approves the site "subject to approved utility and roadway improvement plans at time of development. ". (Emphasis added.) Even so, at the short plat hearing , the Examiner imposed the fees. We believe the Hearing Examiner 's previous state- ments were correct: during a multi-stage development process, a vehicle tax should not be imposed until the actual building permit phase. The final important issue to be addressed is the absence of documentation supporting the $20 fee. We are unable to deter- mine that the necessary research was conducted to determine: (a) the cost of necessary roadway improvements in the area; (b)- the portion of use related to the proposed proj- ect; or 4c) the equitable share in total costs which should be assessed on either a "per trip" or project basis. The selection of a $20 fee as compared with any other dol- lar figure was apparently arbitrary and consequently unfair . Until documentation is produced demonstrating why $20 is the appropriate fee, the. imposition of the fee should not be per- missible. We appreciate your having taken the time to review our comments. We look forward to personally meeting you this Thursday and discussing these matters in more detail. Very truly yours, Kenneth B. Shellan • REPORT OF SOILS INVESTIGATION PROPOSED PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON 1' for PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY MICROFILMED . _ J\ PfG�c�4b �r\\ AUG 29 i98t, --------------------- • 4//4, „Ay • DAMES & MOORE • 1978-100-05 • May 15, 1979 ANCHORAGE LOS ANGELES • ATLANTA NEW ORLEANS 416 BILLINGS NEWPORT BEACH ` ATHENS RIYADH BOCA RATON NEW YORK =� JAKARTA SINGAPORE BOSTON PHOENIX KUWAIT SYDNEY CHICAGO PORTLANDsK LONDON TEHRAN CI R SALT LAKE CITY & . MADRID TOKYO C gANANFOFORD ®" E S CO CO®� E SAN FRANCISCO MELBOURNE TORONTO DENVER SANTA BARBARA PERTH VANCOUVER FAIRBANKS SEATTLE CONSULTANTS IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES HONOLULU SYRACUSE HOUSTON WASHINGTON,D.C. LEXINGTON.KY WHITE PLAINS SUITE 500,NORTHGATE EXECUTIVE CENTER • 155 N. E.100TH STREET • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98125 • 1206) 523-0560 CABLE: DAMEMORE TWX: 910-444-2021 May 15, 1979 Puget Sound Power & Light Company Real Estate Division • Puget Power Building Bellevue, Washington 98009 Attention: Mr. Robert B. Boyd Gentlemen: We submit herewith six copies of our "Report of Soils Investigation, Proposed Property Development, Renton, Washington," for Puget Sound Power & Light Company. The scope of our investigation was described by our proposal dated December 7, 1978. Authorization was provided by your Purchase Order Number E 39011SPL dated April 3, 1979. We appreciate the opportunity of serving you on this project. Please call us if you need any clarification concerning our recommendations. We will be pleased to provide necessary geotechnical consultations and inspections during site development and construction. Yours very truly, DAMES & MOORE By 47.),i,'. 0207)..7,;4977 Larry e. Morrison Associate LLM:HLC:mb Enclosures TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. INTRODUCTION 1 SCOPE 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 SITE A 2 SITE B 3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 GENERAL 4 PILE SUPPORT 4 SPREAD FOOTING SUPPORT 5 AREAL SETTLEMENT, PRELOAD, AND SURCHARGE REQUIREMENTS . . 6 SITE PREPARATION AND FILL PLACEMENT 8 FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT 9 APPENDIX FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TEST A-1 FIELD EXPLORATIONS A-1 LABORATORY TESTS A-2 SOIL SAMPLER TYPE U A-3 PLATES • Plates 1 and 2 - Plot Plans Plate A-1 through A-3 - Logs of Borings Plate A-4 - Logs of Hand-Auguer Holes Plate A-5 - Unified Soil Classification System Plate A-6 - Results of Direct Shear Tests Plate A-7 - Results of Consolidation Test ®ONES a !MOORE REPORT OF SOILS INVESTIGATION PROPOSED PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON for PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY INTRODUCTION In this report we present the results of our soils investigation of two separate parcels of property located just north of South Grady Way in Renton, Washington. The locations of the properties relative to other features in the vicinity are shown on the Plot Plan, Plates 1 and 2. Plans for the development of the properties have not been finalized but it is expected that construction will consist of one- or two-story commercial buildings. A previous investigation has been performed by our office for the transmission line which occupies the southern portion of both properties. The results of that investigation were summarized in our report dated • November 13, 1969. In arriving at our conclusions and recommendations we have supplemented the data collected during this investigation with information developed during the earlier study. SCOPE The purposes of this investigation are to explore the subsurface soil and ground water conditions at the the sites and to provide recom- mendations for foundation support and site development. Specifically, our study includes the following: -1- p A FVB E S a W1+9O0 62 E r - 1. Providing recommendations for site preparation and filling. 2. Providing recommendations for foundation and floor slab support, including bearing capacities, minimum footing widths and minimum footing depths. 3. Providing recommendations for a preload or surcharge program, including preload heights and estimated loading intervals. 4. Providing pile foundation recommendations. 5. Providing estimates of postconstruction settlements for the recommended site preparation methods and foundation types. SITE CONDITIONS The northern portion of both properties is a 100- to 110-foot-wide right-of-way formerly owned by the Northern Pacific Railroad. The abandoned railroad grade is some 10 to 12 feet wide at the crest and is built up about 3 to 8 feet above the surrounding land. Subsurface conditions at the sites were investigated by soil borings and shallow hand-auger holes. In addition, subsurface data developed by a previous investigation was used. Subsurface conditions of the two parcels of property are quite different; consequently, for ease of reference we have divided the property into Parcels "A" and "B" for presentation of our comments and recommendations. SITE A (The parcel just west of Talbot Road) In this parcel the railroad embankment and other fills are about 3 to 10 feet thick. Beneath this fill, and at the surface in unfilled portions of the site, there is a somewhat variable layer composed dominantly of soft silt but which includes layers and lenses of sand and organic material. In Boring 1 a deposit of well graded sand with gravel -2- - rasaew Es e. PA 00 F2E was present just beneath this silt; beneath the sand a thick layer of medium stiff peat was encountered. In Boring 2 the peat layer occurred just beneath the silt and above the sand formation. In Boring 3, the peat was found to occur within the general silt formation and the sand with gravel occurred at the base of the silt. Two of our previous borings in this area also encountered peat and confirmed its presence beneath virtually all of Parcel A. The silt formation is of moderate strength and moderate to high compressibility. The peat layer, which varies in thickness from about 6 to 15 feet, is highly compressible. The ground water table is no more than about 2 to 3 feet below the surface of the site (except in higher fill areas). SITE B (The parcel beween Rainier and Lind Avenues) In this area our borings indicated that the railroad embankment fill is about 6 to 9 feet in thickness. Some sections of the embankment appear to have been constructed from silt taken from the right-of-way. Beneath the fill (and at the surface in the unfilled areas) there is a layer of medium stiff silt which varies significantly in thickness across this parcel. Beneath the silt dense sand with gravel occurs. The silt varies in thickness from approximately 10 to 25 feet at the location of the borings and appears to be thinner in some places (where it was apparently excavated for embankment construction. It is characterized by moderate strength and moderate to high compressibility. The ground water table is no more than about 2 to 3 feet below the surface of the site (except in higher fill areas). • • -3- ID"fV9ES g Moonn CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS • GENERAL • On the basis of our explorations and analyses we conclude that both sites can be developed for light industrial or commercial buildings. Pile support of buildings will be required at Site A; Spread footing support is appropriate for light structures at Site B. Soil support of floor slabs at grade is feasible in both parcels, but preloading or ' surcharging of building sites prior to construction will be necessary to minimize postconstruction floor settlements. • PILE SUPPORT Based on .the results of borings drilled' during this investigation and subsurface data from our previous work in the area, we conclude that the- whole of Site A is unsuitable for support of structures on • ' spread footings; pile support. will be required. For column loads in the range of 30 kips to 60 kips, we recommend the use of treated wooden piles. Our analyses indicate that wooden • piles having an 8 inch tip diameter, designed to carry 25 tons per pile, will require a penetration of 5 feet into the dense sand layer (that is the pile tips will need to be at about Elevation -20) in order to develop suitable support. Twelve-inch diameter auger-cast concrete • piles may be used instead of timber piles; these will require,a penetra- tion of 4 feet into the sand and gravel layer to develop a capacity of 30 tons. Piles installed to above criteria will undergo postconstruction • settlements estimated to be on the order of 1 inch. Higher capacity, piles are also feasible but would have to penetrate the peat layer . . and develop their support in the underlying granular soils to minimize -4- • ®AMES e. MOORE ' settlement. High capacity piles may be difficult to install through the granular soil layers above the peat. Settlements of high-capacity piles terminating in the granular soils beneath the peat will be nominal. • • SPREAD FOOTING SUPPORT • At Site B light buildings may be safely supported on shallow footings • founded within the fill which will be placed over the existing native soils, provided that the footings are separated from the native soils by a minimum of 3 feet of properly compacted granular fill. On the basis of our explorations, we feel that significant portions of the material forming the abandoned railroad embankment can be used as general site fill. However, the extent to which silt has been used in the basal portions of the embankment is not precisely known. This question will have to be answered through inspections at the time of grading. The planned site grades are not known to us. If grades are such that the recommended minimum fill thickness beneath footings will not be available, then it will be necessary to overexcavate at footing locations and replace the excavated native soils with compacted granular fill. The • area of over-excavation and replacement should extend a minimum of 18 inches outside the footing limits. We recommend that engineering inspec- tion of the footing excavations and backfilling be provided to insure that.the work is carried out as intended. Since the water table occurs at shallow depth beneath the natural site surface, we recommend that this work be done during the generally dry summer season if possible. We recommend that all footings have a minimum width of 18 inches and be founded not less than 18 inches below the adjacent grades. -5- • 10)A IV!ES a MOORE Footings constructed in this manner may be designed using a maximum bearing pressure of 1,500 pounds per square foot. This pressure is intended to include the total of all dead and live loads, exclusive of the weight of footings and the backfill over the footings. We estimate that footings constructed in the above manner, assuming column loads of up to 40 kips, will undergo settlements on the order of 1 to 2 inches. Some of this settlement will occur during the construction period. Postconstruction settlements are expected to be less than 1 inch. AREAL SETTLEMENT, PRELOAD, AND SURCHARGE REQUIREMENTS Our analyses indicate that the combination of permanent site fill loading and anticipated floor loading will produce significant amounts of settlement across both property parcels. For development of specific settlement estimates, we have assumed that the surface grade in those • . portions of the site that have not previously been filled will be raised about 2 feet through placement of granular compacted fill. Also, we have assumed that. live floor loadings will be on the order of 200 pounds per square foot. If greater thicknesses of fill are placed and/or if floor loads are greater, the expected amount of settlement would also increase. On the basis of our site grade and floor load assumptions, we estimate total settlements of up to about 8 inches at Site A and settlements varying from about 1-1/2 to 5 inches at Site B, depending on the actual 'thickness of the compressible silt layer. To reduce postconstruction settlement of the buildings and floors (on Site B) and floor slabs (on Site A), we recommend the use of a preload fill program. For planning purposes, we recommend that 1 foot of preload fill be provided for each 100 psf of design floor load; however -6- ®AMES C R19OOFIE the minimum preload height should not be less than 2 feet. The height of the preload fill should be measured from the design floor grade. Any preload fill should extend at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the building in all directions at full height. • Our estimates of settlement and preload time requirements may be summarized as follows: Estimated Settlements For 2 Feet of Site Estimated Estimated Fill and 200 psf Preload Residual Area Floor Loading Period Settlement Site A 6 - 8 inches 4 - 6 months 1/2 - 1 inch Site B 1-1/2 - 5 inches 2 - 3 months < 1/2 inch Greater heights of site fill and/or heavier floor loads (and therefore heavier preload fills) would increase the total amount of settlement expected but would not significantly change the estimated preload period. The time interval between fill placement and construction of founda- tions and floor slabs (the estimated preload period) can be reduced by • applying a fill surcharge to building areas. A surcharge program involves the placement of a fill load which is in excess of the anticipated building and live floor loadings. For example, if 6 feet of fill were • placed above the planned floor grades (2 feet of preload fill and 4 feet of surcharge) the estimated loading period for Site A would be reduced to about 8 to 10 weeks and the estimated loading period for Site B would be reduced to approximately 3 to 4 weeks. Of course, other combinations of • ' surcharge thickness and loading period could be utilized. In general, the greater the thickness of surcharge fill the shorter the required loading period. -7- 1,611.YNES L' MOOFEE Depending on the planned final site grades and the specific locations of the buildings, it may be possible to avoid preloading or surcharging some sections of the building areas. This would be possible because the compressible native soils below the existing railroad embankment have already been "preloaded" by the weight of the embankment fill. Proper evaluation of this issue will require a precise topographic survey of the site and specific information on building locations. The size of the area that has already been "preloaded" will, of course, be smaller for higher site grades and larger for lower site grades. We recommend that a series of settlement markers be installed in all preload or surcharge areas prior to placement of any fill to provide information on magnitude and rate of settlement. The settlement markers should be read on a biweekly basis during placement of all site fills, permanent and temporary, and should be read once per week thereafter. This information will facilitate definition of the earliest practical date for preload or surcharge removal. If desired, we would be pleased to provide a typical sketch of a settlement marker for the use of you or your contractor. • SITE PREPARATION AND FILL PLACEMENT Prior to any filling all vegetation should be cut off at ground level and removed from the site. , The railroad embankment should then be cut down to the planned site grade. Granular material excavated from the `'"'Nz,. embankment may be placed as fill in the low-lying portions of the property provided it does not contain excessive amounts of silt. How much of this material is usable will depend in part on the weather conditions at that time. The determinations should be made in the field as the site work progresses. ' -8- We recommend that all permanent fill required to establish the • design floor grades or yard grades consist of clean granular soil which is free of organic materials or excessive amounts of silt. The fill should be placed in lifts with a maximum loose thickness of 8 inches and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum density as determined by AASHTO Compaction Test Procedure T-180. Placement of preload or surcharge fill may commence as soon as the • structural fill is completed. We recommend that the permanent compacted structural fill be carried at least 6 inches above the planned floor slab subgrade elevation to allow for settlement during the surcharge period. No particular compaction criteria are needed for the surcharge fill. FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT Floor slabs may be supported on the compacted granular fill. We • recommend that slab be directly underlain by at least 4 inches of clean free-draining coarse sand as a capillary moisture break. We estimate that the settlements of floor slabs resulting from • structural and live loads of up to 200 pounds per square foot will be on the order of 1/2 inch. Differential settlements may result in footings moving downward as much as 1/2 inch below the adjacent floor slabs. The • settlement estimates given above assume that the building areas have been preloaded or surcharged in accordance with our recommendations, and that • -9- IDA rAIES L' I10100FrE • no soft or loosened material is trapped between the new construction and the prepared foundation pads. Respectfully submitted, • DAMES & MOORE • . ti� J• (�= By 7;202,44te.)7 , ,-1•'a •, Larry . Morrison ti Associate •t ° ) ,.. i` And i William J. Graham Senior Engineer • • May 15, 1979 • 1978-100-05 • -10- DiaMES C. W iOOs8E / \ | \ --- | / As \ / . / _ ` . | | / ' .[l ' ^�> ' L/- ' ` _ � ^ . l | �� ~~ | | ' 2 1/2 ~~ �� ~ 2 1/3 �^� ' - - .� / ] : ' K[Y' -- SOu` - 1 . ~..~- LOCATION AND NUMBER OF BORING DRILLED - fill�l r DURING THIS INVESTIGATION. ` \\����T d�^ � ~ l n ^' «wr- �� / ' - -'^^~ LOCATION AND NUMBER OF BORING DRILLED FOR PREVIOUS DAMES & MO0RE INVESTIGATION. ' l LOCATION AND NUMBER OF HAND AUGER HOLE . / PLOT PLAN �� U _-- U--8�~»�~� � K-' 8_~���U �� ��SI��yT1� � TE�� � 1O0 0 lOU 200 ' � REFERENCE:' KING COUNTY ASSESSORS SITE PLAN, N'E'4 19-23-5, SCALE IN FEET � - DATED 10-13-78. -_ -_ _-- _ ___ ( _ 0 N • Ip 1 OI - --1 . / cc .:cc ! i • . i . • I I Z w I= = I- OI • 0 Q 4 o Z i : . . Z ..- J I0 C.5 RA11-R0AD • Z J ce D W CO . Z - -I ?pCOC 1/6 - Q 3 A ;o s � . I � . e. o SW • - AN NGRl KERN w AY _N�; -0- P Ow ER _ r V 1/7 e w SOUND _ _ G\V"s° IZ • SOOT Hw 51 • _ w KEY:4PLOT PLAN w J dm LOCATION AND NUMBER OF BORING DRILLED SITE _B r DURING THIS INVESTIGATION. Q 100 0 100 200 1/6 LOCATION AND NUMBER OF BORING DRILLED _' ;.; .a FOR PREVIOUS DAMES & MOORE INVESTIGATION. SCALE IN FEET REFERENCE: KING COUNTY ASSESSORS SITE PLAN, N .W.y 19-23=5 , 3 LOCATION AND NUMBER OF HAND AUGER HOLE . ogw. Et aeo osaOM DATED 10-23-78. _ V j • PLATE 2 APPENDIX FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTS • FIELD EXPLORATIONS Soil conditions at the two parcels of property were investigated by -- drilling five borings with truck-mounted drilling equipment to depths ranging from 39 feet to 73.5 feet below the ground surface. In addition, : 3 hand-auger holes were drilled. The locations of the boring and hand- auger holes are shown on the Plot Plans - Plates 1 and 2. The field explorations were carried out under the continuous observation of one of our soils engineers who classified the soils and prepared a detailed log of each boring. The boring logs are presented on Plates A-1 through A-3. The soils are classified in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System which is described on Plate A-5. Undisturbed samples were taken from each boring at regular intervals, as noted on the boring logs. The samples were taken with a Dames & Moore Type U Sampler which is illustrated on page A-3. The sampler was driven into the soil with a drop hammer weighing 300 pounds falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler a distance of 1 foot into the soil is noted immediately above the sample notations on the boring logs. For the sampler and driving equipment • used, the Dames & Moore blow count may be assumed as equivalent to the standard penetration tests inasmuch as t e computed difference is only a few percent. In addition to the machine drilled borings, three hand-auger holes were drilled at location shown on the Plot Plan. Disturbed samples were extracted mainly for identification purposes. The logs of the hand-auger holes are shown on Plate A-4. A-1 ®i%EMI Es e. INC 0 Co IaE The elevation of the borings and hand-auger holes were estimated by hand level measurements from known elevations of the base plates on the transmission towers. • LABORATORY TESTS Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples obtained from the borings to evaluate their pertinent engineering prop- ; erties. Several direct shear tests were performed on the relatively undisturbed samples for evaluating the strength of the near surface silts. These tests were conducted at a continuous rate of shearing deflection. The results of the shear tests are presented on Plate • A-6. Moisture and denisty tests were made on selected samples for correlation purposes. The moisture and density data appear to the left of the sample notations on the boring logs. One consolidation test was carried out on the organic silt to . determine its compressibility characteristics and the time rate of consolidation. The results of the consolidation test are presented • on Plate A-7. ' • • • • A-2 oximuS$ MOORE C;;;11 :11 SOIL SAMPLER TYPE U I DRIVING OR PUSHING FOR SOILS DIFFICULT TO RETAIN IN SAMPLER , I MECHANISM I, I. COUPLING • i WATER OUTLETS \` il:� • • t/`l, ...r VP" 0.' i it 011 NOTCHES FOR 4 a\� I; •ENGAGING a CHECK VALVES j FISHING TOOL ` §7' I', / i '! NEOPRENE GASKET I ` •0/ • i.i HEAD # L 1,../..t .� VALVE CAGE . I ,@ I • +I , I; ` NOTE: ,, I! •HEAD EXTENSIO CAN F I', BE INTRODUCE N•D BETWEEN I t j, HEAD AND"SPLIT BARREL" • I! Wii :I ALTERNATE ATTACHMENTS i ' • 1! SPLIT BARREL �k ' 1 I \ (TO FACILITATE REMOVAL 011111• •` ,: II OF CORE SAMPLE) is . ... • ,;i CORE-RETAINER ,\ RINGS II a I (T \I/t"O.D.BY 1"LONG) il NI ::, 11 1 lari' SPLIT BARR' l 3 i;' V $ dh '1! • {; LOCKING / }I}t -CORE-RETAINING . 1; 00 RING �` i� ' t�/ DEVICE ``-'C SPLIT y/ I 11 BIT��, �•�� CORE-RETAINING FERRULE', �i �,' DEVICE a� RETAINER RING 'i �,1� �� RETAINER PLATES y%, (INTERCHANGEABLE WITH ,J OTHER TYPES) THIN-WALL ED SAMPLING TUBE (INTERCHANGEABLE n .r LENGTHS) f 5 f - • DAMES C MOORE A-3 • __RING I BORING 2 0... , ELEVATION 25.0'± ELEVATION 26.0'3 0'"'SM DARK BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 0 1 SM BROWN SILTY GRAVELLY FINE TO •~� (FILL) I MEDIUM SAND(FILL) -68 ■ pm_ GRAY SILT(MEDIUM STIFF) • II I I� I GRADES WITH SOME LUMPS OF SILT 5 4 5 6 I 45.3%-75 • 36.5%-84 IIC,'I GRADES WITH VERY FINE SAND 10 i��i I GRADES TO GRAY • ■ I 10 4 GRADES SOFT 10 IR I1 DARK GRAY MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND • 12 ■U. sii WITH A TRACE OF GRAVEL(LOOSE) • (SATURATED) el OL BROWNISH-GRAY ORGANIC SILT • (MEDIUM STIFF) 15 GRADES WITH LENSES OF SAND AND 15 GRADES WITH LENSES OF FINE TO ORGANIC MATTER MEDIUM SAND • 2 • F 38.9%-61 $p GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND(LOOSE) 20• 20 ML GRAY SANDY SILT(MEDIUM DENSE) 9 57.2%-73 • 25 W 25 J LL a o ■ GRADES WITH LENSES OF FINE TO M MEDIUM SAND .- 1 30 0 30 1 1 )S 3 i i i i ■ - PT DARK DARK BROWN PEAT(MEDIUM STIFF) = 35 35 . • Z 6 x ■ 6 • Ca GRAY WELL GRADED SAND WITH SOME 1 , SW ••. SW WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL 0 40 GRAVEL(MEDIUM DENSE) 40 '..•6. (MEDIUM DENSE) •••,. GRADES DENSE . • •. 45 45 •!. 39 •.•' v.: • • SO .1:• 50 •19 — pT DARK BROWN PEAT(MEDIUM STIFF)• r; ■ 63 GRADES WITH LENSES OF FINE SAND ■ BORING COMPLETED 4-12-79 55 55 GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING AT T DEPTH 12 L ■ = 0 60 `-" r • r Y .� r •;5 10 EEE ■ KEY: 65 ' BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE SAMPLER ONE FOOT 13 1 SM GRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH LENSES WEIGHTr300LB5., STROKE.30INCHES. ■ OF CLEAN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 5 E+'I (MEDIUM DENSE) MOISTURE ■ INDICATES DEPTH AT WHICH UNDISTURBED I CONTENT SAMPLE WAS EXTRACTED ' 62.2%-68 0 INDICATES SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 21 ( - DRY • 1 ■ DENSITY 63 INDICATES DEPTH AT WHICH DISTURBED BORING COMPLETED 4-11-79 IN PCF SAMPLE WAS EXTRACTED. 75 GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING AT 5'DEPTH NOTE: THE DISCUSSION IN THE TEXT OF THIS REPORT IS 'NECESSARY FOR A PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE , NATURE OF,THE SUBSURFACE MATERIALS. LOG OF BORINGS DAMES 6 MOORE PLATE A-1 • BORING 3 . • • ELEVATION 25.7'* • 0 y'■SM BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH OCCASIONAL GRAVEL(FILL) • 9.1%-91 & ▪1: 1 5 i ,:,4, 2 ML GRAY SANDY SILT(MEDIUM STIFF) 36.5%-82 ■ 10 5• GRADES WITH LENSES or FINE TO • MEDIUM SAND AND SOME ORGANIC • MATTER 15 • .PT DARK BROWN PEATY SILT WITH SOME SAND• • 3 'OL (SOFT) 39.2%-66 • 20 W . Z 3 el x k i'1 I . PC"' 25 ---1 � ML GRAY SILT WITH LENSES OF FINE TO MEDIUM SAND(SOFT) 4 30 . • 1C! . 35 • 9 , • I GRADES MEDIUM STIFF 40 't•.I SW GRAY WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL • 21 ', • ® •:• • BORING COMPLETED 4-12-79 45 GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING AT 5'DEPTH ' i j i 1 r ■ • }r 1 V • • • LOG OF BORINGS MAMEB B MOORE PLATE A-2 • BORING 4 • BORING 5 ELEVATION 26.5'* ELEVATION 27.0'* 0 0 • •.,SW BROWN GRAVELLY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND r.1: ' BROWN SILTY SANDY GRAVEL(FILL) 4.;0 SAND(MEDIUM DENSE)(FILL) �'t�li 21 24 P(' 8.2%-138 • •.•.•• • d!.1. 5 N.•, 5 ML BROWNISH-GRAY SILT(MEDIUM STIFF) ® 40.8%-76 11. • 6 ML MOTTLED BROWNISH-GRAY SILT 9 (MEDIUM STIFF) 46.6%-71 . GRADES WITH THIN LENSES OF FINE 10 36.6%-82 10 SILTY SAND •- GRADES WITH LENSES OF VERY FINE SILTY SAND 15 15 - - iq i BROWN SILTY SAND(LOOSE) • W � • SW GRAY WELL GRADED SAND WITH r" ��I. W •. LL • ;:• GRAVEL(MEDIUM DENSE) • ? 20 •••• - 20101 BROWNISH GRAY SILT(MEDIUM STIFF) xCt x 112 "t::. 0 5 p :.• GRADES DENSE ■ 25 25 1 GRAY SILTY FINE SAND(LOOSE) , . i 0 0 j i• 136 •••••.• 22 PIZ • •i•: III 1•o SW GRAY WELL GRADED SAND WITH 30 ',•; • 30 •o GRAVEL(DENSE) • 35 �•:.1 35 ••• 79 •':: .•• • BORING COMPLETED 4-13-79 BORING COMPLETED 4-13-79. 40 GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING AT 8}'DEPTH , DURING DRILLING AT 18'DEPTH • • • ti • o ^H r C Y • • LOG OF BORINGS ' . DAMES III MOORS • • HAND-AUGER I HAND-AUGER 2 • ELEVATION 21.0.* _ ELEVATION 21.5'3 •• __ 0 i • I OL DARK BROWN ORGANIC SILT 0 - -ML BLACK SANDY SILT WITH CHARCOAL III BITS AND NUMEROUS ROOT FIBRES OFT) I i I LL GRADES WITH LENSES OF SAND AND 5 - .. SP BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND(LOOSE) Z 5 ORGANIC MATTER W HAND-AUGER BORING COMPLETED 4-17-79 ~ w HAND-AUGER BORING COMPLETED 4-17-79 GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT 1.5'DEPTH o GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT 2.5'DEPTH 10 10 f f • 0 HAND-AUGER 3 0 ELEVATION 19.5'± • 1[11ji ML DARK BROWN SANDY SILT(SOFT) • •`SW BROWN GRAVELLY FINE TO COARSE o- SAND(LOOSE) 4L i•p Z 5 HAND-AUGER BORING COMPLETED 4-17-79 i o GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT 2.5'DEPTH • 10 • •• • • S y • • • • • LOG OF BORINGS DAMES B MOORE • • • • MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH LETTER SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS V1171WELL-GRADED OR GRAVEL- GRAVEL CLEAN GRAVELS k �v, # GW SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR �� +y-7 NO TIMES AND ILITTLE OR NO • II.4 •* GRAVELLY FINES) g(I :Elii BF":: SOILS •..�'" � rooRLr•GRADED oRAvtta, o RAVE L- • Ir ifi!;i GP SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR COARSE • :8: :,.”iii.l NO FINES - GRAINED • SOILS i , I il��`1 SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SANO- MORE THAN SO% ,�°° , GM SILT MIXTURES GRAVELS WITH FINES I r I OF COARSE FR AC- �` h,[�I • TION RETAINED (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT j Y ON NO. 4 SIEVE Of FINES) /I CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND- • •• • F/ice ,1 GC CLAY MIXTURES re , SW WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY • SAND • • ••I S SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES - CLEAN SAND °•, AND (LITTLE OR NO ` •O �:A •SA NDY • FINES I POORLY-ORADED SANDS, GRAVELLY MORE THAN SO% SOILS E SP SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINED OF MATERIAL IS •.• 2 /eri/ AL ROER THAN NO. • ' 200 SIEVE SIZE II , Q MORE THAN 50% SANDS WITH FINES SM • SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES OF COARSE FRAC- (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT TION PASSING OF FINES) ' NO. • SIEVE Sc CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES • /// INORGANICS SILTSK ANDA.VERY FINE ML • CLAYEY f10NE SANDSR�ORI CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY FINE SILTS /j/2J / INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM . LIQUID LIMIT ►LASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, GRAINED AND LE3§ THAN SO ////� CL SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,LEAN • • SOILS CLAYS 7r/ ( CLAYS 1 fl it ill I ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC I I I111111 I I I I O` SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY I I I I I II • - I I !III I: 1FII II INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR ' [ M H DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR ill I�FII��jll�,I II SILTY SOILS • SL• Iny • MORE THAN Bo% SILTS j� '%� LIQUID LIMIT 'INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH OF MATERIAL IS AND 3 1 SMALLER THAN NO. R6 EATER THAN SO �j/ CH ►L ASTIC ITY, FAT CLAYS 200 SIEVE SIZE CLAYS j /, ' y /.. ////// ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH . i i/i/,/ OH PL ASTICTY, ORGANIC SILTS • " PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS PT • HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS WITH NIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS NOTE• DUAL SYMBOLS ABE USED ,TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS. • • • • SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM • DAMES 8 MOORE • PLATE A er wave Loomis DATE 4-1.371r •' 11ENi$IONS' CHECKED CV FILE 1978-100-1605/ P.S.P. -& L. . BY DATE MOISTURE DRY NORMAL YIELD BORING DEPTH SOIL TYPE CONTENT DENSITY PRESSURE SHEAR (FEET) % OF STRENGTH • DRY WEIGHT LBSJCU.FT. LBS./SQ.FT. LBSJSQ FT. 1 22.7 SILT WITH ORGANICS 57.2 73 1500 500 2 13.2 SILT 38.9 61 1500 400 3 8.7 SILT 36.5 82 1000 650 3 19.0 SANDY SILT 39.2 67 1200 650 5 5.7 SILT - 40.8 76 500 550 • I SUMMARY OF DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA • LOAD IN LBS./SQ. FT. • `oo tioo goo ,00 goo° so se bete A� �oo� ,��/po 0.- 1 I 1 i I • .12 1 ___-..�_. ---._—�-.- I i I I .16 7 —__....— -- --; t— I j _ U , I I N . 1 oo.' C.) .24 t I I { 1 u Z 1 I 1 I : ; .28 i o o .32 j _— 1 I i ZC) i i ' ( . i lvic.1 I 1 y 1 0 0 .44 ) 1 .48 2 + I I • a , I V .52 ,- - - ---- . .56 , BORING DEPTH SOIL TYPE MOISTURE CONTENT DRY DENSITY IN (FEET) BEFORE- AFTER LBS./CU.FT. ' 3 13.7 SANDY SILT WITH ORGANIC MATTER 277.4 168.3 ' 22 • ' • CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA GAMES S MOORE SOIL MCCMAMICS[M01 • PLATE A-7 r S A-012- 8e . _ MerIeter -- • SURVEYORS Bachman associates inc. ENGINEERS 14110 N. E. 21ST STREET I BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98007 I 746-8330 I I File No . 3447 August 13 , 1980 /4<> pqpit k:k 1 P, City of Renton -e" R Planning Department �- -------- - 1 City::_Hal.l 2.. + I 200 Mill Avenue South 'NG DEPP►R14 Renton, Washington 98055 1 I Attn: Mr. Roger Blaylock I Re : Puget Western Property, S. W. Grady Way. 1 Gentlemen: In accordance with your request , we have reviewed the impact 1 of this development on the Metro Sewer Line as follows : I 1 The Metro sewer is located almost on the North property line of this property. As shown in the ' attached cross-section, we I are meeting the existing elevation along this property line I "so there is little , if any, fill directly over this line. As ' / I a result, all existing manholes are accessible and there is no 1 appreciable load on the sewer. Actually, access will be im- proved as the existing ditches will be filled and parking I areas will provide access with ordinary equipment that could not 1 reach this area before it is improved. If you have any questions , please call me . Your early attention I to this matter will be greatly appreciated. i ' Yours truly, , / MERIWETHER-LEACHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. —1-. 6_Q?;tj Ra nd F. Reed P.E. Chief Engineer cc : Puget Western Dick Causey. - k NORTH fl- GRADY 2b WAX 5U/LD/NG PAD f / 24— 22— F/lV/SN GRADE F/LL 2 20- 1S—'— I (o EX/ST. G/FOUND 0.5 METRO SEWER APPRoX. L.V.E I 0 20 40 60 80 WO 17-0 /40 /60 /80 100 TYPICAL X— SECTION SCALE I"= 40' NOR/a. /.' = 8' VERT. r„:„ R \ J_ 1 0, I s7 I O T%' 1 I a' '1es2Q .,...i.,‘, ..../1 GFMDY WAY PROPERTY ryry eathE T FOR WESTERN C. `7F..:t Tb'..YI':<..:1'3']a te?.W.z's�6sr41:a41.wwc61fwai.M'T'n...n��.r yy-u--�ticdGin�.+�s�.✓s.r:uWv.,�c su`....� ,.w.....va v....... •.. M n3 .. IER 141la fi&.7{8! ;i'Vrtr ET, a4.1.I.:MU"a.; wa., a+btoQ:+ .1.> ,. SNOWN L7RvEyo,,, 6LEAc �` 'ef1 r. r „�µ ,, „ ., .yg. ti. s . 5 -, .., u /1 ..._._k.._..•_�_...r......, ._._.._.. �._.._..__ .--- .__..7 Gfi:::7I,' .., •.�•34.4.7 a'N:SiD ,�0457uh3t1.1 i9FR -a r2.x-:te- - OF • R44, • 4$ 0 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON — DIRECTOR Z hal p9 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 • 0 SEP�.t40' BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH • MEMORANDUM MAYOR DATE: APRIL 2, 1982 -TO: DEL MEAD, CITY CLERK • FROM: BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT RE: GRADY WAY WEST SHORT PLAT, 100-80 Attached is the mylar of the subject short plat for recording with King County. Please note that there are no restrictive • covenants and the recording fee has been paid. Thank vou. RUB ATTACHMENT • • • CITY OF RENTON 3523 CITY TREASURER'S CHECK it Jan. 12 1982 19-18e/1250 To-rn �" • Kin g County Recorder $ 10.00 Tlei 313of Od gsQpct+'av I)()I.L_1I:� , Oki ii. National Bank „ osRenton Highlands Branch ,G Renton,Washington 98055 NOR Maple Va1]ey HPit?htc Short Plat 033-81 rJ .Dr.a,\t,� J_A, . `JI, ,r , ,r It i. 000352311' i; r, ,� L2500L8871:977.110002070 - -'- fi --, c--- �-gam ._aa_ ,, • \ t , , '4 k` ,..Iyr . is 11 • tl IF ' CITY OF RENTON 3 7 0 0 1 CITY TREASURER'S CHECK il April 5 1$) 82 19-iss/I2so ,� 1)A-1- : To TII1: 10.00 .: p Fijoi King County Recor + ;� -..-,.-a- Lit) `0aCt :..: : , ,� DOLLAR S Old I, Bank OWN Renton Highlands Branch `�j 1 Renton,Washington 98055 '•'mil Dyftrt�✓ {-� C1� h ).,,t 1 r()R Grady Way West Short Plat 100-80 .,� n n 1 :tt • • _ II300 3 70O n' 1: L 2 500 L88 7':9 7 7111000 20 7il' l.;may,.??.7 eamur:- ; =11::• , �..••:MICIDID,.;- .- ,, naram, „117=1:.••:=28%: OZEMIN.:- .- ,nnzae:- crarra ;:--: - ,1915=.-- „tee;.; .� �.; l S ;, , 1 MEMORANDUM TO Edna, Finance Department DATE 4/5/82 FROM Dee, City Clerk's Office SUBJECT Grady Way West Short Plat 100-80 May I please have a check for $6.00 made out to King Co. Recorder for the recording of the above-referenced short plat, Please charge to account # 000/000/05.514.21.42.14 • Thank you, Delores Beedle Id MEMORANDUM TO Edna, Finance Department DATE 4/5/82 FROM Dee, City Clerk's Office SUBJECT Grady Way West Short Plat. 100-80 May I please have a check for $10.00 Made out to King Co. Recorder for the recording of the above-referenced short plat. Please charge to account I 000/000/05.514.21.42.14 Thank you, 0 Delores Beedle • 0.14,40, ?. -,A., ,1/4 e ,.. *�sip kdS 6�" „;� .. t R V. C.tx, -5 f tr,t.r v.a,,It ,�f` P ' MEMORANDU TO Edna, Finance Department DATE 4/5/82 FROM Dee, City Clerk's Office SUBJECT Grady Way West Short Plat 100-80 May I please have a check for $6.00 made out to King Co. Recorder for the recording of the above-referenced short plat, Please charge to account # i 000/000/05.514.21.42.14 Thank you, `e.._,- ( 70 Delores Beedle V r —.5-, / 9 .?c7.-- 000/3 /. aa.u4.i 3701 1� CITY OF RENTON +? CITY TREASURER'S CHECK 19-188/1250 April 5 Icy 82 $ 6.00 3 j TO THE King County Recorder !� y,/� ( �y ORDER C1FmS.L;E 4i L[L3y 1 DOLLARS 1 Old National i Bank i. �BRenton Highlands Branch Renton,Washington 98055 FOR _ I 11100370 Le1: L 2500 L887I:977"'000 20711' I -'.} titr;f"'!l,M7,,�.k'. , ,14,1 7x' 1'.S"o Fe Eilii:i:' '`- I r I PUGET t LSTERN, INC. pviE ce CITY OF RENTON ® Z1 IM Puget Power Building, Bellevue,WA 98009 (206)454-6363 D MAR 2 9 1982 March 29, 1982 GRAD-1/82-CAUS Page 1 of 3 Mr. Roger Blaylock Zoning Administrator City of Renton Municipal Building Renton, WA. 98055 Reference: Grady Way Short Plat, 1000-80 m Enclosed for final approval and recording is, the final plat mylar for the above noted project. According to your letter of February 1, 1982, we understand that submission of the mylar at this time is acceptable. It was brought to our attention on September 11, 1981 through a phone con- versation between Steve Munson and Andy Padvorac that six items needed to be resolved before the short plat could be recorded. Those six items are listed below, each item being accompanied by an explanation of how it was resolved. 1) "Puget Western must sign a Deferral of Off Site Improvements Agreement." Don Monaghan indicated that this Agreement is not necessary because no more improvements are planned adjacent to this site. 2) "The final short plat must have a storm drain easement." A storm drainage easement that satisfies the criteria given by Renton's Public Works Department is now shown on the short plat drawing. 3) "Specifically locate the waterline and grant an easement for it to the City of Renton." The waterline is now specifically located on the short plat drawing. An easement to the City of Renton is on the mylar and a signed waterline easement document has been transmitted with this letter to Renton's Public Works Department for recording. CITY OF RENTO MAR 2 9 1982 Page 2 of 3 March 29, 1982 II GRAD-1/82-CADS 4) "Show on the drawing the portion of Lind Avenue S.W. that the City of Renton does not own, and dedicate that portion to the City of Renton." A document deeding the said portion of Lind Avenue S.W. to the City of Renton has been acquired from Burlington Northern, the most recent owner of said portion of Lind Avenue S.W. , and has been transmitted with this letter to Renton's Public Works Department for recording. Don Monaghan indicated that the portion of Lind Avenue S.W. being deeded to the City of Renton by Burlington Northern does not need to be shown on the short plat drawing. 5) "Renton's Traffic Engineer must accept the driveway, i.e. , the joint access easement." We understand that the necessary approvals for the driveway were finalized on December 30, 1980 by Fred Kaufman, the Renton Hear- ing Examiner. 6) "The Legal Description must be run out and verified as accurate by the City of Renton." It is our understanding that the legal is accurate and will be accepted as such by the City of Renton. Dave Clements sent Puget Western a letter, dated October 26, 1981, that stated that the property we're short platting was illegally segregated. We understand that the transmittal of Burlington Northern's Quitclaim Deed for the said portion of Lind Avenue S.W. to Renton's Public Works Department legalizes the segregation of our property, thus allowing our property, north of Grady Way between Lind and Rainier Avenues S.W. , to be short platted. Ron Olsen will receive, with a copy of this letter, the waterline easement document for recording. Don Monaghan will receive, with a copy of this letter, the Burlington Northern document deeding a portion of Lind Avenue S.W. to the City of Renton for recording. . Please notify Puget Western concerning the recording number of the easement and provide our office with a copy of the recorded water line easement, dedication of Lind and Grady Way Short Plat #100-80. CITY Or RENTON DPage 3 of 3 MAR 2 9 1982 March 29, 1982 GRAD-1/82-CADS Having satisfied the above six numbered items, we understand that approval of the final short plat is forthcoming. Please direct notification of short plat approval to Andy Padvorac at 454-6363, extension 5177. PALIA_ Ca)451 Dick Causey Manager Development Planning Enclosure DC:cf cc: Don Monaghan (with attachment-Burlington Northern Quitclaim Deed) Ron Olsen (with attachment-Waterline Easement Document) OF IRS ti .di O BUILDING ZONING DEPART' ENT "' RONALD G. NELSON — DIRECTOR 09 co� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 0 235-2540 • 0 -€0 SEP11-- BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH ME 4 01 ' A N DU I, i MAYOR DATE. APRIL 1 , 19$2 TO: FRED J. KAUFMAN, LANDUSE HEARINNG EXAMINER FROM: ROGER J. BLAYLOCK, ZONINt AfMINISTRATOR SUBJECT: GRADY WAY WEST SHORT PLAT/ 100-80 The applicant has completed the requirements' of the short plat approval and all of the respective departments have signed the plat. The traffic mitigation fees were paid on August 28, 1981 by Puget Western, Receipt Number 20959. The applicant was granted an extention by the Building and Zoning Department until April 10, 1982. Please sign so that the document can be transmitted to King County for recording by April 5, 1982. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT MARCH 2 , 1981 PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHORT PLAT 100-80 E122-80 The Planning and Development Committee has considered the appeal of the Puget Sound Power & Light Company regarding the above-mentioned Short Plat application and finding no error, recommends by a vote of 2 to 1 , that the City Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner as set forth in his Report and Decision dated December 30, 1980. The Committee Chairman voted to recommend that the matter be remanded to the Hearing .Examiner for re-hearing to take evidence concerning the fee to be charged for mitigation of vehicle trips. Randy Rockhill , Chairman A Earl Clymer John Reed OF „ y.. ;, THE CITY OF RENTON $ 511>FP MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 oselL s .. o BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • DELORES A. MEAD 9.0 CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2500 Odi)gT�D SEP-Ve° JLi VV January 30, 1981 C!TY OF REik 04 APPEAL FILED BY KENNETH B. SHELLAN, ATTORNEY FOR PUGET SOUND P YELOFFICE `' LIGHT COMPANY RE: Appeal of Land Use Examiner's Decision Dated December 30, 1980, Grady Way Short Plat,Duane Wells/Puget Sound Power & Light, Short Plat 100-80 E-122-80 To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title 4, Chapter 30, City Code, written appeal of Land Use Hearing Examiner' s decision has been filed with the City Clerk, along with the proper fee of $25.00. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council 's Planning and Development Committee and will be considered by the City Council when the matter is reported out of Committee. Please contact the Council Secretary 235-2586, for date and time of the committee and council meetings, should you desire to attend. Yours very truly, CITY OF RENTON Delores A. Mead, C.M.C. City Clerk DAM/st - . O PERKINS, COI E, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS TOM A.ALBERG DONALD G.KARI I900 WASHINGTON BUILDING JOHN DANIEL BALLBACH JENNIFER SUE MORGAN BURROUGHS D.ANDERSON EDWARD W.KUHRAU WILFRED D.BENNETT CLARK REED NICHOLS J.DAVID ANDREWS DOUGLAS S.LITTLE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 RONALD L.BERENSTAIN JANE NOLAND JOHN F.ASLIN TIMOTHY A.MANRING DAVID J.BURMAN RUSSELL L.PERISHO DOUGLAS P.BEIGHLE STEVEN C.MARSHALL BRUCE D.CORKER THOMAS E.PLATT DENNIS L.BEK EM EY ER STEPHEN A.MeK EON TELEPHONE:206-682-8770 RICHARD C.COYLE RICHARD OTTESEN PRENTKE STEVEN SCOTT BELL ROBERT S.MUCKLESTONE TELECOPIER:206-682-6784 SUSAN K.DONALDSON LAWRENCE B.RANSOM JOHN H.BINNS,JR. J.SHAH MULLIN ROBERT E.GILES RICHARD R.ROHDE WAYNE C.BOOTH,JR. HAROLD F.OLSEN TELEX:32-0319 PAUL B.GOODRICH MARK A.ROWLEY J.PAUL COTE OMAR S.PARKER,JR. RONALD M.GOULD HARRY H.SCHN EIDER,JR. THEODORE J.COLLINS CHARLES I.STONE STEPHEN M.GRAHAM JAMES H.SIMON BRUCE MICHAEL CROSS F.THEODORE THOMSEN HEATHER S.HOWARD PETER D.SLOANE CALHOUN DICKINSON RICHARD S.TWISS ANCHORAGE OFFICE WASHINGTON,D.C.OFFICE MARY ROSE HUGHES EVELYN SROUFE JOHN D.DILLOW DAVID E.WAGONER BARRY M.KAPLAN EDWIN B.STERNER WALTER W.EVER RICHARD E.WALKER CHARLES J.KAT2,JR. ROBERT STONES,JR. GRAHAM H.FERNALD WILLIAM S.WEAVER 420"L"STREET 1300-19TH STREET N.W. OTTO G.KLEIN III C.JAIRUS STRATTON,III H.WESTON FOSS ANDREW M.WILLIAMS RICHARD ALAN KLOBUCHER BART WALDMAN KEITH GERRARD RICHARD E.WILLIAMS ANCH DRAG E,ALASKA 99501 WASHINGTON,D.C.20036 CHERYL A.LEAMER VERNON L.WOOLSTON,JR. CHARLES C.GORDON -- DAVID LIEBERWORTH JIMMY WU WILLIAM A.GOULD CHRISTOPHER T.BAYLEY JAMES R.LISBAKNEN --- LAWRENCE B.HANNAH JOHN R.PRICE RICHARD E.MCCANN WENDELL W.BLACK JAMES M.HILTON OF COUNSEL JANET M.MCKAY LUCIEN F.MARION RAMER B.HOLTAN,JR. PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE M.MARGARET MCKEOWN LOWELL P.MICKELWAIT THOMAS J.MCLAUGHLIN D.FOREST PERKINS • LEE E.MILLER COUNSEL January 22, 1981 ei1,"3):1,:6 .co 4.4.4) v Renton City Council = Q. -.-,' The City of Renton ��; �� ;, �. Municipal Buiding �'.• ; ("e 200 Mill Avenue South ` 'J` �� Renton, Washington 98055 =-.�N1-:.. Re: Notice of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner' s Decision Regarding Puget Sound Power & Light Company' s Short Plat, File No. SH.PL. 100-80, E-122-80 Dear Renton City Council Members : Pursuant to Title 4, § 3016 of the Renton City Code and other relevant Code sections, and on behalf of Puget Sound Power & Light Company, we hereby appeal the report and decision of the Renton City Hearing Examiner regard- ing the short platting petition, file no. SH.PL. - 100-80, E-122-80. The Hearing Examiner refused our Request for Recon- sideration on January 15 , 1981 (please see Exhibit A attached) . This Notice of Appeal is based on the following grounds: • 1. The Findings are based on errors of fact; 2. Conclusions are based on errors of law; 3. The imposition of a fee for vehicle trips is not authorized by law; 4 . The Renton Ordinances (4-3014 (D) , 9-1105 (4) and 9-1106 (2) (E) ) cited by the Hearing Examiner do not authorize the imposition of the vehicle trip fee; • 410" Renton City Council January 22 , 1981 Page Two 5. The vehicle trip fee imposed is excessive; 6. The need for vehicle trip fee is 'unsupported by the evidence; 7. The vehicle trip fee will not be used to improve public roads and facilities contiguous with the short plat site, as required by law; 8 . The vehicle trip fee imposed is not reasonably related to the impacts of the short plat applied for; 9. Such other grounds as shall be presented at the hearing. Oral argument and an opportunity to offer additional testimony and evidence are requested. Reasonable prior notice of the appeals hearing date is requested to enable appellant to prepare and submit an appeal' s brief. Sincerely, PERKINS, COIE, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS Attorneys for Puget Sound Power & Light Company By Kenneth B. Shellan KBS/kc cc: City Clerk Renton Planning Department Mr. Fred J. Kaufman 401 + OF R4. THE CITY OF RENTON CJ CI ' Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 Z • o o mmn P RAF?RAI?A Y, CHINPOCH, MAYOR a LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 9'0 co FRED .I. KAUFMAN. 235-2593 OgTFo SEFtENIP January 15, 1981 Mr. Kenneth B. Shellan Perkins, Coie, Stone, Olsen & Williams 1900 Wa liingIon Building so:l' I.1 e, WA 98101 RE: File No. Short Plat 100-80, E-122-80; Puget Sound Power & Light Company; Request for Reconsideration. Dear 14r. Shellan: I have had an opportunity to review your request for reconsideration and find that there is no justification in your request to change the decision. The Hearing Examiner Ordinance, Section 4-3014 (D) and the Subdivision Ordinance, particularly Subsections 9-1105(4) and 9-1106(2) (E) , respectively, permit the imposition of conditions and require a determination that the public roadways are or must be provided for by the applicant. It should be noted that there is no procedure entitling the applicant to an oral argument on reconsideration. Reconsideration is based on the existing record, that is, the testimony previously received into evidence along with the various exhibits. The applicant is still entitled to appeal this matter to the City Council within a second l4-day appeal period to expire on January 29, 1981 . . Very truly yours, Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc:. Parties of Record • .. - J • PEI ,,. ',',Sr COI Er STONE. OLSEN & %, -;-- ,TAMS TON IL use r4 OONALO R.1. 1900 WASHINGTON !WILDING • OVRAO.w1N{O. TORAH/r1.AV RAV JOrr O.N.tI{•l1 N+CM J[NNI/[/1V[NOIIOAy J•/Aap AROR.F1 /W./LA/t.U l[ •Q• l O. /r {I.jA r((0 rKy4.4 6/0 JQNN/AWN TINAIN,A..A NINO 9EATTLC/W^gHINaTC�N a610) O N,., U[�lrcltlM JARS NouD4 �"`IVO/SI OHIC {IR[N C.I.A. NAIL • 0•.••R I OIANAM IN*NA* l•ftwlawo Olrw.{1.1lJ[N[TtN 'niftily...N TON 1/1[I•N0N1 RQQ•QA7.077Q Ild.rtie.t.0 0•CON•l. .4...A{•M.Tr IT[vtO[COLT/(.l RV1i41 ■.M • L[SI.N1 IULIN D C CO�tt /.{w.A4 411(Afr N JOHN N/1rr{,1. J.INAN NY111 - T/I C40.114'110.11.1•11T�A WEAN R.DOyAL0/ON (wL RAMC CN0.11w•/r M.N010 I OL/ N IIONf/r[.A..(N IARN[NC[RNAN/ON IliCHJ.Mill [:7/•0710 MUL■.000ONICN A. I.*OHM C•0•t ON1R t IAA. �, • MARS A.POrIL[V 1w(A40.(J COILINt I.al. l /Ay.\r N.Rum If) NAIRr N 10[N,JL RAW(M.CNAtI CNO•/ LIN[ODA'. . W1[• r"... [T[/•NI.N..IRAnAN JAN1/N 11NON CALMOVN ON:tINCRN ..Tw.AA I.iv. I XtAINtR 1.NOT1NN0 RRN O.1LOArt MAN O.ONLMr O...p{ w..T, [N • ANCNVIIAOR O//IC( WA7NINOTy N.0.C.0//IC[ Ny Mt[NYO..(R CV[LTN snows*AMR R.[TfN rn;r.r0 t.RA N[N WA.N.Ia*AN (OHM LI?[NNgu /AAl1Ar N•.arrA\O RIll1AN LWf Ir A/O•t. NTNR(T .1300•Ire.1rNRIlr N.W. in.rl.{,/...It1A NORUNM riofft,JO. Al wt11w twill .NOA[W r•v.a I•N1 OTTO O.RIIIN IN C.lAINV1 1TNAI IP..le Atl.r O[NRANO /,46.A1I1 I RI 'AN/ ANC/IOWANS.Al AVIA'ROO• WAONINOION.D C 1001• RICNARO ALMA■ N►O .in(N RANT wALDRAN IIANL[A C/OA.,gtr •0 CN[RU A N VERNON l(AN( INON L000LA1ON,JR. WIUTAAI a{Q..10 CMR1/a.IN[N .RAri(VC Ow \•a7 PJNR a1.I . mum,. A'\I I LAMAMC(O.MANION N„'N N M1I( • !'N[11 N.LI1/A1RRI� - __ MN[1 Y.NI AN of!I••M1[L — NICXMID l.IiCANN w{NOBLE R.MAC! 'WHIN�NOII.I•.pr 1rL[A* NKr•lT Ti) ',CATTLE orrice: le�4 r wl.A. ►1N:IfN I.N4/.ON AN7AgT M.NRORM lAw(\\ prgA(\vu► - iNOYAR J.N.YVONUr O.e001.,.10011M1 III O.OMO. • COIINI[L JAnuaty 13, 1981 • RECEIVED • CITY• • HEARING EXAMINER Office of th4 Land Use Hearing exam; ner JAPl 3 14j AM City of Renton 71819110,;l,',,; r „ -, , r.'• Renton, Wash• ngton 980SS • Re: Re uest for Reconsideration of the Hearin 4 y Ex.miner's Decision regarding Puget Sound • t ;. Po er & Light/Company's Short Plat, File No. SH PL.100--80. i:, .••122-80 • Dear Mr./ Kau 'man: . • ' • • Pursuan to, title 4, S301S.' .of the 'Renton City Code and l • ,. other releva t Code sections,. and on behalf of Puget Sound • !i Power & Ligh Company, we hereby request reconsideration oi' ! . . . the report a d decision of the Renton City hearing examiner � ; regarding th • short platting petition, file no. SH.PL. 100-80, ' ''' 1a-122-80. . • : This re 1c uest for reconsideration is based on the following grounds: . . • • 1. , The findings are based on errors, of fact; ' • • • ' 2. Corp lusions are based on errors of laws . • • 3. ' The imposition of a fee for vehicle trips is . not • aut11orized by law; • • • • 4. The vehicle trip fee imposed is excessive; • • • • ' S. The need for vehicle trip tee is unsupported by the ' evi4ence; • Office of th. Land Use . • . Hearing Exalener • January 13, 1981 • Pacie two 6. The vehicle trip fee imposed is not reasonably related to he impacts of the short plat applied for; 7. Suc other grounds as shall be presented at the .hearing. Oral ar!ument and an opportunity to offer additional testimony and evidence are requested. • ‘Irt Sincerely, • • PERKINS, COIE, STONE, OLSEN • • • & WILLIAMS . Attorneys for Puget Sound • • ' Power & Light Compant • •• . . ' • • • . , By • • Kenneth B. Shellan • • 1 . • • • . . • • • . KBS/vc • • • • • . cc: City Cl..rk, Renton 'lanning 'Departmelit • • • • • . . • • • 4 RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 2 , 1981 Municipal Building Monday , 8 : 00 P .M . Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF EARL CLYMER, Council President Pro tem; RANDALL ROCKHILL, COUNCIL ROBERT HUGHES, THOMAS W. TRIMM, CHARLES SHANE AND JOHN W. REED. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND REED, EXCUSE COUNCIL PRESIDENT RICHARD M. STREDICKE (ATTENDING NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE IN WASHINGTON, D.C.) . CARRIED. CITY OFFICIALS BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE WARREN, City Attorney; IN ATTENDANCE DEL MEAD, City Clerk; W. E. BENNETT, Acting Finance Director; DAVID CLEMENS, Acting Planning Director; DON PERSSON, Police Department Representative; JAMES MATTHEWS, Fire Department Representative; MICHAEL PARNESS, Administrative Assistant. MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND HUGHES, APPROVE COUNCIL MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 23, 1981 . CARRIED. PRESS Greg Anderson, Renton Record Chronicle. PROCLAMATION A Proclamation of Mayor Shinpoch declared March 8-14, 1981 Girl Scout as Girl Scout Week. Girl Scout Troup 1557 and Scout Leader 69th Anniversary Karen Bliesner were in attendance , Troup Members Siri Bliesner, Christina Rynweld and Robin Swanson accepted the Proclamation. The Scouts offered cookies to the Mayor, Council and Audience. AUDIENCE COMMENT Kenneth Shellan, 1900 Washington Bldg. , Seattle, Attorney Grady Way representing Puget Sound Power and Light inquired re Appeal Short Plat 100-80 of Hearing Examiner's Decision of 12/30/80 re roadway system and E-122-80 development charge imposed as a Condition for granting of Appeal by Short Plat 100-80 and Exception 122-80; property located on the Puget Sound north side of SW Grady Way between Lind Ave. SW and Rainier Ave S. Power and Light ' Councilman Trimm was excused from the Council Chambers due to possible conflict of interest and took no part in this ; matter. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND SHANE, SUSPEND THE ORDER OF ` AGENDA BUSINESS AND PRESENT THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMIT- TEE REPORT WITH REGARD TO SHORT PLAT. CARRIED. Continued Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill presented ! committee report regarding consideration of the Appeal by the Puget Sound Power and Light Co. regarding SP 100-80,E-122-80 Viand found no error, recommended by a vote of 2 to 1 , that the Council concur in the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner as set forth in his decision of 12/30/80. The report further stated that the Committee Chairman voted to recommend that the matter be remanded to the Hearing Examiner for re-hearing con- cerning the fee to be charged for mitigation of vehicle trips. iDiscussion followed. Attorney Kenneth Shellan emphasized three points: Hearing Examiner has imposed roadway systems development ' charge affecting all roadways in the City. Shellan claimed no ordinance has been adopted which would permit fees to be assessed and suggested assessment could be imposed at the time of site approval hearing following adoption of the systems development charge ordinance; further claiming imposing fees is illegal ' without an ordinance. Upon Council inquiry, City Attorney Warren explained authority for establishing fees for mitigation of environmental impact is granted with the National and State Environmental Policy Act. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND REED, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT APPROVING DECISION OF HEARING EXAMI- NER OF 12/30/80. CARRIED. Councilman Trimm returned to the Chambers. Time 8:25 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are adopted by one motion, which follows those business matters included: 41111 4111 'r Renton City Council 3/2/81 rage 2 Consent Agenda - Continued . Latecomer's Letter from William S. Tsao, 2367 Eastlake Ave. E. , Seattle, Agreement requested latecomer's agreement on behalf of Michael R. Mastro for storm drainage line installed for 175 unit apartments located at 3811 NE 3rd Court. Refer to the Utilities Committee. Fire Captain Letter from Mayor Shinpoch appointed Raymond C. Barilleaux to Appointment the position of Fire Captain effective March 5, 1981 , subject to the customary six-month probationary period. Barilleaux fills the vacancy created by the retirement of Capt. T. LaValley. Council concur. LID #322 Letter from Acting Finance Director Bennett submitted letter from Bonds Seattle Northwest Securities Corp. , 500 .Union St. , Seattle, for information purposes. The letter expressed willingness and expectation to submit an offer to underwrite LID ,#322 bonds on or before 7/31/82 in an amount sufficient to repay at least $526,978 of the Renton LID #322 warrants Rainier Bank will be holding. Talbot Hill City Clerk Mead reported 8 bids received at 2/18/81 bid opening Pipeline Talbot Hill Pipeline. Refer to Utilities Committee. Burnett Ave. S Letter from Public Works Department, R. Houghton, requested LID #315 authorization for $10,500 loan from Forward Thrust 'Fund #301 to L. I .D. #315 Fund for Burnett Ave. South. The letter explained a short-term loan is recommended for advanced financing for the Burnett Ave. South LID #315 contractor payments pending interim financing arrangements after final assessment roll preparation. Refer to Ways and Means Committee for resolution. Stonebridge Co. Hearing Examiner Fred Kaufman recommended approval with conditions Rezone R-127-80 for Lazetti-Malesis Rezone R-127-80 located in the vicinity of east end of NE 16th St. and east of Kirkland Ave. NE. Rezone from G to R-2 for the purpose of future development as townhouse apartments. Refer to Ways and Means Committee for ordinance. Consent Agenda MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND HUGHES, ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS Approved PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Robin Ordonez, Townsend-Chastain & Assoc. , Inc. , Parkridge East 409 S 3rd Ave. , Kent, requested the City Council and Utility Plat Committee review their request for a drainage release to be Drainage Plans granted by the City to King County in conjunction with the approval of street and storm drainage plans for the plat of Parkridge East. The letter noted severe erosion problems within the Springbrook watershed and explained diverting some of the flows and proposed to build a retention pond, claiming no effect on the basin. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND REED, REFER TO THE UTILITY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Parking Lot Councilman Reed noted new parking areas near Park and Pelly Landscaping Avenues North without landscaping and inquired regarding time Delayed allowed for plantings. Mayor Shinpoch noted she would advise. ORDINANCES AND Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented committee RESOLUTIONS report recommending second and final readings for the following ordinances: (First readings 2/23/81 ) Ordinance #3512 An ordinance was read amending the Code of General Ordinances Cabaret of the City relating to cabarets, prohibiting operation between 2:00 AM and 6:00 PM. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND ROCKHILL, ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AND SUMMARY AS READ. ROLL CALL: 5-AYES: ROCKHILL, HUGHES, CLYMER, TRIMM AND REED. ONE-NO: SHANE. Councilman Shane was absent from the Chambers during the roll call vote and upon his return requested his NO vote be recorded. MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance#3513 An ordinance was read rezoning property from GS-1 to R-3, from CF/CHG Associates R-1 to R-3 and from S-1 to B-1 , located west of Hardie Ave. SW Rezone R-097-80 (Edwards Ave.) , east of South 140th St. between SW Sunset Blvd. and the Burlington Northern right-of-way; formerly CHG Inter- national rezone. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND HUGHES, ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. { {, _ g I • i e1 - -S., l,. t' "i„ G•i.Y ...1f�. .�tj. ^Y_ • mot' '';G ,ys :'Sr . r?rts., 7rii' t� +r` 7 h''- *t.. yu, 't, i , - :iY', 'F =w .t;r �:i - 7: • fir `; t. ;y}t sX i2t: +f;r •t- P L.�'NN;'NG' ND�D '�V� 'OP OMM1`-TT A I 'A E ESL MENT-.0 �:..;:.�,-:`-;�"`::;:,�.-'r'•<_��' -0 IIl'TEE'.. E R C t. MA CHI' 9 F SOUN'D 'POWER' � I GHT•,C MP UGET L 0 A 100 80 1'22�8 - HORT. O. AT E S L - The 'Planning and^'Devel.opment:•:,Committee has Icons irdered:"Jt•he:;;appea'l:-of: the Puget'' „. 'Sound Power. & Light'.:Company''regar.d'.ing', the;;above'-'m"en`t,ioned'(Sh'o:rt,..'Pl at• application , ;`" ' :.. and- findingho er.ror' recommends•':`b,` a `vot'e ,`of";`2.`to}'1:.'.? hat;`.the;;'City:'Counc i 1 concur :_fi;r: i e 're m e d foil f'. he. ear�i .. .i; •.i'� ''h,i. :'Re •` rt. and , `':f'::,.:,. , n 'th co m r at o o t H r n''g:<-i:x'am .ner:;as;. set`�;':fora•h' n':• '.'. po • ,. , Decision dated 'December"3 .�0'^ 1:. 80.r .. -The ;Committee 'Chai.rman, voted .,•t.o.':r-ecommend'!•,.th'a't• the' mat-ter:`.be,yremanded to the Hearing Examiner for re=,hear.i ng ' t'o .:'tak'e <ev`irdence`'.'con.cerni'ng;,th'e fee;>to, 'be char ged. ` ;,,....,,;!',',..„...7,:c.',.:,i,:,,,ii.„,7,::Fi - ;- :;;_;'';=.., for•mitigation of vehicle trips r{. \. y l.` tI • /'r. �r1 N,, • i Rand R khil Cha rman Y ,. • r ay':. • f Earl C ClY finer. • .rt? �.4 ,.t a vg9" �1.-.;J S` - "'Tohn Reed' C' i ' V?' e , dt� cei - •.. - • ' ry n„ •1 .i+ t"v l t k+ 'f^ Y,11M t`: ., Y9� +f.,, . i, p ,a - j: f,ff .,.t, F�;.', ast�'n'�i, .f,a4F .yi .Mt�t.}s>:r.: _ 'yt ,7 p.J, > 1 !` i ..ra. -'7:': "l.i .• ,•1:. -.`ti. 3@i.r{cy • Ii ; t\', `r tS ..t 1• i PERKINS, COIE, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS . ANCHORAGE OFFICE 1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING WASHINGTON,D.C.OFFICE 420 "L" STREET SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 1920 N STREET N.W. SUITE 403 ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99601 TELEPHONE:206-682-8770 WASHINGTON,D.C.20036 TELEPHONE:907-279-8561 TELECOPIER:206-682-8784 TELEPHONE:202-887-9030 TELECOPI ER:9O7-276-3108 CABLE"PERKINS SEATTLE.' TELEX:89-446 TELEX:32-0319 PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE February 27, 1981 VIA MESSENGER ion 1981 Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch c y of R VE® The City of Renton ; �NTON - Municipal Building ��pLERKS OFFICE 200 Mill Avenue South ��c)6`$1L00,=� Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Appeal to the Renton City Council of the Hearing Examiner' s Decision Regarding Puget Sound Power & Light Company Short Plat, File No. Sh.Pl. 100-ATE-122-80 Dear Mayor Shinpoch: Enclosed are documents in support of Puget Sound Power & Light Company' s appeal. I recognize that 'reviewing this information will take some time; the issues involved in this appeal, however, are important not only to us but also to the City as well. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. I look forward to discussing this matter with you at Monday night' s City Council meeting. Very truly yours, ,y?( I Kenneth B. Shellan KBS/mas Enclosures • cc: Sharlene TeSelle cc: Earl Clymer cc: Robert Hughes cc: Dave Clemens cc: Randall Rockhill cc: Thomas Trimm cc: Lawrence Warren cc: John Reed cc: Charles Shane cc: Richard Stredicke oimo For. Use By City Clerk's Office Only A. I . # AGENDA ITEM ' RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SUBMITTING Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. City Clerk' s Office For Agenda Of 2/181 (Meeting Date) Staff Contact Del Mead (Name) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: Appeal of Hearing Examiner' s Decision Consent XXXX Puget Sound Power & Light Co. Public Hearing Correspondence SHORT PLAT 100-80 & E-122-80 Ordinance/Resolution Old Business Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attach New Business Study Session A. Appeal Other B. Hearing Fxaminer's Decision 12/30/80 C. City Clerk' s Letter 1/30/81 Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No N/A X COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Refer to Planning Finance Dept . Yes No. N/A X and Development Committee Other Clearance FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Appropriation- Expenditure Required $ Budgeted $ Transfer Required SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) (Attach additional pages if necessary. ) Appeal filed by Kenneth B. Shellan, Attorney for Puget Sound Power and Light Company. Received 1/29/81 . PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: See File SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION. Renton City Council 2/9/81 Page 2 CONSENT AGENDA The following items are adopted by one motion which follows those business matters included: Cable Television Letter from Mayor Shinpoch requested a public hearing be set 3/9/81 Franchise Holder to consider the proposal of Westinghouse Broadcasting, Inc. a sub- Merger sidiary of Westinghouse Electric Corp. to acquire control of North- Public Hearing west Cablevision, Inc. , a subsidiary of Teleprompter Corporation. Letter attached from 3-H Management & Consultants, Inc. , Seattle, L. Hurd, CATV Director, explained need for public hearing and Council approval . Council approve hearing date be set 3/9/81 . Appointment Mayor Shinpoch appointed Jim C. Thompson, 535 Smithers Ave. S. , Firefighter to the position of Firefighter with the Renton Fire Department effective 2/16/81, subject to the customary six-month probationary period. Thompson has been certified by the Fire Civil Service Commission to fill the vacancy created by retirement of Capt. T. LaValley. Council concur. Renton Attorney Letter from Mayor Shinpoch appointed Donald G. Holm, 1015 Tacoma Appointed to Ave. NE, to the Fire Civil Service Commission replacing Judge Civil Service Robert McBeth, who has resigned. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Newcastle Letter from King County Boundary Review Board announced a public Incorporation hearing 3/2/81 re proposed incorporation of City of Newcastle Public Hearing File No. •927 (also incorporations of Federal Way and Woodinville noted in letter) . Newcastle incorporation area: That portion of unincorporated King County generally described as lying North of May Creek, and the City of Renton; West of 148th SE (extended) ; South of the City of Bellevue and East of Lake Washington. Refer to the Planning Department for recommendation. Housing and Letter from the South King County Activity Center, 8611 S 228th, Community Kent, Helene Heglund Director of Public Relations and Funding, Development expressed thanks. to Council for sponsoring their proposal for Funds H and CD Block Grant Funds as joint project with Kent. The letter noted the project was recommended for funding. Information. Syrstad/Moore Land Use Hearing Examiner Fred Kaufman recommended denial of Rezone Denied application rezone from SR-1 to R-2 to permit future multiple development of property located 1506 Puget Dr. SE, filed by Harold Syrstad and Mary Moore, R-120-80. Council concur. Appeal An appeal was filed by Attorney for Puget Sound Power and Light Puget Power Co. for Hearing Examiner's recommendation for approval with con- Sh.Plat 100-80 ditions of proposed four-lot short plat and exception to Subdivision & E-122-80 Ordinance Short Plat 100-80 and E-122-80, known as Duane Wells and Puget Sound Power and Light Co. Grady Way West Short Plat. Refer to the Planning and Development Committee. (Lind Ave. S/Rainier S) Disposition of Letter from City Clerk Mead reported no bids were received 2/5/81 Public Use Area at the Public Auction for disposition of public use area in the Renton Highlands. Refer to the Administration to negotiate sale at highest possible price. Council concur. Consent Agenda MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND ROCKHILL, APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA Approved AS PREPARED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Edith Look (MS victim, Renton Highlands) expressed Appreciation , appreciation for work done by the Housing and Community Development from Invalid housing repair program, block grant, for installation ;of picture window allowing her to see out. Information. OLD BUSINESS' Community Community Services Committee Chairman Reed submitted committee Services report stating that due to a decrease in the official population H&CD Project count, King County recently notified the City that the 1981 H&CD Population Fund was reduced by $5,149. Therefore the City needs to reduce one of its 1981 Population Fund projects. The committee recommended that the Senior Housing & Pedestrian Corridor Project be reduced by $5,149 and the committee will be working with staff f I RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 9 , 1981 Municipal Building Monday , 8 : 00 P . M . Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. 1 ROLL CALL OF RICHARD M. STREDICKE, Council President; JOHN W. REED, THOMAS COUNCIL W. TRIMM, ROBERT J. HUGHES AND RANDALL ROCKHILL. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECOND ROCKHILL, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMAN CLYMER. CARRIED. ABSENT: CHARLES F. SHANE. CITY OFFICIALS BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE WARREN, City Attorney; DON IN ATTENDANCE PERSSON, Police Representative; W. E. BENNETT, Deputy Finance Director; DAVID CLEMENS, Acting Planning Director; MICHAEL PARNESS, Administrative Assistant. MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND HUGHES, APPROVE COUNCIL MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 2, 1981 AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted, Union Avenue published and mailed according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the Annexation public hearing to consider the Union Avenue Annexation (Revised) . (Revised) The area is 28.5 acres located on the east side of Union Ave. between NE 4th St. and Heather Downs (SE 1st Pl .) and easterly East of Union Ave to approximately 136th Ave. SE. Mrs. Prather, 12905 SE 136th, between NE 4th opposed annexation. Mary Ryan, 226 .Lake Desire Dr. S, reported & Heather Downs circulating the petition and stated on the revised area Mrs. Prather's property was omitted from annexation area. Donald Weckerle, 13307 SE 131st, made inquriy as to cost of annexation to property owners, explaining SanJose, Calif. annexation fee of $5,000 for services. Weckerle was advised, Renton has no annexa- tion fee; ,however, would assume City's bonded indebtedness for the Senior Center and Lake Washington Beach Park (costs for the entire city) . Acting Planning Director Clemens explained for all property that has annexed into the City, the real estate taxes have been reduced from $.50 to $.75 per tax rate. Clemens pointed , out area on wall map and explained present King County zoning is variable single family; Comprehensive Plan is single family with transition to medium density multiple family at the north; plat of single family Fernwood abutsthe southern edge of the annexation. Mr. Weckerle inquired re City acceptance of the private street SE 131st, City Attorney Warren explained the street must meet City standards beforeiacceptance. Council President Stredicke explained that if sewer service was desired, an L. I .D. could be .requested and street repairs included. Speaking in favor of the annexation: Don Weckerle; Vince Buckham, 13212 132nd SE. William R. Bell , 13227 SE 131st, inquired re affect of annexation on private lawsuit; City Attorney advised no civil court in City. Inquiries regarding sewers: Lyle Thorman, 13018 132nd SE; John Laush, 13315 131st. , Upon inquiry, City Clerk Mead noted the 10% petition was considered by Council 11/3/80 at public meeting, at which time zoning, compre- hensive plan and assumption of City's bonded indebtedness were accepted by representative of the annexation petition. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECOND ROCKHILL, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND REED, ACCEPT THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AND REFER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR FORWARDING TO THE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Police Lt. Persson reported for Council information that two bank Public Safety robbers were apprehended in Renton today and are in the City jail awaiting the FBI . MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND STREDICKE, CONGRATU- LATIONS BE EXTENDED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR JOB WELL DONE. CARRIED. Upon request, Lt. Persson also told of Friday afternoon incidents in Renton when police officer talked mental patient into throwing away knives after attaching officer and threatening suicide; also rape incidents. Council President Stredicke noted house fire at home of Donald Holm., Mayor's appointment to the Fire Civil Service Commission. OF R.,4, • .? �� 0 THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 / n o BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • DELORES A. MEAD �,� CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2500 04'All p SEP1°° January 30, 1981 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) DELORES A. MEAD, City Clerk of the City of Renton,being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and I not a party to nor interested in this matter. IThat on the 30th day-of January, 1981 , at the hour of 5:00 p.m. , your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, _King County, Washington, by first class mail , to all parties of record, a true and correct NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED BY KENNETH B. SHELLAN, ATTORNEY FOR PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, SHORT PLAT 100-80, E-122-80. .,a,/,,,,_} ?. y-) ,,,,zz Delores A. Mea , City ,Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 30th day of January, 1981 . Notary Public in and -for the State of Washington, residing in King County st OF I o THE CITY OF RENTON `$ ® Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 n rn BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • DELORES A. MEAD 9,0 �o CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2500 0gTF SEP1°R)P D January 30, 1981 APPEAL FILED BY KENNETH B. SHELLAN, ATTORNEY FOR PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY RE: Appeal of Land Use Examiner' s Decision Dated December 30, 1980, Grady, Way Short Plat,Duane Wells/Puget Sound Power & Light, Short Plat 100-80 E-122-80 To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title 4, Chapter 30, City Code, written appeal of Land Use Hearing Examiner' s decision has been filed with the City Clerk, along with the proper fee of $25.00. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents' will be reviewed by the Council ' s Planning and Development Committee and will be considered by the City Council when the matter is reported out of Committee. Please contact the Council Secretary 235-2586, for date and time of the committee and council meetings, should you desire to attend. Yours very truly, CITY OF RENTON /L a ;74‘ Delores A. Mead, C.M.C. City Clerk DAM/st CITY .OF., RENTON FINANCE ' DEPARTMENT NO. 16814 RENTON, WASHIN N 98055• G / � 19 1S / RECEIVED OF (.�J J • . GWEN E., MARSH , FINANCE DI ECTOR , • BY S}' • NEED COPIES TO: SENT X CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE )C RECORD CHRONICLE (PRESS) X MAYOR' S OFFICE. k CITY COUNCIL // FINANCE DEPARTMENT X HEARING EXAMINER - PLANNING DEPARTMENT r,r PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR PARK DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT POLICE�� / DEPARTMENT y/ /7Xt.,4Q if e JJ�r lerfmt.sw �1 Zoe d e4' Se4/��41 'Zs et ir? Obgof/Ss4/f1-____e_ �]_ "Weil /o/n0J .A/.Ii'/6/f11 r1/4, . .. __, 1 PERKINS, COI E, STONE, OLSEN (St,WILLIAMS TOM A.ALBERG DONALD G.KARI 1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING JOHN DANIEL BALLBACH JENNIFER SUE MORGAN BURROUGHS B.ANDERSON EDWARD W.KUHRAU WILFRED D.BENNETT CLARK REED NICHOLS J.DAVID ANDREWS DOUGLAS S.LITTLE SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101 RONALD L.BERENSTAIN JANE NOLAND JOHN F.ASLIN TIMOTHY A.MANRING DAVID J.BURMAN RUSSELL L.PERISHO DOUGLAS P.BEIGH LE STEVEN C.MARSHALL MRUCE D.CORKER THOMAS E.PLATT DENNIS L.BEKEM EYER STEPH EN A.Mc KEON TELEPHONE:206-682-8770 RICHARD C.COYLE RICHARD OTTESEN PRENTKE STEVEN SCOTT BELL ROBERT S.MUCKLESTONE TELECOPIER:206-682-8784 SUSAN K.DONALDSON LAWRENCE B.RANSOM JOHN H.BINNS,JR. J.SHAN MULLIN ROBERT E.GILES RICHARD R.ROHDE WAYNE C.BOOTH,JR. HAROLD F.OLSEN TELEX:32-0319 PAUL B.GOODRICH MARK A.ROWLEY J.PAUL COIE OMAR S.PARKER,JR. RONALD M.GOULD HARRY H.SCHNEIDER,JR. THEODORE J.COLLINS CHARLES I.STONE STEPHEN M.GRAHAM JAMES H.SIMON BRUCE MICHAEL CROSS F.TH EODORE THOMSEN HEATHER S.HOWARD PETER D.SLOANE CALHOUN DICKINSON RICHARD S.TWISS MARY ROSE RUCHES EVELYN SROUFE JOHN D.DILLOW DAVID E.WAGONER ANCHORAGE OFFICE WASHINGTON,D.C.OFFICE BARRY M.KAPLAN EDWIN B.STERNER WALTER W.EVER RICHARD E.WALKER CHARLES J.KATZ,JR. ROBERT STOKES,JR. 420"L"STREET 1300-19TH STREET N.W. GRAHAM H.FERNALD WILLIAM S.WEAVER OTTO G.KLEIN III C.JAIRUS STRATTON,III H.WESTON FOSS ANDREW M.WILLIAMS RICHARD ALAN KLOBUCHER BART WALDMAN KEITH GERRARD RICHARD E.WILLIAMS ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 WASHINGTON,D.C.20036 CHERYL A.LEAM ER VERNON L.WOOL5TO N,JR. CHARLES C.GORDON DAVID LIEBERWORTH JIMMY WU WILLIAM A.GOULD CHRISTOPHER T.BAYLEY JAMES R.LISBAK KEN LAWRENCE B.HANNAH JOHN R.PRICE - RICHARD E.McCANN WEN DELL W.BLACK JAMES M.HILTON OF COUNSEL JANET M.McKAY LUCIEN F.MARION RAMER B.HOLTAN,JR. PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE M.MARGARET McKEOWN LOWELL P.MICKELWAIT THOMAS J.McLAUGHLIN D.FOREST PERKINS • LEE E.MILLER COUNSEL • January 22, 1981 , r G • ,;� c(9., L v Renton City Council ; F, ' The City of Renton r o Municipal Buiding \E ,. v v �`�,( 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 ��� ' �� Re; Notice of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner' s Decision Regarding Puget Sound Power & Light Company' s Short Plat, File No. SH.PL. 100-80, E-122-80 Dear Renton City Council Members ; Pursuant to Title 4, § 3016 of the Renton City Code and other relevant Code sections, and on behalf of Puget It Sound Power & Light Company, we hereby appeal the report and decision of the Renton City Hearing Examiner regard- ing the short platting petition, file no. SH.PL. 100-80, 1 E-122-80 . The Hearing Examiner refused our Request for Recon- sideration on January 15, 1981 (please see Exhibit A • attached) . 1 This Notice of Appeal is based on the following 1; grounds ; 1. The Findings are based on errors of fact; 2. Conclusions are based on errors of law; 3. The imposition of a fee for vehicle trips is not authorized by law; 4 . The Renton Ordinances (4-3014 (D) , 9-1105 (4) and 9-1106 (2) (E) ) cited by the Hearing Examiner do not authorize the imposition of the vehicle trip fee; • Renton City Council January 22, 1981 Page Two 5. The vehicle trip fee imposed is excessive; 6. The need for vehicle trip fee is unsupported by the evidence; 7 . The vehicle trip fee will not be used to improve public roads and facilities contiguous with the short plat site, as required by law; 8. The vehicle trip fee imposed is not reasonably related to the impacts of the short plat applied for; 9. Such other grounds as shall be presented at the hearing. Oral argument and an opportunity to offer additional testimony and evidence are requested. Reasonable prior notice of the appeals hearing date is requested to enable appellant to prepare and submit an appeal' s brief. Sincerely, PERKINS, COIE, STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS Attorneys for Puget Sound Power & Light Company By Kenneth B. Shellan KBS/kc cc: City Clerk Renton Planning Department Mr. Fred J. Kaufman � A 1 .4 OF R4.• A. THE CITY OF RENTON c) Cif MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 of3ARRARA Y. SHINROCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 9q co FRED J. KAUFMAN, 235-2593 o911 o SEP(E�Q�P January 15, 1981 Mr. Kenneth B. Shellan Perkins, Coie, Stone, Olsen & Williams 1900 Washington Building Sc:1';t l c , WA 98101 RE: File No. Short Plat 100-80, E-122-80; Puget Sound Power & Light Company; Request for Reconsideration. Dear Mr. Shellan: I have had an opportunity to review your request for reconsideration and find that there is no justification in your request to change the decision. The Hearing Examiner Ordinance, Section 4-3014(D) and the Subdivision Ordinance, particularly Subsections 9-1105(4) and 9-1106(2) (E) , respectively, permit the imposition of conditions and require a determination that the public roadways are or must be provided for by the applicant. It should be noted that there is no procedure entitling the applicant to an oral argument on reconsideration. Reconsideration is based on the existing record, that is, the testimony previously received into evidence along with the various exhibits . The applicant is still entitled to appeal this matter to the City Council within a second 14-day appeal period to expire on January 29, 1981 . Very truly yours, AuA Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc: Parties of Record .1 ' ` PENK NST COIE, STONE. OLSEN & WILLIAMS • 1oN i.uaf•p DONALD a.I■ IpOO WASHINGTON BUILDING JO►►as►1 SIJ AG.n1.,,S.AND(R(ON SD+AAO•.IV RAY to WI••cl. J[NNI/A( aU[MOROAN .1l tC4•t.•a S.U ticN1\1Rt0 O. 11 (J in t, ral J t+►10•rv�t JQHY.r•(VN TI►OINT A.*IA MHO �EATTLC,W^$HINQtGN 98101 ti.1 a winos/Am a ..OL* 1,ItwHlt $lrvlN C.Y•R MALL • tMv.111/11JNMN a►{((a►4.a(M(no 1(rrll\.a1n■N(TlR (IlANir•.M fON /St[RNPN( >l0O.O/7•/774 llVel O•CON■tr T►4L1••*IL•TT IISV/N SCOTT S( I Ao1141 V.M IflT..( 4644440 C MOWN}illlaf►N(rl■ . JONN N.SI►rl,.J. ASNAN HUM • T[IRC,ODI(R'104.1108•OTO• imam a.DOI,NALO ALOION LAITRtNC[[.RANSOM 10•f4T[.0111a I AINC C.SO11In,J+ R•rOlO I.Ola N NCNANO I.aONDC J.NY►SO1t oN•a 4 pa.• fI.Ofl/ MYl[.0000RICN ' U,660Ort J COIUN( I.at AL MAAA A.NORL[t atlr•a.Y.1I0w10 MAMA*N. 1011%44 e NTtDNII I.NOTM•Y NV{(InCNA[t CAO.• r.IN[OD�as I OMStM �• N[ATN[R[.N01MRO JAN[l .11.0A N CALMOYN 0K11N10/. Rw:w•R0♦n1 S 1R 1tN 0.110Ar[ JONN 0.S1►IOI t11.11 1 • en ANCN00AO[CIVIC( WASHIN4TJN.b.C.OTIK[ N•11 RM1 ntlinta EVELYN SNDYr[ (MLTIN W.[T/■ e.t.a*,t.11A III S■a•T N.I.h�r [D►IN Lamm /SIMIY N.1(rrllO WItUAR LWf A• •80'L NTR[(T .'I)00'11ITN*mar M.M. UIID III J salt,JA . imam Mt SIDNA?T ". N w/llor rasa ANOAtW N.aft 1am1 CM O.1LtIN IN • CRT WA 1TIIAt T9r.q Ian.OSR1Mno . 1..:n•�Il ANCNORAnt.•{•RYA.1101 SICLYSD ALLY[tGR1. n . tEl RI ANS wA1ININOTONI ac 1001•, { (N mom imunuN CNARLS1 C.•OS1,�tr ._� CH[i.►LIt•►[• VERNON LWDOL•TON,JP/ WILLIAM L*Oot0 CMn111'IHf■ .4TL06 Orly tN.LI RTJ0RIN • JIMMY Wa1 LA.I(.C(S.MANNIN JO1.N n.Na;( _ ICHAJ R.LISNCAH[M __ HIM N.INITON Of r+l•.Y1IL RICNAnD LYaGMN IUCIENla A.SIJN:R • /LY[R O.I '.,•,.. J•►tl r ,y■•i LYGItN I.NgS[aLl I�l[Allk NKT•{T Tn 7CATTLI army M.rARrl►r[(KA[OMN lOr(t\I,rq■(\T»1T . TNONAa J.L.LAUMNl1► O110N811 rtIRIMI • Ill l•w\IIN CowNasl • January 13, 1981 • • • RECEIVED • • CITY OF RENTON HEARING -EXAMINrR Office of the Land Use JA 3 19,9I Hearing Dxam; nor AM City of Renton' 71r31.�31.[1;t1 i!,1?,•e •-, • Imo'• Renton, Wash ngton 98055 .> He: Re uest for Reconsideration of the raring • Ex miner's Decision regarding Puget Sound •• • Ai. • Po or &- /, ompany's Short Plat, File No. . . • SR PL.100-80••, . -•122-so . Dear Mr./Kau •man: a.:.: • • :Pursuan to, title . 4, S301S.v .of the Renton City Code and •-1 • othor• releva t .Code sections, andt.. on behalf of Puget Sound i . Power & Ligh Company, we hereby request reconsideration of the report, a d decision of the. Renton City hearing examiner ; 4 regarding th • short platting petition, file .no. SH.pL. 100=$0,. • ` • , • This .re ,uest for reconsideration is' based on the following '. grounds: . 1. , The Findings are based on errors. of fact; ' • • • • • . 2. Con. lusiOng ,are based on errors of law; • • 3■ " The .imposition of a fee for vehicle trips. is , not . aut�loxized• . by law; . • • • • 4. The vehicle trip f e .imposed is excessive; • • ' S. The nerd for vehicle trip tee 16 unsupported by then evi/ once, . I .. ., / ' • , . , . r/ ',___, • y .\ • . • . • • • . . . . • , . • . . • • • Office of th- Land Use .. ;. .• :: • Hearing Exam:ner . - , Janwry 13, 1981 , . .- • . Page two . . . . . . . • 6. The vehicle trip fee imposed is not reasonably related to he impacts of the short plat applied for; 7. Sue other grounds as shall be presented at the hearing. • Oral ar!ument and an opportunity to offer additional testimony .. .. . and evidence are requested. . ... • r .. • , Sincerely, . . . , . . • • • • . . / . • • • PERKINS, COIE, STONE, OLSEN ,i... .:.! v.. • • & WILLIAMS - . ; ,;•!.!:;..i • • -.1 ....,...r. • . . . . . . . Attorneys for Puget Sound ,..• ' .' il.iiiiYJ.,•:. • : .. 4-;.11. . • • . • : ' Power & Light qompant i• • ,,, -.-..,,J.,,, • . • •. • '.:: -.1:;!..4i•::1 • :.• . • • • • • :. 4.4:;!1'.1. .• • • ••• . " ; • . '. . •!''•11. .•;. '. • • • - .. By• - . .. -• .. . . . . . , . . - .1 . • : Kenneth B. Shellan .• • . , . . . . • . . . • Md. . • ,.. .;• , . . . . . . . " . - • . • • • .. . . , • '... • . • KBS/V a • • • .. . . . . • • • . I .. . . . , cc: City Cl.rk, . . • - . Renton. •lanning .Departmont . • : . • • , . • • • . ' . - . • . .. . . . • . . . . . . . . . • • • • • . . ' . . . • • . . • 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 30th day of December , 19 80, 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 3o day of beC.e.wAApt' , 19 g0 . L' $ LlYt • ` 'U.4.? Notary Public in and fort a State of Washington, residing at V.0,Yicpyf Application, Petition or Case: Puget Power, Short Plat 100-80 (The minutez contain a ti6t o4 the pcur is o4 &cooed. ) i E December 30, 1980 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION . APPLICANT: Puget Sound Power & Light Company FILE NO. SH. PL. 100-80, E-122-80 LOCATION: Northwest corner of Rainier Avenue South and S.W. Grady Way. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks approval of a proposed four-lot short plat together with an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance to permit access to Lots 2 and 3 by a joint easement. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions. Hearing Examiner Decision: Approval with conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on December 16, 1980. 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 December 23, 1980 at 10:20 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report. Steve Munson, Planning Department, presented the report, and entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #1 : Application File containing Planning Department report and other pertinent documents Exhibit #2: Short Plat as submitted Exhibit #3: Short Plat with staff comments The Examiner indicated that further research would be required to determine whether or not a variance should be requested from the Parking and Loading Ordinance in lieu of an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance. The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was : Dick Causey Manager, Land Planning Puget Sound Power & Light Co. Puget Power Building Bellevue, WA 98009 Mr. Causey indicated concurrence in the recommendations of the Planning Department. He clarified that during rezone review Puget Power had agreed to provide the city with an easement for an existing water line which crosses the property, and during special permit review, storm drainage plans had been coordinated. Mr. Causey advised that an exception had been requested to allow for a single driveway between Lots 2 and 3 which would eliminate one driveway along Grady Way, provide for landscape screening and reduce the number of potent i.a-1 accidents . The Examiner indicated that the short plat cart be approved without an exception, but in the event a variance application is determined- necessary, reapplication will be required. Since there were no further comments , the hearing regarding File No. Short Plat 100-80 and E-122-80 was closed by the Examiner at 10:25 a.m. Sh. Pl . .J0-80 Page Two 1/1/r/' : FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS : 1 . The request is for approval of a four-lot short plat of +4.96 acres together with an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance for a shared easement access for proposed Lots 2 and 3. 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the Planning Department report, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit #1 . 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , R.C.W. 43.21 .C. , as amended, the subject proposal has been determined exempt from the threshold determination by members of the Environmental Review. Committee, responsible officials. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. There was no opposition to the proposal expressed. 6. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. The water main crossing the property must be extended to the property line and an easement granted to the city for access. 7. The subject property is located on the north side of Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue S. The property was rezoned from G (General ; Single Family Residential ; Minimum lot size - 35,000 square feet) to B-1 (Business/Commercial) in late 1980. A special permit to grade and fill the site was issued in September, 1980. 8. The proposal would create four lots and each lot would have frontage along Grady Way. In addition, Lots 1 and 4 would have frontage along Rainier Avenue and Lind Avenue, respectively. 9. Access to Lot 1 would be via Grady Way approximately adjacent to its western boundary and away from the Grady Way/Rainier intersection. Lot 4 would have access onto Lind Avenue S.W. 10. The applicant proposes access for the two central lots, Lots 2 and 3, via a joint driveway. The applicant has proposed this method to lessen the number of curb cuts and driveways intersecting Grady Way, a heavily used arterial . The proposed driveway will create an easement driveway between Lot 2 and Lot 3 and straddle the common property line. Such driveway will violate Section 4-2204(2) (A) which requires that driveways be no closer than five feet to the property line. The applicant has applied for an exception to the Subdivision Code. Instead, a variance is required from the provision which is in the Parking and Loading Ordinance. Notice of the exception fully disclosed the nature of the relief requested, that is, modification of the provision prohibiting a driveway from abutting a property line. 11 . The development on the subject site will generate approximately 470 vehicle trips per day. The Traffic Engineering Division has determined that traffic related improvements in this area will cost in excess of $20 per trip generated. CONCLUSIONS: 1 . The four-lot short plat proposed by the applicant appears to serve the public use and interest. The division and subsequent development of each of the lots of the short subdivision will help increase the tax base of the City of Renton. 2. The access to Lots 1 and 4 will minimize interference with Grady Way and Rainier Avenue which are both heavily traveled arterials. The proposed joint driveway would help additionally decrease the effective curb cuts and areas of turning along Grady Way. The notice of the public hearing On this matter was sufficient to encompass the necessary variance request, and therefore, a variance may be granted. The elimination of an extra driveway will lessen interference with the arterial traffic on Grady Way and improve public safety. The variance will not prove detrimental to neighboring properties nor harmful to the general public. The location of the subject property fronting three heavily used arterials , Lind, Grady and Rainier, justifies granting the variance for a public safety aspect as indicated above. i - Sh. 100-80 Page Three 3. The proposed development of the subject site will generate approximately 470 vehicle trips per day in the vicinity of the Grady Way/Lind Avenue intersection and the Grady Way and Rainier intersection. To defer the costs of various city required traffic improvements in the areas surrounding the subject site, a fee of $20 per vehicle trip is required to assure that the project makes appropriate provisions for traffic ways pursuant to Sections 9-1105(4) and 9-1106(2) (E) . Since the Hearing Examiner does not have the authority to impose traffic related fees at the site approval stage, but has the authority to assure that the short subdivision provides for the public use and interest and specifically provides for public services such as traffic ways, it is appropriate to impose that fee at this time. DECISION: Exhibit #3 is approved with the variance for the shared driveway and subject to the payment of a fee of $9,400 for traffic ways in the vicinity of the subject site. ORDERED THIS 30th day of December, 1980. Fred J. Ka man Land Use He ring Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 30th day of December, 1980 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Dick Causey, Manager, Land Planning, Puget Sound Power & Light Co. , Puget Power Building, Bellevue, WA 98009 TRANSMITTED THIS 30th day of December, 1980 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Michael Porter, Planning Commission Chairman Barbara Schellert, Planning Commissioner Ron Nelson, Building Official 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 January 13, 1980. 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 Finance Department, first floor of City Hall , or same may be purchased at cost in said department. • PLANNING DrawARTMENT PRELIM m'Y REPORT TO ` mm 119.C1C11RJ{.11WG EXAMINER ' XAM S LL91 R PUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 23, 1980 APPLICANT: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY FILE NUMBER: SHORT PLAT 100-80; E-122-80 • A. SUMMARY s PD 1.;N S1E OF A ,IZE T: The applicant seeks approval of a proposed 4-lot short plat together with an exception to the Subdivision 'Ordinance to permit access to lots 2 and 3 by a joint easement. B. GENERAL' INFO A`9 A TIO : 1 . Owner of Record: DUANE WELLS, INC. 2. Applicant: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 3. Location: (Vicinity Map Attached) N.W. corner of Rainier Avenue South and S.W. Grady Way 4. Legal Description: A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. 5. Size of Property: +4. 96 acres 6. Access: Via Grady Way and Lind Avenue S.W. • 7. Existing Zoning: "G" , General Classification District; minimum lot size 35,000 sq. ft. 8. Existing Zoning in the Area: "G" , B-1 , Business • Use; M-P, Manufacturing Park • 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial, Manufacturing Park 10. Notification: . The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Seattle Times on December 10, 1980 and posted in three places on or near the site as required • nby City ordinance on December 5, 1980. C. m ISTOR1£' l:'ACEGR®DND: The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance #1745 of April 14 , 1959 at which time the present zoning classification was applied. A special permit for fill and grade of approximately 32, 200 cubic yards on the site was approved by the Hearing Examiner on September 22 , 1980 and a rezone from "G" to B-1 was also approved by the Hearing Examiner on November 24 , 1980. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT CO. ; SHORT PLAT 100-80 ' DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE TWO D. PHYSIC :. wJ: : i . 1. Topography: The subject site was utilized for a railroad in the past. A built up roadbed extends parallel to S.W. Grady Way. The two swales create present storm water drainage pattern. 2. Soils : Urban land (Ur) is soil that has been modified by disturbance of the natural layers with additions of fill material several feet thick to accommodate large industrial and housing installations. The • erosion hazard is slight to moderate. 3. Vegetation: The site has been cleared in the past. Second growth scrub vegetation covers the subject site. 4 . Wildlife: Existing vegetation on the site may provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. Water: 6. Land Use: The site itself is undeveloped at this time. In the past it was occupied by railroad tracks. • E. EIelIRL'::O f;OOD CHA1RAC ERISTICS: The surrounding properties are developing into light commercial and office park type uses. The older. re- sidential area on the south side of S.W. Grady Way is - gradually being replaced by commercial and office uses, F. PUBLIC SERVICES : 1 . Water and Sewer: A 12" water main runs parallel to S.W. Grady Way approximately 50 feet north of . the subject site. A. second 12" water line running north and 'south bisects the property. The primary 108" Metro gravity sewer line is located on the northern property line. Access will have to be via an established manhole. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by• the Renton Fire . Department as per Ordinance requirements, 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route #161 operates along S.W. .Grady Way adjacent to the subject site. 4 . Schools : Not Applicable 5. Recreation: Not Applicable G. APPLICA81i„E SECTIONS QIF 11E Z*NING CODE: • 1 . Section 4-729 ; "G" , General Classification District. 2. Section 4-711 ; B-1 , Business District. H. AAPPLIC/' TL1P SECTIONS OF ¶1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ® R OFFICIAL CITY : 1 . Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan, June 1976 , Objective pages 5-7. 2. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, 1965, Commercial, page 11 . 3. Subdivision Ordinance, Section 9-1105; Short Sub- division. 4 . Subdivision Ordinance, Section 9-1109 ; Exceptions. • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT, CO. SHORT PLAT 100-80; DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE THREE I. IMPACT OF THE NATURAL AL Om, 1UMAN EINIVE m4ININI : 1 . Natural Systems : Minor 2. Population/Employment: The requested short plat will have no direct impact on population or employment. Future site development will, however, and will need to be addressed at that time. 3. Schools: Not Applicable 4 . . Social: Not Applicable 5. Traffic: The proposed office use will generate approximately 470 additional vehicle trips per day. • J. ENVI�*NMEN 'AL ASSESSMENT/TE N,'S;SOLD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton' s Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended, RCW 43-21C, the subject proposal is exempt from the Threshold Determination of Environmental Significance. K. EEIEE/IIDE7 EELI?ETLC® MEE : 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. L. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: • 1 . The proposed short plat is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of commercial and manufacturing park for the site and surrounding areas. 2. The proposal is compatible with the existingcommercial and office uses to the north and west of the subject site. 3. All of the proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance for the size and frontage. . 4 . Although each lot does front on a public street, the applicant is requesting an exception to Section 4-2204-2A of the Parking and Loading Ordinance to permit access to lots 2 and 3 by a joint access easement and common driveway. This would be necessary in order to comply with the 5 ° standard of this section. The existing street pattern and topography do not provide for access to the rear. In addition, the requirement for separate driveways per individual lots would necessitate the removal of substantial amounts of existing curbing on Grady Way. Approval of this request would not only reduce the number of driveways and potential circulation conflicts but also lower substantially the expense of curbing removal. A somewhat similar request was approved by the Hearing Examiner in the Doug Weston Short Plat #2 (Short Plat 061-80) on August 1 , 1980. Given this and a related exception approved in the Cecelia Wooten Short Plat (Short Plat 375-79) , `cr j 1 1ti PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT CO. : SHORT PLAT 100-80 DECEMBER 23, 1980 PAGE FOUR it would appear that there is some precedent for such a request and that justification has been. supplied (See 9-1109) . 5. Suitable utilities are available to the subject site, although a water main extension plan along Grady Way will be required as well as an easement for extending the existing 12" water main. Utilities Engineering also notes that standard hookup fees will apply. 6. The Engineering Division advises that all off-site improvements and storm drainage across the site in an east-west direction will be required. 7. Proper ingress and agress must be provided and all future building construction shall meet fire codes as per Fire Department comment. M. DEp TA L c (Er dmirakoATIONIS Based upon the above analysis it is recommended that approval of the short plat and exception requests be granted subject to the satisfaction of the requirements outlined in L-5 and L-6. • ! - '4 i 44 Planning 12-1979 _ RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : �} �� �. , ,.r Location `, ".;y`(gardo4` E? olci :44,4644E7V #"i VMS. vea f%/'{u "4 "` a '1 Applicant : ,:= c.4Gap li ( ''? f TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : iaigke Police Department A. R. C. MEETING DATE : ' /, r,frs/ Public Works Department Engineering Division Traffic Engineering Buil ' rig Division Utilities Engineering e Fire Department (Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING FO THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON AT Y :UO A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOU E ARTMENT DION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE Tp A TEND THE ARC, PLEAS; V E THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:OU P .M. ON 1 ' U REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : igi4:- Approved ,/ Approved with Conditions Not Approved y-a mug 4),4=vz-, a ffnt Z 1/ 4--i2 - ' �t-//2e' / Ja2 / 6� 9f , G,C'c SS' Foie /mil %e6L&L-'c_.�' Q6-(/7")/f-%/6-ti i, /<)(/ /- /%� ,c-- 1 JG//L-O/ti6-. (bk,cs'�/''C i�oit) `9///'Z /--,''C .:% / 9/C- /iPGc= <_c/iJG-s c. - \ --/ Signature of` D Director or Au horized Representative 'ate REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : u-,";v Approved '�Approved with Conditions Not Approved SWSl66T 1b warerLs',,4,.4 Exrosisom PL.6^-( 4LOro6 G OY ,-✓,p,../ . $1 I eiSE,14514t NFL Tv(. iv, LpIL1.,N,0,44, S.is far a, s`f 5�'+-, ow, C a'5 . 01/ Fr z. 1..✓4E¢ccriL Oa" . o I/ I- 'Z 5ewr-.,/Z, 11 /7 % Signature o Director or Authorized Representative Date KtV1tWINU UCrhl► inLim ► ' uara.Jay . . ---y-ra /7 • `2 /`_, r 7 Approved k Approved with Conditions _.___ Not Approved 1H- -P l.+-) b eS-5 r r S- ree+ p LYL j acco vsi oe1 a16. L'7 e_�► � �p 71-4Lc. $ I f C/ V c'_('b Y t, ai, - ,. /u 1-1 LA)r l r si b // � 4-r Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Dat 1� REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : C—O Cam; X Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved Signa r of Director or Authorized Representative / Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 4/7/i7C'rrYi7C, • Approved .( Approved with Conditions Not Approved Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date - - REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved -'r • Signature ,of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved ®` �_� �.. .�, .'7 'R,'� .• '.�,�r,_,'sV 'iN s",.' .VI rw��"� `' , _Z ;....- 1 .... .� , ,'y • , N ''' . CA,. WI 6t 4,711•.?\AV' -• ..-I- r ',I, �,� ,a. ..�► *f 4 3E )..v \.. Q ... - .vi+ 'Cc ``. ` / /' ,1. 1 f S 4 i N'•' , .' = V®"•"�' ),,. I/ •` i / Ili { / `'i- • i . 1 .. i ... I 1.6i filik4 CCD il .,,ilp\../1. .. _JP ____ ______1;t ,,<:)r' ' 1 L' 1 • •,174;.. i • li 14 .. ....•• , .•••••••• 1 1 1- 1,.. „,,, ) . .i. 11` , • %, ,%1 • .\.., 0 17. 4 0410\, .,,v14:11,.‘,..4.0.“;;,.r..,,f:1;44.44ttettA .@4°...'...l......r4,''''.........":::-;;;:".'lli............:71':' IT-- • • �a ;� ,1 4.4-r4 p < 1 1 . . ;rij4iF ,t ,f,,,1 : I,.;111.- 1. i fi. 1 1 i .__ _;e� • ...._a._ -` ,. .. �, ,'"3,"ry ��,4111 101,'t1•11111111111' C ' ''^t I .I. .. _ • M �9•G �'`.), -'��j1�1 It'jj`il s , ,;fl li��fllr. , -...•...,I "e3 tfi 1 1111 j'I rM' . .• t4°11.. "f•-‘1° .:„ a 4111,01111011t 10-1.1t.irf , 1 C,,,iy'"t1;1, 1 Att t,..'„,-ttl. ,.-„, [�� , I !— ,:�.�1 11111 `SFr»�{ ` r, '[.',t�(li.��* t (I� f (11 �'•f.) !� t'011d1 >'—t °p 1 i�11 •'�' i' {I V i'wi r '6.0 :.... ---•::- -� `f •r �`' •-`'. 1t I II 1 t ��p '�`w1U 111 • yF:1 _�, �.. �,�—`• 1 � _{ ' • 1' ,t,(Ntt• i �i ��`�. 1 1 1, p ,J` s 1 �r `.. �:r3.1" �'2,w,nm r/ .„" a' '" r�ti9V,r: i 1 •, �p� n .• w K �11.1 r• �_ �JY • ,yam ' •!+ pi •' A.1:1,- ii+ III ,per , ..n,•.. ,� ro� t s �' .R 4 • °` � e 1 q• � 's . ��i p 1 5 ''1II i U/� A i 1 Ali!.° .. .„ , i { `4 �' 1 ,.vA. 1 ��•1 ..b. ,.,.. w#.Y 1 , e ._ -..• •••_' :.... • .© ~ II is': 4. yM , e ;, • .. f���_ - val�, ! . ' �' �i•i! �It'Ib1t': �. •o r' iN� �• ♦ 1• ..� �i+�a�„ ' I' 1+i u ' a. ( q iq _ AA YJ a ��aq p I' 1 •p _I `4w{•,: LasflJ�S t q..�' v _�► ..d ��r pr � ` P' ?.j1. : 1 1 •j '! f o t �" 1� I• 1 1. �Imaj01,6 G 1 t'♦S• .:1'' 'i ••,- I. _ 1 1 1 ii • •.•i , e t. 21I ?•}� a yj ,.• �i I 4:1 9.1 O �t., ^ 1 t b . \e 4 \ " cow{d ;i; `°�" bci. ••'/ a i.i; }:. i :(1 1'0`t4 ' •Fu.--r'R4.+4.YeW fHeYl9-IAi.-..MW'!i#T:Rti. M+h iT#M'+ . 711*14s,1 clRa1�, •—.01. CLAIH. —_— `. 1 7 f. i i i Iv". »C„ .< lob 1 , •• 1 .ti inl arfil , ,,.. .. • 1 i G# 1i GI .. ..., ...:A..„...., , 4 _ . ,_ • , ,{A;w-.«sR.px+ Nw.',rm' Mjil_,‘ 1_. . t . r .1 • •O V. 1 k L-1 a PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHORT PLAT 100-80; E-122-80 , APPLICANT Puget Sound Power & Light Co. TOTAL AREA +4. 96 acres Y PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Grady Way and Lind Ave. S .W. . EXISTING ZONING G, General Classification District r • EXISTING USE Undeveloped a , i PROPOSED USE Commercial Use COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial, Manufacturing Park COMMENTS • • • •.‘ . . • •• , I . . •-•• 4,44 ; • ''-.:'-' 1-i•.; (5.5,11V41 tilop„.NiON",aN - '7AN . ..:;.5 A.'41517,6 VI Avll- 11-1 e--01 Ail AP9f °JIM 4.19119,61 t-P94 - .aki , i.,,:...• e5gi AlivsNA :t-incitil A.1.14140 .0eN 111 el 9Pd-15V17 2,/i°,rig NI — d , AW)-Sria Pi 1 )-1119 0 1 Sg Al 1 tmvJ :min Ap4pvt,i Aol - di 1 ivieykzistrivvo°2-5', . lvt)-Hgemgv AIIIVt1 .91 ,111S • m.fr.t.L,••i,(::T.ma,'N,„0.....-"V::.;s'a-: ,...14..(1,,, 1 - : . '...,..,,,,.,..". ,..,.. ‘ '. , ....‘r,,,,ixe,,TL.7„43 :7:1,'..1..ti,lki!:'14,-4:'''.4:4,r'igc-.-::.': v.5,. • 4ir /L,IN", Ai '` ::,, irlip _____,...„.=.5,,,gc; • .,•• •• 11, .1, ..t. )::446,:,•::j ,, ..';'4 •{4.. , '•.1 • . i t. \ * .,.....e..,k.e, , P,,,,,,,,,,t.14•*, ,t...e;$.7.,.•N-. % 1 -.41, . f•t-44.ep,14,-.• , 1, . . rt. • :,; •,, , e, I it • .14 ..• . -. I . • . i • .‘ lit ' , i •:',.':61.,,''.: ' 1 i a. .4.r•'.1• • ' Irt • I ' •s Or..;... '• I'•'.4',,?:*1.41‘..Lek1/4,;ItiPs?P':1 . n . • e 'or.7,..' Till ' ..4,.,M. t.;;•!!:•: I - 4 \i• . , .' •), .. .' ..... / /:' , .. k , . i. ...::,.. •., , :,..ro. I,.:, . ,,,, . , •• 'JP-4,, k • . ,4., .t , 4? , ,.• 'IA, ..-f 1., •1A '. ••• •.:4 . 4.'440,I f ;401 i iti V.,1.;4,4.1. • ,3, t•4? $ 1 1t-N4 :.'till I i,Vii..,EirA•.411 -IL .414„• •tik ' 1 ,;';It:4,.,,•*'*-': . . ;' iL 1., 4* . '• :./tie I& L, r.••,..- ,t,• •••.• ,p,p't ty . ' - It, }4.'t• ," It", ‘1.,.. ,,,,,, ,....,' j '* • • s "R"' 11 ..*I,.1, .4.*,, • Iltrt,i004, telege.1.40.4.11001 .01.41" I....MI 4........11.......... ....,....,... ..,.... < -....... . ..../ , ' I ^t i.• / A. ' 'PAN • A f.1.c • '1 n„,,, ,.,.. lip ,,,a 0 0 I)...., . ) . .. ' 1 il,, i'.i.'11.•.4i 1.r1.3:.4.:,,,,.'. . , ..i..Z.;i 41.::At i i; 1 t;P..1 ''At ' ,,.... 01 .,t 1;?':' i . .. :1'4:3'.:'.:c.:•Atfl.ri h 'it) 4 i.4 41.‘:., I v°Ir' • 1 1 ik .-••'• l'i 1 1 0-1 i • k.-11 ., , • 1 ,.... .„,... ,,,.... , , 1 elV:...I .',. 4 ,pi,.• ,.,, ,,,,,,,,i A h 0 f .11,11.p. .•-• .. 5,,,,,,11,,,i 4, A.4V•: . •LH, t ..'S . Ity r., s. 0 , ,ii01 ....y%,..,.- ,. ,s4,ti i 4.1,;.•;., 1). 1.1" '14 . i . k .t, ...c./ I.,;*' .,7 • .• • Fkr ' .4.,r.:04 iri i'4 p..‘t.:1.r.It'Zik..114 4 ' 1 '' ' :.. .% , 21. . - • st, . i . itti!.., •,,. t;',-0. . • „, ER • A, t. e 1, , .." • . i),, . ' ., tt, 41, ,, T, ,.• — f i'$'1,c , 4 1 40 47 f i 4 ' 41,;.',IO\/N''A,kistt'A%k/,,,,Ar i/0.-/A•'o,...r. f k,e, t)*.,.•,say.1,'','m,'..i‘:1lkt„,1.,.,4'"4,1',^".14a"0.,.,1.(y747_?."'?.4.t,t.,'':.4„4t.-r),4o4°1-0:.•M..!-..1 O•.VfrA,g.,','•i*a,pA 4e-.1..,,_-,:-' , * ' 1 / ' . ,4 V,, ."•..A0;.4.-.'.•,,-,..,,,.4,•-"_r:t 1i,f tf It''01.,...,i..r.-:iyRt..g.fi•t-.,,.,a tr f'iltl„9io..i•t-, o.S,—.1.tI,•It"..4.'.'..,..':..-t„s,,,J', --4-"1'r-'_^.-'•.r,„,,„1-,t.„,•i''-*-r, •2-i".,,t.,', .;,•,•,X,,-,.4‘,,,9,..0.0..0.'*, .4k .'.-...1•.'...M•....r.Si.t.I0 t.i.1.t%i..s,1.,.,14,.,14,11ei•V,,,',fv,f"_W'..3.,.„.„,'.'„'..'._.'..'.•....,..‘..."...,.;.,'.,"':.,,.'....,..,,t",,,„.,.*t.,,,,.,.i i"„,,t.,1'ri•,:','•0'..-'s" 0o'• 41•.4-1 1 ....4..„..•........4.,4,,.0-..'1'..,.0...0....A ,,. z......"). b't•,h_ -• 0.,,,t.roPC * ' I • *‘.4.7,00.1 n or MO. ' ,P's". . tt,* '' ••-•*.••••'? ....." ittiltr91"."--r-.-1' ''.i. ..,./ .i.'..... • ., 1-.. 1 - . 20,- pi „. _ . ; • ..,;,,.t,.. „.,,, .. ,,,, ,,AiN:11: w.."14::::15`. ' ;<,,,,,,' ,:,...),,,,,,ii;::\:...... , 1 (.1. '''‘ / - . 111 ..1 , ti --i• , --t.,,r4 --- r? f :-.. .1.--- ),(2:43 y .,3 < 14.... .,.... ,,,,,, ,:rt,..,... s .." ...' ',Ply' * I t m .. , , .,,,t u•v,...,,,,..4"' .„,.,.. ilk 4, ..., ,,•''•• 1,•40 f.TIV...MW . * hil 43fr ,.....-- lV,.. • • ..-. r," ' ,.,,,, 4••••0* •"1. )' „r•-•.'". 1 -.. !.11 to:4 A a il ' :'iiV ____--or'' ''' , Of, --- • '•• - I... ti„,0,4tv t'' --4-------- ma r•;?,J.),1,14.,b,„, ci 1 f - '. i •Vt kfi'4.t10/44;46'4444 r*'''.'"*"'*!•6'• .. ' 'I. . . .' ' PI * "I‘S,,y4-t•. 4,f , 1 ' S71 Wit-4,V004,0' — :, -, - . . . . .,. . . • .,.-. ..., , 4,044,,cv id--•ty ,• • so.c.,01-0110 .. • c , . ! .... • • .;„. ••.: • ,••••••• ,.-,.„,„ .. , • • • '.- *".-4/1U1S4nahA , -.1 ,''' -•, • ;T.1. ,-t•i,,,,,,,, ,,,i. • •••••1 1 „„.h s s,;071/4 sA,4,1,;•:?.IF.I.T ... sp.:i, ...1 014 si A, •'...(.4."- •.. ..,.. ... le,9rgr17 il, ,i. .1 ..'..., ,. , • . ,.. . . ..,. ' - . .s., . •V 1 •.. . . ........• .., .,, ,..,,,_ • •,... . ,,,,, A ... -..k R. . ,..,.• ..p4,,t,.* . • . L'i Of ; .. I "•• i. • . i ' .0N,..i • 11 , L.f...K :, • •r4 v 1. t ' ',, 4 . ' ., '),•:..,..41 ,,.4 ''4 10 ‘ ' \ ; :•••••1- , •,v. g.14-,..1",••::: it'll' .4 . .. -, ••• , .,., s . •• •-1 • •- . ::‘ — ., . , ,•.,1, .,..,." ;.'..'" -';‘,,•w:••• ii•"" ••"•.;•••• 1 •• . ••••t “: •, ••• ., :..:1 '..• i .i.,$,..; , , ,,,:ti• :',. el 0''r r . 4 , ‘471';'444'41'..'1.;‘L'•;.'I, ., lik" ,t414,4:,,, f•.45 * •... ..itikot.1 r :Pq`.) IA . It q..... •-• -" ,1 -ot,.1‘, - ,*'ti . .04 A•(• ;4' • . ..4.•-. . •'•"•%c iti ' / 't ' l'.Y1 1 1'9.1.:• rk..A.44, •, ' :A.•,;1.,; 1 ,0,•1.14 i. , 11,1,, ''',A.,.. •,,,,. F-,. • . .- . ,41:‘,. en t,•• if, it tfi gq:• i .ila 1 ,'• ., ...,.... . .0.,,,,..q. • ... - ,,,I,,,:4 itk, AP A • '''. if 11 '' '' V' '. .1. 4. ‘"-*'4." ' 115'' 'CIN‘'.4.1- : 4.t'':',4 •T4. ' "'Ir i. "4.'21/?: •' ...-, -, •'a.,;',( '10 ;'i,•1,i' ' . .:4( 11 4,, ' L. Al '.'..•• •,•••':".'1 tt•. '' ..,\...?.h'4k •'; .i .:‘ liV4y/it I, .,41.1.:10:' . - ,i4f •.: •', t;V;41 , .,i',.. . ii. ..f A . .x.",et,v..4 .N...4.8e 04 $ C.,0‘t z,sk.•.. . ., :44... ,. ;14',.!.', • 4'i 11•,•i.4"::. • 1( ...",%4V, iaral s. ..‘A..ilt- i.•.i k.,„,-, . ,'AI,. 4r: •••1. 7 ::;•,-_ i ,•;.,„/. , .•„ .. 4 1, i ,:., . , 4: 1 . y Az-, Wtitto..tv .,&f.04.1,,?;.-J.%) ext .0 -6:Jli,,•,. , ,-.-.!,.. ',. . -17 ...a . -., • ',... -,.. ., ,* ,,.. 4,0.N. .,.i.. ,. '0 If!,, . '7, ' P. ,' '1 R/1 ‘....1 - 1. ,•:::1,4:1 ,11..° ., ••,*.i *. ''*'1.ti• ''',,..4 14 -•,1-. , '. - ''•,_:,,,.:t h 9`4-,,,., ,', • * •',, v 4'•' '' in ...t. .'t I.3.), ' .v). r•i •• ' • kg,.-..‘.• , .. ,..0,*, , li,"' '.-' „q• t•--i 1- '.e. ., ..:4,_ , • ... _. '''10,-A.,Aii-ft ;,,,, ,;.d...4P't • • . :::,M,z, ,:' i t,•.:`, ,-..., •*. 44.. N ..:;f .Ii•.Lieo4E.S,-.iVf'fiV Volnifrn4:,i iii.`.! - OF it4,, „ ti z THE CITY OF RENTON `,e4 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 eeiiL � o c — _ BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR e PLANNING DEPARTMENT .0 235- 2550 0,94 7. e0 SEPS��O�P December 4 , 1980 Duane Wells & Puget Sound Power and Light Company Puget Power Building Bellevue, Washington 98009 Re: Application for 4-lot short plat and Exception to the Subdivision Ordinance for future commercial development; File Nos. Short Plat 100-80, E-122-80; property located on the north side of S.W. Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue South • Gentlemen: The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on December 4 , 1980. A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for Decmeber 23, 1980 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, Planning Director By: Ro e J. layloc Associate. Planner RJB:yb cc: Dick Causey, Puget Sound Power & Light Company, Puget Power Building, Bellevue, Washington 98009 ri J_ ' ,• , „ ,:,1x 0a :: . r.A ..i 40„ 41 ; 01* ..F . . „it ,,„, ° 4T *� } t. k . GENERALLOCATION: A 69 OR ADDRESS: PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF S.W. GRADY WAY BETWEEN LIND AVENUE S.W. AND RAINIER AVENUE SOUTH LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON FILE IN THE RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT I S POSTED TO NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS OF �:w; x. ALl ' ' '�t u r M r A'M T s BE HEL I° IN CITY COUNCIL C AMBERS, MUNICIPAL r4 IING DECEMBER 23, 1980 BEGINNING AT 9: 0Q A.M. P.M. CONCERNINGITEM REZI; NE NE D SPEC1 A 5PERMIT SITE APPROVL `.L D WAIVER ... El SH11, -=. E, fi IN ,,'' A'" r.,4 L G___,cE Fps 'ENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR FOUR LOT SHORT PLAT AND EXCEPTION TO SUBDIVISION ORDINACE: FILE NOS: SHORT PLAT 100-80;E-122-80 i, ' FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL 235 2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT A I ' + '47.ATION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 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 DECEMBER 23, 1980, AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: 1 . RAINIER SAND & GRAVEL CO. Application for special permit to fill and grade of 1. 6 million cubic yards over life of project; File No. SP-099-80; property located approximately 370' south of N.E. 3rd Street on hill east of Mt. Olivet Cemetery. 2. DUANE WELLS & PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT CO. (GRADY WAY WEST SHORT PLAT) Application for 4-lot short plat and Exception to the Subdivision Ordinance for joint access easement for future commercial develop- ment; File Nos. Short Plat 100-80, E-122-80; property located north side of S.W. Grady Way between Lind Avenue S.W. and Rainier Avenue South. 3. RENTON BIBLE CHURCH Application for special permit to allow construction of a t11,154 sq. ft. addition to an existing *5,609 sq. ft. church; File No. SP-110-80; property located in the vicinity of 973 Union Avenue N.E. Legal descriptions of files noted above are on file in the Renton Planning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER 23, 1980, AT 9: 00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: DECEMBER 10, 1980 GORDON Y. ERICKSEN, 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, in and for the State of Washington residing in King County, on the 4th day of December, 1980. `1 SIGNED:ogea.....42. M 1:2,7"01727 November 25, 1980 GRAD-1/80-CAUS City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA. 98055 Attn: Roger Blaylock Associate Planner At our last meeting you indicated that our proposed short plat and conceptual site plan conflicts with section 4-2204 (2a) of your code. This section states "Driveway shall be not closer than five feet to any 'property line exclusive of the property line the curb cut is parallel to." Upon our review and your concurrence we are requesting an exception of section 4-2204 (2a) to allow a joint access easement on the westerly driveway between lots 2 and 3. This joint access.easement would reduce the number of'-driveways on Grady Way consequently reducing the number of potential accidents. It would also provide a more pleasing and continuous landscape design. The granting of this exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity. In the event that this property is sold and the owners do not develop as indicated on the attached conceptual plan, the driveway would then be subject to section 4-2204 (2a) of the city code. Should you have any questions concerning this exception feel free to call. is ' Causey Manager, Land Planning DC:cf g VIV Puget Sound Power&Light Company Puget Power Building Bellevue,Washington 98009 (206)454-6363 40 CITY OF RENTON 4110 ---1— SHORT PLAT PLAT APPLICATION FILE NO. MAJOR PLAT DATE REC' D. /161 7° —t 6 TENTATIVE Y�I � APPLICATION FEE $PRELIMINARY P o�' ENVIRONMENTAL((J 10 1980. 2'. RECEIPT NO. / `f5_ac� .''• SM NO. `L / P U D NO . APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 7 : 1. Plat Name & Location Grady Way West Short Plat - North Side of S.W. Grady Way between Line Ave S.W. and Rainier Ave. S. 2 . No. Lots 4 Total Acreage 4.93 Zoning R-1 (Proposed) 3 . Owner Duane Wells & Puget Sound Power and Light Co-. Phone 453-6758 Address Puget Power Building, Bellevue, WA 98009 Attn: Dick Causev. 5 . Underground Utilities : Yes No Not Installed Telephone ( x ) ( ) ( ) Electric ( x ) ( ) ( ) Street Lights ( ,X ) ( ) ( ) Natural Gas ( x ) ( ) ( ) TV Cable ( x ) ( ) ( ) 6 . Sanitation & Water: (' x ) City Water ( x ) Sanitary Sewers ( ) Water District No . ( ) Dry Sewers ( ) Septic Tanks 7. Vicinity and plat maps as required by Subdivision Ordinance. 8. DATE REFERRED TO: ENGINEERING PARKS BUILDING HEALTH TRAFFIC ENG. STATE HIGHWAY FIRE COUNTY PLANNING BD. PUBLIC WORKS OTHER 9 . STAFF ACTION: TENTATIVE PLAT APPROVED DENIED APPEALED EXPIRED 10. LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER'S ACTION: SHORT PLAT APPROVED DENIED PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED DENIED FINAL PLAT APPEALED EXPIRED 11 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED DENIED FINAL PLAT APPEALED EXPIRED • 12. DEFERRED IMPROVEMENTS : DATE DATE BOND NO. AND TYPE GRANTED -EXPIRES AMOUNT Planning Dept . Rev. 1/77 r 410/1 AFFIDAVIT SI) • PARCEL "A" J 1 , DUANE WELLS, INC. , being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this 3 day of 62d....q4 , 196t) , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at &../ 1,lx . DUANE WELLS, INC. X , E <I--eg-o•-e.P._-Ct-7/E-- dr----,- --- (Name of Notary Public) (Signature of Owner President // � /e) / 15 So. Grady Way (Address) (Address) • •�'�� OF Renton Washington f,/,�� �� (City) (State) . . ( • ®CT \ r °o . \N ''''''" / 255-1293 ,�� �,`'A�� (Telephone) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application . Date Received , 19 By : Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 L 41111/ AFFIDAVIT PARCEL B I I . PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY , being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this day of ®e,:-/ , 19a,, Notary Public in and for the State f Washington, residing at ��/// PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 41 if '' o4- 401.A, 4.04„,,, (Name of Notary Publ ) Director Real_ Estate /9/00 /Vik/*���!/'� PUGET POWER BUILDING (Address) (Address) /7.05-F-7--7N� ` BELLEVUE WA 98009 . PllilIr-1 p /1 . (City) (State) cf— 0 t `9 .a 454-6363 �'1,r (Telephone). (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application . Date Received , 19 By : Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 -:Pi • 411107c;,,,i:( IF • GRADY WAY PROPERTIES 1® O�vATTACHMENT , 0 -j. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 4-1'AR-0\ Parcel A Those portions of the Burlington Northern Inc. former 120 foot wide right-of-way in Government Lot 1, Government Lot 2, and the fractional Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 19, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in the City- - of Renton, King County, Washington, lying between the_-East line of that certain easement conveyed to the City-of Renton by an instrument recorded December 10, 1969, and recorded under recording No. 6597277, records of King County, Washington, Northern Pacific-Railway Company, Grantor, being also an extension of the East line of Lind Avenue__Southwest--uroduced Southerly and parallel•. with the. West. line thereof across the above- mentioned right-of-way and the West_1ine of that._certain- easement granted.to the State of Washington far -Rainier Avenue by instrument recorded March 11, . 1959, and -recorded Tinder Recording No. 5.0-06790, records of King County Washington, Northern Pacific Railway Company, Grantor. • Parcel That portion. of--'the Puget Sound 'Power & Light- Company right-of- . way (formerly the Puget Sound Electric Railway right-of-way, . Renton Branch) in the Northwest quarter of. Section_.19, Township ' 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , lying -between Lind Avenue S. W. and Rainier Avenue and North of South West Grady Way and South of the former Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way; ALL situate in the County of King, State -of 'Washington-. ENDING OF FILE Fig nnF Ak ‘a/