Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1DEPARTMENT OF COMfvivNITY City of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ° n,,3i" MODIFICATION & ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE REPORT & DECISION A. SUMMARYAND PURPOSE OF REQUEST REPORT DATE: May 22, 2015 Project Name: Marok Retaining Wall Modification and Driveway Variance Decision Owner/Applicant/ Gurpreet Singh Marok, 910 Renton Ave S, Renton, WA 98057 Contact: Fife Number: LUA15-000221, MOD & LUA15-000308 VAR Project Manager: All Ding, Senior Planner Project Summary: The applicant is requesting a modification of the Retaining Walls Development Standards (RMC 4-4-040.0.2) for a front yard wall on an infill residential lot with an approved single-family home building permit. The proposed project site is 8,450 square feet located in the Residential -8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. The applicant is requesting two modifications from the Retaining Wall standards; a modification from the setback from public rights-of-way (RMC 4-4-040C.2.d) and a modification to allow portions of the retaining wall above 48 inches (RMC 4-4-040D.2). The requested modifications to the retaining wall standards would allow for a residential driveway not to exceed the maximum permitted slope of 15% and would allow for increased vehicle maneuverability from the garage, given the steep topographical incline to the garage from the public street. It is anticipated that a driveway, which connects the garage directly to Renton Ave S would have a grade of 18-20°x6. Driveways with a grade exceeding 15% require approval of an administrative Variance. Project Location: 910 Renton Avenue S Site Area: 8,450 Square Feet (0.19 acres) Project Location Mop Modification Denial and Variance Report City of Menton Department of Com y & Economic Development Modifica Administrative Variance Report & Decision MAROK RETAINING WALL MODIFICATION & DRIVEWAY VARIANCE LUAIS-000211 MOD & LUAIS-0W308, VAR Report of May 22, 2015 Page 2 of 9 B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND: The subject R-8 zoned property is currently under construction with a new infill single-family residence under permit 612001783, as identified in the submitted photo (Exhibit 4). Topography and coal mine issues have caused the home to be constructed at a higher elevation than originally proposed. The elevation change has caused the garage to be located at a greater height above the public street than initially proposed, which requires a reconfiguration of the driveway to the garage to keep the driveway slopes below 15 percent or a variance to permit a driveway with a grade between 18 and 20 percent. The applicant's proposal is to construct a curved driveway up and around a proposed front yard retaining wall. The proposed retaining wall would be approximately 50 feet in length, beginning at the northern edge of the residential driveway entrance and ending at the northern property line (Exhibit 1, Site Plan). The wall would be setback from the fight -of -way approximately 3 -inches and would be approximately 48 inches to 60 inches in height (Exhibit 2, Applicant letter and Justification). The tallest point of the wall would be at the driveway entrance on the southern portion of the site, because the site slopes downward from north to south. The applicant submitted a picture representation of the wall that would be constructed (Exhibit 3) where the wall would be level at the top with the applicant's site sloping down from the north property line to the driveway. The tallest portion of the wall would not be near either abutting properties to the south or north. The applicant's letter states that the required 3 -foot retaining wall setback from the right-of-way, per development standards, would reduce the 3 feet of landscape area at the top of the wall and additionally constrict the driveway width, which is already constricted due to topographical challenges of the garage location. The applicant states that a 3 -foot wide landscape strip at the top of the proposed retaining wall provides a planting area for 'a mixture of exotic plants' and states that the submitted picture representation (Exhibit 3) would have similar plantings. The plantings at the top of the wall would allow no guardrail to be installed along the driveway, as the plantings would be a buffer for the walking surface of the driveway. If the 3 -foot setback is required from the right-of-way, no landscape area would be provided at the top of the proposed retaining wall, and a guardrail would most likely be required. An added guardrail at the top of the single-family residence would most likely add a negative aesthetic impact to the street and neighboring properties. Modification Denial and Variance Report City of Renton Deportment of Commun` Economic Development Modification ministrative Varionce Report & Decision MAROK RETAINING WALL MODIFICA & DRIVEWAY VARIANCE 15-000221 MOD & LUA15-000308, VAR Report of May 22, 2015 Page 3 of 9 C. EXHIBITS: The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit 1: Site Plan Exhibit 2: Modification Justification Exhibit 3: Example Retaining Wall and Landscaping Photograph Exhibit 4: Photograph of Residence under Construction Exhibit 5: Neighborhood Detail Map D. FINDINGS: Having reviewed the written record in the matter, the City now makes and enters the following: 1. Request: The applicant is requesting two modifications from the Retaining Wall standards; a modification from the setback from public rights-of-way (RMC 4-4-040C.2.d) and a modification to allow portions of the retaining wall above 48 inches (RMC 4-4-040D.2). The requested modifications to the retaining wall standards would allow for a residential driveway not to exceed the maximum permitted slope of 15% and would allow for increased vehicle maneuverability from the garage, given the steep topographical incline to the garage from the public street. It is anticipated that a driveway, which connects the garage directly to Renton Ave S would have a grade of 18-20%. Driveways with a grade exceeding 15% require approval of an Administrative Variance. 2. Modifications and Administrative Variance: The applicant's submittal materials comply with the requirements necessary to process the modifications and administrative variance. The applicant's neighborhood vicinity map, site plan and other project drawings are provided as Exhibits 1-5. 3. Existing Zoning and Land Uses: The zoning of the project site and all properties within the project vicinity is Residential — 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8). The surrounding properties to the north, south, and east are developed with single family residences. The properties to the west are currently vacant. E. CONSISTENCY WITH MODIFICATION CRITERIA: RMC 4-9-250D.2 addresses the Criteria for Modifications of Development Standards for the proposed front yard retaining wall height up to 60 inches and 3 -inch setback from the public right-of-way. The requested modification has been evaluated using the fallowing criteria: 1. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; and The retaining wall height standards of RMC 4-4-040D.1 allows for residential retaining walls up to 72 inches, although up to 48 inches is the maximum height within a front yard, unless a modification is received. A 3 -foot setback from the public right-of-way is required for retaining walls. The applicant applied for the single-family building permit in 2012, when retaining walls Modification Denial and Variance Report City of Renton Department of Cam y & Economic Development Modifica Administrative Variance Report & Decision MAROK RETAINING WALL MODIFICATION & DRIVEWAY VARIANCE LUA15-OW221 MOD & LUA15-WO308, VAR Report of May 22, 2015 Page 4 of 9 were allowed along the right-of-way without a setback. The proposed wall would require a separate building permit with engineered drawings that meet sound engineering judgment and minimum standards of the International Building Code. The proposed retaining wall would allow for improved vehicle maneuvering from the driveway to the garage location, compared to a wall that is setback 3 feet from the street, given the topographical constraints of the site. If the 3 -foot setback is required, a driveway slope above 15% could be created and the driveway width would be reduced from the proposed 11 -foot width. Additionally, in a scenario with a 3 -foot setback and the proximity of the driveway above a wall setback, an additional 24 -inch tall or taller guardrail could be required. If there is no vegetation buffer on top of the wall blocking access over the wall, the driveway would be considered a walking surface and require a railing. An additional barrier at the top of a wall would create a 7 -foot or taller barrier viewed from the street grade along approximately 40 to 50 linear feet of the street frontage. However, the current driveway configuration proposed results in the entire front yard being dominated by the proposed curved driveway. The granting of a variance to allow a driveway with a maximum grade of 20% would allow for the installation of a straight driveway with direct access to the garage from Renton Avenue S, which results in a much shorter driveway and a landscaped front yard. Therefore, staff finds that in this instance the granting of a variance to permit the construction of a driveway with a maximum grade of 20% results in less of an aesthetic impact to the surrounding neighborhood than the approval of the modification. The proposed modification does not meet the objectives or appearance criteria intended by City Code. 2. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity; and The driveway configuration proposed with the modification application results in the entire front yard being dominated by the proposed curved driveway and associated retaining walls. The granting of a variance to allow a driveway with a maximum grade of 20% would allow for the installation of a straight driveway with direct access to the garage from Renton Avenue S, which results in a much shorter driveway and a landscaped front yard. A steep driveway is common in the immediate neighborhood and would be more in keeping with the character of the surrounding area than the proposed retaining walls. The aesthetic impact of the proposed retaining walls would be injurious to other properties in the vicinity as the walls would be out of character and scale for the imidiate neighborhood. Therefore, staff finds that the granting of a variance to allow a driveway with a maximum grade of 20% results in less of an aesthetic impact to the surrounding neighborhood than the proposed modification. 3. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and The intent of retaining wall setbacks and height limits in front yards is to not allow blank walls or tall structures along sidewalks and the public realm. The applicant is proposing a cast -in place concrete wall with a smooth exterior finish to provide an enhanced design aesthetic. Additionally, a landscape strip is proposed at the top of the wall. If the wall was required to comply with the 3 - foot setback, the planting space along the top of the wall would be removed and a guardrail would be required at the top of the wall along the driveway. The requirement for a guardrail would Modification Denial and Variance Report City of Renton Department of Commun' Economic Development Modification ninistrative Variance Report & Decision MAROK RETAINING WALL MODIFICAT & DRIVEWAY VARIANCE 15-OW221 MOD & LUA15-000308, VAR Report of May 22, 2015 Page 5 of 9 increase the height of the wall, increasing the aesthetic impacts as viewed from the public realm. Guardrails are typically not required and/or seen in front yards of single-family homes. The requirement for the 3 -foot landscape buffer is to screen retaining walls from the public realm. The landscaping provided at the top of the wall instead of a guardrail would meet the intent of the purpose of the code, provided that a portion of the landscaping is designed to grow over the wall and down towards the sidewalk. Plants over the wall are anticipated to create a partial natural screening of the wall overtime. However, the current driveway configuration proposed results in the entire front yard being dominated by the proposed driveway. The granting of a variance to allow a driveway with a maximum grade of 20% would allow for the installation of a straight driveway with direct access to the garage from Renton Avenue S, which results in a much shorter driveway and a landscaped front yard. Staff contends that the granting of a variance to permit a driveway with a maximum grade of 20% would meet the intent and purpose of the Code better than the granting of the requested modification. 4. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and The site's grade is higher than originally intended when the single family building permit was issued in 2012. The additional height above the public street has required re -design of the driveway. The driveway must either be curved with the addition of a retaining wall in the front yard as requested in the current modification, or shall be straight with a grade of up to 20% requiring the approval of a variance. Staff finds, in this instance, that the granting of a variance to allow a steeper driveway grade is preferable to the modification requested for the retaining walls, as the granting of the modification would result in the front yard largely being dominated by the curved driveway and associated retaining walls. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed modifications to the retaining wall standards are not justified and are not required for the use and situation intended if a variance is granted for the driveway slope. 5. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Based on the staff analysis above, staff finds the proposed retaining wall and driveway configuration to be a negative aesthetic impact to other properties in the vicinity. F. CONSISTENCY WITH VARIANCE CRITERIA: Section 4-9-2508.5.0 lists 4 criteria that the Planning Director is asked to consider, along with all other relevant information, in making a decision on an Administrative Variance application. These include the following: The Planning Director shall have authority to grant an Administrative Variance upon making a determination, in writing, that the conditions specified below have been found to exist: 1. The applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, and location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of Modification Denial and Variance Report City of Renton Department of Com 'y & Economic Development Modif+ca � Administrative Variance Report & Recision MAROK RETAINING WALL MODIFICATION & DRIVEWAY VARIANCE LUA15-000221 MOD & LUA15-000308, VAR Report of May 22, 2015 Page 6 of 9 the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification: The subject property is currently under construction with a new single-family residence under permit 812001783. Topography and coal mine issues have caused the home to be constructed at a higher elevation than originally proposed. The elevation change has caused the garage to be located at a greater height above the public street than initially proposed which requires a reconfiguration of the driveway to the garage to keep the driveway slopes below 15% or a variance to permit a driveway with a maximum grade of 20%. As previously discussed above, a modification was originally requested to the retaining wall standards, to allow the construction of a curved driveway with a grade that would not exceed 15%. During the course of the City's review, it was determined that the proposed curved driveway would result in the front yard being largely dominated by the driveway and the associated retaining walls which would create a greater negative aesthetic impact than the granting of a variance to allow a straight driveway with a maximum grade of 20%. Due to the site's topography and the strict application of the 15% maximum driveway grade requirements, the property owner would be deprived the right and privilege of driveway access to the garage enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated: The driveway configuration proposed under the modification application would result in the construction of a retaining wall approximately 50 feet in length along the front property line. Per RMC 4-4-0801.3.b, the maximum width of a double loaded garage driveway is 16 feet. The approval of the modification would have resulted in the entire front yard being dominated by the curved driveway and associated retaining walls. The granting of a variance to allow a driveway with a maximum grade of 20% would allow for the installation of a straight, 16 -foot wide, driveway with direct access to the garage from Renton Avenue S, which results in a much shorter driveway and a landscaped front yard. This design is more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood then the proposed retaining walls along the street. Therefore, staff finds that the granting of a variance to allow a 16 -foot wide driveway with a maximum grade of 20% results in less of a visual impact to the surrounding neighborhood than the proposed modification. The granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the driveway configuration be revised to show a straight driveway with a maximum width of 16 feet, providing access from Renton Avenue S to the double loaded garage. 3. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated: The subject property is currently under construction with a new single-family residence under permit 812001783. Topography and coal mine issues have caused the home to be constructed at a higher elevation than originally proposed. The elevation change has caused the garage to be located at a greater height above the public street than initially proposed and would result in a maximum driveway grade of 20%. The granting of a variance to permit the construction of a driveway with a maximum 20% grade is the result of topographical challenges exacerbated by coal mine hazards and is not a special privilege, inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. Modification Denim and Variance Report City of Renton Department of Commun' Economic Development Modification ministrative Variance Report & Decision MAROK RETAINING WALL MODIFICA7 & DRIVEWAY VARIANCE 15,000221 MOD & LUAIS-000308, VAR Report of May 22, 2415 Page 7 of 9 4. That the approval is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose: The approval of a variance to permit a 20% maximum grade for the proposed driveway is the minimum variance needed to accomplish the desired purpose of providing direct access to the garage without having the front yard dominated by a curved driveway and retaining walls. G. CONCLUSIONS: The subject site is located at 910 Renton Avenue S. The site is within the Residential — 8 dwelling unit per acre (R-8) zoning classification. 2. The subject property is currently under construction with a new single-family residence under permit 812001783. Topography and coal mine issues have caused the home to be constructed at a higher elevation than originally proposed. 3. The applicant's proposal is to construct a curved driveway up and around a proposed front yard retaining wall. The retaining wall is approximately 50 feet in length. 4. Retaining walls are required to maintain a 3 -foot minimum setback from the right-of-way (RMC 4-4-040C.2.d) and are required to maintain a maximum height of 48 inches when located within the front yard setback area (RMC 4-4-040D.2). 5. The analysis of the proposal according to the modification criteria is found in the body of the Staff Report. 6. The analysis of the a 16 -foot wide straight driveway with a maximum grade of 20% in lieu of the proposed retaining walls was evaluated according to variance criteria and is found in the body of the Staff Report. 7. During the course of the review, staff determined that a 16 -foot wide straight driveway with a maximum grade of 20% would provide less of an adverse aesthetic impact to the surrounding properties than the proposed retaining walls. The proposed retaining walls did not meet the five (5) modification criteria as specified in RMC 4-9-250D.2. A 16 -foot wide straight driveway with a maximum grade of 20% meets the four (4) criteria to be considered in making a decision on a variance request as specified in RMC 4-9-250135.a. Special circumstances apply to the subject site which impose undue limitations on the property; the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; the granting of the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon the use of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located; and the approval of the variance request would be the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the desired purpose. Modification Denial and Variance Report City of Renton Department of Com y & Economic Development Modifica : Administrative Variance Report & Decision MAROK RETAINING WALL MODIFICATION & DRIVEWAY VARIANCE LUA15-000221 MOD & LUA15-000308, VAR Report of May 22, 2015 Page 8 of 9 H. DECISION: The Modifications for the Marok Front Yard Retaining Walls, File No. LUA15-000221, is hereby denied. The Administrative Variance for Marok Driveway, File No. LUA15-000308, is hereby approved subject to the following condition: 1. The driveway configuration shall be revised to show a straight driveway with a maximum width of 16 feet providing access from Renton Avenue S to the double loaded garage. DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURE: Jennifer Henning, AICP, PliWning Director Department of Community & Economic Development TRANSMITTED this 22nd day of May, 2015 to the Contact/Applicant/Owner: Gurpreet Singh Marok: 910 Renton Avenue S Renton, WA 98057 TRANSMITTED this 22°d day of May, 2015 to the following Parties of Record: No Parties of Record TRANSMITTED this 2fd day of May, 2015 to the following: Chip Vincent, CED Administrator Craig Burnell, Building official Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Steve Lee, Development Engineering Manager Fire Marshal Renton Reporter 5/2's- U / 5 - Date 1. LAND USE ACTION APPEALS, REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, & EXPIRATION The administrative land use decision will become final if it is not appealed within 14 days of the effective date of decision. APPEAL: This administrative land use decision will become final if not appealed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 PM on June 5, 2015. An appeal of the decision must be filed within the 14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). 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, Renton City Hall — 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. Appeals must be filed in writing, together with the required fee to the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Modification Denial and Variance Report City of Renton Deportment of Commui Economic Development Modification ministrative Variance Report & Decision MAROK RETAINING WALL MODIFICA' & DRIVEWAY VARIANCE 15-000221 MOO & LUA25-000305, VAR Report of May 22, 2015 Page 9 of 9 RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the effective date of decision, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14 -day appeal time frame. EXPIRATION: The variance(s) approval will expire two (2) years from the date of decision. A variance one (1) year extension may be requested pursuant to RMC 4-9-250B.17, THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE: provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning the land use decision. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial decision, but to Appeals to the Hearing Examiner as well. All communications after the decision/approval date must be made in writing through the Hearing Examiner. All communications are public record and this permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence in writing. Any violation of this doctrine could result in the invalidation of the appeal by the Court. Modification Denial and Variance Report . L;4.- I .ag -. NN �� --- — --- ----- �qq I A { Q 1 f44 ^tie NN N S^n \� w r Ka Y� 1 _ • b M1I J ac c4 0 - LU, w r P �ti 6 � r � N ui tau a� m INW Izz m u� 'n 0. m� � Fes'• U � o d0 In8 l\ � l s 7 � co �N MID y, J/w�N�d Mdt)r�*� 1 .�qQoa a .. .f Seep p ono, W1 eXACS ima`�`' e IN��1 ��l �cxr� {royll `��Wh, T he fps w, I� C' �xb�bit Z April 2, 2015 Modification Request for: 910 Renton Ave South, Renton Wa 98057 Permit: B12001783 Dear Renton Planning Committee, This letter is to request a modification of the building guidelines in regard to 2.D setback from pubic rights-of-way. I have included a site plan that outlines our driveway, retaining walls, and location of plants. I've also included two images, one of my home, and another of a home in San Francisco. Our home was designed by Urban design group. We plan on building retaining walls that are set 3 inches back from the right of way. Our driveway curves up behind the retaining wall, and we prefer we don't lose 3 feet of space that could be used to have a wider driveway (approximately 11 feet). if we have to drop back 3 feet, we will have to decrease our driveway width to 9 feet with no room for landscaping above the retaining wall. The major issue will be making the left turn to go up a small driveway (please see site plan). Retaining Wall: Our retaining walls in front of our home will look exactly like the image presented with this package. We will also be using the steps for areas that need a higher retaining wall, compared those that need a smaller one. Our retaining walls will be between 4 to 5 feet high depending on the driveway and lot. Above the retaining wall we plan on having landscaping and a mixture of exotic plants. The image of the home in San Francisco is approximatley how we want our landscaping and retaining walls to look like. Our intention is to have a contemporary -modern home on Renton Hill and start a trend for our neighborhood. I would like to buy the 3.2 acre lot in front of my house and one day build homes similar to my home. If you drive through the Madison lake front area in seattle, you will see many architectural retaining walls next to the right of way. Thank you for your consideration. I_YZ�4� RL,.k Gurpreet Singh Marok g-xki6+ H LU LOZ M. F-- _rn W M C.9 F4W 17 T23N R5E W 112 s rill j D .M. -U 18 >o °O Feet s5>xfPL 1:9,350 20 T23N R5E W 112 Page 49 of 80 City Limits Q (COR) Commerd aVOffice/RasidentiaY © (R-4) Residential 4dulac. r J RENTON U PM -1 CU e _ Potential Annexation Area Q OH) lndushial Henry Q(RC) Resource Conservation RC Q OL) lndustdal Light �M CO oCP Q (RM -T) Resi. Multi -Family Tradibonal Q(CD) Center Downtown Q(R-1) Residential lduMc Q(RM-U)Rest, Wild -Family Urban Center CD Q(RMH)ResidentialManufactured Homes a Q(R-14)Residential Wulac Q(UC-N 1) Urban Center North 1 Q (UC -12) Urban Center North 2 �� CA _ °Q R-8 CA , R-8 CA �P8T CA C9 R-8 CA:gE ac gTH PL .. r CA ¢ rJ SE a� U a U4C IO t j . } a R-8 czm RMF g y CO y � ZONING MAP BOOK PLANNING - TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED DATE: 1010212013 This document is a graphic representation, not guaranteed to survey accuracy, and is based on the hast information avaiiable as of the date shown. This map is intended for City dtspiay purposes only Community & Economic Cletreloprment {. L -celp- F w"o Ad"A ¢aersvmfam G.5 s CA m RM -F kJ � f V CA R-8 > �R C ,N n p RM -F b n R-8 R-8 RM -F im vgohESFx foster: _ 5 EK m,iEK 'frf fl )OWf1l i1Y1ri E.n ,5E(F - �• ChF arE tm ECEN� WwiY I6N,4SE wie`In.�'. a.,ae�wr Mr�rF�.w3,, :R xFa 3 RM -F RM -F TE i`o I K-0 -g Lam/ r RM -F °mooC9R-8 ui z H4W29 T23N R5E W 112 0 420 840 G4W Feet 1:9,350 20 T23N R5E W 112 Page 49 of 80 City Limits Q (COR) Commerd aVOffice/RasidentiaY © (R-4) Residential 4dulac. r J RENTON Q (CV) Center Wlage Q (R-8) Residential 8dulac _ Potential Annexation Area Q OH) lndushial Henry Q(RC) Resource Conservation Zoning Designation Q OL) lndustdal Light Q (RMF) Residential Wali -Family Q (CA) Commatnlal A.rterlal © 04 Industrial Madium Q (RM -T) Resi. Multi -Family Tradibonal Q(CD) Center Downtown Q(R-1) Residential lduMc Q(RM-U)Rest, Wild -Family Urban Center Q(CN) Commercial Neighborhood 0(R-10)Residential l0dulx Q(RMH)ResidentialManufactured Homes Qpo)CommerdalOtace Q(R-14)Residential Wulac Q(UC-N 1) Urban Center North 1 Q (UC -12) Urban Center North 2 I 9 5428'`5428'54 5427'` 542615425'5425164 B1WB1E B2W B2E I B„r, HE B 4E B5W B5E 26 TAN ? 26T24N 25T24N 25 T24N � 3C TAN � � 66W B6E � B�7E B$W j B$E j B WEWt12 � R4EE1 < R4EW112 R4E E112 ?MEW112 � � N CE4112 N 28 T24N ' 28 T24N l 27 T24N 27 T24N 26 T24N W 1f2 R5EW 12 R5E E 112 ME W 112 ; > T24N 25 T24N 25 T24N 30 11"` j R5E E 1 2 M. W 1f2 RSE'5.112 I ME W 112 ME 112 R5E 443514435]4436!4436!5431 543115432 2.15433'5433 5434 5434;5435 5435 5436`5436 C1 W CIE C2W G2E C3W C3 64 35 T24N 35 T24N 3B T24N i 36 T24N 31 T24N 31T 32 C4;W 32 T24N C5W G5E C5W C6E ; G7W C7E C8W! C8E G R4E W 112 i WE E 112 i WE W 112 WE E 112 RSE W 112 R5 12 ? ME W 112 34 T24N 34 T24N 35 724N 35 T24N � 38 TAN i 36 T24N 31 ME W 11 ME _, s-_ - .....,..�........,..... i ",.... i 'RBE 4� R5E E� ME W 112 ME E 172 ME W 12 ME E !12 3W 5305 ;�� 5304 � 4 5303 530 5 2 53021 4302 ` 4302 4301 4301 5306 5306^' (�,ryJ W E I W D4E I D5W I E ' D6W D D7V . D7E 3 5301: 5301, 63 D2 �23N �7Z3N ;'. 1 �- as 23N 05 T23N I 04 T23N 04 T23N C3 T23N jj- Q3 Tj7 Q2 T23N 23N ! � j �$Q� Dai R4EW92 R4EE112 EW112 R4Eft12 EW1r2 RSEE112 W112 RSEE112 R5EW1f2 R5EE112 ` MEW112 1 R5E 1 RSEW12 'L s 06 TA RSE 112 ' ME W 112 RSE E 12 1 RBE 4311 4311 4312j4312 5 307 53D$ 5308�5309;:5309.5310 531015311;5311 5312'531 j' 1 W E 1 E E2W E2E E E E4W ` E4E E5W €E BE E6W E6E E7 FE E8W BE 11 3N 11 T23N 12 T23N 12 T23N 07 AN 3 C7 23N i 08 TAN 00 T23N 09 T23N E 09 T23N 10 T23N 10 T23N It T23N WE !n i WE E 112 R4E W 112 WE EjW - 112 � ME f12 ME W 112 R5E E 112 �, MEW 12 t ME E 112 ME W 112 - ME E t12�R5ETW ME E V2 12 TAN 12 T23N 07 T 4 € _ 12 R8 W ME W 1r2 I ME 314 14 4 1314 335318 53181%F4 15317; 1 5316°5316€5315'5315 5 313 531 18 14 F1OW FT i3T € 13 T2 F3W F3E 18 T24N 18 T24N N; 4E F5W ; �,!E!12 F6 E ° F7E F8W F8E F WEW112 WE F e 0 N I 15T23N 1�4EEi12 RSEW12 R5EE112 ! R5EW112 R5EE114T�137AN i ! E112 EW7 .._� W 1 EW 12 ME E ME 12 ME E V2 ME 1 !4323 432314 4 42415319 5319'5320. 5320 5321`532.1522` 2 5 1 G 1 W G 1 E G2 '; G2 G3W1 G3E 1 G4W 1 G4E G5W ? G5E 2 631 23 R4E WV2 NE EE11 24 TAN ! 24 T23N 19 T23N 19T23N 20TZ3N 20 T23N 21 T23N 22T 2 WEWIII RAEE1/0�MEWV21 MEE112 MEW112 R5EE112 ( R5EW4R MEE112 MEW1 '� ME � R5EW112 23 24 T23N 24 T23N 23 ......... EE V2 R6E W 4326'4326 432 14325 53301 X330 15329 5329 5328'5328 6327':532T532EE �l 6 5326 5 5325:633 H13N H1 E H2 ' H2E H3W€ N' 3E ' H4W � H4E ` H5W H5E W H6E ' H7W WE ` H � H8E H9 26 T23N 26 T23N 25T23 25T23N R4E W 172 WE E 1f2 R4E W 1 _ R4E E i1 T23N 29 723N q 29 T23N 23N ME AN 3 N 27 T23N M20 T23N E W 112 T23N € EEM _ R5EW112 I MEE112 W112 25T ...fu - ...E 12 j ,1112 ME E 112 �f R5E E 112 E 1f2 PSE W 1 .,, 2g.... r _ _ �r 43351'4335 433 1!53771331%321533215333'63 533`5334 53 35,5335 3615336 633 5 W 11 E 36 12VI,1' !2E,' 13W J 13E 33 141 1 14E 15W SE 16W 16E 17W 17E 18 18E 19 R4EW112 1 ETANp EyyNJ. RET R5EWV�� MEEl2 € MEW131 r23N � � RSEE12 R5EW172 � E�112 R5EW112 � EN 34 T23N 34 TEi12 R5EWN 35 V2 1 ET�2 R5EW7 J R5EE112 RBEW1 4202 4202 01 4201 52061520 '5205 5Z05 5204 5 5203:5 520215 02 5201 J1 W J1 E J2W 3 J2E A9 722N J3W J3E AW J4& J"N 5W J5E . , 6JZW BE � JAW Residential (RC) Resource Conservation Mixed Use Centers (CV) Center Village Industrial (IL) Industrial Light PAGE (R-1) Residential 1 dulac (CD) Center Downtown (IM) Industrial Medium (R4) Residential 4dulac (UC -N1) Urban Center North 1 � [IH) Industrial Heavy INDEX (R-8) Residential 8dulac (R-10) Residential 10dulac (UC -N2) Urban Center North 2 Page (R•14) Residential 14dulac Commercial r I RENTON Number (RM F) Residential Multi -Family (CA) Commercial Arlerial " t Potential Annexation Area SecllfawnlRange (RM -T) Res Multi-FamilyTraditianal (CN) Commercial Neighborhood (RM -U) Res Multi-Famlly Urban Center (CO) Commercial Office (RMH) Res Manufactured Hanes (COR) CanmerciallOificelResidential DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY; -","—city of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT �- { llIeNl _ MODIFICATION & ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE REPOR & A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST REPORTDATE: May 22, 2015 Project Name: Marok Retaining Wall Modification and Drivewa nce acQon 2 Owner/Applicant/ Gurpreet Singh Marok, 910 Renton Ave S, Renton, WA 98057 Contact: File Number: LUA15-000221, MOD & LUA15-000308 VAR Project Manager: Jill Ding, Senior Planner Project Summary: The applicant is requesting a modification of the Retaining Wails Development Standards (RMC 4-4-040.C.2) for a front yard wall on an infill residential lot with an approved single-family home building permit. The proposed project site is 8,450 square feet located in the Residential -8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. The applicant is requesting two modifications from the Retaining Wall standards; a modification from the setback from public rights-of-way (RMC 4-4-040C.2.d) and a modification to allow portions of the retaining wall above 48 inches (RMC -4-4-040D.2). The requested modifications to the'retaining wall standards would allow for a residential driveway to not to exceed the maximum permitted slope of 15% and would allow for increased vehicle maneuverability from the garage given the steep topographical incline to the garage from the public street. It is anticipated that a driveway, which connects the garage directly to Renton Ave S would have a grade of 18-20%. Driveways with a grade exceeding 15% require approval of an administrative Variance. Project Location: 910 Renton Avenue S Site Area: 8,450 Square Feet (0.19 acres) Project Location Map Modification Denial and Variance Report On On the 8th day of May, 2015, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Application and Acceptance documents. This information was sent to: Iqbal marok/Gurpreet Marok I Owners 1300' Surrounding Properties I See Attached (Signature of Sender): V V V STATE OF WASHINGTON ) _—`` 01Ap� °,� .0 ti' ����.a�ttitp / COUNTY OF KING ) a s' *'A '` m � $ v C ;0 A co C- I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante ir��r a signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act fdr,' �§ d�urn69es mentioned in the instrument. 01ril'�'f1JGT0 �.�`` Dated: ci Notary (Print): My appointment expires: «`a,t s3Kb�'w•e xE' EpS3ocS:s.k:':kdi+n::a:ff e LUA15-000308, V-A template - affidavit of service by mailing )tAry Public in and for the State of Washington tit �- z I I C�Df f . A 1w :m:� „.. ............... ..r .. ...... .. NAM':' ... }�, ... ,... ...E GURPREET MAROK Iqbal Marok 23408 30th Ave 5 Kent, WA 98032 . lw 3294700160 3294700040 3294700250 ABADILLA SEAN+DIANE ATKINS JON & SUSAN BOTCH JERRET J+ERIKA M 811 GRANT AVE S 120 ORCHARD PARK LN 908 GRANT AVE S RENTON WA 98057 POLSON MT 59860 RENTON WA 98057 3294700110 3294700032 3294700251 CASEY ELIZABETH A CASTELLUCCIO CARRIE A DUSEL JAMES+CASEY AUTUMN 812 RENTON AVE S 818 CEDAR AVE S 527 GRANT AVE S RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98057 3294700230 3294700130 3294700150 EGAN LINDA D FAKHARZADEH M HADI FAKHARZADEH M HADI 810 GRANT AVE S PO BOX 78404 PO BOX 78404 RENTON WA 98057 SEATTLE WA 98178 SEATTLE WA 98178 3294700140 3294700162 3294700041 GILROY PAUL E GOLDMANN BRUCE W KROEGER DAVID+MELODY 1316 S 10TH 5T 807 GRANT AVE S 705 RENTON AVE 5 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98057 3294700142 3294700125 3294700260 MARCHETTI MONTE MAROK IQBAL S+SUKHWINDER K MCCANN ROBERT 907 GRANT AVE S 23408 30TH AVE S 1002 GRANT AVE S RENTON WA 98055 KENT WA 98032 RENTON WA 98055 3294700146 3294700145 3294700111 MCINTOSH DOUGLAS L MELNICHUK L MOSES RHONA 903 GRANT AVE S 25319 176TH AVE SE 816 RENTON AVE S RENTON WA 98055 COVINGTON WA 98042 RENTON WA 98057 3294700231 3294700240 3294700120 NIXON JOHN F+PREBLE DARCANNE E PARKER JASON+TERRI PAVONE GEORGE A+ANGELA D 812 GRANT AVE S 904 GRANT AVE S 532 RENTON AVE S RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98057 RENTON WA 98057 2023059050 7200196 7200196 PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC RAFEL LAW GROUP PLLC RAFEL LAW GROUP PLLC PO BOX 97034 600 UNIVERSITY ST#2520 901 Renton Ave S LOT BELLEVUE WA 98009 SEATTLE WA 98101 Renton WA 98057 RESIDENT 7200196 7200196 1003 Renton Ave S LOT RESIDENT RESIDENT Renton WA 98057 913 Renton Ave 5 LOT 907 Renton Ave S LOT Renton WA 98057 Renton WA 98057 7200196 3294700121 3294700245 RESIDENT THOMPSON ERICK S THRASHER M LYNN+MARIAN C 919 Renton Ave S LOT 13015 9TH ST 1405 S 9TH ST Renton WA 98057 RENTON WA 98057 RENTON WA 98057 7200191 VU THERESA CAT 1005 GRANT AVE S RENTON WA 98057 3294700030 YIP THOMAS ET AL 521518TH AVE NE SEATTLE WA 98105 3294700252 WILHOIT JAMES P+MAYAT 910 GRANT AVE S RENTON WA 98055 3294700131 WRIGHT DAVID H 918 RENTON AVE S RENTON WA 98055 ,a . -�....— �- �1�"City of NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Magf AppKulloe FIC baen RIld antl ecce Prrd wlth the Oapartrnlh[d CommuNYy i FKanwnk Oartlopmrrt {CWk—Phaanbsp lRllyan of rhl Cky of Rlnlan. TheMlhwlnF hryRy dam6aa tly apPKnban aad rly nawwy Publk Rpyot& MTEOFNOAQIIP"NrATION: May p, 2015 IYIWERNAMEiMINYFR; MaioF Odvewa111"1--0003M I PROIEQOEpplllhp! i5e ""-M requaaOmmoi AtlminlNlallea Wrtwau [nr fha [Oh➢burtlon of a eaw drtww.y fpr a new sinAle lam�[Y resitlence. he prgposetl da] -my p hive+ nyaaYmm� pad¢ W 2 hl0 sMrten4 wN lxmeda Ura maxlm„m Venninad Arade of 15 aroM W RMCMAEO. The Pfodan i,e k butrE stithti lh¢z1ftd09 d"11`1unhcer acre IR'EImr,ene d¢arinadon+nd Crals SAW agsw IM M a m. A naw alma farnry nsltlenKe k orrrenlly Wtr ronstrvalon IPermrt 5 1110 118 31, q I:iEls mal mine ht2>d area moderaq yrrCl� ha[ary +roe, erwbn fi W p, Intl sanhlve s4Vp¢s 19�atlea herwlen 25 arMa10 Percen[I an mapped m rAA larplaa Nta PROJECT IMATIORt 911 Neuron Av 5 PERNfr6A11Vl fiFQyE5TEp: vananoa APPUCAM/PROgE CONTACT PEMN; Jabal NaroYJ23i 3Gf AmVKeM.WA4R031f30ETy�- Od6JnarPr ee6mambgpnap.rrrll C,aoo n m ft abom, appilmim must ha aubmined la aRflhrE m A Dim Stow Plamyr, OfprtmM of Gpmmnnhy l Fnypolk pkvekPmen[. 1055 south Grady W.V. RarrtoN WAsew. by 390 Rm�. M1, 11301.E IE you haw que%Gm about thb prnaoral. or 1;1h m oe made a Party W mMrd arod racatre add100M1 noubolbn by map, aanbn dy pfpf[H 2Aana0R a[ 18251 a30659g. Anyone wM10 mnkP wrttlan mmman[p wM ayppmatldN bamn9 a P+ny Ot rB[md antl wil M mllfied of any dpe;slort an fhb prniNCt PEEI{SE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CAWNG FOR PROPER RI,E IOE2NEIflC4T70N DATE OF APPOCAT201pt MAY R, 20p,5 NOEIC'0FC0MPEERAPMCAT101V: MAY&2015 If you would IIYa [p be matle a pd•ry of *-k Prumm reca. rn'leei¢r tunl+w Inl'wm9Ods on Mb P."fe[t. plHa tl4 MrJn and re:bvn En: CKy of Rarrton, [gip, Viannma O:uitlon, 1035 SOuM GmOy WN, ReAvn, WA u No Name 110., M.m Ork*,ayl LUAl,n0p308, V, hAME: MARINO AOORE55: CYl051'rao(Aw TELEPHONE NO.: CERTIFICATION i, hereby certify that copies of the above document were posted in conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: Signed: STATE OF WASHINGTON } ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) 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. Dated: Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): My appointment expires: Denis Law Mayor May 8, 2015 lqbal Marok 23408 301h Ave S Kent, WA 98032 +a. Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application Marok Driveway, LUA15-000308, V-A Dear Iqbal Marok: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: Gurpreet Marok / Owner(s) Renton City Mall . 1 055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov City Df `� r NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: May 8, 2015 Marok Driveway / LUA15-000308, V-A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting and Administrative Variance for the construction of a new driveway for a new single family residence. The proposed driveway would have a maximum grade of 20 percent, which exceeds the maximum permitted grade of 15 percent per RMC 4-4-080. The project site is located within the Residential -8 dwelling unit per acre (R-8) zoning designation and totals 8,450 square feet in area. A new single family residence is currently under construction (permit B12001783). A high coal mine hazard area, moderate landslide hazard area, erosion hazard, and sensitive slopes (grades between 25 and 40 percent) are mapped on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 910 Renton Ave 5 PERMITS/REVIEW REQUESTED: Variance APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Iqbal Marok/23408 3e Ave S/Kent, WA 98032/206-724- 7044/gurpreet.marok@gmaii.com Comments an the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. on May 22, 2015. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager at (425) 430-6598. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: MAY 8, 2015 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MAY 8, 2015 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name / No.: Marak Driveway/ LUA15-000308, V-A NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: City/State/Zip: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNII AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Planning Division City _of :- (.�,j , DR� LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: CLLyre-J 1 V 10.Yo�C ADDRESS: CITY: leve toll ZIP: 5 7 TELEPHONE NUMBER: z0 0 CC^ j 7 _ 1t f 39 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: CONTACT PERSON NAME: VL11r i d Y1G� l� COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS-Av5- eJ CITY: ZIP: 7,07 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: MA OK PROJECTIADDRESS(S)ILOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 9 10 ievJai,% Ave SF lei �� ($03 7 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): EXISTING LAND USE(S): &SIC 6 tk. 10T- 0A C0k5iVVG Y PROPOSED LAND USE(S): EXISTIN6 COMPREHENSI E PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) At IP, EXISTING ZONING: ts icle PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): SITE AREA (in square feet): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) E4`` rC1D NUMBER OF PROPOSEOTS,(if aIlipde) aQ��Q. NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING Uf e): H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\master Appiication.doc Rev: 02/2015 April 2, 2015 Modification Request for: 910 Renton Ave South, Renton Wa 98057 Permit: 1312001783 Dear Renton Planning Committee, This letter is to request a modification of the building guidelines in regard to 2.D setback from pubic rights-of-way. i have included a site plan that outlines our driveway, retaining walls, and location of plants. I've also included two images, one of my home, and another of a home in San Francisco. Our home was designed by Urban design group. We plan on building retaining walls that are set 3 inches back from the right of way. Our driveway curves up behind the retaining wall, and we prefer we don't lose 3 feet of space that could be used to have a wider driveway (approximately 11 feet). If we have to drop back 3 feet, we will have to decrease our driveway width to 9 feet with no room for landscaping above the retaining wall. The major issue will be making the left turn to go up a small driveway (please see site plan). Retaining Wall: Our retaining walls in front of our home will look exactly like the image presented with this package. We will also be using the steps for areas that need a higher retaining wall, compared those that need a smaller one. Our retaining walls will be between 4 to 5 feet high depending on the driveway and lot. Above the retaining wall we plan on having landscaping and a mixture of exotic plants. The image of the home in San Francisco is approximatley how we want our landscaping and retaining walls to look like. Our intention is to have a contemporary -modern home on Renton Hill and start a trend for our neighborhood. i would like to buy the 3.2 acre lot in front of my house and one day build homes similar to my home. If you drive through the Madison lake front area in seattle, you will see many architectural retaining walls next to the right of way. Thank you for your consideration. Ao]�A- 1XVVak Gurpreet Singh Marok �Q 9.fd3�b�i/38 01 ;.P�Zv/Y `? y NN K 4.na v I X � — ` _ �_ 5•�� efo v x ZI V,3�. L �L V s u p a Fr 7 VIf, M $ 4 s x w r a tt �° }fib x H a it' IN Ito kQ CL a .S a � �� � � oma � � � d. 4 2 az x ---�� x row 8 d Ess oacr _� •• y �� M *0 C, N 11FIRIMIMMI 3f ep W1 eVACI y (As w �� �i. ke will Willar rcvn �,Iw T h� S pa w i I �; xac P'� i« ~jt6t k ff RECEIPT EG00036136 BILLING CONTACT Marok Gurpreet 23408 30TH AVE S KENT, WA 980322825 REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME LUA15-000221 PLAN - Modification Technology Fee g City of Transaction Date: April 03, 2015 -° TRANSACTION PAYMENT cF AMOUNT PAID TYPE METHOD Fee Payment heck #1092 $150-00 Fee Payment heck 41092 $4.50 SUB TOTAL $154.50 TOTAL $154.50 Printart nn- AM/901 r,, Pronnr=H 14— Wvin Cnranenn Pane 1 of 1 ib r' del§ ;Ak 6 rr