The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-03-004 i r CITY OF RENTON PLANNING / BUILDING / PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Date: November 16, 2006 To: City Clerk's Office . From: Holly Graber Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. ' Project Name: Bales Annexation LUA (file) Number: LUA-03-004, A, R, ECF Cross-References: AKA's: �, Project Manager: Don Erickson Acceptance Date: January 15, 2003 � Applicant: Steve Beck Owner: various & Irvin Leifer Contact: City of Renton - Don Erickson ° PID Number: 142305-9068, 9065, 9064, 9070 & 9094 � ERC Approval Date: February 4, 2003 #� ERC Appeal Date: February 24, 2003 Administrative Denial: Appeal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: #" Date Appealed to�HEX: � By Whom: �, HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: � By Whom: Council, Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: ANNEXATION (ELECTION METHOD) & PREZONE (R-5) OF 8.5Z ACRES W OF 152ND AVE SE BTWN NE 4TH ST AND SE 180TH ST. CURRENT KING COUNTY ZONING IS R-5 Location: �� south of NE 4th St by 152"d Ave SE ;� � Comments: ERC approval Februay 4, 2003. September 16, 2003 residents failed to approve the ballot issue. Januar 27, 2004 t�e Environmental Review Committee a roved an Addendum. !' � �-- _;,_ _. . i CITY OF 1zENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: � May 6,2004 TO: Kathy Keolker-W�ler,Mayor L�� ,`�� FROM: Alex Pietsch,Admmistrator SUBJECT: � Bales Annexation Certification Requirements Pursuant to RCW 35A.14.700 cities are required to submit a certificate to the Office of Financial Management after an annexation becomes effective. The"certificate"includes three copies of the final ordinance adopting an annexation, three copies of a map on 8 '/z" X 11" paper showing the annexation boundaries and the outline of the former city limits, and, the original, handwritten . Special Population Census Sheets used to enumerate the population and housing of the annexed area. The mayor of the annexing city must sign the Summary She�t. Until the annexations are certified by OFM, population in annexed areas is not considered for determining the population of cities and towns, and hence is not used for revenue distribution. We conduct a Special Population Census for all annexations a,pproved by Council and ado�ted by - ordinance. As a result, in the future we will need your signature on the Census Summary Sheet � - , for annexations approved by Council and adopted by ordinance before we can submit them to OFM. cc: Rebecca Lind Don Erickson I:uVIy Documents�mayor memo.doc\cor � ; t�;� - ---� - ;: _ '�__,�, CIT�',.. .-.D�' 12E1�T'�ON „u Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning K t6y Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor Aleg Pietsch,Administrato�' May 6, 2004 . . Office of Firiancial Management . Forecasting Division - 450 Insuranee Building . PO Box 43113 Olympia,WA 9$504-3113 • SUBJECT: BALES ANNEXATION SPECIAL POPULATION CENSUS . Dear SirLMadam:` ' � . Enclosed please find three copies of the final;ordmance containing the legal description`of tlie ' Bales Annexation, three copies of;a map.clearly showing the annexed area.and existirig city limits on 8-iiz"x 11"paper, and the original haridwritteri Special_Populatiqn Census Sheet used to - enumerated the population and housing of the annexed area. y . , . Please contact Don Erickson, Senior Planner;at 425-430-6581 if you liave any questioris about � - these materials. � - . �. ,. , Sincerely,.. , . ; , c�/ . - . . � � ° ' Rebecca Lind ; Planning Manager/Strategic Pl'anning :. ` AttacHments ' � . cc: Don Erickson � : � 1055 South Grady ay-Renton,Washington 98055 � � 1�1 g � 1'�! �This paper contains 50%recyded material,30%post consumer A H E A D O F T H E C U R V E Z r .. . „ ��gTATg o� -. � r � State of Washington � �� ,p,� Oy �y'L 188b a . � AliTl\TEXATIOl\T CE1ZT'IFI�CATE Office of Financial Management,Forecasting Division,450 Insurance Building,PO Box 43113,Olympia,WA 98504-3113 IMPOR'I'ANT: The following documents must be attached with this certificate(RCW 35.13.260 and 35A.14.700): 1. 'E'hree copies of the final ordinance containing the legal description of the annexed area; 2. Three copies of a map cleariy showing annexed area and existing city limits on an 8%z"xl l"or an 8'/z"x14"size paper. Outline the annexation boundaries in red;outline former city limits in green. Maps should conform to acceptable engineering standards, including directional arrow,scale,street designations,rivers,and other relevant physical characteristics;and, 3. The original,handwritten Special Population Census Sheets used to enumerate the population and housing of the annexed area and all census summary sheets. Census procedures and definitions must follow the Office of Financial Management's(OFM) . Enumerator's Manual. Duplicate copies of the census are not needed. Please contact OFM for census manuals and forms at (360)902-0597 or(360)902-0599. City/7'own Renton county King Name of the Annexation(if any) g a 1 e s Ordinance Number 5064 Amending Ordinance Number(if applicable) Date Passed Ma rch l 5. 2004 Date Passed Date Published M�r�h lg 9 ��4 Date Published Ordinance Effective Date ��1a rch 24. 2004 Ordinance Effective Date Annexation Effective Date Ma rch 24, 2��4 Annexatton Effective Date Sfatute(s)Authorizing Annexation: RCW 34 A.14.Q15 . Was a boundary or AnnexaEion Review Hearing Required? Yes No X If yes,date of hearing Annexation Area(in acres) $,52 Population and Housing Census: Housing Units 5 Occupied Housing Units 5 Population 13 �,5� CER �ICA�TON: I hereby cert:fy that,to effect the above annexation,all legal requirements have been satisfied,and that ,��1�`. �'' � the data set forth in this certificate,including the attached documents,are true and correct. .• "�;-• �•,� : i� ��t�.i.,;� �CI+`T't,Y SEAL]� ` �,r (Mayor) � ''`-'�� Date 7"� / �'��.y ,.� :� � Kat y o er— ee er � �• + Atfest:(Cify/Tawn Clerk) x��°j'j�jJj(�(�� /�yiV Date .�—�J- Q�)� Bonnie I. Walton Cit Clerk , _.. . . _ , . _ OFFICE OF'FINl�IVCIAL MANAGEIvIENT IZECORD Date Received ': -Date Approved Stkfe Certifying Official OFM Fi1e.Number (White) Office of Financial Management No Carbon Paper Needed (Canary) Department of Transportarion Do Not Separate Form (Pink) Return to City/Town Return All Three Copies f � � 'ii _ � _ , , / - SPECIAL POPULATIOIV CENSUS SUMMARY SHEET Year: �pa� Total Population: S City/Town: ��.,,,-t o-�.� (Lines 8+14) ��) �2) �3) �4) �5) �s) �) � Total Vacant Occupied Pop Per Percent Percent Units Per Housing Housing Housing Occ. HU Occupied Vacant Structure Units Units ��}�2� Population (4)/(3) (3�(1) �2��) 1. 1-Unit Structures �� O o 2. 2-Unit Structures 3. 3-Unit Structures 4. 4-Unit Structures � 5. 5 or More Units 6. Mobile Homes 7. Special** 8. 7otals � f7 ,� /3 �. 6 /o o �, "Special Housing: Unusual living quarters not generally considered a housing unit(e.g.,boats,boxcars,tents,etc.). Only counted when occupied by person(s)meeting"resident"criteria. Specify type of housing in comments section below. Group Quarters Number of Facilities Population 9. Nursing/Convalescent Homes 10. College Dormitories 11. Mental/Correctionallnstitutions 12. Military Installations(e.g. barracks, BEQ) 13. Other(Specify): 14. Total Group Quarters � �j Comments: Census Administrator or Contact Person: Name: �LI �f�ICIG.S�YJ/ �� . Si ned: ��e'f�'c�il��b�Q�,5� �'o y cDI✓�P Tkp�/�`��g ��rh/� ayor� thy Keolker Wrneeler��z�V� t% �/ Telephone#: gar"j -.¢�j�fo�� Attest: � . �'��7 ( ityRownClerkorCensusAdministrator (Date) DayslHours of Operation: ��Oill)�$;�� lyl-F ' Bonnie I. Walton, Cit Clerk Office of Financial Management State of Washington Revised 2/94 . ., ti � x��.� x�.,. j � \ , � � . ,.. � \ � x,�n %�x,: x,� ,� �. .., � .` l �\ � � �. �--_. .,a. , \ � x,�, x��. x, \ � »�` �'�'+ �`�` `\ \ �� , � `� � \M tros9 �e0.N V�� ..`� � .— .� % % l � �\ "'1 ua�+ �� '�•,� �°4 � � " xn K � � �•\\�,' `} . '�` '•i�5� '�`t.. ,� ` _ � � � ia.m na�� 1 , :1,� � Y„ -� � � . •,, � x�ma �i u�l 1 ..i,l z � 1,, \ \ � � �%assx�eau X�aata x»ras �`1 � •, � \ `, ` 1 �-- ��5� � x,, ,�.o 1 x�aa� x�ea �l` \ .� \ ` � � �� x m.r � �eaa x a+.n x � �� {�` l_-. � � 1 � ea.Xn x� 'r�c O �ues l ` xiva 'jI�' �� \ �` \ `�`� 1 � \ � I ` � „ier.a xia.i� �, nxaa `^ \ �,/�{ im3a � 1 � �,_..�=.��. ��``� `�..- �\. �_.�� ` x � m.ra �J ' z j-,xie .-'-rr= � � - r-'_ �„ .:s�� -�.�.. _,,,_ � � ro // +-_"' \� 4\ C\ (( ix.n ux�a �l'�� ,`� �� ! f �� X Xi'46�1��Y160.T! �E6L Niil� _ l E.T ` ,__.... l� ` � � `�` ~`� ;�z+.w t�. . . z� xwm x K�a.v 'S�u+ Kar.0\ 'Seas} x aan xm_s'«� �a. ��,� �'� l t , l� �.`�.)� 'E'7:- i x� :F'" '6 �`� `� a7 i'�" `f� �� ? x �, r( �` % � +r\' � �• � l. �. � . j ' � x ` �1! i asn� �i 1\ � . ,i .� V �� r.0 l � � � �� i I � t`� a �h.. uvi � �aa `'., +• � � �-._ �. y�v ��jy� "r '"\ � It.! a>�> ��...,,J�� ' \ a ,�� \ �\ '\ � :� �,Ct�j . 5 �'�, %� `y�l KE0. ` �,'1 %1a11t '�� t .,,, � ".�1\7 xt ..` .'J x ]0 �M1� l.� xiM. 1 �` t � Y T . ♦� �`' t � ` Y �. ,� �a _ �i • �+ix 1 �1 ; �i aa6 \ '�� " x�wi � ��i� � 7 �:�, �i xiaw x s�.a 1l \r � 1�� \'� ,u.. � � .:.y ��- `x �: .p'� %,aa '. . ` ` �x •� i t `•_..� x ixise �( . t�. `�, �, ! � � " "''"�__'` "� l 1` � , �\ " r �i p c "� '„�,` a* xr t t y � x�w.0 x x�a.ae � xiu.0 �, �� r•�, s 'ix � �� t t�,c " w r.h� ` � `� '\� Fi � �t�'' ?�i r YXy � ��;y.tc� � � . � ^ a� �'�, `\ � 6�''�r. � ��` �'G1 `"�yi„�. �r"�21�.�1t� x,x,o xna�+ x,er. ...� .�.,,_-�S'�,1 " � \ �a�i ,�� i�'k �] Li t'�f�iMAs `"T�, �'"��.'r ��3._ ' ' � ��, xiuw `� �'i.�" ��. �` r.�� z} i �! t . �� xiw� --...,'_...__...-.��„`` x,wn � t � `'\ x y x} S� :y� F .�� i,a�i „iu�a .��` .. `��\ ~ �,`. '•:}. � _ ,'� • , "" _' �;. , '�d' „ � '`� '� � L,- " ' `rw ..i�, x�. x ...x ,� , ` \` , i � ■' �e ` �� `� � x,.�,. �.�,.\ � �� .1 � -� �\. `� +u \. � � ` O iazro �� `�`�..._ � - � c- �` 7 � \ \ � � x�aas JI x�sa.�a\ y x . 1� x�axei `�� \\ � x x�a.m � �' � � xu�.n �� xuxaa . Q u nx Rio�.a � � � �u�.« ��t�/ �-... µ 10. ei.9� �t01.M � �,.,---. � \ \ ' 4 � j x,.�ao �\ __ l\ �'"" \ � ianK l� �,�1 � x � '� �s..��..� x \ / �, x�s i�a♦r x xw.:� X �� xsa xwr x�aui %a raxaF x�suu xsan :y_�;;1 �t C��}�S�� BC�t�.r�7 1"l��XG�IO� VI�� 1mintervalContour d �� 6�d Exhibit H: Topography Map —� - -- Existing City Limits 1 ,�, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strntcgic Pianniag PfO�?OS6CI ACICIEXatif?fi 1 ; ��QQ '� Alex Pic�sch,Administramr s�y��¢�� ? �o��Rog,�;o Boundary T I G APrit 2fl63 , :.� - ' ,� �� _ <TATp ��E /p �°� Certification of Annexations: ^4 • l J ��"{� Ji �� '� � Procedures "r �y �'�ta3u a Office of Financial Management Assistance OFM will assist you in meeting annexation certification requirements. It is to your advantage to inform OFM of forthcoming annexations that contain large populations (1,000 or more), so the timing of the census can be arranged to meet quarterly filing deadlines. OFM will provide manuals and census forms for all annexation censuses, and census administrator and enumerator training for large auiexation censuses. To schedule a training session, please contact Lawrence Weisser at (360) 902-0589 (email: lawrence.weisser@ofin.wa.gov). A request for training should be received at least a week in advance of the intended training date. OFM conducts Census Admuustrator Training in Febniary of each year. Any city intending to annex areas with large populations may send a representative to the training session. Cities should call or send a notice in advance to participate in the trauung. The Census Adininistrator's Training Manual, Enumerator's Training Manual, and the Census Tabulation Manual are available upon request. Please contact Diana Brunink at (360) 902-0597 or the main reception desk at(360) 902-0599.�These manuals will be added to the website as time allows. Mail all the annexation documents to: Office of Financial Management � Forecasting Division 450 Insurance Building PO Box 43113 , Olympia, WA 98504-3113 Annexation Filing Requirements The following documents must be included with three copies of the annexation certificate (RCW 35.13.260 and 35A.14.700): 1. Three copies of the final ordinance containing the legal description of the annexed area; 2. Three copies of a map clearly showing annexed area and existing city limits on an 8'IZxI l"or an 8I'2x14" size paper. Outline the annexation boundaries in red; outline former city limits in green. Maps should conform to acceptable engineering standards, including directional arrow, scale, street designations,rivers,and other relevant�physical characteristics; and, 1 C � ' �\ � ��__ 3. The oYiginal, handwritten Special Population Census Sheets used to enumerate the population and housing of the annexed area and all census summary sheets. Census procedures and definitions must follow the Office of Financial Management's(OFN�Enumerator's Manual. Duplicate copies of the census are not needed. Verification of Annexation Boundaries City boundaries must be recorded accurately. Municipal boundaries are used in the collection and distribution of revenues and in the administration of state, local and federal programs. Nearly 300 municipal annexations are now certified by the Office of Financial Management and recorded by the Washington State Department of Transportation each year. In the past, many of the annexation boundary descriptions had been diffcult to decipher, incomplete, and sometimes incorrect. Not infrequently, incorporated areas have been included in the proposed annexation area. Sometimes the annexation description includes an area that is in another city. It is difficult and time con��ming to correct these situations. Our goal is to obtain clear, concise, and accurate boundary descriptions that are easy to plot. Annexations are now sent to the Cartographic Division at the Department of Transportation (DOT)for verification prior to approval and certification by the Offzce of Financial Management (OFM). Boundary description verification by the Depariment of Transportation usually adds one to two weeks to the certification process. This period may be longer due to a large number of annexations submitted toward the end of each filing period,or due to problems in deciphering the annexation boundary description. Please plan for the additional delay when submitting annexations for approval and certification. This is particularly true for annexations that contain sizable populations. Delays in processing these annexations may result in a loss of revenues anticipated by the city. When large populations are involved,it is advisable to contact OFM staff and submit a copy of the legal boundary description and map in advance of submitting the completed certificate, census and other required information. This will allow an early identification and resolution of boundary description problems. With assistance from DOT's cartographic staff, OFM is developing a guide to writing clear, concise, and accurate legal definitions for annexation boundaries. Until this guide is complete, the cartographic staff have several suggestions that will assist cities in preparing legal descriptions that can be readily plotted,verified and processed. Suggestions for Preparing Legal Descriptions 1. Once a boundary description is written and typed and ready to be submitted for consideration to the city council or the electorate, have someone other than the person who wrote the description plot it on a map as it is written. This confimis that the description is written correctly and there is sufficient information to make it possible to plot. This boundary description—not the accompanying map—is.the legal definition of the property annexed. 2. Documents needed to interpret and plot the annexation boundary description must be copied and accompany the annexation. For example, the portion of the boundary descrip�ion 2 . 1 shown below is legal, but cannot be used by Department of Transportation staff or anyone without access to the quoted documents stored in King County. "And also lots 1, 2, and 3 of King County Short Plat No. 880080 recorded under King County Recording No. 811040550, said short plat being a portion of tract 4,block 4, Terrace Park 10 acre tracts. According to the plat recorded in Volume 15 of Plats page 56 Records of King County." Supplemental documents should be provided in all of the following circuir�stances: • If tax lots or plats are used in boundary descriptions, include a copy of the plat map or other needed documents with the annexation. • If the boundary follows a circuitous right of way,include a copy of the right of way plan map. • If long abandoned rights of ways are followed,include a copy of the plan,map or right of way plan. "Following the East right of way of the Oregon Washington Rail&Navigation Co.abandon in 1897." is not sufficient informatiorr—nor is a rail right of way description which has not.been updated since the Oregon Washington Rail and Navigation Co. became a part of Union Pacific � Raikoad. . • If inean high or mean low water marks are used in a description, provide clear maps and sources. 3. Whenever possible—boundaries should be described in terms of • A true point of beguuiuig with bearings and distances, • Portions of sections or lines within sections,and • Readily lrnown features, such as "the North right of way line of 1415` Street to the East right of way line of 53`d Avenue. 4. Tie the point of beginning to readily known points such as quarter comers, intersections or intersecting rights of ways of major streets. Do not start a description on a tax lot, government lot,or Donation Land Claim (DLC) line or corner. If possible avoid using g�vernment lots anywhere in the annexation description. Government lots are usually difficult to plot. 5. Spell out words. Abbreviations slow the description reading and calculation process. 6. Do not define an annexation boundary by exclusion. That is, do mt write a description that talces in everything, then excludes in small portions almost everything. Describe what is being annexed,not what is not being annexed,unless the description of the exclusion is shorter than that of the area being included. 3 . , t� Census Requirements The purpose of an annexation census is to enumerate all residential housing units and residents in the annexed territory. The count of population in annexed territory is conducted exactly the same way as in a standard city or town census. Annexations may include no residences, a few houses, or a.large population. Regardless of size, cities and towns are required to file all annexations with the Office of Financial Management(OFN� for certification. Until the annexations are certified by OFM, population in annexed areas is not considered for determining the population of cities and towns, and hence are not used for revenue distribution. � The accuracy and completeness of population and housing count in an annexation census is as important as in any standard special city censuses. Annexed population must be accurately determined because it impacts the revenue distribution to all cities and towns. Census procedures must meet the certification requirements set forth by OFM. These procedures are outlined in the Enumerator's Manual, which include: • Complete systematic canvass of the census area by block; • Contacting each household and listing the names of all persons meeting the census definition of resident; • A listing of all housing units by structure type,both occupied and vacant;and • Summary tabularion of population by siructure type. Timing of the Annexation Census and Meeting Filing Deadlines An annexation census should be conducted within 30 days of the effective date of the annexation. Census mapping and prenaration mav be�in prior to the annexation's effective date but actual enumeration should not be�in until the annexed uarcel officiallv becomes a uart of the citv. Cities often want to begin the enumeration early, sometimes before all county and city legal processing requirements have been completed. OFM will allow some cities to begin the enumeration a week or two prior to the annexation's effective date if all legal annexation requirements are completed. This is usually done when a quarterly filing deadline is approaching and there is a large population to be enumerated. Enumeration in an annexed area prior to the effective date of the annexation should be pre-approved by OFM. All censuses are office checked. Field checks are also done by OFM if considered necessary. On the basis of approved annexation censuses, OFM makes a quarterly adjustment of city populations for state revenue distributions. Any problems found in the census and other documentation need to be resolved prior to the certification. To allow sufficient time for processing,OFM must receive the completed census forms and other annexation documentation by the filing deadlines shown below. Please note that any annexations filed after the recommended dates may not get processed in the same quarterly period. Such annexations will be processed in the next quarterly period. 4 � ' � � ' ,� . __ ' � � � Date Annexation Documents Need to be Received by OFM For Processing by End of Quarterly Annexation Period Population in Annexed Area Quarterly Annexation Period 0-99 100—�499 500-2,499 2,500^4,999 5,000+ People People People People People Start Filinq Date* September 1 — November 30 November 23 November 15 November 1 November 1 October 15 December 1 — February 28 February 21 February 15 February 1 February 1 January 15 March 1 — May 31 May 24 May 15 May 1 Call OFM Call OFM June 1 — August 31 August 24 August 15 August 1 August 1 July 15 *Note: The actual filing date is the last working day of the indicated month. Please avoid submitting annexations with a population of 2,500 or more for the May 31 filing date. Population staff are developing annual April 1 population estimates from April through June and annexations with large populations mav not be processed in time for the May 31 filin�. Please plan accordingly. Uncooperative Residents and Other Enumeration Problems Annexation areas may contain uncooperative persons who are unhappy about becoming a part of the city. In such cases, uncooperative residents make the enumeration more difficult by refusing to provide required census information. Some of the hostility may be managed by carefully worded census publicity and enumerator training. The name and the number of persons living in an uncooperative household may often be - obtained from a neighbor. Sometimes it is only possible to obtain the number of persons living in the house from the neighbors (not the names). This is permissible for a limited number of houses. Obtaining the names of residents is a census control tool and the accuracy of the census is very important. For the census to be considered acceptable, names must be obtained for the residents in at least 95 percent of the occupied housing. In addition, supplemental census information, entered on the census schedules, must indicate the source of the information obtained about the number of individuals in the uncooperative household. This supplemental information is subject to verification by OFM. Large aparirnent complexes with difficult to contact residents and uncooperarive apartment managers may also create count problems. Often, there is very little time to resolve unanticipated problems,given quarterly filing deadlines. It is advisable to contact the managers of large apartments in advance of the enumeration to identify problems. It is sometunes necessary to contact the owner(s) of an apartment building to secure the manager's cooperation. All suitable methods have to be utilized to get first-hand information from difficult to contact residents, whether in large aparlment complexes or in houses. If a telephone notice is left at the door, the telephone needs to be attended by the staff or some other arrangements, like voice-mail or answering machine,have to be made for use by those residents who return home late. 5 . : _ _-- ----. . --- -- . . --- - - --��,1 - � :'r'- _ � �� N ------ �i. � _ �- _ ;� .. Planning/Building%Pub.�icWorks.11epartment � Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor �iregg Zimmerman P E.,Adminisfrator � ' LONG RANGE PLANNING �Marcfi 31,20Q4 . . . 6�� , ._ � � . . �� SiJBJECT: ADDRESS.CHANGES AT.$ALES ANIV�XATION _ ':; E _�_....,_n:_z....._.�.. ._.,.,.;�,� TO WHOM.TT MAY CONC�RN; .. , . . . . ,:. Please nate the following address chang�es required b�`ihe:recent Bales a�inexation:. , � . OLID. NEW PARCEL# , . . Bales Annexatio�n � � > � 15221 SE 128. ,Sirest' ' 6135 NE 4 Str�et. 1423059094 � 15217 SE 128�' Street . 6129 N� 4�`�treet -. 14230v9065 � Unknown �. : 61:23 NE 4�'Street 142305'9068 15325 SE )28�' Streef � 62OZ NE 4�' Street � 14�3059064 � 15311 SE 128th Steet� � 6201 NE 4�';Streef , 142�059070 : Sin � ely, , � ran Conkliri � .:: .. � . : . , ;... . Development Services Representative . _ Developmei�t Servxces Division � • � � , Telephorie: 425-430-7276 : • , . . . � : #l:utilltr : � . � 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 � � � � � �_ �This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%past consumer A H E A D O F T H E C U R V E • • I � • � � � , � _ -� . - 1 - - ' • � - I - I r - , � - � - - - -- I - - - � - - - - � - y t § � l ;=� _- j..^ _ - _ - - - _ - _ �� •:� � � . -_" - - - r' ' - .-_. .. - _'.. ' . : _ - _- _ - � -- _ � _:4 � � - � � ' ., _ , . - � _ �Y � __ ._ -� _ _ _ . ' ��-'? � -_ � �� s � � • ► : . - ' - . • � � � - � � ^ . .... .....�::::::::::::::::::::;::::::�>;:::::�:::>; . , . ��:;::::<:::::.::::;:: J � . • „ �� 11 \ ,' .., - .— ~ ::, - ,_ CIT� DF RENTON „u . Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Kathy Keolker-Wheeter,.l�ayor Ale%Pietsch,Administrafor March 10,2004 � Steve Beck . . 4735 NE 4`�Street Renton,WA 98059 - SUBJECT: BALES ANNEXATION SPECIAL ELECTION COSTS,LUA-03-004 Dear Steve, We have finally received the billing for the Bales-Special Electiori last September 16`�. Whereas � King County Records,Elections and Licensing Services had previously told us to estimate costs' - at up fo$1,SQ0 the allocated amount for this annexation was only$54:61. Pursuant to your agreeing to pay tlie election.costs for this special annexation election please • remit a check made out to the City of Renton�for the amount of$54.61.. � We anticipate first reading of the annexation and zoning ordinances for the Bales Annexation on ' March 15,2004: Please call,if you have any`questions. T can be.reached at 425-430-6581 during normal tiusiness hours. Sincerely, r . - . � .. . . Donald.K.Erickson,AICP ' Senior Plariner/Strategic Planning . � cc: Victoria Runkle �iiEBid-"si=n�cir�nexatieitskB��eelrL�re£}eeEioa�esEs.�seEeer R t'i 1�I 1 O 1`7 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 �Thispapercontains50%recycledmaterial,30%postconsumer . AHEAD OF TFIE CbRVE , 'i � �' ; - ' APPORTIONMENT OF ELECTION EXPENSE FOR PRIMARY ELECTION HELD 1N K1NG COUNTY, WASHINGTON ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2003 � Sum of Registered Voters for all participating jurisdictions/districts . 4,873,045 COSTS: Polling Places $60,215.00 Election Officials (poll workers) $411,858.03 Extra help $259,685.80 Election Support Section $642,718.00 Administration $69,471.00 Advertising $21,120.63 Printing $419,25�.�49 Postage and Mailing Service $200,909.83 Transportation $12,853.34 Supplies,repairs, &miscellaneous $7,676.65 SUBTOTAL ELECTION COSTS $2,105,758.77 County Support $94,689.00 System Services $73,503.39 Capital Cost Recovery $287,948.00 SUBTOTAL OVERHEAD $456,140.39 Minimum Fee Subtraction ($2,200.00) ELECTION COSTS TO BE ALLOCATED $2,559,699.16 Costs Apportioned t Bale Anne -City of Renton Registere oters: 9 Percentage Factor: .0000018 Polling Places $ 0.11 Election Officials(poll workers) $ 0.74 Extra help $ 0.47 Election Support Section $ 1.16 Administration $ 0.13 Advertising $ 0.04 Printing $ 0.75 Postage and Mailing Service $ 036 Transportation $ 0.02 Supplies,repairs, &miscellaneous $ 0.01 SUBTOTAL ELECTION COSTS $ 3.79 County Support $ 0.17 System Services $ 0.13 Capital Cost Recovery $ 0.52 SUBTOTAL OVERHEAD $ 0•82 Minimum Fee Subtraction $ 0.00 ELECTION COSTS ALLOCATED $ 4.61 Minimum Fee � Total Election Cost Allocation $ 54.61 L�: �on �r�'ckso� ti�Y o City of Renton � ei �- � DEPARTMENT OF � � ` � ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, '`��N��'� NEIGHBORHOODS, and STRATEGIC PLANNING Dafe• 03/10/2004 Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 TO: MaryAnn Anthony's Office FROIVI: Don Erickson, AICP City Attorney Project Manager Phorre; (425) 255-8678 Phone: (425) 430-6581 Fax Phone: (425) 255-5474 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 SUBJEC7": Bales Annexation Ordinance Numher of pages including cover sheet 3 and Bales R-1 Prezone Ord. REMARPCS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ Reply ❑ Please � For your be mailed ASAP Comment review Hi Mary Ann, Attached on the initialed memorandums showing that I have reviewed and approved the two ordinances for the Bales Annexation. Thank you for your help in getting it finally all straightened out. Don ��11 LVt�. Ahead of the curve � , �. :�� - ; � � , � . . : CITY 7F .�RENTO.N : , . �,�y . �. _ . � ,� Off ce of the.City Attorney .: � Kathy Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor . • ; ' ' � � , _ ' . Lawrerice J.!'Varren � , . . ' . � � ; '...., . � . .:Assastant City Attorneys� � : ' � . ' ,. ' �„ ' . .` '. Mark Barber' , , , . , '. .. ,.,� , Zanetta L:Fontes . . . : • : Russell S.�Wilson , . , ; . ' . MEM�I�NI�UM . . . ' .. _ . Ann.S:;Nie'Isen.- ' ; - ' . . " . . ' ' Sash'a_P. Alessi , . , � ' , . . � ' ' , � . ; . , . ' . . ' - . ' To: . Don Erickson, EI�NSP � - . � , , , , : From: " . Lawrence J. Warren; City Attorney . . - . . , , ,: " . Datec � ' - February 26; 2004 , , ' . � ' " . , .Su_bject; Bales annexation and zoning ordinances �. " : - . � � I have enclo sed copies of�the�above-mentioried ordinances: The�originals,have beeri sent to the ,. � - . .City.Clerk.� . � - .. , - . � " : � : . - . , � � '• . � '� ` G�� ,` . t , , . '. � ' - .. . ' � . � � =Lawrence J. Warren. , . , :.. LJW:ma. . • . . � . : . �` � , . l � . - _- , Ene. - � �. ., . , : . . � . ,, . . . - � � - � , , . cc , Jay�.Covington ' . , , , , ; , . . . � . : , . �Bonnie T. Walton : ,. � , .' , , . . . . � '- . ' - � , _ . , . . , � ; . ? . . � � . . '. " , ' . .' - � , � ` , . � � . . ` ' ' . . �. ' • +' . . Post Office,Box 626=Renton,Washington•98057-(42'S)255-8678/FAX(425)255-5474 � ,� E'lr.T 0 lr,' ' � . ' - � �This papercontains 50/recycled material 30/�post consumer A,H E A D O F T H E C U R V E '' , � , . . ., . _.. . , . ' . . . ., � � " � � �t „' � � , i . ti�✓ t�c _ . ., . , .. . _ ' . ' . . - , ' •. '' . . . ' ' . , . , .; � � . . . . . f ,:.. �. . . . � • . � - . . , � ti�Y o City of Renton � � �% �- � . DEPARTMENT OF � ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ��N��'� NEIGHBORHOODS, and STRATEGIC PLANNING Date: 02/26/2004 Sixth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 TO: MaryAnn Anthony's Office FROM: Don Erickson, AICP City Attorney Project Manager Phone: (425) 255-8678 Phone: (425) 430-6581 Fax Phone: (425) 255-5474 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 SUBJECT: Bales Annexation Ordinance Number of pages including cover sheet 3 and Bales R-1 Prezone Ord. REMARKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ Reply ❑ Please � For your be mailed ASAP Comment review � Attachedare the legal description and site map for this annexation and rezone. In this case because no public right-of-ways are included in the annexation,the legal description is the same for both the annexation ordinance and the prezone ordinance. Call if you have any questions. Thanks, �/1v--- ��1 i�v��. Ahead of the curve , � ,. . . , . , - . . - " , , . . -_..._�a _ . - . . .. ., CIT� � �F RENTON. ��.� . � :� � .: - _ � : � .. . . . Off ce of the City Attorney • ." - Lawrence J.Warren � . Kathy Keolker.-Wheeler,Mayor, ' ' '� - . . , � : . . . . . ' � . � h . ' ; As'sistant City Atfbr.neys � ' . . . . . . . . .. - ' ' . � ' ' . . : , , . Ma'rkBarbei. `, . . , . � � � � � ' . Zanetta L.Eontes' :� � ' � . - ; � � Russell.S. Wilson . � , . - ' : . , lO�IEIVIOR[�NDUM � � . . Ann S.'Nielsen � . ,_ , , = . _ ' ' Sasfia P. Alessi-: , To: ' � � , Donald Erickson EDNSP .� ` , - . . : . . . -- � . . _ " �, �. _ ��,��.�- - . . From: � ; Lawrence 7. Warren; City Attorney . _- , . ��; :�. � : �. �E� 1, 0%2Q��. � : • � 'D`dt�: :` � ' -Februar 9 ZOO4 � . � ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; -, ' , Y � � f . NEIGHBORHOOD;;; • , ' - AND STRATEGIC PLANIVING 1 � � '. .. .. . � _ � . , , - . Subject: . Bales Annexation;Ordinance . : . : ' . . . - � . , . , . . ... , , , � . � :' I have.enclosed a copy of the.above-mentioned ordiriarice.. The.original has been sent to the.City ,, • � '�. ' ' � Clerk.��. '. , .� - . ; ". � - : . . . � , � . . : . = . : . . . �,- ,, � `� . � - . , � � �, . . � � . , ,. � I,awrence J.:W �en'. � � ' � �� LJW:ma.. - . � � � , � . �. � � . - � . � � , ' �� . � � _ . �. . � � �, Enc. , , � � � � . - ` '_, � . � _ cc: � Jay Covingtori: : . �� ' 4 . . _ . � , .. , : , ��Bonnie'I: Walton , ' . . � . � . � • _ � . . . „ " . ' ; � . ; ' . .. " _ : � - , . , -` ,' . , , : " - . , ` "_ �. . . �. " _ �. _ � . . , . . , _ , . . . - _ , . � . , , , . ,. . . , . _ ,, ".. � � ' � ; . .: . . . . .. ; ' , ; _. - „ . ' ! "Rost Office Box,626-;Renton,.Washington 98057-,(425),255-8678./gAX(425)255 5474 �. 1�.E l�l , 1 �. 1V, ;' '� , This paper contains 50%recycled material 30%post consumer � ; A H E A,D O F' T H E C U,R V E ` ', - - . , r � . . '. . . . . , � . 5 � � _ , � � - .. .. . . � .t..t , ' ' ... ' . . - . ' . .. . .. . ,. . . . � � . . . , ' � � . . . ' . . . . ' '- . . ' i . .• � � . ' 1. . � .. ' ' ' .. . . ' . . . _ . . .. . . , . .. � ". . � . � . . . .. i ' . . . . . . ... � . . ' ; . ' , . . . . .� . . . ' .. . ' � .. '. ' f . . " �1 . � . � . � � . � . . . � . . .. . .�1 .. � " . ' � � - ... .. , .. '�� .r ' �... , .. • . . ' . . ` � BALES ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALY . SHEET- R-1 ZONING ' ,_�� Units Po ulation AV Existin dev. 4 10 $760,000 Full dev. 36 90 $10,800,000 Assumptions: 2.5 persons/household $300,000 $190,000 AV/existing unit Reuer�ues Total revenues :: ........ :; Existing Full Rate Existmg $3,892'17 Re ular levy $2,402 $34,128 3.16 Full ; $�7,89�;22: ........ .._ . Excess levy $67 $957 0.08865 State shared revenues Rate (per cap) Existin Full Liquor tax $3.52 $3520 $316.80 Liquor Board rofits $5.04 $50.40 $453.60 Fuel tax- roads $14.46 $144.60 $1,301.40 Fuel tax- arterials $6.47 $64.70 $582.30 MVET $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Cam er excise $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Criminal justice $0.36 $3.60 $32.40 Total $298.50 $2,686.50 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existin Full Real estate excise` $40.86 $408.60 $3,677.40 Utility tax** $133.20 $532.80 $4,795.20 Fines &forfeits' $18.33 $183.30 $1,649.70 Total $1,124.70 $10,122.30 * Per capita ** Per housing unit- based on $2,220 annual utility billing @ 6%tax rate .... �o�� ' Total ongoing costs Per ca ita Existin Full Existing $4,��'S�3; Contracted Services Full ; $�7,U8� 97; Alcohol $0.23 $2.27 $20.43 Public Defender $3.13 $31.34 $282.06 Jail $7.19 $71.92 $647.28 � Subtotal $105.53 $949.77 Court/le al/admin. $57.08 $570.80 $5,137.20 Parks maintenance* $14.90 $149.00 $1,341.00 Police $270.00 $2,700.00 $24,300.00 Road maintenance"* N/A $500.00 $1,854 Fire''`* $1.25 $950.00 $13,500.00 Total $4,975.33 $47,081.97 ` See Sheet Parks FIA `* See Sheet Roads FIA *** Rate per$1,000 of assessed yaluation (FD#25 contract) Net fiscal impact Existing �'E,Q83.'tf . , Full $8�2.25 Qn�f�me�osts;,;Parks acquisition &development (from Sheet Parks FIA): Other one-time costs: � $14.90 Total one-time costs $1'1,529;��;; Revised 8-29 per Finance Memo a� �,` _ . CITY F 1�ENTOloT � � . , Planning7Building%PublicWorks Department Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Ad►ninistrator � ' January 30, 2004 Don Erickson - . � Economic Development/Neighborhoods/Strategic Planning , � City of Renton . � 1055 S: Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 � � ' - SUBJECT: Addendum to Bales Annexation Pre-Zone � . � LUA03-004, A, R, ECF Dear Mr. Erickson: � This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to inform you that they have completed their review of tfie environmental impacts of the above-referenced project. The Committee, on January 27, 2004, decided that your project will be issued a Determination of Non-Significance. � The City of Renton ERC has determined that it does not have�a probable significant adverse ' � impact on the environment. An EnVironmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under - � RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made by the ERC under the authority of Section 4-6- 6,� Renton Municipal Code, after review of a completed environmental checklist and other " information, on file with the lead.a�ency. This information is available to the public on request. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at (425) 430-7286. � . � For the Environmental ReView Committee, � ' . �� , . , � . � . �� , Jennifer Henning � Project Manager . cc: . Irvin Leifer/Bales Limited Partnership/Owners - , Steve Beck/Applicant ' • � 1 55 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 � � lr 1 -� lr � � �This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post co�sumer A H E A D O F T H E C U RV E 1�✓ „ �. CITY �F REl�tTT01� ., �- . ,;u � Planning/Building/PublicWorks Deparhnent Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator January 30, 2004 King County'Department of Developmenf and Enuironmental Services Attention: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdafe Ave SW Renton,.WA 98055 Subject: Environmental Determinations ' Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Gommittee (ERC) on January 27, 2004: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE RRDJECT NANrE: Addendum.to Bales Annexation Pre-Zone PROJECT NUMBER: :.LUA03-004, A, R, ECF • . LOCATION: 8.52 acr.es between I�E 4th,SE 130th;S 152"d, & 155th Ave SE DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton EDNSP Department fias su6mitted an addendum to the environmental checklist for the above-referenced annexation proposal. On September 16, 2003, residents of the Bales Annexation failed.to approve the ballot issue for future R-5 zoning of the annexation area, although the annexation was .a.pproved. Tlie .Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation applied to the area is Residential Rural .which corresponds to .Resource . ' Conservation (RC), Residential — 1 .DU/AC (R-1) and Residential- 5 DU%AC (R-5);implement'ing. . zones. SEPA previously evaluated the impacts.of R-5.zoning:on the property. The currenf city-. initiated proposal changes the..pre-zoning from R-5 (5 du/acre)to R-1 (1 du/aere). If you have questions; please eall me at (425) 430-7286. , For the Environmental Review Committee, ��"`'J� y . � � �J� Jennifer Henning Principal P,lanner Enclosure e er. oc 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 � � � � � g� �This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer A H E A D O F T H E C U R V E G✓ , �) �� :� , - ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GOMMITTEE ; , 'MEETING �NOTICE�' � , JANUARY 27,;2004; ` To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief - From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning , _ ; ; - ; Nieeting Date Janua.ry 27;:2QQ4 ' Time...; Consent Ager�da ;No Mee�rng , �; ; LocatiQn Sixth Flaqr Confer�n�e Roorn #�2� ; � ; _ � _ _. Agenda listed below. The Following is a Consent Agenda. Addendum fo Bales Annexation Pre-Zone (Henninq) LUA-03-004, A, R, ECF The City of Renton EDNSP Department has submitted an addendum to the environmental checklist for the above-referenced annexation proposal. On September 16, 2003, residents of the Bales Annexation failed to approve the ballot issue for future R-5 zoning o# the annexation area, although the annexation was approved. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation applied to the area is Residential Rural which corresponds to Resource Conservation (RC), Residential — 1 DU/AC (R-1) and Residential — 5DU/AC (R-5) implementing zones. SEPA previously evaluated #he impacts of R-5 zoning on the property. The current city-initiated proposal changes the pre-zoning from R-5 (5 du/acre) to R-1 (1 du/acre). , t � � cc: K.Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor J.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer . A. Pietsch,EDNSP Administrator O B.Wolters, EDNSP Director0 J.G�ay,Fire Prevention N.Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director O F. Kaufman,Hearing Examiner L. Rude,Fire Prevention O J.Medzegian,Council S.Meyer,P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director R.Lind,Economic Development L.Warren,City Attorney 0 r� : 4, �/�� rv , i i V�� O� F; ♦ � '�" ♦ ��N�� CITY OF RENTON - ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Pursuant to WAC 197-11-600 (4) (c) and WAC 197-11-625 Addendum to Bales Annexation Pre-Zone (LUA-03-004. A, R, ECF) Determination of Non-Siqnificance (DNS) Date of Addendum: January 27,2004 Date of Original Issuance of SEPA Threshold Determination: February 4, 2003 Proponent: City of Renton ED/N/SP Application File: LUA-03-004, A, R, ECF Project Name: Bales Annexation Pre-Zone Proposal / Purpose of Addendum: City of Renton ED/N/SP Department has submitted an addendum to the environmental checklist for the above-referenced annexation proposal. On September 16, 2003, residents of the Bales Annexation failed to approve the ballot issue for future R-5 zoning of the annexation area, although the annexation was approved. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation applied to ' the area is Residential Rural which corresponds to Resource Conservation (RC), Residential — 1 DU/AC (R-1) and Residential — 5 DU/AC (R-5) implementing zones. SEPA previously evaluated the impacts of R-5 zoning on the property. The current city- � initiated proposal changes the pre-zoning from R-5 (5 du/acre) to R-1 (1 du/ac). The allowed maximum densities under the R-1 Zone are less than those allowed under the R-5 Zone. It has been determined that the environmental impacts of the new proposal are adequately addressed under the analysis of significant impacts contained within the previously adopted DNS. Based on WAC 197-11-600(4) c, the addendum process may be used if analysis or information is added that does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. Therefore, the SEPA addendum process has been utilized for the necessary Environmental Review of.the proposed development. rt Location: 8.52 acres generally located between NE 4th Street on the north and SE 130th (if extended) on the sauth, 152"d Avenue SE (if extended) on the west and 155th Avenue SE (if extended) on the east. KCA Assessors Parcel Numbers: 14233059068, 1423059065, 1423059064, 1423059094, 1423059070. Lead Agency: City of Renton, Plarining/Building/Public Works Department � r:` ` . % Review Process: Individual development proposals for the Bales Annexation Prezone site will be reviewed under SEPA Rules and City of Renton policies and regulations applicable to the development. Additional Information: If you would like additional information, please contact Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner, City of Renton, Development Services Division, Planning/Building/Public Works Department at (425) 430-7286. I - ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator DATE Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Dennis Culp, Administrator DATE Community Services Department Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department r, � . �. �. � ,. . ; . .. �. CaLy�of�Zenton� �,�� ` :ENVIRON1Vl'ENTAL CHECKLIST ADDENDUM h'OR BALES ANNEXATION .' ` 1. Change is project description in original Environmental Checklist. The original proposal for the Bales Annexation was to zone it R-5 upon annexation consistent . with the Comprehensive Plan Residential Rural land use designation. Because there was an insufficient number of voters approving this zoning the City has no choice but to prezone the - 8.52-acre annexation site R-1 if it is to be brought into the City. The current proposal is to prezone the Bales Annexation R-1 rather than R-5 as originally proposed. 2. Change in Surface Water Runoff A reduction in density from 5 units per net acre to 1 unit per net acre should significantly reduce the amount of disturbance to existing surfaces and the amount of impervious surfaces that would be constructed on the 8.52-acre site. As a consequence,surface water runoff impacts would be assumed to be less with R-1 zoning than with R-5 zoning as previously proposed for this site. Because this is a non-project legislative action no mitigation measures are proposed. 3. Change in Land and Shoreline Use. The proposed land use, single-family detached housing,would not change as a result of this downzone from 5 units per net acre to 1 unit per net acre. 4. Change in Housing Impacts. The number of units that could be built under R-1 zoning is approximately 1/5 of what could be built under R-5 zoning. Previously, it was estimated that up to 34 dwelling units could eventually be accommodated on the 8.52-acre site. With R-1 zoning, this number would drop to approximately six or seven units. The housing target transferred to Renton for this small acreage is negligible. Since City land use capacity exceeds its assigned housing growth targets,no impacts are anticipated from this reduction in units. Because this is a non-project legislative action it is not possible to determine how many of the existing houses on site will eventually be removed and/or replaced. S. Change in Recreation Impacts. As a consequence of the number of potential units declining from±34 to six or seven units,there would be a comparable decline in the.demand for recreational services.R-1 zoning is anticipated to only increase the number of units on the 8.52-acre site by one or two units so the increased demand for services would be negligible. 6. ' Change in Transportation Impacts � � . Similarly,the number of vehicular trips per day could be expected to decline from an estimated 340 AWDTE to approximately 60 or 70 AWDTE with a change in zoning from R-5 to R-L Because this is a non-project legislative action no mitigation measures are proposed. � Bales Annexation Prezone r�uuendum 2 O1/13/04 7. Change in Public Services With an estimated change in population that would occur with such a downzone from R-5 to R-1 zoning, from 85 persons to approximately 17 persons their would be a comparable decline in the demand for public services. R-1 zoning is anticipated to only increase the number of units on the 8.52-acre site by one or two units so the increased demand for services would be negligible. SIGNATURE I understand, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this addendum should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: ��'�%1a,�1)��?l/� Name Printed: �,-G��d/�c� C.-�f/1� Date: �� I Ilo' Ilth S�� ' � � � '' �S � � 1 ��• � �!"KE T ;�t � , u :- �,;t ,w �. . . 7,5•' -",,'t. .4 ?:�.7. � � q . r � ❑ ' � r' �). ' � ��_.. U . � s1 q�y \ � � �� { 1 ,~•r � ��'{ � ❑ . �� ti II$ h r � f�a � �� .t� �� k•;�� . ��_ §� �� ' .v�: ,-.� ��,�� E"� �$ � 'i . .. Zi � x ��kY� �`�� 1 rc"?.,, � �x a ��.. ,y L �]T+�.q � 1 4' t ��h�� , �� ,,K � ��_ <,� s� �� f {� � � f-�[�F��n. �.:F�•.,=...�3`.:::,`T+'. I J � ❑ � �� :'-::.. _ � � , , �� fy� ��,Renton , :; :., � �� EN�1RaNME'I��►TA'�,',�CH�GKCIS�T ;� ,i ,�� , ,.. .. .,. . ,,. �.. ..i ., ,:;., ....� ,.�..a i�.,a�i.,� ,.�«�� .�,.M1.a ., ,..,::. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmenfal Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.2iC RCW, requires all govemmenta! � agencies to consider fhe environmenta! impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (ElS) must be prepared for a!!proposals with probable significant adverse impacfs on fhe quality of the environment The purpose of ihis checklisf is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal(and to reduce or avoid �,� impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and fo help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Govemmental agencies use this checklisf to determine whefher the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give fhe best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to fhe best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do nof know fhe answer, or if a question does not apply fo your proposal, write "do not know°or °does nof apply" Comp/efe answers fo the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some quesfions ask about govemmenta!regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer fhese questions if you can. If you have problems, fhe govemmenfal agencies can assist you. _ The checklist quesfions apply fo all parts of your proposal, even if you plan fo do therrm over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information fhat will help describe your propasa!or its environmenta!effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonab/y related to determining if fhere may be significanf adverse impacf. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered"does not apply." IN ADDITION, complefe fhe SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR IVONPROJECT ACTIONS(part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references _ in the checklist to the words "project,°"applicant,'and"property or site"should be read as "proposal," °proposer,"and"affecfed geographic area,"respectively. - A. BACKGROUND . � 1. Name of proposed project,if applicable: Proposed rezone of approximately 8.52 acre area from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's Residential 5•du/ac(R-5)Zone. Zoning would be applied at the time the subject site is annexed into the City of Renton. NING D�C{-��(OF REiJTON JAN 14 2003 R�C�IVED t . `. Bales A.nnexation Rezane ' , �- '+ January 7, 20Q3 Page 2 - 2. Name of applicant: Alex Pietsch,Acting Administrator, Economic Development, Neighborhoods&Strategic Pianning Department City of Renton 3. Address and phane number of applicant and contact persan: � Address: Economic Devefoprnent,Neighborhoods& Strategic Planning Depactment City of Renton 1055 5outh G�ady Way Renton,WA 98055 Contact Person: Don Erickson,AlCP (425�430-6581 4. Date checklist prepared: January 7,2003 5. Agency requesting checklist: C'rty of Renton, Department of Plannfig/Building/Publ'�c Works-Development " Se+vices division 6. Propsased timing or schedule{including phasing,if applicable): Adoption of the rezone ordinance is anticipated pending SEPA campiiance,at the time of annexation into Renton. 7. Do you ha ve any plans for future additions, expansian, or further activiry related ta or connec#ed with fhis proposal? Jf yes, expiain. . Yes. Applicants have applied for annexation into the City of Rentan. Urider RCW 43.21,C.222 annexations are specifically exempt from SEPA. Upon annexation into , Renton applicants or their successors will likely subdivide and develop vacar�t properties w�th single-family dwellings per the City of Renton's R=8 zaning. 8. List any environmental information you know abouf that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly relafed to fhis propasal. FEIS on the 1995 Comprehensive Pla�of the City of Renton 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for govemmenfal appravals of other propasais dlrectty affechng fhe property covered 6y your proposaJ? if yes,exptain. No knowledge of ather pending governmentai approvats of affected properties. 10. List any c/ovemmentai approvals ar permits thaf wilJ be needed for yaur propasal, if � knov�m. Counaii aparoval is re�uired for this rezone from Cot�n#y to City zoning. i�. Give brief, complete t�escription of yaur proposaJ, includrng the proposed uses and ihe size of the prqj�ct and si#�. 7he subiect proposal is to�rezone the 8.52 acre Bales Annexatian site frorn King County's R-4 Zone(4 duf'gross acre).to Renton's R-5 Zone(5 c1u/net acre). The site cauld accommodate appraximateiy 34 dweilings under Rentan's R-5 Zone and approximately 34 dwellings under K�ng Gounty's R•1 Zone 12. Locatian of fhe proposal. Give su�cient /�formaGon for a person to understand the preclse locab"on of your propased projecf,includrrzg a street address,rf arry,and section, towrrship,and range it known. !f a proposa(woald occur over a�ange of area,provlde the rarrge or bouu�rdarres of fhe site(sJ. Provide a legal description,site plan, vicinity map,and topographic map, if reasonably available. While Bales Annexation Rezone j� �` ,��fanuary 7, 2003 . Page 3 �'_•' _� you should submit any plans required by the agency,you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed pfans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist The subject annexation site abuts NE 4"'Street(SE 128 St)on the north and 152'� Avenue SE, if extended,on the west. It is bounded by SE 130"'Street, if extended, on the south and approximately 155�'Avenue SE, if extended, on the east Please � see attachments.) B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description oi the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The 8.52-acre annexation site is relatively flat. B. What is the steepesf slope on the site(approximate percent slope?) Renton Slope Maps indicate some small area in the southwest comer with a � slope of 15%-25%. a Whaf generaJ types of soi/s are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know fhe classificafion of agricu/tural soils, specify them and note any pnme farmland. Alderwood Association. d. Are there surface indications or hisfory of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? !f so, describe. There do not appear to be any significant steep slopes on the rezone portion of the annexation site. e. Describe fhe purpose: type, and approximate quantifies of any fi/ling or grading proposed. Indicate source of�ill. Not apnficable for this non project legislative action. f. Could erosion occur as a result of dearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No construction is proposed as a result of this non-proiect annexation and rezone proposal. Erosion presumably could occur as a result of future development under the proposed R-5 Zone. Mftigation measures would be applied typically at the time of future development. g. About whaf percent of the site will be covered with im rvious surfaces after project construction(for example, asphalf or buildings� �proximatelv 35%. No construction is proposed as a resuft of this non- project legislative proposal. h. Proposed measures to reduce or contro! erosion, or ofher impacts fo fhe earth, if any: - No construction is proposed as a result of this non-�roiect legislative action. Any futi,r,re development occurring as a consequence of the proposed R-5 Zone would be required to follow mana ement practices in the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations(�RMC 4-4-130)and in the Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations(RMC 4-4-060). 2. A!R a. Whai types of emissions fo fhe air would result from the proposal(i.e., dust, aufomob�le, odors, industrial wood smoke) during constructron and when the projecr is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Bales Annexatzon Rezone _ � �` January 7, 2003 ' ' Page 4 NIA. No new canstruction is praposed as a result of this (egisiative nan- project proposal, At the time o#project Isvel devetopment specifie air-related impacts may be identified and apprapriate mitigation measutes applied. b. Are there any oif-site sources af emission or odor that may affecf your proposal? !f sa,generaJly describe. . Unlikeiy and not applicable for this nan-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures fo reduce or confrot emissivrrs ar other impacts to air, if any: , .= Nof applicable for this non-proiect leqisfiative actian. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: i) ls fhere any surface wafer body on ar in fhe immediate vicini#y of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? It yes, describe t�pe and provide names. !f appropriafe,sfate what stream or river rt flaws into. No. � 2) Wil/the projecf requfre any work over,in,oradjacent to(within 200 feet)the described wafers? if yes,ptease describe and attach available plans. No. 3J Estimate the amount of fr!l artd.dredge materiat that wou/d 6e pJaced in or remaved from surface water ar wetlands and ind�ca#e fhe area � of tfre site thaf would be affected. /ndicate fhe source of fill material. NlA. No construction is proposed immediately as a resul# of #his , non-project iegislative proposal. 4) Wi/i the praposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general descripfion, purpo,se, and approximate quantities !f known. NlA. No aonstruc#ion is piopased immediately as a result af tt�is non-project legislative proposal, 5) Does the proposal !ie within a 100 year Boodpiain? !f sq note locafian on the si#e plan. No. The subject site is not mapped as part af the 100-ysar flaodplain. 6} Does,,:fhe proposa! involve any discharges af waste materials ta ��rtface wa�ers? if so, describe fhe type af wasfe and anficipated . valume of..discharge. No. Thi�,:.is a non-project legislative ac#ion. No devefopmen# is proposecf as a result of this proposal. � I 33ales Annexation Rezone ' t; 1anuary 7, 2003 Page 5 ` _. b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be wifhdrawn, or wi!! water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action.The proposed rezone is not expected to result in the discharge or withdrawal of water that is � not now occurring. 2) Describe wasfe material fhat will be discharged into the ground from septic fanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;industrial, containing the following chemicals...;agricWtural; _ etc.). Describe the general size of fhe system, the number of such systems, the number of houses fo be served ("�f applicable), or fhe number of animals or humans the system(s)are expected fo serve. No construction is proposed as a result of this non project legislative rezone proposal. No new septic tanks will be allowed once the site is annexed into Renton and all new development will be hooked up to sanitary sewer. c Water Runoff(including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm wafer)and methoaf of collection and disposal, if any(include quanfifies, if known). Where will this water flow? Wil! fhis water Now info other waters? !f so, describe. N/A. No construction and therefore runoff is proposed as a resuft of this non-project legislative proposal. Surface water appears to run off the site in a north/northeasterly direction. Although no new development is proposed at this time the proposed zoning would provide for densities comparable to what already exists in King County. Environmental review, however, would be required for any non-exempt development under SEPA. 2) Could waste material enfer ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. Future new residential development would be hooked up to sanitary sewer. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts,if any: Not applicable since this is a non-proiect leqislative action. Future development allowed under the proposed R-5 Zone would be required to � comply with City of Renton Drainage Standards(RMC 4-6-030). 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle rypes of vegetation found on the site: �� • deciduous free:alder,maple,aspen,other ever'green free:fir,cedar,pine, other shrubs grass pasture ' , ., —,� . Bales Annexation Rezone, ', ,` ` __�`� January'7, 2003 � . Page 6 . crop ar grain wer soi!plants:cattail,buftercup,bulfrush,skunk cabbage,other water plants:water lily, eel grass,milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amounf of vegefation wili be removed or altered? N/A. No construction and there(ore no vegetatior� wi!! be removed as a - result of this non-project legislative proposal. Future development wiA have to camply with Rentan's Tree Cutting regutations(RMC 4-4-130). c. Lisf threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Nane are known at this time, d. Propased landscaping, use of native planfs, or ather measures to preserve . or enhance vegetaf�on on the site,�f any: Not apulicabie. This is a non:project action. As nated above, development that occurs under Renton's junsd�etion must confarm to the City's codes and regulations. 5 anrrn�acs a. Circle any birds and animals which have been obsenred an or near the sfte or are known to be on or near the site: _ Brrds:hawk,heron, eagle,songbirds, other Mammals:deerJ bear, elk,beaver, other Fish:bass,salmon,trout,herring,she/Ifish,other b. List any fh�eatened or endangered species known fo be on or near fhe site. No threa#ened or entianqered species are known to be on or near the site. c. Is t`he site part of a mlgration route? If so,exptain Unknoxm. but the entire State of Washington is included within a migration rouie for birds known as the Pacific Ftyway. This fiyway, as if averties Renton, is used by a variety of mig�atory birds, including, bu#not lirnited to � the Canada Goose. d. Propased m+easures to preserve or enhance wiidlife,if arry: This is a non-proj,ect legislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this rezone prapasai. Mitiga#ion measures� 'rf any, may be irnposed at the time o#;future develapment. �r . 6. ENERGY AIVD NATUR.�L FIESOURCES a. What kinds.of:energy (electric, natural gas, oil, waocf stove, salarl witl be used to meet lfie comple[ed projecYs energy needs? Qescribe whefher it will be used far heating,manufacturing, efc. It is anticipated that the potential 34 dwelling units the R-5 zoning woult! ailow an #he site wiil use primariiy electircal and natura!gas resaurces for heating and runninq appliances. � Bales Annexation Rezone ;�� - � ��anuary 7, 2003 Page 7 - --- b. Wou/d your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,genera!!y describe. Unlike . Zoning provides some setbacks and restricts the height of new structures to 30 feet. c. What kinds of energy conservation feafures are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts,if any: None. This is a non-proiect legislative action. Future development occurring on the site will meet all related energy code provisions. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH � a. Are fhere any environmental healfh hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposa!? !f so, describe. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. No environmental health hazards are anticipated from future single-family residential development. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards,if any: N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Noise 1) What fypes of noise exist in the area which ma affect your proJecf (for example:tra�c, equipment,operation, other�? Not aoplicable since this is a leqislative non-qroject action. 2) What types and levels of noise woWd be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: . traff"rc, consfruction, operation, other)? Indicafe what hours noise would come from fhe site. Not apalicable. New development occuning under the R-5 Zone could include construction activiry and normal noise associated with ground related residential living. � 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. This is a non-project action. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE . a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The westerty portion of the 8.52-acre rezone site is developed with an outdoor heavy construction equipment maintenance company that is � scheduled to cease its operations in January 2003. Lower density single- family dwellings and a vacant parcel exist to the east. Existing densities are not believed to exceed 5 du/ac. Has fhe site been'�used for agriculture?If so, describe. Not activelv. One of the parcels does have fruit trees on it. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are an estimated four existina sinqle-familv dwellings on the subject 8.52-ac�e site. Bales Ann�xation R�zone. . _ ' `°� ..�`7anuary'7, 2003 � . Page 8 � - d Wiil any sirucfures be demotished? !f sa, whar? This is a legislative nan-praject rezone action. It is not anticipated that this proposed rezone wiii resuit in the ciemaiition of any structures. e. What is fhe current zorring classifrcation of the sife? The current iGnc„�County zonina ciassification is the R-4 Zone which attows 4 du/gross acre, The current proposat is for R-5 zaning that allaws 5-dulnet . acre. Densities a�e assumed to be comparabls, � .- f. What is the current comprehensive plan designafion of the site? The 8.52 acre rezone site is cunently designated "Residentia! Rura�' on Renton's Comprehensive Pian Land Use Map and "Urban Residential 4- i 2dWad'on King County's Comprehensive Plan Map. Renton's designation would altow zor�ing with up to 5 units per net acre and King Count}�s designation currently aAows zoni�g wi#h 4 units per gross acre. B�cause Qf this it is assumed that densities are comparable under either zone. g. If appiica6/e, whaf fs fhe current shoreline masfer program designation af fhe site? Not�plicable. � h. Has any part of the site been ciassiflred as an "environmentaily sensitive' area? !f so,specify. No portians of the subject site are known to be environmentaity sensitive. i. Approximafely how many people would reside or work in fhe compieted proiect? At fuli redevelopment u�der the proposed R-5 zoni�g, it is anticipated that appro�cimately 85 residents cou(d evenEually reside on these 8.52 acres. j. Approximafely how many peopie wou/d the comptefed project displace? Unknown. This is a non-project action. The estimated five existing residents could choose, for example, ta reiacate ta new dweltings within the annexation area. k. Proposed measures to avad or reduce dispiacement impacts,if any: Not a�plicable at this non-project stage. J. Proposed measures fa ensure fhe propasa!is compatible with exisfing and pro%ec#ed larrd uses and plarrs,if aRy: As noted above the proposed rezane is consistent with the City�s current Residential Rural land use designatian for the subject site. 9. HbUSING � � l�tt ` a. ApproximateJy,�ow many unifs wouJd be provided, if any? Indicafe whether , high,mlddle, ar lctw-income housing. Unknown:� Jt a� an#icipated that up to 34 dwe!ling ur�its could b�e accommodated on the sub�ect site under Rentan's R-5 zoning. b. Approximately how ma»y unifs, if any, would be e/iminafed? lndicate whe#her hrgh,tniddie,Of IOW-ltTCOttt�'I?{X1Sit?l�. Unknawn. The propased rezone witt not eliminate any unifs by itseif, As futufe development occurs the tvuo sxisting dwre!lings may be reptaced and/or relocated although this is not currently known. Bales Annexation Rezone `; � � °?anuary 7, 2003 Page 9 , �- -- c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts,if any: The proposed zoning is consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and applicable policies for this area. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallesf height of any proposed structure(s), not including . , antennas;what is the principal extenor burld�ng material(s)proposed. � Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. No new development is specifically proposed as a resuft of this change in zoning classification. Heights of residential structures are restricted to two stories and 30' in the proposed R-5 Zone � b. What views in fhe immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Unknown. This is a non-project rezone action. This is not known at this level. c. Proposed measures fo reduce or control aesthetic impacts,if any: Unknown. At the future project level impacts will be assessed and mitigated. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. Whaf type of light or glare will fhe proposal produce? Whaf time of day would it mainly occur? Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. Future development may create some visible nighttime light. b. Could light or glare from fhe �inished projecf be a safety hazard or inferfere with views? Unknown. Future single-family homes are not anticipated to result in sufficient levels of glare to impair views from surrounding properties. c. What existing off-site sources of lighf or glare may affect your proposal? Unknown. d. Proposed measures t�reduce or confrol lighf and glare impacts,if any: Not applicable. 12. RECREATIDN a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the � immediate vicinity? King County currently owns the two abutting parcels immediately to the south of the subject site. These two parcels with a combined area of 9.34 acres have been set aside for a future park. Presumably, upon annexation these two parcels will be transferred to the City for future park development. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.;; � � , No.This is a non-project legislative action. c. Proposed meas��es to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including � recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable at this non-project level of review. The City will collect a . recreation mitigation fee at the time of future development. Baies Annexation Rezone . '•�_ ,.' � . -`� 7anuary 7, 2003 � . Page 10 . - 13. NISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATICIN a. Are there any places or o6jecfs lrsted on, or propased for, nationa!stafe, or loca! preservafion registers known to be on or nex# fo the sife? lf so, generally describe. Unknown. Th�s is a non•project legisiative actior�. . b. Generatly describe any iandmarks or evidence af historic, archaeological, scientifrc, or cu/tura!impartance known.#o be on or ne.a�to the site. Unknawn. This is a non•project iegistative actian. � c. Proposed measures to reduce ar cantrol impacts,if any: Unknown. 14. TR.4NSPORTATION a. ldentify public streets and highways serving fhe site, and describe propased access fo the existing street system. Show on site ptans,if any. The site is primarilv served by SE 128�'Street. b, is site currenfly served by public transit? lf nat, whaf is fhe approximafe ' distance to fhe nearest fr~ansit s#op7 Yes. Bus service is availabte on NE 4�'Street. c Haw many parking spaces wou/d the cample#ed project have? How many would the prv�ect elrminafe? Unknown. Assumin�34 dwelGng units and parking being provided between 1.75 spaces per und and 2.25 spaces per urnt, there potentially coutd be between 59 and 76 required off-sfreet spaces deveioped on the rezone site. No spaces are anticipated to be elirr�inated. d. Wil/ the proposa/ require any new roads ar streets, or improvements ta existing roads or streets, not including drfveways7 Jf so, genera/ly describe (rndicate whether pubtic or private? Very likelv. Future subdivision of the site wauld be requi�ed to comply with Ci#y reguiations pertaining to street widfh, curbs, sidewaiks, lighting, etc. At this �int it is dif€icutt to antic�pate what improvsrnents 28 new dweliir�gs in the Bales Mnexation area would require. New streets woutd most likely be iacal access streets including loop streets andlor cul-de-sacs. e. WiN the project use{or occur!n the ir»mediafe vicfnity otJ water, rail, or air transpartation? lf so,generally describe. No. f. How many veh�cular frips per day would be generated by fhe completed project? �f known,indicate when peak volumes would occur. �; , � This is a tegislative non-project action in which #ransporta#ion impacis have not been iden#ified:since the actual (evels of development are still unknown. Howeve�, if 30 ai�clitionai u�its were buiit, and assuming 10 AWDVTE,there could be as-ma�y as 300 addi#ionai vehicles trip ends per 24 hour period. g. Proposed measures to reduce or contral transportation impacts, if any: Not applicabte a# this non-�rQiect tevei. levei of #uiure devefopment is speculative at this point. + �Bales Annexation Rezone � � � �,ianuary 7, 2003 Page 11 �- � . • 75. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so,generally describe. Probabiv. Residential development that might occur in the future would increase the need for public services that typically senre such development. Affected services may mclude, but wouid not be limited to, fire protection, police protection,emergency services, and schoois. b. Proposed measures to reduce or confrol direct impacts on public se�vices, if any. . The Citv of Renton currentiv collects mitiqation fees to control such impacts to parks and recreation,fire, and transportation. The City also collects taxes for most of these services. Until a specific proposal is made at the project level, however, it is too ea�ly to ascertain what these impacts, if any,will be. 16. UTIUTIES a. Circle utilities currenfly available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, felephone,sanitary sewer,septic system, other. , The current proposal is a non-project action. However, the area it would apply to will likely be served by sewer,telephone,electricity, and water. b. Describe the utilities fhat are proposed for the project, fhe utility providing the service, and fhe general construction activifies on the sife or in the immediate vicinity which mighf be needeal. Unknown. Non-project action. C. S/GNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. u� � Pro�vonent: h � , Name Prinfed.• �� ! Ur--, Date: Y ! ` ' Bales Annexation Rezone �'`, " �"�anuary 7, 2003' Page 12 -- - D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheets shou/d only be used for actions invo/ving decisions on policies,p/ans and programs. You do not need to fill out these sheets for project actions.) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpfu! to read them in conjunction with the list of fhe elements of the environmenf. When answering these questions, be aware of the extenf the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, wouJd affect the item at a greater intensity or at a�fasfer rate than if the proposal were nof implemented. Respond briefly and in genera!ferms. 1. How would the proposal be likely fo increase discharge fo water;emisslons to air; product7on, storage, or re%ase of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? This is a legislative non-project rezone action that is not anticipated by itself to change operations at the subject site or increase substance discharges into the environment. Subsequent development, whether under the current County R-4 zoning or the proposed City of Renton R-5 zoning, would be required to comply with SEPA at the time of development, unless categorically exempt. Any new development will likely increase discharges to air, water, etc. These, tiowever, are _ anticipated to be relatively small. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: This non-proiect legislative action. Subsequent development as a result of this proposed map amendment would have to go through environmental review unless SEPA exempt. It is likely that air emissions, etc. would be addressed at this time when type and quantities of discharges are more likely to be known. Because Renton's R-5 Zone would allow comparable densities to those allowed under King County's R-4 Zone, impacts, 'rf any, are assumed to be comparable. 2. How would the proposal be likely fo affect plants,animals,fish,or marine life? No significant impacts to plants, animals, fish or marine I'rfe are anticipated to occur as a consequence of the proposed zoning action. The proposal would supplant existing County R-4 single-family zoning which allows 4 du/ac (gross) with Renton's R-5 single-family zoning, which allows 5 du/ac (net). As a result future development under Renton's R-5 zornng is assumed to be comparable to that currently allowed under King Count�s R-4 zoning. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants,animals,�sh, or marine life are: Not a�plicable. 3. How would the proposa!be likely to deplefe energy or natural resources? This non proiect leQislative action will not directly impact enerqv or natural resources. Future single-family development will, however, likely result in some additional demand of such resowrces. Future development under Renton's R-5 zoning would allow up to 30 adtlitiona! homes in the area. The County's R-4 Zone would also � allow approximately 30 new units. As a consequence the proposed zoning would not increase the demand f.or energy and natural resources over what is currently allowed. Proposed measures fo proteci or conserve energy and nafura!resources are: None are proposed, since this is currently a non-project action. „ . , --�: Bales Annexation Rezone��..,.�,_ J r ,) January 7, 2003 � � Page 13 4. How would the p�oposal be likely to use or affecf environmentally sensitive � areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmentai protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,historic or cultural sites, weflands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? This non-project rezone proposal will not directly impact environmentaliy sensitive areas. Whether future development occurs under County or City zoning sensitive � � areas, if any,would have to be addressed. . Proposed measures fo protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are; None�roposed at this time for this non-project action. �� 5. How would the proposa!be likely to affecf Iand and shoreline use, including whefher ff would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses Incompatible with exisring plans? This proposed non-project rezone will not directly affect land or shoreline use. Proposed new zoning would be in compliance with the Cit�s Comprehensive Plan. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None nroposed at this non-project level. As noted above any new development under the proposed R5 zoning will be reviewed by the City to ensure compliance wifh relevant state and local regulations. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportatlon or public services and ufllities? This is a legislative non-project action. Future development would resuft in increased demands on transportation,the use of utilities, or other services over what is allowed under current King County zoning. If additional homes are buift in this area as many � as 300 addftional vehicle trips per day could be generated over a 24•hour period. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: None are proposed for this non-project action. Future development will be asked to mitigate any identified significant adverse impacts. 7. Identffy, If possible, whether fhe proposal may conf/fcf with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protectlon of fhe envlronmenf. No conflicts with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment are known to exist with the subject non-project legislative rezone proposal. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best ot my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. . � Proponent: ; QO �1 Name Printed: ��C� (��O Date: �Gf��G�` l� o�� EfVVIROfVIVI'ENTAL_REVIEIII/ COIViMJTT'EE NI EETING'NOTiCE JANUARY;27, 2004 To: � Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning Meeting Date: January 27, 2004 ` , . Time: ' Consent Agenda- No Meeting Location: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 Agenda listed below. The Following is a Consent Agenda. Addendum to Bales Annexafion Pre-Zone (Henning) LUA-03-004, A, R, ECF The City of Renton EDNSP Department has submitted an addendum to the environmental checklist for the above-referenced annexation proposal. On September 16, 2003, residents of the Bales Annexation failed to approve the ballot issue for future R-5 zoning of the annexation area, although the annexation was approved. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation applied to the area is Residential Rural which corresponds to Resource Conservation (RC), Residential — 1 DU/AC (R-1) and Residential — 5DU/AC (R-5) implementing zones. SEPA previously evaluated the impacts ofi R-5 zoning on the property. The current city-initiated proposal changes the pre-zoning from R-5 (5 du/acre) to R-1 (1 du/acre). cc: K. Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor J.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator0 B.Wolters, EDNSP Director O J.Gray, Fire Prevention N.Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director O F.Kaufman,Hearing Examiner L. Rude, Fire Prevention O J. Medzegian,Council S.Meyer, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director R. Lind, Economic Development L.Warren,City Attorney OO ^� _ `� � � U��Y �� ;: . ♦ � '- ♦ ��N�o� CITY OF RENTON ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICAfVCE (DNS) Pursuant to WAC 197-11-600 (4) (c) and WAC 197-11-625 Addendum to Bales Annexation Pre-Zone (LUA-03-004. A, R, ECF) Determination of Non-Siqnificance (DNS) Date of Addendum: January 27, 2004 Date of Original Issuance of SEPA Threshold Determination: February 4, 2003 Proponent: City of Renton ED/N/SP Application File: LUA-03-004, A, R, ECF Project Name: Bales Annexation Pre-Zone Proposal / Purpose of Addendum: City of Renton ED/N/SP Department has submitted an addendum to the environmental checklist for the above-referenced annexation proposal. On September 16, 2003, residents of the Bales Annexation failed to approve the ballot issue for future R-5 zoning of the annexation area, although the annexation was approved. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation applied to ' the area is Residential Rural which corresponds to Resource Conservation (RC), Residential — 1 DU/AC (R-1) and Residential — 5 DU/AC (R-5) implementing zones. SEPA previously evaluated the impacts of R-5 zoning on the property. The current city- initiated proposal changes the pre-zoning from R-5 (5 du/acre) to R-1 (1 du/ac). The allowed maximum densities under the R-1 Zone are less than those allowed under the R-5 Zone. It has been determined that the environmental impacts of the new proposal are adequately addressed under the analysis of significant impacts contained within the previously adopted DNS. Based on WAC 197-11-600(4) c, the addendum process may be used if analysis or information is added that does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. Therefore, the SEPA addendum process has been utilized for the necessary Environmental Review of the proposed development. Location: 8.52 acres generally located between NE 4th Street on the north and SE 130th (if extended) on the south, 152"d Avenue SE (if extended) on the west and 155th Avenue SE (if extended) on the east. KCA Assessors Parcel Numbers: 14233059068, 1423059065, 1423059064, 1423059094, 1423059070. Lead Agency: City of Renton, Planning/Building/Public Works Department Review Process: Individual development proposals for the Bales Annexation Prezone site will be reviewed under SEPA Rules and City of Renton policies and regulations applicable to the development. Additional Information: If you would like additional information, please contact Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner, City of Renton, Development Services Division, Planning/Building/Public Works Department at (425) 430-7286. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SIGNATURES: /1P �' � �� Gregg Zimme m n, A i istrator DATE Department of la ng/Building/Public Works 1 �,'� Q Dennis Culp, Administrat DATE Community Services D rtment ' - ��o� Lee h I , ire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department City of Renton ENVIRONMENTAL"CHECKLIST ADDENDUM FOR�ALES ANNEXATION 1. Change is project description in original Environmental Checklist. The original proposal for the Bales Annexation was to zone it R-5 upon annexation consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Residential Rural land use designation. Because there was an insufficient number of voters approving this zoning the City has�no choice but to prezone the 8.52-acre annexation site R-1 if it is to be brought into the City. The current proposal is to prezone the Bales Annexation R-1 rather than R-5 as originally proposed. 2. Change in Surface Water Runoff A reduction in density from 5 units per net acre to 1 unit per net acre should significantly reduce the amount of disturbance to existing surfaces and the amount of impervious surfaces that would be constructed on the 8.52-acre site. As a consequence, surface water runoff impacts would be assumed to be less with R-1 zoning than with R-5 zoning as previously proposed for this site. Because this is a non-project legislative action no mitigation measures are proposed. 3. Change in Land and Shoreline Use. The proposed land use, single-family detached housing, would not change as a result of this downzone from 5 units per net acre to 1 unit per net acre. 4. Change in Housing Impacts. The number of units that could be built under R-1 zoning is approximately 1/5 of what could be built under R-5 zoning. Previously, it was estimated that up to 34 dwelling units could eventually be accommodated on the 8.52-acre site. With R-1 zoning, this number would drop to approximately six or seven units. The housing target transferred to Renton for this small acreage is negligible. Since City land use capacity exceeds its assigned housing growth targets, no impacts are anticipated from this reduction in units. Because this is a non-project legislative action it is not possible to determine how many of the existing houses on site will eventually be removed and/or replaced. S. Change in Recreation I»�pacts. As a consequence of the number of potential units declining from±34 to six or seven units,there would be a comparable decline in the demand for recreational services. R-1 zoning is anticipated to only increase the number of units on the 8.52-acre site by one or two units so the increased demand for services would be negligible. 6. Change in Transportation Impacts Similarly, the number of vehicular trips per day could be expected to decline from an estimated 340 AWDTE to approximately 60 or 70 AWDTE with a change in zoning from R-5 to R-1. Because this is a non-project legislative action no mitigation measures are proposed. � Bales Annexation Prezone A::...,.idum 2 O1/13/04 7. Change in Public Services _ With an estimated change in population that would occur with such a downzone from R-5 to R-1 zoning,from 85 persons to approximately 17 persons their would be a comparable decline in the demand for public services. R-1 zoning is anticipated to only increase the number of units on the 8.52-acre site by one or two units so the increased demand for services would be negligible. SIGNATURE I understand, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this addendum should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: /C/r��li�,dl J/�/��l/� �/ / i Name Printed: . .��(�c�'1 (�I /!� Date: � �� i l Ilt h S�l� -,- - �� _ � S 1 _ � N.'�. � �.11- "1ZE T �� ,#n��, �� f� �„� � � ' � ❑ ' � . ^ "„` ��`�� u \ � p� p �� ° �� II f�:_;' �+ ti -4 q��'`'�` y {��`{v 2g � a ^{-�a� � � `' �(y � � yy � �� G. t � A, 4£j�� J�� R . �I�$ hC N �'�p � � f 1 h+ r � S �1 T e F�r i �� 2��1�� \ �/'�. � 1r s a �� p� . � s a � � ' ;�7V �,r,. ;� � o � � ,� �."�. .::"t� n=�`�:: ' � (��` - �J � �;:' ❑ o LI-�J � � _ o � - � . j ' r .. . ...., . .. . . ... .,_ .. . ... � . ' �ltf�C��,�@II�Of7 ,. : ENt/IRONMENT.4L CHE�KCIST, : PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The Sfate Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapfer 43.21C RCW, requires all govemmental agencies to consider fhe environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmenfal Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for a/l proposals wifh probable signincant adverse impacts on fhe quality of the environmenf. The purpose of ihis checklisf is fo provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INS�RUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: - This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Govemmental agencies use this checklisf to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparafion of an EIS. Answer the quesfions briefly, witf► the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and careful/y, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the quesfions from your own observations or project plans withouf the need to hire experts. If you really do nof know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know"or "does not apply" Complefe answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regu/afions, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these guestions if you can. If you have problems, the govemmenfal agencies can assisf you. The checklist questions apply fo all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Aitach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonab/y related to defermining if fhere may be significanf adverse impacf. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Comp/ete this checklisf for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered"does not apply." IN ADDlTION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTlONS(part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references _ in the checklist to the words "project,""applicant,"and°'property or site"shou/d be read as "proposal," "proposer,"and"affected geographic area,"respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: � Proposed rezone of approximately 8.52 acre area from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's Residential 5 du/ac(R-5)Zone. Zoning would be applied at the time the subject site is annexed into the City of Renton. p�,p�NN1NG pEVELOPMENT C{TY OF REt�ffOtV JpN .14 20�3 RECElVED ,,—�- _ Bales Annexation Rezon�� January 7, 2003 , Page 2 - ' - 2. Name of applicant: Alex Pietsch,Acting Administrator, � Economic Development, Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Department City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicant and confact person: Address: Economic Development, Neighborhoods& Strategic Planning Department City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Contact Person: Don Erickson,AICP � (425)430-6581 4. Dafe checklisf prepared: January 7, 2003 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton, Department of Planning/Building/Public Works- Development Services Division 6. Proposed fiming or schedule(including phasing,if applicable): Adoption of the rezone ordinance is anticipated pending SEPA compliance,at the time of annexation into Renton. � � 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or.further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, expJain. Yes. Applicants have applied for annexation i�to the City of Renton. Under RCW 43.21.C.222 annexations are specffically exempt from SEPA. Upon annexation into Renton applicants or their successors will likely subdivide and develop vacant . properties with single-family dwellings Per the City of Renton's R-8 zornng. 8. Lisf any environmental informafion you know abouf that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly celated fo this proposal. FEIS on the 1995 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton 9. Do you know whefher applications are pending for govemmental approvals of other proposals directly affecfing the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No knowledge of other pending governmental approvals of affected properties. 10. List any govemmental approvals or permits fhar will be needed for your proposal, if � _known. Council approval is re4uired for this rezone from County to City zoning. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of fhe project and site. � The subject proposal is to rezone the 8.52 acre Bales Annexation site from King County's R-4 Zone(4 du/gross acre),to Renton's R-5 Zone (5 du/net acre). The site could accommodate approximately 34 dwellings under Renton's R-5 Zone and approximately 34 dwellings under King County's R-1 Zone 12. Location of fhe proposal. Give su�cient information for a person to understand the precise - location of your proposed project, including a street address,if any, and section, township,and range if known. If a proposal woWd occur over a range of area,provide the range or boundaries of ihe site(sJ. Provide a legal description,site plan, vicinity map,and topographic map, if reasonably available. While , $ales Annexation Rezone. �January 7, 2003 � Page 2 2. Name of applicant: Alex Pietsch,Acting Administrat4r, Economic Develapment, Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Departmenf City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: ` Address: Econamic Development, Neighborhoods& Strategic Planning Department City of Rentan 1Q55 South Grady Way Renton�WA 98055 Contacf Person: Don Erickson,AICP (425)430-6581 4. Dafe checklist prepared: January 7,2003 5. Agency requesfing checklist: Citv of Rentan, Depa�tment of P(anningl8uildingJPubiic Worics-Development Services Division 6 Proposed fiming or schedule(including phasing,if applicable): Adoption of the rezone ardinance is anticipated pending SEPA compliance,at the time of annexation into Renton. 7. Do yau have any plans for future additions, expansion, or furfher activity retated to or cannected wifh this proposal? If yes, explain. _ Yes. ApplicaMs have applied for annexatian into fhe City of Renton. Under RCW 4321.C.222 annexations are specificalty exempt from SEPA. Upon annexation into R�nton applicants or the(r successors wil!likely subdivide and develop vacant praperties with single-family dwellings per the City of Renton's R-8 zonmg. 8. List any environmenfal informafion yau know about fhat has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related fo this proposal. FE1S on the 1995 Comprehensive Pian of the City of Renton 9. Do you knarv whether appiicafions are pending for govemmenta!approvais af other prvposals dlrectly affectrng the property covered by your proposal? tf yes,exp/ain. No know(edge of other pending governmentai appt�ov�ls a#affected prope�ties. JD. Lisf any govemmental approvals or permits tha#will be needed for your proposaJ, if � known. Council auproval is reauired for this rezone from County to Gity zaning. 1�. Give brief, complete description of yaur proposai, incJuding the proposed uses and the size af the pr�qj�ct and si�e. The subject�roposal is to rezone the 8.52 acre Bales Annexation site from King Count�s R-4 Zone t4 dutgrass acre),ta Renton`s R-5 Zone(5 dulnet acre}. The site could accommodate approximately 34 dwellings ur�der Renton's R-5 Zone and approximately 34 dwellings under King County's R-1 Zone 12. Locatron of the proposai. �ive su�cieni informatiort for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed proJect including a street address,if any,and section, townshrp,and range if known. If a propasa!would occur over a range of area,provide the range o�boundaries af ihe site{s). Provide a Iega1 description,site p/an, vicinity map,and tapographic map, if reasanabiy available. While ' 'Bales Annexation Rezone . --�,nuary 7, 2003 . �age 3 . _. � ` _ ` you should submit any plans required by the agency,you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related fo ihis checklisf. The subject annexation site abuts NE 4�'Street(SE 128 St)on the north and 152"a Avenue SE, if extended,on the west. It is bounded by SE 130�'Street, if extended, on the south and approximately 155�'Avenue SE, if extended, on the east Please see attachments.) B. ENVIRONMENT�IL ELEMENTS � 1. EARTH a. General description of fhe site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The 8.52-acre annexation site is relatively flat. 8. What is the steepest slope on fhe site(approximate percent slope?) Renton Slope Maps indicate some smail area in the southwest corner with a slope of 15%-25%. c. What general fypes of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? !f you know the classification of agricultural soils, � specify fhem and note any pnme farmland. Alderwood Association. d. Are there surface indications or hisfory of unsfable soils in the immediafe vicinify? If so, describe. � There do not appear to be anv significant steep slopes on the rezone nortion of the annexation site. e. Describe fhe purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any �lling or grading propased. Indicate source of�ll. Not applicable for this non-project leqislative action. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No construction is proe,osed as a result of this non-project annexation and rezone proposal. Erosion presumably could occur as a result of future development under the proposed R-5 Zone. Mitigation measures would be applied typically at the time of future development. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with im ervious surfaces after � project construcfion(for example,',asphalt or buildings�� Approximately 35%. No construction is proposed as a result of this non- project legislative proposal. � h. Proposed measures to reduce or confro! erosion, or other impacfs to the earth, if any: � No construction is proposed as a result of this non-project legislative action. Any future development occurring as a consequence of the proposed R-5 Zone would be required to follow management practices in the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130)and in the Grading, Excavation ancJ Mining Regulations(RMC 4-4-060). 2. AIR �, a. What fypes of emissions fo fhe air wou/d result from fhe proposal(i.e., dusf, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construct�on and when the project is completed? !f any, generally describe"and give approximate quanfities if known. Bales Annexation Rezor " � "`' � January 7, 2003 � Page 4 - - ` • - N/A. No new construction is proposed as a result of this legislative non- project proposal. At the time of pro�ect level development specific air-related impacts may be identified and appropciate mitigation measures applied. b. Are there any off-sife sources of emission or odor thaf may affect your proposal? If so,generally describe. Unlikely and not applicable for this non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures fo reduce or control emissions or other impacfs fo air, if any: Not applicable for this non-proiect legislative action. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: � 1) Is there any surface water body on or in fhe immediafe vicinity of fhe site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwafer, lakes, ponds, wet/ands)? !f yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriafe, state what stream or river it flows inCo. No. 2) Wil!the project require any work over, in, or adjacenf fo(within 200 feet)the described wafers? If yes,please describe and aftach available plans. No. 3) Estimate fhe amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed' in or removed from surtace water or weflands and indicate the area of fhe site fhat would he affected Indicate the source of fil!material. N/A. No construction is proposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. 4) Will the proposal require surtace water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A. No construction is p�oposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. ' 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. The subject site is not mapped as part of the 100-year floodplain. 6) Does fhe proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to �surface wafers? If so, describe the type of waste and anficipated volume of discharge. No. This is a non-project legislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this proposal. Bales A�uiexation Rezone � _ � 3anuary 7, 2003 ' ' ' Page 4 � N/A. No new construction.is proposed as a result af this legislafive non- project proposai. At the time of project leve!development specific air-re{ated impacts may be identified and appropriate mitigation measures applied. 6. Are there any off-sife sources of emission or odor that may affecf your propasal? !f so,generally describe. . Unlikely and not applicabie for this non-project fegisiative actian. c. Proposed measures fo reduce or contro!emissions or ofher impacts to air, rf any: . Not applicabie for this non-project legisiative ac#ion. 3. WATER a. Surface Wafer: i) ls there any surface water body on or in the immec�iate vicin�ty of the site (including year-round and seasana! streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wefiands}? If yes, deseribe type and provide names. If apprQprrafe,state wha#stream or river rt flows info. No. 2) Wil1 fhe projecf require any work aver,in,or adjacenf fo(wifhin 200 feet)the descrrt�ed waters? tf yes,please descri6e and aitach available plans. Na. 3) Estimafe the amount af fill and dredge maferial that would be placed in or remaved from surface wafer or wetlands and indicate fhe area � of the site that woutd be affectecl. lndicate the source of�ii!material. N/A. No construction is praposed immediately as a resuit of this non-praject tegislative proposal. 41 Wi!l the propasal requfre surface wafer withdrawais or diverslons? Give general descript�on, putpose, and approximate quanrities if known. N/A. No construc#ion is p�oposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. 5) Does the proposal Ire within a 7t1()year fJoodp/ain? if so, note location orr the s�#e plan. No. The subject site is nat mapped as part of the 100-year flaodplain. 6) Does, fhe proposal invoive any discharges of waste materials to Sc�rface waters? !f so, describe the type of waste and aRficipafed volume af.discharge. No. Thi�, is a nan-project legislative action. No development is propased as a resu(t of this praposal. ' �ales Annexation Rezone ,"�� "��nuary 7, 2003 Page 5 � � � b. Ground Water: 1) Wil! ground water be wifhdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general descripfion,purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action.The proposed rezone is not expected to result in the discharge or withdrawal of water that is not now occurring. 2) Describe waste material thaf will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or ofher sources, if any (for example: Domestic , sewage;indusfrial, containing fhe following chemicals...;agricultural; etc.). Describe fhe general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses fo be served (rf applicable), or the number of animals or humans fhe system(s)are expected fo serve. No construction is proposed as a result of this non-proiect legislative rezone proposal. No new septic tanks will be allowed once the site is annexed into Renton and all new development will be hooked up to sanitary sewer. c. Water Runoff(including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any(include quantities, if known). Where will tf�is water flow? Will ihis water flow into other waters? If so, describe. N/A. No construction and therefore runoff is proposed as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. Surtace water appears to run off the site in a north/northeasterly direction. Although no new development is proposed at this time the proposed zonmg would provide for densities comparable to wha[ already exists in King County. Environmental review, however, would be required for any � non-exempt development under SEPA. 2) Cou/d waste materia! enter ground or su►face waters? lf so, general/y describe. Not applicable. Future new residential development would be hooked up to sanitary sewer. d. Proposed measures fo reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Not applicable since this is a non-project leqislative action. Future development allowed under the.proposed R-5 Zone would be required to comply with City of Renton Drainage Standards (RMC 4-6-030). 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegefafion found on fhe site: deciduous free:alder,maple,aspen, other evergreen tree:fir,cedar,pine, other shrubs grass pasture Bales Annexation Rezon�'-�,�:... , January 7, 2003 � Page 6 � crop or grain wet soil plants:cattail, buttercup,bullrush, skunk cabbage, other wafer plants:water lily, eel grass,milfoil, other other types of vegeration b. What kind and amounf of vegefation will be removed or alfered? N/A. No construction and therefore no vegetation will be removed as a resuit of this non-project legislative proposal. Future development will have to comply with Renton's Tree Cutting regulations(RMC 4-4-130). c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None are known at this time. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures fo preserve or enhance vegetaf►on on fhe site, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. As noted above, development that occurs under Renton's jurisdiction must conform to the City's codes and regulations. 5. AIV/MALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known fo be on or near the site: _ Birds:hawk,heron, eagle,songbirds, other Mammals:deer,bear, elk, beaver, other Fish:bass,salmon, trout, herring,shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered species are known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migrafion route? If so, explain Unknown. but the entire State of Washington is included within a migration route for birds known as the Pacific Flyway. This flyway, as it overlies Renton, is used by a variety of migratory birds, including, but not limited to the Canada Goose. d. Proposed measures fo preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: This is a non-project leQislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this rezone proposal. Mitigation measures, if any, may be imposed at the time of future development. 6. ENERGYAI1fD NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (elecfric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet fhe completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it wil! . be used for heafing, manufacfuring, eic. It is anticipated that the potential 34 dwelling units the R-5 zoning would allow on the site will use primarily electircal and natural gas resources for heatinq and runnina appliances. Bales Annexatian Rezone, � January 7, 2003 ' � ' Fage 6 � crop or grain wef soil planfs:cattail, buftercup,bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water pJants:wafer li1y, ee1 grass,milfoil, aiher other fypes of vegetafron b. What kind and amounf af vegetation will be removed or alfered? � No construction and therefore no vegetation wili be removed as a - resu(t of this non-project iegislative propasal. Future devetopment wiil have � to comply wi#h Renton's T�ee Cutting regulations{RMC 4-4-i 30}. c. Lrsf threatened or endangered species knavvn to be on or near the site. None are known at this time. d Propased landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures ta preserve or enhance vege#atron an fhe site,if any: Nat appiicabte. This is a non-project action. As noted above, development that occurs under Ren#an's jurisd�c#ron must conform to the City's codes and regulatians. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animais which have been observed on or near the sife � ar are known to 6e on or near fhe site: _ Birds:hawk,heron, eagle,sangbirds, other Mammals:deer,bear, elk,beaver, ofher Fish:bass,salmon, trocrt,herring,shellfrsh, ofher b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be an or near the site. No threatened or endanqered species are known to be on or�ear the site. c. ls the site part of a migration raufe? lf so, explain Urtknown. bu#the entire State af Washington is inciuded within a migration rou#e for birds known as the Pacific Flyway. This flyway, as it averlies . Rentan, is used by a variety of migratory birds, including, but nat limited to the Canada Goose. d Proposed measu�es ta preserve or enhance wikflife,if any: This is a non-project legislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this rezone proposat. Mitigation measures, �f any, may be irnposed at the tirne of future development. T t � 6. EtVERGY AIVD IVATtlRAL RESOUA'CES a. Whaf kinds.of energy (elecfric, natural gasa ail, wood stove, solar) wilf be used to meef fiie cnmpleted projecYs energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heafing,manufactunng, etc. It is anticipated that the �otential 34 dwellinct units the R-5 zoning wouid 'L a(law on fhe site witf use,primarilv electircal and naturaf gas resources for heatinq and runnir�q appliances. ' Bales Annexation Rezone � "�� , � �� `rnuary 7, 2003 . �Page 7 �--'� � - % b. Wou1d your project affect the potentia! use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,generally describe. Unlikelv Zoning provides some setbacks and restricts the height of new structures to 30 feet. � c. What kinds of energy consenration features are included in the plans of this proposal? List ofher proposed measures to reduce or conrrol energy impacts, if any: None. This is a non-proiect leQislative action. Future development occurring on the site will meet all related energy code provisions. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are fhere any environmental health hazards, including exposure fo toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, fhat could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. 1) Describe special emergency services thaf might be required. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. No environmental health hazards are anticipated from future single-family residential development. 2) Proposed measures fo reduce or control environmental health hazards,if any: N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Noise i) What types of noise exist in fhe area which may affect your project (for examp/e:traffic, equipment, operation, ofher)? Not aqplicable since this is a legislative non-project action. 2) Whaf fypes and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-ferm or a long-term basis (for example: trafflc, construction, operation, other)? Indicate whaf hours noise would come from the site. . Not applicable. New development occurring under the R-5 Zone could include construction activiry and normal noise associated with ground related residential living. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts,if any: None. This is a non-project action. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is fhe currenf use of the site and adjacent properties? The westerly portion of the 8.52-acre rezone site is developed with an outdoor heavy construction equipment maintenance company that is scheduled to cease its operations in January 2003. Lower density single- family dwellings and a vacant parcel exist to the east. Existing densities are not believed to exceed 5 du/ac. Has fhe site been used for agricuJture?!f so, describe. Not activelv. One of the parcels does have fruit trees on it. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are an estimated four existin4 single-familv dwellings on the subject 8.52-acre site. Bales Annexation Rezone�'�� '�'�� January 7, 2003 � Page 8 . � d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? This is a legislative non-project rezone action. It is not anticipated that this proposed rezone will result in the demolition of any structures. e. What is fhe current zoning classification of fhe sife? The current King County zoning classification is the R-4 Zone which allows 4 du/gross acre. The current proposal is for R-5 zoning that allows 5-du/net acre. Densities are assumed to be comparable. f. Whaf is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The 8.52 acre rezone site is currently designated "Residential Rural" on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and "Urban Residential 4- 12du/ac"on King County's Comprehensive Plan Map. Renton's designation would allow zoning with up to 5 units per net acre and King County's designation currently allows zoning with 4 units per gross acre. Because of this it is assumed that densities are comparable under either zone. g. If applicable, whaf is the current shoreline masfer program designation of the site? Not a�plicable. h. Has any part of fhe site been classified as an "environmenfally sensitive° area? If so,specify. No portions of the subject site are known to be environmentally sensitive. i. Approximately how many peop/e would reside or work in the completed project? At full redevelopment under the proposed R-5 zoning, it is anticipated that approximately 85 residents could eventually reside on these 8.52 acres. j. Approximatety how many people would the completed project displace? Unknown. This is a ,non-project action. The estimated five existing residents could choose, for example, to relocate to new dwellings within the annexation area. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable at this non-project stage. l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with exisfing and projected land uses and plans,if any: As noted above the proposed rezone is consistent with the City's current Residential Rural land use designation for the subject site. 9. HOUSIIVG a. Approximafely how many unifs would be provided, if any? Indicafe whefher . high, midd/e, or low-income housing. Unknown. It is anticipated that up to 34 dwelling units could be accommodated on the subject site under Renton's R-5 zoning. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? lndicate whether high,middle, or low-income housing. Unknown. The proposed rezone will not eliminate any units by itself. As future development occurs the two existing dwellings may be replaced and/or relocated although this is not currently known. Bales Annexation Rezone � - _��a�uary 7, 2�?3 , . � Page 8 ` � - d. Will any structures be demolished? /f so, what? This is a legislative nan-project rezone action. It is not anticipated that this proposed rezone wilt resutt in#he demalitian a#any sttvctures. e. What is the current zoningr classi�cation of the site? The current Kina Counfy zanina ciassificat9on is the R-4 Zone which aiiows 4 dulgr�ss acre. The current proposal is for R-5 zoning tha# allows 5-dutnet acre. Densities are assumed to be camparabie. . - f. Whaf is the current comprehensive plan designafion of the sife? Ths 8.52 acre rezone site is currently designated "Residential Rural" on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and "Urban Residentiai 4- 12dulac"on �ng Caunf�'s Comprehensive Ptan Map. Renton's designation would allow zonmg with up ta 5 units per net acre ar�d King County's designat�on current�y allows zoning with 4 units per gross acre. Because af this it is assumed that densities are comparable under either zone. g. tf applicable, whai is the current shoreline master program designation af the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classrfied as an "environmenfaliy sensitive° area? If so,speci�y: No portions of#he subject site are known ta be enviranmentalty sensitive. i. Approximafely how many psopte would reside or wark in the completed projec#? � At fuil redevelopment under the prapased R-5 zoning, it is anticipated #hat approxirnately 85 res"rdents coutd evenfua#ly reside on these 8.52 acres. j. Appraximafely haw rriany peaple wauld the completed projeet displace? Unknown. This is a non-project action. The estimated five existing residen#s could choose, for example, to relocate ta new dwellings within the annexation area. k. Propased measures to avold or reduce displacement impacts,it any.• Not applicable at this non-project stage, t. Proposed measures fo ensure the proposa!is compatible with existing and projecfed land uses and plans,if any: As noted above the proposed rezone is consistent with ihe Cit}�'s current ResidentiaJ Rural land use designation for the subject site. 9. HOUSIIVC . . tf � a. Approximatety how many unifs wou/d be provrded, if any? lndicate whether . high, middle, or lcrw-income housing. Unknawn:'.!t is an#icipated that up to 34 dweiling units could be accommodated on tfie sub�ect site under Renton's R-5 zoning. b. Appraxrmately how many units, if any, would 6e eliminated? lndicate whether high,middle,or low-income housing. Unknawn. The pcoposed rezor�e wi!( nat ef'rminate any units by i#self. As fu#ure development occurs the two sxisting dwellings may be reglaced andJor relocated although this is not currently known. " Bales Annexation Rezone ,'` nuary 7, 2003 �Page 9 �- - c. Proposed measures fo reduce or control housing impacts,if any: The proposed zoning is consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and applicable policies for this area. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), nof including antennas;what is the principal exterior building material(s)proposed. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. No new development is specifically proposed as a result of this change in zoning classification. Heights of residential structures are restricted to two stories and 30' in the proposed R-5 Zone b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Unknown. This is a non-project rezone action. This is not known at this level. ' c. Proposed measures fo reduce or control aesthetic impacts,if any: Unknown. At the future project level impacts will be assessed and mitigated. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would rf mainly occur? Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. Future development may create some visible nighttime light. b. Could light or glare from fhe finished project be a safety frazard or inferfere with views? Unknown. Future single-family homes are not anticipated to result in sufficient levels of glare to impair views from surrounding properties. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposa!? Unknown. d. Proposed measures f�reduce or contro!light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. , 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? King County currently owns the two abutting parcels immediately to the south of the subject site. These two parcels with a combined area of 9.34 acres have been set aside for a future park. Presumably, upon annexation these two parcefs will be transferred to the City for future park development. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No.This is a non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not apqlicable at this non-proiect level of review. The City will collect a . recreation mitigation fee at the time of future development. Bales Annexation Rezon�' ^`� ��'� January 7, 2003 Page 10 - • - 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or ob%ects lisfed on, or proposed for, national sfate, or local preservation_registers known to be on or nexf to the site? If so, generally describe. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or culfural importance known to be on or nexf to the sife. Unknown. This is a non-project legisiative action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or confro/impacfs, if any: Unknown. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing sfreet sysfem. Show on sife plans, if any. The site is primarilv served by SE 128�'Street. b. Is site currently served by public fransit? If nof, what is the approximate distance to fhe nearesf transif stop? Yes. Bus service is available on NE 4�'Street. a How many parking spaces would fhe completed project have? How many would the projecf el�mrnate? Unknown. Assuming 34 dwelling units and parking being provided between 1.75 spaces per unit and 2.25 spaces per unit, there potentially could be between 59 and 76 required off-street spaces developed on the rezone site. No spaces are anticipated to be eliminated. d. Will fhe proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements fo existing roads or streets, nof including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or privafe? Verv IikelY Future subdivision of the site would be required to comply with City re�ulations pertaining to street width, curbs, sidewalks, lighting, etc. At this pomt it is difficult to anticipate what improvements 28 new dwellings in the Bales Annexation area would require. New streets would most likely be local access streets including loop streets and/or cul-de-sacs. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity o fl water, rail, or air , transportafion? If so,generally describe. . No. f. How many vehicu/ar frips per day would be generafed by the completed projecf? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. This is a legislative non-project action in which transportation impacts have not been identified since the actual levels of development are still unknown. However, if 30 additional units were built, and assuming 10 AWDVTE, there could be as many as 300 additional vehicles trip ends per 24 hour period. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable at this non-project level. Level of future development is speculative at this point. Ba1es Annsxation Rezane , � � � ��__,�January 7, 2003 � � � Page 10 � �3. NISTORtC AlVD CULTURAL PRESERVATfG1N a. Are there any places or obfec�s tisted on, or proposed f�r, national s#ate, or local preservation.regisfers known fo be on or next fo the site? If so, generally descnbe. . Unknawn. This is a non-project legis{ative action, b. Generally describe any landmarks ar evidence of histaric, archaeologicaf, scienfific, or cultural importance known fo be on or next to the site. Unknawn. This is a non•project legislative actian. c. Proposed measures to reduce or conirol impacts,if any: Unknawn. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. ldentify pu6lic streets and highways serving the site, and descri6e proposed access ta the existing sfreet system. Show or�sire plans,if any. The site is primarily served 6y SE 128�'Street. b.. /s sife currenfly served by public fransit? lf nof, rvhat is the approxrmate distance to the nearest#ransrt stop? Yes. Bus service is available on NE 4"'S#reet, a How many parking spaces would fhe campleted prajeci have? How many v�rould tha pro�ect et�minate? Unknown. Assumin� 34 dwelling units and parking being provided between 1 J5 spaces per unit and 2.25 spaces per unit, there po#entiaily could be between 59 and 76 required aff-street spaces developed on the rezone site. No spaces are anticipated to be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvemenfs fo existing roads ar streets, not including driveways? if so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? Very likety. Future subdivision af the site would be required ta camply with Cify re�uEa#ions pertaining to street width, curbs, sidewafks, lighting, etc. At this pant it is difficult to anttcipate what improvements 28 new dwell�ngs in the Bales Annexation area would require. New streets would most likely be facal access streets inciuding loop streets and/or cu{-de-sacs. e, Wi!l the project use {ar occur in th� immediate vicinity ofJ wafer, rail, or air franspvrtation? If so,generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular frips per day would be generafed by the completed project� /f known, indicate when peak vo/umes would occur. tf � Thls is a legislatiye nan-project action in which transporta#ion impac#s have not been iden#ifi�,d.since the actual leveis of development are still unknown. However, if 30 additianai units were built, and assummg 10 AWDVTE,there could be as`mar�yas 304 additiona!vehicles trip ends per 24 hour period. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control#ranspartation impacts, if any: Not a�p{icable at this nan-project level. Level of future development is speculative at this point. J "Bales Annexation Rezone ,• "- ,, u�uary 7, 2003 •Page 11 `,. - ` �� 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would fhe project resu/t in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protecfion, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so,generally describe. Probablv. Residential development that might occur in the future would increase the need for public services that typically serve such development. Affected services may include, but would not be limited to, fire protection, police protection, emergency services, and schools. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacfs on public services, if any. The Citv of Renton currentiv collects mitiQation fees to control such impacts to parks and recreation, fire, and transportation. The City also collects taxes for most of these services. Until a specific proposal is made at the project level, however, it is too early to ascertain what these impacts, if any,will be. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle ufilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, felephone,sanitary sewer, septic sysfem, other. The current proposal is a non-project action. However, the area it would apply to will likely be served by sewer,telephone, electriciry,and water. b. Describe the utilifies that are proposed for fhe project, fhe utilify providing the service, and the general construction activ�t�es on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Unknown. Non-project action._ C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: �1��h��l lY6 '�� . Name Prinfed: ��2� �/ Dafe: U� � Bales Annexation Rezon� . .. January 7, 2003 Page 13 ' - 4. How wou/d the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designa�ed (or eliqible or under study) foe� governmenta! protection; such as parks, wilderness, wrild and scenic rivers, threafenes! or endangered species haB�itat, historic or culfural siges, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? This non-project rezone proposal will.not directly impact environmentally sensitive areas. Whether future development occurs under County or City zoning sensitive areas, if any,would have to be addressed. � Proposed measures to profecf such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None proposed at this time for this non-project action. 5. How would the proposal be likely to atfecf land and shoreline use, incls►ding ►rtihefher it would allow or eracourage land or shoreline uses iracompatible with exis#ing plans? This proposed non-project rezone will not directly affect land or shoreline use. Proposed new zoning would be in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Proposed measures fo avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None proposed at this non-proiect level. As noted above any new development under the proposed R5 zoning will be reviewed by the City to ensure compliance with relevant state and local regulations. . 6. How would fhe proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? This is a leQislative non-project action. Future development would result in increased demands on transportation,the use of utilities, or other services over what is allowed under current King County zoning. If additional homes are built in this area as many as 300 additional vehicle t�ips per day could be generated over a 24-hour period. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: None are proposed for this non-project action. Future development will be asked to mitigate any identified significant adverse impacts. 7. ldenfify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, sfafe, or federal laws or requirements for fhe protecfion of the environment, No conflicts with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment are known to exist with the subject non-project legislative rezone proposal. SIG/VATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. � �Q Proponent: eP��vi Name Printed: ��e C�'�� Dafe: v��I�GI�y f¢ o��.� V � Bales Annexation Rezone ' -`t, -�nuary 7, 2003 �age 12 . D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheets shou/d only be used for actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs. You do not need fo fill out these sheets for project actions.) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read fhem in conjunction with the list of fhe elements of fhe environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensify or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemenfed. Respond briefly and in general ferms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water;emissions fo air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or producfion of noise? This is a legislative non proiect rezone action that is not anticipated by itself to change operations at the subject site or increase substance discharges into the environment. Subsequent development, whether under the current County R-4 zoning or the proposed City of Renton R-5 zoning,would be required to comply with SEPA at the time of development, unless categorically exempt. Any new development will likely increase discharges to air, water, etc. These, however, are . anticipated to be relatively small. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: This non-proiect legislative action. Subsequent development as a result of this proposed map amendment would have to go through environmental review unless SEPA exempt. It is likely that air emissions, etc. would be addressed at this time when.type and quantities of discharges are more likely to be known. Because Renton's R-5 Zone would allow comparable densities to those allowed under King Count�s R-4 Zone, impacts, if any, are assumed to be comparable. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants,animals,fish, or marine life? No significant impacts to plants, animals, fish or marine life are anticipated to occur as a consequence of the proposed zoning action. The proposal would supplant existing County R-4 single-family zoning which allows 4 du/ac (gross) with Renton's R-5 single-family zoning, which allows 5 du/ac (net). As a result future development under Renton's R-5 zornng is assumed to be comparable to that currently allowed under King County's R-4 zoning. Proposed measures fo protect or conserve plants,animals, fish, or marine life are: Not applicable. 3. How would fhe proposal be Iikely to deplefe energy or natural resources? This non-proiect legislative action will not directiv impact enerqv or natural resources. Future single-family development will, however, likely result in some additional demand'of such resources. Future development under Renton's R-5 zoning would allow up to 30 additional homes in the area. The Count�s R-4 Zone would also ' - allow approximately 30 new units. As a consequence the proposed zoning would not increase the demand for energy and natural resources over what is currently allowed. Proposed measures fo profect or conserve energy and natura!resources are: None are pro�osed since this is currently a non-proiect action. . Bales Annexation Rezone��.... . � "� `fanuary 7, 2003 � Page 13 " _ , 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affecf environmentally sensitive areas or areas designafed (or eligible or under sfudy) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threafened or endangered species habitat,historic or cultural sites, weflands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? This non-project rezone proposal will not directiy impact environmentaliy sensitive areas. Whether future development occurs under County or City zoning sensitive � areas, if any,would have to be addressed. . Proposed measures fo protect such resources o�to avoid or reduce impacts are: None proaosed at this time for this non-project action. '- 5. How would the proposal be likely to affecf land and shoreline use, including whefher it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses lncompatible with exPsting plans? This proposed non-project rezone will not directly affect land or shoreline use. Proposed new zoning would be in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None proposed at this non-proiect level. As noted above any new development under the proposed R5 zoning will be reviewed by the City to ensure compliance with relevant state and local regulations. 6 How would the proposa!be likely fo increase demands on transportatlon or pub/lc servlces and utilities? , This is a legislative non-project action. Future development would resuft in increased , demands on transportation,the use of utilities, or other services over what is allowed under current King County zoning. If additional homes are built in this area as many as 300 additional vehicle trips per day could be generated over a 24-hour period. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: None are proposed for this non-project action. Future development will be asked to mitigate any identified significant adverse impacts. 7. Identify, !f possible, whefher fhe proposal may conflicf with local, sfate, or federal laws orrequirements for the protectlon vf the envlronment No conflicts with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment are known to exist with the subject non-project legislative rezone proposal. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. tt is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. . � Proponent: IYI�PQP��IS'�G�1�i1 _ ____ _ Name Printed: ��t`/Q��.� C�/�U Dafe: UG��/�GI'` �¢ 0�0�-3 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } A�FIi)AVIT OI' PUBI.ICATION PUBI,IC NOTICE ca�oF xErrroN Lily Nguyen, being first duly sworn on oath that she is a Legal Advertising NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Representative of the t at�Tt e Ren onHCi�ty Councilvhas fixed the 26th day of January,2004, Kin� COUIl� Journal at 7:30 p.m.as the date and time for b y a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall,1055 S.Grady Way, a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general Renton, WA 98055, to consider the circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date following: . of ublication hereinafter referred to, ub(ished in the EnQlish lanQuaQe �'oposed R-1 (Residential - one P P b b c dwelling unit per acre)prezoning continuously as a daily newspaper in Kin� County, Washington. The King for the Bales Annexation site, County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the consisting of 8.52 acres generally bounded by the City of Renton Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. corporate boundary,including SE The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the 128th St. to the north; SE 130th St., if eictended, to the south; King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly 156th Ave.SE,if extended,to the distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed east;and the middle of 152nd Ave. SE, to the west. ��'�tes=� notice, a Annexation) All interested parties are invited to Notice of Public I-�earin attend the hearing and present g written or oral comments regarding the proposal. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American was published on Tuesday, 1/13/04 Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. For The full amount of the fee char�ed for said foregoin� publication is the sum information,ca11425-430-6502. of $71.88 at the rate of$15.50 per inch for the first publication and N/A per Bonnie I.Walton City Clerk inch for h s�bse i sertion. Published in the King County , Journal January 13, 2004.#845696 Lily Nguye Legal Ad ertising Representative, Kin�Counry Journal Subsc•ibed and sworn to me this 13th day of January,2004. \\\\��t��// .��`�� `: �1�q G'y�i�i �' i � � : �\Ssion�E � �` i'�� Tom A. Meagher � �'� +'O�'•.�' % �� NOTARy �°; Notary Public for the State of Washin�ton,Residing in Redmond,Washin�ton : _�_ _ Ad Number: 84�696 P.O. Number: ` c��: A :� ` Cost of publishin`�this notice includes an affidavit surchar��e. � p ° �8L1� � O � � ��'�qY 0��.:� �� i � �°. 2: 2,.' �? �� \ �\ �,��///oF!�I�SN`�\\\\ � City of'_..�A_�ton Department of Planning/Building/Pubi'�; '�rks ENVlRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:• COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 14, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-00 , ECF, R DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 8,2004 � APPLICANT: Cit of Renton, EDNSP De artment PROJECT MANAGER: Don Erickson PROJECT TITLE: Bales Annexation R-1 Prezone PLAN REVIEW: N/A SITE AREA: 8.52-acres BUILDING AREA ross : N/A LOCATION: NE 4T"Street and 152"d Ave SE(if extended) WORK ORDER NO: 77 SUMMAFiY OF PROPOSAL: The City Council has recommended that the Bales Annexation site be prezoned R-1 because of the failure of the residents within the annexation area to approve R-5 zoning at the special election on the Bales Annexation held on September 16,2003. The Resi�ential Low Density land use desi�nation allows RC, R-1 or R-5 zoning. T�e 8.51-acre site is generally located between NE 4 Street on the north and SE 130 Street(if extended)on the south, 152 Avenue SE (if extended) on the west,and 155'h Avenue SE(if extended)on the east. The proposed R-1 prezoning would allow a density�/a that of the current County R-4 zoning. Under the proposed R-1 prezoning the number of units currently on the site would increase from 5 to 8. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Informat/on Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housin Air Aesthetics Water Li hUGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Trans ortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment f 0,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Routing Sheet for R-1.doc Rev.10/93 City Of l�enton ENVII�ONMENT�4L CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA), Chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacfs of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals wifh probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information fo help you and the agency idenfify impacts from your proposal(and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, �f it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmenta/ agencies use this checklist fo defermine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer fhe questions briefly, with the most precise information known, orgive the best description you can. You musf answer each question accurately and carefully, to the besf of your know/edge. In most cases, you shou/d be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans wifhouf the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a quesfion does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know"or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental � agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan fo do fhem over a period of fime or on differenf parcels of/and. Attach any addifional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmenta/effecfs. The agency to which you submit this checklisf may ask you fo explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete fhis checklist for nonprojecf proposals, even though quesfions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete fhe SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS(part D). For nonproject actions (acfions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in fhe checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer,"and "affected geographic area,"respectively. A. BACKGFiO(1ND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Non-Project: R-1 prezoning of the proposed Bales Annexation site 2. Name of applicant: City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Contact Person: EDNSP Dept. Don Erickson City of Renton, City of Renton Renton, WA 98055 Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Phone: (425) 430-6581 Phone: (425) 430-6581 R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renton Environmenta/Ci�_ _..�ist Non-Pro%ecf:Prezoning o'• __'Proposed Bales Annexation January 6,2004 Page 2 of i2 4. Dafe checklist prepared: January 6th, 2004 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton _ 6. Proposed fiming or schedu/e (inc/uding phasing, if applicable): Completion of annexation and adoption of R-1 prezoning anticipated for the first quarter of 2004. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity relafed fo or connected with this proposal? If yes, exp/ain. Annexation of the subject properties. 8. List any environmental information you know abouf that has been prepared, or wi/l be prepared, directly related to this proposal. King County Comprehensive Plan Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Draft, Final and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecfing the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No known pending governmental approvals. 10. List any governmenfal approvals or permifs fhat wil/ be needed for your proposal, if known. Adoption of R-1 prezoning ordinance by the Renton City Council. 11. Give brief, compfete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and fhe size of the project and sife. The proposed non-project action is the adoption of City of Renton R-1 prezoning for the five properties included in the proposed Bales Annexation pursuant to RCW 35.A.14.330- 340. City of Renton prezoning would supplant existing King County R-4 zoning upon annexation of the 8.52-acre site. 12. LOCat1017 Of the pI'OpOsal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description,site plan, vicinity map,and topographic map,if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The affected area is generall�r between NE 4th Street on the nor�h and SE 130th Street (if extended) on the south, 152 Avenue SE on the west, and 155t Avenue SE (if extended) on the east (see Exhibit E.1: Vicinity Map, attached). B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEIVIENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circ/e one); flat, rollinp, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The subject area slopes gradually from its northeast corner to its southeast corner at about a 4% slope. b. What is the steepesf slope on the site (approximafe percent slope?) Unknown, No slopes over 25%, R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renton Environmental CI _ _.:'ist �Non-Project:Prezoning o '�Proposed Bales Annexation January 6,2004 Page 3 of 12 c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classificafion of agricultura/soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Alderwood (AgC) gravelly sandy loam (USDA Soil Conservation Service, 1972). d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. The City's Critical Areas Inventory maps show no geologic hazards for the subject area. e. Describe fhe purpose, type, and approximate quanfities of any filling or grading proposed. lndicate source of fill. N/A. This is a non-project action. f. Could erosion occur as a resu/t of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. The proposal is a nonproject action and no development is proposed at this time. g. About what percent of fhe site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? N/A. This is a non-project action. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: N/A. This is a nonproject action. Potential impacts that may result from specific development proposals should be assessed and mitigations proposed through the development application review process. Any development projects proposed for the site would be required to follow management practices in the Land Clearing and Tree Cuiting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130) and in the Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060), 2. A/R a. What types of emissions to fhe air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, genera/ly describe and give approximate quantities if known. N/A. This is a non-project action. Emissions to the air may result from the development of the area under the proposed zoning and from the single family uses created. Potential impacts are anticipated to be significantly less under the proposed R-1 prezone than may occur under the existing King County R-4 Zone. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. N/A. This is a non-project action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: N/A. This is a non-project action. At such time as development is proposed for the subject area, project-specific impacts to the air should be identified and appropriate mitigation measures applied. 3. lNATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of fhe site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwafer, lakes, ponds, R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renton Environmental Chr_ >t Non-Project:Prezoning of. Proposed Bales Annexafion January 6,2004 Page 4 of 12 weflands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriafe, sfafe what stream or river it flows into. The Cedar River Basin Plan shows no streams or tributaries running across the subject site, 2) Will the projecf require any work over, in, or adjacent to (wifhin 200 feet) fhe described waters? If yes,please describe and attach available plans. N/A. This is a non-project action. 3) Estimafe the amount of fill and dredge materia/that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A, This is a nonproject action. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description,purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A, This is a nonproject action, 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on fhe sife plan. No portion of the subject area is mapped as 100-year floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. N/A, This is a nonproject action, 6. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description,purpose,and approximate quantities if known. N/A, This is a nonproject action. 2) Describe waste materia/ that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, If al7y (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served(if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s)are expected to serve. N/A, This is a nonproject action, It is anticipated that development that may occur under the City's jurisdiction would connect to sanitary sewers. Other potential contaminants that may be discharged to the ground as a result of development under the proposed zoning would be substances associated with residential activities. Such impacts would not change as a result of the proposed application of R-1 prezoning. c. Water Runoff(including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. N/A, This is a nonproject action. The subject area is within the Cedar River Basin. 2) Cou/d waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renton Environmental ChE_, ;,t Non-Project:Prezoning of Proposed Bales Annexation January 6,2004 Page 5 of 12 N/A, This is a nonproject action, d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: N/A, This is a nonproject action, Potential impacts that may result from specific future development proposals, These should be assessed and mitigation measures proposed through the application process. Future development unde�r the proposed zoning would be required to comply with City of Renton Drainage Standards (RMC 4-6-030) 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree:alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree:fir, cedar,pine, other X shrubs X grass � pasture crop or grain wef soil plants:cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other wafer planfs: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, ofher other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or alfered? NA, This is a nonproject action. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near fhe site. None known at this time. d. Proposed landscaping, use of nafive planfs, or other measures fo preserve or enhance vegetafion on the sife, if any: NA, This is a nonproject action. Development that occurs under Renton's jurisdiction must conform to the City's codes and regulations including the Land Clearing and Tree Cuiting regulations which prohibits the removal of trees or ground cover within 25 feet of the annual high water mark of creeks or streams or within 15 feet of the top of the bank of the same. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Unknown. Portions of the subject area are undeveloped and may provide habitat to a variety of wildlife species. Birds:hawk, heron, eagle, son ir s, other Mammals:deer, bear, elk, beaver, ofher Fish:bass, salmon, frout, herring, shellfish, ofher b. Lisf any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renfon Environmental ChE_, _f Non-Pro%ect:Prezoninq of. :�roposed Bales Annexation January 6,2004 � Page 6 of 12 Unknown. c. Is the site part of a migrafion route? If so, explain The entire State of Washington is included within a migration route for birds, known as the Pacific Flyway. This flyway, as it overlies Renton, is used by a variety of migratory birds, including, but not limited to, the Canada Goose. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: NA, This is a nonproject action. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (elecfric, nafural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used fo meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, efc. NA, This is a nonproject action, Future uses that may be established as a result of implementation of the proposed R-1 Zone may have energy demands that include natural gas, electricity, wood stove, oil or other types of energy for ongoing activities associated with single family development, b. Would your projeci affect fhe pofential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,generally describe. NA, This is a nonproject action, Future residential development that may occur as a result of implementation of the proposed zoning for the subject properties is anticipated to have a minimal impact on the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation feafures are included in fhe plans of fhis proposal? Lisf other proposed measures to reduce or confrol energy impacts, if any: NA, This is a nonproject action, " 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental healfh hazards, including exposure to foxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, thaf could occur as a resulf of ihis proposal? If so, describe. The proposed single family residential zoning would supplant existing King County residential zoning upon annexation. Allowed uses under both existing and proposed zones are similar. Assignment of the R-1 Zone to the subject properties is likely to decrease environmental health hazards over those resulting from the existing zoning. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N/A. This is a nonproject action. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental healfh hazards, if any: N/A. This is a nonproject action. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in fhe area which may atfect your project (for example: fraffic, equipment, operation, other)? This is a nonproject action. R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renfon Environmenta/ChE_, �t Non-Pro%ecf:Prezoning of f \�roposed Ba/es Annexafion January 6,2004 Page 7 of 12 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associafed wifh fhe projecf on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: fraffic, consfrucfion, operafion, ofher)? Indicafe what hours noise would come from fhe site. This is a nonproject action. Apart from limited residential development activities, the only noise impacts that may result from the proposed zoning would be those typically associated with residential development. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or confrol noise impacfs, if any: NA. This is a nonproject action. . 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The subject area includes 5 single family detached homes. Adjacent properties are predominantly residential and/or vacant. The vacant parcel to the south is owned by King County for future park development. b. Has the sife been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No agricultural uses more intensive than hobby farms are known to have occurred on the site. c. Describe any structures on the sife. Five single family homes and accessory structures. One commercial use existed but has now been removed. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? N/A. This is a non-project action. e. What is the curreni zoning classification of fhe site? The current classification is King County's R-4 Zone. f. Whaf is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? King County: Urban Residential -4 to 12 units per acre. City of Renton: Residential Low Density. g. If applicable, what is fhe currenf shoreline masfer program designafion of the site? N/A. h. Has any part of fhe site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive"area? If so, specify. No. There are no known streams, wetlands, or steep slopes associated with the site. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?. The future population of the subject properties cannot be precisely determined at this point. For purposes of assessing the potential fiscal impact of the annexation on City resources, a future population of 20 was estimated. j. Approximately how many people would fhe completed project displace? N/A. This is a nonproject action. k. Proposed measures fo avoid or reduce displaeement impacts, if any: N/A. This is a nonproject action. R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renton Environmenfa/CI'. ;ist Non-Pro%ect:Prezoning a�_ �Proposed Bales Annexation January 6,2004 Page 8 of 12 1. Proposed measures fo ensure the proposal is compafible wifh exisfing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed zoning is consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and applicable policies. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A. This is a nonproject action. The number of housing units is anticipated to increase from 5 to 8 at buildout. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A. This is a nonproject action. The buildout estimate assumes redevelopment of three existing single family units. � c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A. This is a non-project action. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the fallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exferior building material(s)proposed. This is a nonproject action. The maximum building height for new development in the R-1 Zone is two stories or 30'. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? N/A. This is a nonproject action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or confrol aesfhefic impacts, if any: N/A. This is a nonproject action. 11. UGHT AND GLARE a. Whaf fype of light or glare will the proposal produce? What fime of day would it mainly occur? N/A. This is a nonproject action. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A. This is a nonproject action. c. Whaf existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? N/A. This is a nonproject action. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control lighf and glare impacts, if any: N/A. This is a nonproject action. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreationa/ opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The subject area is adjacent to the about 10 acres of land acquired by King County for future development as a park to its south. R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renton Environmental Che'_ _:t Non-Project:Prezoning of_ �roposed Bales Annexation January 6,2004 Page 9 of 12 b. Wou/d the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposal is a nonproject action. No formal public recreational facilities exist on the subject properties. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacfs on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: N/A. This is a nonproject action. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, nafional state, or local preservation registers known to be on or nexf to the site? If so, generally describe. None known or identified in the 1983 King County Newcastle Community Plan. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or culfural importance known to be on or next to fhe site. None known or identified in the 1983 King County Newcastle Community Plan. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A. This is a non-project action. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the exisfing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The NE 4th Street community arterial abuts the site on the north. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is fhe approximate disfance to the nearest transit stop? Transit exists on NE 4'h Street. Frequency and duration of routes is unknown c. How many parking spaces would the completed projecf have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A. This is a nonproject action. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streefs, or improvements to existing roads or sfreets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? N/A. This is a nonproject action. Future development under the proposed zoning will likely require the construction of new public and/or private streets and improvements to NE 4�h Street. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. N/A. The proposal is a nonproject action. No water, rail or air transportation facilities are in the vicinity of the subject properties. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by fhe completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. NA. This is a nonproject action. g. Proposed measures fo reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: NA. This is a nonproject action. Transportation impacts are assessed and mitigation measures applied with review of specific development projects. R-1 ENVCHLST.doc City of Renton Environmental C�, _list Non-Projecf:Prezoning c'__ _�Proposed Bales Annexafion January 6,2004 Page 10 of 12 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protecfion, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, genera/ly describe. Development that may occur following annexation and under the proposed R-1 Zone will slightly increase the need for various public services. Such services may include, but would not be limited to, fire protection, police protection, health care and schools. Since potential densities are less than those allowed under the County's R-4 zoning, future impacts are actually anticipated to be less than those that might occur under the current zoning as a result of the proposed nonproject action. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. N/A. This is a non-project action. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, sepfic system, other. Unknown. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, fhe utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on fhe site or in the immediate vicinify which might be needed. NA. This is a nonproject action. , C. SIGNATLIRE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: , ��yrl Name Printed: Donald Erickson for the City of Renton------------- Date: ^� � R-1 ENVCHLST.doc � " - . City of Renton Environmental Che�� ,:r Non-Project:Prezoning of i J ��roposed Ba/es Annexation January 6,2004 Page i 1 of 12 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheets shou/d only be used for actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs. You do not need to fill out these sheets for project actions.) Because these questions are very general, if may be helpfu/to read them in conjunction with the list of the e/ements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of ihe extent the proposal, or the types of aciivities like/y to resu/t from the proposal, wou/d affect the item at a greafer intens�ty or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not imp/emented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely fo increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of foxic or hazardous substances; or producfion of noise? The proposal would not significantly alter the existing range of uses allowed and the current maximum zoned density would be reduced by 300%. Therefore, the potential level of these emissions is likely to be reduced. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: None proposed. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect planfs,animals, fish, or marine life? No significant impacts to plants, animals, fish or marine life are anticipated to occur as a consequence of the proposed downzoning action. The proposal would supplant existing single family 4 units per gross acre density with single-family detached residential zoning at 1 unit per net acre zoning. Therefore, the potential impacts to plants, animals, fish and marine life is anticipated to be considerably less under the proposed R-1 prezoning. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: None proposed. 3. How would the proposal be likely fo dep/efe energy or natural resources? No significant depletion of energy or natural resources is anticipated to result from the proposal. Residential development that may occur under the proposed zoning would be considerably less than that allowed under current King County zoning. Energy and natural resources required to construct and maintain such lower density single family development would be depleted at a lower rate than under the existing zoning. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None proposed. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas desiqnated(or eligible or under study) for governmenfal protecfion; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitaf,historic or culfural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Protection of environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for governmental protection would not change under this proposal. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None proposed. R-1 ENVCNLST.doc � �� _ � City of Renton Environmental CI'��_.,ist Non-Project:Prezoning os, _'�Proposed Bales Annexation January 6,2004 Page 12 of 12 5. How would the proposal be likely fo affeci land and shoreline use, includinq whether if would allow or encourage land or shorellne uses incompatib/e with existing plans? The proposal would not affect shoreline use. The proposed R-1 prezoning implements the Residential Low Density land use designation mapped for the subject area on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None proposed. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The proposal is not expected to significantly increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities, since the proposed zoning is considerably less in terms of potential density and range of land uses,than what is allowed under the existing zoning. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: None proposed. 7. Idenfify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, sfate, or tederal laws or requirements for fhe protecfion of the environment. No conflicts with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment are known. S/GNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. it is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or wiliful lack of full disclosure on my part. c �G��,�✓ Proponent: Name Printed: Donald Erickson for the City of Renton Da te: � R-1 ENVCHLST.doc � � �� `'1 `�� , Y , --- � � �. ��:: � + � '- ♦ ��N�o� NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA-04-00 , R, ECF/BALES ANNEXATION AND PREZONE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject site is an 8.52-acre area generally located between NE 4th Street (SE 128th St) on the north and SE 130'h Street (if extended) on the south, 152"d Avenue SE (if extended) on the west, and 155tn Avenue SE (if extended) on the east. It abuts the City of Renton boundary on its north and west. The proposed City zoning for the subject annexation site is R-5, allowing up to 5 dwelling units per net acre. However, at the special election for this annexation on September 16, 2003 residents failed to approve this zoning. As a consequence, R-1 prezoning is now proposed in order to allow this annexation to proceed. The density allowed under the R-1 zone is considerably less than what the current King County R-4 zoning would allow, which is�up to 4 dwelling units per rg oss acre. Future zoning would allow up to approximately 8 single-family detached dwellings on the 8.52-acre annexation site. PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed annexation is located on the south side of NE 4th Street SE across the street from the Morrison Annexation/Maureen Subdivision, west of White Fence Ranch. It abuts the City of Renton to its north along NE4th Street and to its west. PUBLIC APPROVALS: Prezone, and Environmental Review for Prezone � ' � I � I � � � � �. ��th s� = SE � I ,� ,-�- �e . . � � � � 11 o � ' .� . �.,} , _ CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: January 13, 2004 TO: Jennifer Henning FROM: Rebecca Z.int�V STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Bales Annexation Prezone SEPA Checklist Addendum As you are aware the residents of the Bales Annexation failed on September 16;2003 to approve the ballot issue on future R-5 zoning of the annexation area, even though they approved the annexation and agreed to assume their fair share of the City's outstanding bonded indebtedness. In order to bring this annexation into the City we are having to change the proposed prezoning from R-5, 5 units per net acre,to R-1, 1 unit per net acre. Staff have prepared the attached addendum to the January 14, 2003 Environmental Checklist addressing the change from the formerly proposed R-5 prezoning to R-1 prezoning. Because the allowed maximum densities under the R-1 zone are significantly less than those allowed under the R-5 zone, impacts in most areas would be considerably less as well. In fact, the R-1 zone allows only an increase of two or three units over the four existing houses in the 8.52-acre annexation area. Attachments(2) cc: Don Erickson Documentl\d � , ; - . Ciry,of Renton : ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ADDENDUM FOdZ BALES AIVNEXATION 1. Change is project description in original Environmental Checklist. The original proposal for the Bales Annexation was to zone it R-5 upon annexation consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Residential Rural land use designation. Because there was an insufficient number of voters approving this zoning the City has,no choice but to prezone the 8.52-acre annexation site R-1 if it is to be brought into the City. The current proposal is to prezone the Bales Annexation R-1 rather than R-5 as originally proposed. 2. Change in Surface Water Runoff A reduction in density from 5 units per net acre to 1 unit per net acre should significantly reduce the amount of disturbance to existing surfaces and the amount of impervious surfaces that would be constructed on the 8.52-acre site. As a consequence, surface water runoff impacts would be assumed to be less with R-1 zoning than with R-5 zoning as previously proposed for this site. Because this is a non-project legislative action no mitigation measures are proposed. 3. Change in Land and Shoreline Use. The proposed land use, single-family detached housing, would not change as a result of this downzone from 5 units per net acre to 1 unit per net acre. 4. Change in Housing Impacts. The number of units that could be built under R-1 zoning is approximately 1/5 of what could be built under R-5 zoning. Previously, it was estimated that up to 34 dwelling units could eventually be accommodated on the 8.52-acre site. With R-1 zoning,this number would drop to approximately six or seven units. The housing target transferred to Renton for this small acreage is negligible. Since City land use capacity exceeds its assigned housing growth targets,no impacts are anticipated from this reduction in units. Because this is a non-project legislative action it is not possible to determine how many of the existing houses on site will eventually be removed and/or replaced. S. Change in Recreation Impacts. As a consequence of the number of potential units declining from±34 to six or seven units,there would be a comparable decline in the demand for recreational services. R-1 zoning is anticipated to only increase the number of units on the 8.52-acre site by one or two units so the increased demand for services would be negligible. 6. Change in Transportation Impacts Similarly, the number of vehicular trips per day could be expected to decline from an estimated 340 AWDTE to approximately 60 or 70 AWDTE with a change in zoning from R-5 to R-1. Because this is a non-project legislative action no mitigation measures are proposed. , Bales Annexation Prezone tiddendum 2 O1/13/04 7. Clzange in Public Services With an estimated change in population that would occur with such a downzone from R-5 to R-1 zoning, from 85 persons to approximately 17 persons their would be a comparable decline in the demand for public services. R-1 zoning is anticipated to only increase the number of units on the 8.52-acre site by one or two units so the increased demand for services would be negligible. SIGNATURE I understand, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this addendum should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Date: I 1 � I � �rry O�,�enton ;: ,,�..,... ; EI��IRONMEN,7''�I�L�H��ICL�$T; , ':, , " ,�.� ,,...��...��w .�� ,��.�,s�.�y2�.,�..W�-.,_ ,,�, .�� i.,, _.,�.�„.::�,� ��, PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The Sfafe Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapfer 43.21C RCW, requires all govemmenfal agencies to consider the environmenta! impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An , Environmental impact Stafement (EIS) musr be prepared for a!!proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on fhe quality of the environmenf. The purpose of this checklisf is to provide inforrnation to help you and the agency idenfify impacfs from your proposal(and to reduce or avoid impacts from fhe proposal, if it can be done) and fo help the agency decide whether an ElS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPUCANTS: . This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Govemmenfal agencies use this checklisf to defermine whether the environmenfa!impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with fhe most precise informafion known,orgive fhe best description you can. You must answer each quesfion accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. !n mosf cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans wifhout the need to hire experfs. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your�proposal, write "do not know°or"does not apply" Complete answers fo the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about govemmenta!regulafions, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designafiorrs. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. _ The checklist questions apply fo all parts of your proposal, even if you plan fo do them over a period of time or on differenf parcels of land. Attach any addifiona!information fhat witl help descrrbe your proposal or its environmental effecfs. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably relafed to defermining if fhere may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete fhis checklist for nonproject proposals, even fhough questions may be answered"does not apply." IN ADDlTIOIV, complefe the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS(part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references _ in the checklisf to the words "projecf,"'applicant,"and"property or site"should be read as "proposal," "proposer,"and"affected geographic area,"respectively. A. BACKGROUND i. Name of proposed projecr,if applicable: Proposed rezone of approximately 8.52 acre area from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's Residential 5 du/ac(R-5)Zone. Zoning would be applied at the time the subject site is annexed into the City of Renton, p�pNNING ��C{-�(YP OF RE�ON JAN 1 � 2003 RECEI!!ED Bales Annexation Rezone� '� ' � ' January 7, 2003 � � Page 2 - 2. Name of applicanf: Alex Pietsch,Acting Administrator, Economic Development, Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Department City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Address: Economic Development, Neighborhoods& Strategic Planning Department City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Confact Person: Don Erickson,AICP (425)430-6581 4. Date checklist prepared: January 7,2003 5. Agency requesting checklist: � City of Renton, Department of Planning/Building/Public Works-Development Serv�ces Division 6. Proposed timing or schedule(including phasing,if applicable): Adoption of the rezone ordinance is anticipated pending SEPA compliance,at the time of annexation into Renton. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with fhis proposal? If yes, explain. Yes. Applicants have applied for annexation into the City of Renton. Under RCW 43.21.C.222 annexations are specificalty exempt from SEPA. Upon annexation into Renton applicants or their successors will likely subdivide and develop vacant properties with single-family dwellings per the City of Renton's R-8 zoning. 8. List any environmental informafion you know a6out that has been prepared,or wi0 be prepared, direcfly related to this proposal. FEIS on the 1995 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton 9 Do you know whether applications are pending for govemmental approvals of other proposals direcfly affecting the property covered by your proposaJ? /f yes, explain. No knowledge of other pending governmental approvals of affected properties. 10. List any govemmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if � knowrr. Council approval is required for this rezone from County to City zoning. 11. Give brief, complefe descripfion of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and sife. The subject proposal is to rezone the 8.52 acre Bales Annexation site from King County's R-4 Zone(4 du/gross acre),to Renton's R-5 Zone(5 du/net acre). The site could accommodate approximately 34 dwellings under Renton's R-5 Zone and approximately 34 dwellings under King Count�s R-1 Zone 12. Location of the proposal. Give su�cient information for a person to understand the precise location of your propased proJect including a street address,if any,and section, township,and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area,provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legaf description,site plan, vicinity map,and topographic map,if reasonably available. While , ; Bales Annexation Rezone - Tanuary 7, 2(?03 _ Page 3 you should submit any plans required by the agency,you are not requi�ed to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this check(ist. The subject annexation site abuts NE 4�'Street(SE 128 St)on the north and 152"a Avenue SE, if extended, on the west. It is bounded by SE 130"'Street, if extended, on the south and approximately 155�'Avenue SE, if extended,on the east Ptease see attachments.) B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. Genera! description of fhe site (cirde one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mounfainous, other The 8.52-acre annexation site is relativeiv flat. , 8. Whaf is the sfeepest slope on the site(approximate percenr slope?) Renton Sloae Maps indicate some small area in the southwest comer with a slone of 15%-25%. c. What general fypes of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the class'rf"icafion of agricultural soils, specify them and note any pnme farmland. Aldervvood Association. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There do not appear to be an�sianificant steep slopes on the rezone portion of the annexation site. e. Describe fhe purpose, type, and approxtinate quantities of any nlling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Not ap�licable for this non-proiect leQislative action. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No construction is�ro�osed as a result of this non-proiect annexation and rezone proposal. Erosion presumably could occur as a resuft of future development under the proposed R-5 Zone. Mitigation measures would be applied typically at the time of future development. g. About whaf percent of fhe site will be covered with im ervious surfaces after project construcfion(for example, asphalt or buildings�� A�proximately 35%. No construction is proposed as a resuft of this non- project legislative proposal. h. Proposed measures to reduce or contro! erosion, or ofher impacts to fhe earth, if any: No construction is proposed as a result of this non-aroiect leqislative action. � Any future development occu�ring as a consequence of the proposed R-5 Zone would be required to follow mana ement practices in the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations(�RMC 4-4-130)and in the Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060). 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would resu/t from fhe proposal(i.e., dust, . aufomobile, odors, industrial wood smoke)during construct�on and when fhe project is complefed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Bales Annexation Rezone �� January 7, 2003 ' ' ' ' Page 4 - - N/A. No new construction is proposed as a result of this legislative non- project proposal. At the time of project level development specific air-related impacts may be identified and appropriate mitigation measures applied. b. Are there any off-sife sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? !f so,generally describe. Unlikely and not applicable for this non-project legislative action. a Proposed measures io reduce or contro!emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable for this non-project legislative action. - 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) ls there any surface wafer body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal sfreams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe fype and provide names. If appropnate,sfate what stream or river rt flows info. No. 2) Will the projeci require any work over,in,or adjacent fo(wifhin 200 feet)the descrrbed wafers? If yes,please describe and attach available plans. No. 3) Estimate the amount of fil!and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface wafer or wetlands and indicafe fhe area � of the sife fhat would be affecfed. Indicate fhe source of fill material. N/A. No construction is proposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. 4) Will ihe proposal require surface water withdrawa/s or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximafe quantifies if known. N/A. No construction is p"roposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. 5) Does fhe proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note locafion on fhe s�te plan. No. The subject site is not mapped as part of the 100-year floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges �of waste maferials fo surface waters? If so, describe the fype of waste and anticipafed volume of discharge. . No. This is a non-project legislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this proposal. r ; �3ales Aruiexation Rezone _ Tanuary 7, 2003 Page 5 + , b. Ground Water: 1) Wil! ground water be withdrawn, or wil! water be discharged to ground wafer? Give genera!descripfion,purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A. This is a non-project legislatiye action.The proposed rezone is not expected to result in the discharge or withdrawal of water that is not now occurring, 2) Describe wasfe material fhaf will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;industrial, containing fhe following chemicals...;agricultural; efc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such sysfems, the number of houses fo be served("►f applicable), or the number of animals or humans fhe system(s)are expected to serve. No construction is proposed as a resuft of this non_project legislative rezone proposal. No new septic tanks will be allowed once the site is annexed into Renton and all new development will be hooked up to sanitary sewer. c. Water Runoff(including sform water): 1) � Describe fhe source of runoff(including storm water) and method of ' collection and disposal, if any(include quantities, if known). Where will this wafer flow? Will fhis wafer flow into other waters? If so, � describe. N/A. No construction and therefore runoff is proposed as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. Surface water appears to run off the site in a north/northeasterly direction. Although no new development is proposed at this time the proposed zoning wrould provide for densities comparable to what already exists m King County. Environmental review, however, would be required for any non-exempt development under SEPA. 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. " Not applicable. Future new residential development would be hooked up to sanitary sewer. d. Proposed measures to reduce or contro!surface, ground, and runoff wafer impacts,if any: PVot applicable since this is a non-aroiect leqslative action. Future development allowed under the proposed R-5 Zone would be required to comply with City of Renton Drainage Standards (RMC 4-6-030). 4. PL4NTS � a. Check or circle types of vegetafion found on fhe site: deciduous tree:alder,maple,aspen, other evergreen tree:fir, cedar,pine, other shrubs grass pasture Bales Annexation Rezone.. � �: January 7, 2003 �� ' Page 6 � crop or grain wet soi!planfs:cattail, buffercup, bul/rush,skunk cabbage, ofher wafer plants:water lily, eel grass,milfoil, ofher � , other types of vegetafion b. Whaf kind and amounf of vegetation wil!be removed or altered? N/A. No construction and therefore no vegetation will be removed as a . result of this non-project legislative proposal. Future development will have to comply with Renton's Tree Cutting regulations(RMC 4-4-130). c. Lisf fhreatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None are known at this time. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or ofher measures fo preserve � or enhance vegetat►on on the site, if any: Not applicable. This is a non:project action. As noted above, development that occurs under Renton's junsdiction must conform to the Cit�s codes and regulations. 5. ANIMALS a. Cirde any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near fhe site: _ Birds:hawk,heron, eagle, songbirds, ofher Mammals:deer,bear, elk,beaver, other Fish:bass,salmon, trout, herring,shellfish, other b. List any fhreatened or endangered species known fo be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered species are known to be on or near the site. c. !s fhe sife part of a migration route? If so, explain Unknown. but the entire State of Washington is included within a migration route for birds known as the Pacific Flyway. This flyway, as it overfies • Renton, is used by a variety of migratory birds, including, but not limited to the Canada Goose. d. Proposed measures fo preserve or enhance wildlife,if any: This is a non-project legislative action. No development is proposed as a �result of this rezone proposal. Mitigation measures, rf any, may be imposed at the time of future development. 6. ENERGYAND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, nafura/gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet fhe completed project's energy needs? Describe whether if will be used for heating, manufacturing, eic. � It is anticipated that the potential 34 dwellinq units the R-5 zoning would � allow on the site will use primarilv electircal and natural gas resources for heating and runninq appliances. ; Bales Annexation Rezone , Tanuary 7, 2003 Page 7 � � b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,generally describe. Unlike . Zoning provides some setbacks and restricts the height of new structures to 30 feet. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in fhe plans of fhis proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacfs,if any: None. This is a non-proiect le4islative action. Future development occurring on the site will meet all related energy code provisions. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of frre and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? !f so, describe. 1) Describe specia!emergency services thai might be required. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. No environmental health hazards are anticipated from future single-family residential development. 2) Proposed measures fo reduce or control environmental heaJth hazards,if any: N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Nofse 1) Whaf types of noise exist in the area which ma affect your project (for example:tra�c, equipment,operation, other�? Not applicable since this is a legislative non project action. 2) Whaf fypes and levels of noise would be creafed by or associated with fhe project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: fraffrc, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from fhe site. Not aaplicable. New development occurring under the R-5 Zone could include construction activity and normal noise associated with ground related residential living. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. This is a non-project action. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE . a. What is fhe current use of the site and adjacent properties? The westerly portion of the 8.52-acre rezone site is developed with an outdoor heavy construction equipment maintenance company that is � scheduled to cease its operations in January 2003. Lower density single- family dwellings and a vacant parcel exist to the east. Existing densities are not believed to exceed 5 du/ac. Has the sfte been used for agriculture?If so, describe. Not activelv. One of the parcels does have fruit trees on it. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are an estimated four existina sinqle-family dwellings on the subject 8.52-acre site. Bales Annexation Rezone: � January 7, 2003 � � � Page 8 � d. Will any structures be demolished? lf so, what? This is a legislative non-project rezone action. It is not anticipated that this proposed rezone will result in the demolition of any structures. _ e. What is fhe currenf zoning classificafion of the sife? The current King Countv zonin4 classification is the R-4 Zone which allows 4 du/gross acre. The current proposal is for R-5 zoning that allows 5-du/net acre. Densities are assumed to be comparable. f. What is fhe current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The 8.52 acre rezone site is currently designated "Residential Rural� on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and "Urban Residential 4- 12du/ac" on King County's Comprehensive Plan Map. Renton's designation would allow zoning with up to 5 units per net acre and King County's designation currently allows zoning with 4 units per gross acre. Because of this it is assumed that densities are comparable under either zone. g. If applicable, what is fhe currenf shoreline master program designafion of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentalJy sensitive" area? !f so, specify. No portions of the subject sfte are known to be environmentally sensitive. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed projecf? At full redevelopment under the proposed R-5 zoning, it is anticipated that approximately 85 residents could eventually reside on these 8.52 acres. j. Approximately how many people would fhe completed project displace? Unknown. This is a non-project action. The estimated five existing residents could choose, for example, to relocate to new dwellings within the annexation area. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts,if any: Not applicable at this non-project stage. l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projecfed land uses and plans,if any: As noted above the proposed rezone is consistent with the Cit�s cunent Residential Rural land use designation for the subject site. . 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many unifs would be provided, if any? Indicafe whefher . high,middle, or!ow-income housing. Unknown. It is anticipated that up to 34 dwelling u�its could be accommodated on the subject site under Renton's R-5 zoning. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,middle, or low-income housing. Unknown. The proposed rezone will not eliminate any units by itself. As future development occurs the two existing dwellings may be replaced and/or relocated although this is not currently known. ; �ales Annexation Rezone �anuary 7, 2003 Page 9 , � � c. Proposed measures fo reduce or control housing impacis,if any.- The proposed zoning is consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and applicable policies for this area. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas;what is fhe principal exterior buildmg material(s)proposed. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. No new development is specifically proposed as a resuft of this change in zoning classffication. Heights of residential structures are rest�icted to two stories and 30' in the proposed R-5 Zone b. What views in the immediate vicinify would be altered or obstructed? Unknown. This is a non-project rezone action. This is not known at this level. a Proposed measures fo reduce or control aesfhefic impacts,if any: Unknown. At the future project level impacts will be assessed and mitigated. 71. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will ihe propasal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. Future development may create some visible nighttime light. b. Could light or glare from the nnished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Unknown. Future single-family homes are not anticipated to result in sufficient levels of glare to impair views from surrounding properties. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposa!? Unknown. d. Proposed measures tcs reduce or coniro!fighf and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in fhe immediate vicinity? King County currently owns the two abutting parcels immediately to the � south of the subject s�te. These two parcels with a combined area of 9.34 acres have been set aside for a future park. Presumably, upon annexation these two parcels will be transferred to the City for future park development. b. Would the proposed project dispface any existing recreational uses? If so, � describe. No.This is a non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including � recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not anplicable at this non-proiect level of review. The City will collect a , recreation mitigation fee at the time of future development. Bales Annexation Rezone , (� ` �' January 7, 2003 �� ' Page 10 - - 73. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects lisfed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation.registers known to be on or next to the site? !f so, generally describe. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to fhe site. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacfs,if any: Unknown. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Jdenfify public streefs and highways serving fhe sife, and describe proposed access fo fhe existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site is arimarily served by SE 128'"Street. b. Is site currently served by puWic fransit? If nof, whaf is the approximafe distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. Bus service is available on NE 4"'Street. a How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project el�mmate? Unknown. Assuming 34 dwelling units and parking being provided between 1.75 spaces per unit and 225 spaces per unit, there potentially could be between 59 and 76 required off-street spaces developed on the rezone site. No spaces are anticipated to be eliminated. d Will the proposal require any new roads or streefs, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or privafe? Ve like . Future subdivision of the site would be required to comply with City regulations pertaining to street width, curbs, sidewalks, lighting, etc. At _ this point it is difficult to anticipate what improvements 28 new dwellings in the Bales Annexation area would require. New streets would most likely be local access streets including loop streets and/or cul-de-sacs. e. Will the projecf use (or occur in the immediafe vicinity o� water, rail, or air transportairon? If so,generally describe. - No. f. How many vehicula� frips per day would be generated by fhe completed project? If known, indicafe when peak volumes would occur. This is a legislative non-project action in which transportation impacts have not been identified since the actual levels of development are still unknown. Howeve�. if 30 additional units were built, and assuming 10 AWDVTE, there could be as many as 300 additional vehicles trip ends per 24 hour period. g. Proposed measures to reduce or contro!transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable at this non-proiect level. Level of future development is speculative at this point. Bales Annexation Rezone January 7, 2003 � � Page 11 � ` 15. PUBLIC SERVJCES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services {for example: fire protection, police protecfion, health care, schools, other)? If so,generally describe. Probablv. Residential development that might occur in the future would increase the need for pubiic services that typicatiy serve such development. � Affected services may include, but wouid not be limited to, fire protection, police protection,emergency services, and schools. b. Proposed measures fo reduce or confrol direct impacts on public services, if any. The Citv of Renton currentiv collects miti4ation fees to control such impacts to parks and recreation, fire, and transportation. The City also collects taxes for most of these services. Until a spec�fic proposal is made at the project level, however, it is too early to ascertain what these impacts, if any,will be. 16. UT1d.IT/ES a. Circle utilities currently available af the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, felephone,sanifary sewer, septic system, other. The current proposal is a non-project action. However, the area it would apply to will likely be served by sewer,telephone, electricity, and water. b. Describe the utilifies that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the � senrice, and the general consfruction activ�tres on the sife or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Unknown. Non-project action. C. S/GN.4TURE I, the undersigned, sYate that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: � �i�h��'�� . Name Printed.• �� Ur--� � Date: Bales Annexation Rezone��.�' ,�;� '�� January 7, 2003 � � � � Page 13 - 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affecf environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under sfudy) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threafened or endangered species habitat, hlstoric or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? This non-project rezone proposal will not directiy impact environmentally sensitive areas. Whether future development occurs under County or City zoning sensitive areas, 'rf any,would have to be addressed. � Proposed measures to profect such resources or fo avoid or reduce impacfs are: None proposed at this time for this non-project action. 5. How would fhe proposal be likely fo affect land and shoreline use, lncluding . whefher it would allov�+or encourage land or shoreline uses Incompatible wifh exisfing plans? This proposed non-project rezone will not directly affect land or shoreline use. , Proposed new zoning would be in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None aroposed at this non-project level. As noted above any new development unde�the proposed R5 zoning will be reviewed by the City to ensure compliance with relevant state and local regulations. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportatlon or public services and utilities? This is a leQislative non-project action. Future development would result in increased demands on transportation,the use of utilities, or other services over what is allowed under current King County zoning. If additional homes are built in this area as many as 300 additional vehicle trips per day could be generated over a 24-hour period. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: None are proposed for this non-project action. Future development will be asked to mitigate any identified significant adverse impacts. 7. ldentify, if posslble, whether the proposal may conflict with Iocal, sfate, or federa!laws or requlrements for the protectlon of the environment. No conflicts with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment are known to exist with the subject non-project legislative rezone proposal. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. ,./,( �� _�1 Proponent: QP�s�lY�sl�l Name Printed: ��C/�C� GA�U Date: uG/��GI�� l7' 0��03 � �� ' Bales Annexation Rezone ��``� ��•� January 7, 2003 Page 12 . _ D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheefs shou/d only be used for acfions involving decisions on policies,plans and programs. You do not need to fi1l out these sheets for project actions.) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful fo read them in conjunction wifh the lisf of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extenf fhe proposal, or the types of activifies like7y to result from the proposal, would affecf the item at a greater intensity or ai a faster rate than if the proposal were nof implementecl. Respond briefly and in general ferms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase dlscharge to water;emissions to air; production, sforage, or release of foxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? This is a legislative non-project rezone action that is not anticipated by itself to change operations at the subject site or increase substance discharges mto the environment. Subsequent development, whether under the current County R-4 zoning or the proposed City of Renton R-5 zoning,would be required to comply with SEPA at the time of development, unless categorically exempt. Any new development will likely increase discharges to air, water, etc. These, however, are _ anticipated to be relatively small. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: This non-proiect lecaislative action. Subsequent development as a result of this � proposed map amendment would have to go through environmental review unless SEPA exempt. It is likely that air emissions, etc. would be addressed at this time when type and quantities of discharges are more likely to be known. Because Renton's R-5 Zone would allow comparable densities to those allowed under King Countyrs R-4 Zone, impacts,'rf any,are assumed to be comparable. 2. How would fhe proposal be likely fo affecr p/ants,animals,fish,or marine Iife? No significant impacts to plants, animals, fish or marine life are anticipated to occur as a consequence of the proposed zoning action. The proposal would supplant existing County R-4 single-family zoning which allows 4 du/ac (gross) with Renton's R-5 single-family zoning,which allows 5 du/ac (net). As a result future develo�ment under Renton's R-5 zoning is assumed to be comparable to that currently allowed under King County's R-4 zonmg. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants,animals, fish, or marine life are: Not anplicable. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? This non-proiect legislative action will not directly impact enerqv or natural resources. Future single-family development will, however, likely result m some additional demand of such resources. Future development under Renton's R-5 zoning would allow up to 30 additional homes in the area. The County's R-4 Zone would also allow approximately 30 new units. As a consequence the proposed zoning would not inc�ease the demand for energy and natural resources over what is currently allowed. Proposed measures to profect or conserve energy and natura!resources are: None are proposed since this is currently a non-proiect action. w , F ; � SPECIAL POPULATION CENSUS SUMMARY SHEET Year: �po� Total Population: S City/Town: ��.,,,-�o r (Lines 8+14) ��) �2) �3) �4) ��) �s) �) • Total Vacant Occupied Pop Per Percent Percent Units Per Housing Housing Housing Occ. HU Occupied Vacant Structure Units Units ��}(2� Population (4)/(3j (3�(1) �2�i(�� 1. 1-Unit Structures a�� 4 0 2. 2-Unit Structures 3. 3-Unit Structures 4. 4-Unit Structures 5. 5 or More Units 6. Mobile Homes 7. Special"" 8. Totals � b ,� !3 a, 6 /b o a �*Special Housing: Unusual living quarters not generally considered a housing unit(e.g.;boats,boxcars,tents,etc.). Only counted when occupied by person(s)meeting"resident"criteria. Specify type of housing in comments section below. Group Quarters Number of Facilities Population 9. Nursing/Convalescent Homes 10. College Dormitories 11. Mental/Correctionallnstitutions 12. Military Installations(e.g. barracks, BEQ) 13. Other(Specify): 14. Total Group Quarters � � Comments: Census Administrator or Contact Person: Name: �LJ T/{�YClGSOYJ� �� , Si ned: CQ�G��7 ��/��'�j(1i �Qj!'!1/� (Mayor) (Date) (/ Telephone#: ��i"j- .¢��`i�� Attest: (CiHRown Clerk or Census Administrator (Date) Days/Hours of Operation: ��0��S;dD��l?'F O�ce of Financial Management State of Washington Revised 2/94 SPECIAL POPULATIOIV GENSIJS SFiEET Enum. Area/Tract No.: Year or Ordinance: ��;� Block No.: Page No.: City/Town: ��'�jy� Enumerator: ��<,[o c�� s C• �s r. �( � One Ent Onl 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Street Housing No.of Mobile Name of Each Person Whase Usual Place of Residence on the � or Unit Units in Home/ Date of Enumeration Was In This Household Line Road House Address A t.No.' Se .No. Structure Trailer S ecial" Enter Last Name First � No. "_, / MH/TR Spec. i ' �� 1 MH(fR Spec. 2 � � _� % MH(iR Spec. �J� i �� 3 MHffR Spec. Q �S 4 MH/TR Spec. �,,� 5 MH/TR Spec. 6 / MH/TR Spec. ��( �� 7 MH/TR Spec. 8 C� r�.:S �,;� ri MHITR Spec. �c,�� : � g � �} u`g 4 � : ��Y, Z: + Sq: 1 � ; MH/TR ��Spec.n� '� ��L a5' ( ;C ;� 10 �� „ � :�.� � . . ,, ,� ;< � MHlTRj Spec.� ,�� 11 M�I. 1-� � , . � ; MH(TRi Spec. �,. � � t: �;�� 12 .� .w�� :� -% x� :� .t, z "` ^ � �. � .a � � a � MH/TR:A Sp�� `I �.L�' � E:�"��r��, �* �t 13 ^1 -�� s C e � .;.. S ,:.� � �b ,.:� r' Z�. t�:�a<;�,... � ; �� .�� MH(TR� Spec.x }. 14 � k ,�'t 4: 7 n_ ,� x.K »5 k '.� �� \Q�� P`i � MH(fR.. �Spec. 15 �t � , _ �A � l /€� �i`� .��,�'� MHlTR Spec. �O �1 /)� C. 16 J MHlTR Spec. �, � � 17 C� MHlTR Spec. 18 � MHlTR Spec. '19 MH/TR Spec. 20 MH/'fR Spec. 21 MH/TR Spec. 2z MHIfR Spec. ZZ MHlTR Spec. 23 MH/TR Spec. 25 By using this form,city/town agrees to keep all data collected confidential Page Totals •Each housing unit in structures having only one house address,but more than one,unit Total Persons: /� should be separately identified by the letter or number appearing on the mail box and/or Total Housing Units: S` `Special Housing: Unusual living quarters not generally considered a housing unit(e.g., Vacant Housing Units: (� ,ats,boxcars,tents,recreational vehicles,etc.). Only counted when occupied by person Occupied Housing Units: 7 meeting"resident"criteria. Specify type of housing. Office of Financial Management State of Washington Revised February 1994 _..�.,._..,,_ ,_ —..^�,a�ru �w s t — �?3— S SCAC.E t V � �`' S.E. IyBTH. ST. N " - IbQ' �.r u�» .rsa�Jiu �i i� w.,.e. .�•a.ay�,�f33f1[t Q ' , fG•• �.. ' aa�.v� �r �s t�.. . S,E. t 2- H. S7 c��"�"�+'" � o ..�.ei.�+✓• ur.u• �ar •.u-N a �ra�I r�s.«,. toav3 'Y, i�' r.r..r �au ia' i:e�aw+ut�r�o . , � . . isf 1i.a�_�...-� ' 4 ` � �� ` � � � � � ' _ �g ' � C�`! ( �. � : � � : VJ ' t1.� a ` a •{ � ' � � ' '" ' i ' �' v <o � �`, \ � , I � ^ � � � °�a� � � �� ir� � �— �. � i � �A � *� ia o �� . � N f; �a . u ��' � � --�_ � /1 k . � 1 �� ' --� � �V �" � w ; ! � � � � � �� ; � � � l o- �' � � � a �, � � W � � � � �o V � � 3 �c `�~}� a ,�,o�c. `,� „ � b� ^� � • � �ln.o i t y � �kc' � til ' d 3 � " �Cr x AO (� F,t� 1 T �i ppp�r.� +,� j�q �� t�. ��S �,�1�ti. `—_. `�T[" 1�� `0 0 .L � ri"S O (rM1J � /{�'� -S.it@t,.3��.. r� �0 Ur. 4' \Y � b U...._.- ` ` � " -Y� _ aa�.,a � I�l.a4 �e I- _ +'Q ` � ��,. '�J �,�^ �,,(� ase.oi �- ^�.� -� �, �d —��,y'3 � � �• ry � �y VJ � �ZN � w d G � '��~ '�"d � � •qV� \.. � , 4 y ` H 4�7 �\„� � '1 . ^ � � U ~ � � � � ` � � � w y Q � _ � � � �\ v�-.�.,_, +'t �� z (f ------'--�.., � . '"� �` ' ' �+ita. ew�.1 ✓m.ix.s�w �izW ... a (�ry1 VJ � `� �^ x�, rrJ.at x„ �i.t.. }i _ KC SP 484p56- �n G� �� , _ � a i wr i �Zd xc��,�seao�si e�iwo�ior�ea! (� �A ? '� � �� , 6- � � , �` . �yyy : y� zor z � �or a z� �or 4 �� .4 � � � h O{ O �'�' � ^ NY.�� ( IM.+Y � N 3 � 1 � _1 � N a p n.ao � ne.n.va � 7� (� � {e l v g t � ��.:a`:... x � � � � �, g— � 3 0 �a �� ,,�o 3i< ,�a 4 c.fl {p � rJAf�� ,. I seo� l�y,p^q ��5 ��N I' its'ca 1 �..ae� $�r�r,c g� � e�� ry A Q O D r ,�i ' r�y ��t ,v : 1 06�� .a {`� � '� Q.� ,S � „^-kn,--�-�._ ,rro.ro.oew srxsr<x1 �r�» e,..o .�+.r� .,�..a....aw *ri w�'y ~�� t " Gr-- �. ,�' 'c'x.-r..� �. . � Il16�35 s�`..�axrrwnem.` n J ^�{ (`�• r�, �, C (;� �,t� SSi��e.. " _ a260 SE. 132N0 ;S7 -_. __ a �z 'a. �y � I +;�;• � ^ 44'�6A 4t.��d ' . iar rv \ � �'" �" �i .. t g� Z 3 � � s E$ ES TES M ; c � ys,�; ot ' � � tl �' �i ii�2° Y{5tio�o -GE4Aft� CR T , e = io t iz �� z- p ti 13 '; �-. t � . p � j � �' � � �P�4 pdA oOco °°`o. oQ'd �ta �p � ' i ,► � z3 ($ �a (6 0' or�c ai`a eY�° .'��j � ,r ) � 1 6 .... ..... „ ,,, ...., •'� � .�.., ,,,.': � . �i�. s h• BALES ANNEXATION FISCAL ANAL'� � SHEET- R-1 ZONING ' Units Po ulation AV Existin dev. 4 10 $760,000 Full dev. 8 20 $2,800,000 Assumptions: 2.5 persons/household $350,000 AV/new unit ................ $190,000 AV/existing unit ................... :FieV�riues:::�:?:':':::? Total revenues �� Existin Full Rate Existing:;::::::::'::::;$�;89�:;�7: _ Re ular levy $2,402 $8,848 3.16 Full:::::::::::::$'1:1s;942;�62: Excess levy $67 $248 0.08865 State shared revenues Rate er ca Existin Full Li uor tax $3.52 $35.20 $70.40 Li uor Board profits $5.04 $50.40 $100.80 Fuel tax - roads $14.46 $144.60 � $289.20 Fuel tax -arterials $6.47 $64.70 $129.40 MVET $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Cam er excise $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Criminal justice $0.36 $3.60 $7.20 Total $298.50 $597.00 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existin Full Real estate excise* $40.86 $408.60 $817.20 Utilit tax** $13320 $532.80 $1,065.60 Fines &forfeits* $18.33 $183.30 $366.60 Total $1,124.70 $2,249.40 * Per capita ** Per housing unit- based on $2,220 annual utility billing @ 6%tax rate ................ :�b�t�:::::::::::::::::::::?:; Total ongoing costs �� Per ca ita Existin Full Existing�:::::�:::`:::?:$4;�'��:33: Contracted Services Full:::::::�:::��:��2;4�#;�6: Alcohol $0.23 $2.27 $4.54 .. . . . Public Defender $3.13 $31.34 $62.68 Jail $7.19 $71.92 $143.84 Subtotal $105.53 $211.06 Court/le al/admin. $57.08 $570.80 $1,141.60 Parks maintenance* $14.90 $149.00 $298.00 Police $270.00 $2,700.00 $5,400.00 Road maintenance"* N/A $500.00 $1,854 Fire**" $1.25 $950.00 $3,500.00 Total $4,975.33 $12,404.66 * See Sheet Parks FIA ''* See Sheet Roads FIA *** Rate per$1,000 of assessed valuation (FD#25 contract) Net fiscal impact Existing::::::`:::;'::;:»$1;;t1$3:��i' Fu I I:::::::::::::::::::�46�:��; :Qt�e��ii�i�:�osts;� Parks acquisition &development (from Sheet Parks FIA): Other one-time costs: $14.90 Total one-time costs:;;;�;::�:::::::::::':::$:�4:�0: Revised 8-29 per Finance Memo / �- PROPOSED BALES ANNEXATION��..._��AL ANALYSIS CALCULATION SHEE',, �' Units Po ulation AV Existin dev. 4 10 $1,230,000 Full dev. 34 85 $8,840,000 Assumptions: 2.5 persons/household $260,000 ...:.:.:::.:.:.:.:.:::::.:::::.::::::: 1 existing house will not redevelop :.. : . :��s:::::::::::::: ota revenues Existin Full Rate Existing�:::::::::::::::$�;5f7s54� Re ular lev $4,010 $28,822 3.26036 Full:::::::::`::�$��;0�8;6�' Excess le $116 $831 0.09397 � State shared revenues Rate er ca Existin Full Li uor tax $3.30 $33.00 $280.50 Li uor Board rofits $5.29 $52.90 $449.65 Fuel tax- roads $14.45 $144.50 $1,228.25 Fuel tax-arterials $6.76 $67.60 $574.60 MVET $0.00 $0.00 Cam er excise $0.00 $0.00 Criminal 'ustice $0.91 $9.10 $77.35 Total $307.10 $2,610.35 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existin Full Real estate excise'' $54.69 $546.90 $4,648�65 Utilit tax"* $133.00 $532.00 $4,522.00 Fines &forfeits* $17.13 $171.30 $1,456.05 � Total $1,250.20 $10,626.70 * Per capita ** Per housing unit- based on $2,220 annual utility billing �� "��"�� Total on oin costs :�osts'''::::::::::::::::::::: 9.......g............. �� Per ca ita Existin Full Existing�:::::::::::::'$�;i�41::�3: Contracted Services Full::;:::�:::::;$d�;2�:tl;j;�;: Alcohol $0.23 $2.27 $19.30 Public Defender $3.13 $31.34 $266.39 Jail $7.19 $71.92 $611.32 Subtotal $105.53 $897.01 Court/le al/admin. $50.96 $509.60 $4,331.60 Parks maintenance` $14.90 $149.00 $1,266.50 Police $270.00 $2,700.00 $22,950.00 Road maintenance** $0.00 $1,715 Fire*"` $1.25 $1,537.50 $11,050.00 Total $5,001.63 $42,210.11 * See Sheet Parks FIA ** See Sheet Roads FIA *** Rate per$1,000 of assessed valuation (FD#25 contract) Net fiscal impact Existing:�:::'::::::::::::::$565;�'1: ' Full:::::::::::::`:'::��'i:5"1�:�7 ;��e:�ti�`i�;�ostS;: Parks acquisition &development (from Sheet Parks FIA): $20,244.70 .:....... . ... . Other one-time costs: $0.00 • Total one-time costs: `:;::::::::;��;�44:7Q; � ' � � ,�� r� '� ,l CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANI�TING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUlVI DATE: December 17, 2003 TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, President City Council Members VIA: Mayor Jesse Tanner FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator r ' Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson.(x-6581) SUBJECT: Bales Annexation R-1 Prezone ISSUE: . Because R-5 zoning for this annexation by election was voted down the annexation site must be prezoned consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Of the two remaining zones allowed under the Residential Low Density land use designation, R-1 is the denser of the two and therefore closer to the R-5 zone. RECOMMENDATION: • Prezone the 8.52-acre Bales Annexation site R-1, one unit per net acre, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. • Hold the first of two required public hearings on this proposed prezone on January 26, 2004. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: � Voters at the special annexation election held on September 16, 2003 approved by a majority the Bales Annexation and agreed to assume their fair share of the City's bonded indebtedness. However, they failed to approve the proposed R-5 prezone since the vote was split 50/50 between those supporting it and those opposed to .it. The City Attorney has determined that since the R-5 zoning was basically rejected by the voters, it can not be reconsidered as part of the annexation. Therefore, in order for the 8.52-acre site to be � brought into the City it must be prezoned with another zone consistent with the City's current � Bales Annexation R-1 PrezonE�-"�`�, ,—�`-� �' December 17, 2003 Page 2 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation for it. Besides the R-5 zone, the Residential Low Density land use designation also allows the Resource Conservation zone and the R-1 zone. Staff is recommending the R-1 zone, with the understanding that the applicant will apply for R-5 zoning, through the Hearing Examiner, once the Bales Annexation site is brought into the City. On December 15`�, 2003 Council adopted the recommendation of the Committee of the Whole to adopt R-1 prezoning for the Bales Annexation site consistent with the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan land use designation. Under state law two public hearings on the proposed prezone are required. Staff are requesting that the first of these be held on January 26`�, 2004 and the second on March ls`, 2004. CONCLUSION: R-1 prezoning of the Bales Annexation site would allow the City to complete the annexation process and bring this 8.52 acre site into the city. Since Council endorsed this annexation earlier, this would appear to be in the best interest and general welfare of the Ciry. The applicant has stated that it is their intent, once they are in the City, to request a rezone to the R-5 zone, through the Hearing Examiner. Staff have indicated that they would support such a change since surrounding properties within the City are currently zoned R-5 and future properties in the Residential Low Density designation nearby will likely be zon�d R-4, upon annexation. H:/EDNSP/Strategic Planning/PAA/Annexations/Bales �...., ,, . , ..__ _ -. > , .. . . ., . _ , . .. .. _ _ . .h. .. ' . I __ � I ----- - .>- Q —— .� ----- O � O � � � � SL �Z� hS � S W —J � > 0 � --__ � � N F 6�n S't '24th PI w _i ao � w � -- w — y a� N �D - a a� � I � ¢ � � — = � � — -- - -�- - — - 1� � � h PI ,r� � � o_ _ �. - - E 4t S', ' i ' - �� h St ��'� ,�'�t� ;._ � �-�- S 1 8th St � I � _ i ! '� I I ' � D I , i I � I� I , i � I��_ . � � �-� N T SE 1 t t. � NF NE 3 d St � ¢ �� . --- - - 'LL�Ly1�1�11 r , �T � - � � - � .E 1 nd t - 2n St NE 2nd St SE 13 nd t ; �, d " �� - v� z - '-`' _ � cn -- Q Q Q > _ � � S� 134,h t. � -� Q i � � � - � � � � � � v d- o � � _� � � � � i - � SE 136th St E 13 th t. � � w � � SE � �� w Q � ie � ¢ ---— 1 � IT�._ _— — ---- — � t P . �. _ � — 1 -- i1L_ — \ � ' ` ' ite o l000 Z000 Pro osed Bales Annexat�on S . � �ts � — — — Existing City Lim Figure 1: Vicnity Map Proposed Annexation 1 : 1200� /o Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Shategic Plannin6 � Boundary �;�� Alcz Pictach,�c[ing Adminislntor 1Y�/ G.Dd Ruartio �� 20 Dccember 2002 C3 ° �, � o , � — n � � i r� � � � � o � h P - � � � �, , o , � � �— � � � Q � � I ► � o i� �� o - th S � c �� I - � S 12 � ,� � '�� ' � � �--�� __ _ � � o �� I �� o �� ___ � �___• �� I �� _ � � � � � �,,_� � _ �. � �� ; � �', o ' �. i �� ' � — � � � � � , I�� i � ��_ � � I � . I, - I,-�-� a J � - � ,�, —� � � � � o � �� — — � �i� �°—� � 0 � 0 �� JE 2nd St ° g S E 1�� 0 — � Proposed Bales Annexation Site _ _ _ EX;St;n9 �;ty �;m;ts o 300 600 Figure 2: Existing Structure Map � Proposed Annexation 0,�, Economic Development,Neighbocfioods&Strategic Planning Boundary 1 . 3 600 ♦� ♦ AlezPictsch,ectingAdministrator � Existing Structure G.Del Rosario F .�O$ 20 Decembcr 2002 � �\ � �� ,� x ., x v ti � � � ��..ss �-a=' � f� � _> � �\ _ � � ,,.� „�,. x �' % N �,,.� ' � � � ' � �� \ \ \ ,M Y �1 N).f} � � 1Y.b%IAJ� X1M10 x �t � I • \ � � ,.�,sJ a 1 �� I � �� ,,:u , � n . ., . N .� x t , a � . µ° x � � � x, � _ � � T � x,�„ Z . � < '� , u ,�.,�- � _ ` . . wn_ _ , . ,.:., ; �� fi.N, , ;�.,y � ,.� �s..� ,.,.., �s..�, . „ x „ x-,�, . � . � � � ,,., , �,, . ., � . � , . .,u� � , ,. :� .,� , � � , � K..� . �. , � � - x � s, �_ ? �_ �� x a , _ . . , , , � ` " " , , `� — — • " ,,�.> � _ � ( ,. , m � � �� '1 � 0 � , p \ \� x ., xx� � t • p • x ��' ��, � x ,. , , , ,. - --, _ � ��,, � ;3M ` - � ��' �'�' � y�- > , '�l �� ,,..m � 0 � x � % �y M'r{ x • � �/ x ~ � � M % ___,.\ x .N X Y � ` F . \ — _ \\ �.. _ t 1J� � x t>� \ x 1 / _�� , i ,., %. .� , x� ..� �i�.�t ` z �.« �� ater ��.a � `, . � `-�� :an. " . x �y.0 uas� .0� �er.w '- ' x r i . . - '� , . » .. �_ '__ �, � ' . � ; � , -�-� `� ' .: i �, �I �'� , . � . Proposed Bales Annexation Site �m ,nteNa, �o�tou� 0 300 600 Figure 3: Topography Map - - - Existing City�imits O,� Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Proposed Annexation � . 3 600 ♦ ♦ Alex Pietsch.acting Adminiahator � �� G.DeI Roserio Boundary FNT 20Decemba2002 (Q:IMrSIDIDataIRENTON�3.SIDJ Scale 1:4728.132 �!' � • }•� � �' ,�"�" ;� «� ' � . � i�_ t.. ,. �a , ��+r'� �_ �►�._ �* :a � � �_ �� ..� ��i , •:" (�'` .�y. �� !� � x + ti !- ` , , i �r� � ''s��T� '` `� r� �l ' • ` ..,,►�:. �, • � •� � y � y , � , . '�r � �i �' r r� .t y �� k ...r �'�� . �' .�t[ � � . r i� ��'. �,.1 � . �.,�1� � u+-. I �n ��1+' S`� ,� � �— ,;�-� ,� „' ��IS. _,�.��ai[' a�t�''� �4' � � � .. . � I, ��'ril�'•.. ' ��-L r � . : sr.e��- , •" . " "� y t� �"+ , F • • • �t � �r ,� a . . . �:..r S �r Y t. ' . i- , r. � .,. . - ' . .,.. � ' �� Y �.. �..—. 1�...�. aa��.:y� .., . .. . . ' � . Al k :� � � e . �` � n — � �4��'T� • � * �•� a��` � � � I..y .. _ . � � � � l� � �. �Y.f � �'' ! . o- '�+'; _. � ;-� � `�� 4Y } � � ,' i , '.� . � 6 a'ya� � . + '..`� � * �'�; ,� � ` i ' �, '..� I � �t A da �.� � � � . �� ' � � ' i• t t �4 ;. .�� ' '�j, ��'� �, '� �l � * � +�� '• �' 't�,r s .` ' �i` + i � ' ��'. A ' #s � � t �, �� _� � � ' � ,a , , ' . u , � , � y � 1 i � _ �i 1 � ' . i x, f ^+n� 4 'q . � + • Z# e� �v ; .'` s` ' � . . , 4'� �•� .' '� � �, � ;� : .'�, � �� r ��, � 1 �� y�y� �� ,-. �'''^ta�� ~L � x�� . . � � ' 11( 4 _'l •� •, •� . .. � '��• I � ( V � .. r ' � � � . ;+ y . , ! ,t:; � ' � � �� .� ' � • � ,� � �, �'Y '� {' � � .�� - � 3, : � _i; A 6 ; ;�� ' ,L , �, �• �� , . . � t � ,� � d �= .,.� . - , ,� �� ; � "'�, � �. �W� � , , ° �'� �s� ,�.� �,�� .,� � —�, . . � � , - ,r � . � • t �. . , , t, �• •+� � , ,rj� ,. �'�'�' � � , ' � � Y 1. r � � . i'� �� .l� ` � . �4 • � � � �.s ' . Vw � .� � � } - �. � � �. .� v , •* .jl � ..� � a �' ` 1 .y" � � �� a�{��' .� ". � ,. ` . yA . ' C t � �.l. � , � ',� �; "'� � , r` � .,, �.� �'"'*- '�. � � i� �' �"�& � ,�;�; "� �'�� ' ;� � �� , . ,a . R� � :. - :S ��` � � *��. .� �� t.� . � T ,�b.► ° : li' � . !�� * �""'. , _ - - . . '�'T , , � � � • ;�. , � . . � - `. _ . , , ;,, , , . ,� , . , �,, . k �. 1� , • 'f � �' r� '�� r , a�. '! , SL. ��....�1 - ' �. x ' s� .�1I : .S`� '�''��a!�'j !� � ,� . . i v I � � MrS'ID Viewer }�-, ■ ` } ' � "" " " � _ � �� ✓ � % CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: December 15,2003 TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Council President � . ....� .. .:. ,. FROM: Alex Pietsch,Administrator SUBJECT: Letter from Randy and Rosemary Leifer regarding Bales • Annexation Zoning In their letter of November 3,2003 the Leifers indicate their support for the Bales Annexation but note that they mistakenly voted against the proposed R-5 zoning. Since ballots are kept confidential by King County Records,Elections and Licensing,and there were four people voting in the special elecrion for this annexation,there is no way of knowing for sure which voters voted for the annexarion. � The City Attomey, in reviewing the issue at our request, has indicated that since the voters rejected the proposed zoning regulation (R-5) that issue would be off the table for further considerarion. However, because the existing Residential Low Density (RLD) land use designation allows three different zones (RC, R-1 and R-5) the Council could choose either the RC zone at one unit per 10 acres, or the R-1 zone at one unit per net acre. After annexation to the City the applicant, however, could apply for a rezone to R-5 zoning. It is our recommendation that Council adopt R-1 zoning at the time it accepts the Bales Annexation. We have attached Larry Warren's letter of September 26,2003 on this matter. Attachment cc: Mayor Tanner Jay Covington Rebecca Lind Don Erickson H;�EDNSP�PAA�Annexations�Bales\COW Memo regrd Leifers 1V.doc\d � . `�' , �_--- ' . � _ �� c: ;- �_ � � �� _ �IT,�- ��D�' ��l�TC3N� � ' � Office ofthe City Attorney Lawrence J.Warren � Jesse Tanner,Mayor Assistant City Atforneys " Mark Barber Zanetta L.Fontes Russcll S. Wilson Au�n S. Nielsen MEMORANDUM Sasha P. Alessi _ , To: Rebecca Lind,.EDNSP _. ..y.... � Fram: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attomey Date: September 26, 2003 Subject: Annexation Vote Rejecting Zoning Regulation but Adopting Annexation This memorandum is to confirm my canversation with you of September 24, 2003. The priar day. you called and indicated that there had been an annexatiori vote and. that the questian .of , annexation was submitted separately from the questian of vvhether or not to adopt the City's proposed zoning regulation. The annexation passed but the proposed zaning.failed. You ask for guidance. � _ � RCW 35A.14.080 pravides for suiirtiission.of:thFee potential ballot issues. � 1. For and against annexatian. 2. Far or against annexation arid�daption of the prapased zoning regulatian, . 3. For or against assumption of aI1 or a portion af the indebtedness_ From this reading of the law, it was impraper to submit the issue of adop�on of the proposed � zoning regulation separate and apart fram that of the annexation. � Having concluded that the ballot issues were improperly submitted does not answer the question of what should be.dane ne�rt. The electarate�ias voted ta be annexed. However, the property is � without zoning. That faet is no different, however, than:if the only issue submitted had been£or or against annexation. The City would have to schedule public hearings and�adopt zoning� far the property. . . . � I would suggest we follaw that procedure. We properly notice and hold pubiic hearings about the zoning to be imposed on the property and then adapt a zoning ordinance at the sarri�time we adopt the annexation ordinance. � � One caveat seerns appropriate, however. Since the voters rejected a praposed zoning regulatian, ' that zoning regulatian wauld appear to be off the table. As I uaderstand it, the comprehensive - �—�i'�"'�`� icE Bo 2b-.Renton Washin tan 9805?- �i25 255-86?8/F1�X(425)255-5474 �� jr 1 � ly~ Post flf�' x b , g ( ) AHEAA OF 7HE CURYE �ThEs paper cantains 501 recycied materiai,30l post consumer , -. . �,. . - - -=� ' - � -- 9/26/03 Page 2 plan designation supports three separate zoning designations and so, the Council would have to choose one of the two zoning designations that had not been rejected by the electorate. If you have any further questions, please let me know. . , � � � I.�wrence d�Varren � LJW:tYnj : . ce: Alex Pietscfi Jay Covington �,��-��;�� " � � a �� ,�.�. �� . `� � � �`�• �`�o . ''� ' ,`'� � -�'��.,��'��'"��°�+� � z� � , �.: '� ''� �� . . ,� ,,"` Y�a�,� � ��1`� �` 1 '��,� i �`��, � � � ?'�'.y��s�'� �v aa�� ,a� �� f�ntl`�� .. � ' . . . � :ry ��g� 4��-°� �� ' � �� , J��' ��' � ;s ,„� - �� „�. � � ,�... � � ,,��' . • � .;r.�,�, 3 y�y� -�.� � � a� .x�,a . . 1' e '?��k, r � r�. .. �� #x t �� . . .. i#; � �_�:� ?{� �% . . � r �a�..�'�;:�t «w.� � �+., �� . . � .,� � - ' . ' �� .'�`�=� . - � ' • � , ;`�`P' F �j�'�`� Y�°'titf �� u � � �� ,P�``.,a'��24 +�+:;�.� �x;��°�"�� ;p�p ,��` `� � . : �� -..�,� � � � . . , �. 4 ` � f�� , �, Hr��Y,�' � . � . �. � ''��t'Si. � $ � �, , . . . . . . � . '4�'",��- w.i_ +��i �... ��g. ' . . . . .. _ ��'�"�a,`r aya�;��J� . . , . � `�&��""�- .. �?.�%-:� .,� � t� C�.,�'ol�, �' � . i�E�E1�ED November 3,2003 �� 0 5 zo0� r�yor Jesse T�er AY�IZS OF�'IC� City of Renton Q- I 1055 South Crrady Way �c: �{es �nnexa��on �`�� Renton,WA 98055 __ C17Y OF RENTCtV _-. � Dear Mayor Tanner�-- ��- �Q� 0 5 2a03 R�C�IVED CIT'Y CLERK'S OFFICE My wife and I are the owners of the property.at.15311 SE 128�', I grew up in Renton and , . . worked for the city of Renton for.a number of years. My parents were part owners in a Renton clothing store. My father ta.ught and coached at Renton High School for thirty years,and my wife currently teaches at Sierra Heights,a Renton school. Our ties to Renton are many. We recently voted to annex to the City of Renton. We look forward to the annexation but would like to be annexed at R-5. When we voted against the R-5 zoning,we mistakenly thought we were voting for R-6 zoning. We now realize that this was not the case and would like to request R-5 for our property. Thank you for your consideration,and we look forward to being part of the City of Renton. � Sincerely, ��,�' Randy Leifer ; `�� . Rosemary Leife� 5 i a�t s Fo�-�f�l:h sf Se�-�l� W�4 R8�7� � ��: ,Do� ' , � 1 � y. � l, - �, �, , ,t ' Metropolitan King County Council � Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council n Room 1025,King County Courthouse 516 Third Avenue ` Seattle,WA 98104-3272 ' , (206) 296-1020 � FAX`(206) 205-8165 , , E-maii:anne.noris@mefrokc.gov , -.- � TTYlTDD(206)296-1024 � . . , , . , . , � ' i December 2, 2003 � , Harry Sanders . ' Records &Elections Division � King County Department of Information &Administrative Services � 500 Fourth Avenue,Room 553 • � , Seattle,WA 98104 , - RE: City of Renton—Bales Annexation �.(BRB File No. 2145) � Dear Harry: , This annexation was approved by the voters on September 16, 2003. A copy of the certification � of election is enclosed for,your review. _ � Ttiis action has been finalized and is now a matter of public record: If you have any questions, please call me at(206) 296-0364. , � ' Sincerely, � ' ' � , . '. . � Anne Noris � � Clerk of the Council ' . � � AN:ama Attachments: Distribution List � Certification of Elec:tion , , , �` � � � Harry Sanders � � � _ Page 2 - . - cc: Lenora Blauman,Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County - Sue Gordon, Communications Section, KC Department of Public Safety ' . Bob Hirsch, Wastewater Treatment Division,KC Department"of Natural Resources Dr. Ngozi Oleru,Environmental Health Division, KC Department of Public Health ' Lee Ann Merrill,Water and Land Resources Division, KC.Department of Natural Resources Dianne Murdock, Accounting Division,KC pepartment of Assessments Paul McCombs, GIS Section, KC Department of Development and-Environinental Services Mike Thomas, Strategic Planning,KC Office of Budget and Strategic Planning Bernard Thompson, Construation and Facility Management,Property Services . Rey Sugui, KC Department of Transportation,Roads Delite Morris,KC Department of Transportation, Roads � � Jodi Simmons,KC Department of Transportation,Roads Brandy Rettig;KC Department of Transportation,Maps and Records � John Miller,KC Finance, MS ADM-ES-0653. Lauren Smith,Council Staff _ Peggy Dorothy, Council Staff � : : � �Sharon Claussen,KC Parks � � . Feliza Azpirtarte,Public Health Jeff Gregg, KCDOT � , Chris Haugen,Budget , - ' Environmental Review—NW Regional Office '. � � Washington Surveying and Rating Bureau . , Puget Sound Energy � Chicago Title Insurance Go. , � � Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Co. � Evergreen Title Insurance Co. Data Trace � Old Republic Title Insurance Co. . Transnation Title Insurance Co. � ' Western Title Insurance Co. ' ' � Kroll Map Company, Inc. Thomas Brothers Maps . � - � � , This routing list was last updated on October 3, 2003 'If you wish to have your name removed,please contact Angel Allende at(206)296-0302. ' . .;, - �� - �'� ' -- � . - ..- / ' . � T�� _ � �� 3 P� 1� 3� -, ��o�oc�' _ King`County . ' G�-��K : � ,Department af Executive 5ervices � �S.;hG COUNi� C��'��11.. Records,Elections and Licensing Services Division � � • �FGng County Administration Building,MS:ADM-ES-0553 500 Faufth Avenue,Room 553 , , -. � SeatUe,WA 98104-2337 . . - 206-296-1540 FAX 206-296-0108 TTY Relay 711 , � ' STA'IB OF WASHINGTON) ' _ . }SS: � . , Ct4UNTY OF KING . )- . . This is to certify that on September 16;2003, there was held a Special Eleetion in conjunctio�z � _ with the Primary,in the Proposed Bales Annexation Area, King County, Washington;for�the; :submission ofthree propasitions to the voters far their approval or rejection. . 'Thaf the results af the eiection were duly canvassed by the King County Canvassing Board of ` Elect�on Returns on September 26,2003, and the results of said canvass are as follows: , - PROPOSED BALES ANNEXATION � PROPOSITION NU. 1 - PROPOSED AN.(NEXATION QF THE.AREA . ' � � KNOWN AS TI�BALES PROPERTY TO THE' � . CITY.OF RENTON � . � � FOR ANN]�XATION 4 . 100% PASSED AGAINST ANNEXATIC)N . �. � 0%- : - ` � ' � , � . ' VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS . - Proposition No. 1 required a sirnple rnajority for passage. Having�received a 100%0.affirmative vote, the measure was carried. , - .., �.. - , r , - � � . "``� '� Proposed Bales Annexation . - � _ �- , Page 2 . � - � . . , _ � � `- . PRQPOSITION NO.2 � ` � , ASSUMPTION t3F ' - INDEBTEDNESS . . . . yES 4 100% PASSEI3 � ` . . - NO 0 ' 0°l0 . . � . ; ' � � ; � , VALIDATION REQUIR�MENTS _ . � Proposition No. 2 required a snper imajority plus a minirnurn turnout and a minimum Yes vote: ' Having,received a 100% affirmative vote and satisfying the tumout and minilnum �.'es vote .requirements,the measure�was carried. PROPOSITION NO.3 ' y . � FRQPOSED ZONIl�tG REGULATIQN FOR ADOPTION 2 � 50%o FAIL,ED : . AGAINST ADOPTION - 2 50°l0 � . . , . .. . VALIDATIQN REQU�ZEMENTS . ' . Prvposition No. 3 required a simple majority for passage. The measure did na# r.eceive-the required majority.The measure was defeated. � � Dated at Seattle,Kin,g County,Washingtan;.this 2G`t'day of September 2003. �� . � - _ ,- �� . �� _ Dean:+.L'ogan,.I3irect,r-lesig�.ee . . � • . . . ' � �- ��'��`a "t , � �, ��_�.,,�;�x��'� � ; �-- - , .k._ ,,. � . .. �_..' Ko�g'�aun�y ;_�� :r.,, ¢ L7 ,,, Road�ervices Division ��'i � + � �''#: . `� ;. Deparkment of Transpartation '�� . :;;- , �K5C-7R-0231 �''�i': , '.:4.'-_ ,. '� � 201 South Jackson Street ' " " • ;�:Ai(;j; Seattle,WA 9$104-3$56 " May 9,�2003 ' Lenora Biauman z Executive Secretary Boundary Review Board CEN-BR-0608 � � RE: City of Renton—Bales Annexatian (File 2145� Dear Ms. Blauman: Thank you for the oppartunity ta review the legal description transmitted with yaur Apri121,2003 letter for the proposed Bales Annexation area to the City of Renton. Staff has reviewed the enclosed legal description and found that the boundaries of the area described by the legal description are the same as highlighted oza the accompanying Assessor's map. This annexation does not iz�clude,a portion of a county park nor conflict with any other � rriunicipal boundaries in the�vicinity. If yau have any questions,please call Jodi Simmoz�s, Vacations and Boundaries Engineer,at (206)296-3731. , Sincerely, - t !1� � ydia Re ds-Jon�s Manager � ' Project Support Services LR:JRS:hdt ' Enclosure; File and One map cc: '�ne��I�ns,:Clerk Qf the King Caunty Council Paulette Norman, Acting County Road Engineer, Raad Services Division l[31�-�o�"�i'AZM � . W , . ! Lenora Blauman . � �" May 9, 2003 , - � Page 2 bcc: 1Vlary Coltrane, Intergovernmental Relations Coordinator,Road Services.Division f ' .� :�� - - _ EXHIBIT «C�� . . \ _. �t . - � � - , �� ; `;� � � - � � - _ BAI:ES ANNEXATION . . _ LEGAL DFSCRIPTION- - � - � , � , , . �- _ . ,. \ - The Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter"of the N�rthwesf quarter of Section 14, _ - _ -_ - Township 23 North,Range 5 East,,W.M.,in King County,Washington; - � �- - � EXCEPT the east 32.45 feet of the north 4U6.01 feet thereof; - EXCEPT that portion for street right of way(NE 4�'Stre�t): . - _ - � . = � - FILE h0. 2145 - CTTY..UF R�NTON �-�$ALES ANNEXATION - � � . `. � . _ - - � � , . . . . � . - . - . � - - _ ` , , ,. . , . � . - i , - .� �, - : . . . . ; , _ . . _ - . . - . - d<< . � -- � : . � �� . � . -- �°� _. -- . - , �, . : - � : a51°� � - � . . ., . �I .. . . ' . � � ; - , " ., ' � . • ` � _ , ' .., . ' � ' . ' " � � � . -� _ , � _� : r�n r.— ' -�-i---� ' '� - .. f i � � � N • �..i J � ��' �..�' : „p G� i - . � � � � h St � - � � . � S 1 � C� � . -f'I ' . . . r'� � . m � . � � . c� - . � � i � � . ` � � a r � ni . �- • t�, ' � - . � z 2 �ry ._.____ :+G � • .� � . O Z , - , ^ � . . ...,1 ., � _ . SE1 � n � � . . . t Praposed Bales Annexatian �ite _,,, _,. ... Exlsting Clty`Limits O . � �OO 6OO ` " -- Exfiibit E2; Annexatiori Area Size Map proposed.Annexat�o� � ' � �oundary 1 ' 3�0� '�"' fieonomie Devetopment.Noighborhaads dc Sautey�io Planning . �� Q Dei�ir4tdmin4irua . CITY OF RENTOI�1 EC01�10MIC I)EVELOPIVIENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEIVIORANDUM DATE: November 18, 2003 TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Council President FROM: Alex Pietsch,Administrator VIA: Mayor Tanner SUBJECT: Letter from Randy and Rosemary Leifer regarding Bales Annexation Zoning In their letter of November 3, 2003 the Leifers indicate their support for the Bales Annexation but note that they mistakenly voted against the proposed R-5 zoning. Since ballots are kept confidential by King County Records,Elections and Licensing, and there were four people voting in the special election for this annexation, there is no way of knowing for sure which voters voted for what when the vote was split The City Attorney, in reviewing the issue at our request, has indicated that since the voters rejected the proposed zoning regulation (R-5) that issue would be off the table for further consideration. However,because the existing Residential Rural land use designation allows three different zones (RC, R-1 and R-5)the Council could choose either the RC zone at one unit per 10 acres, or the R-1 zone at one unit per net acre. After annexation to the City the applicant, however, could apply for a rezone to R-5 zoning. It is our recommendation that Council adopt R- 1 zoning at the time it accepts the Bales Annexation. We have attached Larry Warren's letter of September 26,2003 on this matter. Attachment cc: Rebecca Lind Don Erickson Document3\d �� - , , -�� _ � � � � L/. �� :i F,s��.,ry �k.'..1��7 � .s E: i �.wi-.�r:,n COUNCIL REFERRAL TO ADMIIVISTRATION , .. . � . � �..._... ., __.....��t TO: '�Alex Pietsch,EDNSP Administrator DATE: 11/10/03 FROM: �Bonnie Walton LOG#: N/A On 11/10/03, Council referred the following: Letter from Randy and Rosemary Leifer, 5127 S.Fountain St., Seattle, 98178, owners of the property at 15311 SE 128"'St., who stated that they mistakenly voted against the R-5 zoning at the Special Election for the Bales Annexation. Referred to Committee of the Whole Please respond as follows: Prepare memo to Councilmembers via Mayor. (After Mayor's approval,Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return copy to you.) Prepare memo to Councilmembers via Mayor and include attached letter with memo. (After Mayor's approval,Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return copy to you.) Prepare letter(s) to citizen/agency with denartment head's signature and submit to Mayor for approval. (After Mayor approves the letter,the Mayor's secretary will mail it out after making a copy for Council arid Clerk and returning a copy to you.) XX Schedule matter on Council committee agenda. Arrange with Council Liaison ASAP. (Copy of response to City Clerk not required.) Other: (as noted) PLEASE REFERENCE LOG NUMBER ON ALL LETTERS. : Please complete request by(as determined). Thank you. cc: Margaret Pullar � . �� ^ �� . . RE�EI�� ` ,=:'rTovember 3,2003 ��y 0 5 2�Q� �' a��s�FF�� " Mayor Jesse Tanner � City of Renton �'��. , 1055 South Grady VVay �c: ��cs �h�ed�a��Oh , ��a�� r Renton,WA 98055 CiTY OF R�NTC�! ��, � - � �OU 0 5 2003 �� Dear Mayor Tanner, �� Ci7Y CL RK��FFICE My wife and I are the owners of the properiy at 15311 SE 128�. I grew up in Renton and � worked for the cit}r of Renton for a number of years. My parents were part owaers in a Renton clothi.ng store. My father taught and coached at Renton I�igh School for thirty years,and my wife currently teaches at Sierra Heights, a Renton school. Our�ies to Renton are many. We recently voted to annex to the City of Renton. We look forward to the annexation but vvould like to be annexed at R-5. When we voted against the R-5 zoning,we mistakenly thought we were voting for R-6 zoning. We now realize that ttus was not the case and would like to request R-5 for our pro�rty. Thank you for yow consideration,and we look forward to being part of the City of Rentoa � Sincerely, �� . . Randy Leifer � . . a �o�� Rosemary Leifer ' S r a'7 s Fo��fr�tv► Sf Sea-�J� w/� 98�7� . . �C: on ��( � � y� �`'� c� �- - `-� ��'�'�c�>>_,��' 1�]�l�+T'�'�� "�` City Clerk ,.. Jesse Tanner,Mayor Bannie I.Walton . T+Tovember 10;2003 � Mr. &I�Zrs.Randy Leifer . � , �127 S.F'ountain St. - ' . Seatt]e,�VA 9817.8 Re: Ba1es Annexatian Zaning. � � � Deai Mr. &�irIrs.Leifer:� � . � .. . .At the regular Council mee�ing of Noy��aiber:I{�,�00�,the Rentan City Cbuncil referred ' - your�lett�z vf�1l3i2043�o the C��i.�ttee'bf�the�WhoIe�f��review.and recommenc�ation: . Yot�wili be notified af the ti�'ie.and date of".the cammittee iiieeting by the Gbuncil � . . secretary when this item is scheduled�, � � � � - � . � � If I can pravide additiona�irifcimnataon�arassis�ance,please feel�ee ta ccintact�me. � Sincerely, . . �. : � : � �t97'L�.,�,�� L't�G��'r`=? � .. � �. . . . .. _ . : � Bonni�I. Waiton , ' ' -. � � . � . . - � .. . �. �.City C1erk . , . . . . �. �.� " ec:, 1Vlayor Jesse Tar�ner ' . � � . Co�ncii President Kathy�eolker-Wheeler � � . � Don Erickson, Senzor Planiier-�EDNSF � - � . � . . � ��_ . . . —�,"��\ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washingtan 98055-(425)430-6510I PAX(425)430-6516 � � j� �+s- � �y �Thispapercontains50%recydedmateria1,30%postconsumer AI3EAD OF THE CLJRVE : . . . _ ' Oetober 20;2003 ' : �llY.OF R�i��N . : � .. , . . . , ' Natalie Dohrn : :. . ` . .. .�_ '. . _ _ � i , ::. ciryofxenton: . :. . . �CT � 1 '�003 . � Plarining�Commissiori `: _ , �U ,;. . . .... �¢,�Q— IQSS South Grady Way ; `` � . ' . �lTl';CL� r-FICE ,i , , . , Renton;WA 98055 '` . ° _ �� . .. ._ , RE , R 6 0verlay _ -' .. . : ;. . .., n :, . � Dear:3Vatalie .'', , , , .. • 'T�m the owner of property being atuiexed by the City o�Renton m the very near future The properry,is ; `_ � located at 1,5221 SE 12.8`�,Renton,legally.desci7bed:as.:Ta�c Lots#65:and#6$: I would be very much�m " " '- � °, _ _ favor ofrezoning to an R 6 Overl�y ::Please consider my request wheri tlie.council is�makizig its deeision . - ' ; �, on_the goni�g'poiicy,:.Tliank you for yoiu attentiori"to tlus mattef - - :` '... SincerEly, ,� , . _ .. V .` '`.: '.: ; . - � , ,. . , . - _ ' • � , :: ,, :�. , .. . .. .. � � . . . . �. ;George.H Bales . , . . ' . . _ - . . , ,. ce . .- Mayor:Tanner.., :... . - . �.- °. :%R�n[to'n'City Coim�l�; ' ,- . . . , _ .. . , . . . _ , , . . � : :,' � _ . . � . .. , _ � . . , , . _ . . . . . ;, -. , .. „ , , _ , , _ . . . . , , ;. ... : ,, , � .. . / , ✓ ' : ' . . _ . , , ,_ . : .. . � , .�G�:. . ,�'�,r;� ��./�J��' . , ` ' F _ �� ' , - . . � C1TY O!=R��"I'C;�� , . .. , � , , `. . � `.:. ..- . . ,. _ . OCT � :1- 2�¢:�3 . - ' R�'GEIV€D , "October20,2003 , ; . , ' `Cf7Y GLE�'r<`�QFFiCL - : . Natalie Dohrn . . _ _ ' `. City of Renton:; , ` . , ,. - . , : '._ Planning Coriimission.. . ... _ - . � , • `1055 South.Grady.Way � .:.. : . � ,`�ienton;WA 98055 . ' . - . ;. . . , . , ,.. , ;i . ' RE '''R 6.Overlay � � ` , .. � . '.Dear Natahe ' : . , .. , �I.am t13e`land manager for progerty l�gally deseribed as Ta�.Lots#65&.#68(1522I:.SE 128.`�)that is � _ . � . - :bemg,annexed by tlie Gi,ty.ofRentoai,in:the "v.ery near futuze:;My employer';and I-would be very supportive;: . ... . , ; _ _ = of the area tjeing zoned as ari.R:§overlay Elease Considei:my request:when the counCiL is mal�ing:a . �. - . ; . . .:. ., . . ; . ._ . ,. , -� - ery.much a rec'iated. � , ; decision`bn'the zonmg'po�icy:.Your aftention,to this�natter.would�be v �ip , >' ' :.�,'Smcerely, ... .- , .. .. ... . . , , . : . ; . ; , , . , : . , , ,,Robin Bales ' `_ , . •, : _ - . . cc _ <Mayor'Tanlqer. . ; . .. , _ , Re�itbn Ctty�a�c� � . ;: , .. , . � �.�d ' ` i . . , . ; .. ' � � � � � ` - � .---� � � � . � _ � � . , , ; . . ' CITY OF R�1TC;N . , �. . - , , . : � 2��3 . , . . , : 0 .. : , C � . . . T2 . October 20,2003 ` . . , � .. ::F�G�I�!E� .: ; � . . . � . �.CtTY CLE�iK'S OF�ICE .. . Natalie Dohrn . - - , , . . .. .. . � - . City•of'Renton" , � . ,:. . . ' • , � . Planning Coinmission ' . � . • � . . . . 1055, South Grady Way.. - ; . . . . . � , . �,. , . . . . - . : : .. .� . Renton,:WA.98U55 . ' : ' � . . � � . ,. " , RE R 6 O�erlay _. , . � , Dear 1VataliE:� , . . '. �; I am the,�nwner�of propeity.being annezecl,bj!fhe City of Renton in the very near future The properly i� � � ; located`at 1521'7 SE 1�8�',�Renton,legaYly descnbed as Tax f.ot#94_.:,.I.would.be verymuch'in favor of �� -rezonmg to an R 6 Overlay PTease corisider my request when ttie council is makmg:its decision�on.the � , , .. • ,° ' ,'zonin : oli Your attention-to this�iattet wouid be:gredtly,appreciated • g P iY• � . Sincerely, � , , , . , � . , �.G ay F�al��s � , � ., . : ` . . • . -.. � cc �Mayoz Tanner_ . . K�n�on'�it�,�ounc�l s.: ; . , . .. � . . . .. . . , . . . . . , .. . ,: _ . . , L � � � �. �. • King County . � C1TY OF R�NTGt�! Department of Executive Services - � Records,Elections and Licensing Services Division , 0 C T i 4 2003 . � King CountyAdministraUon Building,MS:ADM-ES-0553 ' R�CEIVED 500 FouFth Avenue,Room 553 CI1Y CLERK'S OFFiCE Seattle,WA 98104-2337 . � 206-296-1540 FAX 206-296-0108 TTY Relay 711 � STATE OF WASHII�IGTON) . � . ) SS. . _ . � COiJNTY OF KING ) ' , This is to certify that on September 16,2003,there was held a Special Election in conju.nction � with the Primary,in the.Proposed Ba1es Annexation Area,King County,Washington,for the submission of three propositions to the voters for their approval or rejection. � That the results of the election were duly canvassed by the King County�Canvassing Board of Election Returns on September 26,2003, and the results of said canuass are as follows: PROPOSED BALES ANNEXATION � � � PROPOSTTION NO. 1 PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF TI�AREA . � ` � KNOWN AS THE BALES PROPERTY TO TI� - CITY OF RENTON . FOR ANNEXATION 4 100% PASSED � AGAINST ANNEXATION 0 0% VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS � Proposition No. 1 required a simple majority for passage. Having received a�100% affirmative vote,the measure was carried. �� K . . . . Proposed Bales Annexation � . . Page 2 � . . ; PRQPOSITION NO. 2 ASSUMPTION OF � � INDEBTEDNESS YES 4 100% PASSED . � NO 0 � 0% � . VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS . . Proposition No. 2 required a super majority plus.:�minimum turnout and a minimum Yes vote. . ' Havi.ng, received a 100% affirmative �ote and satisfying the turnuut �and minimum Yes vote requirements,the measure was carried. . PROPOSITION NO. 3 � PROPOSED ZONING REGULATION . FOR ADOPTION 2 50% FAILED AGAINST ADOPTION 2 5.0% . . � � � VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS Proposition No. 3 required a simple majority for passage. The measure did not receive the requ.ired majority. The measure was defeated. Dated at Seattle,King Couniy,Washington,this 26�'day of September 2003. � �C.��,�iu . .. Dean C. Logan,Direct�r-de .'gnee ♦`iAy`�' �� /� P�zmar� O �c�a �n�a � � ,�;;�vV' COU�YTY 9/ZS/03 3:.rs:zspn� �- ��"" � , • . ' � $� f6t�7/�si''16� 2003 . � . . ' Page 11 of II ' . PR.OPC3SED�A1�IT�E�ATIUN � � . P� tJP4SED AI�1r�EXATI+C}N . . �,�c;�s ��.�ca�v . . � . . . �..�r�u�co Az�rr�x,A�co�v ,8nllot's Cnst/Re�`si'ered Yoters: , ' 47 9 .44.44% •� Bullots Cast./Re,�istered Yoters: 2/ 3 . � 66.67°fo ' � ,Prec' a n e l P c n � � 1 1 • : 0 0 ° ecin s C unte o a �rec ncts: 11 1 104.Q0°to � � Pr-oposi�ion No. I.Bales Anne�c'To Renton � " � • � Proposi�'on No. l Tj�dico.Arinex�To Renton � � � Ff)RANNE}CAT1C?N" � 4 1Q.0.00°!0 'F4RANNEXATlON � 2 100A0°lo AGAtNST ANNEXATlON � ��. • . 0 0.00°!c AGAINST ANNEXATfON . • 0 : 0.00°l0 Propositzon.No.•2 Assumption of Indebtedness • . . Proposztion No..��Assurn�tion of.indebtedness . • ; , YES . � � � �00.40°lo Yes : . . • � 2 �00.00°l0 NC} � : ' q ' OAO°/a � NO ' • ' . 0 'O.QQ°lo Fropositian�Vo. 3 Proposed Zaning�egulation ' � . , Proposition No.,3 Pro,posed Zonzng.�tegulation . ' ..«..'r.i..n......�� , ��.�, _._ � � FQR ADOPTION . � 2 50.40°l0 � FL?R ADOPTION � 7 • . . 2 10Q.�0°!0 AGAtNST ADQPTIC?N • 2 �0.4t)°lo AGAtNST ADOPTION , � 0 0.00% F�,��v��.Txo�v � . � � � � � . � . . � . Batlots CtistJRe,�istered Vaters: � 35/ 6 � 250.44% � ' � ' , � Precincts vrartte otal ecin` 1' 1 104 00° . � . ' � Proposition.�fo. X Falk Aririex To.Renton . . .. . . . • • ` . 'OR ANNEXATt4N . � � � � � � y �$" 5T.14°!0 ��,. . v'" ' �� . � ,GAINST ANNEXATiON � � . 4 -8' 42.86°l0 � �� . � i PropositionNo. 2 Assum�,ption a.flndebteriness ' . ,(} � . � � t f o ('��' F✓. � , " . � ,c-o� � . 3s � : � . .9` 84.29!o +��1 n� � ) ' C? •6�' 35.71°lo .,��''"..� '� ' �C� —` O • . ' � �;rn .�- � Pr.opasition No. 3 Proposed Zoning Regulation . � ,� �� ►�,,. � : . � �' .--s � }R ADOPTtON � � � � �$' � 71.43%�� 1�. . .. . . . . � � `�`'' � . . n• �AlNST ADC}PTtON ' � .' O •�" � �28.57% � � . : � . � '. � , . • , .. �� . .' ,`�� ;y y s , CIT` OF RENTOl�T ..LL � Office of the City Attorney � Lawrence J.Warren Jesse Tanner,Mayor � Assistant City Attorneys . 1VYark Barber Zanetta L.Fontes Russell S. Wilson Ann S. Nielsen MEMO 'R.�11�TDUM � g$1�a.s.P„i,p�iessi � „yy y�A .�/�9�Ylli �om'� ��,�'�� mI�� S�P 2 6 20Q3 T�; Rebecca Lind� EDNSP " ECONOMIC DE�fE�CpAdF� NEIGHBOftHOOUS `.� Fa-om: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney AND sTH^rF u�:�r��v;,��,:�+�A�=.� Date: September 26, 2003 Subject: Annexation Vote Rejecting Zoning Regulation but Adopting Annexation This memorandum is to confirm my conversation with you of September 24, 2003. The prior day you called and indicated that there had been an annexation vote and, that the question of annexation was submitted separately from the question,of whether or not to adopt the City's proposed zoning regulation. The annexation passed but the proposed zoning failed. You ask for guidance. � RCW 35A.14.080 provides for submission of three potential ballot issues. 1. For and against annexation. 2. For or against annexation and adoption of the proposed zoning regulation. 3. For or against assumption of all or a portion of the indebtedness. From this reading of the law, it was improper to submit the issue of adoption of the proposed zoning regulation separate and apart from that of the annexation. . Having concluded that the ballot issues were improperly submitted does not answer the question of what should be done next. The electorate has voted to be annexed. However, the property is , without zoning. That fact is no different, however, than if the only issiae submitted had been for or against annexation. The City would have to schedule public heari�gs and adopt zoning for the property. . , I would suggest we follow that procedure. We properly notice and hold public heaxings about the , zoning to be imposed on the property and then adopt a zoning ordinance at the same time we adopt the annexation ordinance. One caveat seems appropriate, however. Since the voters rejected a proposed zoning regulation, that zoning regulation would appear to be off the table. As I understand it, the comprehensive Post Office Box 626-.Renton,Washington 98057-(425)255-8678/FAX(425)255-5474 1` � ld 1 � l�l �This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer A H E A D O F T H E C U RV E . :^ � r 9/26/03 Page 2 . , plan designation supports three separate zoning designations and so, the Council would have to choase one of the twa zoning designations that had not been rejected by the electarate. If you have any further questians, please let me know. � � Lawrence J.�arren LJW:tmj � cc: Alex Pietscli . Jay Govington t.. �� c� �: � ' _ , �� CIT`.�_-�'OF REl`�TTON "LL Office of the City Attorney — Jesse Tanner,Mayor Lawrence J.Warren Assistant City Attorneys Mark Barber . _ Zanetta L.Fontes Russell S. Wilson Ann S. Nielsen MEMORANDUM ��,�.�ess`��. � ��`�� ' To• Rebecca Lind,EDNSP �E� 2 � 2003 ' ECONOMIC DEL'ELCP,�iENT, NEIG}-igrJqf;00DS From: � Lawrence J. Warren, Clty AttOII18y AN�STHAT.F�;,;p:;�n�,,�r�� , � . Date: September 26, 2003 . Subject: Annexation Vote Rejecting Zoning Regulation but Adopting Annexation This memorandum is to confirm my conversation with you of September 24, 2003. The prior day. you called and indicated that there had been an annexation vote and. that the question of annexation was submitted separately from the question of whether or not to adopt the City's proposed zoning regulation. The annexation passed but the proposed zoning failed. You ask for guidance. ' RCW 35A.14.080 provides for submission of three potential ballot issues. 1. For and against annexation. 2. For or against annexation and adoption of the proposed zoning regulation. 3. For or against assumption of all or a portion of the�indebtedness. From this reading of the law, it was improper to submit the issue of adoption of the proposed zoning regulation separate and apart from that of the annexation. Having concluded that the ballot issues were improperly submitted does not answer the question of what should be.done next. The electorate has voted to be annexed. However, the property is without zoning. That fact is no different, however, than if the only is��,te submitted had been for or against annexation. The City would have to schedule public hearf�s and adopt zoning for the property. I would suggest we follow that procedure. We properly notice and hold public hearings about the zoning to be imposed on the property and then adopt a zoning ordinance at the same time we adopt the annexation ordinance. � One caveat seems appropriate, however. Since the voters rejected a proposed zoning regulation, that zoning regulation would appear to be off the table. As I understand it, the comprehensive Post Office Box 626-Renton,Washington 98057-(425)255-8678/F�1X(425)255-5474 1` � jv 1 0 lr �Thispapercontains50%recycledmateriat,30%postconsumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE Y ' - 9/26/03 Page 2 plan designation supports three separate zoning designations and so, the Council would have to choose one of the two zoning designations that had not been rejected by the.electorate. If you have any further questions, please let me know. - � � L�wrence J.�arren LJW:tmj cc: Alex Pietscli Jay Covington , ,.. k � �i�' d g � . a . ' � �'f. '.:4 ..<.. �'� 4r� ' �� S S ,._ ..f"� �� .� �?�' ' _ � . ? ..^�'�>W! 'r � _ .o-^� „ . ��' 2 f� p q �C�".1 YS 'n. ' . i Y A:1'� 1�S �tk � � � � ;Y\: : � ..� f g -. .. �� .: � . ."a- � ? ..,, � �°' , i� �:: �, � F t:. ^; }?: xl,: k � �£ b Y :\ i��e . * �: t ... � . ... 2�1� � � �; � ��'�� z.>'-; z � . . � . . : �� . King County . � �l'iY OF R�NT�N � Department of Executive Services - � � � � Records,Elections and Licensing Services Division , OCT � 4 Z003 . . ' FGng County Administration Building,Ms:�wM-ES-o553 � RECElVED �500 Fouffh Avenue,Room 553 CITY CLERK'S O�FiC� SeatUe.WA 98104-2337 . . � 20Cr296-1540 FAX 206-296-0108 TTY Retay 711 � STATE OF WASHINGTON) . � � � � . . )SS. . � � � COUNTY OF KING ) ' , . � This is to ceitify that on September 16,2003,there was held.a Special Election in conjunction � with the Primary,in the.Proposed Ba1es Annexation Area,King County,Washington,for the � submission of three propositions to the voters for their approval or rej ection. � That the results of the election were duly canvassed by the King County�anvassing Board of Election Reiums on September 26,2003, and the results of said canvass aze as follows: PROPOSED BALES ANN�XATION � � � PROPOSTTION NO. 1 . PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF THE AREA . � �� KNOWN AS THE BALES PROPERTY TO THE - CTTY OF RENTON . FOR ANNEXATION 4 100% PASSED . � � AGAINST ANNEXATION 0 0% . VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS � Proposition No. 1 required a simple majority for passage. Having received a�100% affirniative . vote,the measure was cazried. . ' �. , . •'� � ' � � �_�- ' � Proposed Bales Annexation � . . � Page 2 � � . . . . ; . . � � , PRQPOSITION NO.2 � ASSUMPTION OF - � � INDEBTEDNESS � � YES 4 100% PASSED � � � NO 0 � 0% " � - 1 VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS _ Proposition No. 2 required a super majority plus..�minimum turnout and a minimum Yes vote. . ' Having.received a 100% affinnative vote and satisfying the tumuut�and minimum Yes vote requirements,the measure was carried. . PROPOSTTION NO. 3 � PROPOSED ZONING REGULATION � . FOR ADO�TION 2 50% FAILED :. AGAINST ADOPT`ION 2 5.0% _ . � � � � . VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS � Pmposition No. 3 required a simple majority for passage. The measure did not receive the � required majority.The measure was defeated. � . Dated at Seattle,King County,Washington,this 26�'day of September 2003. � ��v�- � � - .. . �Dean C.Logan,Direct r-de 'gnee • Y ia .f'�ima�y V'�"�`1GIa•� �1n'c1 � � ,��'�''r COIl.�YfiY �/25%03 3.z�:a�P�n' � � • • � � � Se te�ber 18, 2043 . � . � �. � � p��e u ofz� � � "� PRO�'t35ED�ANT�'E�ATION � � � . ° P� O t�►SED • �ATI+�N . . �a�.tiEs A1vivE�.z�o�v . . � � . � . . :.z�►�co Ar�r��zzar� � Ballots Cast/Re,�t'st'ered Voters: , ' 4! 9 .44.44°/a •� Bdllots Cast.lRe,�lste�ed Yotet's: 2/ 3 � 66.67% , ` ' e al in • � ° c n C nt � e n . 1 1' 144.Od°/a � � �'ropos�#on No, l Bales��inn�x'To Renton � ' � . � Prvpos�tion No. Y ?�dico Arin�x�To Renton � � ' � � - FtaR ANNEXATiOi�fi ' 4 �l0,0.00% 'FQR ANNEXATION � . 2 10Q.OQ°la AGAthlST ANi�lE?CAl`!4N • �.. � 0 0.00°!c AGAtNST ANNEXATlON �, . . . � p �, p,Qpo/p' �'ropositior�N'o.•2 tl.rsumption af Indebtedness • . Propos�tian Na.2'Assuntption of Ind�btedness . � � . . . . �_.�..._....�, ._...,._., '� YES . ' 4 ' �4Q.00% Y9S ` � 2 100.00°l0 NO � : ' • 0 ' 0.00°fo � tda • • , ' . � 0 �0.00% ProposYtian Nn. 3 Pro�ased Zaning Regulation ' � . , Progositioic.No. 3 Praposed Zoning�egulation � . �.�.�.,_,__...,.�..`�� FC?R AD�I�TION . ' 2 5Q.00% � FOR ADOPTION � 4 • . • 2 100.00°to qGAtNST ADOPTION ' 2 $OA�°lo AGAtNST ADOPI`!ON , � 0 0.00% �'ALK A1��NEXATION ' . � � � ' � . � • . ` BalXots Cast/Re�i�tered Yaterst • 15/ 6 ' 254.40% ' • ' � � � ecin rcrrte tal e � p � . . � • . Praposition Na.��7 FalkAririex To Renton . . . .. ' ' . . � . . , ' 'OR ANNEXATI{ON , � � � . � • � � �8' S7.14°fo ��• � • .' , . . ,C.�AiNST Ai�1NF,.7CATtON � � . . 4 �•8' � 42.86% � �� . � . ' - i� ; Proposition 1Yo. 2 �lssum�tion o.f Indebted.n�ss • - � � ' 3s ' : • � .9' 84.29°l0 �� `� � • . ' • � �,.�,� n �� U .�&" 35.7�°�o , ��''`,,� �� n'� `" � . . � • . . . • 4 �. Pr.oposit�on No.3 Proposed Zoning RegulatioM • � � � � ��-,� � � . � . � � . . �° � -� )R ADOPTiC)N • � � .ti9" � fi1.43°fo�� . ' � � � ' . , . '� r-"� � � � . . , � � � � ' +AINST ADOPTIt3N ' � ' "U' •�"` � ��28,57% � �j . � . • � •� . , . � . • . . • ' • .. �. rr.�.. �.• .. . . . . � , ' � . . . ' . � '. • . . . �1RlYkf�" ,1. _ .;�'1,��► '.��'��.:�� 5�_ ,r �__._,.. � AN ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR RECORDS, ELECTIONS AND LICENSING SERVICES DIVISION � . KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON ��TYor-�R��'� ; ` �--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=-------�-�!---� �3 Z0� . , WHEREAS, the�Council of King County, Washington, did present on June 25, 2003 Ord�� No. 14685 dated June 23, 2003 wherein they direct that a Special Election be held pursuant to RGW 29.13.010 and 35A.14.050 for submission to the qualified voters of the Proposed � Annexation Area Known as the Bales Property, three propositions for their consideration; and WHEREAS, said governing body states that an emergency exists and, accordingly, requests that � the Special Election be held September 16, 2003 in conjunction with the Primary; and WHEREAS, the request is found to be in compliance with the pertinent statutes governing special elections; � NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDERED by the Director of King County Records,Elections � and Licensing Services Division as ex-officio supervisor�of elections, having deemed that an emergency exists, that a Specia] Election shall be held in the Proposed Annexation Area Known as the Bales Property on September 16, 2003, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified voters of said jurisdiction the following ballot measures: � � PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF THE AREA KNOWN AS TH�BALES PROPERTY TO � THE CITY OF RENTON � PROPOSITION NO. 1 � � _ PROPOSED ANN�XATION TO THE CITY OF RENTON Shall the area of unincorporated King County contiguous to the city of Renton and commonly known as the Bales property, which is legally described in King County Ordinance No. 14685 � and city of Renton Resolution No. 3624, be annexed to and become part of the city of Renton? . FOR ANNEXATION � AGAINST ANNEXATION ; � PROPOSITION NO. 2 � ASSUMPTION OF INDEBTEDNESS � Shall all property within the area, upon annexation, be assessed and taxed at the same rate as the property located within the city of Renton is assessed and taxed to pay for all or any portion of � the then outstanding indebtedness of the city, which indebtedness has been approved by the � voters, contracted for, or incurred prior to, or existing at, the date of annexation? � YES " NO nn , / „_. �a_ , : � . .�..� �`TA / Cq .. , . � . ' � . � ' . . � . ^ i . I ' , . �:_ Proposed Annexation of the Area Known as the Bales Property To the City of Renton . Page 2 . PROPOSITION NO.3 • PROPOSED ZONING REGULATION Shall all property located within the temtory to be annexed, excluding street rights-of-ways, simultaneous with the annexation have imposed the city of Renton zoning regulations, with a � comprehensive plan designation of residential rural (RR) and a,zoning designation of R-5? FOR ADOPTION OF PROPOSED ZONING REGULATION AGAINST ADOPTION OF PROPOSED ZONING REGULATION . The foregoing ballot title has been certified in accordance with RCW 29.27.065. " DATED at Seattle,Washington, this 23rd day.of.July 2003. . . . �� I erim Direc ar,Records, Elections and � Licensing Services Division; King County . � , � I � _, ''�, i� � - , � ��GJG%�? �� . �� King County —��r� �'t'�� . Department of Executive Services �`° L��' �°��'m Records, Elections and Licensing Services Divisior. ��296 i.�� Elections Sec#ion King County Administration Building C(�.Y�F�Z��„Q� 500 4 Avenue,Rm.553 Seattle,WA 98104-2337 206-296-1565 Fax 206-296-0108 TTY 206-296-0109 �� ,3 � �� EGE!VED 7une 25, 2003 � G3 i�'�L��tK'�t��u� Ms. Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council Metropolitan King County Council King County Courthouse MS: KCGCC-1025 R�: Request for Special �lection, Acknowled�ement of Receipt Dear Ms. Noris, This letter serves to acknowledge receipt of Ordinance No. 14685 requesting that a Special . Election be held in King County, Washington, in conjunction with the Primary on September 16, 2003. The ballot measures will appear on the ballot as Proposition Nos. 1, 2 and 3, for the proposed annexation area 1<nown as the B^les property. A copy of the Order of Election will be sent immediately following the review of the official � ballot title. T�f you nave any questions dbout th�calendar for this election or the adminisirafion of your election, please call Election Operations Supervisor Linda Sanchez at (206) 296-1565 Sincerely, �� Pam Floyd Acting Assistant Superintendent . . -�� ,�,,��- - -��-�z��s-�� r�� . ; �j� `_/ -� Washington State Boundary Review Board For King County Yesler Building,Room 220,400 Yesler Way, Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206)296-6800 •Fax: (206)296-6803 • http://www.metrokc.gov/annexations ��,�a�.,�.�.,,x,,.r June 6, 2003 ��m� J U N 9 zoo3 Cl�T of Renton ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, �,7 NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLAhNING Attn: Don Erickson, e� AICP, Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 9$O55 RE: CLOSING LETTER FOR COMPLETED ACTION—File No. 2145—City of Renton— Ba1es Annexation Dear Mr. Erickson: We are writing to advise you that the Boundary Review Board has now completed the required Evaluation, as specified in RCW 36.93,for the above-referenced proposed action(filed with the . Board effective April 21,2003. � The Boundary Review Board also provided a 45-day public review period April 21—June 5,2003, as prescribed by RCW 36.93. The Board received no request for a public hearing of this proposed action during the public review period. The Boundary Review Board, therefore, hereby deems this proposed action approved effective June 5,2003. Fina1 approval of the proposed action is also subject to the following actions, where applicable: 1. Sewer and Water District actions and some other actions are also subject to approval by the Metropolitan King County Council. If the �ouncil mak�s changes to the proposai, the $oard may then be required to hold a public hearing. 2. Filing with King County of franchise application(s), as required, accompanied by a copy of this letter. 3. Filing with King County of permit application(s), as required, accompanied Uy a copy of this letter. � 4. Fulfillment of all other statutory requirements and/or procedures specified in your Notice of Intention. Page two continued,June 6,2003 Form 13 5. Notification to King County Office of Regional Policy and Planning, in writing, of your intended effective date of annexation. This notification should be provided as early as possible. Please send this information to Michael Thomas, Office of Management and Budget, 516 Third Avenue,Room 402, Seattle, Washington 98104,and 6. Filing with King Couniy Council of: (1)one certified copy of final resolution or ordinance accomplishing this proposed action; and(2) a copy of this letter. This document should be filed with the Clerk of the Council (Attn: Anne Noris), King County Courthouse, Room 1025, Seattle,Washington 98104 If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact our office at 206-296- 6800. � Sincerely, � , ��:....e-t�J Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary cc: Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council ` Harry Sanders,Records and Elections Division Diane Murdock,Department of Assessment . Lydia Reynolds-Jones,Manager,Project Support Services King County"911" Program Paul Reitenbach,Department of Development&Environmental Services Michael Thomas, Office of Management and Budget Form 13 i� � f CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN OIYDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ANNEXII�IG CONTIGUOUS UNINCORPORATED TERRI'TORY KNOWN AS THE BALES ANNEXATION, BY THE ELECTION METHOD, ANI) SETTING THE TAXATION RATE, ESTABLISI3ING ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS, AND FIXING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ANNEXATION. WHEREAS, after public hearing, the City Council enacted a resolution calling for an annexation by election under RCW 35A.14.015 for an area commonly referred to as the Bales Annexation, which area is the properiy generally bounded by the south side of NE 4th Street to the north, SE 130`h Street to the south, if extended, the west side of Parcel Number 1423059062, to the east, and the centerline of 152nd Avenue SE, if extended, to the west, legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth; and WHEREAS, said resolution also called for an election on a proposition that the property in the�Bales Annexation should be subject to existing bonded indebtedness; and I WHEREAS, said resolution also called for an election on the proposition that all property located within the territory to be annexed, excluding street right-of-ways, shall, simultaneous with the annexation, have imposed the City of Renton zoning regulations, with a Comprehensive Plan designation of Residential Rural (RR) and a zoning designation of R-5; and WHEREAS, those voting rejected R-5 zoning for the annexation, leaving only RC or R-1 zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan desigation of Residential Rural (RR), and WHEREAS the R-1 zone more appro�riate for this site than RC zone, and WHEREAS, said proposed annexation had been submitted to and approved by the King County Boundary Review Board; and � _ � ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS,an election was held pursuant to State statute; and WHEREAS, in the September 16, 2003, election the Bales Annexation, the assumption of indebtedness was approved by the voters; and WHEREAS, the election results certifying a sufficient majority to permit annexation of the area have been received by the City; NOW, TI�EREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: � SECTION I. There has been filed with the City Council of the City of Renton, Washington, certified election results indicating a sufficient majority was received approving the Bales Annexation to the City of Renton and such annexation has been approved by the King County Planning Review Board. The City Council finds it to be in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Renton to annex and does hereby annex the territory submitted to the voters as the Bales Annexation situated in King County, Washington, as contiguous, proximate and adjacent to the present corporate limits of the City and as more particularly described by its legal description as set forth in Exhibit A and graphically shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated in full by this reference. SECTION II. The territory set forth in this ordinance and for which said election results were certified for annexation should be and is hereby made a part of the City of Renton. The area shall be assessed and taxed at the same rate on the same basis as property within the City of Renton to pay for all or any portion of the outstanding indebtedness of the City of Renton, which indebtedness has been approved by the voters, contracted for, or incurred prior to or existing at, the date of annexation. 2 a- � ; ' ORDINANCE NO. SECTIOIV III. Zoning for the annexed area is hereby designated as R31, consistent with a Comprehensive Plan designation of RR(Residential Rural). SECTION I�. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five days after its passage, approval, and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COLTNCIL this day of , 2003. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2003. Jesse Tanner, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1049:10/7/03:ma 3 � � :.�► , _ �� CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON � ORDINANCE NO. AN ORI)INANCE OF THE CITY OF IZENTON, WASHINGTON, ANNEXING CONTIGUOUS UNINCORPORATED TERRITO1tY KNOWN AS THE B�.A`7:ES��j1��NE�'AT��O� BY THE ELECTION 1dIETHOD, AND SETTII�G THE TAXATION RATE, ESTABLISHING ZOI�TING CLASSIFICATIONS, AND FIXING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ANNE�ATION. WHEIZEAS, after public hearing, the City Council enacted a resolution calling for an annexation by election under RCW 35A.14.015 for an area commonly referred to as the Bales Annexation, which area is the property generally bounded by the southside of NE 4th Street to the �� north, SE 130th Street�to the south, the west side of Parcel Number 1423059062, to the east, and the centerline of 152°d Avenue SE, if extended, to the west, legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth; and WHEREAS, said resolution also called for an election on a proposition that the property in the Falk Annexation should be subject to existing bonded indebtedness; and WHEREAS, said resolution also called for an election on the proposition that all property located within the territory to be annexed, excluding street right-of-ways, shall, simultaneous with the annexation, have imposed the City of Renton zoning regulations, prepared under RCW 35A.14.340, with a Comprehensive Plan designation of Residential Rural (RR) and a zoning designation of R-5, and WHEREAS, said proposed annexation had been submitted to and approved by the King County Boundary Review Board; and WHEREAS, an election was held pursuant to State statute; and ,�_ fi,n�, �,_,.,�`:� �j ,��;�..;�� t'; � �� . ti" �'� . . ��r ORDINANCE NO. _ � WHEREAS, in the date election the Annexation, the assumption of indebtedness, and the zoning regulations were approved by the voters; and WHEREAS, the election results certifying a sufficient majority to permit annexation of the area have been received by the City; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. There•has been filed with the City Council of the City of Renton, Washington, certified election results indicating a sufficient majority was received approving the Annexation to the City of Renton and such annexation has been approved by the King County Planning Review Board. The City Council finds it to be in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Renton to annex and does hereby annex the territory submitted to the voters as the Annexation situated in King County, Washington, as contiguous, proximate and adjacent to the present corporate limits of the City and as more particularly described by its legal description as set forth in Exhibit A and graphically shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated in full by this reference. SECTION II. The territory set forth in this ordinance and for which said election results were certified for annexation should be and is hereby made a part of the City of Renton. The area shall be assessed and tu�ed at the same rate on the same basis as property within the City of Renton to pay for all or any portion of the outstanding indebtedness of the City of Renton, which indebtedness has been approved by the voters, contracted for, or incurred prior to or existing at, the date of annexation. 2 �" 1 A - ORDINANCE NO. SECTION III. Zoning for the annexed area is hereby designated as , with a Comprehensive Plan designation of SECTION IV. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five days after its passage, approval, and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COIJNCIL this day of , 2003. � Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2003. �I i Jesse Tanner, Mayor Approved as to form: 'I Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. � 3 r- . ,�:,{�.- 1�TOTICE OF INTENTION Bales Annexation i __.� �---- -------___ ____ __------� I. BACKGROUND/MAPS �� l -J ; 1. The description of and reason for seeking the proposed action: The proposed action is to annex approximately 8.52 acres to the City of Renton. The primary purposes of the annexation are to develop under City of Renton regulations and � oversight and to receive Renton sanitary sewer service. ! i The annexation was initiated through the Resolution for Election method under RCW ' 35A.14.015, 14.070, 14.080, 14.085, 14.090, 14 .100. The proposed annexation area is located in the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/a Section 14, Township 23 North,.Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington, excepting the east 32.45 feet of the north 406.01 feet and the street right-of-way of NE 4`�' Street. Its western boundary abuts Renton at 152°d Avenue SE, if extended, and its northern boundary abuts Renton at NE 4"'Street. It eastern boundary would be 152°d Avenue SE, if extended. , i B. Copies of the Renton City Council rr►inutes for actions taken relative to the proposed , annexation: � i� A. Exhibit A: Certified minutes of the March 17, 2003 meeting of the Renton City ' �� Council adopting the annexation resolution and autharizing the ! holding of an annexation election for the 8.52-acre Bales �� Annexation site. � B. Exhibit B: Certified minutes of theMarch 17, 2003 meeting of the Renton City ; t Council regarding prezoning the 8.52-acre Bales Annexation site R- Li 5 consistent with the existing Residential Rural land use designation shown the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. 3. Pursuant to RCW 43.21C.222,annexations are exempt from SEPA. n4. Exhibit C: Legal description of the proposed annexation boundaries. 5. The following maps are enclosed: � A. Exhibit D: King County Assessor's maps (three sets) displaying: ��, � 1) The proposed Bales Annexation site boundary. �� ; 2) The size in acres. �t 3) The City of Renton corporate limits in relationship to the proposed �ti� Bales Annexation site. .� t� i 4) The location of the nearest service points for the required utility I services to the area. �'i ... ,--� Washington State Boundary Rev Board for King County Proposed Bales Annexation Page 2 B. ` Exhibit E: Vicinity maps displaying: � i � 1) The proposed Bales Annexation site boundary. � � � 2) The size of the proposed annexation in acres. � � 3) The City of Renton existing corparate limits relative to the � proposed annexation area. l � 4) All major streets and other major physical features. '� 5) The boundaries, including future service area boundaries, of all i cities or special service districts having jurisdiction in or near the , proposal. ' NOTE: The City and County library service area boundaries a correspond to the City's corporate boundary. � ' 6) King County Urban Growth Area and City of Renton Potential ' Annexation Area boundaries established under the Growth " Management Act. �i C. � �� Exhibit F: A map of the current City of Renton corporate limits upon which � the proposed Bales Annexation site boundaries have been delineated. �� D. ° Exhibit G: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations. E. � Exhibit H: Topography. � , II. FACTORS THE BOARD MUST CONSIDER 1. Overview A. The population of the proposed Annexation area is estimated to be about eight. The City of Renton estimated population as of June lst, 2002, was 53,840. B. The proposed annexation area includes about 8.52-acres, excluding roads. C. The population density of the proposed Annexation area is about .21 persons per gross acre. D. The assessed value of the properties proposed for annexation is $776,000. 2. Land Use A. Existing uses include one single family home, one construction business and vacant land. B. No development of the subject parcels has been proposed to the City of Renton. However, the annexation was proposed to facilitate development of the properties. 3. Comprehensive Plans/Franchises . �`� . ' � ti�Y o� City of Renton � F: � DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, � � � NEIGHBORHOODS, and STRATEGIC PLANNING � �� Sixth Floor �1vT 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 www.ci.renton.wa.us Date: June 5, 2003 , TO: Steve Beck FROM: Don Erickson, AICP Bales Annexation Strategic Planning Division Phone: (425) 444-0461 Phone: (425) 430-6581 Fax Phone: (425) 227-5224 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 ISUBJECT: Bales Annexation I Number of pages including cover sheet 4 REM.4RKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ Reply ❑ Please � For your be mailed ASAP Comment review Attached are the petition materials I discussed with you this morning. If you have any questions please give me a ca11. Thanks. t��11�v��. Ahead of the curve i WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY,REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY YESLE400 YES�LER WAY M 220 " �w��,.k�.��k �� SEATTLE, WA 98104 �1�Y 2 � 2003 May 21�2��3 ECONOGHBORHCODS,ENt, AND STRATEr_•I�p�p,��tiG a- . �,�_�„,�s City of Renton Attn: Don Erickson AICP, Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way � - Renton, WA 98055 RE: NOTIFICATION OF OFFICIAL FILING File No. 2145—City of Renton—Bales Annexation Dear Mr. Erickson: We have received approval from King County engineering staff of the legal description for the above-referenced Notice of Intention. The Notice of Intention is now considered complete and has been officially filed effective May 21, 2003. Therefore, the end of the forty-five day period allowed for invoking the Board's jurisdiction and requesting a public hearing is officially June 5, 2003. You will be advised of any further changes in the status of the Notice before the Board. Please be aware that any future final ordinance or resolution on the proposed action must incorporate the legal description approved by King County engineering staff, including any revisions made in response to the engineering staff review. Si erely, Lenora Blaum Executive Secretary cc: Anne Noris, Clerlc of the Council Lydia Reynolds-Jones,Manager,Project Support Services Diane Murdock,Department of Assessments Hariy Sanders,Records and Election Division Paul Reitenbach,Department of Development and Environmental Services Michael Thomas, Office Management and Budget FORM 12 . , � - 1 ti�Y o Cit� of Renton U �� DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, � � ♦ NEIGHBORHOODS, and STRATEGIC PLANNING �� Sixth Floor N`� 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 www.ci.renton.wa.us Date: 04/25/03 TO: Lenora Blauman FROM: Don Erickson, AICP Executive Secreteary Office of Strategic Planning Wash. State Boundary ENDSP Department Review Board for King City of Renton County Phone: (206) 296-6801 Phone: (425) 430-6581 Fax Phone: (206) 296-6803 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 ISUBJECT: Bales Annexation Summary I Number of pages including cover sheef 4 REMARKS: ❑ Orrginal to ❑ Urgent ❑ Reply ❑ Please � For your be mailed ASAP Comment review Lenora, Attached are our edits for the Bales Annexation Summary. Please call if you have questions. Thank you. RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE SUMMARY FILE NO. 2145 Thomas Guide Map No. 656 Date Received: 04/21/03 Date Distributed: 04/22/03 ENTITY City of Renton Date Filed: ACTION Resolution for Election for Land Annexation �� Expiration 45 Days: 06/05/03 , �� TITLE Bales Annexation Y"� Board Meeting: 05/08/03 , Location. '� The site is located �east of the City of Renton. The si abuts the City of Renton on its northe�n (SE 128�' Street) and weste�.`n boundaries �I (152"d Avenue SE), The site is bordered on the�ast by 15�"Avenue S . � The southern border is generally formed by SE 130�'Street(if extended). Land Area Approximately 8.52 acres Land Use � � �� single-family homes; business use; undeveloped land. , Population Approximately 8 persons Assessed Valuation $1,230,000. County Comprehensive � Plan Designation Urban Residential �`� � County Zoning � Residential (R-4 Zone: 4.�dwelling units pe acre) N City Comprehensive Plan Residential Rural City�Zoning Proposed: R sidential — Low Density (R-5 Zone: maximum 5 tlwelling �S units/pe�cre) District Comprehensive Plan City of Renton Comprehensive Water&'Sewer District Plan District Franchise No franchise is required at this time. A franchise may be required for future service to this area. . Urban Growth Area(UGA) The site is located within the Urban Growth Area as identified under the State Growth Management Act, King County Comprehensive Plan and City of Renton Comprehensive Plan SEPA Declaration The proposed annexation is exempt from SEPA pursuant to RCW 43.21 C.222 ENTITIES/AGENCIES NOTIFIED: i King County Council Member(s) Rob McKenna; David Irons King County:� Clerk of Council, Department of Assessments, Fire Marshal, Health Division, State Department of Ecology, Puget Sound Regional Council, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro) , Cities: Not applicable Fire Districts: King County Fire District No. 25; City of Renton Fire Department Water Districts: King County Water District No. 90; City of Renton Water Department � Sewer Districts: City of Renton Sewer Department School Districts: ` PSchool District No. 403 �� h `� r� . _ .. . ,. � .1 SUMMARY(File No. 2145) The City of Renton proposes the annexation of 8.52 acres, known as the Bales Annexation. Renton City Council adopted this annexation proposal by Resolution in March of 2003. � The Bales Annexation site is located on the eastern boundary of the City of Rento . 'n the vicinity of the Renton-Tukwila Plateau. The site abuts the City of Renton on its northern (SE 128 Street)and western boundaries(152"d Avenue SE). The site is bordered on the east by 156�'Avenue SE: The southern border is generally formed by SE 130th Street(if extended). The unincorporated area is included in the "Annexation Element° of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and is located within the Renton Potential Annexation Area. The proposed . action is consistent with City of Renton Comprehensive Plan policies addressing annexation, including those provisions which call for inclusion of urban areas (e.g., LU-380) and provision of services (e.g., LU-386, LU-394). The Bales' property owners are seeking annexation in order to develop properties under City of Renton regulations and to receive public services (e.g., sewer services) from Renton. The City of Renton has planned for growth at urban densities and can provide urban services to the area with annexation. Annexation would also perrr�it protection for enviror�mentally ser�sitive areas (e.g., storm wateNflood management). The City of Renton reports that the Bales Annexation is consistent with the State Growth Management Act provisions (e.g., RCW 36.70.A.210.3.b.) calling for incorporation of territory. The proposal is reportedly also consistent with King County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Planning Policies for annexation. For example, the Bales Annexation is reported to address King County policies (e.g., LU- 31, LU-32, U-3, U-208, U-301, U-304) that call for contiguous orderly growth. The Growth Management Act and King County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Planning Policies also establish cities as the appropriate providers of urban services(e.g., KCCP LU-33, U-203, U-304). The City of Renton reports that the proposed annexation is consistent with the provisions of RCW 36.93 (Boundary Review Board Regulations). More specifically, RCW 36.93.180 requires that annexations be evaluated with respect to nine objectives. In this application, several key objectives have been identified as being potentially relevant for specific consideration, including: ■ Objective 1: Presenration of neighborhoods, ■ Objective 3: Creation and preservation of logical service areas, ' ■ Objective 4: Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries, More specifically, this annexafion would be consistent with Objective 1, which calls for the presenration of neighborhoods. As this area is largely undeveloped, there is no currently established neighborhood. However, permitted development would create a defined neighborhood. This annexation would also be consistent with Objective 3, which calls for creation of logical service areas, � and Objectives 4/7, which call for the achievement of reasonable boundaries for a jurisdiction. This area is linked to Renton by environmental characteristics, geographic proximiry, public facilities (e.g., access routes), etc. Local property owners are seeking annexation in order that all services and land use regulations affecting their area may be efficiently coordinated by a single local government unit. This annexation would also be consistent with Objective 8, which calls for inclusion of urban areas wifhin municipalities. ��{1�� { The City of Renton has designated the area�for single-family residential land use at low density and proposes zoning allowing approximately 5 units per net acre. The Bale Annexation Area is single- , family residential in character. The maximum capacity of the annexation area is estimated at � approximately omes. � a � The City of Renton will provide the Bales properties with sewer servic � � The City � will provide fire services (under contract with King County Fire District No. 25) ' ' ' police service to the Bales Annexation properties. King County Water District No. 90 will continue to - provide water service�": Area residents would have access to schools in the � School District. Renton libraries and recreation facilities would be available to residents of the area. . �� a`� _ : ' • �I The City of Renton is prepared to provide environmental review(including evaluation and regulation of environmentally sensitive areas), development review, and general administrative services to the annexation area. For example, the City's Critical Areas Ordinance regulates critical areas, describes permitted and prohibited uses, and establishes permit processes for environmentally sensitive areas. The Bales Annexation is not expected to have a significant impact on cost and adequacy of services, finances, debt structure or rights of other governmental units. Upon annexation, property owners will assume their share of the regular and special levy rate of the City. f) � _ �`' - y !_ � , �� ti�Y o City of Renton * :: ,s � DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, � NEIGHBORHOODS, and STRATEGIC PLANNING � �� Si�h Floor �N� 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 www.ci.renton.wa.us Date: 04/25/03 TO: Lenora Blauman FROM: Don Erickson, AICP Executive Secreteary Office of Strategic Planning Wash. State Boundary ENDSP Department Review Board for King City of Renton County Phone: (206) 296-6801 Phone: (425) 430-6581 Fax Phone; (206) 296-6803 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 ISUBJECT: Bales Annexation I Number of pages including cover sheet 2 REMARKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ Reply ❑ Please � For your be mailed ASAP Comment review Lenora,� Attached is revised page two for the Bales Annexation Notice of Intention. The number of houses on the 8.52-acre site was apparently incorrectly report as one on this page. It should read as four,the current number of dwellings on the site. If you or Reggie could substitute this page it would be most appreciated. Please call if you have questions. Thank you. RENTON AHLAD OF THL CURVE � �I' , L Washington State Boundary Re� , Board for King County Proposed Bales Annexation Page 2 B. Exhibit E: Vicinity maps displaying: 1) The proposed Bales Annexation site boundary. 2) The size of the proposed annexation in acres. 3) The City of Renton existing corporate limits relative to the proposed annexation area. 4) All major streets and other major physical features. 5) The boundaries, including future service area boundaries, of all cities or special service districts having jurisdiction in or near the proposal. NOTE: The City and County library service area boundaries correspond to the City's corporate boundary. 6) King County Urban Growth Area and City of Renton Potential Annexation Area boundaries established under the Growth Management Act. C. �xhibit F: A map of the current City of Renton corporate limits upon which the proposed Bales Annexation site boundaries have been delineated. D. Exhibit G: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations. E. Exhibit H: Topography. II. FACTORS THE BOARD MUST CONSIDER 1. Overview A. The population of the proposed Annexation area is estimated to be about eight. The City of Renton estimated population as of June lst, 2002, was 53,840. B. The proposed annexation area includes about 8.52-acres, excluding roads. C. The population density of the proposed Annexation area is about 10 persons per gross acre. D. The assessed value of the properties proposed for annexation is $1,230,000. 2. Land Use A. Existing uses include four single-family dwellings, one construction business and vacantland. B. No development of the subject parcels has been proposed to the City of Renton. However, the annexation was proposed to facilitate future development of the properties. �'\ ' 1 �� - Washington State Boundary Review Board For King County Central Building, Suite 608,810 3rd Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104-1645 Phone (206) 296-6800 •Fax (206)296-6803 ��°�� IY'^'.,.x Y�� i�� Apri122, 2003 APR 2 � 2003 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHSORHOOC�S, AND STHATFGIC PLpNry��;G, City of Renton Attn: Don Erickson, AICP, Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: SUMMARY File No. 2145—City of Renton—Bales Annexation . Dear Mr. Erickson: Enclosed is the Sununary prepared by Boundary Review Board staff for the above-referenced Notice of Intention. The Summary will be sent to the Boundary Review Board members, along with the Notice of Intention, as part of the agenda packet for the next regular monthly Board meeting. If you see any corrections or clarifications, which should be made in the Summary, I would appreciate hearing from you at(206)296-6801. Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary Enclosure: Slunmary FORM 11 . . . � � � o • e s � ■ Complete items 1,2,� Also complete A. ature item 4 if Restricted De is desired. � • ,,�� ,��„""� ent ■ Print your name and address on the reverse X �� Addressee so that we can return the card to you. g, ceiv dJ y( nnted NameJ C. Date of Deliveh ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, � � or on the front if space permits. � � � � , '� D. Is eli'ery address different f o it m ? � � 1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑ No ��-�� I�aE�� z� C�-� �6 a � ��.. VU � �OC � �✓��j( � 3. Service Type V " � ❑Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ R istered ❑ Return Receiptfor Merchandise � Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer from service label) PS Form 3811,August 2001 • Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-251 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail . - " Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No. G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • �6 av ��'..( C�.�� C �-�-( 6 -� ��NT� ''� 1 r� S� � - �'��--a�, �� L � �,--:�r�.�� , G� Pi �� PtEASE DET'ACH B��dRE DEPOSITlNG CI�',`�OF REN�ON,WA 98055 AGCQUNTS PAYABLE CHEGK NO.2'I/��O$ �'�'`�� ,<fNVQICE!NUtv1$EFi>tn �r� � a t)ATE °�� . u !.r l -. r, '"� �"� D�3CR4PTICJN � H`t� r ` �„y,�"+r��d"P.Oi`NUM �� ,. , � 'OISC4UNT�� , ;�� „xYnAMOUNT,ni<..��3�i _.� t� �^,� �, FiiingFee 04/16I2003 Filing fee for Ba(es Annexation � �"�'�� 0.Q0 �50.Q0 -�;� ` `�'` - " � � ,_..� � ; � � � � �� RT �° 56420 ' �►� �:= c, . te � � �; fl f� � � r � � w � Received From A� 'Q�M �� ,� r4ft y�� aUr �� dr s i � Cb1� � Q � � � ;�� ti'� c o ¢ F�- OC � �a A ,,�_, ' � � � ~ �� W 1 7 ��/w! "' i.��' �� U� cn a] .- � C'dSfl o�� Z � ,,J W F~- �' For .,,,� ^�... Y� Z � d p� w Chec k ""� �� U Z�� eferen ¢� � OthB� �ay: i Q , s� � � �a.00 ,� - �-� �� . ::.. �;; �� = �CIT,�_.. �'OF R�NTOl\T - ..LL Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning ._ 7esse Tanner,Mayor Alex Pietsch,Administrator April 17,2003 State of Washington . Boundary Review Board for King County Central Building, Suite 608 - . 810 T'hird Avenue � Seattle,WA 98104-1693 Subject: NOTICE OF INTENTION TO EXPAND THE CITY OF RENTON CORPORATE LIMITS BY ANNEXATION . Dear Board Members: As required by Chapter 36.93 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), the City of Renton hereby gives notice of intention to annex territory hereafter referred to as the "Bales � Annexation". This annexation is proposed under the council resolution election method in ' accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 35A.14 of the RCW. A copy of the authorizing resolution is attached. This annexation would incorporate into the City of Renton approximately 9.61 acres of territory for the provision of urban services. - To assist in your consideration of the proposed action, the required articles and exhibits are enclosed and numbered in accordance with the Board's suggested format. The $50.00 filing fee is also enclosed. Should questions arise during the review of the information and exhibits provided with this Notice of Intention to Annex, please feel free to contact Don Erickson,.Senior Planner, at (425) 430-6581. Please send notices and other communications regarding the proposed annexation to: Don Erickson,AICP/Senior Planner � Department of Economic Developinent, . Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning , City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 o Thank you for your consideration. Sin ely, Jesse Tanner - Mayor , - 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 � � lr � � lr �This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer A H E A D O F T H E C U RV E - z �'s 1 t ,. ,, a r a y. _ x . ° ; — • t ` U S BANK OF WASHINGT z 19 10/21;. E , u �, , RENTON BRANCH , �. 1250 t j a -'` � s, 'e Ps. '' .�-^ �a � �.a�v �""5= � " �^ F`a r.` �X'°:� �PTY�F REn,��! r u��o�`�-�� > � �� -��i ��[�� `�,�� a u„ �.. �-w ,�...: 3 °� ''�'u��'�z x v s ,#r`r ��'t � , � s ACCOU�1'S PAYABLE � .� r�*��*�*�*« :' � � 43 / 460 Y'= = x 1055 S�GRAbY`�,WA`Y 0�91 � �4/1 T 2003 2'� 8 ; � �0 0� a� � � �f � 'rt"� RENTOjV WA 98055�z� � > ` > `�`�� ' �. ` +" � + ��.� ' � x , t ��: , 1 : • �« .� � � �° ,� ;, Phorre (4�5)�30 691.8 ' ti � �, �; ; � �=�� ,�: - '�j�� .+� Fax°(425�430 6855 $ , VOID.4FT�R 61YIONTI-�S � �. � � � F � ; t N xx '� ♦ ,' 3 y;� �' f..'P . a d � P�� ` Flf�;�0�}E1CS a11C��0�i217�S �• .�� 'x� a a r„ g `x .�� :d , �, .� `� � :�p , - - ,�„ � a .�- , ; , t�-: r.{ .'� ., _ � .. a. ,'s � � � � �. � * �� z � �� , �� ,�. �Pa,r ``'� WSBRE3�OR KIN,G�CNT,Y � �� 7� �� , �;� `� ,; � �,� � k, �� `�� s`� �� . � �;= io rHe� ��f �CE�l,�R�.B�LDG a STE�608 � , ;<, z ` � ; ,�� , _�'' �� <�� a :, '� M�vbR� i; ��oRoeR r�:�'810 3RD �A\/E� ,� ' t �:w r � . � r � �b �� - � oF �� S�AT�'L�,V�A 98��04 1693 � , , � ''�� '` � ' � , � � ��, s �� a; ,� ,�p 't" '� TREA5UR�R'� f " t ` � } j F y . t E �. z �. '� E - � 3 z � t � �� w s � `r �.� :. �.e : t � . � �:x e.,, � �.�` . x M � r �. � �r s' � , � i � � �r g s� ; � �i, t�` g ^ s �' � `{ a �. �� , '�. h , �.- �� i :�r s�� . ` r l s F ,F � �_L S S�i +�� "y. �. .,�� ,. . ., . .. �, . 4 $� p z �:.:"£ ' �� ,�', � �� ,.� ��it�0 ��60�ii� ��=1 2 50�00 10 5a� �: L�5 3��500698 3�L�n■ f � � � � �, x ��,x � e a 'g. � ,� 'S �< ...,,� $A.� ...>.,a. .3,.. .a.4�.._,.. r, .4r.x..�-'.s-.2 �.z�... Y.ar�.e. . S .. . _, ..s .,. .a . _.... < . .,:.. ,, t�,,. . . �" FN 4 Y PLEASE DETACH BEFOflE DEPOSITING CITY OF RENTON,WA 98055 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK NO.Z146O8 ,� � �:� rr � r : � �, �r �� r � ; �'� � r � �� .e- ,� s^� ,� � �� g=� ... ,{1�fO1GEttlUN(BEft� �t��ia�17 �„�"�,+�a�w� ....ks:;..a,.. ,.�..��`�,�[�8CE#IFT3CJN ��:�"&`"�,>.,�c�::..w, 1?O_7,•117$9BER�z'��r'��,�;P� :,�I��GQU�T?r,r��r'.��''.,�xAM(St1NT .��s,.w.M=. FilingFee 04/16/2003 Filing fee for Bales Annexation 0.00 50.00 � :.x _ ...r 50.00 -�• _ - -- - �. ' - �{ NOTICE OF INTENTION Bales Annexation I. BACKGROUND/MAPS 1. The description of and reason for seeking the proposed action: , The proposed action is to annex approximately 8.52 acres to the City of Renton. The primary purposes of the annexation are to develop under City of Renton regulations and oversight and to receive Renton sanitary sewer service. The annexation was initiated through the Resolution for Election method under RCW 35A.14.015, 14.070, 14.080, 14.085, 14.090, 14 .100. The proposed annexation area is located in the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of the NW i/a Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington, excepting the east 32.45 feet of the north 406.01 feet and the street right-of-way of NE 4`�StreeC. Its western boundary abuts Renton at 152°d Avenue SE, if extended, and its northern boundary abuts Renton at NE 4�'Street. It eastern boundary would be 152°a Avenue SE, if extended. 2. Copies of the Renton City Council minutes for actions taken relative to the proposed annexation: A. Exhibit A: Certified minutes of the March 17, 2003 meeting of the Renton City Council adopting the annexation resolution and authorizing the holding of an annexation election for the 8.52-acre Bales Annexation site. B. Exhibit B: Certified minutes of the March 17, 2003 meeting of the Renton City � Council regarding prezoning the 8.52-acre Bales Annexation site R- 5 consistent with the existing Residential Rural land use designation shown the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. 3. Pursuant to RCW 43.21C.222,annexations are exempt from SEPA. 4. Exhibit C: Legal description of the proposed annexation boundaries. 5. The following maps are enclosed: A. Exhibit D: King County Assessor's maps (three sets)displaying: 1) The proposed Bales Annexation site boundary. 2) The size in acres. � 3) The City of Renton corporate limits in relationship to the proposed Bales Annexation site. 4) The location of the nearest service points for the required utility services to the area. - I . _ Washington State Boundary Re Board for King County � _ Proposed Bales Annexation ' Page 2 B. �xhilbit E: Vicinity maps displaying: 1) The proposed Bales Annexation site boundary. 2) The size of the proposed annexation in acres. 3) The City of Renton existing corporate limits relative to the proposed annexation area. 4) All major streets and other major physical features. 5) The boundaries, including future service area boundaries, of all cities or special service districts having jurisdiction in or near the proposal. NOTE: The City and County library service area boundaries correspond to the City's corporate boundary. 6) King County Urban Growth Area and City of Renton Potential Annexation Area boundaries established under the Growth 1Vlanagement Act. C. Exhibit F: A map of the current City of Renton corporate limits upon which the proposed Bales Annexation site boundaries have been delineated. D. Exhibit G: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations. E. Exhibit II: Topography. IIe FACTO1tS THE�OAIZD MUST CO1�iSIDE1Z 1. Overview A. The population of the proposed Annexation area is estimated to be about eight. The City of Renton estimated population as of June lst, 2002, was 53,840. B. The proposed annexation area includes about 8.52-acres, excluding roads. C. The population density of the proposed Annexation area is about 10 persons per gross acre. D. The assessed value of the properties proposed for annexation is $1,230,000. 2. Y,and Use A. Existing uses include one single family home, one construction business and vacant land. B. No development of the subject parcels has been proposed to the City of Renton. However, the annexation was proposed to facilitate future development of the properties. � Washington State Boundary Re� �Board for King County = Proposed Bales Annexation Page 3 � 3. Coanprehensive Plans/Franchises A. King County Countywide Planning Policies The proposed action is consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies in general, and following policies in particular. LU-31 In collaboration with adjacent counties and cities and King County, and in consultation with residential groups in affected areas, each city shall designate a potential annexation area. Each potential annexation area shall be speci�c to each city. LU-32 A city may annex territory only within its designated potential annexation area. All cities shall phase annexations to coincide with the ability for the city to coordinate the provision of a full range of urban services to areas to be annexed. • The City of Renton has designated a Potential Annexation Area in the City's Comprehensive Plan (Exhibit G). Renton has the ability to provide a full range of urban services to the area proposed for annexation. LU-33 Undeveloped lands adjacent to that city should be annexed at the same time development is proposed to receive a full range urban services. Development of the subject properties has not been formally proposed. However, it is anticipated to closely follow completion of the proposed annexation. FW-13 Cities are appropriate providers of local urban services to urban areas either directly or by contract. The City of Renton is prepared to provide local urban services to the area. B. King County Comprehensive Plan/Ordinances 1) County Planning under the Growth Management Act(GMA): Among other requirements; counties that plan under the Act must: a) adopt a countywide planning policy; b) designate urban growth areas; c) designate and adopt development regulations to protect critical areas; and, d) adopt a comprehensive plan. (RCW 36.70A.040) a) King County's Countywide Planning Policies state: "In collaboration with...King County.., each city shall designate a potential annexation area."(LU-31) The proposed annexation is within Renton's designated Potential Annexation Area. Washington State Boundary Re',, :�Board for King County _� _ Proposed Bales Annexation Page 4 "Undeveloped lands adjacent to that city should be annexed at the time development is proposed to receive a full range of urban services." (LU-33) Development of the subject properties has not been formally proposed. However, it is anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed annexation. "Cities are the appropriate providers of local urban services to urban areas either directly or by contract."(FW-13) The City of Renton is prepared to provide local urban services to the area. Water service by King County Water District 90 is expected to continue should annexation occur. b) Urban Growth Area: The proposed annexation is within the Urban Growth Area as directed by the Growth Managernent Act and the King County Countywide Policies and as identified in the King County � Comprehensive Plan. (see Exhibit F) c) The King County Sensitive Area Maps Folio. These maps do not indicate any sensitive areas on the subject annexafion site. d) The King County Comprehensive Plan is addressed below. 2) King County Comprehensive Plan Policies The following adopted King County Comprehensive Plan policies specifically support the proposed annexation: Chapter Two, Urban Land Use, Section II.B,Directin� Growth to Cities and Urban Areas U-203 King County should encourage most population and employment growth to locate in the contiguous Urban Growth Area in western King County, especially in cities and their potential annexation areas. Note: Annexation would allow immediate access to the City's sanitary sewer system, thereby encouraging additional population growth within the Urban Growth Area and within the city limits. Washington State Boundary Re��. Board for King County = Proposed Bales Annexation Page 5 Chapter Two, Uxban Land Use, Section II.C. Urban Growth Area Ta—�ts U-208 King County shall provide adequate land capacity for residential, commercial and industrial growth in the urban unincorporated area. This land capacity shall include both redevelopment opportunities as well as opportunities for development on vacant lands. Note: Zoning proposed for the subject properties would support the capacity represented by the existing King County R-4 zoning. Chapter Two, LTrban Land Use, Section III.A, Planning with King Countv's Cities for Future Annexation U-301 King County should work with cities to focus countywide growth within their boundaries and should support annexations within the Urban Growth Area when consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan and Countywide Planning Policies. �I-304 King County should support annexation proposals when: a. The proposal is consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan; b. The proposed area is wholly within the Urban Growth Area and within the city s designated Potential Annexation Area (for annexations); c. The city is planning for urban densities and efficient land use patterns consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies and King County land use plans; and, d. Adopted Countywide goals and policies for urban services, environmental and cultural resource protection will be supported. Note: The proposal is generally consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. The area proposed for annexation is wholly within the Urban Growth Area and within Renton's Potential Annexation Area. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan policies and the City's development regulations support the Countywide goals and policies for urban densities, urban services and environmental and cultural resource protection. 3) The adopted Newcastle Community Plan (May, 1983) was supplanted by the adopted King County Comprehensive Plan (1994). However, some of the policies from this subarea plan were incorporated into the king County Comprehensive Plan. 4) The adopted King County Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the proposed annexation area is Urban Residential4-12 du/ac. The designation is implemented by the R-4 Zone. The R-4 Zone would have a buildout capacity of 34.08 units. Washington State Boundary Re�,___._. Board for King County __ %' - Proposed Bales Annexation Page 6 5) The annexation would result in King County ordinances and regulations being supplanted with those of Che City of Renton. The primary ordinances directly affecting the development of the site are the City's zoning and building codes. a) Sewer and Water Plans: The King County Sewer/Water Comprehensive Plan. King County Code Chapter 13.24, Sewer and Water Comprehensive Plans, sets the requirements for comprehensive plans of water and sewer districts serving within the County's jurisdiction. The City of Renton has no comparable ordinance, since the City is capable of providing a full range of urban services. Further, the Chapter does not apply to the current proposal since such service expansions as may occur as a result of the proposal will be wholly contained within the Renton city limits. If service provision within the city limits by an outside agency is appropriate, the arrangement is governed by a franchise agreement. The Comprehensive Water System Plan (adopted by Resolution 3361, 1998) is the functional plan that directs the maintenance, operation and development of the City's water utility system. b) The King County Sewerage General Plan. Renton's Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan (adopted by City Resolution 3417, 1999 and by King County Ordinance 13708, 2000), would supplant the King County Sewerage General Plan. This functional plan directs the maintenance, operation and development of the City's sanitary sewer utility system. c) Re�ulations for the preservation of a�ricultural or other resource lands: The proposed annexation area is not within any of the agricultural districts identified for first or second priority in purchase of development rights. Further, the property is not currently under agricultural use. The City of Renton does not have a program authorizing transfer or purchase of development rights. d) Reeulations for the protection of sensitive areas: No sensitive areas were identified on any portion of the annexation site. However, critical areas are protected under Renton's Critical and Resource Areas Ordinances, which would supplant King County Ordinance 4365. City sensitive area regulations are as follows: - Greenbelt Re�ulations (RMC 4-3-070) adopts King County Sensitive Areas Folio, by reference, and provides critical area protections in addition to the regulations of the underlying zones. Washington State Boundary Re . �Board for King County = Proposed Bales Annexation Page 7 Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Re�ulations (RMC 4-4-130) regulates land clearing, tree cutting and ground cover management in the vicinity of wetlands and State shorelines, on steep slopes and erosion hazard areas, and along riparian corridors. Gradin�, Excavation and Minin�Regulations (RMC 4-4-060) provides regulations designed to minimize the detrimental environmental impacts of mining, excavation and grading activities. Flood Hazards (RMC 4-3-050 I) regulates development in flood hazard areas identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Environmental Review Procedures (RMC 4-9-070) requires disclosure of and mitigation measures for detrimental environmental impacts which might result from proposed project and non-project land use actions (pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act,43.21C.120). Shoreline Master Pro�ram (RMC 4-3-090) is a general, comprehensive and long range plan to regulate construction and land use along shorelines of local and state-wide significance (pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act,RCW 90.58). Wetland Re�ulations (RMC 4-3-OSOB7) is designed to protect and maintain existing wetlands and wetland buffers and to encourage restoration of disturbed and low quality wetlands. Aquifer Protection Ordinance (RMC 4-3-OSOH) provides protection of the City's potable water aquifers from contamination by regulated substances. (The preceding Renton Critical and Resource Area Ordinances are available on request.) e) Preservation of Landmarks or Landmark Districts: No landmarks or sites of historical significance are mapped for the site in the Newcastle Community Plan. Renton Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-345 states, "Officially designated historical sites should be preserved and/or incorporated into all development projects." fl Surface Water Control: The City of Renton has adopted the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual by reference in the City's Drainage (Surface Water) Standards (RMC 4-6-030) as the design standard for controlling erosion and stormwater runoff for new development within the City limits. (The City of Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance is available on request.) C. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan/Franchise 1) City Planning Under the Growth Management Act(GMA) Washington State Boundary Re_ �Board for King County = Proposed Bales Annexation Page 8 The City of Renton is required to plan under RCW 36.70A.040. In conformance with the requirements of the GMA, the City has designated critical areas and adopted development regulations protecting these designated critical areas. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(4), since the City of Renton does not have a program authorizing transfer or purchase of development rights, forest and agricultural lands are not designated for long-term commercial significance. As a city planning under the GMA, the City of Renton is required to adopt a comprehensive plan. The City's Comprehensive Plan was adopted on February 20, 1995. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates land uses for all areas within the City and within the City's Potential Annexation Areas. (see Exhibit G, City of Renton Land Use Designations) 2) The proposal is not specifically addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, but is generally consistent with its relevant policies. Discussion of adopted Comprehensive Plan policies relating to the proposal follows. The proposal is consistent with the Land Use Element policies of the Comprehensive Plan that support annexation of lands within Renton's Urban Growth Boundary: • that are within Renton's Potential Annexation Area(LU-378); • where the availability of infrastructure and services allow for the development of urban densities (LU-379); • that are subject to development pressure (LU-380); • that are available for urbanization under county comprehensive planning, zoning, and subdivision regulations (LU-380); • for which the City of Renton should logically be the primary provider of urban infrastructure and services (LU-383); • that would include those who already use City services or who impact City infrastructure(LU-386); and • that lie within existing, emerging or prospective aquifer recharge zones that currently or potentially supply domestic water to the City (LU-394). 3) No amendments to the adopted land use map or policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan have been necessitated by this proposal. The City is currently prezoning the site to R-5, 5 units per net acre, consistent with the existing Residential Rural land use designation for this area. 4) The State has reviewed Renton's Comprehensive Plan for consistency with the provisions of the Growth Management Act. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted on February 20, 1995. 5) The provision of services to the area by the City of Renton will not require a franchise. Water service by King County Water District 90 is expected to continue and will require a franchise agreement. Washington State Boundary Re ��Board for King County = Proposed Bales Annexation � Page 9 6) The area has not been the subject of a pre-Annexation Zoning Agreement. Pre-zoning, pursuant to RCW 35.A.14.330-.340, is currently being developed for the site. 7) The adopted Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation for the subject area is Residential Rural (Exhibit G). Proposed zoning regulations have not been adopted at this time. A zoning ordinance for the subject parcels will be adopted following the Boundary Review Board's decision. As noted above, proposed zoning is R-5, consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan land use designations. 8) Proposed zoning is virtually the same as the existing King County R-4 zoning. Approximately 34 single-family detached dwellings could be developed under Renton's proposed zoning versus approximately the same number under King County's R-4 zoning. 4. Planning data A. Revenues/Expenditures This analysis identifies the General Fund revenues and costs associated with annexing the subject properties as they are currently developed, as well as estimating the annual�scal impact of their full development at some undetermined point in the future. "Full development" does not equate to the absolute zoned capacity. Rather, it includes an assumption that a portion of the subject properties will not develop within the foreseeable future due to market forces and the choices of individual property owners. All assumptions regarding revenues and costs are based on existing standards or other comparable data,but actual results are likely to vary from these estimates. In general, costs associated with utilities have been assumed to be supported by the rates charged for those services. Units Population Assessed Valuation Existin conditions 4 10 $1,230,000 Full develo ment(est.) 34 85 $8,840,000 1) Estimated City Expenditures Current Full Cit Service Develo ment � Develo ment Contracted services $105.53 $897.01 Road Maintenance $0.00 $1,715.00 Fire Protection $1,537.50 $11,050.00 Police Protection $2,700.00 $22,950.00 Parks Maintenance $149.00 $1,266.50 Court,Legal and Other $509.60 $4,331.60 Total ongoing costs $5,001.63 $42,210.11 Washington State Boundary Re. Board for King County = Proposed Bales Annexation Page 10 2) Estimated City Revenues to be Gained Current Fu�ll Revenue Source Develo ment Develo ment Regular Property Tax Levy $4,010.00 $28,822.00 State-Shared Revenues $307.10 $2,610.35 Miscellaneous Revenues $1,250.20 $10,626.70 Total $5,567.30 $42,059.05 Excess Levy $116.00 $831.00 3) The estimated reduction in County revenues would be approximately $5,035 at cunent development. 4) The estimated annual cost to the City to serve this annexation under full development is approximately$151 or approximately$4.44 per household. 5) The estimated reduction in County expenditures is anticipated to negligible, since no County roadway exists within the proposed annexation and since the City and the County have a reciprocal library use agreement. 6) The area proposed for annexation lies within Fire District #25. The reduction in annual revenues to Fire District #25 would theoretically be $1,537.50. However, the City of Renton currently provides fire protection service to the area, under contract with Fire District#25. Of the $1.50 per $1,000 in assessed valuation levied by the Fire District, all but $.25 per $1,000 is remitted to the City under the contract. Therefore, the true impact to the Fire District, under the current contract with the City of Renton, is $196.80 annually. 7) The estimated reduction in expenditures by Fire District #25 is anticipated to be commensurate with the reduction in revenues. B. Services 1) Water Service The proposed annexation is within Water District 90's water service area as identi�ed in the City's Comprehensive Water System Plan. The following information was taken from the City's Comprehensive Water System Plan. a) The area will continue to be served by Water District #90 for the foreseeable future per agreements between the City and District. Washington State Boundary Re '�Board for King County � _ Proposed Bales Annexation Page 11 2) Sanitary Sewer Service a) The City of Renton would provide sewer service to the proposed annexation. Sewer lines currently exist in NE 4"' Street out to the site. Sewer has also been provided to development immediately west of the site. b) Sewage disposal will be through METRO's treatment facilities. c) Renton's sanitary sewer system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed annexation area. 3) Fire Service The annexation site is currently served by the Renton Fire Department under contract with Fire District #25. Following annexation, the City of Renton would directly provide prevention and suppression services to all portions of the subject site. a) The nearest station is Station #16 located at 156"' Avenue SE and SE 128�'Street, a couple of blocks to the east. • b) Response time to any point within the proposed annexation boundaries could range from three to four minutes. Since the area is already served from Station #16 under Fire District#25's service contract with the City, response time would not change with annexation. c) Station #16 is fully manned, with a staff of fifteen. Three fire�ghters are on duty per shift. d) Major equipment located at Station #16 includes two 1,500 gallon per minute pumpers and one aid car. e) All shift personnel are certified EMT/D-Fib. fl Renton's fire rating is three, as detemuned by the Washington State Survey and Rating Bureau. g) Valley Communication 911 service is the source of emergency vehicle/aid dispatch. 5) General A) No annexation agreements are in effect for the subject area. B) The subject site is generally flat, declining slightly to the southeast. A heavy equipment maintenance facility and storage area previously existed along the western portion of the site. Other lots include single-family homes with small pastures with horses (Exhibit I,Topography) Washington State Boundary Re 'Board for King County ' '� _ Proposed Bales Annexation Page 12 C) The area is too small to make reasonable inferences from large-area growth forecasts. The City projects about 30 new single-family units on the 8.52-acre lot. This is based on proposed R-5 zoning and assumptions regarding access needs. D) There are no service issues associated with the proposal. With annexation, future property owners and future residents of the site would have access to a full range of urban services. E) Access to the City's sanitary sewer system would be available on the effective date of the annexation. However, mains to serve the area would be installed by developer extension if these have not already been put in. Additionally, the current waste hauler would provide solid waste removal for seven years, according to State law. The area would then be included in the contract with the City's waster hauler. For other city-provided services, no delays are expected in implementing service delivery to the area. All City departments reviewing the annexation proposal indicated that they would be able to adequately serve existing and future development in the area. King County owns nearly 14-acres of land to the south that has been set aside for future parks. It is likely that the City would negotiate with the County on acquiring these lands and developing them for recreational purposes. F) Existing services to the area appear to be adequate with the exception of sanitary sewer service, which currently does not serve the site, but will upon annexation. Development at the densities allowed and required under existing King County zoning are not be achievable without this service. G) Future rate increases for City utilities must be approved by the City Council. Rates may be affected by external factors, such as increases in tipping fees for solid waste disposal and in METRO charges for sewage treatment. These would apply regardless of whether the area was annexed or not. H) The required filing fee of$50 is enclosed. III. OBJECTIVES 1) Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities. There are no well-defined neighborhoods within the proposed annexation area. White Fence Ranch, a subdivision of some years ago that was developed on septic, exists across NE 4�'Street to the northeast along 155"'and 156�'Avenues SE,north to SE 120`�Street. Maplewood Estates (2171ots) and Amberwood Lots (18 lots) are immediately to the west and across the street the Maureen Highlands (1241ots) subdivision is proposed. The site is therefore in an area that is rapidly developing with new homes and will become part of that environment when it also develops with new single-family homes. 2) Use of physical lioundaries, including but not limited to bodies of water, highways and land contours. � The boundaries for this annexation are thought to be reasonable. The western and northern boundaries are those of the City of Renton city limits at this time. The southern boundary is Washington State Boundary Re� Board for King County � _ Proposed Bales Annexation Page 13 defined by a change in axis of the existing parcels in the area. An existing parcel line likewise defines the eastern boundary. The current annexation may be viewed as one step in the process of expanding the city to the Urban Growth Boundary(Exhibit E.6,Urban Growth Area and Renton's Potential Annexation Area). 3) Creation and preservation of logical service areas. City staffs have stated that the proposed area would represent logical extensions of City services. The properties are currently served by the City's Fire Department under contract with Fire District#25. Renton will also provide sewer under existing agreements with King County for the provision of sewer in the area. Water service will continue to be provided by District#90 pursuant to existing service area planning agreements. Also, only the City of Renton currently has the necessary infrastructure and urban services to adequately support the proposed annexation area after it develops to urban densities. 4) Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries. The city boundaries in this area are already somewhat irregular but not abnormal. As this area is annexed out to the Urban Growth Boundary the city boundaries will become much more regular. New annexations are filling in unincorporated edges to create a more regular and predictable urban pattern. No peninsulas or islands of unincorporated land will result from this annexation. 5) Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of incorporation of cities in excess of ten thousancl population in heavily populated urban areas. Not applicable. 6) Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts. Not applicable. 7) Adjustment of irnpractical boundaries. Neither existing nor proposed city boundaries are impractical. From a land use and service delivery standpoint,jurisdiction over both sides of NE 4�'Street is more rational and more efficient than service to either side from separate jurisdictions. �) Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to cities or towns of unineorporated areas which are urban in character King County has designated this unincorporated area for urban development and it is located within Renton's acknowledged Potential Annexation Area. 9) Frotection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county legislative authority. Not applicable. No portions of the proposed annexation area are rural or designated for long term productive agricultural use in either the King County Comprehensive Plan or Renton's Comprehensive Plan. � — > -- -- - Q — - � -- o � � � o � � SE 120 h S `� _ _ S - ��, � > L, � .� - � k � _�_l N - E 6tn �: 124th PI 1 _ , w .� �--�,�--- , �� w � �_ Q _ �, � , o-� - � - � � > -� --�_. - ' � � C,-� � � J �� --� �� _ � � � � � �� ,i _� n Pi �, � ' � � � ,� � T ��iE 4l St i �- -� ' �'�� O�- - _ E th - �' � � =:� �-_ S t 8th St ; I ,i I I I � I�_ .,il �i � I -- � �_�__ �_ - - ' � �I �� w - SE 1 t t. � � i S d . t _ � Q a - � -- - - - 'L1�L'_L`_L�P1J � -i 1 � � � � -L i� _C! 1 nd t - SE 13 nd t � _I-�__ d � - � - - - - - - � z _ w r-- � cn a_ - -r-_ - - -- � � Q > --- °' � SE 134th t. r, _- - � � � o � � � � � � o -- = � 7 � �n ,r� �� SE 136th St � E 13 th t. � � I w - � l-1 cn � SE � ' ie Q �; � Q � ---- --_- t P. __��, I. - - , -_ �-- G- � ;�� - - ~ �` �_-�- � �. , � p 1000 2000 d Bales Annexation Site P�� _ — — Existmg City Limits Exhibit E1: Vicnity Map Proposed Annexation 1 : 12�� ti/y�.�� Ilconomic Dcvclopmcnt,Ncighborhoods&Stratcgic PlanninF 0 Boundary ��.�/� :Vcx Pic�sch,Adminis�a�or � (I Dcl Rosario ,t. I h Arnl 3UIli �— I � _� T h P I '-� � � � th St S 12 8.52 acres � SE 1 � n d t Proposed Bales Annexation Site _ _ _ EX;St;ng �;ty �;m;ts o 300 600 Exhibit E2: Annexation Area Size Map � Proposed Annexation 0.,� Fconomic Dcvclopmcnt,Ncighborhoods&Stratcgic Planning Bounaary 1 : 3600 ♦� � Alcx Pictsch.AJministrator (i.Dcl Rosario .� I/�A�nl 21N13 , ===== ===`===_-=== �_ ________" ______________ "_ J.. ____-r_=_-_'r_ ___________ _____ . �',,LAKEBOREN ._-_-_-_____'____ ___==r=_=r--_'_ _______-- �_-_-i � 0 4000 8000 1 : 48000 = ,�J � �� ---=-=====--- �- -� -�---� h PI � � � �--- th St S 12 , � SE1 � nd t Proposed Bales Annexation Site o 300 600 Exhibit E4: Major Streets and Physical Features Map O� Lconomic Devclopment,Ncighborhoods'&Stratcgic Planning 1 . 3 600 �� Alcx Picisch,AJministraior G.Dd Ros:v�o .t I(A�nl2flUl y� � ----- � �� 1■■�� ri� �� I a :C : _:�':�4'.'��i:'r� ��■■�� I�I�'■%►�' �� ••, -� �=,�i� . 'll�• ��I�;��11�3��1■\� i i 1� �� n � ��■ ■ n��l�lll�Q �� .rr+ �� ii ' ■ ��I�! ■,�1 ,1"1� � �� ■ �.��1 �'IRau��=��= CI�� . � .I� — �► � :,�� . um � .� � un�= ! �� =n�� illllll � .� �� u� � �� ' '� C: .��.� � :... � .. =` 'i ali . �' � � a .. . �a �� l l� :: :�i►�C: �/ ��,• �� '� �, �� ■■C �� .1�. �� ■/ a . . � �o � ■ � -�� ' � � �� n�� C� :1►��i` ► � : �'■C ��.� � � ��i��ii��: _: : _ - ..,� � I■•- -►�.�� ..... �� L��n11d1� I7p1��Il1I�'� 11 � - ■ � � �.� . i►� � �:�i�� i�t � ��l.,t-� ' = � � � p Ziun: ��■■.�./,A//11 �p� � /► 1e�s f!lIDi�E� � ��7�1 � �� _- �_ �� '�� s •�an�r CII�� o�a��i� :►� � 11i � � ��11� : :: :�.�� = � _ '•�.�.• ��•�� p� y ��11 � �i��i ■ . ._ . �� i� �� 1111� : :. : � Iu111► � u�il.� - � � � - � �� IHIIII► �� '� / �� 71 b�1�N i -� ��:, � � � �n�� du �� i� �C III�p d = ■ ::� : :: i 111�111 �11111111111 �� /I�n��l �' � ■ �� _ �� ;N� �u u naiemn�•�■�7 �_ �� _� ��:��.� ' a�a ��.� ►,_�� Nlf � o� �� :�� i�1 1 i111I� �J � Nq�� n 1111=�� . � ��I ��1�� IL11�L �■ ��'�u1N N i �� :�E-.�� H �1 �tr.1 �7i7 �a s�� .I r: �1� :111111 i� I//I�� ► �p ��a ii i � �� . _,,,,,,E _ - I �� .��.�. � .� . �n� . � ��\ � �ra ��s;�� L•f� �� a \�= �`1 ��7�LJr7� � ■ �51I ��/III1� �� 1 ■ ��i� /tl ��11 � ,. � � � ��a�� •r. F� ��i � � �, ��, � I -111��I�H C�1: ■ 0 �� r ��i� w �� 1'��i. amu � -�ii3:: - . ,� _ L� :a .e� . � �� .�a =11i�.. . �1� � � ��;; • � �� ' , ,�� r�� tu � �II,�� = IIL:i�i�' : �� 11 �: io i� , �� anr_' �_rll:�q� �1►_ ' �i a�di� �� ;� . �� _� I� ■■. � �� .�� . , , - �1�� -- =� '�-� :.�.�., � r I� ��III. . .��IIII HII 111:�•��: �_��,_, ,�nu�� — � � _ �: —=� = ..:s� ■ =' � - ::I: � ��i��.,,,.,` ,,,,.,��-- _.._ .,��. �� . — � --- .�� _ _.� � ��r�jl.�! �� ■� �� ■�• � � � � : 1 � �� ..d,��n�n -�- -■� __ �t� i��1� �'� i ��I■�Q •� � ��D �''!,' w i'� p�� o ■ �� ,►'� � �11�� I��''L, ,�� "�� 11111�11 ��\ �� 11111��, ��,��' � •(� �� ti � ..;��.■ �� ♦� ' � �� +., iL��IDi�E�1 .� L►� i i � �� ` � ��_r�u� ■■■��■ .—--� ��►!.� . ��3�'1: � Ill��p �� :�� ► ♦ t�� iiil`/ �� : � .e � Jl31 ■■■� J ��' �� i �fl�� !� ■;i �■�1��w �r� ��II. �� il��: . . �� ' �� . . �N�� i� ��. ■��—� � ��111111�1111: �.�.,a ��aaE� rr•.!� � � L w1� � � ��=� . C��' :�.:. ,c �� . � i�ii : ��I/�� :�� b�i= �1��■��■ �� '11� 11� ..��'�� n� �..�_ - �� .r��.■■■■� ��i�i�■�a�r■ : ��_'-' � � � !� :m■�■r. ��i . ■ ��II � � ♦�� " � I �� r�� ■ . ��1�� _ - �� ►� �� k�ti, �■� �--�� //�� :GI`l��IIR�'J iy�Immn.. - � �� liIF7]�i� = �•� C ��au �i�i��: :■D � I��i . ��muu�:: ■ �� I ��L� I�p �� 11111111111 '�rsa��,Rua!ui �l�• �� :�� ' C' �� ,�� :: �3�� l� - �n�� a� .�N�► S��' : :i �� i� ■■� . .�ii�►��: '��'� �. p �i' ■ - i � �� ,`�I � �� '�� • � '. : - ��,d�� i�� :� -�i�� : �� EY��f��os�� =�1�■ . � �� -- �� L�I�1i�7 . IIRI7■�I II��i�� ! ,�� :� �\��/�� - � � �►��.. �i�t L ¢��.�..�� :�4•ss.��.��.■ � r� ��. � • �� ■ �� :�, ■•►� : ��i��s • � ��1� � �� er �� ra ��' ��w�1R1 � �. � �� 1� � �+ �■ � . � - C��I�I ' � %�\ .�� ' � �� ■�►�� :�t�i� iiti�� r �� k�� _,.■��/��r1.��. � �� rs: �� --- =�= �:i�� • • • ' • : . � � ' . • � .. , :. .. 1 11 � 11 �, . .. � .. � �::.�:::,:>:>::�;:>.::::;.:>::::::;:>::.>::::::::::.::: ...... �:.::�;:.;::�<:�:>::: . _ - ... -. � - . � � � � J � :. .. ♦ � o r � - i , ._ A -- . � ---� --------- E h Sf 1L , . '. '-. -� .,F ` �1.- ;�*. . , i �o `_.�. . i_J_r� � � ' ___.1 � — �_.J l y . 1 1 � } �r , 1-_ ' ' '4 � ' � rI 117 h t _ },'y _ J 1. I . �I �1 ^ li� I �� l i l__ i ___ � � 1_!iM V .._�1 �r �` i .'�il'J t �i __._�� ..__' ' <'j�• y� �� . , ¢ R i'' C j \ - � -' � 1 l - - __ i/r i. �1 1 �� L i.�J I L i i_ i . f � _ - i I . + O O � i y� _; r) '__i I ' !r, 1� i ' �.' -li i I _lt - ;jl .i: � I � Z/ � , , - }- -i _j� �t r -�r , _ r ___. _�_._._._., � �. -,' `y �� --� r .J�� SE 120 h S � �;-- - � � _;t �� .� y ' I� � �: � '' s >�} ' �� i � ' r �f r � ,� � r � r{ -�'' � • w \I j�rr �4 �i� -i� ti � � .. oo / ' '� �/ .i� S _i� 4 �...Tl' r i �\ / x � 7 ; r,<�,�>- .- �� ..�� _-i� -;�ir '�i' -f `� ..,�� s _'�_ I_�!_.�_�L -'i 1 �` j�- '`_�i �i'� � �� .. /F ' �. j I -f f r, Y_i I a-1 I.r__I f \.: � 1 � 1 1 � � I I I I i,' I . h I 11_ �i . �/n-r I,In',_ � I � CV .1 � I . . '1 l �i-�.� . . ' 9 I�'; 1 i i - si' ' � � - 1 )f— i=�- - _ .._.� __"' �r`- `-- �24th � - l� ,�I +, f i � i i�� '1 i �"'I-., w F� ; .. �'a 1 .'i '" ,i _ � . II jl I :-i -.<F. ��S Y - i� i � b�� _ iii+'i ' �^I _ _ ii.�i � I w � i �'_= �- ' _'i . � " t ii i _� i ',-- Q a� 1 '� ___' . - �} I_i_ �_� i . � (I': � I _ ` J � � i' ' i ' j i _"— ,« i a'I � i��r L t > ' / � __ /�f. _1' __ `? i 1I '. � -� � � o � U �� 1 ��--y i i I� 1 � I 11 ' f I i �� ' � � � _ I --- i � .. �� `, � � ` � � h Pl � � � - , � , � � �� ,. --=----��-- :' ,; �, ; ; - �_ � � ._.. . __ _1 � , � ; � -----------_ �--- � _ E t h � ---- - -- , -- �--- __ _`-_ 'r�n ` S 1 8th St �-��._ � . �� , �� ,---- „ � �� , , D , ., �--- ...---i� ' y' ' ' � ti ii � , . -- r - _.�i. __� r � � � i� . � �� - , , ---- ' ;- � ' 1 - ---- '�- ---_�� ;� �' _ �� - �_ ---�� '' '-1,; �•-r•---- � i� � - � � ,' --�� ' �� , ��;}`,-"'` d St I a�� SE 1 t t. +- �� - -- --- - I �t ; ;; � -----`-�---'-------'---; 'r- �1 -r �� -(i E 1 n d t S ' �i ' t � , _1 '>,� =1,, -r�i __------ SE 13 n � - �, , . ---- -' � � i 1L ��' 'i , � i l.. r„� i c � i� t i � � �� - �� r-�----- -a� ..._ , d �i ;' �. _ i i �` '��" �!'� ��._i i� -- � z - f � _1 -i; = ¢ � j -�-�� .. - r i--�i± J�� R— �=ii. ... __ > > . } � - � � � � �� °' � SE 134th - i( , _ � i-- -- - --� �� 1 ' " ��_- �� o t. 'i _ � y / ' y.,,� � , �� a o Q �'--�� ` � � � � � (�'"�'"�.�I ------- ---�-�-�-�-�------- i �-i i i , 'r��.i s- � � r�� i..�.r � i- . .��t . SE 136th St � � r ..._ � � :� "-i''_' {' � -y', �n F_r-'�_�. _,`' ' ' --.,�' f h �-�-�-LL1J � � ,_,__ E 13 t. � ,, , , , � i.� �,-, %�- ; i � �� ti �. ,�1 w � � . i. i i l- - ,\ cn � '------------ � i 14�,. �-' . 5 --- � � —�- - - I� �� ,��, Q SE j L.�__.1_.-- � ,,, Y-� �., � -r-,.,-,..t .1� -o v' � � � ;�,�- �; e �� i��_i_i_'_r.!_j-l:r',�... a" t P. Q ''.i.__. 11'��\i`,`�-"�\y'''``-'", _�``"'^. .`;.� _- �. ' ffJ_�'_' �\�y%•�ra� � � w ' -=-- - S 9t � -- , ;�-- . .. - � �; r , �; ,,, ------ - � ,,.� --� - > � -- _ ,-----. ' > Q / ' —- __ --• I 1 � w � � ■ Proposed Bales Annexation Site � �-- -- EX�St�ng ��ty �,m�ts o i2oo 2400 Exhibit E5: Water District Map � Proposed Annexation Boundary 1 : 14400 �,�, Economic Dcvclopmcn�,ticighborhoods&Stratcgic Planning Renton Water District �� Alex Pictsch,AJministramr O G.Dcl Rosano T ihn��iznuz S@NIC@ BOUfldaf)/ 'r_ � , `'__. ' ..____" _\ �� L:\IiFN()Iil-:N f_ � 0 SQ00 10000 � � ; 1 : 60000 ,� �,1s �K� l�+�`-� __"_ . `��-� "'-- LnKF\S:�SlIMt�T()N - " �\. \ � . ... ._.-._. _ � � \ _'_--"_____'___'-_ � I$y ______ _______ 3 F _ _'_'_""____- j :_"'''____- � "-:_"'--,-" I . 1� �� , �� ` � - _.�.j\ �.. =_=� / a. "i ��_ .. �a , AKf I � � �t � ` � `, .. v � � ��-\ � � \ �\\ �/� � � • �! � � \ Ln )FSIRF� JI � ` � y � �� x � � -' s..M � ------ . : _ � s tiH KF PANTNERLAKF - -- � � F `. \ � . . L4K1�.YGI�N(iS '� �. : -_.-__-� . � ......-._._ � Proposed Bales Annexation Site _ _ _ EX;St;ng �;ty �;m;ts Exhibit E6: City of Renton UGA and PAA Boundaries Map -� Proposed Annexation Economic DevelopmenC Ncighborhoods&SVatcgic Planning Boundary �•♦ Alcx Pie�sch.Adminisva�or cl.Dcl Rosario ,� I fi Apnl 21N13 �� :=�AJ�� t��• •��• ��"��7\�V��•��r�t�tt��t��t��t1��t��.��.��1�t�� •�'�1�'It��• ��I��Y'�'��-�.�.��1��►��I��-�=�-�-��=��I��r��►��►�� ♦��0��4��i��o��. ♦��.. ♦��1��.��1��1��♦ �•��.�►��'- ��1�0��9��'�'�'�'�4��►��:r��'��'��..'��•�.s.►��►.��.*�� Di�i�i�i�i�i�i`ii'i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�ii��'OOOi'O��O•��OO��O��i�i�O��i�i�i�DO��DOi�iO�00i►��Oi�i�OO��i�Oi�i�iO�i�i�0i�0iO�O�O�O�O�i�i�0i�i�i�d0�'��!i�i�0i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i!i�i�i'i•i'i'Pi�OP��ii� - •��o��o��.....��.----- + •n��e��o��♦ •��♦ •��♦ i��_�.��o��.��r��ro�i�-- •��i��o��9►��f •��_�. a��►��n�o�o��u��•��►'��u��o��f��• �:�:"��•e��""!P�QQ��►:��:Q��:`�Q��r�iO�i�i'i�i��i�O��i�i�00000��i�iO�i!��i�i�►�i�►�OO��i�i�O��i�iO�i�i�000��i�i�i�OO�O�i�i�i�i�i�i�00��i�i�i�i;�'"�•�it��!�!�!�!�!�!�%�=�:�:�:�:�:�0��0�� ►��•��• ♦��.....��►�� r��.��'�'- •�.�_�� O�O�i�i�iO�i�'�OOO��i�i�'�O��O�O�i�i�i�i�i'��i�iO"OOi�'�i�i�i�iO�i�i�i0�'�i�i�O00��i�i�b�i�0i�0ib'�:'�0��0��u��•:�6�i�i�i�i'i'�00'i'i�i'i�i!i i�e��i►i�i�� !�'�'�i�00�!"��i�i�i►OO��i�OOi�i►OOO�O�O��irOO��i�i°��i••s�i�0i�i�iO�i�00000iO�i•��0i�i�i►��O��O��u��i�i�i�i�i'��i�i'�'��i�i�i'�'�!�'�:!i!Oi�►�i'��POi�i�i'��i �'�'O��i�i�i�i`��i�i'��i'��i�i�i�i'��i�iO�i c•�'O��'��i'��e��•.�i�.�iO�i�i'��i'OO�'��i'��i�i�i!'s!Oi�i�i,�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i'��i�i�i�i�i�i'Di"��<�'".��;i�i�i'i�i'��i�i'�'�!P�P��°i�O��i'Oi�i�i'��i'� Pi�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i"i'i�i�i!��i�i�i�i!►�i�i�i�i�i�i�i!��i^i�v��i►��i►:!:�:�:b�i!►�i�O��i�O�!�.�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��_��r.��i�i�,•�:�o:!!�'-��°e�►�i�i��!�!�?i!�!�!� i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��i�i�i�i�i`��i�o�OO��O��i�i�i�0i`,��i�i��i�i�i,�i�i,�i�.,<►�i�n�i��!��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��"i�i�i'�o�i��i�i'��i�i�i�i�i�i!i�i°i�i'i�i�0i�i�►'i�� ►�Oi'��i�i'��i�i�i�i�i'�'�'�►i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i►i�i�i�i�i�i�i��'�'•�:�'�!��i�0�'•O��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��i�i►��i►OOD��;�a��s��00��°i!a�i�i��!��i�i'��i�i�i'O��i!O��i:�e��0i�i�Pi�i�i'O�'� ♦��►��.►��o�r��►��►�►.a��o��_��o��o��.a�.�� •��.��• !��i�i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i'�!►�i'�'Oi�i�i�i�►�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��iO�i�i�i�i�i;�i�i�i�iO�i�i�i�i�i"��ic!Oi�Q�i�►�i�►"i�i'�`��i�i►i�i'��i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i'Oi'�'��i'O�'�'D�'��i'��i�i�i�r�i,;-��e�!�i�i�i!�!�!�!�!�!�V°�i�i�i!��4�i�i�iO�i�00�� • ♦.�i��u��. ♦��o��o��• ♦�..��,.""�"_�- ►��.••�.�� •��►��N��o.A��i.• •��o��r��►��►�r��oO�V��u��N��o�A��o��-��.:-... •��1��'C�.� •��6��i��1��i��1��1��i��1��►�� i�i�i�i��i��t��'��►��r��►��♦ •��f r��1�� Y�-ii��Qi��l��>��Oi�i�j�j�j�j��i��►��1��/��-�=�-�.��.�.��_��q�� i��i�i�i��Y"�Y��C��:�i��i��j�j��j�j��j��.'�..�i'Y��i i��.��!�� 'o i�.�:��1��YYY��'i i i►��/��!��i�i�� ►��,��I��•��=�=��:�.�.��.��.��._ ♦��►��►��►��U��I��1�� ♦��♦ ♦��p��1��•��♦ ��1��►��►��p��9��1��:�-�.�.�:�� ►��11 ♦��.��♦ ♦�� •�• •� �..��i�i�i�i��►��►��►��i��,��/��I��G� ��►��►��r��=��=�i�� •��►��A��U�� r.��'►��►��►��♦ ♦A��u��1��• ��►��►��P��1��ii1►��►��O��i/��i i��i��i�i��i��►�� •�U��.►� ♦��d�.A��l�i��♦ •��o��♦ ��'�'��•��_A��•►��d��U��U��Y��.��•q��f.��q��A��U��o��'�'�-��- ��b�� .. •��0 N•��.��U��i��r��4�� ♦��•►��A��U��Ir�q��i�•0��►��p��U��u��•��♦ ��j��j��►��►��i��V��:!��P��0��i�i i�d��/��i�� / ��0��i•r��Y��♦ ♦♦ ♦��• �_��A��1��=�=�=�. •��►��0��1��►��♦ ♦��II��rG��:r��.��_ ��►��►��/��,� � '•��11��'��"�'�' ��Y-�Y'�'��t t��A��=��I�� 1��11�� , ►��'�'��♦ ��•�•��•��=.-1,-�=�•�•�.♦��♦��•�.��.��.�.�.�.��,��,��.��.� �� ►��• ♦��♦ YY' -�-��.��"' �.��_A��1��=��•i �� • •• • •• ��'�'�'�'��".'�� i��i��_��'�n�i��1��=�=�:�=�:�=�� ♦��►��' ��p��.►��IrU��u��O��Y�'��i�.�""' ��.�_� ♦��N •��1��•►��•►��►��0'�YY�yY'�r��.r�� ♦��♦ ��►��O��Uo��A��p��1�� ..��i��Q��j�j��j�j�j��j�j� ��•►��•►��•►��►��II��Ir��o��p�� - �L � �"rY"�' '1 ��•��f��• '�" wi" • O i �rrrr��...'.'� •�� i�i�i!Oi�i�Oi�i�i��iP��•►��►��•►��o��o��o��.►��• �i�Wi��i�t ♦��r��rrr�....�• •��✓i�i�i�i�i�i��i'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i!�"'��p��p�� , 0��i��y��l,� ��0��0��0��pc�� ►��►��on��n��n��•rr��• O�i Y� •�� ::�:'"�:=-:i�i�i�i�!��!�.�i�i!�'�'��i�i'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i4�i�i�i�i'f�i�i�i�i�i�C'Oi�i,�i�i�i�i�i�i�' ,s�i�1�i��i�'i�i��'��i'�I �i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i'��i'i�i �'��i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i''i'��i'i�i•�•�'�!��i�i�i�i�i�i'�'��i�i�i�i�i�i��i�i�i!i►•�•�•►•�.�.��!�?i!�!�?i!�!�!i:��i��i �i�i�O�iRii�i�i�i�i� O u��i ��0��4�� •��n��-�� ►�.��........ ♦ R► •♦ • 0i�� •��• !.�.�i!�!i!�!��i�i�i�i�►b�i�i�i��'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��'Oi�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i� 0��i��► �'r�i • �� •�� r�.....��.�.. ..��c��_�_��.�_�.�_��♦ �i �i��0�� ii �� i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i i�i�i�i�i�i�i0�i�i0'Oi�i'i�i'i'�•�•d�'O��i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�.•i'��'i'��!�'�:ir�. . Oi►��i�i��i�• •��•��.��• i� ♦ o• •• •��♦ •�� •��u��!��...�.w�.o��o��o��►��.��• •� 9��i�o• •��o��♦ ;i-i�i':':':�:i�i�:�:�o�e�e�=��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'i�i�i�i�i'i'i'i'i�i'ii�i�ii'iO�i�iii�ii�i�i�i�i�iOi'i�i�i�i�i •i��i��►,ii�i��' �i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'i�i'i�i'i'i�i�i�i�i�i'i�i�i�i •��o��• •��►��o��►��:��":� i�� •�♦ ��i ��..'�`�'�•��i'��i�i�i'��i�i�i�i��'� !�OO�OO��,�Oi�i�i�000��i►��9��f'...`�►�i�i��i�i�i!��i�i�►'i'i'i��•Oi!rrrr �i�i��ti�y�i�� •��o��-r�-rr�..��♦ ;i-i'i':':❖i�i�i`i��=��i i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i i�i�i�i�i�i�i�ii�i i i i i i i�i�i�i�i�Di�i�i i�i�i�i �i�i��it� �ii� "� • �� ♦��P��y��►��►�4��N��►.��A�►��►��• �� •�� :��.'.'..�� •��•�� n�� ;:::•_'__.......•�.. .•,•.o•.00•.00❖.•.......►o.�.❖.•.�.•o.•.►.❖o:o.o•.�.-.-.. ❖�z:❖. .❖ .•� .❖.o�.•.o•.0000•o.•.00000•.o❖.•.000�o� .......►...,.... ......................►.�,.................�►... .. .. . �. ....�.......................�.. ��io��•��• O• ♦�i�♦ �►� • � •�� •.•..•�►••�.•..••••••.•.••••.•••..•..•�►.o•••.•••.�..w._._•_.••►•.• •O•.'�i'.• �. ��• ...•o.•..•.......•..••.....•�. !OO��i�i'�!►O�i�i�O��iO��u��_��►�i��i�i�i�i:��i�i!i`�'�i��OO��; ♦�� ►�� d 9�i �� O��p�� o��s��"�' •��• J ��i O • � .��i •��o��o��•►��r�o-�'i�'►��►�•►�� • �• ♦��o��o ��q��N��• !A• ♦e►��/ ♦��►��o��o�o��►��.�.��.��R � •�R► ♦ •� •��o��o♦ • �.�. o� • • •��♦ •• •�� -��••��•�:►•��!�!i�i�i�i'Oi�i�i�i'Oi�`�:��:'Pi�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�►`�'�4'��i�i�i�i di�i�i �i�• ♦►� Oi e tii�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��i��i��o i'��s��►�ro-r•o...��♦ �i�i��i� Oi��i�i��i •��o��►�o��r��o��o ,i� •• •�n •��o��u♦ ►��o��• ��o��o��o��♦ , ��i ��i��• ♦��►�� '�'��►�i�i�i�i� ►�i�i��i�i�ili�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i!.�.�.�.�.ti►��i'��i�i�i�Di�i�i."�"�`�i'��i�:�� ,�i �i�� P��O��OO��O��O��O��y�� •�� •��....�.�►��....,....rrrrrro��ou• ♦�i�i��O��• ��nii�00�ri��0�'►�iO�O��O1;00�O�i:-:.:��..�.�.�.t�!�!i?i!�� i��n��• •�,►��o��o��........��o--�• O��• � :��►!�2��_�0�0��0�r�iO�i�iO�0000�O�i�i�i�i�i�i�O��iO�i•i�i�O��i�i�i�iO�� ►��i�i��9 • •�Oi,i��►��r��.....• �► '�r. . ..►..............................., ��"�.*••�►!�i!►!�!�!��i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i��•�i�i'Oi�i�i'�'�OOO�i�i�i'��i'��o�� i�i�di�Obii��i�i� �i+�i'�i�i�iOi�ii��i'OO�O�i�i�i'L�i�O��i►O��i�i�00000��i�i�00��i�i�i�i'�� •��v' r..---- •��r..rr.•►�o��o��o• di�• ♦ •♦ o�� •��o��n��..• ��'f�i��D��i�i� �� i�i�i�i��A►�►ii�i� ��►�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i gi�i�i�i�i�.r�i�i�i�i!pi�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��i •��v�r.'.di��u��♦ ♦ 0�� i�o •• •�• •• •�� •��o��o��."��►�o��►��o��o• � d�o��i�• ►• 9�• •�� •��o��•►��o• i��.v-ro��_��_�_�_�.�.�_�.�_��♦ • ♦��♦ ♦► ♦4i • •�� •��o��r��""�.►��:.."'.'..' . � _ wd�!►_��,.��i��', �i • �i •��o��•►��o• i��b��u��o��n��o��o��r�rrr�.� •��9� •�� }��f.��r�� i ��y��:►��OOi�i!�!i!�!�2i!�!��:�� `i'i'i'i'i`i�i�i!.'��i•��!:i�i�i�i�i�0i�i�i�i�O��O��i�i�d��i�i��.0��r��o• ��rrrr�•...... ��n��• •��w••;• ♦��o��o��..►�n��♦ •��• � ��o��o��o��o��.►��o��u��o��♦ ♦�� .�.�i�i�.�.��i�i��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i!��i�i�►�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��i�i�►�i�i�i�i� Oi�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i� i•�•J�•�'�'i�i�i�i'�'DOu�i'�'��i�i!.�i'O��i�i'O��i'�'��i'e�e�e'�'��.►�'�:��.��.��_►��. � ��, ��i�„ �� •��o��o��.��w►��• �..��. ��• ♦�♦ ' •�♦ �f'i• i� •��• '�i��i'� •�� i►• ��0��o��i�i�o�0i'O��OOO��iO�i�d��i�O��D��i�OiO�iO�O��i�Oi i�O�i•iy�i•��0��0��'�i��ii��s��i��i�i�i��i��i�'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'O�'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i��i' ....��o��o��.��w�.w�_�.w�.�.�!i� •��.��♦.�..�..�.�.�.�i!�?i!�!�!i!�!�!��Q��i'Oi�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i�i�Pi, �'�'�'�'�`i'��i�i�i'�'��i��!!��i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��"��i�i,�i'�Oi��.OPO��i�`;Oi�i�i�i�i`o�i�i��rrr�."..`.�_--- - ..._�.�.��'."'��• ♦��o��.��_��.��rr�v.�."' .••.�.�.��'�'�.�•1`�'�i!�!�!�!�!�!�►i� ��. •�N��.r��N��o��u��n�b..-.-:��►��-�rrrw�....�' ♦�� .��'��►�•►��'��•��. ►• ��1��0��i�i�i�i�i��i�i�i�i�i��i!��i�0i��it�ti�i�i�Lti�iA!�!i��i�i��i�i�i�i��i��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�iO�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��O�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i��i�i�00i�i�i�i�i�i�i�►�i .��o��. •�........"'.,��u��►��N��• ��i�i��i�i�i�i��i�i��i��i�i�i��i��i��1��i i�i i i��►��i��i��i��i�i�i��i��i��i��i��i��i�i�i��i�i��i�� ♦��►��•►♦ ��1��-�:�-�.�.��.��1►��►�� •��y�� o�� '��►�� ♦��"r�-�-r�'v��: ��.�.�.��A��..��N�� H�►��N o��N d��•H o��'��..N ..��.w�A_��....��►• ♦��Ir��q��1��4��'�'��' ��_�_�_��•�� ►��`��p• •��1��.��►��►��YY��' � ��.�.�.�.1_��►� ♦��•��J�� ♦��i��1,��1��p��'��.."" ��U��I��.��►��►.��►��►��U��'��" •�♦ ♦��'0��1��•►��CAy��.��'►��11��0��'�Y'�'�'►♦ �j�j�j�j�j�j�jQ��Qj�j��j��j��j�j��j�,��i�i��1.��i��o��►��U��' ♦��1��p��•►• ��►��ir��1��p��1��►��0�� ♦��.��4��1��•��q��p��•►• ��J�1��i��Ii��I�.��0�� ♦��11��1��_�.�.�I��I,��O��II��'��►��►��►1 1��1��'��1��:�1��.►��• ��i�i��1��1��1��.�1��1��►��►�� ♦��.A��1-��4�� ♦��i��i��A��"��►��►��►• ��'�:��1��i�1��►�C��r��1��1��.►��0��i��i�►:�i��ii��►��►��►�� :�i��r��i��:��I�G►��i��►��i:��i��w��i��►� !��i�i�i�i�i�i�i'��i�i�i�i�i'�.��!��i`�:�..�i��ic�>!��i�i`c!�::,'•.v i�'��i`.!��i�i'��i�i•��i'��i�i�i�i'��i'�'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'Oi�•��i`��Oi�i�i�i�i�s'��'�'�•�'��i'�'��i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i'�;�c�i�►'��'��i'��i�i'�'Oi�i�i�i��►�i ��i��i��s��b��J i��C��I��►��C��/��i��.��1��4��!�� '�Y�YYYd�� •A��_♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ..♦ ♦��♦ ♦t��1.�.��l��►��.��►��•.��1��• ♦♦ • 1.• �!��♦ • ♦��`fI�♦ •��• ♦��►��V��4��►��• ♦��• �11• �►'�• �j��lt �� ♦ ��►��p�•►4��►��•►��•��• ��i � �i`0�� y��i�i�i�i�i�i�i �t�i�ii��i ��e��a��d0'.O�i�P��►�i'��,'��00��0��►�i0��,��►�� ►��.1�+.�_'.��.�!-� •�.��1�c�►!i�' •di��i��9��i��i��rr��.��-..��cv��.o�o�+►��i'�►� ►:i��.��•��i!��a!�'��d��O��i�i�i�O��i�►�i'��i�i�i�O��0i�0�� O��i0�i�00��i'�'�'O��i�O��O��00000000000��i�i�i�i'��i�i�O��iO�i'��i►�•��O��i�i'��i'��OO��i'OO�'��O��i�i�0i�i ..��.�.�.��.�.i�.:��.'..%�v:r��ri'.;��yO��0��p��?�?��i�2��O��O��D�00��0�� .�.w�.��'.�..�•O?i!i��!�!ti�!�!��:�:��i�i'�� rvrri::.'-��"�.�.�.�•�•�'�Q P�i2i�i!i��r r • r• • yti •��• • �� - r � �� .��i►.�:�'. � �!4!� .�:«�. -^'-- • � � � � � I • I � � � � • � � r . • • • � � � • • • � �.� •• • :• .. ��'' • � _ � '" ' � 11 � �� •::::::= - \ � �� „ x ., . v , � � � � ��, � � - � � � . . Y � Y � �,r.. _ � �, �� .�� \ � � �� , � , ,. . ., � � . .,�� . . a � � �� -- , ,�,� ., � �..� � �..� , � � � � � � � � . r x � . ..,r `Y� t . � . I �� x ` � � +xw r.m � � yu � — G. n � �� xe� ,S�e+ � _ � _..... .� � n . � ' x. � / �� \ � �� ,.�' ... . . . 1'.�v <� �.a "wss in.a w.n ' a % «___ '_"' � I R e ��° � „ � � >.v d . � � x � ,.,., ,.. � , ., , 1 ,,,. '`�. '\ • , � � . � � � � r � � �� , b . , , ,,. � , ,,.�„ .~ ,.� , � �,_ „ ,y = ,�,. , ` • ��. _- �� ,,.�,� _ Ka.., , I `\ ( • "' _ `� � .� p x ,,k„ � . ; � , A � , R � J � � • " � - , . ; > '�J � y i tt�i� w.m � 1 p , K n x�MJ� R � "M .. / � M .l M xN1.N x �\ �__ \' X .M �MM , d ...,� ,,, - �.. , �, . ,� , , ,_,�. , , . . x,.� �.� . . ,.� ,u.: ,u„ ,�.,. ��, � � � _,s ,.�.�,,�_ x � r . . � �� ,,.�, ,,,,,� . _-- _ _ . . . . � �� L � � � � �� I � � i i �� .,..,� — -- ,_ . �, '_ . . Proposed Bales Annexation Site 1m Interval Contour o 300 600 Exhibit H: Topography Map - -- — Existing City �imits 0,�, I?conomic Dcvclopmcnt,Ncighborhoods&S[ratcgic Planning � Proposed Annexation � . 3 600 :�Ics Picisch.Administr:unr � • Boundary G.Dcl Rosano .� It,Arnl2lNli �i � . � iCIT�' (�I' REN�'ON ..LL ;°~ - Planning/Building/PublicWorks Departrnent _ 7esse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 9, 2003 " Steve Beck 4735 N E 4ih St. Renton, WA 98059 SUBJECT: Bales Annexation Prezone LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF Dear Mr. Beck: -This letter is to inform you that the appeal period has ended for the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non-Significance for the above-referenced,project. No appeals were filed on the ERC deterrriination'. This decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (425) 430-6581. Fo nvironmental vie Committee, __ . „ c!�'�— Don Erickson Project Manager cc: irvir� Leifer/Owner � � 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 � � lr �L � l� �This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%pos[consumer A H E A D O F T H E C U RV E `-..P - Washington State Boundary IZeview Board For King County Central Building, Suite 608,810 3rd Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104-1645 Phone (206) 296-6800 •Fax (206)296-6803 Apri12,2003 � s:.� ° �.�.�..� , :; �+ �� ;�, City of Renton �- Attn:Don Erickson, Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 RE: NOTIFICATION OF OFFICIAL FILING File No. 2143 —City of Renton—Falk Annexation Dear Mr.Erickson: � We.have received approval from King County engineering staff of the legal description for the above-referenced.Notice of Intention. The Notice of Intention is now considered complete and has been ofFicially filed effective February..24. 2003.� Therefore, the end of the forty-five day period allowed for invoking the Board's jurisdiction and requesting a public hearing is officially April 10, 2003. You will be advised of any further changes in the status of the Notice before the Board. Please be aware that any future final ordinance or resolution on the proposed action must incorporate the legal description approved by King County engineering staff, including any revisions made in response to the engineering staff review. Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary cc: Anne Noris,Clerk of the Council Lydia Reynolds-Jones,Manager,Project Support Services Diane Murdock,Department of Assessments . . � Harry Sanders,Records and Election Division . : • . � . Paul Reitenbach,Department of Development and Environmental Services _ 1Vlichael Thomas,.Off ce 1Vlanagement and Budget � ' . FORM 12 -r _ ._` If � CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 3 6 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CALLING FOR THE ANNEXATION, BY ELECTION, OF CONTIGUOUS UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY� TO THE CITY OF RENTON LYING IN AN AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY THE CITY OF RENTON CORPOIdATE BOUNDARY, INCLUDING SE 128T$ STREET TO THE NORTH; SE 130� STREET, IF EXTENDED, TO THE SOUTH; 156TH AVENUE SE, IF EXTENDED, TO THE EAST; AND THE 1VIIDDLE OF 152� AVENUE SE, TO THE WEST. (BALES ANNEXATTON) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Renton, Washington, has determined that it would be in the best interests and general welfare of the City of Renton to annex the property generally bounded by the City of Renton corporate boundary, including SE 128�' Street to the north; SE 130�' Street, if extended, to the south; 156�' Avenue SE, if extended, to the east; and the middle of 152nd Avenue SE,to the west; legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth;and WHEREAS,the City Council is desirous to call for an election for this annexation; NOW, THERE�ORE, TI� CITY COUNCII. OF TI� CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The best interests and general welfare of the City�of Renton would be served by the annexation of contiguous unincorporated territory lying generally in the area bounded by the City of Renton corporate boundary, including SE 128�' Street to the north; SE 130�` Street, if extended, to the south; 156� Avenue SE, if e�ended, to the east; and the middle of 152°fl Avenue SE, to the west; legally descn`bed in Exlu�bit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth. t� . RESOLUTIONNO. 3624 ' SECTION III. As nearly as can be determined the number of voters residing in the aforesaid territory is four. SECTION IV. The City Council hereby calls for an election to be held pursuant to Chapter 3SA.14 RCW to submit to the voters of the aforesaid territory the proposal for annexation. SECTION Ve There shall aLso be submitted to the electorate of the tenitory sought to be annexed a proposition that all property located within the territory to be annexed ` - shall, upon annexation, be assessed and taYed at the same rate and on the same basis as property located within the City of Renton is assessed and taxed to pay for all or any portion of the � outstanding indebtedness of the City of Renton, which indebtedness has been approved by the voters, contracted for, or incurred prior to or existing at, the date of annexation. SECTION VI. There shall also be submitted to the electorate of the territory � sought to be annexed a proposition that all property located within the territory to be annexed shall, simultaneous with the annexation, have imposed the City of Renton zoning regulations, prepared under RCW 35.A.14.340, with a Comprehensive Plan designation of Residential Rural (RR) and a zoning designation of R 5 (Residential single family, 5 dwelling units per acre). SECTION VII. The cost of said annexation election shall be paid by the City of Renton. . SECTION�III. The City Clerk shall file a certified copy of this Resolution with the King County Council and with the King County Boundary Review Board. , SECTION IX. The City Clerk shall also file with the King County Boundary Review Board a Notice of Intention hereof as required by RCW 36.Q3.090 et seq. 2 . ,. _ �' ' � - RESOLUTION NO. 3 6 2 4 PAS SED BY T�IE CITY COITNCIL this 1�h day of M a r c h , 2003. . �� , , A �v ��;i��.� � Michele �I�;e�;�:n,, Deputy City. Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 17 t h day of M a r ch , 200�. � Jesse anner, Mayor Appro as to form: � � Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney � RES.952:11/27/02:ma. 3 RESOLUTION 3624 , - �� ; �' EXHIBIT A - � � :� BALES ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION The Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 14, � Township 23 North,Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; EXCEPT the east 32.45 feet of the north 406.01 feet thereof; EXCEPT that portion for street right of way(NE 4�' Street). ` ��1��_ ...�Y� cii ,/�� r—„ �� ■ _�„�� - � � `_�/� ■ .� � ��'l►�` � �I�# �r� n.� � ��) . . _��r�� ' �� '� �y � , .N� �. r. ! --�.. � � : �a "' ' •� , ■ • �, , �� a�� :..■. . • �i'�II�F� .� � � �,� ► ��.L.�ilN►��//�f� f](�71:(1!/�!=� �►�� 1i� =�="�� - � �� ii► �. .�r `r� � � ----� ��: �■�..�r,�rM�► � .,. � �� !��lo�Ei� �r ::7�"�'� . � � � i�� N11�i ►t�r�M�'� i*��iii � 11i � _, �� • �: :� �I111� � �. ��i � � �� a y l�� _ ��(i ■ ,�� +.. ��i;t► �r�il� �� -� n1�i1.� � . .. �� _ ��■� � �+y�'�ri., 11�� :� � � .�.. . �� 7_.__�M1�IIlM1 �e �� i � �`' ■�■„ r► � == ��i'r..��■r��► . � ,� �� :� : :: : ' . .. C � �� ■ � � ;� �lf�, . :1� '��i:il Gl qlll/ �11r - ��6f,[l�:i�i��i� . � A� � � �, �, ., � ��„�� .� �� :�►� �' �...■� =r o�: :�et:. �� .,,,, • ■ --.�.� � - �.`� �, � r1f111 �Ilil■ �� .� . � �� ■1` � r� � ��` E"� � � � ii i ��i:��: � �� r I ■ nm�o". �,; � �j��r� •i�u�1�'� �� 1111 M�Ia� �r!�. .ra�a . � �■1� II� ■� 7 �G3 � rEa �n � q �III�i � , � � � � - � t��i�M�� ►//Ili 1��=�� ,� ' ira �i�:::�: � iw�i � , ��, � � �,��ai� ��e+:r. F� �� , '� � �:h � .�I�i,i: - ....��.. �s, _ C u,� �y � c� .cr . ,� r�--� . -!llili/f� � nr,. ._ . • : : � ... . �,,,, �► 1� ��tii �j ��'!r�=�= 0 111: :: ' • �1�;!� �,��j� ►,. . n :n�.n �r , � � ' ��1� �1=m:� (=riii�Hi, � ` : ,:�. ��•.��, ' : :� :-- ,i� ��' � ",1' �" ; �, ��.� ~ ��'� �� a -� i■r� i i� �i� �� '_"�'� . r �� ,�� ■ ��111 �� %ai�� .�.��rf�_� ��r � , ,: . . �/�i1ti� � �� ' - ��11�1~ „��■ ��7 � � �� ,"�9.r'.':s ,,� ■ „ , � �t i � a�� . ,�� ,�"" '[ i: i �fr�� ;,� � �; �., r��a �,! �� i (■ �� i111l� � �� ..�,� � •'��■�� . � � �iit,. �' ,,.;-"�� I,� ~ !� � • �/� �i1Rt�� '�� / �...�, ��i7►' � ♦1 � l��r�r•� .. �i , ,� � �� ,�� ►,'►3►�+; .. '�,� ��,�� • �,�� , �■ � �.�...w �L��iOt�E�3l1 .. �.. �� rs�.� ti�. � � �� rt�t�� • . . . . � 111Rl� �x�� ;� u� 1�� „�� , *�t : ��I�/1�1 � �■. _�� r�n. � � � i!� wII�M � , .�� !�s �t�� .�, w�� ►�lli�r� � � •■ � ��ii r ��li• �� r • � � . �M,►� .� �..�,� � �� " : �� i/i1i111i111: �� :��[1�� a:��; ��'�" . �i ♦ � I/'l1rE� r w�� !l,+f!►.��l.�i��l�,`, �� , ^-�� _�� b�l �.' �r��,��• '� rr./r�� !,� �i��.�x�.�.,.. �,�ii � �� . �i� � :_:,�',� ...■■� � �r 1 . a��.,��;N..t�� ►r'��ii ' iiti�� r� � � •- :., ...•... ... „ •• •��:� . � ;,, ,,�,.� ,.,.,� _ ,.. � � ��i a'r�■�1��,�i.�:�r� 1,�'�i' 1//lA�� r1�a��r, �`:O.� .�. � '"' � ��1� �� 7►��! 1�� tt�tuur ��fii • �. .� ` '�• �',1 ..� �1a��iiri� • - n. �� ci�l�lF��3i� ti�c`w �„ .. r .. i�� • ��umu:� � . .� �: ��1�i! �/��t - !IU(I!rl11 .►�, '"' • . � ��f�t�� :: �'1*r�t ,�! "�lrr► 'r, 1i►�/ � �: - !�'� ' � � -► � �r�� `1��,� � � � �� r��i� �C�� ■�� •/ '1►� �1;�3 �1�'1►t '� �► ��, , '�.� ��_ �r�l�lr � :Mu��'►��y�,��y�y��"��1►'*' :�� : �■�i ��i1� ' ■�� .� ��i��N��'►��'' ��►*'!"��'' .. ■ _ .■ � �� r. ♦�* 11�,,,,�`'o �r� .: — i.�"- , ��r��1� �1►�1.,,�ti� r�►'►~ ., �l��,� _; ��l��/1�� E�/i��t��to�� 'ri��i Q�II _._ _....._.►.�� __....: ,_ _ ._ _ __ .!!� .... z.�� r ��,. � ��M� .��.� � � � � t ! . �� ! � +.. � '' � � �� `� 1 111 1 i 1 . � � . �ii��•: t' j�� • ' - - {-�--�-} ' .•. -• • � � � � v !� `��. '�� :. .. a • � ��r �� . v �� V� � _- - . � � � l.ill� F�.� • � , . . o �: � � , � �_ r , ,r�� • � l�r�� v � � � - � f � ��! � � r _ � � . 1 , .. •� •r �s �� ♦ o 00 0, � �� ,� � w�! � �r� v � ' � • � ' � �,� ; � � - � � � � � � � �� 0� �I�I � �-��---�-�- 1� � .. , �� 1 � �. . 1 1 � _ � I � � � � � , , , i _ � ■ ' � .�E . - � � �,� • � �� ' �' _ • - �J � � L� • � � � ` � "`_' 0 '� ■1 �� i� '-�� , �..� ;. � _ � �� ; �'° N � �' � ` - I, �, ,�' � � �U 'r F � . � � - � ■� . ,L � , � . � � � �■ � � ' �' � �� '� w �r�� '� . - J � � _ , � �r� A��w��.��-- r � • � • ' • : . ' � ' . • ' 1 11 • 11 r, . � • — . • �� - ... -. � _ . •::::::�::�::�:�:�:�::x:�ss:�:;�::::�::;�::�s:�::�::�:;�: � - _ .............. �<:.;:,::�;::�:�:::: � � :. .. • � � � �. ,;' '„ � � -•� � J,. - � - ��;, x�rrroN crrY courrcII. ��-�;;XHIBI� "A" & "B" , � '� _� Regular Meeting _ �Mazch 17,2003 Council Chambers ' Monday,730 p.m M I N U T E S Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Jesse Tanner led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF KATHY KEOLKLR-WHEELER,Council President;TERRI BRIERE;KING COUNCILMEMBERS PARI�R;DON PERSSON;RANDY CORMAN;TO1VI NELSON;DAN CLAWSON. CITY STAFF IN JESSE TANNER,Mayor;JAY COVII�iGTON,Chief Administrative Officer; ATTENDANCE LARRY WARREN,City Attomey;MICHII.E NELTMANN,Deputy City Clerk;GREGG ,Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator;TIM SHEPHERD,Community Services Administrator;ALEX PIETSCH,Economic Development Administrator;SANDRA MEYER, Transportation Systems Director;DON ERICKSON,Senior Planner;DEREK TODD,Assistant to the CAO;COMIVIANDER KATHLEEN MCCLINCY, Police Department. . PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Tanner was read declaring March 20,2003,to be "Absolutely Incredible Kid "Absolutely Incredible Kid Day"in the City of Renton,and encouraging all Day—March 20,2003 adults to make a difference in the life of a child by composing letters and delivering them to the children in their lives. MOVED BY KEOLKER- WI�ELER,SECONDED BY PERSSON,COLTNCII.,CONCUR IN TI� PROCLAMATION AS READ. CARRIED. . � Mazgazet Stepper and Karen Nelson accepted the proclamation on behalf of Camp Fire,USA. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Gregg Zimmerman,Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator,reported WSDOT:I-405/SR 167 that the Washington State llepartment of Transportation(WSDOT)has been Interchange Flyover Ramp constructing a flyover ramp at the interchange of SR 167 and I-405 to assist Project traffic movements and to improve safety. He advised that in order to tie the � flyover ramp into the roadway,partial closure of the interchange would be necessary. He introduced WSDOT project managers,Ed Conyers and Ingo Goller,who gave a briefing on the subject. Mr.Goller explained the need to shut down the SR 167 southbound exit ramp . from I-405 to complete the flyover project. He stated that motorists will be directed to proceed to the exit for SR 181,where they will go under I-405,get back on I-405,and;head north. They will then be able to take the southbound • exit for SR 167 from the northbound lanes of I-405. � Councilman Persson thanked WSDOT staff for their work on this difficult project,noting that it will greatly improve the intersection. Mr.Conyers stated that the ramp will close at 10:00 p.m on Friday,Mazch 28, . . and open at 5:00 a.m on March 31. Mr.Goller added that if weather prevented the compledon of the project as scheduled,WSDOT would re-publicize and reschedule the closure for the following weekend. CERTCFICATE I,the undersigned City Clerk of the �_ City:of R�nton,Washington,certify . .. ... .. � � th�t this is a true and conect copy of . � � � v �.,u..u�lYl�, 3/iy oj Subscribed � : � . . and s aled this 96""day of ' ,20 Q3 , � � . . . .' � . City Cierk . � : .. . . . , . _ , ,- � March 17,2003 - Renton City Council Minutes Page 98 PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Annexation: Bales, SE 128th accordance with local and State laws,Mayor Tanner opened the public hearing St to consider the resolution authorizing an annexation election and consideration of R-5(Residential Single Family; five dwelling units per net acre)prezoning for the Bales Annexation;approxunately 8.52 acres generally bounded by SE 128th St. to the north; SE 130th St.,if extended,to the south; 156th Ave. SE,if extended,to the east; and the middle of 152nd Ave. SE,to the west. Don Erickson, Senior Planner,explained that the annexation was initially � submitted in early 2002 but since the State Supreme Court invalidated the petition method of annexation, a revised application was submitted using the election method. He stated that the applicant has agreed in writing to reimburse the City for the cost of the election. Mr.Erickson reported that the site is within the City's potential annexation area and it currently contains four single-family dwellings and an abandoned heavy equipment repair/maintenance facility, Seaport Dozing. He stated that an enforcement action by King County forced Seaport Dozing to close down in February,2003. In regazds to public services,Mr.Erickson reported that the site is served by Fire District#25,the Issaquah School District,Water District #90, and it is within the City's sewer service area. Mr.Erickson noted that the site abuts 14 acres of King County property,which is designated for parklands. Continuing,Mr.Erickson stated that King County zoning is R-4(four dwelling units per gross acre). Renton's Comprehensive Plan designates this site as Residential Rural for which R-5 zoning is proposed. R-5 zoning is consistent � with King County's R-4 zoning. Mr.Erickson reviewed the fiscal impacts of the proposed annexation,assuming an increase to 34 single-family dwelling units at full development,and a new _home value of$260,000. He explained that at current development,there is a surplus of$566,and at full development,a deficit of$151. In conclusion,Mr.Erickson stated the annexation furthers the City's business goals,is consistent with City policies for annexation and for single-family rezones,and meets the Boundary Review Board criteria. He stated that except for an estimated one-time pazks development expense of$21,000,there are no service issues. Mr.Erickson recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing an annexation election for the site; authorize the Administration to draft a prezone ordinance for R-5 zoning;and authorize the submittal of the Notice of Intent package to the Boundary Review Board. Responding to Councilman Clawson's inquiry,Mr.Erickson explained that the applicant will reimburse the City for the cost of the election,which will be approximately$1,500 to$2,000. Councilman Persson inquired about the abutting King County parkland and possible annexation of the area. Mayor Tanner responded that it would be prudent to approach King County on the issue. In response,Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Administrator,explained that because there are no residents on the abutting King County park property,annexation by election could not take place pursuant to statute. � Council discussion ensued regarding whether King County should be approached to determine if they want to divest themselves of the abutting property for attachment to the Bales annexation area. N, :� , � � � �. - -� - March 17,2003 � Renton City Council Minutes � � Page 99 Jim Shepherd,Community Services Administrator,reported that he has been discussing the abutting parkland annexation issue with King County. Larry Warren,City Attorney,confirmed that the scope of the annexation could be expanded to include the property;however,to do so would require renotification and another public hearing. Councilman Persson stated that he is in favor of annexing the parkland but does not want to delay the proposed annexation. Councilman Parker suggested that the City explore annexing the parkland property in the future. Council President Keolker-Wheeler added that there aze other possible annexations in this particulaz area and King County should be approached soon regarding the pazkland property. Public comment was invited. There being none,it was MOVED BY PARI�R, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL CLOSE TI�PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY PARKER,SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN ANNEXATION ELECTION FOR THE BALES PROPERTY TO ASK VOTERS WHETI�R THEY WISH TO BE ANNEXED TO RENTON,WI�THER PROPERTY OWNERS WITHII�T THE ANNEXATION AREA SHOULD BE TAXED AT THE SAME RATE AS OTHER RESIDENTS OF THE CITY,AND WHETHER THEY SUPPORT RENTON'S R-5 ZONIlVG FOR THIS AREA;AND AUTHORIZE THE ADNII1�iISTRATION TO SUBMIT THE NOTICE OF INTENT PACKAGE TO THE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD. CARRIED. ADMIIVISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2003 and beyond. Items noted included: � The Pazks Division has contracted with Susan Black and Associates to conduct an Urban Forest Inventory. The project will begin March 17th and be completed in May. All trees in the public right-of-way and in parks will be inventoried and located by global positioning system points and placed on a geographic information system database. The inventory will include surveys of specific greenway and natural zone areas. The consultants will identify themselves to the general public and pass out City information cards that describe how to obtain further information on the project. � A pre-application workshop for non-profit agencies interested in applying for 2004 Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Public Service Funds or Capital Funds will be held on Thursday,March 27th from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. at Carco Theatre. Renton applications aze due May 12th. � The Boeing Renton Site Environmental Impact Statement Scoping public meeting will be held on Tuesday,March 25th,from 6:00-8:30 p.m.at � -Renton High School Commons(400 S. 2nd St.). The EIS will study four different redevelopment alternatives on Boeing's 280-acre site and the Puget Sound Energy property adjacent to the northeastern corner of Boeing's property. The public can review the alternatives and include input on what environmental issues should be studied and analyzed in the EIS. �z ' _ y Mazch 17,2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 100 EDNSP:Boeing Renton Site Council President Keolker-Wheeler encouraged the public to attend the Boeing EIS Scoping Notice Renton Site EIS Scoping public meeting and provide their comments. AUDIENCE COMIVVII�IVT Kathy Silvernale, 608 S.27th Ct.,Renton,98055,expressed concem about the Citizen Comment: Silvemale— signs placed last week at the comer of S. 23rd St. and Smithers Ave. S.,across Talbot Hill Elementary School from Talbot Hill Elementary School. She reported that notice was not provided Area TrafFic Congestion, to the school prior to installation of the signs. Ms. Silvemale noted that traffic Signage studies were conducted by Renton's Transportation Division,following complaints by Smithers Ave. S.residents of traffic congestion. Ms. Silvemale explained there are only two exits from the school grounds and that Smithers Ave. S. is one of the only access roads to and from the school. She stated that since the signs proliibit left turns onto Smithers during certain hours,a significant traffic backup has resulted,causing a safety hazard for the crossing guards and pedestrians. She reported that school buses are now running late because of the backed up tra�c. Ms. Silvernale requested the signs be removed until further traffic studies are conducted or alternate plans aze made with the school authorities. She stated that restricting traffic from Smithers Ave. S. will not solve the problem,and she also suggested the installation of sidewalks to make the area safer for pedestrians. Citizen Comment:Eide— Paula Eide,2732 Mill Ave. S.,Renton,98055, also expressed her concern Talbot Hill Elementary School about the signs placed near Talbot Hill Elementary School saying they impede _ Area Traffic Congestion, traffic and cause considerable congestion and safety issues for crossing guards Signage and children. She noted that a crossing guard was directing traffic on Talbot Rd. S. today to eliminate the backup. She requested the Council investigate the traffic problems and re-evaluate the traffic studies conducted by the City. Citizen Comment: Johnson— Arland"Buzz"Johnson,334 Wells Ave. S.,Apt. 221,Renton,98055,explained Power Outages,Noise that the power was out again at his apartment building,affecting the use of the Problems elevator. He expressed concem about safety because when the elevator is inoperable,ambulance crews are forced to evacuate people by using the stairs. He also reported that the train that passed through at 1:00 a.m. sounded its whistle 17 times. In addition,Mr.Johnson reported excessive noise from McGowan's Restaurant parking lot resulting in a call to the Police Department. Citizen Comment:Marconi— Terry Marconi,2114 Smithers Ave. S.,Renton,98055,commented on the Talbot Hill Elementary School signage installed near Talbot Hill Elementary School on March 13,2003. Area Traffic Congestion, Because of his 41-year history living on Smithers Ave. S.,he stated that the Signage impact of additional traffic on the street,which was not built to handle high traffic volumes,is significantly impacting the neighborhood. He explained that due to increased tra�c during school hours,residents on Smithers are unable to � leave their driveways. � Responding to Mayor Tanner's question regarding the wording on the signs, Mr.Mazconi explained that the signs prohibit left turns onto Smithers during the hours of 8:00 a.m.and 9:00 a.m.and 3:00 p.m to 4:00 p.m. He noted that the signs have significantly reduced traffic on Smithers.Ave.S. Gregg Zimmerman,Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator,gave a briefing on the matter. Displaying an aerial photograph to illustrate the placement of the signs near the school,he explained how cars traveling on Talbot Rd. S. turn onto S.23rd St.,enter the school grounds,and then exit by taking a right onto S. 23rd St.followed by a left onto Smithers Ave.S. Mr. �;. , _;, , _ March 17,2003 �' Renton City Council Minutes - Page 101 Zimmerman noted that Smithers is a substandard,narrow road with ditches on both sides and limited sidewalks. � Mr.Zimmerman stated that tra�c complaints reported to the Transportation Division included speed and capacity issues during school drop-off and pick-up times. The situation was studied and five options were reviewed in response to the complaints. Mr.Zimmerman noted that the City did not do a good job communicating with school authorities in advance of the sign installation. He explained that City staff is re-evaluating the situation. Councilman Pazker expressed concern regarding the traffic congestion on Smithers Ave. S., and questioned whether a traffic light installed at Talbot Rd. S. and S.23rd St. would help to alleviate congestion. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WI�ELER,SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCII. REFER THE ISSUE OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION IN THE TALBOT HII.L ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AREA TO TRANSPORTATION COMIVIlTTEE. CARRIED. Mayor Tanner stated that recommendations would be made to the Transportation Committee after further studies are conducted. As a temporary solution,Councilman Clawson suggested that a traffic officer be assigned to the area to direct traff'ic during peak hours. Councilwoman Nelson suggested that parents consider carpooling to help reduce traffic volume. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. At Councilwoman Briere's request,item 8.b. was removed for separate consideration. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of March 10,2003. Council concur. March 10,2003 Planning: 2002 Annual Update Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department of the Zoning Book&Wall recommended approval of the 2002 annual amendments to the City's Zoning Map Book and Wall Map. Council concur. (See page 103 for ordinance.) Rezone:Fry Property,Garden Hearing Examiner recommended approval of a rezone of a 21.37-acre site Ave N,IH to COR 3 (R-02- located east of Garden Ave.N. and north of N. 8th St. from Heavy Industrial 149) (II�to Center O�ce Residential3 (COR 3);Fry property(R-02-149). Council � concur to approve the rezone and refer the issue of residential use in the COR 3 Zone east of Garden Ave.N.to Planning and Development Committee. (See page 103 for ordinance.) Technical Services: QWEST Technical Services Division recommended approval of a six-foot utility Utilities Easement for 911 easement with QWEST within the City's easement area(Pazcel Number Emergency Center(City Shops 683840-0010)for installation of a fiber optic cable for the new King County southern property line) 911 Emergency Center located to the south of the City Shops at 3555 NE 2nd � St. Council concur. Technical Services: QWEST Technical Services Division recommended approval of a six-foot utility Utilities Easement for 911 easement with QWEST near the northern property line of the City Shops Emergency Center(City Shops property at 3555 NE 2nd St. (Pazcel Number 162305-9123)for installation of a northern property line) fiber optic cable for the new King County 911 Emergency Center located to the south of the City Shops. Revenue generated is$2,007.18. Council concur. ti . :� �_ � March 17,2003 � Renton City Council Minutes Page 102 Transportation:NE 3rd/4th St Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with Corridor Signal King County to receive grant funding in the amount of$80,000 for the signal Synchronization,King County synchronization of 13 traffic signal locations along the NE 3rd and NE 4th St. ' Grant corridor. Refer to Transportation Committee. Transportation:NE Sunset Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with Blvd&Duvall Ave NE the Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT)for the design Intersection Improvements, and construction of intersection and traffic signal improvements at NE Sunset WSDOT Grant Blvd. and Duvall Ave.NE. City project shaze is$44,000. Refer to Transportation Committee. Utility:Annual Consultant Utility Systems Division requested approval of the annual consultant roster Roster for Appraisal&Right- listing eleven firms to provide appraisal and right-of-way services for 2003, of-Way Services with the option of extending the roster annually in 2004 and 2005 upon Public Works Administrator approval. Council concur. CAG: 02-120, Springbrook Utility Systems Division submitted CAG-02-120, Springbrook Springs Springs Watershed Property Watershed Property Fencing Installation;and requested approval of the project, Fencing Installation,F&H authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of$13,798.02, Fence Co. commencement of 60-day lien period,and release of retained amount of $3,440.13 to F&H Fence Co.,Inc.,contractor,if all required releases are obtained. Council concur.* Public Works: City Shops Referring to items 8.e. and 8.f., Councilman Persson inquired whether there is Fiber Optic Connection an existing fiber optic connection for the City Shops site. Gregg Zunmern�an, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator,responded that he would investigate the matter. *MOVED BY KEOLKER-VVI�ELER,SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCII,APPROVE THE CONSENT AGBNDA AS AMENDED TO REMOVE ITEM 8.b.FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED. Separate Consideration Development Services Division recommended approval of an agreement with Item 8.b. Parametrix to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)for the Barbee Development Services: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal(LUA-02-040). Bazbee Mill Company will pay Mill Preliminary Plat EIS for the EIS prepazation. Preparation,Parametrix � Councilwoman Briere requested that the scope of the EIS report be expanded to include adequate review of historical and cultural resources. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WI�ELER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL HOLD TTEM 8.b.FOR ONE,WEEK FOR REVISION TO THE AGREEMENT. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Conespondence was read from Glenn R.Davis &7effrey M.Silesky of Davis Citizen Comment:Davis & &Silesky Real Estate Investment Services, 15600 NE 8th St., Suite B1-173, Silesky—Olympia Ave NE Bellevue,98008, stating that Urban Crafts is proposing to construct a mixed- Utilities Installation use facility at the corner of NE 4th St. and Olympia Ave.NE in the Renton Highlands. Due to the substandard utilities in that area, they requested that a sanitary sewer and water main be constructed in Olympia Ave. NE as a joint project with the City. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO UTILTTIES COMMITTEE. CARRIED. � , '� � � Y Mazch 17,2003 Renton City CouncillVlinutes Page 103 OLD BUSINESS Community Services Committee Chair Nelson presented a report Co�unitv Services recommending concurrence with the Board of Park Commissioner's Coananittee recommendation to name the planned waterfront trail connection from the Community Services:Trail Cedaz River Trail to Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park the"Sam Chastain Connection Naming in Waterfront Trail"in memory of former Community Services Administrator, Memory of Sam Chastain Sam Chastain. The Committee further authorized staff to secure and post signage designating this section of the trail. Permanent dedication plaques will be included in the final design of the trail. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN TI�COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORIDINANCES AleiD The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: R�SOLUTION5 Resolution#3624 � A resolution was read calling for the annexation,by election, of contiguous Annexation: Bales: SE 128th unincorporated territory to the City of Renton lying in an area generally St bounded by the City of Renton corporate boundary, including SE 128th St.to the north,SE 130th St.,if extended,to the south; 156th Ave. SE,if extended,to the east; and the middle of 152nd Ave. SE,to the west. (Bales Annexation). MOVED BY KEOLKER-VVHEELER,SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. , The following ordinances were presented for fust reading and referred to the Council meeting of 3/24/2003 for second and final reading: Planning: Annual Update of An ordinance was read adopting the 2002 amendments to the zoning the Zoning Book&Wall Map classifications of properties located within the City of Renton. MOVED BY BRIERE,SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 3/24/2003. CARRIED. Rezone:Fry Property,Garden An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of approxunately Ave N,IH to COR 3 (R-02- 21.3 acres located at 800 Garden Ave.N. on the east side of the street,between 149) N. 8th St. on the south and N.Park Dr. on the north,from Heavy Industrial(II� to Center Office Residential3 (COR 3)zone. (R-02-149,Fry Rezone). MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSOIV, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 3/24/2003.. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Councilman Persson requested investigation of a citizen complaint of stop sign Transportation:Mill Ave S/S running at the intersection of Mill Ave. S., Cedar Ave. S. and S.4th St. 4th St Intersection Stop Sign Running Police: Panhandling in Councilman Persson requested investigation of complaints from local business Downtown Renton owners of aggressive panhandling in downtown Renton. Human Resources:Military Council President Keolker-Wheeler requested information on the number of Service,Staff Call-up City employees called up for military service. EXECiJTIVE SESSION MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON,COUNCIL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR 25 MINUTES TO DISCUSS LITIGATION. CARRIED. Time: 9:00 p.m. T , , -. March 17,2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 104 _ The meeting was reconvened at 9:25 p.m.;roll was called; all Councilmembers present. ADJO�TRNMENT MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 9:26 p.m �/�/,I�� `� Michele Neumann,Deputy City Clerk Recorder: Suzann Lombazd Mazch 17,2003 - E�HIBIT "C�� ALES ANNEX.A.TION LEGAL�JESC�.2Ig"TION � The Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Noarthwest quarter of Section 14, . : � Township 23 North,Range 5 E>ast,W.M.,in King County, Washington; E�CEPT the east 32.45 feet cifthe�orth 406,01 feet thereaf; EXGEPT that gortion for street right of way{I�IE 4�'Street). . �� ..:� ' ' . ' . ' Y �I � �/ �� NOTICE OF INTENTION Bales Annexation I. BACKGROUND/MAPS 1. The description of and reason for seeking the proposed action: i The proposed action is to annex approximately 8.52 acres to the City of Renton. The primary purposes of the annexation are to develop under City of Renton regulations and oversight and to receive Renton sanitary sewer service. The annexation was initiated through the Resolution for Election method under RCW 35A.14.015, 14.070, 14.080, 14.085, 14.090, 14 .100. The proposed annexation area is located in the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/a Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington, excepting the east 32.45 feet of the north 406.01 feet and the street right-of-way of NE 4�' Street. Its western boundary abuts Renton at 152nd Avenue SE, if extended, and its northern boundary abuts Renton at NE 4`i'Street. It eastern boundary would be 152nd Avenue SE, if extended. 2. Copies of the Renton City Council minutes for actions taken relative to the proposed annexation: A. Exhibit A: Certified minutes of the March 17, 2003 meeting of the Renton City Council adopting the annexation resolution and authorizing the holding of an annexation election for the 8.52-acre Bales Annexation site. B. Exhibit B: Certified minutes of the March 17, 2003 meeting of the Renton City Council regarding prezoning the 8.52-acre Bales Annexation site R- . 5 consistent with the existing Residential Rural land use designation shown the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. 3. Pursuant to RCW 43.21C.222,annexations are exempt from SEPA. 4. Exhibit C: Legal description of the proposed annexation boundaries. 5. The following maps are enclosed: A. Exhibit D: King County Assessor's maps (three sets)displaying: 1) The proposed Bales Annexation site boundary. 2) The size in acres. 3) The City of Renton corporate limits in relationship to the proposed Bales Annexation site. 4) The location of the nearest service points for the required utility services to the area. � • ' _ , Washington State Boundary Rev�:.,_,,�Board for King County _ ' Proposed Bales Annexation Page 2 B. El,chibit E: Vicinity maps displaying: 1) The proposed Bales Annexation site boundary. 2) The size of the proposed annexation in acres. 3) The City of Renton existing corporate limits relative to the proposed annexation area. 4) All major streets and other major physical features. � 5) The boundaries, including future service area boundaries, of all cities or special service districts having jurisdiction in or near the proposal. NOTE: The City and County library service area boundaries correspond to the City'S corporate boundary. 6) King County Urban Growth Area and City of Renton Potential Annexation Area boundaries established under the Growth Management Act. C. Exhibit F: A map of the current City of Renton corporate limits upon which the proposed Bales Annexation site boundaries have been delineated. D. Exhibit G: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations. E. Exhibit H: Topography. II. FACTORS THE BOARD MUST CONSIDER 1. Overview A. The population of the proposed Annexation area is estimated to be about eight. The City of Renton estimated population as of June lst, 2002, was 53,840. B. The proposed annexation area includes about 8.52-acres,excluding roads. C. The population density of the proposed Annexation area is about 10 persons per gross acre. D. The assessed value of the properties proposed for annexation is $1,230,000. 2. Land Use A. Existing uses include one single family home, one construction business and vacant land. B. No development of the subject parcels has been proposed to the City of Renton. However, the annexation was proposed to facilitate future development of the properties. Washington State Boundary Re� Board for King County Proposed Bales Annexation Page 3 3. Comprehensive Plans/Franchises A. King County Countywide Planning Policies • The proposed action is consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies in general, and following policies in particular. LU-31 In collaborntion with adjacent cotcnties and cities and King County, and in consultation with residential groups in affected areas, each city shall designate a potential annexation area. Each potential annexation area shall be specific to each city. LU-32 A city may annex territory only within its designated potential annexation area. All cities shall phase annexations to coincide with the ability for the city to coordinate the provision of a full range of urban services to areas to be annexed. The City of Renton has designated a Potential Annexation Area in the City's Comprehensive Plan (Exhibit G). Renton has the ability to provide a full range of urban services to the area proposed for annexation. LU-33 Undeveloped lands adjacent to that city should be annexed at the same time development is proposed to receive a full range urban services. Development of the subject properties has not been formally proposed. However, it is anticipated to closely follow completion of the proposed annexation. FW-13 Cities are appropriate providers of local urban services to urban areas either c�irectly or by contract. The City of Renton is prepared to provide local urban services to the area. B. King County Comprehensive Plan/Ordinances 1) County Planning under the Growth Management Act(GMA): Among other requirements, counties that plan under the Act must: a) adopt a countywide planning policy; b) designate urban growth areas; c) designate and adopt development regulations to protect critical areas; and, d) adopt a comprehensive plan. (RCW 36.70A.040) a) King County's Countywide Planning Policies state: "In collaboration with...King County.., each city shall designate a potential annexation area."(LU-31) The proposed annexation is within Renton's designated Potential Annexation Area. , , _ Washington State Boundary Re� ._ Board for King County __ '' Proposed Bales Annexation Page 4 "Undeveloped lands adjacent to that city should be annexed at the time developrnent is proposed to receive a full range of urban services." (LU-33) Development of the subject properties has not been formally proposed. However, it is anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed annexation. "Cities are the appropriate providers of local urban services to urban areas either directly or by contract."(FW-13) The City of Renton is prepared to provide local urban services to the area. Water service by King County Water District 90 is expected to continue should annexation occur. b) Urban Growth Area: The proposed annexation is within the Urban Growth Area as directed by the Growth Management Act and the King County Countywide Policies and as identified in the King County Comprehensive Plan. (see Exhibit F) c) The King County Sensitive Area Maps Folio. These maps do not indicate any sensitive areas on the subject annexation site. d) The King County Comprehensive Plan is addressed below. 2) King County Comprehensive Plan Policies The following adopted King County Comprehensive Plan policies specifically support the proposed annexation: Chapter Two, Urban Land �1se, Section II.B, Directin� Growth to Cities and Urban Areas , U-203 King County shoacld encourage most population and employment growth to locate in the contiguous Urban Growth Area in western King County, especially in cities and their potential annexation areas. Note: Annexation would allow immediate access to the City's sanitary sewer system, thereby encouraging additional population growth within the Urban Growth Area and within the city limits. Washington State Boundary Rer.. Board for King County ' Proposed Bales Annexation Page 5 Chapter Two, Urban Land Use, Section II.C, Urban Growth Area Targets �J-208 King County shall provide adequate land capacity for residential, commercial and industrial growth in the urban unincorporated area. This land capacity shall include both redevelopment opportunities as well as opportunities for development on vacant lands. Note: Zoning proposed for the subject properties would support the capacity represented by the existing King County R-4 zoning. Chapter Two, Urban I,and Use, Section III.A, Plannin� with Kin� County's Cities for Future Annexation U-301 King County should work with cities to focus countywide growth within their boundaries and should support annexations within the Urban Growth Area when consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan and Countywide Planning Policies. U-304 King County should support annexation proposals when: a. The proposal is consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan; b. The proposed area is wholly within the Urban Growth Area and within the city's designated Potential Annexation Area (for annexations); c. The city is planning for urban densities and efficient land a�se patterns consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies and King County land use plans; and, d. Adopted Countywide goals and policies for urban services, environmental and cultural resource protection will be supported. Note: The proposal is generally consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. The area proposed for annexation is wholly within the Urban Growth Area and within Renton's Potential Annexation Area. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan policies and the City's development regulations support the Countywide goals and policies for urban densities, urban services and environmental and cultural resource protection. 3) The adopted Newcastle Community Plan (May, 1983) was supplanted by the adopted King County Comprehensive Plan (1994). However, some of the policies from this subarea plan were incorporated into the king County Comprehensive Plan. 4) The adopted King County Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the proposed annexation area is Urban Residential4-12 du/ac. The designation is implemented by the R-4 Zone. The R-4 Zone would have a buildout capacity of 34.08 units. Washington State Boundary Re�' Board for King County - Proposed Bales Annexation Page 6 5) The annexation would result in King County ordinances and regulations being supplanted with those of the City of Renton. The primary ordinances directly affecting the development of the site are the City's zoning and building codes. a) Sewer and Water Plans: The King County Sewer/Water Comprehensive Plan. King County Code Chapter 13.24, Sewer and Water Comprehensive Plans, sets the requirements for comprehensive plans of water and sewer districts serving within the County's jurisdiction. The City of Renton has no comparable ordinance, since the City is capable of providing a full range of urban services. Further, the Chapter does not apply to the current proposal since such service expansions as may occur as a result of the proposal will be wholly contained within the Renton city limits. If service provision within the city limits by an outside agency is appropriate, the arrangement is governed by a franchise agreement. The Comprehensive Water System Plan (adopted by Resolution 3361, 1998) is the functional plan that directs the maintenance, operation and development of the City's water utility system. b) The King County Sewerage General Plan. Renton's Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan (adopted by City Resolution 3417, 1999 and by King County Ordinance 13708, 2000), would supplant the King County Sewerage General Plan. This functional plan directs the maintenance, operation and development of the City's sanitary sewer utility system. c) Re�ulations for the preservation of agricultural or other resource lands: The proposed annexation area is not within any of the agricultural districts identified for first or second priority in purchase of development rights. Further, the property is not currently under agricultural use. The City of Renton does not have a program authorizing transfer or purchase of development rights. d) Regulations for the�rotection of sensitive areas: No sensitive areas were identified on any portion of the annexation site. However, critical areas are protected under Renton's Critical and Resource Areas Ordinances, which would supplant King County Ordinance 4365. City sensitive area regulations are as follows: Greenbelt Re�ulations (RMC 4-3-070) adopts King County Sensitive Areas Folio, by reference, and provides critical area protections in addition to the regulations of the underlying zones. • Washington State Boundary Re� Board for King County � _ ' Proposed Bales Annexation Page 7 Tree Cuttin� and Land Clearin� Regulations (RMC 4-4-130) regulates land clearing, tree cutting and ground cover management in the vicinity of wetlands and State shorelines, on steep slopes and erosion hazard areas, and along riparian corridors. Gradin�, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060) provides regulations designed to minimize the detrimental environmental impacts of mining, excavation and grading activities. Flood Hazards (RMC 4-3-050 I) regulates development in flood hazard areas identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Environmental Review Procedures (RMC 4-9-070) requires disclosure of and mitigation measures for detrimental environmental impacts which might result from proposed project and non-project land use actions (pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, 43.21C.120). Shareline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090) is a general, comprehensive and long range plan to regulate construction and land use along shorelines of local and state-wide significance (pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act,RCW 90.58). Wetland Re�;ulations (RMC 4-3-OSOB7) is designed to protect and maintain existing wetlands and wetland buffers and to encourage restoration of disturbed and low quality wetlands. Aquifer Protection Ordinance (RMC 4-3-OSOH) provides protection of the City's potable water aquifers from contamination by regulated substances. (The preceding Renton Critical and Resource Area Ordinances are available on request.) e) Preservation of Landmarks or Landmark Districts: No landmarks or sites of historical significance are mapped for the site in the Newcastle Community Plan. Renton Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-345 states, "Officially designated historical sites should be preserved and/or incorporated into all development projects." � Surface Water Control: The City of Renton has adopted the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual by reference in the City's Drainage (Surface Water) Standards (RMC 4-6-030) as the design standard for controlling erosion and stormwater runoff for new development within the City limits. (The City of Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance is available on request.) C. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan/Franchise 1) City Planning Under the Growth Management Act(GMA) Washington State Boundary Re`',.��Board for King County ' _ � Proposed Bales Annexation Page 8 The City of Renton is required to plan under RCW 36.70A.040. In conformance with the requirements of the GMA, the City has designated critical areas and adopted development regulations protecting these designated critical areas. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(4), since the City of Renton does not have a program authorizing transfer or purchase of development rights, forest and agricultural lands are not designated for long-term commercial significance. As a city planning under the GMA, the City of Renton is required to adopt a comprehensive plan. The City's Comprehensive Plan was adopted on February 20, 1995. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates land uses for all areas within the City and within the City's Potential Annexation Areas. (see Exhibit G, City of Renton Land Use Designations) 2) The proposal is not specifically addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, but is generally consistent with its relevant policies. Discussion of adopted Comprehensive Plan policies relating to the proposal follows. The proposal is consistent with the Land Use Element policies of the Comprehensive Plan that support annexation of lands within Renton's Urban Growth Boundary: • that are within Renton's Potential Annexation Area(LU-378); • where the availability of infrastructure and services allow for the development of urban densities (LU-379); • that are subject to development pressure(LU-380); • that are available for urbanization under county comprehensive planning, zoning, and subdivision regulations (LU-380); • for which the City of Renton should logically be the primary provider of urban infrastructure and services (LU-383); • that would include those who already use City services or who impact City infrastructure(LU-386); and • that lie within existing, emerging or prospective aquifer recharge zones that currently or potentially supply domestic water to the City (LU-394). 3) No amendments to the adopted land use map or policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan have been necessitated by this proposal. The City is currently prezoning the site to R-5, 5 units per net acre, consistent with the existing Residential Rural land use designation for this area. 4) The State has reviewed Renton's Comprehensive Plan for consistency with the provisions of the Growth Management Act. Renton's Comprehensive - Plan was adopted on February 20, 1995. 5) The provision of services to the area by the City of Renton will not require a franchise. Water service by King County Water District 90 is expected to continue and will require a franchise agreement. . . � ' Washington State Boundary Re�• . Board for King County _ � Proposed Bales Annexation Page 9 6) The area has not been the subject of a pre-Annexation Zoning Agreement. Pre-zoning, pursuant to RCW 35.A.14.330-.340, is currently being developed for the site. ' 7) The adopted Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation for the subject area is Residential Rural (Exhibit G). Proposed zoning regulations have not been adopted at this time. A zoning ordinance for the subject parcels will be adopted following the Boundary Review Board's decision. As noted above, proposed zoning is R-5, consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan land use designations. 8) Proposed zoning is virtually the same as the existing King County R-4 zoning. Approximately 34 single-family detached dwellings could be developed under Renton's proposed zoning versus approximately the same number under King County's R-4 zoning. 4. I'lanning data A. Revenues/Expenditures This analysis identifies the General Fund revenues and costs associated with annexing the subject properties as they are currently developed, as well as estimating the annual fiscal impact of their full development at some undeternuned point in the future. "Full development" does not equate to the absolute zoned capacity. Rather, it includes an assumption that a portion of the subject properties will not develop within the foreseeable future due to market forces and the choices of individual property owners. All assumptions regarding revenues and costs are based on existing standards or other comparable data,but actual results are likely to . vary from these estimates. In general, costs associated with utilities have been assumed to be supported by the rates charged for those services. Units Population Assessed Valuation Existin conditions 4 10 $1,230,000 Full develo ment (est.) 34 85 $8,840,000 1) Estimated City Expenditures Current Full . Cit Service I)evelo rnent I)evelo ment Contracted services $105.53 $897.01 Road Maintenance $0.00 $1,715.00 Fire Protection $1,537.50 $11,050.00 Police Protection $2,700.00 $22,950.00 Parks Maintenance $149.00 $1,266.50 Court,Legal and Other $509.60 $4,331.60 Total omgoing costs ,$5,001.63 $42,210.11 Washington State Boundary Re� __ Board for King County Proposed Bales Annexation Page 10 2) Estimated City Revenues to be Gained Current Full Revenue Source Develo ment Develo ment Regular Property Tax Levy $4,010.00 $28,822.00 State-Shared Revenues $307.10 $2,610.35 Miscellaneous Revenues $1,250.20 $10,626.70 Total $5,567.30 $42,059.05 Excess Levy $116.00 $831.00 3) The estimated reduction in County revenues would be approximately $5,035 at current development. 4) The estimated annual cost to the City to serve this annexation under full development is approximately$151 or approximately$4.44 per household. 5) The estimated reduction in County expenditures is anticipated to negligible, since no County roadway exists within the proposed annexation and since the City and the County have a reciprocal library use agreement. , 6) The area proposed for annexation lies within Fire District #25. The reduction in annual revenues to Fire District #25 would theoretically be $1,537.50. However, the City of Renton currently provides fire protection service to the area, under contract with Fire District #25. Of the $1.50 per $1,000 in assessed valuation levied by the Fire District, all but $.25 per $1,000 is remitted to the City under the contract. Therefore, the true impact to the Fire District, under the cunent contract with the City of Renton, is $196.80 annually. 7) The estimated reduction in expenditures by Fire District #25 is anticipated to be commensurate with the reduction in revenues. B. Services 1) Water Service The proposed annexation is within Water District 90's water service area as identified in the City's Comprehensive Water System Plan. The following information was taken from the City's Comprehensive Water System Plan. a) The area will continue to be served by Water District #90 for the foreseeable future per agreements between the City and District. Washington State Boundary Re' . . Board for King County - Proposed Bales Annexation Page 11 2) Sanitary Sewer Service a) The City of Renton would provide sewer service to the proposed annexation. Sewer lines currently exist in NE 4"' Street out to the site. Sewer has also been provided to development immediately west of the site. b) Sewage disposal will be through METRO's treatment facilities. c) Renton's sanitary sewer system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed annexation area. 3) Fire Service The annexation site is currently served by the Renton Fire Department under contract with Fire District #25. Following annexation, the City of Renton would directly provide prevention and suppression services to all portions of the subject site. a) The nearest station is Station #16 located at 156"' Avenue SE and SE 128�'Street, a couple of blocks to the east. b) Response time to any point within the proposed annexation boundaries could range from three to four minutes. Since the area is already served from Station #16 under Fire District #25's service contract with the City, response time would not change with annexation. c) Station #16 is fully manned, with a staff of fifteen. Three firefighters are on duty per shift. d) Major equipment located at Station #16 includes two 1,500 gallon per minute pumpers and one aid car. e) All shift personnel are certified EMT/D-Fib. fl Renton's fire rating is three, as determined by the Washington State Survey and Rating Bureau. g) Valley Communication 911 service is the source of emergency vehicle/aid dispatch. 5) General A) No annexation agreements are in effect for the subject area. B) The subject site is generally flat, declining slightly to the southeast. A heavy equipment maintenance facility and storage area previously existed along the western portion of the site. Other lots include single-family homes with small pastures with horses (Exhibit I,Topography) , �:� � - ;'� Washington State Boundary Re��,_.,'Board for King County ''�__-� Proposed Bales Annexation Page 12 C) The area is too small to make reasonable inferences from large-area growth forecasts. The City projects about 30 new single-family units on the 8.52-acre lot. This is based on proposed R-5 zoning and assumptions regarding access needs. D) There are no service issues associated with the proposal. With annexation, future property owners and future residents of the site would have access to a full range of urban services. E) Access to the City's sanitary sewer system would be available on the effective date of the annexation. However, mains to serve the area would be installed by developer extension if these have not already been put in. Additionally, the current waste hauler would provide solid waste removal for seven years, according to State law. The area would then be included in the contract with the City's waster hauler. For other city-provided services, no delays are expected in implementing service � delivery to the area. All City departments reviewing the annexation proposal indicated that they would be able to adequately serve existing and future development in the area. King County owns nearly 14-acres of land to the south that has been set aside for future parks. It is likely that the City would negotiate with the County on acquiring these lands and developing them for recreational purposes. F) Existing services to the area appear to be adequate with the exception of sanitary sewer service, which currently does not serve the site, but will upon annexation. Development at the densities allowed and required under existing King County zoning are not be achievable without this service. G) Future rate increases for City utilities must be approved by the City Council. Rates may be affected by external factors, such as increases in tipping fees for solid waste disposal and in METRO charges for sewage treatment. These would apply regardless of whether the area was annexed or not. � H) The required filing fee of$50 is enclosed. III. OBJECTIVES 1) Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities. There are no well-defined neighborhoods within the proposed annexation area. White � Fence Ranch, a subdivision of some years ago that was developed on septic,exists across NE 4`�Street to the northeast along 155`�and 156`�Avenues SE,north to SE 120`�Street. Maplewood Estates (2171ots)and Amberwood Lots (18 lots)are immediately to the west and across the street the Maureen Highlands (1241ots) subdivision is proposed. The site is therefore in an area that is rapidly developing with new homes and will become part of that environment when it also develops with new single-family homes. 2) Use of physical boundaries,including but not limited to bodies of water,highways and land contours. The boundaries for this annexation are thought to be reasonable. The western and northern boundaries are those of the City of Renton city limits at this time. The southern boundary is a � �� Washington State Boundary Re� Board for King County Proposed Bales Annexation Page 13 defined by a change in axis of the existing parcels in the area. An existing parcel line likewise defines the eastern boundary. The current annexation may be viewed as one step in the process of expanding the city to the Urban Growth Boundary (Exhibit E.6, Urban Growth Area and Renton's Potential Annexation Area). 3) Creation and preservation of logical service areas. City staffs have stated that the proposed area would represent logical extensions of City services. The properties are cunently served by the City's Fire Department under contract with Fire District#25. Renton will also provide sewer under existing agreements with King County for the provision of sewer in the area. Water service will continue to be provided by District#90 pursuant to existing service area planning agreements. Also, only the City of Renton currently has the necessary infrastructure and urban services to adequately support the proposed annexation area after it develops to urban densities. 4) Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries. The city boundaries in this area are already somewhat irregular but not abnormal. As this area is annexed out to the Urban Growth Boundary the city boundaries will become much more regular. New annexations are filling in unincorporated edges to create a more regular and predictable urban pattern. No peninsulas or islands of unincorporated land will result from this annexation. 5) Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of incorporation of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated urban areas. Not applicable. 6) Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts. Not applicable. 7) Adjustment of impractical boundaries. Neither existing nor proposed city boundaries are impractical. From a land use and service delivery standpoint,jurisdiction over both sides of NE 4`�'Street is more rational and more efficient than service to either side from separate jurisdictions. 8) Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to citaes or towns of unincorporated areas which are urban in character King County has designated this unincorporated area for urban development and it is located within Renton's acknowledged Potential Annexation Area. 9) Protection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county legislative authority. Not applicable. No portions of the proposed annexation area are rural or designated for long term productive agricultural use in either the King County Comprehensive Plan or Renton's Comprehensive Plan. . I�ing County Records,Elections and Licensing Services Divasion Elections Section 553 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Seattle,WA 98104 Telephone: (206)296-1565 Fax: (206)296-0108 p; � �_., � s�� -� . �r t.. � r h j t . � 1 �� . March 4,2003 � �m 1 Q ��1�� ' E.;; � City of Renton ; �„ '"; � ' � �:��rar. i! Rebecca Lind,Planning Manager m ` �'-` � � ---�--- :� 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 _ . __ _. ItE: Direct Petition for Annexation Dear Ms. Lind: King County elections received a petition, dated February 21,2003, calling for an election for annexation to the City of Renton,known as Bales annexation. The legal reference governing this petition is RCW 35A.14.020,which states the petition be "signed by electors resident in such territory equal in number to 10 percent of the votes at the last general election". There are ten registered voters in this annexation area. The petition contained one signature. The number of signatures required for sufficiency is one. The number of signatures found to be valid is one. King County Elections has found this petition for annexation to be sufficient. Sincerely, � �1/�R.-e�. �YLb-�. Julie Moore Acting Superintendent � `\� P AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ' _ Barbara Alther,first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the King County Journal - 600 S.Washington Avenue,Kent,Washington 98032 � � NOTICE OF ENVIRON�MENTAL �� a daily newspaper published seven(7)times a week. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper of • - -DETERMINATION general publication and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of . � ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a daily RENTON,WASHINGTON �-�� newspaper in Kent, King County,Washington. The King County Journal has been approved as a The Environmental Review � � , legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. . Committee has issued a �-� The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the King County Joumal(and not Determination of Non-Significance �� in su lemental form which was re ularl distributed to the subscribers durin the below stated £or the following project under the PP � g y 9 authority of,the Renton Municipal � period. The annexed notice,a BALES ANNEXATION – R-5 Bales Annexation-R-5 Rezone REZONE � LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF i �The applicant has requested as published On: 2/10/03 � ' Environmentak (SEPA) Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of$58.50,charged to � � acre annexaCion site (excluding � ACCt. No.8051067. I , streets)from King County's R-4 Zone . to Renton's-R-5 Zone. Location: The The cost above includes a$6.00 fee for the printing of the affidavits. � s.52-acre site is located on the southside of NE 4th St. between 152nd Ave. SE, if extended, on the Legal Number 845226 . - west and 155th Ave.SE,if extended, –�--�62 /f `<l on the east. The annexation site ' ��/� �� abuts the City on its northern and -7� western boundaries. � Legal Clerk, King County Journal _ Pubhshed �n the King County , Journal February-l0-2003.#845226 t I ___�..._� ., '`f�` Subscribed and swom before me on this�`l day of�,2003 ' 1 V �S� � 4�4a`�4a i�4�9 P i�o po��o c . e�. � :,..i, , �',y �°�B� Notary Public of the State o Washingt mv``,i�'��a�'''"�f�xx;�a�!�'`oe residing in Renton e@�;•c,`� �'°s•.h� King County,Washington d�s: „9 T R:°�y : va� ' _ —�� . d � pB/at,Oc° '�:�• � - `e� o o�&ys�,Q�, ��•6�'�0 . �oo��(�,�� ' e'y��;��,o O000A�B da 089A��a��a, tl �,:i +",Sr � � � LIST OF SURROIJIVDINC� PROPERT�( OVlJNERS WITHIN 300-FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Phone:425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PROJECT NAME: � �'c PJ' ��I� �M APPLICATION NO: `�/A —v� � �� 1 r �/ �� T The following is a list of property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The Development Services Division will notify these individuals of the proposed development. IVAM@ ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :�� /`��y� Q:\WEB�PW�DEVSERVWFORM�aformlistospo.doc06/25/02 ��. .��, �i: � � ' n (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) • NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER AePl6cant Certification I, �� , hereby certify that the above list(s)of adjacent properly (Print Name) owners and their addresses were obtained from: ; Title Company Records J Ki g�County Assessors Records � ; �7�s�' ��✓l c�C�( Signe Date (Applicant) NOTARY ATTESTED: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington, residing at on the day of , 20 Signed (Notary Public) a�i �'�G * 2 E�' � �s s�cn ,A,.y'** ,� �,y.* + ,t � `� a� �& w g,w.: r ri�,�,� � � '�`�;�'��''�� s��c� �`� �`�i�� cz�G��j �Rentorr�l)se*" �'�� ' n��,'� �� ,,�y�^ �,� � nE � �� C V Sa�"e :.?• -Yt,, t, � e � x+°�S �..n'�" �. '.T xr �4k«"7 a{�7 � "�h. t�^ `3' �' r �'t" l'Ec,�+'� �� a �' - +,sy�� 'h� ��`� � ��' :�� j `'A �'1�� `� ;��,a�`��Y t�"&v'r �?`� z.,�-� ¢� ! '� �a �f,q,„i �k�: � �x ��ry;x P'E�s ��Y-5 �$'�5�'".�'� '�� "a &R..� ��"Y 1:. � - ,�, �� y ..r..s �. � b d ' � � �t � � t . �1 � � ^� ��y•%+� S,�3' �? X a r � a �*Q /� r M� ��; "� �^ 1-: at � ��;'�� 3`" ��''t�ryd�'��'�?��.5�,��`��l'�,��..�.M��',�?.�G�„\��V��l� -��,s��4� � P`�,� �� 3 ��vt�a"�� ',��f�{ ,�. "'"� �'�ft �'s3`�''# rz�,` �a,f�'? .�,'�.p d ,3�3�,��s"e r„ 5 +�rs��z, t ��, "�' h` 3 ea +?S �M �» � � r��&�.�4,, �,,� ��'� �� a�� 3 h.k3_:� ,� ��, 'k�f�. �`,k� ��' �' � 2 „a 9 , � � �.�r�a��. ��i��a", , � �."5��d��{#��7��.. �s.�'x�r �w�.,�#x� �r ".:i �� .�'�`�y �� fi��t� �� J y,"� y.g f . �: �,: .�2 �.� �. � � a � �,,��y�,� � . � �f � s � � .�SL.� `L, '+� a�.�''��s�..�'�'�;. I� �� s ;� #�reby cerkify tha#n�o��ces�of�the�proPo �pR��4r��e�� t i eg ta��,,,�� 4 e r� °� '� zk, � s�'� 4�a�✓ � �;� ✓�r� � y� ,�. �,iµY� lc��. � a> ,� � 4 �#� t��'� �J� '�u��?;�� a-,.�I71�IQ�/��„�r��^',�� aa n. �a�+��.Er»�,�` n��R �j`��`y�� ,��c�,�y '�� ' 't�� r s : �ro � �� -Sf��"� ��'�^`�r�y �� '� n�, . � �"� z; � i �, _ - '$�tE F"��a�,��. each �st�d 11�`a e�j.b�rnar�on'�� ` ��r '�� '� � ��'�� -r��, ��, �f"` � '�'.l �Al � ,��, t�.Y J74..�'�..._.� � � �f ��5 y, '�'g .��§�a"""�� ^`��.�;�." '�'��y�p,��"�� -��.� x �'` � s t ,.� �� "`�ar sd "� � ��r*4��`s t�a�"tts , � . � ,.� z s�a >�� _�°�� tx��¢� �,` �.a ,��+�r��,�� x�'�'"�� a ,��`�r.t�� '� r��„� n,��a.��,��¢��'��✓k �;��;"` w7 �` '��k 'S�'4�A � r - �.=r ; -s �.s as�� at,�r � �S � � ,,��` :� �.. �� g f.��I�� m��`` �� M�l��s'aY�'.�'w^Y��'��i,�,�a'',��"«'�°'�"��`�^'��Qr� t�+ ��. � a �,�, .�ntsc'�'�„��: fi$��[ 5. �.°4! �g��e� fr� E.& �F F '+�i w5 .#�a'a�+�i � b Y'L;q, �. ��:� lt � :.�„ :: p s. �.t��y�jci��µ�.¢S"��. -r 8�X s �. 's�,�,+„ � e&�'Y1 � x.� `'S�'_E��,�' g`"�; ,s'd�r"i '��,�,.,��3'3 � �� ✓ �'�'y �� 3��55��a,�'a'r".t,c �. s��L�z��;�� s�� „ :�'< `� '� ��`'�.€�e��r ''�'"p �' F f�r� r � � "a k7 � �;. '' r �r+ �,� �7a 1 �q�e r ��'� ,� �, ��"� a»�"' �� s�N f�'' �a,� ' � � .�� s��`,��,t � �� ^r.''6 3s 3,�' �: � )��y�g + �s.'�. �" �X'� ��_.;�3s��'� ��IYo,gf�� e;�is� ir'� � k'��"�`,�r�a^��"�s� e r� y;'�` �' ��i�s%;✓� � `a�� ';E, `��g s�� '�At a�' r ��}�s�r�,��- €�#�� i� ; €� ra �v�5�, �r d a��y��r y�< �� `��,�"��r��`� ��S ��i��.;�'� �'" t`2' �"�'�_.'� b,� � a �a4' .�.. 1�rA��9a J i� � § w� `x °,� n �.�. ��',:�� „��r a��t`��,��v�'�x � `° '��y��r�`��r'��'3��,��a��-��"��'�'°'�� 4 r tr.:, m�$.�ws,3-.. �,J, 'n �i � F s+- ,a� 5 E��'n4^w�Cef�'`P"w�i 3d � �'9�k� a`,�, �ttF»r�« u�b4.° 8��"Fm�n1£�rnt,,ai �s �� s �,�z'S � .s , "�, S �,`, ATTE��Subscribeci��ndZ�'wom befiore�m�,�a��otary�P�ubl�c,��t��a�c�for the Sfa#e�of�'�ashr'r�t,�on�re��tltngy��: 3 �r � � r� dt �s '� } x �h � r +� ,�F,�'�� s e €� ��s . �t� �. � ;��,��.�� , on�heg ��,«��d�y of��x'�� r � �-�`� �� .�:.;�p��►�.�,2�-��`�e�,��' � ��a a - ��" �'��,'��a� "£�"t�„��'% � +z��E�x�"� �. � �re� � ��'�� z "�3��T � ";�'A�s� �' '. ��"�'�r �n � � r ^�. �I� `��"`��° � �^^��r"�k .�ro�+,� ��'� �a'€ 'r�' � ,:�'.� iF°'' � x'r � �i�,,2 ,�' §�',� � � �s ,4r�"'�y� e a z� �i `` �' �f ��Z..t � �:, s �` .d3` � �" ,r�'f�'a� �' .,r �, # ,� 4 c � ^�3'�`K,y�'� � � S f CI,P.� `�v.�' E� ,�' �.. C «2` x'��^• �r�� a` ,�.:`�� & � ��,r�,�",;�..� -"�� '�• �:.a�¢w E � � «a� m ..��_a .. �� ., . .>. . ._.,>o ... ..e. � w.. -; e, �.�_x, ��-� � �' , ,_ _� � ��'.>. .��at��a,�� 69�1PAP�9&�'&U'9EfV1"�XPI�ES:6-�2'�-03 Q:\WEB�PVV�DEVSERV�AFORM�aformlistospo.doc 2 �;Sr��oth Feed SheetsT"" _ , Use tempiate for 5160� � � � 142305906208 � 142305906406 142305906505 � ' HONG JOSAPHAT+ASSUNIPTA �' LEIFER IItVII�T T BALES LIlVIlTED PARTNERSHII' 15409 SE 128TH ST ��,e� 15223 SE 128TH P O BOX 3015 RENTON WA 98059 ,�L,Z�a� �r� RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 �o �� 142305907008 142305907206 142305910606 LEIFER RANDALL D+ROSEMARY M KING COUNTY PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC 5127 S FOUNTAIN ST 500 KC ADMIN BLDG PROPERTY TAX DEPT SEATTLE WA 98178 500 4TH AV PO BOX 90868 SEATTLE WA 98104 BELLEVLTE WA 98009 512630103004 935330076008 935330077006 BITRNSTEAD CONST CO CUNIMINGS WILLIAM R+IDA M � SIMS ROBERT N 1215 120TH AV NE 12652 155TH AV SE � 12815 SE 218TH PL BELLEVLTE WA 98005 RENTON WA 98059 : ' KENT WA 98031 935330078004 935330079002 935330080000 NELSON EMII, SAWYER ERNEST C+MARY JANE HALL FERRON L 7219 S 128TH PO BOX 78526 12657 155TH AV SE 12651 155TH AVE SE SEATTLE WA 98178 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 947792030001 947794050007 CENTEX HOMES D'ETTORE AMEDEO+MARY A C/O TOM BROWN 6013 NE 4TH PL 2320 130TH AV NE RENTON WA 98059 . BELLEVUE WA 98005 � . . �� AVERY� Address Labels Laser 5160� � ��s �tn�x� . ._ ��,�1.� ��-�J Law O�ces � DENNIS J. PERxIlvs 1574 Sx�r.rnr�Tow� �rxorr� �0944 N.E.4�S��r FACSTMII.E t�si��,sss2 B�.'�vt.t�,W.As��+tGz'oN 980a((}4�5841 t�2��s�t e-mail.•dperklaw@seanetcom : . . February 5,2003 ' � , � � . . FEg � 6 2Q�� Mr.Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney � City o£Rentan p��pp{�ENT SERVlC€S � P O bo�626 ��(Q�RENT(��+1 Renton,WA 98057 F�� 2�� RE: Sea-Port Dozing&Development,Inc. 15221 SE 128�`Street ��'�� Renton, WA Dear Mr. Warren: Jay Bales af Sea-Part Dozing & Develapment, Inc., has asked,me to respond to your letter of January 24,2003. Mr. Bales advises that no business is currently being conducted at the above- described praperty, and that items af personal praperty that had been stored on the property are in the process of being moved to Sea-Port's new shop locatian in unincorparated King County. If you desire, Mr. Ba1es will be happy to meet with City af Renton Inspectors at the property,to show them that no business is currently being conducted. I have advised Mr. Bales to notify the county of the abandonment of Conditional Use Pernnit,.and will forwazd you a capy.of his notification letter. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF DENNIS J. PERKINS ___��--- . ' Dennis J. rkins DJP:tb ' � cc: Sea-Port Dozing&Development, Inc. .,�� .�. �__-�_ � ,. . .� ,:T �.,_. ....y.,. _:.,_�H _�.v_: _m .. ,.. Donald Erickson Bales Annexation ,�,_.. .. . ...,_ . ___ . ., . _. ,_ � s,_. Page 3` Dear Mr. Erickson: I know that all written comments were due January 29, 2003. If possible, I would like to submit these comments and hope that they are included in the annexation file. The first comment deals with school impact fees. If this area were annexed into Renton, some of the students from these new homes would be attending schools in the Issaquah School District. Currently, the City of Renton is collecting school impact fees for single-family residences that are lower than the rest of the school district. Apollo, Maywood and Liberty are becoming (if not already overcrowded) overcrowded by the influx of new development within the City Limits. Renton should seriously think about raising the amount of impact fees it collects for the Issaquah School District to the level collected by other jurisdictions. The second issue is traffic on surrounding roads. Currently, King County has declared the East Renton Plateau Area"RED"when it comes to concurrency issues. The roads (SE 128th, 156th) are being inundated with developments and extra traffic. These proposed 34 new homes would add an extra entrance to an already over-crowded SE 128th. What does the City of Renton proposed to do about all the increased traffic on SE 128th? How does the City of Renton proposed to mitigate the increased traffic to those individuals who already live in the area and have�o travel on SE 128th? Thank you in advance to allowing me to comment on this proposed annexation. Sincerely, Claudia Donnelly Cc: Four Creeks UAC Issaquah School Board I will be sending a hard copy for the record. �y ,% CIT� *��F REl�TTON � Planning/Building/PublicWorks Deparhnent — Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator F'ebruary 10, 2003 Michael and Claudia Dounelly 10415 — 147`�'Avenue S.E. • Renton, WA 98059 SUBJECT: BALES ANNEXATION AND PREZONE Thank you for your January 30,.2003 e-mail regarding the proposed Bales Annexation, which was forwarded to me by Don Erickson in the City of Renton's Economic Development, Neighborhood and Strategic Planning Department. Regarding transportation concurrency, the City of Renton has a citywide transportation concurrency program and level of service standard (i.e. the whole city is one zone, which includes the portion of the East Renton Plateau Area). This is in contrast to King County,which has divided unincorporated areas of the county into a series of concurrency zones with an adopted level of service standard for each concurrency zone. . To establish concurrency between land use development and the resulting increased traffic generated by such development, the City of Renton has developed a city-wide transportation plan which includes improvements to the arterial system, high occupancy vehicle facilities, fransit facilities, and non- motorized travel. It addresses planned land use needs over the next twenty years. Renton's Transportation Plan is periodically tested and adjusted to ensure that citywide transportation level of service standards are maintained. To finance the Transportation Plan, the City of Renton has developed a funding strategy that includes a number of funding sources, including a mitigation fee collected from developers as a condition of land use development within Renton. Approval of development is conditioned upon paymeut of the Transportation Mitigation Fee and mitigation of any impacts to the adjacent street systein. The City of Renton allocates the collected Transportation Mitigation Fees to any of the improvement elements in the citywide transportation plan in a manner that ensures that concurrency between tl�e citywide transportation level of service standard and land use development is met. Based on a citywide transportation plan that maintains a citywide transportation level of service, payment of the transportation mitigation fees, and application of site specific mitigation; development will meet City of Renton concurrency requirements. To date, the City of Renton has not had to declare the City a "red" area (King County nomenclature) when it comes to concurrency issues. If you have any questions or desire further clarification on Renton's Transportation Concurrency Program, do not hesitate to contact Bob Mahn, Transportation Systems Division, at(425)430-7322 or e-mail bmahn@ci.renton.wa.us. Also, the City of Renton currently has a transportation planning project studying improvement options to the N.E. 4`h Street corridor(our N.E. 3`a_4`h Corridor Improvement Project). This project has a web page on the City's website (littp://www.ci.renton.wa.us/pw/). You will find that the project's goals directly relate to your concerns. , 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 1� � lr � � l�l �This paper contains 50%recYcled malerial,30%posl consumer A H E A D O F T H E C U R V E Michael and Claudia Dor: y February 10, 2003 Page 2 You are invited to be active in this project through the City's website or by attending a project open house, tentatively scheduled for the evening of March 4`h at Renton Technical College. If you have any additional questions or comments, feel free to contact Keith Woolley at(425) 430-7318. He is the City's project manager for the N.E. 3`d-4��' Corridor Improvement project. With regards specifically to the Bales Annexation, vehicular access is anticipated to be from Rosario Avenue N.E. and N.E. 3`d Court. These streets have been built as part of the Amberwood development. However, during the course of design, an additional access or emergency only access to N.E. 4`�' Street may become necessary. Sincerely, C�� " ' Nick Afzali � Planning and Programming Manager Transportation Systems Division cc: � r��+so K.Woolley B.Mahn File 11:\DIVISION.S\TRANSPOR TA7IPLANNWGUCeith WoolleyU3ales Annex Letter.doc\p ��-- ^ -, BALES ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION The Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 14, �' Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; � EXCEPT the east 32.45 feet of the north 406.01 feet thereof; EXCEPT that portion for street right of way(NE 4�' Street). ! � `� �/I ,�. � �•. uu��i� nv�.:t�2tP'l'N� ��T��'+K'Z'�e s • . ._ SCAL�` S W I i - 2 3 - 5 �...�� .�.-€�-�. �-�'� ( 311 •Q8 N 88 "2� ` � � W ' �4 SS3 j3L� CO.Rv Nd �f35t ES Y = fl, `� � Co. Rp. �.et3,e}yf�a fVE CoR� d� � { � � /2r��•G1S • Ya/.4 � � �� :0 363 �GOGOQ�.55S-g� ��.-_�:•.._,;, -G."oi't✓_' •7' :'ts- -•_-"`..�'` 3�� k 137.53 �^_ /6S" 7.7 7 ��:`�`"�ft ' � � �-:��_;��,--. �� .. . " , . , = t y , . . • ` .':�•`_` ...-_ . s. t S �� ' .i� � ;� t � . . M�� . ;t : Rs ! � ` �b O .. '^��' q � � ,� :� p I t 4 � �� M11 .� ♦ �g� t �: � '! � �.a r 1 � :� � � � �.. r! N ;: Q �- � , . 3' v � /6S' ✓�� ?�'' • .. .1 �: � ' � . �: � ,Qo�` � •� �� ".� g�k � -� � �a ., �=� NO �' . ¢ 4 _ _ o '. � . � � VI � : � i�o � \} � �3 �� 1 � `C�`,.� � �}„ ( � 32-43 . ,� � � , Q ;�,: r � 4 :.�� ... -. . .� :j J � . . '' �- 0 ' ' � `�'m`.� ,�' � . ' .,. „� , . �. �.. . � � , .-'�? � O+ i\ � n I � %•) z ; � �o C.� �0 T �-' � . � a: y' . � � m ' ' ' �'� • ' M ' � ;. � � � =:*;; , . :; a ;:� . � ... ' • ' �• . . ., �, '�♦ . �j4�G, . , � � `z:: ' �� o �-c.� . _ . : Y.�' `1'�,/'��/1 ' 4� . 9 A G �r y, ,.'�� ,ro.dc.. �°� �' . . , � � . d-•5 �r � . � • . . . �7� � G� . 2 n �:. . . � _. _ ".:t. 3 8.84 �g � � `"� . -,�'� 1 .__._. .�V6 . . . . ..,...-,. _ ..,Ye�:e:�: �_ �?'y�„a.:;�-x�.,a•:.$"s'. :�`�;."�.':��' — , , .,. . ._, . .._ �_ . 4 3_ _ � `"`_ . ' " . O . �h , . , ' ..., . ' ' • —`? � � . . . �.�l/�. I�-,1� �-�- �.1.�(:. J.� , -. � : � . •.. ' �. .:.. . r } ��. . . . . . . .. ._..: .... :. CITY OF REN,TON CURRENT�PLANNING DIVISION� AFFIbAUIT;OF SERVICE BY'MAILING On the � day of F,� �,,,,�,,u,� , 2003, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing E (�C J7z�.�m��-,,'a� documents. This information was sent to: Name Representinq ; S�� r� (Signature of Sender) ) STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that P��s�l�. lrr�� signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntaqr act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. ` v�/ . D ate c�:�..,�:,-�:�+..3:�-��. . �,gr-��$��'6�� F��=��F Notary P ic in and for the State ashington ��r�� Notary(Print)�y�� , ,��a��F : ��t�p��A�i�iP��T0�9 MY aPPointme��Rf��•a-�A��rr��e�i�a�c•�.�cs..�s� C�ii��,�P��B�� `��IE��S � ' � .�9..�� `�, e0�3 Project Name: �Cc�ts ��n��ra.�i�h -�- ��¢36n� Project Number: Do A � �� C� �,�� 03 — � NOTARY.DOC �` �.� , AGENCY(DOE)LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology Washington Dept. of Fish&Wildlife Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section Habitat Program Attn.SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard 39015—172nd Avenue SE OI ia,WA 98504-7703 Mill Creek,WA 98012 Auburn,WA 98092 . - WSDOT Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office Mr. David Dietzman Attn: Ramin Pazooki 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW—Front A Dept, of Natural Resources King Area Dev.Serv., MS-240 Burien,WA 98166 PO Box 47015 PO Box 330310 Olympia,WA 98504-7015 Seattle,WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp.of Engineers Ms. Shirley Marroquin Eric Swennson Seattle Dist�ict Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Real Estate Services PO Box C-3755 KC Wastewater Treatment Division Seattle Public Utilities Seattle,WA 98124 201 South Jackson St, MS KSC-NR=050 �Suite 4900,,Key Tower Attn: SEPA Reviewer Seattle,WA 98104-3855 700 Fifth Avenue Seattle,WA 98104 KC Dev.&Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom,AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton,WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72"� Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent,WA 98032-5895 Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager City of Tukwila Metro Transit PO Box 90868 6300 Southcenter Blvd. � 201 South Jackson Street MS: XRD-01W Tukwila,WA 98188 KSC-TR-0431 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868 Seattle,WA 98104-3856 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an"Optional DNS",the following agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's,and the notice of application. Also note, do not mail David Dietzman any of the notices he gets his from the web. Only send him the ERC Determination paperwork. Last printed 10/22/02 3:57 PM i � -� ; � — - - - __ I . ,-=---, � ' I ` ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION � PROJECT NAME: BALES ANNEXATION AND PREZONE � PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION: The applicant,Steve Beck,has requested Environmental � Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site(excluding streets)from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone.Because annexations are SEPA exempt(RCW i 43.21C.222)this environmental review is onl for the rezone. Under Renton's R-5 zoning the 8.52 acre site(including street right-of-way�could theoretically accommodate±34 dwelling � units,assuming 5 du/net acre. The proposed rezone is consistent with Renton's Residential � Rural land use designalion,as shown on the Citys Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. No new development(s currently proposed as a result of uiis proposed annexatior�. Location:The ' 8.52-acre site is located on th�southside of NE 4 Street between 152" Avenue SE, if extended,on the west and 155 Avenue SE,if extended,on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northem and western boundaries. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED � THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE , ENVIRONMENT. APPEALS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION MUST BE FILED IN WRITING ON OR BEFORE 5:00 � � PM,FEBRUARY 24�",2003.APPEALS MUST BE FILED IN WRITING TOGETHER WITH THE REOUIRED$75.00 APPLICATION FEE WITH:HEARING E%AMINER,CITY OF RENTON,1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY,RENTON,WA 98055. APPEALS TO THE EXAMINER ARE GOVERNED BY CIN OF RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4- � 8•110, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE APPEAL PROCESS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE RENTON CIN CLERK'S OFFICE,(425)-430-6510. � !� � �th St� � � �S 1 ' � � , � ;� , , � � ~ S ' \ ° 11;.� "� ^ t . � R k "'`4 .� �,� 4 'h.' e � �— � � v d� � �91� N. � ~..��y�� 0 � ' 'ro'_'.;�:��:3��.'.'-�''�"�' :u�? � , N �J� � -. • FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBERwhen calling for properfile identlflcation. �,��59�1°�� 1��E�F CERTIFICATION � ��` ��LI� S��TE OF V��ASHlNG�'Oi�l ' ��I!�o�fE��i��l9 ��PIC��S �./'� / �..��..�6�s� ��, '��Q3 I, ,' ;��.-�,-��. � _ ,hereby certify that 3 t copies of the above document were posted by me in 3 conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on �z-�• `7+ZC2�3 _ Signed: G23c ` ATTEST:Subscribed a worn before me,a Notary Public,in and for e State of ;�� Washington residing in ,on the 1�-�day of�v.�r� o"�OD 3 ��ASLY�9 KA�dCEiEFF ��?`t�f�6�0ln1Ts1��NT EXPIRES: 6-29-03 :;; ,_ � CIT��I� RENTON / ' � Planning/Building/PublicWorks Deparhnent - J Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Eebruary 6,2003 � - Steve Beck 4735'N E 4�'Street Renton,WA 98059 ' SUBJECT: Bales Annexation and Prezone LUA-03-004,ECF Dear Mr. Beck : This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to inform you that they have completed their review of the environmental impacts of the above-referenced project. The Committee, on February 4, 2003, decided that your project will be issued a Determination of Non- Significance. The City of Renton ERC has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental lmpact Statement(EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made by the ERG under the authority of Section 4-6-6, Renton Municipal Code, after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information, on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request: - Appeals of the environmental determination musf be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 24th, 2003. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the � Examiner are governed by City:of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. �Additional information regarding the appeal process may 6e obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at(425)430-6581. For the Environmental Review Committee, � Don Erickson Project Manager cc: Irvin Leifer/Owner �`�� ad �,�� dnslett . R Ei N �' � N 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 �Thispapercontains50%recycledmateria1,30%postconsumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE �y { ; - t� CIT��.� RENTON � Planning/Building/PublicWorks Deparirnent J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator February 6, 2003 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Subje�t: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee(ERC)on February 4, 2003: DETERMINATION OF NON�IGNIFICANCE . BALES ANNEXATION AND PREZONE LUA-03-004,A,R,EC F The applicant, Steve Beck, has requested Environmenfal Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site(excluding streets)from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because annexations are SEPA exempt(RCW 43.21 C.222)this environmental review is only for the rezone. Under Renton's R-5 zoning the 8:52 acre site(including street right-of-way) could theoretically accommodate±34 dwelling units, assuming 5 du/net acre. The proposed rezone is consistent with Renton's Residenfial Rural land use designation, as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. No new development is currently proposed as a result of this proposed annexation. Location: The 8.52-acre site is located on the southside of NE 4'n Street between 152`�Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 1,55th Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. - Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 24th,2003. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with; Hearing Exarriiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady.Way, Renton,WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal prQcess may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. If you have questions, please call me at(425)430-6581. For the Environmental Review Committee, ✓ o�� Don Erickson Senior Planner cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries . David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources WSDOT, Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe(Ordinance) (n�`` a�3��63 � US Army Corp.of Engineers Enclosure agencyle er. oc L� E N T O N 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 �Thispapercontains50%recycledmateria1,30%postconsumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE . ,��.. y�-.._[ � � � CITY OF RENTON �`� � DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE APPLICATION NUMBER: LUA-03-004,A, R, ECF APPLICANT: Steve Beck PROJECT NAME: Bales Annexation DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, Steve Beck, has requested Environmental Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site (excluding streets)from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because annexations are SEPA exempt(RCW 43.21 C.222)this environmental review is only for the rezone. Under Renton's R-5 zoning the 8.52 acre site (including street right-of-way)could theoretically accommodate +34 dwelling units, assuming 5 du/net acre. The proposed rezone is consistent with Renton's Residential Rural land use designation, as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. No new development is currently proposed as a result of this proposed annexation. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The 8.52-acre site is located on the southside of NE 4th Street between 152°d Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 155th Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation.site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section This Determination of Non-Significance is issued under WAC 197-11-340. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Ap�eals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 24t ,2003. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: February 10, 2003 DATE OF DECISION: February 4,2003 SIGNATURES: r Gre im r an, dmin s rator T D tme of Plan ing/Building/Public Works r�--� ��- ,� � � �� im Shepherd,AdminN t ator � AT � Community Services Department , � _ � �. �il'/'r� C�� `C>�� . Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department signature.doc - � � � NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. BALES ANNEXATION—R-5 REZOfVE LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF The applicant has requested Environmental (SEPA) Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site (excluding streets) from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zbne. Location: The 8.52-acre site is located on the southside of NE 4th St. between 152"d Ave. SE, if extended, on the west and 155th Ave. SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. Publication Date: February 10, 2003 Account No. 51067 dnspub -— , ,,,� �_ . � ��'� � . ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: BALES ANNEXATION AND PREZONE PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION: The applicant, Steve Beck, has requested Environmental Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site (excluding streets) from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because.annexations are SEPA exempt(RCW 43.21C.222)this envi�onmental review is only for the rezone. Under Renton's R-5 zoning the 8.52 acre site (including street right-of-way) could theoretically accommodate +34 dwelling • units, assuming 5 du/net acre. The proposed rezone is consistent with Renton's Residential Rural land use designation, as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. No new development is currently proposed as a result of t�iis proposed annexation. Location:The 8.52-acre site is located on th� southside of NE 4 Street between 152"d Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 155 Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED - THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. APPEALS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION MUST BE FILED IN WRITING ON OR BEFORE 5:00. ', PM,FEBRUARY 24T",2003. APPEALS MUST BE FILED IN WRITING TOGETHER WITH THE REQUIRED$75.00 APPLICATION FEE WITH: HEARING EXAMINER,CITY OF RENTON, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY,RENTON,WA , 98055. APPEALS TO THE EXAMINER ARE GOVERNED BY CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4- 5-110. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE APPEAL PROCESS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE RENTON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE,(425)-430-6510. , � �o' !th S�� ' � IS � � � � a .'E• � T , ta��.F� .�F,,� � y� ' i .� 5... � �,xz �'�� U � Il� ❑ . � �y ,�� x � L �� , �� w�,k'��; ' , �, , n � ,�, �� A��S'.: h .f.. Q �e . .. � N I I l . �r'c b'F�:t '�a�- , ' .. 0.x7 L r 4 �;7� � ef LJ � J '' . . : .�,� „ ;�, � ` . � <.}fikr,sk�:.i�µ+.��: ,5`y.± � � � , �J.� � N -� FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)430-7200, � DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please,include the:project:NUMBER when calling;for�proper;file identification. . � �� .F k'H 1.� i� '. �" Y4 X � 3CY 4 . ��IiiIRO�N��t��'�;L�I�E �°1E1�9 C�4'1�1�11�T�T��E .: .. '..f � ,� : g � . � . . :. . � -_ . y /� � '/l�,. m�� y�4: 'f � . G �� f C '; ; : -. . 1 . �y � F� �� O��V�hY .' t 4R : � � � - 1 h .. ' . :� �: FT■w '��i _ i+ t �: . 1".; ' �� .. ' ��'.i�`��$� ��#u .:� ��i *�� . �_.: �r .. � t s 3, � �' L ��. �, r�u I "#- § 4 S � .'� a. m#� �`.k'"� �..."E a 4 ,�^+ F�,r . ;� a r � r ^��„c ' �.� , �`4 ��, a �^�.�'a�`� �� .��"�` �°,�� '� �w�� . � s, a� � J � :� �� <„ �� ,,,, ,.�°.,�,n � z i f:,.� 5a ,�.:� u 4 .,fa �a.��r'''��.n`.:i''�"�5.� �sps,,a��` 3��, �"�?� ,�a.r7:�a,'°"� '�,.�Afi �' �^�:`k��Z *`�''zy�yil�n�: �.� '� r �i.��.- .�' �: ' �,`3^ q"� ' b ,...,...s- � S i!"`t�ri � 1�;j3� �k ,�' E �'fr, �R::..��` �,�-r,... � :hx.ar,a�-z'��,z�x,.,<`�H� �`et'�,��"5.-.�t'#-G,".��'.� �� . i �- ��;�,�r "Y r . 'r e:`#�'' ,�� ?^� g �. „��V��. � �n \/� r�:�.�a�tTM'��a�'�'�'-i xa`} `_ � �S . "�`i i�''� ��t �.�i � -r �S�'sY i:r `� ��. rt .3 v�,..,� t` . v.,�.'�.1�X .�'�s�±�, k'� #�,,.�"��-.�� "�: c �,° �., �� "i^,:�.��'�"�� r` ��,� �. n ;'. +:�'��? ,�' .a � ¢dja ��:. �` �` �� 3: � �i k� � s . Y"' r :�sua 4,`��y�,� �� `§., k 7 � +",�f x�"` {. 3}��""7``?,�k �,r�r�� .t' �,..�". ��' �� ' :� � - � ; T . i i� � re r r � � aih� y.. ,? � " I I .� I .� Y II��y' :.�I I A;•�`. l��;� � L" �� ` k-:� :k .�4 I k ..� .ii .. 4 p �� F :l_ 1 i. i- '�3: � .!.� :I: .� .., l :.�i> �rv:.:i. u Y .:� �I � I C {ir� ,. .,. ..�. , � . , � . .... . .., . «. ._. �.�..r,�:: .,,, .. .. H :, � . ., .�� F ... . . ... ;�., :,a e -' To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Buiiding/Public Works Administrator Jim Shepherd, Community Services Administrator Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief . Frome Jennifer Henning, Development Planning �e ,�- -5, 5 ,�s: r e. �,,,yts .�. �.€�. t '�.i �' f �:5� � M.I 1 � s7�£� t' :� :a Meetdng b�ax� � T��estlay! Febpruary 4��2003 , # 4 �, � ,,, „r �; f � . 1 c 4 � y\��1y� 4 � sadL ,�i �"`4 �. r d ' S. r� . e . "TI117� > �� t/�l�Xju j �"W y �tr� I� �; y a . f � "^.� �r ' S� � `" }k � '�r �e � � � r r �.�r' d.1. � 1:� a a ,�� z i i.�;.�,.�a s �' 7� ��`;., s �."' ��,�x �"t -.. y �. t� �� y ' - c k ;� . `'` .. , , L�cafion ;; } �,, . S��h F�oo�-Ga�iference�oor��#�20 ;s ; �, �� ,��x� �, , �� * . .,.. , �.�� . : . �: � �� .. ,. : ::. . . .. � . : , : .. . � � Agenda listed below. PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A CONSENT AC�ENDA Ba/es Annexation/Prezone (Erickson) LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF The applicant, Steve Beck, has requested Environmental Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site (excluding streets) from King Count�s R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because annexations are SEPA exempt (RCW 43.21C.222) this environmental review is only for the rezone. Under Renton's R-5 zoning the 8.52 acre site (including street right-of-way)could theoretically accommodate±34 dwelling units, assuming 5 du/net acre. The proposed rezone is consistent with Renton's Residen#ial Rural land use designation, as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use QVlap. No new development is currently proposed as a result of this proposed annexation. Location: The 8.52- acre site is located on the southside of NE 4"'Street between 152`�Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 155�'Avenue SE, if extended,on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. St.Anthonv's Dev.Aqreement (Nishihlra) LUA-03-005,ECF St. Anthony's Parish has requested Environmental (SEPA) Review of a Development Agreement for the parish campus. The agreement establishes the boundaries of the campus as well as the proposed phasing of a master plan for campus development to occur in the future. Location: Generally located between �Vlorris Avenue South and Shattuck Avenue South; South 4�'Street and alley south of South 3`d Street. cc: J.Tanner,Mayor J.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer A Pietsch,EDNSP Director� J.Gray,Fire Prevention N.Watts,P/B/PW Development Senrices Director O F.Kaufman,Hearing Examiner , L.Rude,Fire Prevention O J.Medzegian,Council S.Meyer,P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director R.Lind,Economic Development L.Warren,City Attorney O � F._W / ` � 7 ��' 1� / �' �..-�'`` City of Renton � STAFF Deparfinent of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and REPORT Strategic Planning ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEVV COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE February 4t" , 2003 Project Name Bales Annexation- R-5 Rezone Applicant Steve Beck File Number LUA-03-004, A, R, ECF Project Manager pon Erickson Project Description The applicant, Steve Beck, has requested Environmental Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site (excluding streets) from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because annexations are SEPA exempt (RCW 43.21 C.222) this environmental review is only for the rezone. Under Renton's R-5 zoning the 8.52 acre site (including street right-of-way) could theoretically accommodate +34 dwelling units, assuming 5 du/net acre. The proposed rezone is consistent with Renton's Residential Rural land use designation, as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. No new development is currently proposed as a result of this proposed annexation. The 8.52-acre site is located on the southside of NE 4th Street between 152"d Avenue Project Location SE, if extended, on the west and 155th Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. Exist. Bldg. Area gsf N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area gsf N/A Site Area 8.52 acres Total Building Area gsf N/A SITE MAP See below. PT'O)eCt I,OC1tlOri Map erc report.doc Ciry ofRenton EDNSP Department �' �'``�� ' 'ntalReview Committee StaffReport BALESANNEXATION&R-S REZON d_,_% �'`" � ' LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF FEBR UARY 4T'�1003 Page2 of 3 � � � u I '-u - i "l � � � � - I _.+-_ �� I f � - . , � �� h P �,� � � � o � � 7 ilj � -_—� `� /� D � �[�_ � � _ � ' � � '� � .� I - � �. � r � -�� . - � ,� , �.._ �� , , o � =� � — � I c�l NE 4 Street I{ t � �s � 1 ; — � � � � �, o �� 156 v �S � �� _ -------- �. � ,;,� � ,� - -- I �� Q � � �� ,�. �. �-------� - _ ✓�, � . � � � � n � ��`� � � _� � 0 i�,L 4 R T N Q � � � g � � � � i�� `� �J � -I- (� ' - � � . B. RECOMMENDAT/ON Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: DETERMINATION OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE NON-SIGN/FICANCE-MITIGATED. X Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 da A eal Period. Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. erc report.doc City of Renton EDNSP Department ;�'�' �l p ntal Review Committee Staff Report BALES ANNEXATION&R-5 REZONI'�, ,��'� � �� '� Ll7A-03-004,A,R,ECF REPORTAND DECISIONOFFEBRUARY4TX 2003 Page3 of 3 C. M/T/GATION MEA�URES None required for this non-project action. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following non-project environmental review addresses only fhose impacts fhat are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Transportation Impacts: None identified for this non-project legislative action. At build-out 34 potential dwellings could potentially create 340 vehicle trip ends per week day. Spread out over a number of hours throughout the day this potential number of trips is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact. Mitiqation Measures: Impacts, if any, are better assessed at the project level. Nexus: Not applicable. E. COMMENTS OF REVIEW/NG DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circu/ated fo City Departmenfal / Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these commenfs have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mifigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. X Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to fhis report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 24 ,2003. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. erc report.doc pf. 1.��'/ / . 1 . ('�-� ,,. ., .�. ._ .-.-:� . ..�. .:.�.. �-:i. -:: � .: . ... ^ .�� . n ,. . � 4 ,hi .�- _ , ': . " . � .'- ,_ . , '_'- . ' ' ENV6RONNIENTAL REVIE�/ COxIVIi�IIITTEE _ - ; �� , . N IVI�ETI G NOTICE , . z::: �. : , �,� � . : � , . � . ,. . -. � .. :, . , , COPV IVT AC�ENDA } y E , � � c ,�* �_ � , r a ' � � � � F`E�RIJARY 4, 20�03 '_ � � R � € �` �; � � � ; _�� i � ��` �� . �� - I ':i, ..�Y �k x To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Adrr�inistrator Jim Shepherd, Community Services Administrator Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning '"� ,��. �: ! ..� ..�: .u:: �� f ' ; ..� . N9eeting Date ; Tuestlay, February 4, 2003 ; . . �ftr�e.� ; { 9 00 AM, �� . s �, . � � :� � >. � r � r=Locatiot�. �; � _�� Sixth Floar Canference'Room #620 �' ; �� ; . - >,ro ,,, .j< ... `i . ..., „ i , .. �. Agenda listed below. PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A COIVSENT AGENDA Ba/es Annexafion/Prezone (Erickson) LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF The applicant, Steve Beck, has requested Environmental Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site (excluding streets) from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because annexations are SEPA exempt (RCW 43.21C.222) this environmental review is only for the rezone. Under Renton's R-5 zoning the 8.52 acre site (including street right-of-way) could theoretically accommodate +34 dwelling units, assuming 5 du/net acre. The proposed rezone is consistent with Renton's Residential Rural land use designation, as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. No new development is currently proposed as a result of this proposed annexation. Location: The 8.52- acre site is located on the southside of NE 4th Street between 152"d Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 155'h Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. St.Anthonv's Dev.A_qreement (IVishihira) LUA-03-005,ECF St. Anthony's Parish has requested Environmental (SEPA) Review of a Development Agreement for the parish campus. The agreement establishes the boundaries of the campus as well as the proposed phasing of a master plan for campus development to occur in the future. Location: Generally located between Morris Avenue South and Shattuck Avenue South; South 4th Street and alley south of South 3`�Street. cc: J.Tanner,Mayor J.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer A Pietsch,EDNSP Director� J.Gray,Fire Prevention N.Watts,P/B/PW Development Services Director � F.Kaufman,Hearing Examiner , L.Rude,Fire Prevention � J.Medzegian,Council S.Meyer,P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director R.Lind,Economic Development L.Warren,City Attorney O .� :� ;� , ' ` _�� - Cify of Renton STAFF Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and REPORT Strategic Planning ENV/RONMEN�"AL REVIEW COMMITTEE - A. BACKGROUND � ERC MEETING DATE February 4th , 2003 Projecf IVame Bales Annexation - R-5 Rezone � Applicant Steve Beck File Number LUA-03-004,A, R, ECF Project Manager pon Erickson Project Description The applicant, Steve Beck, has requested Environmental Review for the proposed rezoning of this 8.52 acre annexation site (excluding streets) from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because annexations are SEPA exempt (RCW 43.21C.222) this environmental review is only for the rezone. Under Renton's R-5 zoning the 8.52 acre site (including street right-of-way) could theoretically accommodate +34 dwelling units, assuming 5 du/net acre. The proposed rezone is consistent with Renton's Residential Rural land use designation, as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. No new development is currently proposed as a result of this proposed annexation. Project Location The 8.52-acre site is located on the so�thside of NE 4�'Street between 152"d Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 155 Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. Exist. Bldg. Area gsf N/A Proposed New Bldg.Area gsf N/A Site Area 8.52 acres Total Building Area gsf N/A S1TE MAP See below. PI'OJeCt I,OCStlOri Map erc reportdoc � �f City of Renton EDNSP Department � E� imenta!Review Committee StaffReport BALES ANNEXATION&R-5 REZONE L UA-03 004,A,R,ECF REPORT AND DEC/SIDN OF FEBRUARY 4";2003 Page2 of 3 � — - � � . : a------�- - —__..--- — — __ ; --i� � .o �- --;- _._ _ � ►-----� ; -- - _-_;., �_' ' _; � �' i� ��' � �� i +W = �- -i- - � p i �� i .�� -, �� --� , � � i -+ � i � `\� i � _�" — 1 �' ,_._ _o I '. � L` _�� ;�I r=--- -==a-�-� � .._ _ �, ' �I � li ; � � � �� -- '_� ri _____��-__.. : �-- � I I � I � �`.`---�;� '; i � ; r-� �i� - `�jl_� -� � ' � �- �� 'v ti �, t'� I ' — I �� —' _ � �� — �I� � i ! .� �� __� —. --- -- � �� _ -� � � � I , `� � ' ,I � I �� i�_ NE 4 Street " � ' ' ' � j I � ' �,�� , , _ -s � � ' �au&� '.�. �'`.0 M��a e�'��<T. �. ' . � ` ( ' � � � ( I '��,w�.�� I I �}�,�� 1�� J� , L.� I ,�� ; � � i � � , �#K" a��,� •� � � ,`��r^� �`� A-��-�`��k�.. � ,r. � i �r�� a,�a T � — J I �� E I! ��,�� _�� ,��: ; �� 156�' V -S� �, � ---- 1,' �,�� `""`�� ,�� 1-----_�, - t " � �� . .. . --i- �.� �� rrw :�.� ��, ,�� ; ---- -- 5 ` � s� �z.��+ . ��. -.� t� . �� + ... ."..y� ��,'��A '¢s�.x,.y,' '" 3�` ��'4 a - - �,��=�`,+�� '", �� ,��'�" _ - . �� .� ��` '` x�, ,� �.� �� '�� . �+� ' '��"'� '�'"�� , �� J� i � '��ti� �� x�� z � I --- � —�._ , ��. �,r � �� y � � � �1 �� o �_� ��.� ��{��_ � �� } � :��ti�� .�z�. � � �• ..�z;��_^_1_.�- °`�---�. i��;� , -----r--- ; � � � �� --='_��------��.--- �� i "' ------ o f -—_- � ._..'___.—.' «-- 1 � ._�—� � ,. �lo ta-r�t j 1 � _, ,� o' �— � ► � 1- �` _ ' -� ,,- - �. .J �, � �, i- '�ti �. �� i I� ; � --�-�_ B. f2ECONlil4EIND.4T101!! Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: DETERiV1l�lAT/ON OF DETERMINA 1 lON OF NON-SIC�IVIFIC�4NCE IVOIV-SIGIlIIF/CAAlCE-f�1ITIl�ATED. X Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 da A eal Period. Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. erc report.doc ! '� Ciry of Renton EDNSP Department Er,;r''°��7mental Review Committee Staff Report , �"�, { BALESANNEXATION&R-5 REZONE��, � 1 ' LUA-03-004,A,R,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF FEBRUARY 4�2003 Page3 of 3 C. MITIGATION MEASURES None required for this non-project action. D. ENV/RONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following non-projecf environmental review addresses only those impacts fhat are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Transportation Impacts: None identified for this non-project legislative action. At build-out 34 potential dwellings could potentially create 340 vehicle trip ends per week day. Spread out over a number of hours throughout the day this potential number of trips is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact. � MitiQation Measures: Impacts, if any, are better assessed at the project level. Nexus: Not applicable. E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposa/ has been circulated to City Departmental / Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the fext of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. X Copies of all Review Commenfs are confained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to fhis report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 24 ,2003. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. erc report.doc � " - , � ERC IVleeting Agendas Note All ERC Meetings Start At 9:00 A.M.Unless Otherwise Notified (Tuesdays-City HaIl/Sixth Floor Conference Room#620) 1055 South Grady Way ` v:�'' ��,v � ap �� i'- . v i �ri��yi �Y �'"`�'1`�b�5"f��'.r'�°:,*'�'� ��a�:v`.�'�'��*L,��''��. ��`��^+��"am�. ��a � a>`_�,.�''-�5 c s�: a �hl��a t 9 o- �` S �,� r,�,n+ 'k• s �S .,r. .� �` "�53� tk�. °Nfe��ing � � � �'�a,�e�� a�€�r��, � �� h �� t�,,.��!��+i7e�i,q,a,��,;X¢'� � � �o��t�s��y � _ r��rr�' �h ��,"� '� � y ri l�k r��`��,tkz��,��;�� t`c`�'¢�z��j'$ G{'�,�-#Y� �ts'�f'W`� �'°�`�is��"'�;��a�� 4��'�gs�^'��.. . " � i . � � �� r�„��- a;i q.,�'s i�;,js41�''�ryS ��t ri h+k�,�i��` r� �,:c dS q�« ��,�� c, i � f � ,k a�� .i��4...;��rL. . .-�: .0 ifiiln..ui�l .i ��i'�::u.6!:.�k�i..;s.�i".i��. ..'�r :+-.;,t.n.��.�uA � �'s,* :r�� "5�dutol�t�' ��..�� ry : <!:v;,� ..;.,:.., ..J�..: ..; �: �' � �.k-'�, � �� ..uv � . � . ,:i._3� ...l,�r,��,..i.ia4€ nt,.��ai.i. ..,,.�. .,.,,�:,:� 01/28/03 02/04/03 � �a es �n a�ion�Prezone, ; - New E�ickso';n��' �'-��A-03-004,A,PZ,ECP" St.Anthony's Dev.Agreement New Nishihira LUA-03-005,ECF 0?J91/03 Honey Creek II Preliminary Plat New Fiala LUA-03-001,PP,ECF Brook�eld Preliminary Plat New Jordan LUA-03-003,PP,ECF 02/18/03 Kenworth R 8�D Center New Fiala LUA-03-006,ECF 02/25/03 03/04/03 03/11/03 03/18/03 03/25/03 �� . ir� o � RE � ron� �� Nl E IVf O R�41V D !J M �AN 2 �.�oo� ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, DATE: January 28,2003 , AND STR TEGiC PL�qNfVING TO: Fred Kaufman/Hearing Examiner FROM: Jennifer Henning/Development Services SUBJECT: Tentative Scheduling for Public Hearings � All meetings begin at 9:00 AM unless otherwise noted. Scheduling of hearings is coordinated through Develo ment Planning 430-7281 . r;:t�b�...� �wt�'. y�4 :�""t��.;'� .u= �+ .n � „!?EF r r rS' a4 .`�"{3"��;�"� �s.,:*'°}S4i`"`F;F^'�:'T �+,.^�;t`�e-`� v�`"",�''a'�`�5:. � � _ +r 2_.�r� 't�u�"' ^�+ .� �" �: `--c'�-k""��..'s*:;a ��s �.,n zv � '� t 'TJ � i?�;� ..� -�r,�.-� - .� '.rr s��,`,�r�:�. � 4„�y�3?:a� s��; � 'A;�` � .�'$'�';ams, �,, x" ��"`� ��'�`� >y 'i�.,,a�,.�.�" �� EAR�I!N'�,G� `.1} .,�'�-�� ,�pt�I`��JEC'T�� ' � ��'� 4.� PROJEC'F.' � ��-� PROJECT� � ��as :� �;� ,��, `v�., r 't.0 ..'� " � `�`i*'�$��fs r.i�v�' � �` �'.,p. �u.,A"xa. "M' ��"��' k ri �y„+,cF�,✓r�a„�r4 5`-�:,`�t�x,r..dx�it- ��'�T+�'�'1:��"!"ha i.:� �j'Sb.. 7cR�r'Sy��`� �I�.:.;:� ��ri R.,,�"�fi`� �° �r��t.' :,�p��.,�� x �:P �.€r �S aa��a,� �.�$,�'.§�t�- ' 'v+�':. r,.�r i��:�.; 1. .A�,. ;h vl�i I ,�'� i 'f I �i�.: r.��;;i 4 4i�.,.it' `r'�°rt r"i'"�`�q��,�ay �}p .I. �, / c�.. 1�"+ I �]'�` �iF�� :�. :�_ :A.,h.: t �i ..:t,� 1 I.. rl�I � i.�, ::i ,I��„ ,:�i;i�n �I .�.,� i..� -,'� r �Itvi,�� ' �.w�. iF �.�7.�'4��.,.1 4�J�,�nq�� II�h+ .:.. � �I.�I:y:,i n ' �QCi� �nC�/�71.Q.C1�� . ;.;, { � k'�:,a � � ..,: �� Iii�ili� : �ir fl'��i� � .,i� ��. I n�.; �'S�, 1'P'��'Y�n i4�'�Ir �Y� 1 �h :�'� � fi kF pF ;,�Jx,`S�'im,;�r". ��-,� ��.�:, . .... .�. .. ��:, �:.�.�, , ��,.;.�ild,ll.�.l� :uf w. .,.�:,a�I��,:�� 4-, h.� � �:,:.n�aninAiasGa,i,.�.,-, :.,,...�....�iq �6Y.i�d,li'�iah� ,,..,.:..,.N�ul.,�,:.+mbi� I i,�1v,4 .,ai.lY, Mvi.w�, 01/28/03 Nicholson Short Piat Appeal . . . LUA-02-111,SHPL-A Planner:Jordan _ 02/04/03 Fr�s Rezone - ' LUA-02-149,ECF,R Planner:Higgins 02/11/03 02/18/03 Aquatic Center LUA-02-147,SA-H,ECF � Planner:Jordan 02/25/03 City of Tukwila 1:30 PM -Business License Denial 03/04/03 03/11/03 Brookfield Prel.Plat 1:30 PM Forfeiture LUA-03-003,PP,ECF Case No.02-976 Planner.Jordan 03/18/03 Honey Creek Estates II Prel. Plat LUA-03-001,PP,ECF Planner:Fiala 03/25/03 cc: M. Pullar, Mayor's Office T.Dauenhauer,Mayor's Office B.Walton,City Clerk A.Pietsch,EDNSP L.Rude,Fire M. Neumann,City Clerk's Office a — � .--, � � , � � o . I I �- � � I I � � o ��, h P � � — � o� � '� Q � � � � � o i� �� i , ,. ,,o th S � � �� . I � � S 1 Y ..:.k .�-- _ ""' � F ;�,�„ � � i: ,i n ��;�: � ° _ ::�fr � ; ��-+ � � l� � i� �� } � � � L � 4 ■ T � S: y � � � � . i �'��..� � A '�i �` . �...M SrT'x �--��p..� I � S ; )� � 1 8�� 5t- � � �� \ �� -�.�: ,: J � ,' ��: $ � � s �� d '�I ;,. r`{� � C, 9 � 5 II � �°� � o � O ` Q� I� E 2nd St ° � S E �� Q 0 — , � Proposed �ales Annexation Site _ _ _ Existing CityLimits � 300 600 Figure 2: Existing Structure Map � Proposed Annexation � � , o Boundary 1 : �600 ,i, Ewnomic Development,Neighbochaods 8c Strategic Planning 'OZ Al��gA��g�� Existing Structure G.De1 Aosario F .�O 20 Dxemba 2002 1 �� ,-- _ ;i` � �� i �� C�ty Qf Renton >ENI/IRONMENFA�! GHECKLISF` PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapfer 43.21 C RCW, requires a/l govemmental agencies fo consider the environmenta! impacfs of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmenfal Impact Stafement (EIS) must be prepared for a/l proposa/s with probable significant adverse impacts on the qualiry of the environment The purpose of this checklist is fo provide information fo help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and.io reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and fo help fhe agency decide whether an E/S is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: � This environmental checklisf asks you fo describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmenfal agencies use this checklist to defermine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an E/S. Answer fhe questions briefly, with fhe most ' precise informafion known, or give ihe best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, fo the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the quesfions from your own observations or project plans without fhe need fo hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not app/y to your proposal, write "do nof know"or "does not apply': Complete answers to fhe quesfions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulafions, such as zoning, shoreline, and /andmark designations. Answer these quesfions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply fo all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of fime or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional informafion that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you fo exp/ain your answers orprovide additional information reasonab/y related to determining if fhere may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complefe this checklisf for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not app/y." IN ADDIT/ON, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). - For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project,""applicant,"and"property or site"shou/d be read as "proposal," "proposer,"and"affectedgeographicarea,"respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed projecf, if applicable: Proposed rezone of approximately 8.52 acre area from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's Residential 5 du/ac (R-5)Zone. Zoning would be applied at the time the subject site is annexed into the City of Renton. .. Bales Annexation Rezone - - -� January 7, 2003 Page 2 � 2. Name of applicant: Alex Pietsch,Acting Administrator, Economic Development, Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Department City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicanf and confact person: Address: Economic Development, Neighborhoods& Strategic Planning Department • City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Confacf Person: Don Erickson,AICP (425)430-6581 4. Date checklist prepared: January 7,2003 5. Agency requesting checklist: Citv of Renton, Department of Planning/Building/Public Works- Development Services Division 6. Proposed timing or schedule(including phasing,if applicable): Adoption of the rezone ordinance is anticipated pending SEPA compliance,at the time of annexation into Renton. , 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connecfed with this proposal? If yes, exp/ain. Yes. Applicants have applied for annexation into the Ciry of Renton. Under RCW 43.21.C.222 annexations are specifically exempt from SEPA. Upon annexation into Renton applicants or their successors will likely subdivide and develop vacant properties with single-family dwellings per the City of Renton's R-8 zoning. 8. List any environmental information you know abouf that has been prepared, or will be prepared, direct/y re/ated to fhis proposal. FEIS on the 1995 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton 9. Do you know whether applicafions are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals direct/y affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No knowledge of other pending governmental approvals of affected properties. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits fhaf will be needed for your proposal, if � known. Council approval is required for this rezone from County to Ciry zoning. 11. Give brief, complete descripfion of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of fhe project and site. The subject proposal is to rezone the 8.52 acre Bales Annexation site from King County's R-4 Zone (4 du/gross acre),to Renton's R-5 Zone(5 du/net acre). The site could accommodate approximately 34 dwellings under Renton's R-5 Zone and approximately 34 dwellings under King County's R-1 Zone i2. Locafion of fhe proposal. Give suNicient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project including a streef address, if any,and section, township,and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area,provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a lega!description, site plan, viciniry map,and topographic map, if reasonably available. While ; Bales Annexation Rezone _ January 7, 2003 � Page 3 � you should submit any plans required by the agency,you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to ihis checklist. The subject annexation site abuts NE 4th Street(SE 128 St) on the north and 152"a Avenue SE, if extended, on the west It is bounded by SE 130th Street, if extended, on the south and approximately 155'�Avenue SE, if extended, on the east Please see attachments.) B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General descripfion of the site (circle one); flaf, rolling, hilly, sfeep slopes, mountainous, other The 8.52-acre annexation site is relatively flat. B. What is fhe sfeepest slope on the site(approximate percenf slope?) Renton Slope Maps indicate some small area in the southwest corner with a sloQe of 15%-25%. c. Whaf general types of soils are found on fhe site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? !f you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and nofe any pnme farmland. Alderwood Association. • d. Are there surface indicafions or history of unstable soils in fhe immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There do not appear to be any siQnificant steep slopes on the rezone portion of the annexation site. e. Describe fhe purpose: type, and approximafe quantifies of any filling or � grading proposed. Ind�cate source of fill. Not applicable for this non-proiect legislative action. f. Could erosion occur as a resu/t of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No construction is pro�,osed as a result of this non-proiect annexation and rezone proposal. Erosion presumably could occur as a result of future development under the proposed R-5 Zone. Mitigation measures would be applied typically at the time of future development. g. About what percenf of the sife will be covered with im ervious surfaces after project construction(for example, aspha/f or buildings�? Approximately 35%. No construction is proposed as a result of this non- project legislative proposal. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or ofher impacts fo the earth, if any: � No construction is proposed as a result of this non-project legislative action. Any future development occurring as a consequence of the proposed R-5 . Zone would be required to follow management practices in the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130) and in the Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060). 2. AIR a. What types of emissions fo fhe air would resu/t from fhe proposal(i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during consfruction and when fhe project is complefed? If any, generally descr�be and give approximafe quanfities if known. Bales Annexation Rezone - � -� January 7, 2003 � ` Page 4 � �� . � � N/A. No new construction is proposed as a result of this legislative non- project proposal. At the time of pro�ect level development specific air-related impacts may be identified and appropriate mitigation measures applied. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor fha[ may affect your proposal? If so,generally describe. Unlikelv and not applicable for this non-project legislative action. � c. Proposed measures fo reduce or control emissions or ofher impacts to air, if any: Not a�plicable for this non-proiect legislative action. 3. WATER a. Surtace Water: 1) Is fhere any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site.(includrng year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wet/ands)? If yes, describe fype and provide names. If appropriate, sfafe whaf sfream or river it f/ows info. No. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to(within 200 feet)the described waters? If yes,please describe and attach available plans. No. 3) Esfimate the amount of fill and dredge materia/that wou/d be placed in or removed from surtace water or weflands and indicate the area of the site thaf would be affected. Indicate the source of fill maferial. N/A. No construction is proposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A. No construction is proposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. 5) Does fhe proposal lie within a 100 year floodplain? If so, nofe location on the s�fe plan. No. The subject site is not mapped as part of the 100-year floodplain. 6) Does fhe proposal invo/ve any discharges of waste materials to surface wafers? If so, describe the type of wasfe and anticipated volume of discharge. No. This is a non-project legislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this proposal. ; Bales Annexation Rezone. January 7, 2003 Page 5 �`` ;. � t� - b. Ground Water: - 1) Will ground wafer 6e withdrawn, or will wafer be discharged fo ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. The proposed rezone is not expected to result in the discharge or withdrawal of water that is not now occurring. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged info fhe ground from septic fanks or otl�er sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;industrial, confaining the following chemicals...;agricu/tural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, fhe number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicab/e), or the number of animals or humans fhe system(s)are expected fo serve. No construction is qroposed as a result of this,non-proiect legislative rezone proposal. No new septic tanks will be allowed once the site is annexed into Renton and all new development will be hooked up to sanitary sewer. c. Wafer Runoff(including sform water): 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any(►nclude quantities, if known). Where will fhis water flow? Will fhis wafer flow into other wafers? If so, describe. N/A. No construction and therefore runoff is proposed as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. Surtace water appears to run off the site in a north/northeasterly direction. Although no new development is proposed at this time the proposed zoning would � provide for densities comparable to what already exists in King County. Environmental review, however, would be required for any non-exempt development under SEPA. 2) Cou/d wasfe material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. Future new residential development would be hooked up to sanitary sewer. � d. Proposed measures#o reduce or confrol surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Not applicable since this is a non-proiect legislative action. Future development allowed under the proposed R-5 Zone would be required to comply with City of Renton Drainage Standards (RMC 4-6-030). 4. PLANT� a. Check or circle fypes of vegefation found on the sife: deciduous tree:a/der,map/e,aspen, other evergreen tree:fir, cedar,pine, other shrubs grass � pasture Bales Annexation Rezone - -- 7anuary 7, 2003" � Page 6 ' � ` crop or grain wet soil planfs:cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water planfs: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, ofher other fypes of vegetation b. Whai kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? N/A. No construction and therefore no vegetatiorr will be removed as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. Future development will have to comply with Renton's Tree Cutting regulations (RMC 4-4-130). c. List fhreatened or endangered species known to be on or near fhe site. None are known at this time. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native p/ants, or ofher measures to preserVe or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. As noted above, development � that occurs under Renton's jurisdiction must conform to the City's codes and regulations. 5. . ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the sife: Birds:hawk, heron, eag/e, songbirds, other Mammals:deer, bear, elk,beaver, other Fish:bass, salmon, trouf, herring, shellfish, other b. Lisf any threatened or endangered species known fo be on or near fhe site. No threatened or endangered species are known to be on or near the site. c. Is ihe sife part of a migrafion route? If so, exp/ain Unknown, but the entire State of Washington is included within a migration route for birds known as the Pacific Flyway. This flyway, as it overlies Renton, is used by a variety of migratory birds, including, but not limited to the Canada Goose. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: This is a non-proiect legislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this rezone proposal. Mitigation measures, if any, may be imposed at the time of future development. 6. ENERGYAND NATURAL RESOURCES a. Whaf kinds of energy (electric, naiural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meef the complefed projecf's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacfuring, efc. It is anticipated that the potential 34 dwellinq units the R-5 zonina would allow on the site will use primarilv electircal and natural gas resources for heating and runninq appliances. Bales Annexation Rezone January 7, 2003 � Page 7 i � b. Wou/d your project affecf the potenfial use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,generally describe. Unlikelv Zoning provides some setbaeks and restricts the height of new structures to 30 feet. c. Whaf kinds of energy conservation features are included in fhe plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or contro/ energy impacfs, if any: None. This is a non-proiect legislative action. Future development occurring on the site will meet all related energy code provisions. . 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to foxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that cou/d occur as a result of fhis proposal? If so, describe. 1) Describe special emergency services that mighf be required. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. No environmental health hazards are anticipated from future single-family residential development: 2) Proposed measures fo reduce or control environmenta! hea/th hazards,if any: N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in fhe area which may affect your project (for example:traffic, equipmenf, operafion, other)? Not applicable since this is a legislative non-project action. 2) What types and levels of noise wou/d be created by or associated with the projecf on a short-ferm or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicafe what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. New development occurring under the R-5 Zone could include construction activity and normal noise associated with ground related residential living.. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. This is a non-project action. 8. LAND AND SHOREUNE USE - a: What is fhe current use of the site and adjacent properties? The westerly portion of the 8.52-acre rezone site is developed with an outdoor heavy construction equipment maintenance company that is scheduled to cease its operations in January 2003. Lower density single- family dwellings and a vacant parcel exist to the east. Existing densities are not believed to exceed 5 du/ac. Has the sife been used for agriculture?If so, describe. Not activelv. One of the parcels does have fruit trees on it. c. Describe any sfructures on the site. � There are an estimated four existinQ sinale-family dwellings on the subject 8.52-acre site. Bales Annexation Rezone - ,--` January 7, 2003 ' Page 8 , � d. Will any sfructures be demolished? If so, what? This is a legislative non-proiect rezone action. It is not anticipated that.this proposed rezone will result in the demolition of any structures. e. What is fhe current zoning c/assification of fhe site?. The current King County zoning classification is the R-4 Zone which allows 4 du/gross acre. The current proposal is for R-5 zoning that allows 5-du/net acre. Densities are assumed to be comparable. f. What is fhe current comprehensive plan designafion of fhe site? The 8.52 acre rezone site is currently designated "Residential Rurat" on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and "Urban Residential 4- 12du/ac" on King County's Gomprehensive Plan Map. Renton's designation would allow zoning with up to 5 units per net acre and King County's designation currently allows zoning with 4 units per gross acre. Because of this it is assumed that densities are comparable under either zone. g. If applicable, what is fhe currenf shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If sq specify. No portions of the subject site are known to be environmentally sensitive. i. Approximafely how many peop/e wou/d reside or work in fhe completed project? At full redevelopment under the proposed R-5 zoning, it is anticipated that a�proximatelv 85 residents could eventually reside on these 8.52 acres. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? , Unknown. This is a non-project action. The estimated five existing residents could choose, for example, to relocate to new dwellings within the annexation area. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable at this non-project stage. l. Proposed measures fo ensure fhe proposal is compatible wifh exisfing and projecied land uses and plans, if any: As noted above the proposed rezone is consistent with the City's current Residential Rural land use designation for the subject site. 9. HOUS/NG a. Approximately how many unifs would be provided, if any? Indicate whefher . hrgh, middle, or low-income housing. Unknown. It is anticipated that up to 34 dwelling units could be accommodated on the subject site under Renton's R-5 zoning. b. Approximafely how many unifs, if any, would be eliminated? lndicate whefher high, middle, or low-income housing. Unknown. The proposed rezone will not eliminate any units by itself. As future development occurs the two existing dwellings may be replaced and/or relocated although this is not currently known. Bales Annexation Rezone _ January 7, 2003 s Page 9 j `' �� c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: The proposed zoning.is consistent with the Ciry of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and applicable policies for this area. 10. AESTHETICS a. Whai is the tallest height of any proposed strueture(s), not including anfennas;what is fhe principal exterior building maferial(s)proposed. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. No new development is specifically proposed as a result of this change in zoning classification. Heights of residential structures are restricted to two stories and 30' in the proposed R-5 Zone b. What views in fhe immediafe vicinity wou/d be alfered or obsfructed? Unknown. This is a non-project rezone action. This is not known at this level. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts,if any: Unknown. At the future project level impacts will be assessed and mitigated. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. Whaf type of light or glare will fhe proposal produce? What fime of day would it mainly occur? Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. Future development may create some visible nighttime light. b. Cou/d lighf or g/are from the finished projecf be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Unknown. Future single-family homes are not anticipated to result in sufficient levels of glare to impair views from surrounding properties. a What exisfing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Unknown. d. Proposed measures fo reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreafional opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? King County currently owns the two abutting parcels immediately to the south of the subject site. These two parcels with a combined area of 9.34 acres have been set aside for a future park. Presumably, upon annexation these two parcels will be transferred to the City for future park development. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. IVo.This is a non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: - Not applicable at this non-proiect level of review. The City will collect a recreation mitigation fee at the time of future development. Bales AnnexationRezone %�� ;,-��, January 7, 2003 Page 10 � � � � 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are fhere any places or objects lisfed on, or proposed for, national stafe, or local preservation regisfers known to be on or next to the sife? If so, generally describe. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Genera/ly describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeo/ogical, scienfific, or cultural importance known to be on or nexf fo the site. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Unknown. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Ideniify public sfreets and highways serving fhe site, and describe proposed access to the existing sfreet system. Show on site plans,if any. The site is primarilv served by SE 128th Street. b. Is sife current/y served by public transit? If not, what is fhe approximate distance to the nearest fransit stop? Yes. Bus service is available on NE 4�'Street. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminaie? Unknown. Assuming 34 dwelling units and parking being provided between 1.75 spaces. per unit and 2.25 spaces per unit, there potentially could be between 59 and 76 required off-street spaces developed on the rezone site. No spaces are anticipated to be eliminated. d. Wil! the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? Very likely. Future subdivision of the site would be required to comply with City regulations pertaining to street width, curbs, sidewalks, lighting, etc. At this point it is difficult to anticipate what improvements 28 new dwellings in the Bales Annexation area would require. New streets would most likely be local access streets including loop streets and/or cul-de-sacs. e. Will the projecf use (or occur in the immediafe vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so,generally describe. No. f. How many vehicu/ar frips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicafe when peak vo/umes would occur. This is a legislative non-project action in which transportation impacts have not been identified since the actual levels of development are still unknown. However, if 30 additional units were built, and assuming 10 AWDVTE, there could be as many as 300 additional vehicles trip ends per 24 hour period. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable at this non-proiect level. Level of future development is . speculative at this point. Bales Annexation Rezone January 7, 2003 f Page 11 �;� 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Wou/d the projecf result in an increased need for public services (for examp/e: fire protection, police protecfion, hea/fh care, schools, ofher)? If so,generally describe. Probablv. Residential development that might occur in the tuture would increase the need for public services that typically serve such development. Affected services may include, but would not be limited to, fire protection, police protection, emergency services, and schools. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The Citv of Renton currentiv collects mitigation fees to control such impacts to parks and recreation, fire, and transportation. The City also collects taxes for most of these services. Until a specific proposal is made at the project level, however, it is too early to ascertain what these impacts, if any,will be. 16. UT/LITIES a. Circle utilities currently availab/e at fhe site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone,sanitary sewer, septic system, other. The current proposal is a non=project action. However, the area it would apply to will likely be served by sewer,,telephone, electricity, and water. b. Describe the ufilities that are proposed for the projecf, the ufility providing the service, and the general consfruction actiwtres on the site or in the immediate vicinify which might be needed. Unknown. Non-project action. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Pro onent Y�1��.�L��-�'�� P ` , Name Printed: /J�� /"`�' Date: � U� � Bales Annexation Rezone ;---�. January 7, 2003 Page 13 �� " t 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sifes, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? This non-project rezone proposal will not directly impact environmentally sensitive areas. Whether future development occurs under County or City zoning sensitive areas, if any,would have to be addressed. Proposed measures to profecf such resources or io avoid or reduce impacts are: None proposed at this time for this non-project action. 5. How would the proposal be likely fo atfecf land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? This proposed non-project rezone will not directly affect land or shoreline use. Proposed new zoning would be in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Proposed measures fo avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None proposed at this non-project level. As noted above any new development under the proposed R5 zoning will be reviewed by the City to ensure compliance with relevant state and local regulations. 6. How would fhe proposal be likely fo increase demands on transportation or pu6lic services and ufilities? This is a le4islative non-proiect action. Future development would result in increased demands on transportation,the use of utilities, or other services over what is allowed under current King County zoning. If additional homes are built in this area as many as 300 additional vehicle trips per day could be generated over a 24-hour period. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s).are: iVone are proposed for this non-project action. Future development will be asked to mitigate any identified significant adverse impacts. 7. Idenfify, if possi6le, whether fhe proposal may conf/ict with local, state, or federal laws o�requirements for the protection of the environment No conflicts with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment are known to exist with the subject non-project legislative rezone proposal. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. � Proponent: P- ^ �� Name Printed: ��G�� A�� Date: lJG/�/�GI�` �� OD� � Bales Annexation Rezone � January 7, 2003 ,r� ; Page 12 ,�'�� .,� D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheefs should on/y be used for actions invo/ving decisions on policies, plans and programs. You do nof need io fill out these sheets for projecf actions.) Because fhese quesfions are very general, if may be helpfu/ to read them in conjuncfion with fhe list of fhe elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extenf the proposal, or the fypes of activities likely to resu/t from the proposal, would affect the item af a greater intensity or at a fasfer rate fhan if fhe proposal were nof implemenfed. Respond brief/y and in general terms. 1. How would fhe proposal be likely fo increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, sforage, or release of toxic or hazardous subsfances; or production of noise? This is a leQislative non-project rezone action that is not anticipated by itself to change operations at the sub�ect site or increase substance discharges into the environment. Subsequent development, whether under the current County R-4 zoning or the proposed City of Renton R-5 zoning, would be required to comply with SEPA at the time of development, unless categorically exempt. Any new development will likely increase discharges to air, water, etc. These, however, are anticipated to be relatively small. Proposed measures fo avoid or reduce such increases are: This non-proiect leqislative action. Subsequent development as a result of this proposed map amendment would have to go through environmental review unless SEPA exempt. It is likely that air emissions, etc. would be addressed at this time when type and quantities of discharges are more likely to be known. Because Renton's R-5 Zone would allow comparable densities to those allowed under King County's R-4 Zone, impacts, if any, are assumed to be comparable. 2. How wou/d the proposal be like/y to affect p/ants,anima/s, fish,or marine life? No significant impacts to plants, animals, fish or marine life are anticipated to occur as a consequence of the proposed zoning action. The proposal would supplant existing County R-4 single-family zoning which allows 4 du/ac (gross) with Renton's R-5 single-family zoning, which allows 5 du/ac (net). As a result future development under Renton's R-5 zoning is assumed to be comparable to that currently allowed under King County's R-4 zoning. Proposed measures fo protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Not applicable. 3. How would.the proposal be likely to deplete energy or nafural resources? This non proiect leqislative action will not directly impact energv or natural resources. Future single-family development will, however, likely result in some additional demand of such resources. Future development under Renton's R-5 zoning would allow up to 30 additional homes in the area. The County's R-4 Zone would also allow approximately 30 new units. As a consequence the proposed zoning would not increase the demand for energy and natural resources over what is currently allowed. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and nafural resources are: None are proposed since this is currently a non-proiect action. . _� R C�� N 3 7 2003 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHUODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING 10415 — 147`h Avenue SE Renton, WA 98059 January 30, 200�'3 Donald Erickson, AICP City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Bales Annexation and Prezone Dear Mr. Erickson: I know that all written comments were due January 29, 2003. I would like to submit these comments and hope that they are included in the annexation file. The first comment deals with school impact fees. If this area were annexed into Renton, some of the students from these new homes would be attending schools in the Issaquah School District. Currently, the City of Renton is collecting school impact fees for single-family residences that are lower than the rest of the school district. Apollo, Maywood and Liberty,are becoming (if not already overcrowded) overcrowded by the influx of new development within the City Limits. Renton should seriously think about raising the amount of impact fees it collects for the Issaquah School District to the level collected by other jurisdictions. , The second issue is traffic on surrounding roads. Currently, King County has declared the East Renton Plateau Area"RED" when it comes to concurrency issues. The roads (SE 128`�', 156`h) are being inundated with developments and extra traffic. These proposed 34 new homes would add an extra entrance to an already over-crowded SE 128"'. What does the City of Renton proposed to do about all the increased traffic on SE 128`h? How does the City of Renton proposed to mitigate the increased traffic to those _ individuals who already live in the area and have �o travel on SE 128`h� Thank you in advance to allowing me to comment on this proposed annexation. Sincerely, �� Claudia Donnelly Cc: Four Creeks UAC Issaquah School Board . ,• _:-. � . CIT �F �NTON.. . �. . ..LL. � Office of the City Attorney , � ' " � `Lawrence J.:Warren. Jesse Tanner,IvIayor � � . " January 24, 20.03� . . � � . . "� � � .. . � � � . '��+��3�f��b. �` � � ' , . , 7ay Bales - President� � � - ��i� �� J�� .' � . :. Seaport Dozing&,Deyelopment, Inc. , . � - P .0.:BOx 3015. . �UIa.:1�11VG-DIVIaSIQ(� � ` '. . . .. Renton;WA 98056� .. ' . - , , . . . _ . : Dear Ntr. Bales: . ,: > . . , : , . . , . , , ... " I have rec�i�red a�eport from the City of Re�tc�n inspectois that you are shll.doing business at the . , . . . . property genierally located at 1��221.SE 1�8 :St, Renfon:`=,As you undoubted�y will,recall;.we � ' : negoti�ted a Resti�ctive Co�enant ruiuung with the land tliat�ou�woul�cease doing busmess 19 � � „months a�er�the Co�enant was signed;buf no.�ater than 7anuary.l, 2003 �ou need_tb , .. -:. �,:`immediately honor.t�at Covenant . ;� r .,; . . �. . .: :. ,, . ; •�ou should>also b.e�aware that Paragra,ph�o�the Cov�nant,allows,�the Gity.of�eriton; as well.as : : , :others,�o enforce.the Covenant.and �eek an�inJunction Zf_su��an i�junctio�n is gi-a.nted,'.then, , . - ' under tha.t same ar a . the C�ty n£;Renton is:entitled to re�over;its reasonable a:ttorriey's fees. � P -:� l�h, ; .". 'and costs �: . ; . . . . , . - � Finally, acccsrding to Paragraph V o£�lie Cpvez�t,-�rou ar�to�iotify King Gnunty_that you have � ..� . ab�:ndonecl the:concilttona.l use pernut o�#k�e p�pperty no later tfian Ja��ary_1;;2003: Would you � : =°.please provrde the�undersign�d,v�th'eYidence.that�ou have notified Ktng Coun�y of the : � ' , � :. abandonment of#he conditio��l,use pemut;kan��:furth+�r ha.ve d�scontlniied use of the property.' . � -, , ` � . . « " . . . . : � ; �. '� If�`do.not hear fi'om ynu, I unll p�es�m�that ou.are still o eratin on;the r`o e and wil�have � . . Y ;P g P ,P rt3': . ,,, the uispectors o�eck one tast time 1f ttiey firid that,-yo�t.a�`e sh11 operating on the property;:�theri I � , . ' intend to file an action seekuig'an injun�tion.to�orce y�u�o obey#he Covenant and.will seek.the ' _ ° °City's cos�s a�d attorney's fees:�or�he'�ecessity�f doing so T:�do not�wish:to waste the City's" � , , . _ , ,, . . . , . : . . . - money.and`time;.nor yours,but:do intend to see th�t t'�e.Covenant is'honored as�iegotiated. . ,. . . . . _ . ,- , _„ ; . . ,. .,. _ V . . , ery y.yotu's, .. , . : � , ;. . , ... . . . , . . Lawrence�7. W: en . �` ., � � � . ,. . , . . , . . . - City Attorriey . � . LJW:ttnj. , . _ . . . . , _ cc:.� Dennis J:Perlcins _ : _ , Linda M Yoiings � : Neil Watts , ' _ ".. , Bob�Arthur . , . , . � , Jay Cdvington . . T10.38:01 . : Post Office Box 626-Renton,.Washington 98057-(425)255-8678/.FAX(425)255-5474. : �` � 1�1 1 O.� �This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consurrier A H E A D,O F T FI E C U RV E _ � : _% -- �� ,� � �� ♦ � �" ♦ ��,N�� BALES ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARING RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ANNEXATION ELECTION & CONSIDERATION OF R-5 PREZONING JANUARY 27TH,2003 The City is in receipt of a request from a number of property owners in the 15000 block of SE 128th Street, for an Election Annexation for the 8.52-acre Bales annexation site abutting Renton's eastern boundary. The subject site is within the City's Potential Annexation Area and is designated as Residential Rural on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Because the site currently has County R-4 zoning, it is the City's intent to prezone it R-5, 5 units per net acre. City zoning would be applied at the time the site comes into the City. The site would accommodate approximately 34 single-family dwelling units under R-5 zoning. The annexation,site appears to have reasonable boundaries. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. 152°a Avenue SE, if extended, would define its western boundary and 156�` Avenue SE, if extended, would define its eastern boundary. The site is relatively flat and not known to have any critically sensitive areas. The site contains fiye parcels and four detached single-family dwellings. It also houses a heavy equipment repair facility(Sea- Port Dozing and Development,Inc.)on its western parcel. A resolution authorizing the holding of an annexation election for the subject site is before the City Council this evening. The Council will also consider prezoning for this site. Council Hearing Handout Ol-27-03\ PROPOSED BALES ANNEXATION�;.,_�iCAL�ANALYSIS CALCULATION SHEE' . : .� Units Po ulation AV Existin dev. 4 10 $1,230,000 Full dev. 34 85 $8,840,000 Assumptions: 2.5 persons/household $260,000 1 existing house will not redevelop �F3�;v�riiies::::::�:�`::�: Total revenues � Existin Full Rate Existing::::;:;:::::::::$�;5��s54� Re ular le $4,010 $28,822 3.26036 Full��:��:��:;�$42;Oa8;��; Excess le $116 $831 0.09397 State shared revenues Rate er ca Existin Full Li uor tax $3.30 $33.00 $280.50 Li uor Board rofits $5.29 $52.90 $449.65 Fuel tax- roads $14.45 $144.50 $1,228.25 Fuel tax-arterials $6.76 $67.60 $574.60 MVET $0.00 $0.00 Cam er excise $0.00 $0.00 Criminal 'ustice $0.91 $9.10 $77.35 Total $307.10 $2,610.35 � Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existin Full Real estate excise" $54.69 $546.90 $4,648.65 Utilit tax*` $133.00 $532.00 $4,522.00 Fines &forfeits* $17.13 $171.30 $1,456.05 Total $1,250.20 $10,626.70 * Per capita ** Per housing unit- based on $2,220 annual utility billing �G��'�`�'�'`�`�'� Total on oin costs �i�ts:::::::':':;:;?::::s:::: 9:......9.............. �� Per ca ita Existin Full Existing::s:::;:':;:';�:$�:;t�01::�3: Contracted Services Full;:::;:;�:�;�:�42;2��t3;1?�;? Alcohol $0.23 $2.27 $19.30 Public Defender $3.13 $31.34 $266.39 � Jail $7.19 $71.92 $611.32 Subtotal $105.53 $897.01 " Court/le al/admin. $50.96 $509.60 $4,331.60 Parks maintenance* $14.90 $149.00 $1,266.50 Police $270.00 $2,700.00 $22,950.00 Road maintenance** $0.00 $1,715 Fire`** $1.25 $1,537.50 $11,050.00 Total $5,001.63 $42,210.11 '`See Sheet Parks FIA ** See Sheet Roads FIA *** Rate per$1,000 of assessed valuation (FD#25 contract) Net fiscal impact Existing:::':::::::::::::::::�5��;�'1: Full�s:�:�::�:::::::::��`1:5'1:��7 :��:e:�tii�i�;costs;: Parks acquisition &development (from Sheet Parks FIA): $20,244.70 _ ..........:................. Other one-time costs: $0.00 Total one-time costs: `:::::::::::: .2�;�44s70: �...�...:.... , �' � � '" Y` PARKS ACQUISTION AND MAINTENANCE COST CALCULATION SHEI Needs: Acquisition of land for new neighborhood &community park Development of new neighborhood&community parks Maintenance of neighborhood &community parks Assumptions: $60,000 per acre for land acquistion $125,000 per acre for development(both neighborhood &community parks) $6,000 per acre to maintain neighborhood parks $7,000 per acre to maintain community parks 1.2 acres/1,000 for neighborhood park(LOS in Comprehensive Park Plan) 1.1 acres/1,000 for community park(LOS in Comprehensive Park Plan) 85 population after 10 years (projected growth) 34 housing units after 10 years (projected growth) $530.76 per single family unit mitigation fees 30 New single family units Per capita annual and one-time costs: One-time Costs: Acquisition: Neighborhood: 1 * 1.2/1000*$60,000= $72.00 Community: 1 '` 1.1/1000* $60,000= $66.00 Development: Neighborhood: 1 * 1.2/1,000 *$125,000= $150.00 Community: 1 * 1.1/1,000 `$125,000= $137.50 Total one-time costs: $425.50 Mitigation fees: New units* $530.76= $15,922.80 Acquisition &development costs minus mitigation fees: $20,244.70 Ongoing costs : (1 ' 1.2/1,000" $6,000) + (1 * 1.1/1,000*$7,000) _ $14.90 (park maintenance) _, � � � - CITY OF 12E1l�TOl�T PI�AleTNIl�G/BUILDING/PUBLIC VVORI�S 1VIEMORANDUM DATE: January 24,2003 TO: �o� �r'c�.son,E��_,tSi' FROM: Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility STAFF CONTACT: Raymond van der Roest(x-7392) SUBJECT: Proposed Bales Annexation,NE 4"' St. & 155`�'Ave. SE 1. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? The Bales Annexation does not present any significant problems for the Surface Water Utilities Division. The.area is in the Lower Cedar River drainage basin. Within a quarter mile down stream the runoff from the area contributes to a protected wetland. Any future development of the area would be subject to level 2-flow control per the 1998 King County Surface Water Desigu Manual. 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure ar service provision to the area? We are not aware of any existing problems or deficiencies in the surface water drainage inside the proposed annexation. The property fi•ontage is along 4`�' St. NE and any development project will be required to provide frontage improvements. Currently the frontage consists of an asphalt shoulder and a grass lined ditch with driveway culverts. The future drainage features will include concrete vertical curb and gutters with catch basins and storm drain sewers. Storm system improvements along NE 4t�' St. will need to be sized to convey runoff from this area and any upstrea�n tributary area. Note that the 4��' St. right-of- way at this location is already within city limits. Another observation is that the 24" diameter corrugated metal culvert under NE 2°d St., down stream of the proposed annexation, inay have to be improved or replaced when the proposed annexation is developed into a plat. 3. Does this amiexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? The annexation would be a logical extension of storm water facilities as the area drains across :p the city limits. The annexation is upstream of the plats named Amber Wood and Maple Wood. H:\File Sys\SWA-Surface Water Section Administration\SWA 26-Annexations\Bales Annexation\BalesAnnexMEMO.doc\Rv\tb I?f I - I s — � 1 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the city would incur as a result of the annexation? The area is within the City of Renton surface water utility service area. Therefore,the City of Renton would be responsible for service and maintenance of existing and future public stonn drains in the proposed annexation area. Currently, there appear to be no public storm drain systems within the proposed annexation area. 5. Would the city assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? No,the proposed annexation does not include any existing publicly owned utilities that would become a new responsibility for the City of Renton. 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of city services?(If yes, please indicate on the attached map.) No. General recommendation and comments: none. H:\File Sys\SWA-Surface Water Section Administration\SWA 26-Annexations\Bales Amiexation\BalesAnnexMEMO.doc\Rv\tb :1` a��—�� ; _ -- - ---- , � U1�Y �� + � � �� NOTICE OF APPLICATIOIV A Mester Appllcetion has been fliad end eeeepted wlth the Oeveiopmant Servleea Dlvlslan of tho City of Fienton. The following brlefiy deacrlbes the eppllcation and the necessery Public Approvels. PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA•03-004,A,PZ,ECF/BALES ANNEXATION AND PREZONE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton,in response to a 10%Petition to Mnex,Is proposing to authorize an annexation election for the proposad Bales Annexatlon. The subject site is an 8.52-acre area generally � located between NE 4°i Street(SE 128°1 St)on the north and SE 130'"Street(it exlended)on Ihe south,152n0 Avenue SE (If eMended)on the west,antl 155'"Avenue SE(it extended)on the east.It ahuts tha Ciry of Renton boundary on its north i and west. The proposed City zoning for tha su6ject annexatlon site is R-5 Zone,allowing up to 5 dweliing units per net acre. This is comparable to King Countys current R-4 zoning which ellowa up to 4 dwelling units per ra oss acre. A , � concunent prezone from the Countys R•4 Zone to Renton's R•5 Zone is also heing processed as a part of lhis application. Future zoning woutd allow up to approximately 34 single-Iamily detached dwellings on lhe 8.52•ecre annexation site. PROJEC7 LOCATION:The proposed ennexation is tocated on the south side of NE 4�Street SE across the street trom the Morrison AnnexatloNMaureen Subdivlslon,west o(White Fence Ranch.It abuts the Ciry of Renton to its noM along , NE4lh Street and to its wast. � PUBLIC APPROVALS: Mnaxatlon,Prezone,and Environmental Revlew lar Prezone � i , ' !�'I � !th St� � � �S 1 .8. E T i' a o ��:. �'�: �S �.—� i� :�;_ . , � '� �'� "`�� y 1 -f o � F��, w.y�• ` 1 � �r � � � �,: ��. �� ` �J� /tl ' Comments on the above epplication must be submided In wrlting to�onald Erickaon,AICP,Development Services � ' Dlvision,1055 South Grady Wey,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on Jenuary 29'",2003. II you have questlons about lhis � ' proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notlficatlon by mail,contact Don Erickson at(425) � 430-6587. Myone who suhmits wrltten comments will autometicaliy become a party of record and will be notified ot any . decision on this proJect. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: January 15,20D3 i NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 15,2003 DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: January 15,2003 Ii you would like to be made e paAy of record to receive further Inlormatian on this proposed pro�ect,complete lhis form and retum to:City o1 Renton,Develapment Planning,1055 South Grady Way,Ranton,WA 98055. File NoJName: LUA-03-004,A,PZ,ECF;BALES ANNEXATION AND PREZONE NAME: � ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: NOTICE OF APPUCATION.doc � - ��L�ra ��°;�—��F ��TAF�Y PU�LI� CERTIFICATION STATE oF WASH�NG i 0� CO�At�ISSION EXPIf�ES JUi�lE 29, 20�J3 I � �� , hereb certif that co ies of the , Y Y � r above document were posted by�e��_conspic s laces on e the described property on � , - `�}'a'�G�-��6 � — Signed: ' � ATTEST:Subsc ' ed and sworn before me,a otary Public,in and for e State of Washington residing i�`��.P�r�5�� ,on the � . �`� day of �- d �RILY�! KAII�CHEFF �tY RPPOtNTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 CIT�' OF 1tEI�1TON DEPAItT1VIENT' OF PI.A1�iNINGBiJILDIIiTG/I'UBLIC WOItI�S MEMOI�l�LTl�i DATE: January 16,2003 TO: Larry Wanen,City Attorney FROM: Neil Watts,Development Services Director SUBJECT: RES1'RIC'TIVE COVENANT IPUNNING WITH THE LAND INVOLVIIVG GEOItGE BALES A1VD SEA-POItT DOZING A1VID DEVELOPIVIENT,INC. Please refer to the attached Restrictive Covenant dated June 8, 2001. This Covenant, under Section V Iiestrictioae, states "George Bales as owner and Sea-Port Dozing and Development, Inc., as tenant, hereby covenant that Sea-Port Dozing &Development, Inc. will operate the business pernutted under Conditional Use Permit L98AC041 at,but not above,its current level of intensity for a period of not more than nineteen (19) months, or, no later than January 1, 2003 and George Bales as owner will not permit any operation under Conditional Use Pernut L98AC041 beyond that time. As of January 16, 2003 evidence has been obtained that shows George Bales is allowing Sea-Port Dozing and Development,Inc.to be operating in violation of the Restrictive Covenant. Under Section VI ENP'Og2CEIVIENT, I believe the City, through your office, should enter an Order that would enjoin George Bales as owner and Sea-Port Dozing and Development, Inc. thus preventing any further violations of this Covenant. Please advise of your actions. File/memobale ' ;5��'�'/��.'�r�� k;i.,�..�.. � �.-4 i=_ E_y'�+ : '�-1 r�2 t•7 ,. F'�_�t=' 1 P1�)�I F•�i� 4 �?t_:�: £ �� €-, i fi�-. ► After recording rc;turn to: � WARREN, Bt'�RBER & FtJNTES, P.S. �.o. Box �?s R.ENT(�N, WASHINGTON 980�7-06Z6 DQCUNiENT TITI,E: Restrictive Covenant REF�RENCE NUMBER 4F RELATED D�CUM�NT: ?�3/A CRAI�tT4R�S}: Bales, C�eor,�e, and Sea-Part Dozing& Development, Inc. ADL7ITIONAL GFtANTOR(S) ON PA�E: N/A . GRANTEE{S}: City of Renton, Burnstead Construetion Company, King County . AI�DITIQI\AL GR.ANTEE(S.} ON PAGE: NiA ABBREVIATED LEGAI: DESCRIPTI4N. ADDITIQNAL LEGAL DESCRIPTIt�N ON PAGE(S}: ASSESSOR'S TAX PARCEL NUMBER(S): RESTRICTIVE CQVENANT � RUNrIIN� WITH THE LANU X. DATE This Coti�enant is voluntarily entered into on this�day of June, 2Q01, II. PARTI�S The ��v�xer of the praperty irnposing this Restrictive Cavenant is Gearge I�ales_ Ge�rge . Bale�s has as a tcnant an that propert} Sea-Port Dozing �,I7cvclapment, inc. The parti�s;o be r--�----^-,_......�-.- , . . be�iefited by this Covenant are tlxe Gity ofRenton, Rumstead Construction Cotnpiny, �nd �Cing County. . yII. �'ACTS George Ba1es and Sea-Port Dozin,g &c_De}�clopmcnt, Inc. received �.report and decisic�n.,, .,dat�ed a��d t�1i�'s_mitted Marcl� 20., 2.941 for�pNproval ofa hame industry to legalize and op��ratc RES"rRICTIVE COVENANT—Page 1 . ; , h![�':'�— ! `._ —�� '� ::�� Ahf _ �,POF.'T'D�-t< I N�� • ��'✓ ">i i�3� I c1 � ; ' . , �'r-'� ��i z �1 ti.� storagc and maintcnlnce of hcavy equipt��ent �t proPerty located at 15221 SE 128`" Strect, Renton, Washin�ton. That approval was timcly Appealed by the Cit}' ofRentan ancl RurnStead Construction Compa�ly. This Govcn�nt is imposed upon the land to settie the differences between the parties and to allow thc ow•ner and tenant of the land to enjoy the.benefits of the use of the Conditional Use Permit for a period of time. IV. LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1'his Coven�nt is imposed upon property commonly known as 15221 SE 128�h Street, � Renton, �Vashington, legally described as follows: The henef;ted property of Burnstead Gonstruction Company is the Maplewood E,iates plat lc�ally dcscribcd in Schcdule A, attached hereto. V. RESTRTCTTON Georgc Bates as o�vner and Se�-Part i��zin�. & Development, .Inc., as tenant, hereby . . _.... . ... _._...._.. _ ...__ __�, covenant that Se�-Port. Dozinb & Devclopment, Inc. will operate the business perrnitted under Condilion�l Usc Pcrnut,L2�AC0 :.at,.but not_ahove its,current.I.c�..c,.1..qf.,intensity for a period of . . _ .. ...... . . _ ..... .. �� .,....__�....7. . .. �.... .. . . i►��Q.}tt,. (l9� � not more tlian ei�ee+� {-}$) months, or, not later than January 1, 2003,:and George Ba1es as owncr wilf n�t rem�it any �reration under Conditional Use�Perrnit L98AC041 beyond that time. This Covenant shall run with thc land, shall touch and concern the Iand and use of ihe land, and � : will bc applicablc to any hcirs, succcssors, Izter owners or users of the property, unless othenuise : �vaivcd by thc bcnefited pzrties. George Bales and Sea-Port Dozin� & Development, Inc. also cavenant t�iat they will notify King County tl�at fhcy have abandoned thc ConditionAl Use Permit at a date no later than JanuAry 1, 2003. . � RESTRIGTIVE COVENANT— Page 2 • : ! t t+-�'�'- i =•�s:�',-° �=s•=� :.�S i=c t�; •='-'f'_ < �i R T Z7 s:?'�:' t !�, 4 R 7 w��f i� F•. ci..� � / _ VY. �NFORCEMEIYT This Co��enant i�iiay be enfc�rcec3 b;J Eitirnstead Construction Company, ttze Cit�- of RPnton, or King County or an}� of the successors in interest to those pnrtics, including any purchaser of the plat of 1�,�laplewood Estates awned by Burnste�d Constnietian Company, any portir�n thereaf, or the later owners af�ny portian of that plat or any lot therein. In the event � , Geor�e Bales and/ar Sea-Port Doa.ing & I.�evelopnae.nt, Inc. are found to have materially � br�achcd this Covenant by faiting ro ecase �Perations un�er ihe Gonditional Use Pertnit on or €zefi�r� 3ant�ary l, 2003,then the persan seeking cnforccmcnt of this Cavenant shall Uc ciititled tu �n Urder enjoinin� fiirther vioi�tions of this Covenant. The prevailing party in any such enforcement action sh�tlI be entitled to recovery of its reasonable attorncys fees and costs, payable by the non-prevailing party or parties. VII.ANNEXATION �'�eorge $ates as owner af the proper�ies upan which these Covenants are imposed, does indicate that he wishes ta develop the prc�perty,subseqttent tc� its c�se undcr thc subjcct Conditionai Use Permit,as residential housing. Ge�rge Bflles has indic�tcd he wauld like ta develop that housing within the City af Rentor�and thc City of Renton has indicated that it wauld be iriterested in annexing this property to the City. 'S�III.T3SE OF C(1VEI�IANT ` This Covenant sha��be filed with the praperty recards of Kin� County, by filin�with the � Couniy Auditor, and, will �e presented to King County as part af ihc settlemez�t of the pent�in� , RESTI2ICTIVF COVENA.NT'—Page 3 ; h`fl`:'— 1 ��--4+';? �i•=� :SS At9 "` �,F''i iF-'T Dli:' I Iaf; . / '.;-i r�_iS.l Ff -�' _-- � F'- �_s� a}�peals brought by thc City of Renton 1nd Btirnstead Construction Cornpany against George Bales and Sea-Port Dozin� � Uevelopment, Inc. under Permit Numher L98AC041. � Uated this � da� of June, 2001. SEA-1'ORT 07ING & DEVELOPMENT, NC. By: . ge es P esident � By: . or�e afes, s Owner � STATE OF WASHINGTUN ) )ss COUTtTY t�F KING ) � I certify that I lcnotiv or havc satisfactory evidenee that George Bales is the Pers�n who � appeared hefore me, and who signed this instrument,on oath stated that he was authorized to � execute the instrument and ac{:nowledged it individually and as the President of Sea-Port Dozing& Develop�nent,Inc, to be the frec�nd voluntlry act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned.in the instrument. <�� Dated: This�day of�y,2001. � ' `�:..�� -` �y�� M' (�S��'� ....��.�, i -��,�',` pN ,��,�� . _� . ,`'�'o�`�O�dP�; � Notary Public in and for the State - "� ' � '= � of��Vashington, residing at��. � � `; '�Ug�,� ;� : . . ��,I`'>'��'''t�24-�,'' � My app�intment expires: 2�-I p � �,�,,.� _ '�, oFwa .- . `��...•��. sr.c:Vn�leslcity�sca-pnrt d��zing�restrictive coven;u�t2 RESTRIC'TiVE COVENANT—Page 4 �� - 1 =-��'<_ �+�- - 55 �-'t!, '�.,_r T ��,\ � ... __ ._ _ . . . . 1 i rinc If�i.; • 7 �'Ei5? �� a.... .e.. ......� u.u....t. u�u�a.L� ,.-� P_ t3+: May 10 O1 02- 49� �u�'n�t,E��d COr15t. �25 996-3�r90 �'�' �,. - .�1C.�G0'I'IIT�..E 1NSdJ�NC`E COR�P.I ' OTdct No.: 423888 F'L.A'�'C�'RTTPICt�TE ' �� (Cam�nuc� � IEGALb�SCRII�I'IQN �MRPG ECNotlf� ESTA TES ) / PARCSL X� THE i�TES1' HA.LF dF THE 1fiEST FlALF OF TFiE NORTNNEST QUAR2ER OF SECTYON 14, T�WNSHIY � 23 NoRTH. RAr7GS 5 F.AST, wll.i.AMETTE H'ERTDiAN, �2t XI2iG coQNT�C, 1fiASHIi•IGToN; EYCEPT THA� POATxON T�EREop OF TF� NORTB 5�4.00 r'EET LYIN6 �Sx os Tx� �A.ST LiNE OF TIiE WEST 30 FEET OF SAID SUSDIVISIDN; . '#CiD EXCEPT T�iHT P�RTIOIi IHERE�F LYING W22SiZN S� EAST 2�5.00 �ET oiF 7HE SOUTH 468.00 FR�T oF �HE NORTR 968.�o FEEr eF S�ID StJBDIVISICN; l�HD EXCEPT TgAT PoRTIon TH$�oF �oNDF.t�r� II� KING C4BNTX SUPERIOR COURT cAuSE � NUHT3ER 632253 £OR S�UTHEAST 1282t� STREE?. � PATtC.EL B:. THE EAST HALF oF THE �PEST fiALF OF THE NaRTHWBST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NOR�, RAt3GS 5 EAST, �LLAHET2� HER�bI�N, xN KIMG cc3�rrrr, WASHir��TON;. EXCEPT THE EAST Ii3f_LF �F T21E NDATBEAST QOAFZI'ER OF THE N�RTf3NEST QUARTER OF, TFiE • NORTHW�ST (3UARTSR; AND EXC�PT THE �AST 30 PEET OF SAID PRF�iT585 CON�TSXFD TO �IP1G COUNZY FOR ROAD; AND EXC'EPT 7.'F�2 PORTZON CONDEHNED IN KIPTG COl7N'!'Y SBPERZoR COURr CAUSE NUtiBER 632Z3�. � i � -� . 124th P� -----------�- ; L�J '—�--�\`.�."'--'-� � �� l--�� -...I a� � w �,��,.. Q � � ; ��.� � , . . � -� ,� � I > I .;,, � ' +, +, i __ •I '�,r-_r.._ _� ` � ^l'. _ - .. U '_'_ � �'__..__" . r— j . � h PI � I �� ---, , -� � � � � ---- �— _;�--�` . � h S t t h S t _ .._�-.._,�-.a- = S 1 �8 t h S t i -�--��-=_- _.!_ r ; �_ �'�� . MS��f ,�`��s' ---�_=--' -. �5 ;��.``�.��',� � r' i �-..___ �; �ti� �� i ��---� i... . (n �, �,�,�`�� --�- � �-----j i . , � ;�?;:� �� -----'---...� i � ., • ' ,�,_�� I i i ; - � 7� � �` :i,�x, � � /�� `�''k."kf•'�'�a-r a;''4�� --r--�--'^-- _� �� .. : � d S t ; `k;4� j , �,E , 1;�; , , .; �'F� NE 3 —L—�� _�t��, � ... �a I � �� i � � l- -- ��c �t-' ; ; — �.;, Ij�� i r-- .; � • . ' I' ;._..: � t � 2n St NE 2nd St SE 13 nd t - �- ' � . � i-:::.' , � �. —�—�_ _.J..-I".�_" (. i ,. f-'J ' '-�---._�`��'�:� �-�--- I�C� � , ...._ � r---_, � � ,� z j �---r-----�---i � �. � : � -- • . , � . w _.___-.. ..._ ' , : � -_..---------� ,....:! > � > (n C/� ; ; Q . � _,r- - , ; ' ' _� (n L � ��.� � ..`i l I.. ;. ' ; d- � O � T— .. I o --� ; _j �-�-��-- ��-: -�-, � __�_.;_� •,,j--i._,.; � � _y i i-� ; � � � � -+� i ; �- � "�� `� -r; � �:� .+� � �. •----�----- `-i' --' --- � � S t r-' . 1�i�___..-:!..._ .:-., �� d �I�� I�� 0 600 1200 z p �:� �ti"�Y o„f, �conomic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning -I . 72 0 0 ��' �O4 SueCazlson,Administrator � 1 ;+�. G.Del Rosazio �FNTO� 18 November2002 � / _/ I� �; ,; � CIT . .,RENTON „� j Planning/Building/PublicWorks Deparhnent � 7 e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator January 15,20Q�� Steve Beck 4735 NE 4th St. Renton,WA 98059 SUBJECT: Bales Annexation and Prezone � LUA-03-004,A,PZ,ECF � Dear Mr. Beck: The Development Planning Section of th� City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideratiori by the Environmental Review Committee on � � February 4, 2003.You will be notified 'if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at(425)430-6581, if you have any questions. Sincerely, ✓ Don Erickson Senior Planner cc: Irvin Leifer/Owner ;�� 1�� acceptance.do�055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N . �Thispapercontains50%recycledmateria1,30%postconsumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE � Annexation l�eview Fo�m R �TCLI1✓ED (X) Notice of Intent J,��B � �" �d�� UILDING DIVISION TO . �B�uilding� Surface Water Utility .�..�.�--,�;�_:;.. �Fire Water Utility �Parks Wastewater Utility �Police Transportation � Public Works IVlaintenance - Current Planning FROM . Economic Development, Neighborhoods &Strategic Planning SUBJECT : Proposed Bales Annexation Location . The parcel is located in the northwest quarter of the Northwest f�uarter of Section 14, Township 23 IVorth, Range 5 East, W.M, in King County. The given address for this annexation is 15325 SE 128�'Street, Renton, Date Circulated: Comments Due: General Information Area : 8.52 Acres Street length : N/A Assessed Value . N/A Estimated Population : 14 Current Uses Residential : 6 single family dwellings Commercial . Industrial . Public . Comp Plan Designat. . Residential Rural Future Uses: . Residential single-family homes Future Population . Unknown for this non-project action. R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department/Division: �v��),;nGv- 1. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? /Vv DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON- JAN 1 4 200� RECEIVED (Over) � 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? �� 3. Does this proposed annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? ��S' 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? �v��r� 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currentiy owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? �/�A 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the aitached map.) �r�rK General recommendation and comments: -; . �:� . � .. ., . , . , . ,`�� Signature: Date: ��f� 4� , �, __. ,>_.. - ._ .__ .. �I! f '�+ �.:J �•_i J t.i.. ..�_._�_-� Annexation Revie�v Forrn ��(�� .1 �.� JAN 15 2�03 (X) Notice of Intent � - e ; ; �-------- __ � TO . Building Surtace Water Utility � f ��'.. � , , � Fir� � Water Utility ------�' . Parks r Wastewater Utility Police Transportation Public Works Maintenance Current Planning FROM . Economic Development, Neighborhoods &Strategic Planning SIJ�JECT : Proposed �ales Annexation Location : The parcel is located in the northwest quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M, in King County. The given address for this annexation is 15325 SE 128'h Street, Renton. Date Circulated: �J �> Comments Due: General Information Area . 8.52 Acres Street length : N/A Assessed Value : N/A Estirnated Population . 14 Current Uses Residential : b single family dwellings Commercial : Industrial . Public : Comp Plan Designat. . Residential Rural Future Uses: : Residential single-family homes Future Population . Unknown for this non-project action. R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department/Division: r�'r•-� � l`"�✓ ;� ��-- 1. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? /V� .�- DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON . JAN 1 4 2�03 RECEIVED (Over) � 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? � ��::�� .. k �°;',�. 9� � �r� v� -� w� f�� a.��,�1�� a� a•�� _ � f.� �� y 3. Does this proposed annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? � 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? �l� � 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? /V� b. Would alternate boundaries create a more logicai annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the attached map.) /(1 -�� General recommendation and comments: �� Si nature: Date: l/ � 9 °� � � � ��a, , t-—,; , Annexation Review Form (X) Notice of Intent TO , Building Surface Water Utility Fire Water Utility � �C,i � Wastewater Utility Police Transportation Public Works Maintenance Current Planning FROM . Economic Development, Neighborhoods &Strqtegic Planning SUBJECT . Proposed Bales Annexation Location . _. The parcel is located in the northwest quarter of the Northwest , ' Qudrter of Section 14, Township 23 Norfh, Range 5 East, W:M, in King County. The given address for this annexqtion is 15325 � , SE 128"'Street, Renton. � Date Circulated: Comments Due: � General Information Area : 8.52 Acres Street length : N/A Assessed Value . N%A Estimated Population . 14 Current Uses � Residential : 6 single family dwellings Commercial . Industrial . Public . Comp Pian Designat. . Residential Rural Future Uses: . Residential single-family homes Future Population . Unknown for this non-project action, R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 r Reviewing Department/Division: " � 1. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? �� , �� . DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON . .lAN 1 4 2003 R�IVED 2, Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? �� G�� 3, Does this proposed annexation represent a logical e�ension of services provided by your department/division? �`� 4, V1/hat additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a resus+nf this annexa�on? d�� _ . , e , � ; : �.�� i��G� ;�a'az,�.;�/�..��'�� r,�� :��,�. _ _��- G�!/�� G�%�-��a0; ��Ze �� , � �� 6�,�� __. �_ �_ �,�'�� - a��►.�°�L�.�o , 5, Would the City assume ownership or responsibility fo f cilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Wouid new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? e �� , C-cr�� / - ��,�'��I�ZSC �` �2 �� c�� e� ��%Zc�--1,� �� 2� 1�� z3 �� , � G�r� ��-�C � 6, W uld alternate boundaries c ate a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the attached map.) �� General recommendation and comments: �G C%YY1/7�'7LG��L�/L� ��ti� �:ri'YIGf L�� l G�/�'7G, � �� . ��✓��{-�j ��i � �C ��i��c i�r,�o c-� � � c� � �� !�,�py�/ � � �C� G�-- � ` f �c.r�0 � � ��%7�- � 7`��D �G�'7l�! � � U�i`ll �i��vc�'� ��-k:eo � � s� � �c�a�� y-- o✓ �'� oLc-� �� =�o Signature: � � Q � ,�Date: �� .� �� o��. .. :, ��-� � � Annexation Review Form (X) Notice of Intent � �� . Building Surface Water Utility Fire Water Utility Parks. Wastewater Utility �,.�� Transportation �Public V1/orks Maintenance Current Planning � �-�I�� Economic Development, Neighborhoods &Strategic Planning { SUBJECT : Proposed Bales Annexation Location . The parcel is located in the northwest qudrter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M, in King County. Tfie given address for this annexation is 15325 SE 128"'Street, Renton. � Date Circulated: Comments Due: General Information Area : 8.52 Acres Street length . N/A Assessed Value . N/A Estimated Population . 14 Current Uses Residential : 6 single family dwellings Commercial . Industrial , _ Public , � Comp Plan Designat. . Residential Rural Future Uses: . Residential single-family homes Future Population . Unknown for. this non-project action. R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department/Division: 1. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your � department/division? DEVELOPMENT PLAIVNING � � CITY OF RE�VTON . JAN i 4 2003 �a� I �'22-� R��IVED � � 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? 3. Does this proposed annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Wouid new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the attached map.) General recommendation and comments: Signature: Date: �, t ��1 .. �� Annexation lteview Form Jq� 1 7 .2003 - �X� NOtICe Of IC�tel�t ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING TO . Building Surtace Water Utility Fire Water Utility Parks , Wastewater Utility Police Transportation � Pubfi 1N'o ks fUlainter�qnc (Sh�p�r� Current Planning FROM , Ecoriomic Development, Neighborhoods &Strategic Planning ' SUBJECT, . Proposed Bcales Annexation Location . The parcel is located in the northwest quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M, in King County. The given address for this'annexation is 15325 SE 128"'Street, Renton. Date.Circulated: Comments Due: General Information � Area . 8.52 Acres Street length : N/A Assessed Value . N/A Estimated Population . 14 , Current Uses Residential : 6 single family dwellings Commercial . Industrial . Public . � Comp Plan Designat. . Residential Rural Future Uses: . Residential single-family homes Future Population . Unknown for this non-project action. R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 ' dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department/Division: �� //��l�J T��8� l. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? �� ' pEVE��A'�N`�ON,N� . 1AN 1 � 2�a� �ECEIVED (over> ', .- 2, Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? ---��j� / 3. Does this proposed annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? �. 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? ,� .��-�� , ��Lt,�d ��2��'-e��, -��.r�c�� d.*y'�/ ��e� �d Z.� C�"0 - D �vG"/"V�/��iQ. �v4% r- '�rr/ � � �0 � yi 6'�"` ' ��7�� Q�'Z�Lo� �GG�� L�� ' GL cG�"`-�-``��y�� , 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? � b. Would aiternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (if yes, please indicate on the aitached map.) � General recommendation and comments: Sign Date: �� ,) Annexation IZevievv Form (X) Notice of Intent TO . Building Surtace Water Utility Fire � 1Na er,,U�fili.ty Parks Wastewater Utility Police Transportation � Public Works Maintenance Current Planning FROM . Economic Development, Neighborhoods &Strategic Planning SUBJECT : Proposed Bales Annexation Location : The parcel is located in the northwest quarter of the Northwest 6�uarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M, in King County, The given address for this annexation is 15325 SE 128"'Street, Renton. Date Circulated: Comments Due: �� _ General Information Area : 8.52 Acres Street length : N/A Assessed Value . N/A Estimated Population : 14 Current Uses Residential . 6 single family dwellings Commerciai . Industrial : Public ; Comp Plan Designat. : Residential Rural Future Uses: ' : Residential single-family homes Future Population . Unknown for this non-project action. R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department/Division: v"�G✓ ��k 1. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? lC�s- 235-�i��o, `'ro vs�'l Q.tnnv,c�hov� cinr;a iS u�-�lul� 11s� �1 _I b UJ a V�✓ �irJi�- a�e c� o � �� (J�t;y�,, �,J�.,�.al�-i'$°� G(1 nkG c� �a �d '� db'�cu N c� ��d�� ` DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTOiV.- � �v� � ce,►/�a.. , ��,. . �.e��l.��mer►� —� JAN 1 4 200� RECEIVED (Over) 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? N� �- C�c�G�� U� 0 � `l d 3. Does this proposed annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? �� 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currentiy owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the attached map.) General recommendation and comments: c�;,t a,l�, G � ,� I��w D�� a� -� Ce�a��- o� �t�►'� �` � ,�c� �et Je� �iYd�pc�o� d ea1r.��rn c,�l� '� ctr+n e,�^-L=,� a✓e� � � \1 . . Pi�foa✓� . a Si nature: �� Date. � 2a� 2� 3 g ��/ �� U�� '' � Annexation Review Form (X) Notice of Intent TO . Building Surface Water Utility Fire Water Utili Parks � Waste�:vuatat�er Uti�,ty Police Transportation . - � �Public Works Maintenance Current Planning � � FROM . Economic Development; Neighborhoods &Strategic Planning . SUBJECT . Proposed Bales Annexation "Location� . , The parcel is located in the_northwest quarter of the Northwest -� � � � � Quarterof Section 14, Township 23 North, �Range 5 East, V1I.M, in King County. The given address for this annexation is 15325 � SE 128"'Street, Renton. Date Circulated: Comments Due: d � � General Information , _ . . , - � - Area . 8.52 Acres . . . � Street length : N/A Assessed Value , N/A Estimated Population . 14 Current Uses Residential ,: b single family dwellings Commercial . Industrial . � � � - � Pubiic , Comp Plan Designat. ; Residential Rural Future Uses: . ...Residential single-family homes __ Future Population . Unknown for this non=project action. R-5 � zoning would allow approximately 34 ... -� dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department/Division: f�TC l. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? � DEVELOPMENT p�qNN��G , CITY OF RENTON _ � . � JAN 14 2003 - . , . _ ' - � RECEI!/Ep (over) � � 2, Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? �/ ��c D 3, Does this proposed annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? �/�� j��,�� G��--�.�� ,��z,�lr �:i��i��j.��?�/� T�//�`�i �o�i��u� D�� ✓D��, 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? ��L�� G �� /G7T/.��`s ��G'1�,�� /s��'��'�^e��"� �yt�//`�. 5, Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or - managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? �_ j� �yY�j��, f �=�e� �� ✓��, 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the aitached map.) �� General recommendation and comments: i�/� �/�l.o� �1B ✓�S �� , ° �� . Sig ature: D e: CtTY OF RENTON Amnexation Review Form a E c E i v E � " (X) Notice of Intent �qN � 5 2002��, BUILDING DIVISION TO . Building Surface Water Util'ity Fire Water Utility Parks Wastewater Utility Police Transportation Public Works Maintenance Current Planning FROM . Economic Development, Nelghbofioods&Strategic Planning SUBJECT . Proposed Bales Annexation Location . The parcel is located in the norfhwest quarter of the Northwest 6�uarter of Section 14,Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M, in King County. The given address for this annexation is 15325 SE 128"'Street, Renton. Date Circulated: . Comments Due: 2 General information Area : 8.52 Acres Street length : N/A . ��'O Assessed Value : N/A ��G � Estimated Population . 14 �'1.� o�'• Current Uses �p' � n��s� Residential : 6 single famlly dweliings �"o Commercial . �c��s� Industr�al . _ Publlc , Comp Plan Designat. : Residential Rural Future Uses: : Residential single-family homes Future Population . Unknown for this non-project action. R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department Divislon: _ �T'ra Hsvo+�"�E�-�o n sv S�c�s�t S 1. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your � department/division? � �o, To BvD�d �he n��d �rdrr�-� a<<ess o�F�,�v�� sf��e-f' DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ��K �L2 �f'n posQd aHHelc a�h�f� a{''ea CITY OF RENTON. e�et�eloPs-:c� -�� -�u�arQf �K'��cc�a-Fe_' �.,ccrss '.'JAN 1 4 2003 SQlrv�n� �e�h�tex�roic. ahea -{a be� pti��ilcc� �; " '-.,: 9 e RECEIVED b� l�v sa.�o �4�e�ke. /1��ae�� l�l�� Lour�". �o�e�� , . 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? ye5. '�oac(wa.r w�d�6.f L�.e�b ar�.d ��,e�er� srlew�(lt ano� s�ree�'/��t.-E-ra� �iz�' ►M�ti�' G�-�, o.�' �e,�'�-� s-�akcl a rrds c�v K o T' e x�s�' a lokq �+t 5 o uT.r� St a�e �'� !U� 4�F� S�rc�'�"' 2 6�.c ff�h� �-e a�k�e.x 2-fi o� s t,-��e. �l 3, Does this proposecl annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? � . 1e5� 4. What additlonal facillties or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a resuft of this annexation? , ,4�ft�owa.� Tva►.sp�w'I�'a�� Sy��e,�x ��a� ev��(d ko�E- d� reg�er�u�.::� i��-cc.�p�.�t �,a� 2K�N.SI.D.n � �11� 3�d Gok✓�' -�h-4ro� �a-� f+tGw� 1+��-�c�K� ,. . . . i . � veacCwars c�c-f•t<<��te,.p�opo,Se.� aKhc.�c��Zo�. s�-l-.e wok�d bs. r��v�c(�t� •-b a✓bt dia�� esr o�o'� /V��{•�, �� Q ,t1� 3rd Cou►-'f ex�CHSeoh a�d ,k��v.•a( vpadwaYs Wo(.!.(d b� d� Tr4e C�CPC�ttG e-� �ew d�v��o�Ok,�a.'f'a�ed�ar ex�s�rk5 I°r.op�r�f-Y�et�kGvS. 5, Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? . NoJ w�-K� ��ar� -� -��-Kspa�l��a� �acef a�-t�s � v�s�r,ksrbrl�-�+ess� ov _ � _ hGu� a�r�GA��w�"s oY� �dke�.�ses • 3 , ,<<� � . 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City �� services? (If yes, please indicate on the attached map.) � . .�o. _ General recommendation and comments: T�� T'v2ksPot,-E'a{ro�. Sys-�r�+�s D� vrsiak �ia.$ �to Lov�ce�rr�-s .I�e�rard�H �l��.�e_� or hof'-��s ��a�� -r�He�c��t'dv� oec.u�S, � ��;;:. .. �-,�_, •t �: -•�;;". . .�z�.. .�;' ' '4 . •�`. :�*.q'::' ' . . - 4. ; , t . . ' f- . . . 1�• . .�L .�l'- `r;_a ly�.�1� ;3 :ti•�►. `^ . �. �.s� . .�..� �p �I `.`� 't� �'�:. '�'��' . �,\� , i. �ti � � i . , . . ... ;��; ,• � • :1 - ;.��. :�%—. ,.��, . � �'' � �� A � �,�. � � ' � + i� 'i _ � .�l�•�•`•r� �� ..�•,�� 1�� _ . .• ..1� i .�,, Signature: _��'. '�� Dafe: � 5��' 0�3�� • • i ��.••. .` �!�s�t'•' ti,�� ,:3.._ r�. .- •. ,. ,;, ., ' . • . -.�..J� . '. � _ �"�,.` ''i:t :t..�� .+.f� �rf�` �'i `� _ _ j ,5,� `• .. � � ,: .. Mt;: , � , ••� �".�,�f '' �'.�� ' �3 r. � a: ^" - A". `}!,� . � . �♦ . :.jl.. ..a• , ". '1 . . .'L '7� . •� , - Annexation lZevievv Form (X) fVotice of Intent TO . Building Surface Water Utility Fire Water Utility Parks Wastewater Utility Police Transportation Public Works Maintenance �C«.urr'�e t�l'lanninq : FROM : Economic Development, Neighborhoods &Strategic Planning SUBJECT . Proposed Bales Annexation Location : The parcel is located in the northwest quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M, in King County. The given address for this annexation is 15325 SE 128"'Street, Renton. Date Circulated: Comments Due: General Information Area . 8.52 Acres Street length : N/A Assessed Value : N/A Estimated Population : 14 Current Uses Residential . 6 single family dwellings Commercial : Industrial . Pubiic : Comp Plan Designat. : Residential Rural Future Uses: . Residential single-family homes Future Population : Unknown for this non-project action. R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department/Division: �7�V�v�1+�G�f ��f�iGO �1�V l Fri�� 1. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? N � ' �EVC�ppOF M.P�ANNI -. REIVTpN,�+G JqN ; � Z�� ECFIV�D (Over) 2. Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? �OVI°(0 1�� ' 3. Does this proposed annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? �� 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? �1 o ht� ��+ P�.F�� 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? 6, Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the aitached map.) � D . General recommendation and comments: � � � e � 03 Sign rl Date: G�'/��-�� CITY OF REN�Olv _ ' DEV�iTM OF R MON �NG DEV�LOPMENT SERVICES I)IVISION JAN 1��<< 2003 l�IASTER APPLIC�4TTO10T OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION(eont) . Note: If ttiere is more than on legal owner,please attach an addifional notarized . EXISTING LAND USE(S): Master applicalion to each owner. Heavy equipment repair,maintenance facility, low-density NAME: Various,including Irvin Leifer single family dwellings and vacant parcel. �DREss: 15325 SE 128`�Street City: Renton,WA ZIP:98059 PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Nonproject action,no new land uses proposed as a TELEPHONE NUMBER: Not available. consequence of this annexation proposal CONTACT PERSOIV/APPLICANT NAME: SteVe BeCIC EXISTING COMPREHENSNE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Residential Rural AnDxEss: 4735 NE 4`h Street PROPOSED COMPREHENSNE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: c�ty: Renton, WA z�: 98059 No change proposed. TELEPHONE NUMBER: �4LS� 4�-O4G 1 EXISTING ZONING: R-4(King County) PROJECT INFORMAT'ION PROPOSED ZONING: PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: R-5 Zone. Bales Annexation—Resolution to Annex and concurrent R-5 Zoning SITE AREA(SQ.FT.OR ACREAGE): PROPERTY/PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: 8.52 acres The subject 8.52-acre area is generally between NE 4`� pROJECT VALUE: Street(SE 128`i'St)on the north and SE 130�'Street(if extended)on the south, 152°a Avenue SE(if extended)on N/A the west and 155"'Avenue SE(if extended)on the east. The subject annexation area abuts the City of Renton IS THE STI'E LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? boundary on the north and west. The site is not designated as an Aquifer Protection Area as it currently lies outside of city limits. KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER: 142305 9068 142305 9094 142305 9065 142305 9070 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA? 142305 9064 No H:�EDNSP�PAA�Annexations\BalesU�IsterApp.doc\d _ �,_ -_ � : .-.LEGAL DESCF��"—rION OF PROPERTY (Attach sr_r��rate sheet if needed) :�;: . ' See attached. - „ _ � , � TYPE OF APPLICATION &`FEES Check all application types that apply--City staff will determine fees. � X ANNEXATION $ SUBDIVISION X REZONE $ SPECIAL PERMIT $ LOT LINE ADNSTMENT $ TEMPORARY PERMIT $ SHORT PLAT $ _CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ TENTATIVE PLAT $ SITE PLAN APPROVAL $ PRELIMINARY PLAT $ GRADE&F1LL PERMTT $ FINAL PLAT $ (No.Cu.Yds• ) VARIANCE $ (from Section: 1 $ PLANNED UNTT DEVELOPMENT $ WAIVER $ PRELIMINARY ROUTINE VEGETATION FIIVAL MANAGEMENT PERMIT $ _BINDING SITE PLAN . MOBILE HOME PARKS $ SHORELINE REVIEWS: SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT $ CONDTTIONAL USE $ VARIANCE $ EXEMPTION $ NO CHARGE X ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ REVISION AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP (See 10% Notice of Intent petition)` I, �r,;nc rr�e>_Steve Beck , declaze that I am (please check one) _the owner of the property involved in this application, X ihe authorized representadve to act for the property owner(please attach proof of authorizadon),and that the foregoing statements and answers herein wntained and the information herewith aze in all respects true and cotrect to the Uest of my lmowledge and belief. I certify that I lmow or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the inswment (Name of Owner/Representative) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary(Print) (Signature of Owner/Representative) My appointment expires: (THIS:SECTION TO.BE COIVIPLETED BY CITY STAFF:) � °:Ciry FIe Numbers ECF : SA R SHPL CU LLA PP FP TP . SP RVM�' V AAD' W FPUD SM SNIE MHP BSP A' �' GPA. TOTAL FEES: $ TOTAL POSTAGE PROVIDED:$ H:�EDNSP�PAA�Annexadons�BaleslMsterApp.doc\d Y "� � 4' r P1tOJECT NA�tI�TIVE The applicants have requested Council to authorize an annexation election for five parcels, comprising some 8.52 acres on the south side of NE 4�`Street between 152nd Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 155"'Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. The annexation election would ask residents who are registered voters whether they support annexation to the City of Renton as well as whether property owners in the annexation area should be required to pay their fair share of the City's bonded indebtedness. " The subject site currently houses four detached dwellings plus a heavy equipment repair facility (Sea- Port Dozing and Development, Inc.). The latter is supposed to cease and desist in January 2003. There are no known wetlands or environmentally sensitive areas on the 8.52-acre site. Because the annexation site will require City zoning if it comes into the City, staff are recommending that it be rezoned from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because the County calculates density based upon gross acres and the City calculates density based upon net acres the number of units allowed would be about the same under either zone. The City estimates that 30 new dwelling units could be built on this 8.52-acre site,for a total of 34 units. An environmental checklist has been prepared for the rezone portion of this request. Annexations are specifically exempted from having to go through SEPA review (RCW 43.21C.222). No , environmental issues were raised for this non-project legislative action. Future development, however,would have to comply with SEPA. Council will be asked to consider a resolution authorizing an annexation election for the subject site as . well as hold the first of two public hearings on the proposed R-5 zoning sometime in February 2003. ��CIN OF RENTON ING JAN 1'a iaa� �ECEI�� Document2\ � .��L�� r� ��7 �� __ r - ��II � �� ,,:�. - =N == � �. ,RII ..■_�� ♦� •�� .�_Ly �. � C C � ,� � 1� � �, �� . o � - - �'` �� ■■.• � : �: : til`� .j � � .�� C=:::i,��r� �7��r.� �I�� 11� �. � - -_� I�II� ��■■...I.A/�11 : � --��+ �► Ic� �Y�lO�E ' i�� - ■ i�� II�/� �v��71Ji� �pl�Ii � 1�� , i ii i� � , �■ �R�!1'��!�III: � � .� � 111�� = i�fi ■ � .. .�. �� I �� I�III� - . .� . �� 11�1I��\�� Il��e � � � - i �: � �� 7�'%IIII►� �: � � � : ��/ i ii i ' � 'C ��111;; ��', = � �: :� i ii i ■��i11B ' ..� . ... . �r� � � �� ■�� .. _� .u�,' l. �ei i�iir ' � �� : � :�� i?il �\i111►� ■� � � �Y a�� 7 ;G7�!!! Fi; n■■■� � '. _:��, �nu� I�� '� ��I�I ■11�1■ ■� .. . r� ��au �' ■ � �1L�ii1�� : ■'�.: =�'==`� 71• - �rr.i �Tf:a� ��: � �� '� � 111111�� Ii/ � � ` �� I� � q� � �� ri �a � ,.�� '� ��'�� - �a n L�J Il�I . '= �. e 111111�'� �� G] �GJ'� sw �a � Lfl �[� - �� 0��:i � � � �`1 ��7 �� r_� � �=1 //IIII� � a —= �� a � Ri ��11 .`� � I' �UII��t:i � III��`�� • ��,� E:y _ ='ui� eiL = iGi ii i �� ' ' i. uuu� . .. . . �w ►,. . . ��. j= � 111: :: � �� ,�r��j '� � � ir�ra �, , ,�`-' �� tii �i ��1� ' - - �� a. : � � :�„'r•��i'I.� �.r .v . , �1 ��uol lerlu��nu��' �� ,�; � . .. . ��', ■ ■ ■� �� r; �� !� �� i'�i��t ��■ ■�� u �� .' � .�i�Z_�► ■. � � 11��11111■■�■�� . - - ■ �� . -- - � _ �� .��.�- �: : - -� _ =� �� . � :�IIII. I�I ��- :: : �� - -��I—'i�`u� � ,�-- - .�� ■� � =� �--- ' :: : I. �'��I■�= ��. � � �� 111 ''� � �� I,I iE� � ♦1 1�� 11��' � � � �� 11111�11 ►�� ` � �11111/�� =:� . ,� .� � � �� fE�l��tr1 ::�� 11� �♦�S� � �� t�.� t�, � � � '�� ■■�■• � . � . . � 111�!ii �� :► �■� �� J►�n� : � � 11�11111 � ■■ __��,� �� : � .�a �I�� ■ �i��. .1�1� �u��a��: �.• .....W� •� .' : � ....�� i. ��: � _ _ L:� .��: �� :��r�� '�� : .. •�• � �. . � � � � � �■ � � . . r � i.�! //I�� , �� . b: ;= �w�� 1� :��= �� I� ■■'�.�.:��i`�: 1� �, � - ■ �L�uz�� ■ � � ��l�d � ' � ;� � �r��I�■�� !� C i��i�� i ��II � - : �i�j�� - � � �\� �� ► �1�� _ . - �� . �► � � � ■ ■ �' , � �1� ��I��r�■� �--��vI %/I�� 5r1`I�.�il�i� ��i�,1� ��:� . � t�� 7 �, I�� r� ��c�uu ■■■�11�� :�D O 1��■I�i � �'1 .��i�iiiii: � =� �� ■��L� c.� .. •C� il�� 1�� 7� �� 11111111111-�taa��a�Run�r7 ��■ �� ►��,:�V,�� 1 � �� - �� - �► �� ' ' �� ■�� I�� ♦ � �� ♦ ♦ 1 ■ �Vt�71�s ��►�� ►�� ■ ' i� �' �� 1� ��►�� . .� �� ■ - .■ � �� .- , ��iiiii►�� ♦ • ��_I � =11��I �.Q�� --- —�.��:��C1��;��I � �!'�-�� _: ��II�� E�l��[��1�a�� -�-., �� EL�I�Yi�7�� + �� '.�,l� � �� • i . � � � � �� . � � ! �� 1 � 111 111 ::.::::.:.....�:>:.::::::::::::::::::::::�::::::::: � . . . � �:_:�;.;:,<:.>:.:::::: • . .•. -. . � � � `I , ' ' - :. .. J ;� �.. �„� - - a � o � o � ° � � ,� � �, oa hP � a �'� � ° � �; Q � �� Q ❑ `� Q � p �3 � Q � � � o th St o � o o � �, S �1 �� `��, M"��L � �"'�` 1^I I/�J ❑ � ��i��$''�� .S�y.Tf��qi' � �5��,r y��. `� �f' 1 � � � 'q t5 ��. .A; ❑ ��'�� 9��ra�� +b�k t�. , �k�° ❑ �� '�� , � x• k�+�� "*aw.'�' z�n � ?r. ` .�� r n `A��'.��v'�'e '::Y�+(�{"^��'",�ya� ° � �.�^�= � LJ �.' " ��,� ��.°� ��." o �, *; J x �� ,x ��,i�� J.��p � � y, f j a.,�+.�� y�' � �� r �� ,. ,� h tl r��F�� . �- �ILr, � �;�t� � ��w� �� r lJ �.,��s�-��i �� '. f��, � A � � � 0 .a'n k'� :r��C'£t ",a.t, ��' � � �4 ❑� � o � � n ❑ � I �� j - �l E 2n d St ° a `� SE1 � r� � Q 0 � Proposed Bales Annexation Site _ _ _ EX;St;n9 �;�,�;m;tS o 300 600 Figure 2: Existing Structure Map Proposed Annexation �� ,� Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Shategic Plenning Boundary 1 . 3 600 ,O� AluPietaoh,ectingAdminis4etnr � Existing Structure ,= G.Del Rns�io TO 20Decemba2002 -�,��--��ri.... ..�.7� �'`� ��.C• r-��,1�`_ll,� � � 1� I/, . �� ; ..�� .. � S � 1 � � � �,, , �,, � rr�� , ►� • - .� ��"�] Il�A � :� �. � � � �� rr r- � � � �.�,� r � � ;- , �� ,J, . `� ►� , , r , s�.� . ,�, � , 1�� J�I�'�i � ,�� / �� If� �� ,I - � . r� � ► , I ��t � ' � J r�i ��i�� `�• � � • II� � � , � . � , �� -_ --%J ISa'� L��i �.,: � ,,` �� , . 1� � � � .::�. .r�. x�. ti- ,.. � a.. _ - , �� _ _ �,�� , ..M ��*`n � �, .�f�A� \ � 1 1 � �� ► �1 � - _ .� � , .1� . 1 � i �� . �� _ �t�� . � ; � � � �� . � � � � � , � �� l-� � �7r�.� � �� 9,� ��, , � ��4 . � : , . � �� ..., .,� , 1�.��,1_ . ��s :�� 11 ,7 . ,, _ .: ""� ;:. � �� . � 1�i��\ �.� �ll� . � �� ; ,.: :� � ----- �1 ��.' . 4 ', �'�:� � �. � �:: J '�� ,�: � �w � � � _. �, . ..�. �i► � , � , � � _ �. � ; � .. . . ` '� - ►�._ C \ � � � � � � ` ' -- �� . � _ V � � 9 � � � -`- �. � ` � � , t � � !� - ., . � , . U . . I , . - � � ,� . I . �I ' � It � �� '► '-_ I � �� . . � � �� / ��L� ��_r.� ��Q.��.��..�C��.�t - � � � � r _��..�� LrTi`...�-.��.....,.�-�---=--�Z�- �-�_ � • • • ' • : . ' � ' . • ' 1 11 . 11 r, . . . .... . . . . � .:::::.._.:�.:::�::::::::::::::::::;::::::::::::::::::::::: _ �:�: . _ ... -. . . • 11 �. `.�' ' _ ` ,... :. .. i . , • ? ., `� . � PROPOSED BALES ANNEXATION FISI�_�'ANALYSIS CALCULATION SHEEI �_, Units Po ulation AV Existin dev. 4 10 $1,230,000 Full dev. 34 85 $8,840,000 Assumptions: 2.5 persons/household $260,000 ...........:..:......:...:.:.:.:.:.:.: 1 existing house will not redevelop °�i��t�t�i�:::::::::::::: Total revenues �� Existin Full Rate Existing':::::::::�::�::��56��54: Re ular le $4,010 $28,822 326036 Fuli:�:�:;:�:?:;:$�:�;Q�$;��: Excess le $116 $831 0.09397 State shared revenues Rate er ca Existin Full Li uor tax $3.30 $33.00 $280.50 Li uor Board rofits $5.29 $52.90 $449.65 Fuel tax-roads $14.45 $144.50 $1,22825 Fuel tax-arterials $6.76 $67.60 $574.60 MVET $0.00 $0.00 Cam er excise $0.00 $0.00 Criminal 'ustice $0.91 $9.10 $77.35 Total $307.10 $2,610.35 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existin Full Real estate excise"' $54.69 $546.90 $4,648.65 � Utilit tax*'' $133.00 $532.00 $4,522.00 Fines &forfeits* $17.13 $171.30 $1,456.05 Total $1,250.20 $10,626.70 * Per capita *i Per housing unit-based on$2,220 annual utility billing :��{�`:?:?:?:::€:?:::::;;;':; Total ongoing costs � � Per ca ita Existin Full Existing:`::::::::::::::��;(10'(:;��: Contracted Services Full;;;::::::::€;�1�;2ti:t�;j;'1'; Alcohol $0.23 $2.27 $19.30 Public Defender $3.13 $31.34 $266.39 Jail $7.19 $71.92 $611.32 Subtotal $105.53 $897.01 Court/le al/admin. $50.96 $509.60 $4,331.60 Parks maintenance" $14.90 $149.00 $1,266.50 Police $270.00 $2,700.00 $22,950.00 Road maintenance"" $0.00 $1,715 Fire"'* $1.25 $1,537.50 $11,050.00 Total $5,001.63 $42,210.11 `See Sheet Parks FIA ''*See Sheet Roads FIA `"* Rate per$1,000 of assessed valuation (FD#25 contract) Net fiscal impact Existing:::::::?:;:;:'::';:::�.��.��:�1; Full:::::::::::::'::::��'1:5"I:��' :�i�e�til�i��Cos�s;' Parks acquisition &development(from Sheet Parks FIA): $20,244.70 .............:..... . . Other one-time costs: $0.00 Total one-time costs: ;:?;::::::::: .��#;�44:x�: . �...,........ _ -� , � . �., _ � PARKS ACQUISTION AND MAINTENANCE COST CALCULATION SHEI Needs: Acquisition of land for new neighborhood&community park Development of new neighborhood&communiry parks Maintenance of neighborhood&community parks Assumptions: $60,000 per acre for land acquistion $125,000 per acre for development(both neighborhood&community parks) $6,000 per acre to maintain neighborhood parks $7,000 per acre to maintain community parks 1.2 acres/1,000 for.neighborhood park(LOS in Comprehensive Park Plan) 1.1 acres/1,000 for community park(LOS in Comprehensive Park Plan) 85 population after 10 years(projected growth) 34 housing units after 10 years(projected growth) $530.76 per single family unit mitigation fees 30 New single family units � Per capita annual and one-time costs: One-time Costs: Acquisition: , Neighborhood: 1 ` 1.2/1000"$60,000= $72.00 Community: 1 * 1.1/1000`$60,000= $66.00 Development: Neighborhood: 1 ' 1.2/1,000 *$125,000= $150.00 Community: 1 * 1.1/1,000'`$125,000= $137.50 Total one-time costs: $425.50 Mitigation fees: New units*$530.76= $15,922.80 Acquisition &development costs minus mitigation fees: $20,244.70 Ongoing costs : (1 * 1.2/1,000* $6,000)+ (1 * 1.1/1,000*$7,000)_ $14.90 (park maintenance) C`ify Of Renton ENV/RONMENTAL;CHECKCIST PURPOSE OF CHECKL/ST: The Sfate Environmental Policy Acf (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies fo consider the environmenfal impacfs of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impacf Statemenf (E/S) must be prepared for all proposals wifh probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of fhe environment. The purpose of fhis checklisf is fo provide informafion to help you and the agency identify impacfs from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if if can be done) and fo help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmenfal checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmenfal agencies use this checklist to determine whether fhe environmental impacts of your proposal are significanf, requiring preparaiion of an EIS. Answer fhe quesfions briefly, with the most precise informafion known, or give the besf description you can. You must answer each quesfion accurafely and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer fhe questions from your own observations or project plans without fhe need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does nof apply fo your proposal, write "do nof know"or "does not apply". Complete answers fo fhe questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask abouf governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmenfal agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply fo all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on differenf parcels of land. Aftach any additional informafion fhat will help describe your proposal or its environmenfal effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional informafion reasonably related fo determining if there may be significant adverse impacf. USE OF CHECKL/ST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though quesfions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklisf to the words "project," "applicant,"and "property or site"should be read as "proposal," "proposer,"and"affected geographic area,"respecfively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Proposed rezone of approximately 8.52 acre area from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's Residential 5 du/ac (R-5) Zone. Zoning would be applied at the time the G subject site is annexed into the City of Renton. vE`OPME�E�ON�N �E G1T`r pF JAN 1 � 20�3 F��G��ED � Bales Annexation Rezone ��; ``�Tanuary 7, 2003 � . Page 2 _ _. 2. Name of applicanf: Alex Pietsch, Acting Administrator, Economic Development, Neighborhoods &Strategic P.lanning Department , City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicant and confact person: Address: Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Department City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Contact Person: Don Erickson,AICP (425) 430-6581 4. Date checklisf prepared: January 7, 2003 5. Agency requesfing checklisf: Citv of Renton, Department of Planning/Building/Public Works - Development Services Division 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Adoption of the rezone ordinance is anticipated pending SEPA compliance, at the time of annexation into Renton. 7. Do you have any plans for fufure additions, expansion, or further activity relafed fo or connected wifh fhis proposal? If yes, explain. Yes. Applicants have applied for annexation into the City of Renton. Under RCW 43.21.C.222 annexations are specifically exempt from SEPA. Upon annexation into Renton applicants or their successors will likely subdivide and develop vacant properties with single-family dwellings per the City of Renton's R-8 zoning. 8. List any environmenfal informafion you know abouf fhat has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. FEIS on the 1995 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton 9. Do you know whether applicafions are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No knowledge of other pending governmental approvals of affected properties. 10. List any governmental approvals or permifs that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Council aqproval is required for this rezone from County to City zoning. 11. Give brief, complefe descripfion of your proposal, including the proposed uses and fhe size of fhe projecf and site. The subiect proposal is to rezone the 8.52 acre Bales Annexation site from King County's R-4 Zone (4 du/gross acre), to Renton's R-5 Zone (5 du/net acre). The site could accommodate approximately 34 dwellings under Renton's R-5 Zone and approximately 34 dwellings under King County's R-1 Zone 12. LoCation of the p►'opoSaL Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area,provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a lega!description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While Bales Annexation Rezone - 'anuary 7, 2003 , _ ` Page 3 � �� _,,` you should submit any plans required by the agency,you are not required to duplicate maps or detai/ed plans submitted with any permit applicafions related to this checklist. The subject annexation site abuts NE 4'h Street (SE 128 St) on the north and 152nd � Avenue SE, if extended, on the west. It is bounded by SE 130`h Street, if extended, on the south and approximately 155'"Avenue SE, if extended, on the east(Please see attachments.) B. ENV/RONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTI-i a. General descripiion of fhe site (circle one); flaf, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, ofher The 8.52-acre annexation site is relatively flat. � B. Whaf is the steepesf slope on the site(approximate percenf slope?) Renton Slope Maps indicate some smali area in the southwest corner with a slope of 15%-25%. c. Whaf genera! fypes of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know fhe classification of agricultural soils, specify fhem and note any prime farmland. Alderwood Association. d. Are fhere surface indications or history of unstable soils in fhe immediate vicinify? If so, describe. There do not appear to be anv siqnificant steep slopes on the rezone portion of the annexation site. e. Describe fhe purpose, type, and approximafe quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Not applicable for this non-project leaislative action. f. Could erosion occur as a resulf of clearing, construcfion, or use? If so, generally describe. No construction is proposed as a result of this non-project annexation and rezone proposal. Erosion presumably could occur as a result of future development under the proposed R-5 Zone. Mitigation measures would be applied typically at the time of future development. g. About what percenf of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? �proximatelv 35%. No construction is proposed as a result of this non- project legislative proposal. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: No construction is proposed as a.result of this non-proiect legislative action. Any future development occurring as a consequence of the proposed R-5 Zone would be required to follow management practices in the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130) and in the Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060). 2. A/R a. What fypes of emissions to fhe air would result from fhe proposal (i.e., dusf, automobile, odors, indusfrial wood smoke) during construct�on and when the project is complefed? If any, generally describe and give approximafe quantifies if known. Bales Annexation Rezone - -� Tanuary 7, 2003 . .� , , . . - Page 4 _ ` _„ � N/A. No new construction is proposed as a result of this legislative non- project proposal. At the time of project.level development specific air-related impacts may be identified and appropriate mitigation measures applied. b. Are fhere any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Unlikelv and not applicable for this non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures fo reduce or control emissions or other impacts fo air, if any: Not applicable for this non-project legislative action. 3. WATER a. Surface Wafer: 1) Is fhere any surface water body on or in the immediafe vicinity of the sife (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to(within 200 feef) the described waters? If yes,please describe and attach � available plans. No. 3) Esfimate fhe amounf of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or weflands and indicafe the area of the site fhat would be affected. Indicate the source of fill maferial. N/A. No construction is proposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. 4) Will the proposal require surface water wifhdrawals or diversions? Give general descripfion, purpose, and approximate quanfities if known. � N/A. No construction is proposed immediately as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. � No. The subject site is not mapped as part of the 100-year floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of wasfe materials to surface waters? If so, describe fhe type of wasfe and anticipated volume of discharge. No. This is a non-project legislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this proposal. Bales Annexation Rezone ,-��4�anuary 7, 2003 , . � Page 5 __ ' . _ , 6. Ground Wafer: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will wafer be discharged fo � ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximafe quantities if known. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. The proposed rezone is not expected to result in the discharge or withdrawal of water thaf is not now occurring. 2) Describe wasfe material that will be discharged into fhe ground from septic tanks or ofher sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;industrial, containing the following chemicals...;agricultural; etc.). Describe fhe general size of the system, the number of such sysfems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s)are expected to serve. No construction.is proposed as a result of this non-proiect legislative rezone proposal. No new septic tanks will be allowed once the site is annexed into Renton and all new development will be hooked up to sanitary sewer. c. Water Runoff(including sform water): 1) Describe fhe source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collecfion and disposal, if any(include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will fhis water flow info other waters? If so, describe. N/A. No construction and therefore runoff is proposed as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. Surtace water appears to xun off the site in a north/northeasterly direction. Although no new development is proposed at this time the proposed zoning would provide for densities comparable to what already exists m King County. Environmental review, however, would be required for any non-exempt development under SEPA. 2) Gould wasfe maferial enfer ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. Future new residential development would be hooked up to sanitary sewer. d. Proposed measures fo reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Not applicable since this is a non-proiect legislative action. Future development allowed under the proposed R-5 Zone would be required to comply with City of Renton Drainage Standards (RMC 4-6-030). 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetafion found on the site: deciduous free:alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen free:fir, cedar,pine, other shrubs grass pasfure Bales Annexation Rezone `anuary 7, 2003 , . �, . . Page 6 _ crop or grain wet soil plants:caftail, buftercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: wafer lily, eel grass, milfoil, ofher other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? N/A. No construction and therefore no vegetation will be removed as a result of this non-project legislative proposal. Future development will have to comply with Renton's Tree Cutting regulations (RMC 4-4-130). c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None are known at this time. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not apqlicable. This is a non-project action. As noted above, development that occurs under Renton's jurisdiction must conform to the City's codes and regulations. 5. AIVIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near fhe site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds:hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other Mammals:deer, bear, elk, beaver, other Fish:bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other 6. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near fhe site. No threatened or endan eq red species are known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Unknown, but the entire State of Washington is included within a migration route for birds known as the Pacific Flyway. This flyway, as it overlies Renton, is used by a variety of migratory birds, including, but not limited to the Canada Goose. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: This is a non-proiect legislative action. No development is proposed as a result of this rezone proposal. Mitigation measures, if any, may be imposed at the time of future development. 6. ENERGYAND N�4TURAL RESOURCES a. Whaf kinds of energy (electric, nafural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether if will be used for heafing, manufacturing, etc. It is anticipated that the potential 34 dwelling units the R-5 zonina would allow on the site will use primarilv electircal and natural gas resources for heatinq and runninc,Lappliances. Bales Annexation Rezone � � -��anuary 7, 2003 . : Page 7 __ �� b. Would your projecf affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacenf properties? If so,generally describe. Unlikelv Zoning provides some setbacks and restricts the height of new structures to 30 feet. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in fhe plans of this proposal? Lisf other proposed measures to reduce or confrol energy impacts, if any: � None. This is a non-proiect legislative action. Future development occurring on the site will meet all related energy code provisions. 7. ENV/RONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmenta/ hea/th hazards, including exposure fo foxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous wasfe, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. No environmental health hazards are anticipated from future single-family residential development. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or confrol environmental health hazards, if any: N/A. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Noise 1) Whaf types of noise exist in fhe area which may atfect your project (for example:traffic, equipment, operafion, other)? Not applicable since this is a leqislative non-project action. 2) Whaf types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-ferm basis (for example: fraffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from fhe site. Not applicable. New development occurring under the R-5 Zone could include construction activity and normal noise associated with ground related residential living. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. This is a non-project action. 8. LAND AND SHOREL/NE USE a. Whaf is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The westerly portion of the 8.52-acre rezone site is developed with an outdoor heavy construction equipment maintenance company that is scheduled to cease its operations in January 2003. Lower densify single- family dwellings and a vacant parcel exist to the east. Existing densities are not believed to exceed 5 du/ac. Has fhe site been used for agriculture?If so, describe. Not activelv. One of the parcels does have fruit trees on it. c. Describe any structures on the sife. There are an estimated four existing sinQle-familv dwellinqs on the subject 8.52-acre site. . Bales Annexation Rezone ~�-�Tanuary 7, 2003 , . Page 8 �` _ ' d. Will any sfructures be demolished? If so; what? This is a legislative non-proiect rezone action. It is not anticipated that this proposed rezone will result in the demolition of any structures. e. Whaf is the current zoning classification of the site? The current Kinq Countv zoning classification is the R-4 Zone which allows 4 du/gross acre. The current proposal is for R-5 zoning that allows 5-du/net acre. Densities are assumed to be comparable. f. What is fhe current comprehensive plan designation of fhe site? The 8.52 acre rezone site is currently designated "Residential Rural" on Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and "Urban Residential 4- 12du/ac" on King County's Comprehensive Plan Map. Renton's designation would allow zoning with up to 5 units per net acre and King County's designation currently allows zoning with 4 units per gross acre. Because of this it is assumed that densities are comparable under either zone. g. If applicable, whaf is fhe current shoreline master program designafion of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No portions of the subject site are known to be environmentally sensitive. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? At full redevelopment under the proposed R-5 zoning, it is anticipated that approximatelv 85 residents could eventually reside on these 8.52 acres. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Unknown. This is a non-project action. The estimated five existing residents could choose, for example, to relocate to new dwellings within the annexation area. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable at this non-project stage. l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: As noted above the proposed rezone is consistent with the City's current Residential Rural land use designation for the subject site. 9. HOUSING a. Approximafely how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Unknown. It is anticipated that up to 34 dwelling units could be accommodated on the subject site under Renton's R-5 zonmg. b. Approximatefy how many unifs, if any, would be eliminated? Indicafe whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Unknown. The proposed rezone will not eliminate any units by itself. As future development occurs the two existing dwellings may be replaced and/or relocated although this is not currently known. _ . Bales Annexation Rezone � � �-�"anuary 7, 2003 , . Page 9 __ c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: The proposed zoning is consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and applicable policies for this area. 10. AESTHET/CS ' a. Whaf is fhe fallesf height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is fhe principal exterior building material(s)proposed. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. No new development is specifically proposed as a result of this change in zoning classification. Heights of residential structures are restricted to two stories and 30' in the proposed R-5 Zone - b. What views in the immediate vicinify would be altered or obstructed? Unknown. This is a non-project rezone action. This is not known at this level. , c. Proposed measures to reduce or confrol aesfhetic impacts, if any: , Unknown. At the future project level impacts will be assessed and mitigated. 11. L/GHT AND GLARE a. What fype of light or glare will fhe proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. Future development may create some visible nighttime light. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safefy hazard or interfere with views? Unknown. Future single-family homes are not anticipated to result in sufficient levels of glare to impair views from surrounding properties. c. What existing off-sife sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Unknown. d. Prop"osed measures fo reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12. RECREAT/ON a. Whaf designated and informal recreational opportunifies are in fhe immediate vicinity? King County currently owns the two abutting parcels immediately to the south of the subject site. These two parcels with a combined area of 9.34 acres have been set aside for a future park. Presumably, upon annexation � these two parcels will be transferred to the City for future park development. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No.This is a non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable at this non-project level of review. The City will collect a recreation mitigation fee at the time of future development. Bales Annexation Rezone ,- ��anuary 7, 2003 , . Page 10 _ __ 13. H/STORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVAT/ON a. Are fhere any places or objecfs listed on, or proposed for, national sfate, or local preservafion regisfers known fo be on or next to fhe site? If so, generally describe. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to fhe site. Unknown. This is a non-project legislative action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or confrol impacts, if any: Unknown. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public sfreefs and highways serving the sife, and describe proposed access to the exisfing street system. Show on sife plans, if any. The site is primarily served bv SE 128'h Street. b. Is sife currenfly served by public fransit? If not, whaf is fhe approximate disfance fo the nearesf fransit sfop? Yes. Bus service is available on NE 4'h Street. c. How many parking spaces would fhe complefed project have? How many would the project eliminafe? Unknown. Assuming 34 dwelling units and parking being provided between 1.75 spaces per unit and 2.25 spaces per unit, there potentially could be between 59 and 76 required off-street spaces developed on the rezone site. No spaces are anticipated to be eliminated. d. Will fhe proposal require any new roads or sfreefs, or improvements to exisfing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicafe whefher public or privafe? Very likelv. Future subdivision of the site would be required to comply with City regulations pertaining to street width, curbs, sidewalks, lighting, etc. At this point it is difficult to anticipate what improvements 28 new dwellings in the Bales Annexation area would require. New streets would most likely be local access streets including loop streets and/or cul-de-sacs. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular frips per day would be generated by the completed projecf? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. This is a legislative non-project action in which transportation impacts have not been identified since the actual levels of development are still unknown. However, if 30 additional units were built, and assuming 10 AWDVTE, there could be as many as 300 additional vehicles trip ends per 24 hour period. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not aqqlicable at this non-proiect level. Level of future development is speculative at this point. Bales Annexation Rezone Y�-��. �-�Tanuary 7, 2003 , .. � Page 11 _� � _ _� 15. PUBL/C SERVICES a. Would fhe project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire profection, police protecfion, healfh care, schools, other)? If so,generally describe. Probablv. Residential development that might occur in the future would increase the need for public services that typically serve such development. Affected services may include, but would not be limited to, fire protection, police protection, emergency services, and schools. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The Citv of Renton currently collects mitigation fees to control such impacts to parks and recreation, fire, and transportation. The City also collects taxes for most of these services. Until a specific proposal is made at the project level, however, it is too early to ascertain what these impacts, if any, will be. 16. UTILIT/ES a. Circle utilities currently available af fhe site: electricity, nafural gas, wafer, refuse service, felephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, ofher. The current proposal is a non-project action. However, the area it would apply to will likely be served by sewer, telephone;electricity, and water. b. Describe the utilities thaf are proposed for the project, fhe utility providing the service, and fhe general construction acfivities on fhe site or in the immediate vicinity which mighf be needed. Unknown. Non-project action. C. S/GNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part.. ��ll/� � rrop�nent: lL� '� � � Name Printed: /1��- �`�v Date: U� 4�� Bales Annexation Rezone � ��Tanuary 7, 2003 . � Page 13 ; � � 4. How wou/d the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensifive areas or areas designated (or eligib/e or under study) for governmenfal protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cu/fural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? _ This non-project rezone proposal will not directly impact environmentally sensitive areas. Whether future development occurs under County or City zoning sensitive areas, if any,would have to be addressed. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None proposed at this time for this non-project action. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, inc/uding whether it wou/d allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatib/e with exisfing plans? This proposed non-project rezone will not directly affect land or shoreline use. Proposed new zoning would be in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None proposed at this non project level. As noted above any new development under the proposed R5 zoning will be reviewed by the City to ensure compliance with relevant state and local regulations. 6. How wou/d the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportafion or public services and utilities? This is a leaislative non-project action. Future development would result in increased demands on transportation, the use of utilities, or other services over what is allowed under current King County zoning. If additional homes are built in this area as many as 300 additional vehicle trips per day could be generated over a 24-hour period. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: None are proposed for this non-project action. Future development will be asked to mitigate any identified significant adverse impacts. 7. Idenfify, if possib/e, whether fhe proposal may conflict with /ocal, stafe, or federal laws or requirements for fhe profection of the environment. No conflicts with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment are known to exist with the subject non-project legislative rezone ' proposal. S/GNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful � misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. � Proponenf: �e0�� Name Printed: �� /�� ' Date: uGf�� `T o��-��' Bales Annexation Rezone �� -!anuary 7, 2003 . ` Page 12 ' r` � � D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheets shou/d on/y be used for actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs. You do not need to fill out these sheets for projecf actions.) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the lisf of the elements of fhe environmenf. When answering these questions, 6e aware of fhe extenf fhe proposal, or the fypes of activities like7y fo result from the proposal, would affect fhe item at a greater intensify or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general ferms. 1. How wou/d the proposa/be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or producfion of noise? This is a legislative non-project rezone action that is not anticipated by itself to change operations at the subject site or increase substance discharges into the . environment. Subsequent development, whether under the current County R-4 zoning or the proposed City of Renton R-5 zoning, would be required to comply with SEPA at the time of development, unless categorically exempt. Any new development will likely increase discharges to air, water, etc. These, however, are anticipated to be relatively small. Proposed measures fo avoid or reduce such increases are: This non-proiect leqislative action. Subsequent development as a result of this proposed map amendment would have to go through environmental review unless SEPA exempt. It is likely that air emissions, etc. would be addressed at this time when type and quantities of discharges are more likely to be known. Because Renton's R-5 Zone would allow comparable densities to those allowed under King County's R-4 Zone, impacts, if any, are assumed to be comparable. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? No significant impacts to plants, animals, fish or marine life are anticipated to occur as a consequence of the proposed zoning action. The proposal would supplant existing County R-4 single-family zoning which allows 4 du/ac (gross) with Renton's R-5 single-family zoning, which allows 5 du/ac (net). As a result future development under Renton's R-5 zoning is assumed to be comparable to that currently allowed under King County's R-4 zoning. Proposed measures to profect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Not a�plicable. 3. How would the proposa/be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? This non-proiect leaislative action will not directly impact energv or natural resources. Future single-family development will, however, likely result in some additional demand of such resources. Future development under Renton's R-5 zoning would allow up to 30 additional homes in the area. The County's R-4 Zone would also allow approximately 30 new units. As a consequence the proposed zoning would not increase the demand for energy and natural resources over what is currently allowed. Proposed measures fo profect or conserve energy and nafural resources are: ' None are proposed since this is currently a non-proiect action. : � �XI�IBIT A � � . BALES ANNEXATIOl\I LEGAL DESCRIPTION The Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 14, � Township 23 North,Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; EXCEPT the east 32.45 feet of the north 406.01 feet thereof; EXCEPT that portion for street right of way(NE 4�'Street). ��--- TO SH�� AC�tl�+TF �dF�I.SDRL�M�N2 S. � I ' � � Y 1 � W I 1 — 23 - 5 � SCA LE Nae -�� - 13 w � 3 ! l .oa � fu 9 d �.Q$'S31«3L` i J, E. � �V 1 N• S �• �D.RD Nd #.�4� �363 �' '! V� Co. Rp. �.�n..s3e}y;�_a /VE CaR. 6s � EST" 3 7GOGdQdS'S� - � �f� 7�' .��93`ta��. .. ,*. d.,a.g� : ,�'?�S''r:;�m�x�'^^J�'�— �'+:r- ,...y��a.: .. :C�W .`^J" -0;; �.;...:s�� s ' ".3M� � T.S3 �. /&.S' / �'�.G7 Ya .42 d' � 3 �.. �. . .. . �� ,w:"�.?�r".,. . .'=S;Lr'°''f?�•.�: , �� I,v . . . . ( . . �` : �. .�a �t'' j . ,' .s� . . .. �¢:. � `�,� . . �� Q � ,.�� 1• H .�''�� '� E � t k' ��: (�' ni �,�. . �q p �__ . �:,� �w �.o r 1 � . =��,�:; �: . ° �06 7. . �Y ',�� \ � �}; ��„ `��; a ;I -,�„�.,'._`'�\ �i';: � .� /6S "", l ��'��.. . , .(. �.�, ,� �' ' � u i. �r!- `Qo�L . . � � . V . � , ` � � � 9�' �. ° � � ' . � ;° �� , 4 � � ' �.� ' '� N z � � d ' iso ' ;� ' , � � V� � , �: � ' �� `, fi ! � W �� ' " 32-43 � �' OQ'1 � �` ;�� _ � �"' C� �� ... - - � �.: . . � . . . a,.w„�� :� .. . . . � , � +� . o�`. ' �%� �� ,: � ''�• ' . . �',. _ ' i�. �� N t�,� .L D T Z " . `� z . � , j� �C . �' .:^; •. �� '��. • ' � . �.• . ,�'A�� . �'�x,•� ' • , � ..+ I . .;,: :r� .. �wi.�..� . , . i . , '�,; . . • ?' :�?� . �. ..� �,� ��. .. �:�� . . .. , . ', . . . p� � : .' . � �: � i•,Q ��` .t.: : � . ... � . �"c'::;� . . q.'� � . ��: � �g a � � �� ;r;-:..., �,,ra,ae.:. ��,q � . . • , � � � �p �� :y,� . �� ,�� •`':E:*:,' , ... . . ,y ' � . �N'�� • . . . . . . ,.. .n Q a ..� .b : ... ., . . . )1� 3 .,,�..,. .,. . .. -- - - ' . , . ._ �.,..f:k;•. q{� . ._.,._:.:.. .. ... � w; _ .� . . �:;_}.;� i+:. :.a...!T.'f/.'M vl't}i'�'as.'..�fy'.-4aY�.w.i... q .� ��''•`• ! J L7 Q ./O �.. � � .. . �i �� . . � � ' �� . ' ' . '� . . , � � � . . �r . � ' � . . . • ' ,��r� ._.. l'�' �.1.� �•�,�. • � f CITY OF RENTON,Wr1 98�55 �� ACCOUPJTS PAYABLE CHECK N0.210350 � INVOICEf�IOMBER�`� t s �"qOAT� .�qr:;�"s��.^m�«t r.� �z D�SCRIPTIONti �'�a„`r x�; `i�'�� aa,°iP..O:NUM i° "w.RISC0Uh1,T m';`'id�,a1�� ^,"`�d j. !AMOUNT., FilingFe�`� 12/04/2002 Application fee for Tydico Annexation 0.00 50.00 � _.— - - – - -- ��, ua - Y' ' � � =.� � U� I � O - , �, I;E�"��iP N_ 5 6 417 a � � � ate � Q � � � fi o� 2�� °��oReceived From � � �(�W� � ��Z Q � Address �l a ~ � � �' 4 �6v �Q�s -- �V _ , .�'c Q �Q p _ �,., � ' � p) � � u' fY; O W Am s .— �_ � o p �' �'� Cash �� rn�n � Q � ` Fa Y� Z �m� � Check 'C �� o U � U Reference e / O Q� Other ey: ��/ Signature J'�� i�� 50.00 � � �� ,� a TIIVIELINE FOIZ t�- ._ :EXATI011o1 USING CITY IN: ATED ELECTIOI�1 PROCESS PROP05ED ACTIOIV TIME�'RAIVIE 1. The City Council adopts a resolution calling for an election to be held Starting Date to submit to the voters of the proposed annexation area. A petition can submitted to the Council by persons representing 10°Io of the registered voters in the area to start the process or the Council can act independently. 2. Copy of resolution filed with the County Council and the Boundary Day 9 Review Board, (go to 4. below), or (9-days) 3. The Boundary Review Board receives and fixes a date for a public Day 24 hearing not less than 15 days or more than 30 days after receipt of the (16 days) petition. 4. The Boundary Review Board notifies City Clerk of proposed hearing Day 30 date for hearing to be held in Renton (4 days) 5. The City shall publish at least once a week for two weeks in a Day 35 newspaper of general circulation the date and place of the proposed (5 days) public hearing which is required to be held in the City at a time and place designated by the Board. 6. Boundary Review Board public hearing held. Day 49 , (14 days) 7. Within 30 days of public hearing, the Boundary Review Board must Day 79 approve the proposed annexation, modify the proposed annexation by (30 days) adjusting the boundaries, or disapprove the proposed annexation. It shall file its decision with County and City Councils. 8. Boundary Review Board transmits decision to City Clerk and County Day 84 Clerk (4 days) 9. If the BRB decision is favorable, the Council, at its next regular Day 91 meeting (or special meeting to be held within 30 days), shall indicate to (7 days) the County Auditor its preference for a special election date. 10. The County Auditor shall confiim the date for the special election. Day 98 (7 days) 11. The City Clerk posts the notice for the special election at least two (2) Day 128 weeks prior to the date of the election within the proposed annexation (30 days) , area as well as publishes it at least once a week for two (2) weeks prior to the election in a newspaper of general circulation in the annexation area. 12. Day of the election for residents of the proposed annexation area. The Day 129 special election shall be held within 60-days or February 4, March 11, (1 days) Apri122, or November 5, 2003. � �° 12/O6/02 - - PROPOSEI) ACTION TIME FRAIVIE 13. On the following Monday, County canvassing board must submit a Day 135 statement on their findings to the County Council. (6 days) 12. The County Council shall enter a finding in its minutes and transmit a Day 156 certified copy to the City Clerk along with a certified abstract of the (21 days) vote. 13. If the election was successful the City Council shall establish a hearing Day 163 date for the adoption of new zoning for the annexation area and (7 days) acceptance of the annexation by ordinance. 14. City staff prepare addresses for annexation area. Day 173 (10 days) 15. The City Clerk shall provide public notice by advertising in a Day 184 newspaper with circulation in the area to be annexed for at least two (21 days) weeks prior to the public hearing 16. The Council shall hold a hearing to adopt an ordinance providing for Day 185 the annexation, the annexation and adoption of new zoning, or the (1 day) annexation, the adoption of new zoning, and the assumption of a portion of indebtedness, if any, approved by the voters. 17. The annexation area and any zoning shall become a part of the City on Day 200 the date specified in the ordinance(s). (15 days) 18. City Clerk notifies all service providers in area, including US Post Day 215 Office,that area is part of City. (15 days) 19. The City conducts a special census for the annexation area and reports Day 221 its results to the Washington Office of Management and Budget. (21 days) PROJECT NA1tRATIVE The applicants have requested Council to authorize an annexation election for five parcels, comprising some 8.52 acres on the south side of NE 4"'Street between 152"d Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 155�'Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and western boundaries. The annexation election would ask residents who are registered voters whether they support annexation to the City of Renton as well as whether property owners in the annexation area should be required to pay their fair share of the City's bonded indebtedness. The subject site cunently houses four detached dwellings plus a heavy equipment repair facility (Sea- Port Dozing and Development, Inc.). The latter is supposed to cease and desist in January 2003. There are no lrnown wetlands or environmentally sensitive areas on the 8.52-acre site. Because the annexation site will require City zoning if it comes into the City, staff are recommending that it be rezoned from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-5 Zone. Because the County calculates density based upon gross acres and the City calculates density based upon net acres the number of units allowed would be about the same under either zone. The City estimates that 30 new dwelling units could be built on this 8.52-acre site,for a total of 34 units. An environmental checklist has been prepared for the rezone portion of this request. Annexations are specifically exempted from having to go through SEPA review (RCW 43.21C.222). No environmental issues were raised for this non-project legislative action. Future development, however, would have to comply with SEPA. Council will be asked to consider a resolution authorizing an annexation election for the subject site as well as hold the first of two public hearings on the proposed R-5 zoning sometime in February 2003. Document2\ CITY OF RENTOleT . DEVELOPMENT SERVICE� DIVISION MASTEIZ APPLICA'TIOloT OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION(cont) Note: If there is more than on legal owner,please attach an additional notarized EXISTING LAND USE(S): Master applica6on to each owner. Heavy equipment repair,maintenance facility, low-density NAME: Various, including Irvin Leifer single family dwellings and vacant parcel. �DRESS: 15325 SE 128�'Street City: Renton,WA ZIP:98059 PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Nonproject action,no new land uses proposed as a TELEPxoNE NUMBER: Not available. consequence of this annexation proposal CONTACT PERSON/APPLICAIVT NAME: SteVe BeCk EXISTING COMPREHENSNE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Residential Rural aDDREss: 4735 NE 4`h Street PROPOSED COMPREHENSNE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: c�cy: Renton, WA zrr: 98059 No change proposed. �LErxorr�rruMBER: (425) 444-0461 EXISTING ZONING: R-4 (King County) PROJECT INFORMATION PROPOSED ZONING: PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: R-5 Zone. Bales Annexation—Resolution to Annex and concurrent R-5 Zoning SITE AREA(SQ.FT.OR ACREAGE): PROPERTY/PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: 8.52 acres The subject 8.52-acre area is generally between NE 4"' pROJECT VALUE: Street(SE 128"'St) on the north and SE 130"'Street(if extended) on the south, 152°d Avenue SE(if extended) on N/A the west and 155"'Avenue SE(if extended)on the east. The subject annexation area abuts the City of Renton IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? boundary on the north and west. The site is not designated as an Aquifer Protection Area as it currently lies outside of city limits. KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER: 142305 9068 142305 9094 142305 9065 142305 9070 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA? 142305 9064 No H:�EDNSP�PAA�Annexations\BalesuVIsterApp.doc\d LEGAL DE�CI�IP �)N OF PROPEItT�' (Attach sep te sheet if needed) See attached. TYP� OF APPLICATION � FEES Check all application types that apply-- City staff will determine fees. X ANNEXATION $ SUBDIVISION X REZONE $ SPECIAL PERMIT $ _LOT LINE ADNSTMENT $ TEMPORARY PERMIT $ _SHORT PLAT $ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ _TENTATIVE PLAT $ SITE PLAN APPROVAL $ _PRELIMINARY PLAT $ GRADE&FILL PERMIT $ _FINAL PLAT $ (No.Cu.Yds: ) _VARIANCE $ (from Section: ) $ PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT $ WAIVER $ PRELIMINARY ROUTINE VEGETATION FINAL MANAGEMENT PERMIT $ _BINDING SITE PLAN MOBILE HOME PARKS $ SHORELINE REVIEWS: SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT $ CONDITIONAL USE $ VARIANCE $ EXEMPTION $ NO CHARGE X ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ REVISION AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP (See 10% Notice of Intent petition) I, (Print Name) Steve Beck , declaze that I am (please check one) _the owner of the property involved in this application, X_the authorized representative to act for the property owner(please attach proof of authorization),and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and Ihe information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the bes[of my knowledge and belief. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. (Name of Owner/Representative) Notary Public in and for the State of Washing[on Notary(Print) (Signature of Owner/Representative) My appointment expires: (THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY STAFF.) City File Number: ECF SA R SHPL CU LLA PP FP TP SP RVMP V AAD W FPUD SM SME MHP BSP A CPA TOTAL FEES: $ TOTAL POSTAGE PROV IDED:$ H:�EDNSP�PAA\Annexations\BalesuvlsterApp.doc\d Annexation Revievv Form (X) Notice of Intent TO : Building Surface Water Utility Fire Water Utility Parks Wastewater Utility Police Transportation Public Works Maintenance Current Planning FROM : Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning SU�JECT : Proposed Bales Annexation Location : The parcel is located in the northwest quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W,M, in King County. The given address for this annexation is 15325 SE 128'h Street, Renton, Date Circulated: Comments Due: General Information Area : 8.52 Acres Street length ; N/A Assessed Value : N/A Estimated Population : 14 Current Uses Residential : 6 single family dwellings Commercial : Industrial : Public : Comp Plan Designat, : Residential Rural � Future Uses: , Residential single-family homes Future Population : Unknown for this non-project action. R-5 zoning would allow approximately 34 dwellin s and an estimated o ulation of 85 Reviewing Department/Division; l. Does this annexation represent any unique or significant problems for your department/division? (Over) 2, Are you aware of any problems or deficiencies in existing infrastructure or service provision to the area? 3, Does this proposed annexation represent a logical extension of services provided by your department/division? 4. What additional facilities or staff would be required to serve this area? Can you identify any other costs the City would incur as a result of this annexation? 5. Would the City assume ownership or responsibility for facilities currently owned or managed by another jurisdiction? Would new agreements or franchises be required as a result of this annexation? 6. Would alternate boundaries create a more logical annexation for provision of City services? (If yes, please indicate on the aitached map.) General recommendation and comments: Signature: Date: > _ Q — � o � o �n o � SE 120 h S � S w � — > — c� � � � N Nt 6th St 124th PI w -�� -- �� `L' w - � � � Q U � ' � ' � � _ � Q L L _ � � � � � � � rl I N � � E 4t St � � � h St ' f�th S1 ��- S 1 8th St i I I � - �-�1 � 8 �' � ; � � � _ , � w -� �. ,_ SE , t t. 0 �_. � NF NE 3 d St - - � Q ��i s � - - � � E 1 nd i 2n St NE 2nd Sf SE 13 nd t — �,� d w _ � z _ ,,, _ � cn -- Q Q > > � � SE 134th t. � Q --- ¢ � � � � � � � �. � — � � o � r � � �n � � SE 136th St E 13 th t. � � SE � "' � ie Q �; � Q I _ � rT 1 t P. � — — , � r -��1 . • p 1000 2000 Pro osed Bales Annexat�on Site � — — — Existing City Limits Figure 1: Vicnity Map Proposed Annexation 1 : 12'�� Economic Development,Neighbofioods&Strategic PlanninB � Boundary �O• Alex Pictsc4�8 Administletor G.Del Rosario E. ,tp 20 Deccmba 2002 a � o a 0 o � d o 0 �— � -� 0 o h P � a �� Q -- � �- °� �] Q ❑ � Q � p �3 � Q � � � o th St o 0 o � d � S �� _ �' - o a o _ * i �, ; � o , �_ � _ ___ ; , a � 7. . � o li ♦ �� — a � � � _ _ _ ' '- � ao 00 - - �� ❑ _ � � o � � ❑ � QO � �IE 2nd St ° a SE1 � r�1 � Q 0 � _ � Proposed Bales Annexation Site _ __ _ EX;St;�9 �;�, �;m;tS o 300 600 Figure 2: Existing Structure Map � Proposed Annexation ��Y ,� Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Sha[egic Planning Boundary � . 3 600 ♦O� A�exPietsch,ectingAdminisastor � Existing Structure ,P ,= G.Dcl Ros�io N.rp 20 Dcccmber 2002 \ � � ', , ' � n . ., x � xy � . � � _ � f � u . . . � ,- �� ,r +J �� \ � � � � � �. � � \ , ,_ . �� _ . .��.� � Q % . . � \ �� , I ,� \ xp � n . . . �°� t . � x . "° x � t .,,� ,. � � �. S . . e. � - � - _ _� � , . - ,.=K .. . . _ I -=� . : . .._ �,;..y .n �b ,.,� ,�„ . ., ._� �- . _ �� x �.n � � ; � � � �x , r � ., � - � �_ ,, . �,� � �� __ . . . r _ - , �. .. - � � b _ , __ . . ,.�� _ ., w , . ,�� . , - . 0 , ., � ,_ � , � . . , � ` x ., x,�.. ; �� . � . � . � �, ,�. x � �� , . -- �, . . .. . . �� - - , �.a� 5 ' � `� f-�• x�wa � P, ��YN A IL. Y� % % \�. M ~ � » � � ' �� M R NtM � x \ � x • � �JI a \ M I��D �� / . �n -- _\ 1 ' �,,� � x v V � „ ` /-- _ � � . ] � �u�. . : . "'� '°�' _ ��..� � —z-'--- _ —- - ■ � — BI Annx in i Pr d a es e at o S te O p O S e 1 m Interval Contour 0 3 00 600 Figure 3: Topography Map - - - Existin9 city �imits .,� Economic Development,Neighborfioods 8c Strategic Planning � Proposed Annexation 1 . 3 600 .a� � AlcxPietsch,ec[ingAdminishator Bounda�/ G.DcI Rosuio •� AN.i � 20 December 2002 � a 4�� r °°'� — – ry � 4,1 ° 41 ✓�� 0 w (� ° Z I'T� � � `� O M.9L'34-1\L. � 101."!1 � a P �rp,o u� �O��`�,'o; � �- ��5 $ Q �� o C�'I � �e$ia n d o � f Y /D/ N -of.H lyf � 6 � 9 � U �' Z ~ 'I�yA�w �i.�� Wa� 76�6 ��69� ,+�r-Ssd ^ N.��-o��e. J,� ' � i � � �/ � Z � �6 � ��s�. W W �o�.z, r�,� , , � � F � �; -J � � � N � `� � 4 08 c7 � � e�''� � a � n 5 � `� 7C22 zt 0` ,0 22$O r t r -l.yqy9� 1-� ppA ` \� E � N � — W ooSo n _ _ y � q �� l5 � � ` oc � �o� , � V ^ � �o,ho o M �o•n�...E� o � _ � C_ • ? °i C �ry -�� Z " - 4 ° �t.�N1. o M �` �� ., o. • or , � :'.f�l• � .� � doqc � vti9 �.1 1 q 1 io 3g'�3>N '�_ ' w _ 1�\\� K \ G 96 ��.� � ' � 0 14�� o � �7 1�,� o . 3 . � �/'� ,�`4�0 � h o I. , � 2S�0 P �00 �� (.J� 3 o � ry z� .� � ,2 gV 3 3 2 3.3 I _ --- � °°�° �., `� � ►� �'�'0 o �oi.a� � —� - "- oz 8/.6o m S � 94 l � � � N a 1 S Ns � ,. � 2 � . � w 1,� � p, r q�D�• I I � � t r w 13 a� �� e�ym+ a ; o;so 1 F . � . Io v � �1 � V J ~ �l �oi.a � ` � a � I�f O � 6 r b b Kao,-..n a.zl . /i k ♦ �o�.z� = I � �ypQ � � �� _ � ho. 9 y'9° o�o .� e : op -�5�' � ti°' oro �1 k. ti �P� i '�� ` 1 �ti � rt�j a �''� v ~ � �iO � `h y N � 14'�tp� N� J � I �� 4,� $C � �1� � qo9.�-i[P� ` O�80(p�0`y0 �� zs ss s,.�o 'o`'o�o �° y � � �Z ts � 8!.�00 1 t.7 �3 �1� �0 70 /00 70 � S. - ---' ' NE 24TH ST R � N/t'O� IO'� �l23.!! - � ' ��f•o7.�0E. �' _ � t �is.04 .vfJ9-07-d9& F3a1SP 1.U�9T-083 SHPL �� (2.� „� ' ,v.E. r r� r 9805149 5 _. • `3 60 9 o I 42 a'S�s So 5/ M1 S� �S! FS as a�, � !30 c7.4/ ��,yr��. �o� �o .va�o�-wc 3 � - � ^ zs rs ��' � i .►b ' � ' �hLOT� � o i c / a � w ` 35 _�° 0 0 +° 34 0�' P LOT� �L,OT 2 �LOT� �530 9 �� ., 2 �y'�'e a�° � o ,ro�p � � � qo I Iw S o ' °� �(� �+ �.(��E V f.G � n O sl'l• � 6'W N 0 p0 u M .� � � y h � ��o� 9L Zy�'� � h k�1��Z q��q, �y(�� oo'.Ga $ � � , vea.P�-ri.r I �'9�.r�.:i� 1 l�y I � p� �.r� 9=-a3 � al9L �Si S/ ^ �r = h 9� �09 sr 0 1 y L?s s.o�w . �''^'se.� –�—aS 9 8�� N "' : 4 s I lo ° a ��'��y� ' oLOT� �o LOTaS �n "'�� i9�� S '` �, r . ^ Z a 34 � N a 'b � � � Baca � 52 m Z o � �19 b ,N � Y 90� . �5� �W I��y.t� �gW 1 � � �3�� n ^ �p� ^ �Q ac ,,,—,J_ �c�r.z __ � � . *�i ��Z � � ., � Q � I \�1 y� v'b n 151^ ^ 2 pRQ i ., e°, � � 3 3 9 � G 3 'y� /3 D 'L��`'+,► , 3�D� ^ � � ta. �?�3� u w q�� ii o� .va�-F aa c sv `� Da3D Q p io�sz ? 3'v� e rsz setr^ .9�s:.- y� . � q �t�. ` j �° ��o� � 0 7 r� 6 � � 4 0 � 2 r�� 3 5 �a � � N h '� r 99p � � ��I 2 • s.cN. w /a rJ T _ � ^e � N�� ., � O,p ,ve s,�. _ — ep o � � p ^ p �a � �• - n� �i o o ar .��^X � NB9.L.9-'1/w �haay �� 9'!o�y� � � ��9� �� o � a9� � 3! �� – - 1~ �ee_,�.;�o� �0�1 � 9� m '�i4 05 f1��,, k '��e a � --- --- — � ' —�- -..-- - _ti� — -- - —l_ lti•o __ � i3�p�o � o� f^ 0 6°� o ,�y .�._- ! -- <i _ _'� .�', —; -� � �-- — t � +J � \ u J � n PI _ � _ _ �--> _ � - , �---_ � � � , ; � �- , ; � ;� � -'--- —_I i _� � , ; -- . �� c- tn St ,- _ � , �� - � S 1 � ; , � ; i ; , i I ; '', - �, , — _____-1 ; , — — i, - �- ; i - --- � � � � __-- k. _—"___ '—._i"_ I ; � I i . .::.:..a� �...�. ' --_______�-__�__ , .��, „ �. -- ------�-- � -_----1-_ , „ - _ � � � � � � + '� ` . � V � � � � � r � I � � — - — � � � � � � � � S � 1 �. n �� t ; � __ Proposed Bales Annexation Site o 300 600 Figure 4: Aerial Map - - - Existin9 city�imits Proposed Annexation �,� Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Boundary � . 3 600 ♦� � Alex Pietsch.ec[ing Adminismmr G.Del Roserio A�,.T � 20 Decemba 2002 Renton .� . � : � :<ti . , . •_;. . --- Renton City Limits } .� - .. � ,�� " �� . f � ,F �:__ � , t ` , . �'i'' ' �� '�� Parcels ' � �:" - '� ,"� x . *. � ��i., �� o � . � � .�, Zonin9 �=� _ _�.� _ �� `�.'��„�..��''��"� � ___ . _ _ �_. .. Resource Convers... �' � — � " ^ _, _ . .: _....,.. 3 --- Residential 1 du/ac � �- ....� ,�,� � � Residential 5du/ac '�,�� -�� '� " - � s1'� � ��_ :�, _�: Residential 8du/ac • �'} .,.ph,� :'y''R . , ._ �.�,; 4 ..4 ,, ��,,•'' ';� � . �� ._3�! 1��-. Residential 10du/ac � '�, 1 '� *�i a� „ � Residential 14du/ac ' . ,'' br a tr � �' � Residential Manufa... :.� > `� - �'*�► x -� � ,� , � �� Residential Multi-F... �'�r'� rin .z �, � . ; # �' ;,,� � Residential Multi-F... ',�e �},��'^ -� �.� -'� , s� A � , . i ' `�'E:-!'�� Residential Multi-F... =� 'z � y` " . ` •. I � ��y Residential Multi-F... � t �-' } - �r �A � � , ��."'�+�� `4' ., , l Residential Multi-F... � r � � �" „ � _, t _ ,� ' 1 � "�� =• ;" `:�r' ; ',, � � ,1� � - `� Center Neighborhood s�': ' '� ^'� : ''� '��: , : . . � �:� � 'Center Suburban �� ,..,.x ' ' f� � � .��, y a ,,� � �,�. �, J .y 1, : , : � , � . Center powntown ,��q[(f : �! r ` , ' �,:\ .YMM '.� \ ' � ' .Sh � y 'k _ r . � ,t Center Office Resi... �- �;;,� � ' � � ; �': - ;, � � � r�� '"�. ' ��' .�; Commercial Arterial �h - ��_ „�x ��."� �n" _ CommercialOffice {�;,,�,r'�� ' �� `�, ;.�,.: . . � � Convenience Com... , �s �� - � � . > � . . � ___ . t Industrial - Light ��s�}J�.'''-` .k; � M '!'.�, - _j�s . , � :�'d �,.,.. Industrial - Medium ��r��f,j;;� ,� � �� y ; �,"�;` �� "�' �i •::.�.rT*'. �5 �'�{ ndustrial - Heavy �� .� � ,�,.� , `� a��,�R_�. t �:��; ,�-,. � '�': � �' �xY't' ;,�ri� ��,v �� '�J'a'"� x�,�r� 'i� � ,� �,j,�`. w 'i- ,�,� y{ '��.... .� _y e.�i�:�'.� ,,..__ l'r- .' �'�".. �'� „. Erosion Hazard Areas � � *f '� � �� } . ��,,,� '�j'- � ' .. Renton Aerial }A �,��:��',,�Y''��..�� ...'% 4'��.i .�. t � .�. � -�� ,,,,�:� ,�-�''k • i L,� .[ •�;1ti�� '�a��i,�-y -� #,_ i.� i� { . ti '`�..�.w ' ��'. •* � i I'f .. �-� y__ f",=.r`h,� � �_ . ��• i'§ .,�4s� ,.i �.;1.��.� .f . �S'`" .'�.�'+` �- '..�ta.•�" �'; .Y �.'.;�... �� .-Y� N SCALE 1 : 2,826 200 0 20o aoo soo FEET http://rentonnet/MapGuide/maps/Parcel.mwf Wednesday, January 08, 2003 10:26 AM (Q:IMrSIDIDataIRENTON�3.SIDJ Scale 1:4728132 •� �� ,-- _..� .�k � x . � ,�{� " *"�t"''. ,j � �' � ,� .� � �� 3 � ��k� �.�� ` ��a� T , t, "_ I•��' t' �1►�" �+�j�►�''�' � � � -� � . - _. 4. . o s4 ..._ - , .. �-: -A, � ,�, -�- ,, ,,� __ .��lr , , �*�� 'a � '` ��. , ,� � ` � , . . � . � , � � :ks �- M �!: �- � h •. � q "�` �.� �;, ��'0._� ;� � � 't' ' ` � � '1 , ' � �' � �,- 2°`�{ �: - ��. � �� '+� ' � ` ',r � •. w , .., . t � i '� r � ' ♦ .� �._ t ?' � � � ��' r�+� �,'� 1 _ t>� . � , . r �' '�, ` , ��, j�oc 4 r :'• � _� �� ~ { i�„'�4 f r� r1 ��4a. , � .� •�..� .l'• .a fi�,, i� ..?.. �* .,..�.� ' ��+ �1�� 4 M. V � � �tl '., � "' . F , . � !�'1 �f I�':1 � `.f\':� �� " --�I � `:',�'s ;� i�:� 'r �� t. , �._ �� ?\ '�+ R`�.' _ P I � ... }. � ��-:,�yy'. � .� .�I � �� " ,�, `"'4 ' . � '�� .;:�t` j'., �, t. ,�`# ; . . , � :.� , r ' �s ��► � � - �,'i �� - �i� ' � , � �;�'�.�,W�a�. � �� ,y�� , � `t'�� . � }�. ♦ �. ,� ,t,,a a � `S �-2 � R, • � ,,4> � , -.� � i �` ,�, t ��t - ^�� . .�'� "` "*�� ,a. � 6�.� � f--i +� 3 ��- �, '' :* . i , � `'�� ,�:�``� � , j .F � ,+ Y ` .+� � � . ,,t� .`� .} ��i�' � * � �' � L t ,. i�.H,•1,.`• 4 -�°� -�� .w � .._ � � � - � , '�� t `! �„� � ` _i � �� .� �F .� � .� . � � i t a r'� 'F�� , , s . Y� �';� .A �. ��w��..� � ��+ yi� :'��• � •� , � } � f1 , � , � :g+��.�' '� .�,:�;��.� • � � _�-.�1� � ; i�`�� . ''',� �i� "'r�;� : �� s�, � • . ,r.�,�� t R♦ l:��r a , � `'r�.. . �._ " .;� t�' 'I!� . �� i ~- � ;� �,"��"'+� � ''��' � ' �i , ! �� t, �� `i.�. M s �;:� •�, i k ,�.y yy� -I k � y •�!. ' ��' » �i � ,� � Y. t �y '� 4.1� I �t•��y.�' � �. � ; �,, �i � � ... . ��.*t .�' '6'-��rG f�_t�a'. � �., � �t �� t . `*�.` � � 4��.^. •; - •r •1;.,y '�� . :�, `� 1� �� i q� + �• e 5 . y��Y �� .'� �' 1�}'+� �,. �' �i �Y N'�! �a'. f .� � �I •Y ,� �- . *��"�r ,'l1 ;i,�„�. �►. ' � ;M, .,�,. R �r- ,,,l. '�� ' ""�,, r. �;�' u::w��•, ��i`� e�.i:.� ,Y.,'.tt"� �:' . `'��s'_�� :�} ., �M_.., : '�� .� MrSID Viewer [Q:IMrSIDIDataIRENTON�3.SIDJ Scale 1:2364.066 , . , �� `� , r , � �, . � , ,j �S - . �t`. �' .��, .. ._ ! U` ! � � � I � w �.� � � � -l�' � t' � r v . wt �� ' d ,_:�� .... �� > -'1.�ti� �' -�c .. ., f '� � t , ' I� . � �. .�� . �-1 . .� ,'7� `� � y y� , �,` . � �.. � � �, � ^ � ��C _ ,� �;. � � '` � � F i_ �� : I ...� , — � .. . J/ :�� ,� - '�� _'�' �4� ' . � �, + x ��;� . .... , . .f • • � , �� ..�. ,� _ _. _ __ �yr.R �. .� �(;,'";`7 � � . _._. - - �- . � ; �y � ti �� ,i . ' �' * d T �'� � � ~t �� . . ..^+►_. Y ��;.. � � � '<„"� �` •1 , ` � t , • '•� '` � � �.� ^a +� �'�i -� '�� '��'1 `' , , �r' � '� rr—�. � + Y r s � `';.,, '�` �Me ,,F � . �� , . � ,� ' �'�'� ' �`�r '� , ; . � "'� . , � � , ; '� � , �t��r ° � - � "{'. - �� 3�. e . � ��V.y�? . �...� � r��, ��:.• � - 1 k� . _ ;� ., r ,�',r �.'_ , + � ; I ,!� ' �` � , � . ��,�„�.� a �,�.+c� ,�,, � ��.�' �� '�` r'" � � � �„ f � ,`'� � r• ,� � � • � �s '� x: 9C w �,. �� y p . lt;sl � , � . . � .� � t �s'�� tr 1��.� �� ; '� � � � � �� t � �M I� ' F� ,. � �,r � 1 ��,_ �, , �w . v �,r , , ' - �: ,� . , _ � �, "� �.=� ' � = • '''�►:>�, .�� d "i=4, ,f e��r► '*'.�,,�,.�1 ;� • �� '� .3:� • � ' t � ��.V�.� . _. _. ... ,� ..�+ � 'r i� �4 4 9� �� ' .. .r 'r .�t#.�+�.�a:�_.. r 4+�It::! 1� .:,�Y�"�e�f,.a � MrSID Viewer �.,a.�e:o.�.�aom�w t � ._ � �p�,pp�r+p� 1di�1LY.IS POry T8S YRk£C3E taT � . �+/�� ricevr um n� rssis*rnc rv�x:xrnc seoa , N W � 4 �3 - � � Q O U . . . .. N O0��OC�Ri 1R1H0#t1d87'e � Y�('iPSfl:[A7D SS 110T GUL'iBAT6ii '. .«v.> .. ' qp S6:i9 dCCPR1TT.9TT.L5.T805HfrY • � �� '�, ,� A_�,�t�e� SCALE I" — t00' � ~9-iz.94' G SW II 2 5 /c-7-'� _ 1311.09 — N8B-21-�iiW — s��c 1311.OD - . > . ..n . S.E. 12BTH. 5T. � ., � . S.E. 1267.N� ST.NBwYR ,.w.s. y, . � - ��i�� `� . .��w. .a'i-oe � w�Mo.vi•w� . ,v o.,>v . ..so .r �.... ivae3 �vni �3v.:� - s vea.oi, _ �� ..e.:� ' ..o �� `• bw I I I � � o�� . i a , �yj{o>c/G� �I > I I I n . � �d""` ` cor � � �a // f � I i I, ..� //, j� , , . „i � � , �—�� v. �• / � PI I IJ y " .-rn�9� - � � . 1 � �� , . I ; �I � v W 7I . I � I I � I+ ' o n<�t 1.1 I I I I .� N 0 f� c q� . _ —� V I �^.G LOT 2 ^j � _ 65 __�£___ • �` CA N I :Y 'I ;0 �� 390.o i a � r �le l �y I , �P� ., �r� o��il/`l� I� � 9��+ ti M1 b � y l� a•�`' �Q 5 a�� o � '�6`' O i'� ' � h I 20 9 _ �--' +1 _ /�B.B4 I_ _ 3�o.ei _ I IV �—�3—_ """._—_ ' _ ae1-it_ _ �8 V � �W �y� ' I In —h :N ry 4 w —�— 4 /�! ��` I � w�3 � I y ^ e • I I ;^ �� / . � l,�cj��. w �� I 'J �1 _ �__z:s -� • �,, '� _ . . ... . ��ii;i� �e. .ivs rr.�z� �m.r �i: i� : � I ^��484036— 909I3056f �'� N ..� ` I � � � IAy NC LLA 9B9O]6I aciooio�ea I �A � � 1/yf�,� �j7� / '� � L07 1 �h' L07 2 � LOT 3 �. L07 9 y :I !%��1��/�C.i-" �Ll/�F.i��,;� � � � y P�l * � % { o i � a �� ,.;�n_,�.. . � a � � " "I � a�=�.. M w� 4 } i ` � � ,pr.� FVa '�'''�. � � o II a„o �`_r�,.z.�. @ '�� I os'�. @ �p F� i� � � �"oeW • � � (� p �'� r d � � � . ' I �lA3A� a�� '�!me ��w.srrt��yS' � ^ O ,o,.,, n m�-�.,�m nN _LSH_/�� I _ _bf9�/6 .vM-ro.00W N�9/!.) .._�_esw. �a�s ,� �rawNi� ——— � �O I I 316.35 ., 3I 6.35 �_.�� :�� qq60 SE. 132N0 5T. �� a,_ 1 O'.� �.,. m - ,. . . . 442fA • p ' ' °° . ' .:s r` o W I �y-Y _ _ - 6 EST TES OL.95' - �_.�'Q�1 zz2 : i F+:- i z 3 ♦ SAR� CRE 7 e s io i: _ iz �a i � _ 0�o - �C£D : � �- ° , - I �'� '�+*W �ow pd,o �,o p�' rP'o �ao yp o�w o��o o�y� o��°� '� 'r .:Q , v.. �i.e. .r... seaws a.°�.iii �,�..� r.w ...v ....r. ,�a r. -_ I ' ' PCI.C ; '` J` �0 i0 p ii � � i2 = i! ��O iso isqo i7o R igo L I' 6 x o� sa0 � `L . ry�� i � j; y e p r��4 �^'V b?� `yF \ �,"°� �, ��+ , �W�`. IO^a•y `•;•_ .r�Es.133RD CJ�. ;~ t• `:�"?+ Sypl..1T011.4 . . � rSE. 133R0'ST. ' �NI� �,,,, ;;"..0,.'',�'�I.AN�.. ., ,... ,,,.. .,.. ,,.,. e.. �,i,, �' i I `.'TP.P eB•��w l W��1 O PCQ.Oo �5 ,5 O . 0 3 O _ Z O ,I 'Q e`^ , � ` �B 4' e� o°' F �P� I° �O`� �2 I es-ae- ew ies�" �• F. `b• ` `ry• F. � do ,{ ��O, •r��: �b �rr�.•� ) �� I I �A„ _ .e, ,^— I � �� NC SP 67B063- 7912110857 0� � h� ay LeT 2 �\i � '.! n� e, tnr i o : `P. t r3d e�Ne 4 , � �� /-�°�� /�/ ,��,v'.� Owner :Hon Josa hat & Assum �@troScan / King (WA) - ----------------*� g p � Parc :142305 9062 l� Site :15409 SE 128Th St Renton 98059 Xfered :05/18/1990 Mail :15409 SE 128Th St Renton Wa 98059 Price :$199, 000 Use :002 Res,Single Family Residence Phone . Bedrm:4 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF:141,557,761Ac:2.30 *=---------------------------• MetroScan / King (WA) --* . •-------------- Owner :Leifer Irvin T Parcel :142305 9064 � Site :15325 SE 128Th St Renton 98059 Xfered . � Mail :15223 SE 128Th St Renton Wa 98059 Price . Use :002 Res,Single Family Residence Phone . Bedrm:3 Bath:1.50 TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF:121,241, 601Ac:2 ;69 *----------------------------• MetroScan / King (WA) . •----------------* Owner :Bales Lp;Bales George H Trustee Parcel :142305 9065 s� Site :15217 SE 128Th St Renton 98059 Xfered :07/28/1998 Mail :15217 SE 128Th St Renton Wa 98059 Price . Use :002 Res,Single Family Residence Phone . Bedrm:2 Bath:1. 00 TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF:100, 925,441Ac:1.10 - *----------------------------: MetroScan / King (WA) :----------------* � Owner :Leifer Randall D/Rosemary M Parcel :142305 9070 Site :15311 SE 128Th St Renton 98059 Xfered :03/08/1991 Mail :5127 S Fountain St Seattle Wa 98178 Price . Use :002 Res,Single Family Residence Phone . Bedrm:5 Bath:2 .25 TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF:169,738,241Ac:2 .10 *----------------------------• MetroScan / King (WA) •----------------* Owner :Bales Lp;Bales Management Trust Parcel :142305 90� � Site :15221 SE 128Th St Renton 98059 Xfered :07/21/1998 Mail :PO Box 3015 Renton Wa 98056 Price . Use :002 Res,Single Family Residence Phone . Bedrm:3 Bath:1.50 TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF:75,366,401 Ac:1.00 Infonnation compiled from various sources.Real Estate Solutions makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy or conapleteness of infonnation contained in t/ais report. 4 �� . f��..� ��.� �� r ,� ��ll� , �' *----------------------------• MetroScan / King (WA) - -------------�* Owner :King County Parc ' :142305 9063 Site : *No Site Address* Xferecl :04/30/1993 Mail :500 K C Admin Bldg Seattle Wa 98104 Price :$150, 000 Use :300 Vacant,Residential Phone . Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF: Ac:4.70 , MetroScan / King (WA) •----------------* *----------------------------. . Owner :Bales Lp;Bales George H Trustee Parcel :142305 9068 Site :15201 SE 128Th St Renton 98059 Xfered :07/28/1998 Mail :15201 SE 128Th 5t Renton Wa 98059 Price . Use :008 Res,Mobile Home Phone . Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF: Ac:1.63 *----------------------------: M�troScan / King (WA) •----------------* Owner :King County Parcel :142305 9071 Site :*No Site Address* Xfered :01/18/1994 Mail :500 K C Admin Bldg Seattle Wa 98104 Price :$376,730 Full Use :300 Vacant,Residential Phone . Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF: Ac:4.67 MetroScan / King (WA) •----------------* *----------------------------: • Owner :King County � Parcel � :142305 9072 Site : *No Site Address* Xfered :01/18/1994 Mail :500 K C Admin Bldg Seattle Wa 98104 Price :$376,730 Full Use :300 Vacant,Residential Phone . Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF: Ac:4.67 *----------------------------• MetroScan / King (WA) •----------------* Owner :City Of Renton Parcel :142305 9095 Site :12923 156Th Ave SE Renton 98059 Xfered . Mail :1055 S Grady Way Renton Wa 98055 Price . Use :172 Pub,Governmental Service Phone . Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF:506,724,352Ac:1.35 *----------------------------• MetroScan / King (6t1A) •----------------* Owner :Puget Sound Energy & Elec Parcel :142305 9106 Site :*No Site Address* Xfered . Mail :PO Box 90868 Bellevue Wa 98009 Price . Use :300 Vacant,Residential Phone :360-423-9573 Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF: Ac: .79 Inforntation compiled from various sources.Real Estate Solutions makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy or cornpleteness of information contained in this report. 5mooth Feed SheetsT"' Use template for 5160� 142305906208 �4230590b406 i42305906505 HONG JOSAPHAT+ASSUMPTA LEIFER IRVIN T BALES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 15409 SE 128TH ST 15223 SE 128TH P O BOX 3015 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 142305907008 142305907206 142305910606 LEIFER RANDALL D+ROSEMARY M KING COUNTY PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC 5127 S FOUNTAIN ST 500 KC ADMIN BLDG PROPERTY TAX DEPT SEATTLE WA 98178 500 4TH AV PO BOX 90868 SEATTLE WA 98104 BELLEVUE WA 98009 512630103004 935330076008 935330077006 BURNSTEAD CONST CO CUMMINGS WILLIAM R+IDA M SIMS ROBERT N 1215 120TH AV NE 12652 155TH AV SE 12815 SE 218TH PL BELLEVUE WA 98005 RENTON WA 98059 KENT WA 98031 935330078004 935330079002 935330080000 NELSON EMIL SAWYER ERNEST C+MARY JANE HALL FERRON L 7219 S 128TH PO BOX 78526 12657 155TH AV SE 12651 155TH AVE SE SEATTLE WA 98178 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 947792030001 947794050007 CENTEX HOMES D'ETTORE AMEDEO+MARY A C/O TOM BROWN 6013 NE 4TH PL 2320 130TH AV NE RENTON WA 98059 BELLEVUE WA 98005 n� IQ►\/ERY� Address Labels Laser 5160� Smooth Feed SheetsT"" Use template for 5160� � - .� 142305906208 �"- i42305906406 - �142305906505 HONG JOSAPHAT+ASSUMPTA LEIFER IltVIN T BALE5 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 15409 SE.128TH ST 15223 SE 128TH P O BOX 3015 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 . 142305907008 142305907206 142305910606 LEIFER RANDALL D+ROSEMARY M KING COUNTY PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC 5127 S FOUNTAIN ST 500 KC ADMIN BLDG PROPERTY TAX DEPT SEATTLE WA 98178 500 4TH AV PO BOX 90868 SEATTLE WA 98104 BELLEVUE WA 98009 512630103004 935330076008 935330077006 BURNSTEAD CONST CO CUMMINGS WILLIAM R+IDA M SIMS ROBERT N 1215 120TH AV NE 12652 155TH AV SE 12815 SE 218TH PL BELLEVUE WA 98005 RENTON WA 98059 KEN'T WA 98031 935330078004 935330079002 935330080000 NELSON EMIL SAWYER ERNEST C+MARY JANE HALL FERRON L 721-9 S 128TH PO BOX 78526 12657 155TH AV SE 12651 155TH AVE SE SEATTLE WA 98178 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 947792030001 947794050007 CENTEX HOMES D'ETTORE AMEDEO+MARY A C/O TOM BROWN 6013 NE 4TH PL 2320 130TH AV NE RENTON WA 98059 BELLEVUE WA 98005 �� AVERYO Address Labels Laser 5360� ry.�. r � o \J ` �'� /• . . EXHIBIT A -,� . BALES ANl +I�AT'XON LEG.�L DESCIaIPTION The Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 14, . Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; � EXCEPT the east 32.45 feet of the north 406.01 feet thereof; EXCEPT that portion for street right of way(NE 4�' Street). � . - � i �� . : � . . .I�. �. : . 1 �a1� � I�,.. I � , __.«�v o w � � — r3— 5 — (40' .. � S.E. I287H.� ST. NQ ��A�� ' •..`�*» <se.titt �* i i e..„w.,,.a : S. ^.<:�.. ao S. � ' / i.. , ets7�at G.. �a.�.�� + r�a E. (2 H, $T;eR�w..� / o wer.ti.s' >' arlw� tar /.iI.N �re �rs.�.. 17QP3 �V ••�..rr .ftt n' t�eTqw�I•ryp . � i . � rss ♦H.a 3,� . - � � � � I -�—_�.� ".,• 'R � � ,. � �� . _ . :. 1 n •... ! �'Y' t.}.� a � .� � � e � � �" a � , � C � LOj ! ti �.. y�A° ."� � S!) ,� `� o•� � Rw ' . � �,. � � , � _.r____� � �, *. �1 d � ' \�` � d � N '� ,•,�A I h} . � � .v a�' � 6 ^-��,�,—. .,� �Q w • � 1 I ' � �! y "'� � �� w s� . � � � .� __{ y `'�,,� � I � j�'� �\'+�\,1 �� „`,""''O ' +U� LP ' `� 1('��, , \�•` � k y '�\ � A 4�pAG � „i I _ G� 1 � � ^r : ' � 3s�.e i � 4 }}}qqq�� ¢`. � �I AG �/� � � . I ` _p� �.� T t"C9 ��/Jy t• ' j Zo o� V g5 y..rac. }� `yr 4't.":y � 4 � h��r L�_.— _1RA.,3 Q r, _ -�� +n `�' ��Q �� : �+r ]67.ii iar.a+ �Q' � tC3 � c'� - _ se I_ _ a�e.oi 9 1�,. �� l� - 1�1 �,,,�� _� ,� �„ *-3 � \J ;` ^ b �„ �; �xN ^ � � � �o C � '�"�� ,t c, (� �t.�; ty � ''. ^ � � i ..-� �\ (� � , � SV � "1~.. f.� M h � Mn': � � N O , � � \ p ry tr+q � ` n`��,_ � � i� C � -\ 1 • � _ \ V • ________�_�___._ ,� �.( �+. � � I ' ..a.a. a.�.es ra�.ir. — " ] s�r ium '—�-------`-��, rn.�! �},, �i �S' � ' �484056- Try ��'� � � �� t09130561-� I' � ln G� \ _ a� wt� � e +tC LLA 4840TEJ-84W0{OT83 ' �`� � � �T�� (� 6"' � � U� �' : y� iot 2 Q� �or a � �or� F� � � . r� (`�'�a 6� � � * 4 �' 'f a ` \ \\ ' C 4 , �N.M.! � � /fa.M � ri G V' �" � C-. � � � a � .%m � � �,rn-;v: � ! � �.,,. � � s � t! � � � � � � � �e�. � � p a � �530 � t�- r. 4 � � � � //��A� ��y,. � }�D� '��.IM'ry �`� �aN �' /f�fe*6 ' �d154 � YR:TC� � 4 � o oeM � � _ � �' � � U � �" '",�,,.,��f � ,,,. �,r a�,.•�. b�/ �' ,..•� -��, ,vn9•ro.aeed sfs9il.+rJ M�� ex..Mo .o..n Aa..e-.ro....cee �'n.� � w.wrrr J��' f � �, � � t-_ z t' 'Z.-a-..�^ �. . � �3 I 6.3 S s''''r'svxrisrue R 1Q f �„Ir � �„ ('� `t � =1i h4•" ^ ' » e ♦260 µ SE. 13$ND ,RT � "� p, } . �_ � •+ �z�,' 4: aa2c�o o�..�s-6 ° '-1`%=r " � � � � � I�� - � . � 3 � ° 6 ES ES TES F . u � Fs"f; °C � � Q � � ({�: :i�4�o _ -GEDAf�� CR 7 - a f Q io - it a ;. i3 '+ _ �t�' iz. �{, � tn �= °� m�° oa�0 00<0 �a�' �,a �o' : '� r � � i� 1 � � � (� /a . _. .,�.:,�, �.. �.... �� ,Q �`� �� qr� j� � 4d� tf 4.J ..s. rra.�. �•.tr 'x�� C � �y ,e CIT� �F REl�TTON ..LL Office of the City Attorney 0 Jesse Tanner,Mayor Lawrence J.Warren MEMORANI)UM �� . �. D E C 1 � 2002 TO: ' Don Erickson, EDNSP ECONONIIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING From: � Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date; December 16, 2002 � . Subject: Resolutions for Falk and Bales Annexations I have enclosed a copy of the above-mentioned resolutions. The originals have been sent to the City Clerk. . GG/�� Lawrence J. Warren LJW:ma. Enc. cc: Jay Covington Bonnie I. Walton Post Office Box 626-Renton,Washington 98057-(425)255-8678/FAX(425)255-5474 � � �V � � 1� �Thispapercontains50%recycledmateria1,30%postconsumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE . . �� December 9, 2002 Mayor Jesse Tanner - City of Renton City Hall 1055 Grady Way South Renton, WA. 98055 SUBJECT: BAI;ES ANNEXATION Deaz Mayor Tanner As the applicants representative for the proposed 8.52-acre Bales Annexation I voluntarily agree to reimburse the City of Renton for all King County Election costs paid by the City to King County for conducting the Ba1es Annexation Election next yeaz. These costs aze estimated by the King County Elections staffto be between $1500. and $2000. It is my intention to reimburse the City for these costs whether or not the Bales Annexation passes or fails, furthermore if the Annexation passes the properties annexed will be required to assume their fair shaze of the cities Outstanding indebtedness. I agree to reimburse the City for the cost of the election within 30 days of its notification to me. Since ,.�� C.0 � � � Steven A. Beck Consultant/Representative Amberwood L.L.C. Cc: Alex Pietsch Rebecca Lind Don Erickson CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC D�VELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AlVD STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUlVi � DATE: December 6, 2002 TO: Dave Chistensen FROM: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Bales and Falk Annexations by Election Process Steve Beck has submitted petitions for these two annexations and Council seems willing to proceed with them. In looking over Steve's legals they do not appear to reflect the whole annexation area which typically includes the abutting street right-of-way if it is not already in the City. We would very much appreciate a quick check of the attached legals before we have Larry Warren include them at attachments in the two resolutions by Council authorizing elections to be held for these two annexations. We don't want to go through the lengthy and costly election process and then find out that what people voted on aren't what we have envisioned. Thanks in advance for your and Sonja's assistance on these two annexation legals. Attachments cc: Rebecca Lind H:\EDNSP\PAA\Annexations\Bales�l.egal description verification.doc\d �:. -. ;_> f.,i– — 1 __--��_ 6+'_ _ 5 r. i1 i�•1 �f.. _�r- T-L�� 7 t a i. . –. . . '_ '^ . . . - e o _ .. � r i'FJ S 1 L=1 ••u amv a ..vvi u..lr.�... l/:l1tLLl 1'� � l�� EJ V V o . �a� 10 oI 02� �9� Bui�ns�,��d C�ns� . �25 9�t�-3�SL �. � .�IC�GO'�Ti'I..�]2d5Ll��CE CO�� ' Ordcr �la.: �238&8 t"LA'I`C.'�'�Ti'IC�7`� �� " (�uc� �Ga�,b�s��c�t (0"1�PGE�at�f� GS�,� TE�1 PARC�L l�� I'HE i�7IESx HA.LP° QF Tf� NEST �?�LF' OF T�E NORTHHES� �U7�RTER OF SECTI�N 14, T��PISHZP �� NORTFi, RANGK 5 EAST, idILI.AMET?� 2i�RTDIAN� T2d 1CYN� Ct7QN'SY, F7AS1iStdGYON; EYCEPT �� PORTION THEREaF OF THE 2iORTH 500.00 �EHT LYIN� EAST oF TxE EAST LINB OF THE t�EST 3Q FEET oF SAID SUHDIVISIoN; ?�CiD EICCEPT TTiAT P�RTIOIi SFfER£QF LYING �TITldxld S}� �AST 225.OP 7F'EET O�F THE S�OTH 4b8.00 F7��T oF TE3E NORTH 468.�0 FEE7 QF S,AID SI3BDaVISICN; �PID E�GEpT TFiAT POATION THB�tEOF CONDE?�J� I1� RING C4IINTX SUPERIc�R COURT CAUSE NUHBER 632253 FOR SOUT�AST 1261'ti STREE2. PARGEL B: THE xA.S'r I�31LF oF TFiE p7E5T fiALF OF TFiE N�RTHWBST QUARTEA aF SECTIoN 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NaRTFt, RAi3G5 5 EA.ST, F7ZLLAHET2E 2lEftibIAN, xN KING cO�NTY, WASHIi`JCTON; EXC£PT T$E EAST HALF oF T`L3E N�RTHEAST QUAttT£R Ok' THE NORTf3WEST QUARTER QF', THE . ATORTHF7,EST (ZUART�R; AND EXCBFT THE �AST 30 FEET oF SAID PREHISES CONVSXED TO ICING COUN2'Y F�R RAAD; AND EXC'EPT TF�.AT PORTZOt�i CONDFM2dED IH KIKG COUN'I'Y SI3PERIOR COURT �AUSE NUHB�R 632�3J. ___--,-.-.----------__... . � --------� ��. +.�____._._----.____.---.- ;°,, r+ � . � 124th P! �` ''� f_ .--�_—�_�....._'�...._..__� - _', � � /�} \ r-`�' 4 �� '� `,f�' LI� � ' L._ .... �i ��f W � � � 4 ;! ' �`\ ,.�'' ,_ ; � � �_}:::-_ a> > j ` �, , � �,_— r� _._:._.... .� � �.�, �--------�--- - h __-_-, � � ` �:-=-�, � J . � � h P I ,.n �.��:_�..-- ' .,� � � - ..-_.,.-_.._,--- , � , ,--� � `� 1 `��t h �� ; , - --,,f�---,.,�- � : ; h S t t h S t ' ; �----��__�__.__^�_,; _ ��-�� .�� , �- _.--- �� ' i �� j� � '._ . . � � �`a c 5.Z� . . � s j. ��z�� ' --- --- -.._�.f.__._.i � �r: �'.�`��"`��,.' � � �� .' _ ,� ,l. • Cn � �1 ��'��' ; r- -- "` � i�� I i • � �'t�` .• ��xf"�-f f ., � ��k�� 'i"s a�f�.'„'��,s',�h,. �` � �,��., � �}( {�±} t �. . ...-'�rr QF'�;::�.�`.'.`'.�""„�r�.d,s':yc:�.. Yrv�.rrw'4 _ �.._._.� _�v�._= `'�' _: � i �'1 � �' -S'-_'__..._._ � { , �_� 'i �Y�i ��' 2 NE 3 d St _ , � i '__-- : � f��`;�` ; � { jI� �1 � �� `,._� . y -�-,-----� � � ; � �, � -�-- -�--_t_L��,.7I � �� 1 E 2 n d S t S E � 3 n d t - � � - --;, '� : `�:;;`_.� ;---- -� 2n St T -- ---- ;_-�=_-=-. � .. _,__�_.. � } �.._.-' � �� ti�C: .� ' .�_._-- ._l �; L,yJ . 1_------ � _ Y ' � �--- ; ; � W 1�_�_____ �____�----.__.---- ; (J7 � > � r�,r- ,{ t i ,y , • v } � Q� Qj ' .L.. ..`-�i: : �f ,:.:. � y— "� _��1 i �i i ! ' � � ':� . (_ti_._. ,,-•�'�i.. '-*.L-�i'_a- f � (f) � � �. ---- � ` � �� t� i �i '`'� � LC7 1�) �----a---��-- ,� --—.)� ,_ �_. � i : <-- r-- !_ �--=--�----....... ,.. c— _ �. --- � �th St , 0 60C 12�� :. ��'�� — �`� `.` � �- d �� r�C1�X — �;�; rc�� : 72�� . 1'�Y o� �conomic Development,Nei�hborhoods&Strategic Planning � � + Sue Cazlson,Adminisaator � -� G.Del Rosario ' ��NTa� �$Novem6er2�02 •' ' DRAFT OF BALES ANNEXATION RESOLUTION CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WELS�IINGTON, CALLING FOR THE ANNEXATION, BY ELECTION, OF CONTIGUOUS UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF RENTON LYING IN AN AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BX THE CITY OF RE1o1TOliT CORPORATION BOUNDARY, INCLUDING SE 128TH STREET, TO THE NORTH, SE 130TH STREET, IF EXTENDED, TO THE SOUTH, 156Tx AVENUE SE, IF EXTENDED, TO THE EAST, AND THE 1VIIDDLE OF 152ND AVENUE SE, TO THE WEST. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Renton, Washington, has determined that it would be in the best interests and general welfare of the City of Renton to annex the property generally bounded by the City of Renton corporate boundary including SE 128`�' Street to the north, and SE 130t�' Street, if extended, to the south, 156t�' Avenue SE, if extended, to the east, and the middle of 152°d Avenue SE, if extended, to the west, legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set fourth; and WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous to call for an election for this annexation; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The best interests and general welfare of the City of Renton would be served by the annexation of contiguous unincorporated territory lying generally in the area bounded by the City of Renton boundary, including SE 128th Street, to the north, SE 130`'' Street, if extended, to the south, 156t" Avenue SE, if extended, to the east, � � ,_ RESOLUTION NO. _ and the iniddle of 152nd Avenue SE, if extended, to the west, legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fiilly set forth. SECTION III. As nearly as can be determined the number of voters residing in the aforesaid territory is four. SECTION IV. The City Council hereby calls for an election to be held pursuant to Chapter 35A.14 RCW to submit to the voters of the aforesaid territory the proposal for annexation. SECTION V. There shall also Ue submitted to the electorate of the tenitory sought to be arulexed a proposition that all property located within the territory to be annexed shall, upon annexation, be assessed and taxed at the same rate and on the same basis as property located within the City of Renton is assessed and taxed to pay for all or any portion of the outstanding indebtedness of the City of Renton, which indebtedness has been approved by the voters, contracted for, or incurred prior to or existing at, the date of annexation. SECTION VI. There shall also be submitted to the electorate of the territory sought to be annexed a proposition that all property located within the territory to be annexed shall, simultaneous with the annexation, have imposed the City of Renton zoning regulations, prepared under RCW 35.A.14.340, with ah Comprehensive Plan designation of Residential Rural and a zoning designation of R-5. SECTION VII. The cost of said annexation shall be paid by the City of Renton. SECTION VIII. The City Clerk shall file a certified copy of this Resolution with the King County Council and the King County Boundary Review Board. RESOLUTION NO. SECTION IX. The City Clerk shall also file with the King County Boundary Review Board a Notice of Intention hereof as required by RCW 36.93.090 et seq. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCII.,this day of , 2002. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerlc APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2002. Jesse Tanner, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attonley RES.952:11/27/02:ma ` �- ' • ; ; DRAFT OF BALES ANNEXATION RESOLUTION CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. A IZ�SOLUTION Or T�I� CITY OF RENTON, Wr�SI3IlVGTON, CALLING FOl� THE ANNEXATION, �Y ELECTION, OF CONTIGUOUS UNINCORPORAT�D TEItRITORY TO THE CIT�' OF RENTON LYING IN AN AREA G�N�RALLY BOUND�D BY THE CITY OF NTON CORPORATE BOUNDAIZY, INCLUDING �� P�� , TO T� + NORT , � � � -l��ii/,�P� , T� THE , SOUTH, dv��s ��,z SG�, �� , TO THE EAST, AND %'� �^��?��P �� TO THE WEST. ��,� WH�I2EAS, the City Council of the City of Renton, Washington, has determined that it would be in the best interests and general welfare of the City of Renton to annex the io ert enerall bounded b the Cit of Renton co orate boundar includin J��r" o�%'-�� P� P Yg Y Y Y �P n�, Y � g i-�i��ecl, to the north, and� ��/��/%'/ ��tO the south, I�� J � ��'� �i��' .�,7 5�, � �� , to the east, and / � ��"��'� , t the west, legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incoiporated by reference as if fully set forth; and WH�R�AS, the City Council is desirous to call for an election for this annexation; NOW, TH�REFOR�, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTIOI�II. The best interests and general welfare of the City of Renton would be served by the annexation of contiguous unincorporated ten-itory lying generally in the area bounded of Renton co orate boundar includin G� �i��V� , to the north, ��i 7``' y y t h c C rt y r p y, g ��P1�a t'� �'��/ , to the south, �—��p�/�U��GI�'.� a� . t��P�G�1�, to the east, and 9 / �� `v�j7 /Ti •2h�� / �? �/f�'✓�� c� f� ,�to the west, legally- described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth. � RESOLUTION NO. _ S�CTION III. As nearly as can be determined the number of voters residing in the aforesaid tei7-itory is four. SECTION IV. The City Council hereby calls for an election to be held pursuant to Chapter 35A.14 RCW to submit to the voters of the aforesaid territory the proposal for annexation. SECTION V. There shall also be submitted to the electorate of the territory sought to be annexed a proposition that all property located within the territory to be annexed shall, upon annexation, be assessed and taxed at the same rate and on the same basis as property located within the City of Renton is assessed and taxed to pay for all or any portion of the outstanding indebtedness of the City of Renton, which indebtedness has been approved by the voters, contracted for, or incurred prior to or existin� at, the date of annexation. SEC'I'ION VI. There shall also be submitted to the electorate of the territory sought to be annexed a proposition that all property located within the territory to be annexed shall, simultaneous with the annexation, have imposed the City of Renton zoning regulations, prepared under RCW 35.A.14.340, with a Comprehensive Plan designation of �,�� Z�l��i�� and a zoning designation of �� SECTION VII. The cost of said annexation election shall be paid by the City of Renton. SECTION VIII. The City Clerlc shall file a certified copy of this Resolution with the King County Council and with the King County Boundary Review Board. S�CTION IX. The City Clerk shall also file with the King County Boundary Review Boai•d a Notice of Intention hereof as required by RCW 36.93.090 et seq. PASSED BY THE CITY COiTNCIL this day of , 2002. 2 �� _ ,.n �LZESOLUTION NO. __ �� Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2002. Jesse Tanner, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES.952:11/27/02:ma 3 . �� . �� CIT�' OF RENTOI�T ��V 2 �2002 ECONOIl�IIC DEVELOPMENT4y"'`'`�«vBqRg�� NEIG�IBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNIlV��FONTES, p� 1l�IEMORANDUM DATE: November 26, 2002 TO: Larry Warren,jity Attorney �11��,� FROM: Rebecca Lmd, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Resolutions for the Proposed Bales Annexation City Council on November 18, 2002 concurred with the staff recommendation to consider election annexations for the Falk and Bales sites and authorized arranging annexation elections for both sites. In order to get this process started we will need resolutions for annexation by election for these two new sites. We are therefore requesting that your office go ahead and prepare the Resolution for Annexation by Election of the Bales Site. Attached please find copies of the legals and vicinity maps for this annexation site. If you have any questions please contact Don Erickson, project manager for these two latest election annexations. Don can be reached at 425-430-6581. Thank you. Attachments (3) cc: Don Erickson H:\EDNSP�PAAWnnexations�Falk\Bales&Falk Resolution Request.doc\d z �. � � ,r ';� � 3�v �� 3�� T � � . � �� ^ � �� f 4 . ��,� } ..�'..'�4t.�,�..�j 1��s� �. "} C7 tj(i fy �� Q� �� , ��.�`�� g��Y9��`��.��,?�.�`��. l�l �� l�� y �i"�`� �r��l`� �.�� A `L.. 1C .��1�� E�I��Z�. �d�IJI�1 D:A1'E: _ .-- Novel��ber 18, 2t)42 :%�`a�'�'��?�`��"t�q:; T0: Toni Nefson, Prc,siclent - City Council Members ��V' .�. �` ��;�i�� VTA: Mayor Jesse Tanner €��C�1V�� GLFR�;'��F�iC� FRC?M: 5ue Carlsoz�, Adzninistrator ._.e��f Ecanornic Developm�nt,Ne'rgl�borhaods, and Stz�ategic Planning STAFF CONTACT: Don Ecickson (6581) SUBJECT: I3aies Annexation Referral ISSUE: a Should the Colmcil support and initiate annexation for the± 8.52 acre Bales Annexation site. RECOMMENDATION: • Refer this item to the Adrrainistration for further identi�cation af issues and processing. BACKGR�UND SUNIMARY: The applicant, Steve Beck on behalf of the Bales, sub�nitted a petition calling for an annexatiozz election for an appraximately 8.5 acre site along the eastern limits of the City at SE 12$`'' �treet and approximately 155`�Avenue SE, if extended. The proposed site includes five lots, all of which to have at least ane dwelling on them. The number of registered voters has not been determined at this time. Sea-Port Dositig & lleveiapment, Inc. operates aut of the site and in March 2007. received appraval � fram King County to operate storage and maintenance of heavy equipznent at 15221 SE 12$"' Street. This decision was appealed by the City and Burnstead Constr-uetion Company. As a part of a settlement between the parties, a covenant was entered into in June 2001 which Iimited the operation af Sea-Port Dosing & Develc�pment, Inc. 19 manths, ar, no later than January 1, 2003. As a part of settlement cavenant Geqrge Bales iadicated his intere$t in being annexed 'znto the City of Renton and tl�e City of Renton at that tzme indicatecl that it would be interested in annexing the Bales property. This item has not yet been routed to City departments for their comment and inptrt. CONCLUSION: Because of previaus indications that the City �vanld be interested in ar�l�exing the Ba]es property and because c�f the provisions set fartl� il� ti�e Restrictive Covenant Rainnir2g tivith tlxe Lc�ntl (attached) for the subjeci�roperty, consideration sl�ould be given to annexation of the Bales site tluough the electian pracess. Such an election could not be t�eld until late spring or early fall next year. Attachment5 cc: Jay Covington 12ebecca Lind H:lEDNSP\Council\Issue Papers-A�,enda Bilis-Ctte R�ports�002\Bales Annexatiun Request.doc\d . � ��.t��'� � �-�:t�. �r =i= , _ s . . � , yKt,� , t_� ',�_� : �;�r�� ;..s �D i`�;y!t i ;;�C�iV�'�' �;I`�`�C;+cR��'�?��`1=�� 1 2. �,��, �E'�'IrTI��1 �'� T'I-��+ �ET�'I'�11 CIT�C' �O�TTI�I��. C�L�,�l�� F'OR �T1 C�.I�1I�d��'�'�OI�t EL�C'�'��I�d Pursuant to RCbU 35A.14.020; the undersi�ned (the "Petitioner") hereby calls upon tlie City Couilcil of the City of Renton, a �Uashington municipal corporation (the "City"), which is a code city, to authoi-ize and arrange for an election to vote upon the annexation to the City of that certain portion of unincorporated King County, Washington the boundaries of which circumscribe the property that is legally-described on Exhibit A attached hereto and all existing street rights-of-way adjacent thereto (the "Proposecl Bales Site Annexation Area"). A map of the Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area and surrounding properties is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Proposed Bales Site ` Annexation Area is contiguous to the City. I am one of not more than four registered voters currently residing within the Proposed Annexation Area. � i nature Name and Address Date of Si�nin� (1 � � �/—/S= v1�/ �� O 2 / ��5�,��.s` .� C i��y�` %�H,-,��!��s� 9`,�dS� WARNING Every person who signs this petition with any other than. his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he is or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is,otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. � '��-�/�,�r�ed'��i,� ��' � �'� ��'�'��i�1 ��r��, ��°`��'�T� �� o ]4-23-t�5 9065 ��67 14 23 05 LOT 2 ICING COUNTZ' SI-�O�T JPLAT 107501(? AI� '76I104t}9{�4 SD FL�IT I�r� �VEST t5� . FT t�F EAST 1166.01 ]�T OF N '/z�F 1'� '/.�fl�1�1W 'l AS NIE��REL3 ALG I'd SD SEC ��: 14-23-OS 90b� ��67 14 23 OS PP ACT 39922653 14iO�iLE �IONJE N '/2 I��E1I4 C�F � '/ LE�� EAST I16b.01 �T I�ASURED ALD N LIeT &LESS C(�.ROl�3 ��E�.. C: 14-23-QS 9(�94 6�57 14 23 OS LOT 1 ��C SHOR"I'PLAT 1Q750115 �' 7�1104Q904 SD PLAT L�.�F WEST I50FT OF EAST 1166.01 FT t�F I�I %z t9F NE '/a OF NW'/a f�S:i+�hEASUREI�ALG L�`d�D SEC LESS CO IZCI.AS3 P�.��El�.�e �TR 14�305 T�X LdT 70 WEST 150 O�EAST 1016.OI FT NI�ASUREI��.I,G N LI�T�3F Nl/2 ��' .lVl: l�d�A' iV qY '�I4 d.+��J�7 �O�Q�. - S 1�R�sl.�.�..'tS.d�: . . STR 142305 TAX JLG►T 64 EAST 866.01 FT OF NO '/z OF NE '/�OF N�V'/a PdIEASU�ZEI��I,G Id LN LESS POR IN NE '�a (�F'I� �r _...,..�.�ra�vrv � w i i — l3— 5 SC A C.E ( " — I00' ��... �. ., � ' N8 � ; qfs?/xcc S.E. I 2 H. ST. eO.�""+uF ia> e-�o W � S.E. 128TH. ST <see/�ce �i ,°� o,,,,o. .�.en��'��.. a... ao x.�i_a� � .. �<t »• vev.�m.�.i•wfca 7 :>? .i1T.T> ! a iaMOSJ./•�' H/Sy� {s.aiv 1�dA} ��. . T l -.. Cf 1d4.�f� � �Q :� iti � 4� I I � b �I tt» � � �r�p,{�' � �1 A � t N � ry � i ` ��'� a { n l.a r t h � � ,� . � � -� M ��9 a �� ` y 3 `I 4, N � i.re - N 4 ° °! � �� y d � �V i �J � �_i "� . i � � � a 4 �, � � � , p,'tOAG ^ �U Lor � � ( 6� � c,1 S 1K ^) i1 � � �90.o i � Q � � a�� Y �� I � a S y..e `�AL (�^ �`�4�t �,iet. � 9ft. Y'/� '� �� , � � 1I� � `�� T� �� \� 1� N � zo or 9 �.d,l �_....--..�.Q��.3..—__ dl _ �TO �]n�.�4_ /]8-H4 SB I� ..__»o.v� _ M � _ � G 6 iO . � ni C'^ '�^"v� -F 4 g N .-f h 4 �.' `7 H�V` � �� - — — — "7 MH � !. 4 ' i*-+ h, 9 q 4 { .�J h, � l 1 � � ! ` 1 _ _. _.___ , • . .Aa. W.e> ,..aJ-rz.sl✓ l i.La) r�-4x }, . >.� ILi.FY �� T.�. S �� xc sp 4saoss — aost3osat � „# �' ,.�� t KC LLA 984076��8 410 010 7 8� � �& � ( � L07! �� L07 2 ,�� L07 3 ,y I �OT 4 � ��i � : n ( � � 5 x e..,.,.� " , ,✓:�-;� Y 4 w � � s.:�o p y� w � q F � � p�{..... X 3 p ¢ � {' Y �C�, a �, W ,.•;Ql71l, � a6r.�p �IC �� as.cs� ` I .1.:w's6 (j �,,,p'A° �,��r-�t�.r" �dr�"� � _ ��_ I r� „„� ��' � � y '� y�t � l • a�w /+'� � ,n..�� ,^� q�i r �/� '� .viv� er,a� �v.n m�.o:new.,+.�m y„n n '�V�rw. 4 ''{ � }��swn M�P+'Chsst, J _,b�:� NN9•ro.POu/ 3f5N/(Y.) v. � _ � _' 'k O � �z..,—,.,�- ,.rr.rl 31 6.35 "-�;'��'_-_�—_� a250 SE. l32NQ .C7 Y "}? ' ��,,� S7y.+j• � " . . ., .. . �� .. .. w I �xr N' " :v� 4` 442f� �L.95"5 � t Ys�� o L �R y' � 6 �S TE5 F �s � s� '`� ��.N� I " 2 3 4 5 C��S 7 8 � �aai' 0 -GEpAR� : e ro �i _ iz = i3 _ � — , ;; V �: �o`a � ,r ." . ��`\ . N� `qS.�t op�� o4pp Ov4� 0�4�^ �'O �¢p �•,p ��da D��o �°p a�a�3 ��d �r �1� . . �, . ..._ . ..... ..... .,.4� r�r,fi .ia.�e i,e.f� .. �� , �� . . ��Q �� a�'�� -�� - - ► p,A n�- � ��a�'�'�� a L � V ,� �-�- �' i��l-�`�- � � i�� s �� a��a�' r , �� o?�- �� ,� ��'�- �- � � � � � � �� , � . � � � �� - r� , .� r� �� ; �2 _ � �� .� � � �� -�-�'.'�' ��f� �� /tr n `� �� 6Z�� ,�� - ��- 1�C1� - �� V � � ?�0� ��'°CL R�K'�0��€�� 3 :12 �.�. PE�'I'I'ION TO T�-IE R�N'I'ON CIT'Y COUl�CIL CALLING . FOl� Al� A1�11VEXATION ELECTI011\T Pursuant to RCW 35A.14.020, the undersigned (the "Petitioner") hereby calls upon the City Council of the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation (the "City"), which is a code city, to authorize and arrange for an election to vote upon the annexation to the City of that certain portion of unincorporated King County, Washington the boi.uidaries of which circumscribe the property that is legally-described on Exhibit A attached hereto and all existing street rights-of-way adjacent thereto (the "Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area"). A map of the Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area and suzrounding properties is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area is contiguous to the City. I am one of not more than four registered voters currently residing within the Proposed Annexation Area. i nature Name and Address Date of Si�nin� � . (1 � " • �i�'v1�T/ �� o �/—/S= a 2 / � � ��5��s .� C�a�y� �.�.r�G"'i/ ��s� q�os� , WARNING Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name,.or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an electiori when he is or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who inakes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. , �� .�� 14-23-US 90&S 6$�7 I4 23 O5 I.,�OT 2 KIN� �4��t'�"'� �Ht�R.�' �'LAT 1075U10 AF' 76I 104090� �I� ��,�T' �AF ��T' 150 FT{>F E��T ��66.01 ��`OF I*d ��z t3�IV� �14 C��NN�V Il4 AS 1��IZEI� �L+G 1`��SE� P�C��b 14-23-fl5 906� 6�67 14 23 OS PP ACT 39922653 1l�IOBILE �CD� N '!z I��JA �� N�iV 'la LE�S ��'T 11�6.01 �T I+�ASURED f�i�N T,N&L�� CQ. Rt.3� P�.r�.I�C�I., �: I�-23-OS �0�4 6�F7 14 23 OS LOT 1 KC SH�JRT FLAT 10750115 A� 7611ED40904 SD PLAT I�AF S�ST I50FT Q��A�'T 1166.01 FT t�P'1� fx�F hTE 'la OF I�T'l A�IiviEt�SURED ALG LN�D SE�LESS CQ RdJ�D �.��L Dd 5TR I423p5 'I'�LOT 70 V��'I' 150 OF EA�T 10I6.01 FT ME.�SURl�D�LG N I,I�T+aF N1/2 C1F NE rf!�F�'/�LE��CC3 RO�. �'��z S'�'R 142305 'TAX L07C 64 EA�T 866.01 FT Q�N�'/z OF AIE'/a 4F'NVV'/410�iEA�UI�D A,i,�G N LN i.ESS P�R iN NE ��C�F I�3E „ _ a w i i — r3— 5 SCA�E f 104' � .....��;�v„yuU 1�” j• t S.E. (28TH ST. N8 � : o..�a. ..�.., � '�.4fn�.�'F:�. ao S.E. I 2 H. ST. co.eP,.n.vf <ar s•.a-r. � SS$eJit! + `' � 4��'_ �pa s�J.iiB �3t2 /a� J>O]M�/!"aID!A• � >.'i) �.lY.» / O �lI�sGOff/•�� /Sn 4L<.erw 79A.o3 .1 ��. . , S .. ICJ ( 1RlI.ol } • � 1ef ^e �" �y un f ! I e � °o �� Y � 9 � �t A I 4 � b i „4a� � i °n tor t °a � °,ob t � { �.1 d �M ��sa ��' � � �'i ,a " w sl V °� ° - ,<o - = �,,,p w a ! f �� S 4 ' � � � � �� ,� --, w � � � ' N I � 4 7oAG 9 '�C Lo7 ,�•' h I b3 `� W � � 79o.a i Q p� 4 � �� l-� I y n4 �o tv � �7' �� i T � 0 = M�1 r`' ti d �+ k- a�.t f ��4 �,f� 4'G� yryo�. y�q � b �K � � } 2o m tY1 Q � � �9 I -._—_�8 t.�� dl /SO 2D4.1t_ l98.8$ �8 �_ _ 3)a.o _ h�V �.�_ _ __ _ ' _ _. :C, . . . . &� � rtt� c`" � 4 RN h S � � �1V~ � f�l � _ — — � � h � n y � aw M, f+� a ti M I 4d �^ i � � h� :� � � _ �,. / . .8a ef.oi Nqt./f.57�✓ /SSq� n i �� >.� n.ci i A� xr.� � i , I��KC SP 484056- 40913056( �� ,�( h KC l,l,A 984076I -8 410 010 7 8 3 � � � � k + c�nr r y@ tor 2 � �.or s a �.or q �� 1� � �� ,q D'. 1 `� .� d ,I Ne_5 I .✓iCt-q�erw 3 W t�l 3.lO �S � tt ti 3 � �� P f t ��; �,� � �� aq,�� r � hl� µ'oi,�`� ' ar,�so I �„Dbpp f �p�,. � +� �b.Q � � r �'b � 0` �IF �"�e,, � �UV A' � �air ti �F 4 ��hi'„� . C:1 �pl43 6S.9a .m.if eb•ro-4wv i/xaa �4�� Os.cr.N J�' ^C t V ' U t� ,?�'�+l+M1i""1@eWG _ �bSj1./ Nli9�/e�.00U/ 5959/CY.J ^I _ __ __ iR ��O �—�t�'--"'-- �.—oe'� �:... . t3t�a260 SE. 132ND RT � n "�? �_ � i t `xs � � •,�' ��;R a �~ TE.S� OL,g5�6 ,1 � � yz� ;� z L � i� 6 S � � �� y i 2 a - n qAR� CRES � e s io - ii _ iz ia Rs � i: w °;x- `� �� ' • ,v � C � . : � 6 � � t • 4'1 �0 .� : . �:^� a��p c�3� 0�`0 po<a rp�^ �,o µ ��o �,�p o� o��o �o o��o� .� , •� r �' ...:, eo " �>.e.o: " �y. � .. .. , .. .. .m.,... �,., �, ,. .. .o .,.,. ,. ,. d � ' - __ ._ .... .,.. .,.�, ,,..., ,,...a ,�..,. �. � � �i -� , .. � ,.. �� cirY a��ro� �.��C � � �� RECE(VED ClTI'C?E�K'�OFFICE PETITI01�1 TO T'�IE iZEN'I'ON C�TY CO�Jl�tCIL CALLIl�G . FOIZ Al� ANIVEXATION EY,ECTION Pursuant to RCW 35A.14.020, the undersigned (the "Petitioner") hereby calls upon the City Council of the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation (the "Cit'y"), which is a code city, to authorize and arrange for an election to vote upon the annexation to the City of that certain portion of unincorporated King County, Washington , the boundaries of which circumscribe the property that is legally-described on Exhibit A attached hereto and all existing street rights-of-way adjacent thereto (the "Proposed Bales Site Annexatiorz Area"). A map of the Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area and surrounding properties is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area is contiguous to the City. I am one of not more than four registered voters currently residing within the Proposed Annexation Area. i nature Name and Address ]Date of Si�nin� cl �� %��,�� ; �, ��-�s= � z �c . � �%5. �� .�; G'i-��r`h9` �� ,ydS I' WARNING Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he is or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false� statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. - . � �- _--�v �w ii - ;�3- 5 sCAt,.E { " _ loo, N � ��C.. ;.. .. •� 5.E. 128Tl�i, ST. �� ss?j,�cc �o.r.�w uF .. W ♦ o..�o. �o�s 4. n.s t�•. �o• S.E. I 2 H. 5T. �ar a•u-» s tf /Se./.I(l ♦ M \•� R.I/.ul{ .�r .Jtf M' I)efNW��I'�+f� �.17 ,�a>.ST t e �bel'�"r•�' /Sa" tta.�er 11dP3 iV , 3 tsi r tlS.o f;�_ � t �+ � 'g ` :» v ' ° „� ' �a a � � � ' � �: ; ,�A� { ^ .�a r , ,° � °','• ' � I � ,.r� . d p� • � I3 ' ,xo•'gF � i y � � .� N ` � I O 0!, 4 ° � W 7i �v ; �y �ty •_' i� � � 41 � , �,�, � Vj I •g 410At. S Y Lar R �+ I 6� �� LI w � z 39e.e i d ^) �! � � � a`• � � �°'� a i yC � �° }- � `�c '�� ,tL��. ��c. *�� 4 `W � �� ' b F�1 xo o, p �---SF..#��3_.�_ `r _ _ .ae _ �n�..a_ iaA_84 �e I_ a�e.a� - � �, �m ri t„ � �F 4�"� �. :' t�', i Q .�""� �C <� � - - - a �,�] n h ^ '-7 M y � » ti �� O �" � , ` k �&� �( " _ _ _ _ _ "s _ � ..>.o. e..e. ..�r�z.nw i�m <,m »� � �-_—�_��A�484056- i09130d6t �x3 "'�`«r k ' �, � ,�� Ix� KC 117�484076I-84I04�0783 {I �� v �A7 1 �h L07 2 g i LtlT 3 �, ` LOf 4 �* a k i � , � � �1 � , Xsa.�.! , I w�+0-n.va• • � a � s.r.so W A ��... � � Y. 3 G ¢ � C�t; „ � W p s . � � a1'r�'p IY^` �1� ''�°t�• � �=ysa � a,,°eM ��-r� � ` I 1•�� y.�� IN I I �� t i�i° pPPW � /t p ��S P� �I' ��'�t t� � ;J , r ,.n,uoe Jtiya' f 11 Ni99 s>.�o .m.rJ M•n+�iw�cro sy,r� a.o+q u i 'u n s'a.aMrrr�rna. "f _. _.Q'S�I Nfl9-/e.OQW 5'1�+9/(a!} l �� .^ �_�T__�\C1 . ^—�----�� -�-�,-,;,,�- ,,. I 316a260 SE. t32NC1 R7 n '�� a,; e�� '��{t.., -. ,—..•.,— . ,. Q42� 95'6 ,� . ., ' '� sti,; OC ... qL. �. I�.�}a ° n : 6 ES ?ES F :"s, `�: �2- I?� : � Zp - 3 � 4 ��EDAR� CRES 7 _ e a �a - Fs _ iz �a : � .� � i`�' - �o` � ' i ,r � ! � �:Nl 'fi•�O`Q W�o 07,0 oo'�a co�P� d y,o� �40 �yo �«� o o ien oi�° .� `�' ) o �' o "� �= ' -a.�...�..>.a�i<� e n.. ...�. .o . .. . .. �. �� ,. w ..... • . .. -- .-'.. ..... ...a., ...a. n:.i. e,.. r ..-. i'�: , • � . � �+XHIBTT A TO FE'�T„TI�1►1V , �.EGAL I�ESCItIPTION PAR�EL A: 14-23-05 9065 68b7 14 23 OS LQT 2 K.ING C4UNTY SH4RT PLAT 1075Q14 AF 7611U40944 SD PLAT DAF WEST 1S0 FT t)F EAST 1166.03 �T QF N %z C?F NE Y4 QF NW %4 AS MEASREA ALG N SD SEC P'A�2CEi, B: , 14-23-OS 9068 686� i 4 23 OS PP ACT 39922653 MOBILE �iOME N 'lZ I�El/4 OP NW '/d LESS EAST 1166.41 FT MEASURED ALI?I�T LN&LESS CO. RC?AD PA�2CEL C: 14-2�-as sasa �s�7 �a�� os LC}T 1 KC SHORT PLAT 10750115 A.F' 7G 11 a40904 SD PLAT DAF WEST 150FT QF�AST 11fi6.41 FT OF N Iz 4F NE'l 4F IYW la AS MEASITRED ALG LN SD SEC LESS CQ RQAD ��.e�L.�: � STR 142305 TAX LQT 70 WEST I50 QF EAST 1016.4I PT MEASI:�D ALG N LN GF N1l2 QF NE Y<OF I�I�'t L�SS CQ ROA.D. �'ARCEL E: STR 142305 TAX L(3T 64 EAST 866.O1 FT QF N4 !z OF NE'1�OF NV4j l4 MEASURED ALG N LN LESS POR IN NE'/{4F NE � �, __ _S.. . .. ,�� PETITION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL CALLING . FOR AN ANNEXATION ELECTION � Pursuant to RCW 35A.14.020, the undersigned (the "Petitioner") hereby calls � upon the City Council of the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation (the "City"), which is a code city, to authorize and arrange for an election to vote upon the annexation to the City of that certain portion of unincorporated King County, Washington the boundaries of which circumscribe the property that is legally-described on Exhibit A attached hereto and all existing street rights-of-way adjacent thereto (the "Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area"). A map of the Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area and surrounding properties is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Proposed Bales Site Annexation Area is contiguous to the City. I am one of not more than four registered voters currently residing within the Proposed Annexation Area. i nature Name and Address Date of Si�nin� . �� cl . .%�� .; . - ir-�s= a z _ � �� " ��E�� .S; r i��i`h,9` ��L�-�s� yyas y WARNING Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an el�ection when he is or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. . -,. � P,��,-�" o�Mc�i��'��.� .�►..J�...1��`'1�`�`�I�,(sCAI.� t° - too� � rr -_n��ra�,ru �w �� - �3- 5 ��..�.. � s.e. i aaTt� st " „ ,. • AfSl�i4C s,E. �� rt. s-r.�R••»••" "' V � !� 4, �es.M�fa�,��r^w Nt be. 4e fif l.�I.M t<t! {S{t�Jii � �'- '_--_ __ I,I/A• 1^rl.� ��lL I}� I)/7/7p��/•Mt6 �.rv aa�. o � • .•' ir• a..,.. �oer� ~ �v . -,. .ss i .. f� .x � i �� . �Q i '� 'I ii I t �y ' � i �y a� i � t 1��G � � � ^ ,cor � ti � °'°` � � , I � .rr� • 1 1•` ♦ � �y N `••3k � � � . ' � e �� .� � �I ,y �, w �� --� W , � � . �,; ,� � «� � � ` 4;70At• _ � j Y Lof' 1 ' M 1 _ . .6� 1 W � R �". 9 79..o e � � i I • . [� � a�� " +� � e � , . �` , A�. �.�.� ,��. p l� - � � � x 4� �'� ',L� y� y� �� `� � 2o a -----IF��$"'�- �- - _ �Te _ qD1•/4� Jas.t+ �0 �- � ?�e.ei + " � � �� y _M i��y � + � � o a�Y�y�� :N ��,.�7 _... � - ^'7 l..� h �' � n y ' f.w . „ ` �I Q � ,�` ..� z � _ _ _ _ _ � _ _ • �.'u.B1 /M.a1 NA7�?-37/ A� /�� i .. � � KC SP 484056- A09l30'J6f i`» �� I �� xc�u saaord-assaoraTas � � � v� LO7 1 ��t LO7 2 Q lOT 3 � LOT 4 �{ 8 tt * � � ' • � � � \ /I�.N µ � .�vu.�. I np•n.v � � � .:.� � A�':t!... h $ 0. � �A o �� i� '� � � !°"Q �� h�Q *;'��' � � �pso ( �„�7�0 ��ra'+ir�Fr''S'J�. � � 4 G py �µ ( � � �A�� a � � �1k' � O ��pp4• � � � � °s �,"�, pf ,t+��Ya rE.�sAc � � �au s s» B w'rN'�:.J4�~ 41f d .� .m.r� -,..iw.wc.e iYaaN+S fl1� a ��( � -b�;I � .rM-iu.cau+ trsxlx) � �,�1 b.35 —�- . "'-�i�"_��' .'c=.�rs:..�' "►" x � .260 SE. 132ND e7 r '! a, x .. -^'— - � - • - - .ar N $3��'� � 442� 04.�a"6 � �,.a, o� � 8 5 'CES � F _ � -• r� � ��• ��3 i �" 2 3 _ ♦ . ° GR� ES e 9 Go it iz '_ �3 � i e'��a ; �4 -CE4AR� „ ' �' I:Hl f�4'�d1�� a�o od`o ao<o d'+�A= �+e� �a �,,0 o,qD o+'O ot'A e'�°� `'� ' .'• � u.. `c ,� � �,' ' t�e . .. .. ..... �.... . +n rr.r�� rv. a�.t • > �.� _ � \ } � 4 EXI�IBIT A T�D P�'�'I�ON LE�AL llESCRIPTION PARCEL A: 14-23-Q5 4065 68b7 l4 23 4S LOT 2 KiNG CQUNTY SHGRT PLAT 1475014 .AF 75t 10449Q4 Sl� PLAT DAF WEST 150 FT QP EAST 1166.Oi �T(JF N %z OF NE't4 QF NW'/AS MEASRED ALG N SD SEC P.AR.CEL B: 14-23-OS 90G8 6$67 i4 23 4S PP ACT 39922653 M4BiLE H4ME N 'l2 IVE114 QP NW Y LESS EAST 1166.Q1 FT MEI�SURED AI,D N LN&LESS�Q.R4AD FARCEL�: 1423-05 9094 b8b'7 la 23 OS LC3T I KC SHOFtT PLAT 107501 i5 AF '761 I040944 SD PLAT DAF WEST 150PT OF EAST 1 J.66AI FT QF N'l�4F NE l OF NW la AS MEASUREI3 ALG LN SD SEC LESS CO RC?AI7 ��ce�L D: STR 142305 TAX LOT 10 WEST 154 QF EAST 1016.41 FT MEASURED ALG N LN OF 1"Jll2 QF NE%4 flF 1'�'t LESS C4 RQAD. P�tCEL E: . STR 142345 TAX LQT 64 EAST 866A1 FT UF Nt}'lz OF NE'!OF NW 1a IvIEASURED ALG N LN LESS POR IN I�tE'l,Q�'NE �` " � , ti�Y o City of Renton � �� DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ♦ � � NEIGHBORHOODS, and STRATEGIC PLANNING �� Sixth Floor N`� 1055 South Grady Way � Renton, WA 98055 www.ci.renton.wa.us Date: November 12, 2002 TO: Steve Beck FROM: Don Erickson, AICP Bales Annexation Strategic Planning Division Phone: (425) 444-0461 Phone: (425) 430-6581 Fax Phone: (425) 227-5224 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 ISUBJECT: Bales Annexation I Numberofpagesincludingcoversheet 4 REMARKS: ❑ Original to ❑ Urgent ❑ Reply ❑ Please � For your . be mailed ASAP Comment review Attached are the petition materials I discussed with you this morning. This is based upon what Dave Halinen used for Tydico. If you have any questions please give me a call. Thanks. � ��il�v��. � Ahead of the curve ��. � J ' � PETITION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL CALLING � FOR AN ANNEXATION ELECTION Pursuant to RCW 35A.14.020, the undersigned (the "Petitioner") hereby calls � upon the City Council of the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation (the "Cit�'), which is a code city, to authorize and arrange for an election to vote upon the annexation to the City of that certain portion of unincorporated King County,Washington the boundaries of which circumscribe the property that is legally=described on Exhibit A attached hereto and all existing street rights-of-way adjacent thereto (the "Proposed Tydico Site Annexation Area"). A map of the Proposed Tydico Site Annexation Area . and surrounding properties is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Proposed Tydico Site Annexation Area is contiguous to the City. I am one of not more than two registered voters currently residing within the Proposed Annexation Area. Si�nature Name and Address Date of Signin� (1) Frank J.Ribera October 10,2002 13011 136`"Avenue SE Renton,WA 98059-4024 WARNING Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who lrnowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he is or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. �• • � I`` l`\ �� i EXI�IBIT A TO PETITION � LEGAL DESCRIPTION . PARCEL A: � � THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERlY: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 . NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 37.5 FEET THEREOF FOR ROAD. (ALSO KNOWN AS THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FE�T OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF TRACT S, MARTINS ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PIJ�T THEREOF.) . PARCEL B: THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EASTERLY 7.5 FEET FOR ROAD. (ALSO KNOWN AS THE SOUTHERLY 1/2 OF TRACTS 5 AND 6, MARTINS ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF.) PARCEL C: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 37.5 FEET THEREOF FOR ROAD; � AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF THE REMAINDER. . (ALSO KNOWN AS THE NORTH 1/2 OF TRACTS 5 AND 6, MARTINS ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF;EXCEPT THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF SAID TRACT 5.) • l� _ -, � � � EXHIBIT B - TO PETITION PROPOSED TYDICO SITE ANNEXATI�N �4REA 9:ttKf" �,8�1Y 83T4 � �i32 '� OQ3�i. :d8+t6�� .��g1p�1 .�t >S{�7� 1 �_�g3�#: , �. . . n, 4S::i�::r' �n?i;ti` ,�J'• a� , � �S'' ' �. ... ., .. . :.. . '. ... . ' . , . r''.^ L£ ��+.:�,:�.:• ' ... � «:.ti;�x .m�r..., � . . �4' 'r. ... ,..:��.•. . , .',, .: Q�' t ' . � � � (+ . � 9i2d�'::.�' � '` : � �r, Q{%4t � . -�> f1� Ot?i� . '.4,J:: �. . �1.0 ��. �� ; . � . ' ZKf3i . :� .`.'. 91-05 . �..; . � . ` "'' ��s3CiT�� iTB . � �; . . ..�: � • ' 'a . ;� �`" � .( �+_ i„I� :ODt'3 . , • . ... . -�...;. . . •. • �, . • : .' ' ' � ... •:.. :�3+3 � : . d81�...�514. . . .�� Y r�S3 �'�5::. ��' " . t161� � . >8i92 . !�. . �. . . ... . •..._ :.. ......... . . � .• . . � � • � �i .• ,' . �. � . B2t2 : 8�?0 '9,�5.:;•.-.:'�Ody7�;� � l�?5�, � `.:�'p75�.�' 92t36 f�� . . �� '.�� `�.\':�;, z ii8ta�. � �z„ aa,s t�•. � . '��,` .... .v . 94 7' • 4 �_ 7 t7T �l. . g215 y 9244 �� z: }c.; GOdit $�i3 9214 � �177 f�t1T fr478 Y �..7 . � �f9i�2 1 � .Or�,€y�Sa' • �i . . • �tn :•.'.ti��: ��:. . . � _ 9o�s �sa - - �' `�` _- � '�- iad; � -- :; � : . �� .. :,, t :.�,..:;.. . . . ...:...,�=.. ,,; �.; ::.'�rS,yS�` .�',w�. .,.. il� ..r. ��+ .+ 'L:''� .1; •.S,N .. - � Ctil�R � �..s`� . �� l�Q . �ifk�i • �� .'� ' `�t•. '' S1 � ikP �� ;:071` 4ots :« . _T� t7.. ..��. 1d � bf _, . �c)20U2,KING,COl1N - , '` �.. : ; 1�;. ' 9184 9Zk}$ 9$1T "� _ aa�su.�� R::a��,>-.� --�^,. �Q n n! The tnformation included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subJect to change without notice.IGng County makes no representations or warranBes,express or implied,as to accuracy,completeness,timeliness,or rights to the use of such information.King County shall not be liable for any general,spec(al,indirect,incidental,or consequential damages including, but not limfted to,lost revenues or lost profits resulting trom the use or misuse of the Infortnation contained on this map.Any sale of fhis map or information on fhis map Is prohibited except by written permission of IGngCounty. ' � � N Prepared October 9, 2002 /�-� . ;; ,_;. �� ` � � � � CIT��_��F RENTON ..LL � Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Planning _ . � 7esse Tanner,Mayor. Susan Carlson,Administrator Apri1.8,2002 Steve Beck - John L. Scott Real Estate 4735 NE 4`�Street Renton,WA 98059 SUBJECT: BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD DECISION REGARDING PROCESSING OF ANNEXATIONS BY PETITION Dear.Steve: The Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County recently notified us that they no . longer have the authority to process annexations by the petition process,even where there is 100% supporh within the proposed annexation area. They have told us that even those applications that preceded the State Supreme Court's March 14�',2002 ruling in the Grant Countv Fire District No. 5 et al versus Citv of Moses Lake Case are now being returned to their respective jurisdictions.by�the.Board. � Until the State Supreme Court reconsiders its dec'ision or the legislature cbmes up with an . alternative.to the election process,the latter is the only.method now avail,able for undertaking . , annexations in the state. B.ecause of the cost of'speciaT elections most rriunicipalities have - avoided using this approach unless it is for a fairly large geographical area. � During the interim you may warit to:look at the Washington State Association of Cities web page at: www.awcnet:org/annexation.htm : � It contains a number�of newspapei articles from around tfie.region and will post information on what is happening on this issue over the next few months. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me(424-430-6581)or Rebecca Lind,Planning Manager,at 425-430-6588. Sincerely, � � ; N Don.Erickson,AICP � . Senior Planner cc:. Rebecca Lind � 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O�N , �This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer A H E A D O F T H E C U R V E . . ��` _f%/!' - . r.,b'`,�j f-%r. ��`�� CIT��;�JF RENTON �: �-:— . � .,,LL Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Planning I e Tanner,Mayor Susan Carlson,Administrator March 18,2002 � . Steve Beck John L. Scott Real Estate 4735 NE 4`�Street � Renton,WA 98059 SUBJECT: RECENT STATE SUPREME COURT DECISION REGARDING ANNEXATIONS BY PETITION � Dear Steve: In light of last week's Supreme Court d`ecision invalidating annexations by the petition process, the City of Renton has suspended activity on all annexations using this process until clarification is received by us on how to process existinp�nd new annexations. Since the Wofford,Falk,and Bales Annexations that the City has been working on are by petition,they are.a part of the eight City annexations that are affected by the Court's decision. . We will inform you as soon as,we receive definitive information on how to proceed from the City Attomey. � Thank you in advance for your patience as we try to resolve this matter. ; Si rely, � , Don Erickson,AICP � � Senior Planner � cc: Rebecca Lind Wayne Jones 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N �Thispapercontains50%recycledmateria1,30%postconsumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE _ — _ _d_� �I � __ _ _ -��--� - E _�-1- Z � - -- > - �� - --�_.--- a Z — I o v � , � - E 1 �- _ > > , .T. � _ - ' � o -- �¢ ' _ �n � Q W4rrz�s � � �on (iG°o} �. _ `soa � NE 1b St --- -- , �� _ . E h St _ > - - -- _`C ,_ Lee � ' . I ;_ �. � Ad pted L ' - �� t _l - �.;� - -- -LL ; ' S€'11$th ..� j � �� _ , , -� ��. � , � .� ,. , �, _ _ ._ � q ''� y+ -S� - � �� ;- � -� q a � _ �, � t� _ � � � c s � t..� _ - o ... _ o � o � - , _ i� Johnsonlj�, �exation � � �n �-� � ��%�I � -� - �?.., �__ URBAN GR WTH B UNDARY S 12 th t C�E -1 1�s�gt - �� -� �� _ _+,_ _c�_. ----- w i � - i �'rII� A cs , vr- -,- -��+} TLv -- — v- _;_1`t79-..� Rr' •� � �'^�V'^3 ._—.� - — +� I _ _ --— x�� -J I ` i � I� � ,r'�, _ +Q -- _ Shamr��k (90�) � j � , -. r ic ,i E 6th St �� ; r '� W - - _ i _ � __-� I�� i24th L" PI �� r= , � Pi ( {- -{ �� Z . �I � � � f._ ! _ :`# E i-�� { i-., �� .I� i i .k i �� i _.�i _ .� 1 t..� ��__�1'K .�.i. .. i r-.-..� ,.0 I 't.-_ I > � `+-' -�..+`- _ � � � � O- - "� h PI � E 4t St th NE 4th St > � - - - - � � 'z ?�'�;��, �. �'; � � �1� , �"i; W � �W - � o�) . � : �: I Q. _ N i ¢ � �i � ` � ��-+ .�-� �. i � ' �£ - M 00 ', . .i., -- E't� .ra� 5�� _.- 2n t i- — —I ; , . _ _' - - - w cn , � ,� ��- r � � � �, � ,; u�� z �' f�v`of�ord a>[ - Q a ,; � ��t0�) �! � � > ; € ! alaie#aa � + jHeFahts_'_ � v� � � Eleer�srstcsy c ��s�ao� : o � �� r, fks�°� J �� > Q � � � E a st Re n to n P I ate a u o �o0o Z000 ' 1 :12,000 An n exati o n s _ . _ . — Urban Growth Boundary � Y o Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning c, — — — — School District Boundary � � * Sue Corlson, Administrator ,p=��z G. Del Rosorio �—; Existing Renton City Limits � c" 1p 18 December 2001 NOTICE OF INTENTION TO COMMENCE As1IYEXATI4N PR.UCEEDIlYGS UNDER RCW 3�A.14.124 �Direct Pedtion Method) TO: T'HE CI'T�CCILTNCIL OF THE CITY 4F RENTON �ity Hall 1055 S. C�rady Way Renton, WA 98055 The �zudersigned are the awners of not less than ten percent (IO°lo) in vaiue, according ta the assessed valuation for general taxation, of property which they desire to annex to the Gity af Renton. We hereby advise the City Councii of the City of Rentan that it is our desire to commence annexatian proceedings under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 of all ar any part of the area described beiow. The territory proposed to be anz�exed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City af Renton. A map (Exhibit 1} and legaI descriptian (E�ibit 2} are included as part of this petition. The City Cauncil is requested ta set a date not Iater than sixty days after the filing af this request for a public meeting with the undersigned. 1. At such mee�ing,the City Council will decide whether the City will accept,reject or geographically modify the proposed annexatian; 2. The City Council will decide whether to require sirnultaneous adoption of zaning regulations; zaning ta be determined after two public hearings and guided by the Cit�s Comprehensive Land Use Plan; and, 3. The City Couneil wi11 decide whether to require the assumptian af existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed. This page is the$rst of a graup af pages containing ide�tical text material. It is intended by#he signers that such multiple pages of the Notice of Intenfian bs presented and considered as ane Notice of intention. It may be fiied with other pages containing additional signat�ues which cumulatively may be cansidered as a single Notice of Intention. WA7t1Yl1VG: Every persan who sigr�s this petitiun with any other than his or her true name, or who knawingty signs more than one af these petitior�s, or signs a petition seeking an ele"ction when he or - she Ps nat a legttl voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not quaXifxed to sign, or who makes herein any,false statemen�shall be guilty of a rnisdemeanor. � Page 1 of 2 The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names af petitioners should be in id�entical form as the same lhat appear on record in the chain of title to ihe real estat�.) � �� iyw f-e,6/��- ��'ti1/�/ 7', ,L c-=i��'P /`�y�.��S'�5,��,�,��`� �'i�- _ 1. �,� Y r �°° �' �'�,t/��`m� i�� ;;,��..�c��O � 2. .� ��.°°�-cPoL 1 , t�- : �.. � �,�'3/J ��'= '�2��'�^ S�' ' �t� Z-��..� �-�C.��o,�. - c�C�7�p�. �d � � � �Y . �i t�ZJl"V 1 �� O�J I .r 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. • 9. . 10. . . � Page 2 of 2 -- ' �'� The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of ti[le Po the real estate.) � � �e� �' �3�.,1� s° i 3�a� �5 6��U�� 2-�o��- 1. /� �,✓ 1i�`°�t'j �� 2�� / 1�d�9 `�� 3� �''�o . �� .3�4� ��"6 - �U�� l�Z 3d�s- 2. �f �✓�f d Z ,ti�✓7�� `'l��f `1��,3 � _ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. - Page 2 of 2 NOTICE OF INTENTION TO COMMENCE ANNEXATIC}N PROCEELIINGS UNDER RCW 35A.14.12U (Direct Petition Method) T4: Z'HE CITY COUNCIL UF THE CITY UF RENTON City Ha11 1455 S. Grady Way , Renton; WA 98055 The undarsigned are the owners of not less than ten percant {i0°lo} in value, accarding to the assessed valuation for general t�ation, of praperty which they desire to annex to #he City of kenton. � � We hereby advise the City Council of the City of Renton that it is our desize to commence annexatian proceedings under the pravisions af RCW 3SA.14.120 of all or any part of the area described below. The territory propased to be annexed is wzthin King County, Washington, and is contiguous ta tbe City af Renton. A rnap (Exhibit 1) and Iegal descriptian (Exhibit 2} are included as part of this petition. The City Council is requested to set a+date not later than siYty days after the filing af this request for a public meeting with the undersigned. 1. At such meeting,the Ci#y Cauncil will decide whether the City will accept,reject ar geagraphically modify the propased annexatian; 2. The City Council will decide whether to require simultan�aus adoption of zaning reguiatians; zoning ta be determined after twa public hearings and guided by th� City's Camprehensive Land Use Plan; and, 3. The City Council wili decide whether ta require the assumptian af existing aity indebtedness by the area to be annexed. This page is the first of a group of pages cantaining identical text material. It is intended by the signers that such multiple pages of the Notice af Intention be presented and considered as one Notice af Intention. It may be filed with other pages eonta�ining additianal signatures which cumu�atively may be considered as a single Notice af Intention. WARNING: �'very persoe� who signs �his petitivn with any other than his or her true name, or wha knowingly signs more than one vf tltese petitivtas, or signs a petition seeking are election when ke vr she is not a Xegal vater, or signs a petition where dce or she is otherwise raot qualifred to sigri, vr wko makes hereitt atxy false stutemen�shall be guilty of a misdemeanon Page 1 of 2 �� - NOTICE OF INTENTION TO COMMENCE ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 (Direct Petition Method) . TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON City Hall _ 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 � � . - . _ . � '<L'r,�' `�' •� , ,, ''- .' The�undersigned are the owners of not less than ten percent (10%) in value, according_to the assessed valuation for general taxation, of property which they desire to annex to the City of Renton. - ` -� � � ., _, We hereby advise the City Council of the City of Renton that it is �our desire�to commence annexation proceedings under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 of all or any part of the_area de�cribed lielow: . ,l Y . The femtory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, anfl is contiguous to the City of Renton. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. The City Council is requested to set a date not later than sixty days after the filing of this request for a public meeting with the undersigned. 1. At such meeting,the City Council will decide whethei the City will accept, rej ect or geographically modify the proposed annexation; 2. The City Council will decide whether to require simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations; zoning to be determined after two public hearings and guided by the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan; and, 3. The City Council will decide whether to require the assumption of existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed. This page is the first of a group of pages containing identical text material. It is intended by the signers that such multiple pages of the Notice of Intention be presented and considered as one � Notice of Intention. It may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures which cumulatively may be considered as a single Notice of Intention. WARNING: Every person rrho signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who kKowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or wlio anakes herein any false statement,sl:all be guilty of a misdemeanor. Page 1 of 2 The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the read esPate.) � � � gp��"� - � �* � ' ..,.� ��a�` �`�„�c� r,�� ,,.�, ��, `� � �' �''y� ?� �� ;a'>��n h�ary`�5�3, 'r�i� ��s;�� 'a��' 3� ��y�,� ��° 4�e s? � ,. � � �:`�' � � �s t p�, t�� ; � r � ��, �. , �,*�c� '��1��,�� ., � 6 , g P � � 1�11 �� a r�� :��s�r� , "�t �� n� �r � �� S �� i t � � � a � � . �� a�- �� '� �", �, �� m�` � � � �` ' � .� A ¢ r �' � "'� � � �l� y�yi t £-t�'� �r ��"�a �� '@�+�k. '��g a �., {�'��Y �a� `f! �,. � ` '�d ro� sr� �''�``�,� �' r'�� a� ��. �S c ;' ��- L`^i i fra fi k" .�-F�' �� z" ��'��.��5�`�:-��a��'',�t��.�. � k '�'��°�� F a��.i,�t�s��`� � 4 ��x �,�,v��: =Z , 3�►5�.. �LIz�Q.�_ c'e �� 3v� 1. ��. .�� " �u•�,� ;,�q ��C �D�� .=s� � � c.'�i r � ,— 2. � " �-- Pc� �3t�x � ��.�Q5 -- �� . �� s� ��y�f ,Z %!� �� 3��s 1�Z�3�� 3. � . � ��C--s "��'�. ,�� ' �Q�� 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 :r ' J,. .� NUTICE OF I1�TTENTIOIY TO C�JMMEI�TCE ANNEXATIf3N PR.Q►�EEDINGS UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 (Direct Petition Method) TO: Z'I� CITY COUNCIL UF T'HE CITY OF RENTON City Ha11 . 1055 S. +�rady Way Renton, WA 9$QS5 � e The undersigned are the owners c�f not less than ten percent (10%) in value, according to the assessed valuation for general taxation, of property which they desire ta annex to the City of . Renton.� � We hereby advise the City Council of the Ciiy of Renton tliat it is our d`esire to cornmence annexation proceedings under the provisions of RCW 3SA.14.120 of al1 ar any part of the area � described below. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguaus to the City of Renton. A rnap (Exhibit 1) and Iegal description (Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. The City Cauncil is requested ta set a date not Ia�er than sixty days after the filing af this request far a public meeting with the undersigned. 1. At such meeting, fihe City�ouncii wiil decide whether the Cify wili accept,reject ar geographically modify the proposed annexation; 2. The Cify Council wi11 decide whether to require simultaneous adaption of zaning regulations; zoning to be deterniined after twa public hearings and guided by tha City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan; and, � 3. The City Council will decide whether to require the assumption of existing city indebtedness by the area to be aruiexed. This page is the first of a graup of pages con�ainning identical text material. It is intended by the signers that such multiple pages af the Natice of Intention be presented and considered as one Notice of Intentian. It may be filed with other pages cantaining additional signatures which cumulatively may be cansidered as a single Natice of intentian. WARNING: Every person who signs this petition. with any vther than his or her true name, or whv knawingly signs more than one of these petitions, or sigt�.s a petition seekang an ele'ction when he ar . she is not a legal vvter, vr signs a petitivn when he or she is otherwise not quaXifed to sign, or who makes herein any,false statemen�shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Page 1 of 2 !• �� The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear o� record in the chain of title to the real estate.) ' T '��,, ,, `� � � , i'4 ti,t L � � . . -�.. . . . . . �. . , s . . . .... � � II��-7�e�� -V�s j��'� �. 3a � s�-��;�� A�� 6� �"`� C��- �� i�� N��- v� s ��= 2. �c�� '�'� � — T � iv � �!�b�� T � � Q�, �� , L�,i��t _ �, � 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 � �, s ' ;t � ' �� . , � � I • � �. • , � � � �• _ �� , ■�� .i�� ■ ��I.J � � :i iii � �7 � � 7�,��r.�•� ;■■.. ■■■■�� ■ � � 'il�� . ��: :�� ■■ - ��u�� ■�� i :C� �� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIL3 �� II�E� ■� ��J�il.l�ilE�i� ' � �: �-� � � �,�� ■��■�rr'-. �.�'-�` �� .� _, - �: :E.;-!a : ' _ � ��:Illl��r i :7� �_ :: ■�� . .,_��:. 1 � �3 - -. ��111`" '. i:.��` � � , �� =':�i,'i : ��'f�i!�I�,■,�' � � �- -► �I i�� •_ .,:: �� 4'� � �� N �� - �� =�,��. , �= �� C :• � �� 1� � �, .��i � � til`:E� �� -� E �: : . ■ i�� ►�a��.�ir�j �%i � ��• ' '�� , � . I _ � !ry ��i 7 � _ ��J� � �� . 1► �c� i�tl0�ti� ■ ��7 :: :: � ' ��i� C 11�� ,, ��„�. . .. �� , � I/�� .1111�11 = i�t� ■ . .. �� ►i ��11�►� 11111!� -' � ��C �� i �� i II►�� r � � ' � � ii � il►� � � � �: :� • ;i ii i 1��'. ► . � � ' .. � ■ �� _� �� :�;:�� . � �i t :�� iuF,il �l�Iu1/ i:7 � � �I u ■u au!L T ��G1!m [Z , . � ■ : r :im� Fr'+ � . � �lll! i�Rl■ �� ■■ • .� ��asi c�� = :� �� . = � �.� �rr.� � p , t -='� . � �' t�ir� � -�` ` �� ■ t� r� � `� �� ! C 111111�1�, /I�� ' � �" r� ra � �I/ C" u• �[� �[:!] � �a rn � `� itR � : IIIIII�'.�' ��\��? � �G] I�IG!� Fa �:� � ;� �[ri � '� � �V �V'� ii �a i • �� %��: �� -��'_■�� .� 1\I� L1'7! �� d �� , �Ilill�� II ' __ � uo e�v � � �C t , �� C � �,�� o IA �� • . �rj�1111l1�� " � . � � , � �h9 � , . Z �� '� � 11�� ti=��f=� =��. �� . a ■��.., � E == = - - - ' �� ■ � �� i ',i��t�� i� � � ■��- .��. .�� - �� :�� n ir�� "� �� ; � �� i . - , y�„ �� "� 7� � _ �� ,��' � •� '�� ■�� . � ,`�� 1�1��1� .■. �1�'� �� ;- � ►��I�;;� � ��': � �111111111111: �� :, ,-e._� - , i.�+ .�►,��, �� w�� 1. :�,� � ;iiiid : � � �'�� }�� _ ;��III �.. - - : ! �� tI� ��■■ �■ - � IF� � ,Iiti��■■ � =�= %/Il/G� � ...��■ 1_ _ �...��o ��. . ..:. :. - .�- �� ;,��,`�i��! ��'i„�� ■ � . � • � . � . .. .. � . . � . �- - .. • . .. ... . -. - . . � - . � . . . � . : �� • '_ � .- . _ �� / � / � � :;�a�: - �: . / � � � .,.: ��Mar-08-02 03 r 40P '��`�. , P.02 N(]TI�E UF I1�TE1oI�.'I�N 'Y'U COIVYlV.C�NC'L ANN��.A'��N PR�.ICEEDINGS �I��R, RCW 35A.14.120 (llirect Petitian Method) TQ: THE CITY COUNCIL �]F THE CITY OF REI�TTON City �-Tall lOSS S. Grady Way R�nton, WA 98055 The undersigri�d �re the owners of not less tha�� tcn perccnt {10%) in �alue, ac.c�rding to the asscssed valuatio�a for general taxatian, of property which thcy desire to annex #o ihc Gity of It�ntc��i. We hcrcby advise the C:1� C:Ql1I1C1I of the City of R�nlaii ihat it is our desir�: tu GOIlllll�]]C� annexaiion prucecditY�,s ��i�dcr thc provisiot�s af FZCW 35A_1a.120 of all or any pai�t of tlic arca described heluw. The tcrritory proposcd to bc amiexed is witl7in King County, Wast�ington, arid is cantigiio«s tn the City af Rcnion. A map (Exhibit 1} and le�l ciescription (Exhibit 2) arc iricludcd as part of tfus petiiion. The C'ity Gpuncil is requested to sct a datc not later than sixty days after thc filit�g of t.l7is reyuest for a public meetin�;with the un�lersi�ned. , 1. At such meeting, the City Council wiil decide whether thc City will accept, reject or geographically modify lhe proposcd annexation; 2. Tttc Ciiy Council will decide whether to requir� simultatieous ado�ti�n of zotung re�ulati�ns; zQnang ta be determincd after two,pablic hearings and guided by thc City's Curnprehcnsiv�Land CJse Pian; and, 3. TlYc C~ity C;owicil wi11 decid� whether io rcquire the assu.r�nplion ��f c�xisting cily indehtedne,�s hy ihe area to be aiuiexed. This pagc is#lie €'irst of a group af pages cont,ainir,g identical text ir►atenal. It is intended by the signers that sueh rnultiple pages af the Noiicc at Intention be presented and considcred as ane NQtlt'r�i OI�I11tCIlt10I1. lt may be filed wiih ather pages containing addiiivnal signatures which cumulati�ely may bc considcred as a single Notice of Intention. WARMNG: Every persan.wha sig�s tfils pe�iti�n with any oiher than his vr her true namc, or who knowingly sig�s �eore 1ht1� dne df rl�ese petitions, ar sig�s a pelirion seeking an electinn wl�en he or � she�.s not a legal voter, or si�ns r�petit�o�t when he. ar she is olherw�se nol qualified to s�gn, or who makes here�r+ Qny false slaternen�shall he gu3lYy of a�+isdemeanor. Pabe 1 of 2 2 a � � Mar-OS-02 03�40P � . P_03 r '1'he undersigned have rcad the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (rVames of pefi�ianer.c slrould be in ident��al forpi as the same thal appeqr on rec.ord rn the cl�ain of title to the real�.•�tutc�.) ��/��,,"j � P�� juRNSTERP �oNrT,��cT�oN Co, 1. ' lzi5 /Za�A �v� n��. �20� l423a5-9o47 �� a�,� �Sly� /�Ec.�Evv�, wA� 9�vos . 2. � :�, 4. 5. � b. 7. 8. 9. 1 U. ---,� � Nagc Z of 2 � , 3