HomeMy WebLinkAboutNelson Plat, Preliminary Plat and Waiver of Street Improvements1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
)
RE: Nelson Plat ) ) FINAL DECISION
Preliminary Plat and Waiver of Street ~
Improvements )
)
LUA11-088, ECF )
------------------------------~)
Summary
16 The Applicant requests preliminary plat approval for a nine lot residential subdivision and has also
requested a waiver of street improvement requirements. The preliminary plat is approved with
17 conditions and the waiver of street improvements is authorized to the extent recommended by staff.
18
19
20
21
Testimony
Rocale Timmons, associate planner, stated that the subject parcel is located on the north-side
ofNE 12th St, west of Aberdeen NE and is east of 1-405 (north of Sunset Blvd). She noted that the
plat is approximately 1.5 acres and is located within the Residential-8 (R-8) dwelling units per acre
zoning classification. She remarked that the Applicant is proposing a 9-lot plat with an addition of 2
22 tracts (one for drainage and one for access) making the total, proposed density 6.5 dwelling units per
acre. She testified that the average lot size ranges from 4,762 square feet in area to 7,918 square feet
and the two tracts would be 6000 sq. feet in total, adding that they are not considered open space.
There is an existing 1660 sq. ft. single family house that is proposed to remain on lot 8, following
development. She noted that access to lots 1-5, 8, and 9 would be provided via an extension of
Monterey Avenue NE, which is in the center of the site, lot 7 would gain access from new portions of
Monterey Ave, and lot 6 would gain access directly off ofNE 12th St. via its own driveway.
26 Additionally, Ms. Timmons said there are currently no critical areas or trees on site. On
23
24
25
PRELIMINARYPLAT-l
1 January 17th , the Environmental Review Committee issued a determination of non-significance
mitigated, which included 3 mitigation measures related to parks, traffic, and fire impact fees. She
2 stated that a 14-day appeal period commenced on January 20th and ended on February 3rd• She
3 testified that neither appeals nor public or agency comments were filed.
In terms of preliminary plat analysis, Ms. Timmons testified that the proposal was consistent
4 with all comprehensive plan, land-use, and community design elements of Renton. The proposal was
also compliant with all relevant zoning requirements if all 5 conditions of approval are followed. She
5 remarked that the first condition of approval is for the Applicant to specify the orientation for the
6 front-yard of the existing home on lot 8. Currently, she said, there is a small access easement located
between lots 8 and 9, which varies the access for lot 8. She stated that staff recommends the access to
7 the existing residence come from the west. She added that staff also asks that the Applicant submit a
revised landscape plan depicting a lO-ft wide landscape strip and a 5-ft wide modified right-of-way
8 planter strip (exhibit 7), which will be located along Monterey Avenue. Additionally, she noted that
staff asks the Applicant to comply with the conditions outlined in the improved street modification
letter that was issued on August 8, 2011 (exhibit 7), which includes a 13-ft pavement from the center
10 line and a 5-ft improved sidewalk along NE 12th St. (the street south of the site). She testified that
staff asks the Applicant to provide 5-ft planter strips on both sides ofthe new Monterey Avenue and a
5-ft sidewalk along the west-side ofthe roadway.
9
11
12 In terms of availability of public services, Ms. Timmons remarked that police and fire staff
have indicated sufficient resources are available to provide services to the proposed development.
13 Students would attend Kennydale Elementary School, McKnight Middle School, and Hazen High
School. She noted that extensions of the existing water and sewer line into Monterey Avenue would
14 be required in order to serve the plat. She stated that the Applicant submitted a preliminary drainage
report prepared by Preferred Engineering LLC. A stormwater pond is proposed at the southwest
15 comer of the property and has been designed per the 2009 King County Surface Water Design
16 Manual as amended by the city. She remarked that this report meets the city's criteria as required in
condition number 3. Therefore, she concluded staff is recommending approval for the Nelson plat
17 with the five recommended conditions of approval.
Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Timmons stated that condition five would be
18 required to be met before engineering approval. She acknowledged that this conflicted with
19 Condition 4, which only required landscaping to be completed prior to final plat approval. She
recommended that the landscape plan be required before the engineering approval and that Condition
20 4 be modified accordingly. In regard to why a Geotech report was prepared, she testified that it was
prepared for stormwater analysis. The project site doesn't contain any steep slopes that qualify as
critical areas. A geotech report is typically required for all projects for stormwater review unless the
land is completely flat.
21
22
23
Kayren Kittrick, Development Services, stated that, upon advice of the City Attorney, it has
been decided that all administrative modifications to development standards should be reviewed by
the hearing examiner if requested in conjunction with a quasi-judicial permit application. Thus, this
24 project's modification approvals have been consolidated. She also noted that Geotech reports are
required for the drainage because the Applicant must show whether or not the ground will accept
25 infiltration.
26 Phil Kitzes, P.K. Enterprises, Applicant's representative, stated that the Applicant concurs
PRELIMINARY PLAT - 2
1 with most of what the Renton staff has prepared. In regard to the recommendations for approval, he
testified that the Applicant would like the ability to have the 5-ft sidewalk on either the west-side or
2 east-side of the new extension of Monterey Avenue. This request is in order to create consistency
with the other sidewalks that will be constructed. 3
4
5
Mr. Kitzes stated that the Applicant also requests a change in the recommendations for the
landscaping. On page 7 of staff report, he said, there is a 10ft planter strip requirement and on page 8
there is an 8ft planter strip requirement. He testified that, previously, the Applicant had requested a
street modification in order to avoid Monterey Avenue going through the plat. However, he said,
6 staff offered a street modification that reduced the roadway, reduced the sidewalk section, and
reduced planter strips. He stated that now staff has asked for an additional 10ft on-site landscaping
7 requirement in their recommendations. The Applicant was unaware of the additional 10ft because it
was not mentioned in the street modification letter. He remarked that there were 2, 5ft planter strips,
but there was no 10ft onsite in the letter. He stated that the Applicant does not believe this additional
landscaping is necessary. To be consistent, he noted, the landscape planter strip on NE 12th St. also
should be reduced to 5ft.
8
9
10
11
Mr. Kitzes submitted photos of Monterey Avenue N (exhibit 9, photo 1) demonstrating the
lack of landscaping on either side. He stated that photo 2 looks west on NE 1ih St, depicting a
limited (30 inch) landscape strip, and photo 3 demonstrates the 30 inch distance. He added that photo
4 shows the tape measure that was used to measure the distance of the landscape strip. He remarked
12 that photo 5 shows there is a lack of landscape on either side of the roadways in the vicinity of the
project. Photo 6 shows that NE 12th St. only has a short 3ft landscape strip adjacent to the planter
strip, according to him. He testified that photos 7 and 8 show the measurement of 36 inches, and
Photo 9 looks down Aberdeen St, which is east of the site. In this photo, he once again pointed out
the lack of landscaping in the area. He stated that photo 10 looks east down NE 1ih St., where there
is also no formal landscaping. Photo 11 looks north up Aberdeen St., showing the lack of sidewalks
on the street, according to him. He said that photo 12 looks at NE 16th St. (north ofthe plat), where a
total of 48 inches oflandscaping can be found (the most in the entire vicinity of the plat). Photo 13
confirms the measurement ofthe 48 inches dimension, according to him. Photo 14 is the west-side of
NE 16th St with 38 inches of planter strip, and, he noted, photo 15 is confirmation of this
18 measurement. Photo 16 is a newer subdivision in the vicinity ofNE 16th St (Monterey Ct.) and shows
19 there are sidewalks, but no landscaping, according to him.
13
14
15
16
17
Mr. Kitzes testified that the Applicant is asking for a consistent, uniform planting area. He
20 remarked that 5ft is more than ample considering what already exists in the area. Additionally, he
noted that the existing sewer from the north plat runs along the northerly edge ofthe subject property.
Included in this line are 4 sewer stubs, he added. The Applicant and developer would like to have
credit for those stubs because they are already in place, according to him. Also, he stated that there
are existing sewer stubs along NE 12th St. that were constructed during the building of another plat.
He noted that the developer wishes to get credit for all of these stubs and any connection fees that are
associated with them.
21
22
23
24
25
26
In response to the Applicant's request regarding the additional lO-ft planter strip, Rocale
Timmons stated it is a landscaping requirement that is mandatory for all new single-family lots under
Renton Municipal Code, section 4-4-070(F). This requirement was not subject to street modification
and is obligatory for all properties. She noted that the Applicant would have to request a modification
PRELIMINARY PLAT - 3
1 or a variance in order to deviate from this city standard. In response to the request regarding the
additional 8-ft planter strip, she testified that the only way the Applicant could deviate from this
2 planter strip would be approval through modification. She added that staff would argue that lack of
street improvements in the surrounding area does not support a modification from the street
modification standards, which are outlined in code section 4-6-060. She submitted the request for
street modification as exhibit 10. She concluded that the current streets do not comply with the
recently adopted street improvements and shouldn't be considered when making decisions for this
project.
3
4
5
6 Kayren Kittrick stated that if there were existing sidewalks in the subject area, the city would
require a transition from sidewalk to the required 8ft planter strips. In regard to the sewer stub
credits, she noted that the existing house on lot 8 will have a standing credit, but the other lots will
still have fees. According to her, the connection fees are not triggered until a connection is actually
7
8 made. Just because there is an existing side sewer does not mean anything is paid. She testified that
9 staff will review the sewer situation, and there is a process for granting credits. Waste water is
willing to work with the Applicant.
10
11
12
Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Rocale Timmons noted that there are existing
sidewalks to the north of the site (along Monterey Avenue), but there are no planter strips. Across
12th St. there are also sidewalks. Planning staff has no objection to switching the side of the sidewalk
to the east, according to her. She added that the Applicant can apply for street modification following
the hearing examiner's decision.
13 Phil Kitzes noted that every developer is looking for a break in today's market and a 3ft
landscape reduction would make it easier for the Applicant to sell the plat. He stated that the
14 Applicant is doing far more for the subject area than has previously been done (which he stated he has
demonstrated through the photos in exhibit 9). The Applicant would like the ability for further street
15 modifications during the future of the project, according to him. He added that nothing the Applicant
16 is asking for would affect health or safety. He testified that the Applicant appreciates staff reviewing
the sewer credit situation because it will help the Applicant sell the property.
17
18
19
Exhibits
Exhibits 1-8 listed on page 2 of the February 7, 2012 staff report, in addition to the staff report
20 itself, were admitted into evidence the public hearing. The following additional exhibits were
21 also admitted during the hearing:
22 Ex. 9:
23 Ex. 10:
24
25
Ex. 111:
16 photos submitted by the Applicant depicting surrounding road conditions.
August 2,2011 request for development standard modification from Applicant.
October 21,2011 geotechnical report
1 The geotechnical report was not listed as an exhibit in the staff report or formally admitted at hearing, but it was
26 submitted to the Examiner by staff along with the staff report and discussed during the hearing.
PRELIMINARY PLAT - 4
1
2
3
4
5
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Applicant. PK Enterprises.
2. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on February 10, 2012
6 in the City of Renton Council Chambers.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
3. Project Description. The Applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat Approval and a waiver of
street improvements for a nine lot subdivision. The subdivision is for a 1.62 acre parcel with an
existing home on proposed Lot 8. In addition to the nine lots, there will also be two tracts. One tract
will be for drainage and the other is for access. Lots will range in size from 4,762 square feet to
7,918 square feet. The proposed subdivision fronts NE 12th St and is close to the intersection ofNE
12th St and Aberdeen Ave NE. Monterey Ave NE abuts the subdivision parcel nears on its north and
south ends and the Applicant proposes to connect Monterey Ave through the approximate center of
the subdivision.
By email dated August 2, 2011 the Applicant requested a waiver of required street improvements for
the Monterey Ave extension. RMC 4-6-060(F) requires Monterey Ave to have 8 foot planting strips
on both sides of the street, 53 feet of right of way, 20 feet of pavement width and five foot wide
sidewalks on both sides. In Ex. 10, the Applicant requested five feet of "landscaping" on both sides
of the street without specifying if she was referring to the eight foot planting strips required by RMC
4-6-060(F) or the ten feet of landscaping frontage required by another code provision, RMC 4-4-
070(F)(I). The Applicant also requested a five foot sidewalk on only one side ofthe street instead of
both sides and a total of 35 feet of right of way. Finally, the Applicant requested a 20 paved street
width, which is already authorized by RMC 4-6-060(F). City staff approved the requested
modifications by letter dated August 8, 2011 (Ex. 7).
4. Applicability of Staff Waiver to Landscaping Frontage Requirements. The staff waiver2
approval, Ex. 7, was not intended to apply to the ten foot landscaping strip imposed by RMC 4-4-
070(F)(1).
24 2 Ex. 7 apparently incorrectly refers to the "waivers" as "modifications". Street improvements may be "waived" by
the process outlined in RMC 4-9-250(C )(2). Other development standards may be "modified" by the process
25 outlined in RMC 4-9-250(D). Ex. 7 did not identify what process was employed (adding further justification to the
confusion of the Applicant), but since staffwaive street improvements it is presumed the waiver process ofRMC 4-
26 9-250(C)(2) was employed.
PRELIMINARY PLAT - 5
1 At the hearing the Applicant expressed surprise that the waiver "decision" did not include waiving
2 landscaping frontage requirements. The confusion is well founded and results in part from the fact
that the Applicant failed to identify what code provisions she sought to have waived in her request for
3 waiver and the City failed to identify what improvements it was waiving in its approval. The
4 Applicant requested five foot wide "landscaping" in its waiver request (Ex. 10) and the City
responded by authorizing five foot "planter strips". In its request for landscaping modifications, the
5 Applicant was evidently requesting the five feet to encompass all landscaping for the roads, including
6 that required by both RMC 4-4-070(F)(I) (10 foot landscaping frontage) and RMC 4-6-060(F)(8 foot
planter strips) while the City was only waiving a portion of the required 8 foot planter strips. As
7 testified by Ms. Timmons, staff don't consider the 10 foot landscaping frontage requirement to be a
8 "street improvement" and RMC 4-9-250(C)(2) only allows staff to modify street improvements. It is
a debatable point whether or not landscaping street frontage requirements qualify as street
9 improvements. However, the staff s interpretation on this issue confirms that staff did not consider a
10 reduction in the 10 foot landscaping frontage requirement when it reviewed the Applicant's
11
12
modification request.
5. Modification "Decision" is Recommendation. Based upon the testimony of staff, the street
improvement waiver request, Ex. 7 and 10, is considered to be consolidated with the preliminary plat
13 application and subject to approval of the hearing examiner. The waiver "approval", Ex.7, is
14 considered to be a recommendation to the hearing examiner.
15 The staff report contradicts the finding above. The staff report notes at Finding of Fact No. 15 that
the street modification, Ex. 7, was " ... approved, on August 8, 2011 by the Development Services
16 Director ... " At hearing the Examiner asked why the appeal period for the administrative approval
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
commenced running concurrently with the appeal period for the decision on the preliminary plat
decision. As noted by the Examiner, if Ex. 7 is an approval as opposed to a recommendation, its
appeal period should expire prior to the public hearing so an appeal of the decision could be
consolidated with the hearing on the preliminary plat application. Ms. Kittridge responded that the
modification approval was actually a recommendation to the Examiner and that the decision on the
request for waiver of street improvements should be considered as consolidated with the preliminary
plat application. Ms. Kittridge's comments appear to be the only way to logically reconcile the
concurrent appeal period as well as the statement in Ex. 7 that the staff approval of the waivers only
becomes "official" when the plat is approved.
6. Adequacy of lnfrastructurelPublic Services. The project will be served by adequate
24 infrastructure and public services as follows:
25
26
A. Water and Sewer Service. Extension of an 8-inch water main will be required in the new
roadway. This will require connecting to the existing 8-inch main in Monterey to the north
PRELThITNARYPLAT-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
and connecting to the 6-inch water main in NE 12th to the south. Extension of an 8-inch
sewer main in the new roadway is required. A 6-inch sewer stub will be provided to each
lot. A certificate of water availability will be required prior to final plat approval as a
condition of approval. For sewer, there is an 8-inch sewer main in an easement adjacent to
the parcel to the west, an 8-inch sewer main in NE 12th St, and an 8-inch sewer main in
Monterey Ave NE. As conditioned, the project provides for adequate water and sewer.
During the hearing the Applicant requested credit for existing sewer stubs that serve the
property. The applicability of credits is determined by staff at the time sewer charges
become due.
B. Police and Fire Protection. Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient
resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; subject to the condition
that the Applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. A Fire Impact Fee,
based on new single-family lot with credit given for the existing single-family residence,
is required by the MDNS for the project. The fee is payable to the City as specified by the
Renton Municipal Code.
C. Drainage. Drainage has been adequately addressed through the preparation of a drainage
report that proposes storm drainage facilities that staff have determined complies with the
standards of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City
of Renton.
The existing drainage system from the site either infiltrates into the ground or is carried
downstream. Currently the property discharges westward towards NE 12th St and Lincoln
Ave NE. The runoff is then tight-lined and conveyed downhill westward, under 1-405.
Ultimately water is conveyed to the John's Creek stream system via a series of ponds and
large culverts.
The Applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report prepared by Preferred
Engineering, LLC, dated December 8, 2011. The report states that the proposed project
would be required to provide detention for the impervious areas on site. A stormwater
wetpond is proposed on the westerly side of the property in order to collect and discharge
flows per the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of
Renton. The drainage report discusses meeting the area specific flow control requirement
under Core Requirement #3. The engineer has noted that the soils will support 100%
infiltration. Individual infiltration trenches will be installed on each lot to collect roof
runoff. Installation of a detention pond and bioswale are proposed in the drainage tract.
PRELIMINARY PLAT - 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Drainage facilities shall be subject to a determination of compliance with City drainage
standards as part of the engineering review for final plat approvaL
D. Parks/Open Space. The MDNS for the project requires the Applicant to pay a Parks and
Recreation Impact fee at the time of final plat recording and the proposal includes 15,134
square feet dedicated to open space. RMC 4-2-115, which governs open space
requirements for residential development, does not have any specific requirements for
open space for residential development in the R-8 district. The impact fees and open
space dedicated by the project provides for adequate parks and open space.
E. Streets. Traffic impact fees are required as a SEP A condition to mitigate for off-street
impacts and staff review did not find a need for any additional off-site improvements other
than street frontage requirements along NE 12th, which mayor may not extend beyond the
project boundary. The proposal fails to meet to meet some street design standards for the
proposed extension of Monterey Avenue, which are addressed in the Conclusions of Law
and the conditions of approvaL As conditioned, the proposal provides for adequate streets.
7. Adverse Impacts. There are no adverse impacts associated with the proposal. As discussed in
Finding of Fact No.3, the proposal provides for adequate infrastructure and is served by adequate
14 public services. The staff report notes that there are no critical areas on-site but at the same time
appears to fmd that the site is located on an aquifer protection area. Nonetheless, the location at an
aquifer protection site just requires the filing of a fill source statement as part of construction permit
submittal and otherwise does not involve any further critical area restrictions. The steepest slopes on
15
16 the property are 15% and a geotechnical report, Ex. 11, recommends avoidance of these slopes as
17 well as other measures to provide for stable construction and adequate drainage. The
recommendations of the geotechnical report will be made a condition of approvaL No other adverse
impacts are reasonably discernible from the record and there was no testimony against the project. 18
19
20
Conclusions of Law
21 1. Authority. RMC 4-7-020(C) and 4-7-050(D)(5) provide that the Hearing Examiner shall hold
22 a hearing and issue a final decision on preliminary plat applications. RMC 4-9-250(C)(2) grants the
Community and Economic Development Administrator or hislher designee the authority to approve
23 waivers to street improvements. The waiver is classified as a Type I permit by RMC 4-8-080(G).
24 However, RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under "the highest-
25
26
number procedure". Staff testified that the street waiver request has been consolidated with the
preliminary plat application, which is classified as a Type III application by RMC 4-8-080(G).
PRELIMINARY PLAT - 8
1 Consequently, the street waiver request is also classified as a Type III application, which is subject to
2 hearing examiner approval pursuant to RMC 4-8-080(G).
3
4
5
6
2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is zoned Residential 8
dwelling units per net acre (R-8). The comprehensive plan map land use designation is Residential
Single Family.
3. Review Criteria. Chapter 4-7 RMC governs the criteria for subdivision review and e RMC 4-
9-250(C)(5) governs the criteria for street waivers. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics
and applied through corresponding conclusions of law.
7
8
9
RMC 4-7-080(B): A subdivision shall be consistent with the following principles of acceptability:
1. Legal Lots: Create legal building sites which comply with all provisions of the City Zoning Code.
10 2. Access: Establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel.
11
12
13
3. Physical Characteristics: Have suitable physical characteristics. A proposed plat may be denied
because of flood, inundation, or wetland conditions. Construction of protective improvements may be
required as a condition of approval, and such improvements shall be noted on the final plat.
4. Drainage: Make adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water
14 supplies and sanitary wastes.
15
16
4. The criterion is satisfied. The proposed lots comply with all requirements of the R-8 zoning
district as detailed by staff at page 6 of the staff report, which is adopted and incorporated by this
reference as if set forth in full. As shown on the preliminary plat map, Ex. 2, each lot will access
17 either Monterey Avenue or NE 12th St, all public streets. As noted in the Findings of Fact, there are
18 no critical areas on the property other than a Zone 2 aquifer recharge area and the steepest slopes on
the property are 15%. Consequently, the site has physical characteristics suitable for development.
19 As determined in the Finding of Fact No.6, the proposal makes adequate provision for drainage,
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
streets water and sewer.
RMC 4-7-080(1)(1): ... The Hearing Examiner shall assure conformance with the general purposes
of the Comprehensive Plan and adopted standards ...
5. The proposed preliminary play is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan as outlined
in pages 5 -6 of the staff report, which is incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full.
RMC 4-7-120(A): No plan for the replatting, subdivision, or dedication of any areas shall be
approved by the Hearing Examiner unless the streets shown therein are connected by surfaced road
or street (according to City specifications) to an existing street or highway.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -9
1 6. The internal circulation system of the subdivision connects to Monterey Avenue and NE 12th
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
st.
RMC 4-7-120(B): The location of all streets shall conform to any adopted plans for streets in the
City.
7. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any applicable street plan or grid
system that would compel the connection of the interior streets to any specific roads. However, the
internal road for the proposal, Monterey Ave., is a natural extension of the existing Monterey Avenue
and is clearly compatible with the existing street system of the vicinity.
RMC 4-7-120(C): If a subdivision is located in the area of an officially designed [sic] trail,
provisions shall be made for reservation of the right-ol-way or for easements to the City for trail
9 purposes.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
8. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any officially designated trail in the
vicinity.
RMC 4-7-130(C): A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication shall be prepared in conformance
with the following provisions:
1. Land Unsuitable for Subdivision: Land which is found to be unsuitable for subdivision includes
land with features likely to be harmful to the safety and general health of the future residents (such as
lands adversely affected by flooding, steep slopes, or rock formations). Land which the Department
or the Hearing Examiner considers inappropriate for subdivision shall not be subdivided unless
adequate safeguards are provided againstthese adverse conditions.
a. Flooding/Inundation: If any portion of the land within the boundary of a preliminary plat is
subject to flooding or inundation, that portion of the subdivision must have the approval of the State
according to chapter 86.16 RCW before the Department and the Hearing Examiner shall consider
such subdivision.
b. Steep Slopes: A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication which would result in the creation of a
lot or lots that primarily have slopes forty percent (40%) or greater as measured per RMC 4-3-
050J1a, without adequate area at lesser slopes upon which development may occur, shall not be
approved.
3. Land Clearing and Tree Retention: Shall comply with RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land
Clearing Regulations.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
4. Streams:
a. Preservation: Every reasonable effort shall be made to preserve existing streams, bodies of water,
and wetland areas.
b. Method: If a stream passes through any of the subject property, a plan shall be presented which
indicates how the stream will be preserved The methodologies used should include an overflow area,
and an attempt to minimize the disturbance of the natural channel and stream bed
c. Culverting: The piping or tunneling of water shall be discouraged and allowed only when going
under streets.
d Clean Water: Every effort shall be made to keep all streams and bodies of water clear of debris
and pollutants.
10 9. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No.4, the land is suitable for development. The property
11
12
13
14
15
16
is not designated as a floodplain and there are not streams on site.
The staff report notes that there are no "significant" trees on site and that tree retention requirements
are inapplicable. It is unclear from this information if there are any trees on site that are required to
be retained. RMC 4-11-200 defines a tree as having a caliper of 2 inches or higher and the tree
retention requirements of RMC 4-4-130 do not provide for any exceptions for trees smaller than six
inches. The project will be conditioned to require 30% of trees having a caliper of2 inches or more.
The project will be conditioned to retain 30% of the on-site trees of 2 inch caliper or greater as
required by 4-4-130(H)(1 )(b )(i).
17 RMC 4-7-140: Approval of all subdivisions located in either single family residential or multi-
18
19
20
21
family residential zones as defined in the Zoning Code shall be contingent upon the subdivider's
dedication of land or providing fees in lieu of dedication to the City, all as necessary to mitigate the
adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreation service levels. The requirements
and procedures for this mitigation shall be per the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Resolution.
10. The MDNS requires the payment of Park and Recreation Impact fees.
22 RMC 4-7-150(A): The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing
streets unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. Prior to approving a street
23
24
25
26
system that does not extend or connect, the Reviewing Official shall find that such exception shall
meet the requirements of subsection E3 of this Section. The roadway classifications shall be as
defined and designated by the Department.
11. The proposed internal street system connects the abutting ends of Monterey Avenue.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -11
1 RMC 4-7-1S0(B): All proposed street names shall be approved by the City.
As conditioned. 2 12.
3 RMC 4-7-1S0(C): Streets intersecting with existing or proposed public highways, major or
4 secondary arterials shall be held to a minimum.
5 13. There is no intersection with a public highway or major or secondary arterial.
6 RMC 4-7-1S0(D): The alignment of all streets shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works
7 Department. The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved. Street
alignment offsets of less than one hundred twenty five feet (l25~ are not desirable, but may be
approved by the Department upon a shOWing of need but only after provision of all necessary safety 8
9 measures.
10 14. The Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the street alignment. Subject to the
11
12
13
approval of requested street improved waivers as discussed further below, the project is consistent
with the requirements ofRMC 4-6-060. Note that RMC 4-6-060 does not include the requirement for
a ten foot on-site landscaping strip along the street frontage, which is required by RMC 4-4-
070(F)(1). That requirement is addressed in Conclusion of Law No. 30.
14 RMC 4-7-1S0(E):
15 1. Grid: A grid street pattern shall be used to connect existing and new development and shall be the
predominant street pattern in any subdivision permitted by this Section.
16
2. Linkages: Linkages, including streets, sidewalks, pedestrian or bike paths, shall be provided within
17 and between neighborhoods when they can create a continuous and interconnected network of roads
18 and pathways. Implementation of this requirement shall comply with Comprehensive Plan
Transportation Element Objective T-A and Policies T-9 through T-16 and Community Design
19 Element, Objective CD-M and Policies CD-50 and CD-60.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3. Exceptions:
a. The grid pattern may be adjusted to a "flexible grid" by reducing the number of linkages or the
alignment between roads, where thefollowingfactors are present on site:
i. Infeasible due to topographical/environmental constraints; and/or
ii. Substantial improvements are existing.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -12
I 4. Connections: Prior to adoption of a complete grid street plan, reasonable connections that link
existing portions of the grid system shall be made. At a minimum, stub streets shall be required
2 within subdivisions to allow future connectivity.
3
5. Alley Access: Alley access is the preferred street pattern except for properties in the Residential
4 Low Density land use designation. The Residential Low Density land use designation includes the
RC, R -1, and R -4 zones. Prior to approval of a plat without alley access, the Reviewing Official shall
5 evaluate an alley layout and determine that the use of alley(s) is not feasible ...
6 6. Alternative Configurations: Offset or loop roads are the preferred alternative configurations.
7
7. Cul-de-Sac Streets: Cul-de-sac streets may only be permitted by the Reviewing Official where due
8 to demonstrable physical constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically
9 possible.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
15. The proposed extension of Monterey Avenue fills a gap in the grid street system of the area
and connects the abutting ends of Monterey Avenue. The proposed sidewalks will connect to
sidewalks on NE 12th St. No cuI de sacs are proposed. Although alley access is encouraged, there is
no room for an alley on the proposed subdivision.
RMC 4-7-150(F): All adjacent rights-ol-way and new rights-ol-way dedicated as part of the plat,
including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and
sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee.
16. As conditioned.
RMC 4-7-150(G): Streets that may be extended in the event of future adjacent platting shall be
required to be dedicated to the plat boundary line. Extensions of greater depth than an average lot
19 shall be improved with temporary turnarounds. Dedication of a full-width boundary street shall be
20 required in certain instances to facilitate future development.
21 17. There are no further street extensions possible for the proposed subdivision.
22
23
24
25
26
RMC 4-7-170(A): Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial
to curved street lines.
18. As depicted in Ex. 2, the side lines are in conformance with the requirement quoted above.
RMC 4-7-170(B): Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private
access easement street per the requirements of the street standards.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -13
1 19. As previously determined, each lot has access to a public street or road.
2 RMC 4-7-170(C): The size, shape, and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width
3 requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of
development and use contemplated Further subdivision of lots within a plat approved through the
4 provisions of this Chapter must be consistent with the then-current applicable maximum density
5 requirement as measured within the plat as a whole.
6 20. As previously determined, the proposed lots comply with the zoning standards of the R-8
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
zone, which includes area, width and density.
RMC 4-7-170(D): Width between side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the
side lot lines intersect with the street right-ai-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent (80%) of
the required lot width except in the cases of (1) pipestem lots, which shall have a minimum width of
twenty feet (20') and (2) lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which
shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35 ').
21. As shown in Ex. 2, the requirement is satisfied.
RMC 4-7-170(E): All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-ai-way, except alleys,
shall have minimum radius offifieenfeet (15').
22. As conditioned.
RMC 4-7-190(A): Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees,
16 watercourses, and similar community assets. Such natural features should be preserved, thereby
17 adding attractiveness and value to the property.
18 23. No natural features as described above are located at the project site.
19 RMC 4-7-200(A): Unless septic tanks are specifically approved by the Public Works Department
20 and the King County Health Department, sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no
cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed
21 eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision
22 development.
23 24. As conditioned.
24 RMC 4-7-200(B): An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all
25
26
surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water flow and shall be of
sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be
designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. The drainage
PRELIMINARY PLAT -14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
system shall include detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include
detention capacity for future development of the lots. Water quality features shall also be designed to
provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat.
25. The proposal provides for adequate drainage that is in confonnance with applicable City drainage
standards as detennined in Finding of Fact No.6 (C).
RMC 4-7-200(C): The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be
designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire
Department requirements.
26. As conditioned.
9 RMC 4-7-200(D): All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground Any
utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the
10 planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all
11
12
13
14
service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and
approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the
maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department.
27. As conditioned.
RMC 4-7-200(E): Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic
15 utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line
16 by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley
improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of
17
18
19
20
trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to
bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider
shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final
ground elevation and capped The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the
subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certifY to the City that it is properly installed
As conditioned. 21 28.
22 RMC 4-7-210:
23
24
25
26
A. MONUMENTS:
Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling corner of
the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department. All surveys
shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -15
1 B. SURVEY.
2 All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards.
3
4
5
6
7
C. STREET SIGNS:
The subdivider shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision.
29. As conditioned.
RMC 4-9-2S0(C)(S): Decision Criteriafor Waivers of Street Improvements: Reasonable
8 justification shall include but not be limited to the following:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
a. Required street improvements will alter an existing wetlands or stream, or have a
negative impact on a shoreline's area.
b. Existing steep topography would make required street improvements infeasible.
c. Required street improvements would have a negative impact on other properties, such as
restricting available access.
d There are no similar improvements in the vicinity and there is little likelihood that the
improvements will be needed or required in the next ten (10) years.
e. In no case shall a waiver be granted unless it is shown that there will be no detrimental
effect on the public health, safety or welfare if the improvements are not installed, and that
the improvements are not needed for current or future development.
30. The street improvement waivers requested for planter strips, right of way width, and
sidewalks identified in the fmal paragraph of Finding of Fact No. 3 are approved as consistent
with the criteria quoted above. Specifically, the location of the existing home and the alignment
of the abutting portions of Monterey Avenue, the low traffic counts cited in the staff "approval"
(Ex. 7) and the limited available space for subdivision on the western side of the subject parcel
justify the requested modifications under RMC 4-9-250(C)(5)(b)(note that "topographic"
considerations are construed to include the shape and size of the subdivision parcel).
As determined in Finding of Fact No.4, the waiver approval of "Ex. 7" does not include any
authorization to waive the 10 foot landscape frontage requirement of RMC 4-4-070(F)(l). There
is insufficient information in the record to justify a waiver of the 10 foot landscape requirement.
Apparently in an attempt to acquire a modification to this requirement, the Applicant provided
extensive testimony on the landscaping provided along the frontage and within planter strips of
PRELIMINARY PLAT -16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
other streets in the vicinity. The Applicant appears3 to have been trying to argue that a waiver to
the 10 foot requirement is justified under RMC 4-9-250(C)(5)(d), which authorizes a waiver
when "there are no similar improvements in the vicinity and there is little likelihood that the
improvements will be needed or required in the next ten (10) years."
It is debatable whether the landscaping requirement is a street improvement requirement that can
be waived by RMC 4-9-250(C). Even ifRMC 4-9-250(C)(5)(d) does apply, it is not satisfied in
this case. The Applicant may have established that there is no similar landscaping in the vicinity,
but the criterion also requires that "there is little likelihood that the improvements will be needed
or required in the next ten (10) years." In adopting the 10 foot landscaping requirement, the City
Council has made a legislative determination that the landscaping is needed to mitigate aesthetic
impacts now. Given the extensive case law prohibiting "roads to nowhere" and the like it is
fairly clear that the "need" standard was designed to avoid situations in which developers are
required to construct road, sidewalk, trail or drainage facility stubs that are not needed now and
depend upon future connections to have any functionality while there is no future connection
anticipated for the foreseeable future. See, e.g. Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. App. 543 (1998).
The 10 foot landscaping requirement is not dependent upon the existence of landscaping in other
parts of the vicinity to enhance its functionality. The landscaping is needed now to mitigate
against aesthetic impacts and for that reason the presence of landscaping in the vicinity is
irrelevant to a waiver determination.
As noted in Finding of Fact No.4, staffs review of the request for street improvement waivers
didn't include a waiver of the ten foot landscaping strip. It is also unclear from the record
whether topographical constraints would justify any such waiver, since the landscaping is
required on the lots themselves and presumably wouldn't have any significant impact on
development potential given that the landscaping could be placed within the 15 foot front yard
setbacks required in the R-8 zone. The denial ofthe Applicant's request for additional waiver of
street improvement beyond the Ex. 7 staff "approval" is denied without prejudice and the
Applicant is free to request the waiver/modification/variance (whichever applies)
administratively after the issuance of this decision. Any further reduction in landscaping
requirements authorized by staff will be considered within the scope of approval of this decision
and no plat alteration subject to examiner approval will be necessary to accommodate the added
reduction. Nothing in this decision shall be construed as dictating what process (variance,
modification or waiver), if any, is available to consider the reduction in landscaping requested by
the Applicant.
DECISION
25 3 To the extent that the Applicant is requesting a further reduction in the 8 foot planter strips required by RMC 4-6-
060(F), the same considerations apply and further reduction is not justified by the absence of similar landscaping in
26 the vicinity.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -17
1 The proposed preliminary plat is approved and the request for waivers of street improvements is
2 approved to the extent authorized in Exhibit 7, subject to the following conditions:
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1. The Applicant shall comply with the three mitigation measures issued as part of the
Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated January 17,2012.
2. The Applicant shall place a covenant on the face of the short plat specifying orientation
for the existing residence on proposed Lot 8. The existing residence shall be oriented
west with a front yard along Monterey Ave NE.
3. The Applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and all required inspections for the
removal of the existing storage shed prior to Final Plat recording.
4. The Applicant shall submit a revised site, roadway and landscape plan, depicting a 10-
foot wide on-site landscape strip and the 5-foot modified right-of-way planter strips as
outlined in Ex. 7 and will incorporate any other variances/modifications/waivers
authorized by staff. The [mal detailed site, roadway and landscape plans shall be
submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final plat
approval. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 30 the Applicant may request an
additional variance/modification/waiver from staff to the landscape requirements if it so
chooses and any staff approved reductions in landscaping shall be considered within the
scope of approval of this decision.
5. The Applicant may choose to place the Monterey Avenue sidewalk required in Ex. 7 on
either side of Monterey Avenue.
6. The Applicant shall acquire a certificate of water availability prior to final plat approval.
7. The proposal shall be subject to the recommendations of the geotechnical report, Ex. 11.
8. The subdivision shall retain 30% of on-site trees of 2 inch caliper or greater as required
by RMC 4-4-130(H)(1 )(b )(i).
9. All adjacent rights·of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, including
streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and
sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards unless a waiver is
granted by this decision or administratively approved by staff as authorized by the Renton
Municipal Code.
10. All lot comers at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have
minimum radius of fifteen feet (15').
11. Sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no cost to the City and designed in
accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each
lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development.
12. The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed
and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire
Department requirements.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
13. All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Those utilities
to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service connections,
as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior
to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance
and operation of utilities as specified by the Department.
14. Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic utilities
are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot
line by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including
sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve
any building. The cost of trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well
as easements therefore required to bring service to the development shall be borne by the
developer and/or land owner. The subdivider shall be responsible only for conduit to
serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and
capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the subdivider
and shall inspect the conduit and certifY to the City that it is properly installed.
15. Monuments, markers and signs shall be installed as required by RMC 4-7-210.
16. All proposed street names shall be approved by the City.
DATED this 28th day of February, 2012.
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
RMC 4-8-110(E)(9) provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to
the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-11 0(E)(9) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision
to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A
request for reconsideration to the hearing e examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal
period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(8) and RMC 4-8-100(G)(4). A new fourteen (14) day
appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information
regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall-i h
floor, (425) 430-6510.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Affected property owners may request a change In valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
PRELIMINARY PLAT -20