Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA78-214
i_. .n L, ly • N _,../ .y/ ��,�-f"�\ _ �,,,-!fi r-' J t 1---�' Nil / � 1'+z 41 - - - - ,-\x--rts, ,•!", \,",, -t-- er-r-C .N.....? -----• 4o* .-9.. - ,2„'..\ IA „ �� 131 „ •�- ,�` , x sA �'� t �,; ANT \r .5 -----"\-10/0 5 ''A ''.:**-C7--- ....ateite4 . 1 4 c, . 0. 2._ ..:P', ,___... ,c__,j_--,•,-,-,. 4", • . S14,G ./_ . ,�- T �:.-ter""' •k n ,,f \ ,- • PC-C t �- NYCALE _ J , \KE ' z55 Tp a,j :. e• / .-: { \m r e p• r' F S \ 1 s c ' L� d1 144 1FIA 11 I^r ,,,• 4\ tQ • o " pJ N0 E R 7S°N, i ti \ ✓ //%iq I I A • /''_pi-�' i I I \ <c l z 1 1 0 ! \1` 63 J , ! r [1 t v. . , 1 t, 2 0 114 , I .;, vl o 1 �a A ko ' ,„i � — �b \� ;+u A �Q� 'Lt 0 i 1 .171 $1.)"(' j\ii 1r' . JJ '� '' K, , t.,„ , T!_ r..? I > I ri , I i , 1 j -L -=, 311990 , r %wo NcusEs , Two ftwsE¢ I ' 1 E----. — ; 7740 N&&'SES" II 7` i ON ONE GOT S Owi ONELcr 1 ' i, i 1 oN 0"t ', --1'''',\s' 1 ' t.„-e-_-_) , -,, ; 4 : I', Lri) ) - r q) ,) ( • e --, i , . \ ,_ ,4, ; c --,,, izi ( /.., --......), . 1,- (-L:4- " . —9____. ',_, ,..,_: . • __. - , li :\- N.: ,,.,..,/ Oil lt, 0) --.4--- 4 ,,, a -•��' f ._ 1��_ — �zS .\ xs • S° ._..'S�. -..-..75_ ± ipo� i -_.._i®o sc+_..�_=sO.- --- '0 -- ' _2_,. E. A I lt.THr I / v Q BER.D E EN /91/e- A/ - AVE .S. _ ._. 0.2.4 tc •"Al v 4Vt /-1(j'( 8e'RDi6N 9,'6. N.E. , _ ,.�s3 4: rvv.vs.•.v 3GS. 44 4°.Q'4 _. ' —EF— T�� i -- - I ley 92 - .f �� 3 31.4 1 i/ / i 7 ` q1•I4_i - - - %`'- - — `�_ r �1; ( -e00a5E NousE i ;/fpuSE �` I i r • -sue ij • 1U:Jems w' I I 1>/ w z, 1 CITY OF RENTOIV .A_, 4LF �_�� o F �-- y Q ' HEARING EXAMINER �'`� J' �1 �yI SEP 51978 .•gib'it Am 4 3 WI 1,18191101161211 1 12.3546�6 .' C s • A'4 ` '•ir .r 1 I� �, s`o 4 \ T I /O3-��.� E 'ti'� 'Ts J S ,.EXHI 1N 0 1 ` w •t-..,, S'- y � oI • ITEM , • 2 -- cr, �'� 9 r N / i� ' ••J -- p! (b 5` 6 '),, R+i !; �s N't//C/N/Ty /,7A� _ 43: C I` ' y b'}F- S) 1:3 '' ,, 3, i. „ w t�a1 SCALE : lzoI `� -N. ;it J, co 7 b. ....... ..,r';,,� ,4 1 f t icy r.�_ / w.,--r 6L02 L�o.vD0 �\\' .. 1 'd • ,/' .. 8C//LDini46 NOT '\ i~ �, IL , g to -rA A' 4. .1v,\ ``J ,6S G4- ,_.. 1 -_.85 7, it, j t .��/QWN TO SCALE '. �,• � I `y-1 \yf. - I -.i� r� ,c.c ���r (,I • /:i" '� . \.'1''U•"/•f�30 P t. 1.1 . i i?, 1. - -- .._ - , / tea .�%�_ - , - / c f �-- _ r ►1 4 4 r •'-�\ i a g I ~PVC " ' ~ �-t --S w 4 `_. ref�' .r�'1 \,, - �.. _ ` - �,AN 51 Et` 0 is z 4, 0 y r. t`/// ` c $FEEL. Q' J rri 6` 6: r® \ �- , A � ,� y o, \ .� err/// 1 v.�P� r "45°4. \ t\1°'. . l t o, 2 �="° ,r ....4igicri _" _! . ter '� •\ Cs-l'P:- t ___ _(..Y . .....-• , .. ENNYpA v, 'hteAG cs P'O r f ' c s \ ," 0 Y0 SCs) \ -s ,,, cC .Y Ye I _ f a I <\c 1 ' 0 f_. . 0 0 .., i a4 , (4, z , t : f _s . , OZ a ___ i, ) . L ......... . A, h k , "�`' \ Q ', , • 1 1' 0 ci f NC /. L ., J r AW ; , , , . .., r 1 -, ,w . j\;\ i .11 \ f Er I , f 7-4!- ) r • 1 \.,. <.) v f 3119gr� ' cliI 7w, ,4„sEs rwo .43 i -' ' aN ONE LOT ` ` Two 0.000Ses ON ONEG?T I ! is I ki „C o r : ' ,- j • , ' \ . 'VI") , . 4„, , ., 1 O- ... Imo. _ h C: ,..�,• V .9. • v- ...1 V '`... YPt.LX UI - ,, NOIJSE "\ cr• i ., o i - 4 n ` "."' L- ry i 1 i i � I � o� • _Lai r 'fa: X$ ,Sr' so 25 : 7.5 _ __. — _ ' _ i __— -'-L-- �o e. ,qdE.Z.DEEnT�/9v� A/6" I T H A V E . S. 5. _ - .- - f \ _ _ _ o.z.j.4c ,s-'j v 9v� 170 BE�t��6rlA;'c.N.E. - ..34_. tio_.�'.v. 3bSa.Ii .._ (_c.,y' _S' «. - - — 7-0,T�� -- 7 1 115 9a " . ' r 3 3/.4; "" /. l 7I 131sa i �.., ), . ( usE i.' NOusB ' t ; t a I I 15-r ��_ i w : I + RECEIVED 8 t.a .:__ ��` i Dsr CITY OF FIENTON `, �. Ad '. (�_ o y a eve, INER 1i ` ?. \max" r I I HEARING �r6 a tv �E�� 5:1978 �`' , N .� �' AM 4 . PM ;a ; �' ( �'� 111�1Ztlt�t3�4t51i �;, , h' y b� 71Rt9t10 ,,�• ;,1� c ' Srq "` <;N i\k7: 1 ';Ts o: • T I io3`'`-�i L• ,yam' Iji%4I .) i(°�A�XHI�I` I -'-- - + o ITEM. 'NO.. �: N!{//C/N/TY /�7A� 3 - .1--4 r 3-t!•T� -‘_--- -.. - w �—� -o 1L n* K� `\'1 f ' •• J lt'.• . i" fay.t=r (coin L.00v2)) , +.. SC ti �r..r,.�• i.� f i !? .GC IL: . ! N ' 4' A A,--- �" 1 r• •• J .-eS u4. <5-, / {g(_, ',.y t .D AWN TD SC.9LE l� 1 V�S`f 1, ,I CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 3258 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF _FONT M RESIDENCE SINGLE FAMILY DIS CT (R-1 T RESIDENCE DISTRICT (R-3) R-214-78) WHEREAS under Chapter 7, Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 known as the "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton", as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has heretofore been zoned as Residence Single Family District (R-1) ; and WHEREAS a proper petition for change of zone classi- fication of said property has been filed with the Planning Department on or about August 15, 1978 which petition was duly referred to the Hearing Examiner for investigation, study and public hearing, and a public hearing having been held thereon on or about September 5, 1978, and said matter having been duly considered by the Hearing Examiner and said zoning request being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council having duly considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties having been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto, NOW THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residence District (R-3)as hereinbelow specified; subject to the findings, conclusions and decision dated September 14, 1978 of the City's Hearing Examiner; the Planning Director is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to-wit: -1- Tract 11 of Harries Garden Home Tracts, as per plat recorded in volume 34 of Plats, on page 38, records of King County, Washington, EXCEPT the north 37 1/2 feet thereof, situate in the County of King, State of Washington (Property located on Aberdeen AVenue N.E. between Sunset Boulevard N.E. and N.E. 12th Street in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Avenue N.E.) SECTION II: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five (5) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 23rd day of October, 1978. ag2A-xe...dJ (.C.. 7uazi... Delores A. Mead, City‘Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this23rd day of October, 1978. Charles . Delaurenti, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication; October 27, 1978 September 14, 1978 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: Arjan Bhatia FILE NO. R-214-78 LOCATION: On Aberdeen Avenue N.E. between Sunset Boulevard N.E. and N.E. 12th Street in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of a rezone from R-1 to R-4 to permit future development of the site for multiple family housing. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval to R-3 with restrictive RECOMMENDATION: covenants. Hearing Examiner: Approval to R-3 with conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on August 30, 1978. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on September 5, 1978 at 9:55 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1, and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #2: King County Assessor's Map Exhibit #3: King County Assessor's Map including designated structures Exhibit #4: Conceptual Plot Plan Mr. Smith corrected the existing zoning category of the property denoted on Exhibit #1 from R-1 to G-7200. He read departmental comments attached to Exhibit #1 into the record and advised that all comments should be added to the Planning Department recommendation. The Examiner called a recess at 10:15 a.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:40 a.m. The Examiner asked the applicant if he concurred in Exhibit #1. Responding was: Arjan Bhatia 8506 S. 125th Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Bhatia indicated his nonconcurrence in the report, and stated that although the Planning Department report reflected accurate facts, he objected to departmental recommendations for a less intense zoning category. He submitted a document outlining points of disagreement with the report which was labeled by the Examiner as follows: Exhibit #5: Applicant's comments regarding staff report Referring to the Planning Department recommendation to rezone the property to R-3 in lieu of the requested R-4 category, Mr. Bhatia emphasized that R-4 zoning is designated on the Comprehensive Plan for the subject property. He advised that the basis for the zoning request was predicated not only upon the allowable density but other considerations such as location of the existing sewer and height limits in development. Mr. Bhatia stated his opinion that details of development should be reviewed during the building permit application process and not at the time of rezone consideration. Referencing Section 0.3 R-214-78 Page Two of Exhibit #1, Mr. Bhatia objected to consideration of the Puget. Power easement located west of the site in review as being irrelevant to the zoning request. , He reviewed location of existing R-4 zoning in surrounding areas to illustrate compatibility of the request to adjacent properties, and noted the existence of steep slope which will accommodate high density multifamily development. He reported his opinion that property values of surrounding property will increase concurrently with increased value of the subject site under R-4 zoning. Mr. Bhatia preferred establishment of a minimum front yard setback from Aberdeen Avenue N.E. according to building code requirements, and cited problems of development' resulting from the location of existing sewer lines and slope of the property. He objected. to recommended' 10-foot side yard setbacks due to the narrow configuration of the property and felt the proposed 50-foot rear yard setback was unnecessary due to the existence of a 60-foot Puget Power right-of-way and additional unuseable open space located on the western portion of the property. Mr. Bhatia objected to recommendations for landscape strips denoted in Section P.2 of Exhibit #1 and supported requirements of the building , code, noting increased requirements would impose severe. design limitations and hardship upon development due to the narrow configuration of the property. Responding to recommendations for retention of vegetation, he indicated his intent to retain all existing fruit trees on the site, but questioned the authority of the Planning Department in establishing the requirement during rezone processes. Mr. Bhatia submitted a topographical graph to illustrate steep slope of the property, and the graph was labeled Exhibit #6 by the Examiner. He indicated development capabilities of the existing slope were in accordance with height allowances for multifamily residential structures in the R-4 zone in constructing two stories below and three stories above ground level. He reiterated previous statements regarding consistency of the request with the Comprehensive Plan and objection to imposition of setback and landscaping requirements during review of the rezone application. The Examiner requested testimony in support of the application. There was no response. He then requested testimony in opposition to the request. Responding was: James Burch 957 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Burch, property owner to the north of the subject site, indicated that he was testifying neither in support not opposition to the request. He favored the requested R-4 zoning and felt that rezone to R-3 would create piecemeal zoning in the area and contribute to deterioration of the value of his property. He advised that existing elevation on the subject site produces flooding and increased storm water runoff onto his property and requested certain provisions during development to mitigate the existing problem. He also clarified the width of the subject property as 62.5 feet,,,not 65.5 feet as noted on Exhibit #2. The Examiner advised that Ordinance No. 3174, Storm Water Drainage Ordinance, provides protection for storm water runoff, and the matter should be considered .separately from the rezone application. The Examiner requested further testimony in opposition to the request. Responding was: Donald Jarvis 951 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Jarvis concurred in testimony previously entered by Mr. Burch in support of R-4 zoning to prevent the occurrence of piecemeal zoning in the area. He also reported incidences of storm water runoff onto his property from Sunset Boulevard N.E. and Aberdeen Avenue N.E. The Examiner reiterated previous comments related to provisions of Ordinance No. 3174, noting requirements for on-site retention and control of surface water runoff. for all developments during separate review. Mr. .Jarvis inquired if fencing would be required in development. The Examiner advised flexibility='of the Planning Department recommendation in allowing the option for either fencing or landscaping. The Examiner requested further testimony in opposition to the request. Responding was: Maxine Motor 950 Sunset Boulevard N.E. Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Motor was affirmed by the Examiner. She indicated her preference for maximum R-3 zoning on the subject property, noting that building heights allowed in R-4 zoning category would obstruct the view of Lake Washington from her home located east of the subject site. The Examiner advised that Mrs. Motor is employed by- the City of Renton, he had not previously discussed the subject application with her, 'and the association R-214-78 Page Three would not influence his recommendation on the matter. The Examiner requested further, comments in support or opposition to the request. There was no response. He then asked Mr. Smith for additional comments. Mr. Smith entered a map designating topography of the site for the purpose of clarification of the existing slope. The map was labeled as follows by the Examiner: Exhibit #7: King County Assessor's Map with topography Mr. Smith designated slope percentages' on the site which increase from 10 to 25 percent from. an eastern: to western .direction on' the,.property, and noted an, existing break, located ' approximately in the center of the site. Responding to previous comments regarding . piecemeal zoning, Mr. Smith noted that a slow transition period had occurred. He reviewed history of previous zoning to R-4 in 1966 and subsequent rezone of certain parcels to R-3 in 1967, the latest occurrence of rezoning in, the area. He explained the role of the Comprehensive Plan in providing a general guide for land use designation, and advised that although the current zoning designation of the property was R-4, other• considerations such as surrounding single family residential uses, existing slope and character of the site had determined the Planning Department recommendation for a less intensive zoning category. Mr. Smith reviewed maximum density of 25 units allowed in an R-3 zone and height limits of 40 feet adjacent to developed single family residential areas. He stated that utilization of underground parking would allow a minimum of two stories above ground level with certain flexibility allowed for increased levels depending upon the building design of the structure. He noted that, to maintain consistency with current development practices and considering adjacent and surrounding properties, certain buffering and landscaping should be required and established during rezone review to achieve amenity standards and goals. He advised that requirements of R-4 zoning do not provide for such landscaping, and based upon environmental impact and other site characteristics, the recommendations were reasonable to mitigate impacts upon adjacent properties and upon site development, such as increased storm water runoff and noise factors resulting from removal of; existing vegetation. ' Mr. Smith stressed' that the'_proposed landscape • buffer will reduce such impacts and increase value of the constructed units on the site. Responding 'to the applicant's concern regarding provision of a 10-foot landscape buffer on the north and south sides Of the property, Mr. Smith indicated an amendment to reduce the requirement' to 9 feet adjacent to the parking area to allow. right-angle parking. He ,also noted the departmental recommendation for 42-foot overall width excluding the building overhang of the units which can be accomplished with proper design. Mr. Bhatia' stated that adjacent property 'owners supported zoning to R-4 designation, and inquired whether Mr. Smith strongly opposed R-4 zoning. Mr. Smith indicated that the staff report clearly recommends R-3 zoning and opposed R-4 zoning if applied throughout the site. He stated that methods of development of the property relative, to setbacks, ' landscaping, buffering, retention of natural characteristics and density controls would alleviate .certain concerns, but he questioned the appropriate timing for R-4 development which would allow a maximum of 43 units on the site. He realized that property owners to the north and south supported the R-4 zoning but indicated that other residents in the area should, be considered. Mr. Smith reiterated his objection to R-4 zoning if consideration for site development did not occur. ' Mr. Bhatia advised 'his opinion that obstruction of view would be negligible from any direction, and requested R-4 zoning with the stipulation that environmental factors such as setback's and buffers could be reviewed during the building permit process with submittal of plans subject for review. . • The Examiner requested information regarding density allowances for both zoning designations for wood-frame construction in view of natural constraints of the property. Mr. Smith estimated the gross allowable density of 43 'two to three bedroom units per acre in an R-4 zone,: or 38 to 40 units considering natural constraints of the property. He noted that a: reasonable allowable density for R-3 zoning would be approximately •25 units per acre., Mr. Smith advised that considerations such as natural slope, narrow configuration of the site, and surrounding uses would determine maximum density. He stressed that the Comprehensive Plan is a general guide supported by other goals and objectives to determine the recommendation for R-3 zoning. He also advised that height limitations would be reflected by the building code. The Examiner inquired if conditions attached to a rezone to R-4 designation would also apply to a rezone to R-3. Mr. Smith indicated ,that such conditions would be :similar ._ with the additional possibility' of site plan review by the Hearing Examiner in considering . . view, design of; the structures and other site development criteria. The Examiner inquired , if city staff maintained. flexibility in environmental review to. reduce density and increase building setbacks and buffers during normal building permit review. Mr. Smith reported that certain authority exists within the environmental ordinance to allow the responsible • • , R-214-78 Page Four . official to issue a conditional negative declaration of impact. He noted that under the building permit process the responsible official is the Public Works Director, but during rezone review, the Planning Director is the responsible official. He advised that although the Public Works Director would be the responsible official if review occurred through the building permit process, the Planning Department would have the option to submit recommendations and comments. The Examiner requested a final recommendation from Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith amended the width of the landscape buffer adjacent to the parking area to 9 feet, and added that if rezone to R-4 were approved by the Examiner, a requirement for site plan approval through Hearing Examiner review be stipulated to assure proper mitigation of all developmental concerns. The Examiner inquired if a similar requirement would-be stipulated if R-3 ' ' zoning were approved. Mr. Smith indicated that rezone to R-3 would not necessitate further public hearing. The Examiner requested further comments. Since there were none, the hearing on File No. .R-214-78 was closed by the Examiner at 11:35 a.m. • FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The request is for reclassification of 0.85 acres from R-1 to R-4. . 2. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter, and is hereby attached as Exhibit #1, and incorporated in this report by reference as set forth in full therein. ' 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the,State Environmental . Policy Act of 1971, as amended by R.C.W. 43.21.C. , a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development and their comments are included in Exhibit #1. 5. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. 6. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the property to potentially be High Density Multiple Family (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . 7. Testimony was not provided regarding the date of the last area land use or zoning analysis involving the property (Section 4-3014. (A) ) . However, in July of 1965, the current goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan were adopted. Since that time, a building permit was issued for construction of condominium units south of the property on a narrow site zoned R-3 (rezoned in 1967) . The existing R-4 zoned property north of the subject property remains undeveloped, but some grading activity has occurred within the past few weeks. Northeast of the subject property is an existing multifamily development in an R-3 zone (Section 4-3014. (C) ) . 8. The westerly approximate one-half of the property has developmental problems created by an average topography of 25 percent (Exhibit #7) and severe slope on the westerly approximate 50 feet (Exhibit #6) . Significant vegetation exists on the site, particularly on the westerly 50 feet. 9. Single family residences, zoned R-1, exist on the north and 'south borders of the property and directly east across Aberdeen Avenue N.E.' • Two individual residences exist 'on the southerly abutting property. ' • 10. Along the westerly property line lies the Puget Sound Power and Light Company transmission line right-of-way. CONCLUSIONS: • 1. A reclassification to R-4 conforms to;the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . In addition to the Map the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive' Plan must also be considered in making a land use decision. Furthermore, the ' Comprehensive Plan is a "general design" for these decisions, not a ,"blueprint." (Section 1.II.1, Ordinance No. 2142 and Section 2.P.2. , Comprehensive Plan, Renton • Urban Area, July, 1965) . Analysis Of the goals and objectives indicates R-3 to be • the more appropriate zoning for: the property under existing'circumstances. R-214-78 Page Five The predominant land use pattern in the neighborhood is clearly single family residential, although some non-conforming situations exist of two homes on single lots. One apartment building exists and another is under construction. The zoning pattern is approximately equally divided between single family (R-1) and multiple family (R-3 and R-4) , with some commercial (B-1) . High Density Multiple Family (R-4) is planned for the area on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. This indicates that the neighborhood is undergoing transition from single family residential to multiple family residential (at least R-3.) which appears to be the "coordinated development" anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan (page 9, Summary, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area, July, 1965) . Existing single family residences in the neighborhood are generally adequately maintained with a few exceptions. Any reclassification should consider this character in interpreting the transition occurring in the neighborhood in order to prevent "premature decay," "unwarranted infiltration," and disorderly "growth" (Ibid and page 17, Objective No. 1, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, July, 1965) . Property values should be protected (Ibid, Objective No. 4) and the "best interest of the community. . ." should be protected (Ibid, page 18, Objective No. 6) . R-3 zoning permits less intensive development than, R-4 zoning and therefore would be more compatible with the existing single family residences (either individually or in a non-conforming "duplex" situation) on three sides of the subject property. In the R-4 zone a building height of six stories or 95 feet is allowed while in R-3, buildings are limited to 40 feet in height adjacent to single family residences. A maximum density of 30 units per acre is allowed in R-3, but depending upon the type of units, a density range of from 43 (two bedroom) to 72 units per acre is permitted in R-4. Open space of 55% is required in R-4, and 65% specified in R-3. A five to seven-foot side yard setback is prescribed in R-3 and five to ten feet required in R-4. The front yard setback in R-4 is ten feet, while it is 20 feet in R-3. A reclassification of the subject property to R-3 or R-4 would impact the abutting R-1 properties, and construction per those zoning requirements would have immediate effect upon the R-1 properties. Clearly, the R-3 zone would have less impact while at the same time implementing the Comprehensive Plan (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . Under normal circumstances the traditional land use principle of graduated land uses and zoning would apply (the single family zone would not directly abut R-3, but a transition zone of R-2: would be placed between the two zones) . Another technique that can accomplish similar transition or buffering is utilization of sufficient landscaping and/or topographical separation in the interface between the two zones to accomplish Objectives No. 1, 4 and 6, pages 17 and 18, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area, July, 1965. Since the subject property is only 62.5 feet wide the latter alternative appears very difficult to utilize without reducing the property to an unuseable residual. 2. The property owners on the northern and southern abutting properties favored the rezone to R-4. Concern was not expressed regarding transition or buffering between their properties and the subject site. During the hearing, sufficient discussion of the potential development under R-3 and R-4 occurred that all parties were aware of the relative impact- of the zoning categories. The property owner east of the site was concerned about the possible height of R-4 development. 3. Due to the transitional character of the neighborhood of gradual, but already committed, change from single family residential to multifamily, it appears appropriate that the rezone to R-3 not be postponed or denied due to the lack of necessary transition between the two zones. Adjacent property owners were agreeable to the interface of the two zones and the attendant impacts. Development on the property may through design be able to mitigate the impacts. However, since the design appears to be significant in reducing the impacts of R-3 zoning, the Examiner should review the site plan and building height to ensure satisfactory mitigation of the impacts. This would accomplish Objectives No. 1, 4 and 6, pages 17 and 18, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, July, 1965. 4. In order to provide a buffer between the subject property and single family development easterly across Aberdeen Avenue N.E. the 20-foot front yard setback should be landscaped in such a way as to form an effective sight screen. Along the northerly and southerly property lines at least a ten-foot setback for buildings should occur with landscaping consisting of an effective sight screen to buffer the adjacent residences. (Objectives No. 1 and 4, page 17, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, July, 1965) . R-214-78 Page Six 5. Topography and soil conditions (paragraph E.2, Exhibit #1) and the applicant's testimony of the difficulty of development on the westerly 50 feet of the property would indicate that the substantial trees in that area should be retained. While the vegetation is a "natural amenity" (page 11, Residential, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, July, 1965) it may serve a more important purpose of stabilizing • the soils.and surface water run-off in that area of the site. The applicant indicated that development would initially occur on the eastern portion of the site (Exhibit #4) and the remainder of the property developed at a later date. At such time as development of the westerly portion of the property is proposed, the westerly 50 feet should be evaluated with more specific environmental data . to determine if that area should still be preserved. . 6. The narrow 62.5-foot width of the property presents great difficulty for designing multifamily development that mitigates the impacts imposed upon the adjacent single family development. Most desirable would be the addition of other property(s) to . provide desirable flexibility of site planning, landscaping, setbacks and parking. ..Due to these' circumstances', any development on the property will, because of the burden of mitigating these impacts, be less intense. than what would be;permitted • ' if the adjacent..;properties were similarly zoned. To 'this extent the timing of the rezone becomes an issue; however, as discussed in Conclusion. No. 1, the trend of the neighborhood zoning appears to be multifamily, and corresponding development seems to be occurring or beginning on the vacant multifamily zoned properties. It seems appropriate, therefore, for the Examiner to have the flexibility to deviate from conditions attached td the rezone. The conditions are in response to existing zoning and land uses surrounding the subject site. If the zoning and land uses change prior to or during the Examiner's review of a development proposal, the conditions should be re-evaluated accordingly by the Examiner in terms of their validity of application to the site. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the record, testimony, findings and conclusions, it is the Examiner's recommendation that the City Council reclassify the property to R-3 subject to the following conditions: ' 1. Final approval by the Examiner,upon completion of a public hearing of the site plan and building height. 2. The 20-foot front yard setback along Aberdeen Avenue N.E. be utilized exclusively • for a landscape buffer sufficient to constitute an effective sight screen. 3. A side yard setback for buildings of 10 feet along the northerly and southerly property lines, which shall be used for a landscape buffer sufficient to constitute an effective sight screen. . 4. Preservation of existing vegetation in the westerly 50 feet of the property until the Examiner's review of development of the westerly portion of the site.' 5. The Examiner in review of the specific development proposal for any portion of the property shall consider the zoning of existing adjacent properties at the time of this review and shall have the flexibility to deviate from the aforementioned conditions. ORDERED THIS 14th day of September, 1978. OW- I\`A _• c _�r'- er Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of September, 1978 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties Of record: Arjan Bhatia, 8506 S. 125th, Renton, WA 98055 • James Burch, 957 Aberdeen Avenue N.E., Renton, WA 98055 Donald Jarvis, 951 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. , Renton, WA 98055 ' Maxine Motor, 950 Sunset Blvd. N.E. , Renton, WA 98055, • Karl Strom, 1010 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. , Renton, WA 98055 • • R-214-78 Page Seven TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of September, 1978 to the following: • Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Councilman Richard M. Stredicke • Councilwoman Patricia Seymour-Thorpe • Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division • Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney • Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be• filed in writing on or before September 28, 1978. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of' the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors-of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen, (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems.proper. • An appeal to.the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires ' that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the City Clerk's office, first floor of City Hall, or same maybe purchased at cost in said office. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECEIVED PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON HEARINQ EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING SEP 51978 PM SEPTEMBER 5, 1978 ABA 7081 '1ti1il912i '121:➢4,5E6 APPLICANT: ARJAN BHATIA FILE NUMBER: R-214-78, REZONE NO. A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: ITEM NO. Applicant requests the approval of a rezone from R-1 to R-4 to permit future development of the site for multiple family housing. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: Arjan Bhatia 2. Applicant: Arjan Bhatia 3. Location: On Aberdeen Ave. N.E. between Sunset Boulevard N.E. and N.E. 12th in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. 4. Legal Description: A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. 5. Size of Property: ±0.85 acres or 37;200 square feet 6. Access: Via Aberdeen Avenue N.E. • 7. Existing Zoning: l , Single Family Residence District 8. Existing Zoning in Area: G-7200, Single Family Residence District; R-1, Single Family Residence District; B-1, Business Use. 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: High Density Multiple Family 10. Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance. C. PURPOSE OF REQUEST: To obtain the proper zoning classification which will allow the applicant to develop the property for multiple family use. D. HISTORY/BACKGROUND: The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance No. 1795 dated October 7, 1959. E. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1. Topography: The site slopes downward from east to west at a total slope of approximately 15';'.. This includes an 8:', slope for approxi- mately the east 350 feet and the remainder drops off very sharply. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO 'HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC .HEARING: ARJAN BHATIA, REZONE FILE NUMBER R-214-78 SEPTEMBER' 5, 1978 PAGE TWO • • 2.. Soils : The eastern 2/3 of the subject site contains Ragnar- Indianola association, sloping (RdC) . Permeability is rapid, available water capacity is moderate to moderately high, runoff is slow to medium, and the erosion hazard is slight to moderate. This soil is used for timber and for urban development. The western 1/3 of the subject site contains Ragnar-Indianola asso- ciation, moderately steep (RdE) . Permeability is rapid, avail- able water.: capacity is moderate, runoff is medium to rapid, and the erosion hazard is moderate to severe. This soil is used for timber. 3. Vegetation:. The site is heavily wooded with dense stands of alder mixed with cedars adjacent to Aberdeen Avenue N.E. and native underbrush throughout the site. 4. Wildlife: Existing vegetation on the site may provide suitable habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. Water: There is no surface water evident on the site. 6. Land Use: The site itself is presently undeveloped. Adjacent properties to the north and south contain single family residences. • Single family residences exist across Aberdeen Avenue N.E. also. A small unit apartment complex consisting of two buildings is under construction to the southwest of the subject site. The. adjacent property to the west consists of the Puget Sound Power and Light Company transmission line right-of-way. • F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: The area is principally single family residential in nature with some scattered multiple family housing. G. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Water and Sewer: Immediately across Aberdeen Avenue N. E. is lo- cated an existing 4-inch watermain while approximately 100 feet to the southeast on Sunset Boulevard N.E. is a 2-inch main. An ex- isting 10-inch sanitary sewer is located on the east side of Aberdeen Avenue N. E. and an 8-inch sewer extends along Sunset Boulevard N. E. approximately 100 feet southeast of the subject site. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department as per ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: METRO Transit Route 107 operates along Sunset Boulevard N.E. within 1/4 of a mile to the south of the subject site. 4. Schools : The Highlands Elementary School is located approximately 1/2 mile southeast of the subject site and McKnight Junior High School is within 1/2 mile northeast and Hazen Senior High School is approximately 1 1/2 miles to the east. 5. Parks : Lake Washington Beach Park is approximately 2/3 of a mile northwest of the site with Windsor Hills Park located 3/4 of a mile to the south and Kennydale Lions Park within one mile to the north. • H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-706, R-1, Residence Single Family. 2. Section 4-709B, R-4, Residential Multiple Family • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: ARJAN BHATIA, REZONE FILE NUMBER R-214-78 SEPTEMBER :5, 1978 PAGE THREE • I . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: Comprehensive Plan, 1965, Land Use Report, Objective 6, p. 18. J. IMPACT ON THE NATURAL SYSTEMS: • Rezoning of the subject site will not have a direct impact on the natural' systems. However, subsequent site development will disturb soil and vegetation, increase storm water runoff, and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. However, through proper development Con- trols ,and procedures , these impacts can be mitigated. K. SOCIAL 'IMPACTS: Development of 'the subject sit will result in a small population increase and provide opprotunities for increased social interaction among the area residents. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: • Pursuant. to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and .the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended, RCW 43-21C, a declaration of non-significance has been issued for the subject rezone. This neg- ative ;declaration is based upon provision of suitable development pro- cedures and standards should the request be approved. 1 M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A vicinity map and a site map are attached. • N. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: 1. City of Renton Building Division. 2. City of Renton Engineering Division. 3. City of Renton Traffice Engineering Division. 4. City of Renton Utilities Division. 5. City of Renton. Fire Department. O. PLANNI'NG DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1 . The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map element which designates the site and surrounding areas as potential high density multiple family. However, existing single family resi- dential uses and zoning are located both south and north of the sub- ject site. Other apartment .developments are being constructed in the area ( i .e. , approximately 200 feet south of the site, site clearing has occurred on R-4 zoned property north, of the site) . 2. Although the area may be in transition from single family residence to multiple family, this transition has been historically quite slow' in this area. Certain measures to protect surrounding single family residence users should be provided as conditions of any rezone and site development. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, 1965, p. 17, objective 4, states that "property values should be protected within the community for the benefit of its residents and property owners, • through effective control of land use and enforcement and applica- tion of building and construction codes. Objective 6 also encour- ages "the development and utilization of land to its highest and PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO '.HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: ARJAN BHATIA, REZONE FILE NUMBER R-214-78 SEPTEMBER 5, 1978 PAGE FOUR best use in such a way as to promote the best interest of the com- munity and contribute to its overall attractiveness and desirability as a place in which to work, shop, live, and play. " 3. Although some existing R-4 zoning is located north of the site, a more, recent rezone to R-3 was approved in 1967 on a parcel approxi- mately 200 feet south of the subject site. A similar density devel- opment (18 dwelling ,units) to that which is proposed for the subject site is being constructed on this R-3 property. In fact, if the sub- ject site was rezoned to R-3, a gross density of approximately 25 dwelling units is permitted. However, it is questionable whether even this many units can be constructed on the site given the exist- ing narrow width of the site, steep topography, and Puget Power' powerline easement which present development limitations particu- larly in the westerly portion of the site. 4. The subject site contains certain significant trees especially in the westerly portion. These should be retained as much as possible as part of site development. A negative declaration of environmental impact has been issued subject to this provision as a mitigating measure of development impacts. The Comprehensive Plan land use report, 1965, p. 11, states that "residentail development may be successfully planned to take good advantage of the amenities which such locations often provide. Natural features such as rock out- croppings, streams, stands of native trees, and views often avail - able from these locations should be used to greatest advantage. " 5. Items 1 through 4 establish the need for rezone to an R-3 zone in lieu of R-4 zoning, and conditions which protect adjacent single family uses and the existing character of the site. Such conditions could include preservation of significant trees and vegetation, pro- visions of setbacks and landscape buffers suitable to protect adja- cent properties, provisions of detailed site development and land- scape plans. 6. The applicant has prepared a conceptual site development plan. Such plan is quite sketchy and will need refinement to conform to ordinance standards and any conditions established with the rezone. Site plans are generally not considered necessary as part of a rezone application and review process. The staff recommendation, therefore, has not specifically considered such site plans. 7. Suitable utilities and access are available to the subject site. However, development of the property will require certain utility extensions and/or upgrading of existing facilities. (See Utilities Division report for further comments. ) 8. Also see attached Fire Department and Engineering Division comments regarding Fire Code, access, and storm drainage requirements as , part of specific site development. P. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: Approved rezone to R-3 based on the above analysis subject to the follow- ing conditions to be established as restrictive covenants, which together will serve to mitigate environmental impacts of property and fulfill ob- jectives of the Comprehensive Plan as mentioned in items 1 through. 5 above. 1. Setbacks -- Minimum 30-foot setback shall be provided along Aberdeen Avenue N.E. A minimum 10-foot .setback shall be provided along the I north and south property lines. A minimum 50-foot setback shall be provided along the west property line. 2. Landscaping A minimum 20-foot landscape strip shall be provided I along Aberdeen Avenue N.E. A minimum 10-foot landscape 'strip suit- able for screening purposes shall be provided along the north and south property lines. A minimum 50-foot natural buffer shall bey preserved and maintained along the west property line. A detailed • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: ARJAN BHATIA, REZONE FILE NUMBER R-214-78 SEPTEMBER 5, 1978 PAGE FIVE landscape plan of the entire site development shall be submitted to ,and approved by the Planning Department. No significant trees shall be cut or cleared without prior approval of the Planning Department. (Also see environmental impact declaration of non- significance. ) • • • I ' I . • l .a-- 1. \._ •-1-.i r.; :a. .4. .a z. , . --..--;•:,-J. : R-3 ... ... , 101.: ..'219 i1D 1.2:•9 :.:M; .,a.'...y.,•, .,.'rI*I �,. i �ir ii 4 ..1.. :..-.:.:. .. .k. • • 2 Wg. ' . ' Ff7.6.-7,4 •. • ,. .. a ri ;y' 43-I - R • j;.. , / 1.4. . .. 4 O ~ 44. /1•.• •°,•y !f � . - • iw f . � G = P-1' • _:; .+-' - :...„: ..i.,.,,,... :-., ;at. :l',4,-.1. \ R-. 4 , IA • - '- r- - )/ - .41 ..l ANY .e . - ; -2. t . . - R;I • . •. , , . , • • 4 `5 , . .• —I 9:' \ • ' I. ,:1• ;. -ter,!•. ' 'l:4j,1•;•- k•✓ ' , • tii •' :;.:, .,.•,•„!.-it,- • ;..4...0,.:, , .4/ - • ‘*•%-.-111' "'....;.:11.9. :i;. "9%81'.9. p,...I A: Air. , Ar ',.*. • •.'1.40,`. \!,.4*44't4I-il.`"/ f..' .:"... . • . •J & ail 1 • ,\*....'.*, •• 0 ,.•,. . ex. i.tli: :,.. . wata,. • V' • • J 1;ile •. & •• •a .1. 0 , • `.• . .••.•'?-l . 11 t) • 4 ,r-6.• 1\\\\ \, , ... 4ti... , ., s. •*1/4.' ...." •illitl iii REZONE • ARJAN BHATIA, APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-1 TO R-4, FILE NO. R-214-78; property ct- edon Aberdeen-Wenue. N.E. between Sunset Boulevard N.E. and N.E. 12th in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. 1 • APPLICANT il Arjan Bhatia !arm_ AREA 10.85 acres (37,200 ft,2$ 1 PR I NC 1 PAL ACCESS Aberdeen Ave. N.E. 'and Sunset Blvd. N.E. and N.E. 12th Ex! SI ING ZONING G-7200 EXISTING USE Undeveloped ' PROPOSED USE R-4 (Apartment/Condominium Buildings) _ • COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN High Density Multiple family COMMENTS ir.., . �o � W ' 0o4 �►''� 18 ' b. Q 0 . Ali to.of (. • . . '.. 0 I , . I IS 0 D 1 .. 14 , Q I 01 ,r-r4o a - - - - C9 f:,. 1 . Q 4.4 .L_________ 1 4..vsil izsim ill e a im itx9 E L=1 . . v‘ - 1 .74,, zyr'. ' . Q8 , . .. - 0 • . •. .. . . 9 �: `2 )• -A. �, p y v • 3 • to Z a r —_ �_ B 1 _6 • - ii! , r9 Di ,_44/ Q ' 6.0,.# 5 ct 0 ki'c>C3, "lig (5 . - \ . -. % ? ,, , L,. .... 0.. , . . . . r-z10 --(-4: 4,i E2 it iL . Viii 2 .-v I el Cl 878 St C'7 �] W Cry m �. °Ρ ' f Q e %\ Sc,ALE:- iss- 200.1 . N . . - , • . . .. . s ' • 4 SOQIJET 5e is IV: :,,,. 1 A N e.)4 /1 pi. REznNE . Q - b. : fr. ' i .. .. .. 'I., 1► +++i i.j.C? PROPOSED/FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No . R-214-78 ❑ PROPOSED Declaration Environmental! Checklist No . 377-78 0 FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Applicant requests rezone from R-1, Single Family Residence District, to R-4, Residential Multiple Family. Proponent Arjan Bhatia On Aberdeen Ave. N.E. between Sunset Blvd. N.E. and Location of P;rop.osal N.E. 12th in the vicinity of 951 and '957 Averdeen Ave. N.E. Lead Agency Renton Planning Department This proposal has been determined to ❑ have ® not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS ❑ is 1251 is not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 (2 ) (c ) . This decision was ma--a after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . Reasons for declaration of environmental/significance : The declaration of non-significance is for the rezone request only and does not apply to any specific development plan. The proposed request is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. However, suitable landscape/buffer and preservation of significant trees as part of site development shall be required to .mitigate potential impacts of such development. Measures , if any., that. could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental ', impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a (proposed/final ) declaration of non-significance : Should the request be approved, at the time of development the applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Zoning Code, and suitable development standards and landscaping will be necessary as mitigating measures. Responsible Official Gordon Y, Ericksen Title Planni it or , Date 8/30/78 Signature City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : tff Comments � Signature of; Director or Authorized Repres,efitati ve ate ' REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Signature ofDirector or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments U 17 sµ- � II Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date ROUTING SCHEDULE FOR APPLICATION TO : O Finance Department 8tFire Department Library Department OPark Department Police Department Public Works Department ' A/ 0 Building Div . , �� © Engineering Div . / y>� lw.- i." i.. .74k.. ; .,/ k1pc..., X Traffic Engineering Div . Utilities Engineering Div . FROM: Planning Department , ( signed by responsible official or ' his designee ) . r ,M IL AI-AL-IL - -i Tli DATE : .r / /7.Y PLEASE REVIEW THIS APPLICATION FOR : l - j - Z-I41. ---/ REZONE , .• i r,.• ,.' cl MAJOR PLAT SITE APPROVAL SHORT PLAT SPECIAL PERMIT WAIVER SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT OR EXEMPTION AND RETURN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT . / WITH ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE , BEFORE ,/ l. `/f _I X' REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : -1 :,.- Department : L -4�' L, Co ment's : / / .. - / , ;. Signatu7:6 of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : / ..21.,L — 1 ..', % '/' 1i' 1', it it' /t_. /" Comments,. f I ,.',/,` ,. ' .c /�.•,. • . ./t/ ,./ ,, /` f ` `; .. /;' ,'' /'l , ,• , •"I i ;WA.• J / •4 ' /, '/. , '• , ,%) ... i 2 / 1t °, / ' ( j • - Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date ' /.. I - REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : T7,t%,. Comments : • �lr ,y, , / ' <fry:W:2'G Signature of .Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHIER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : • Department : Comments : • Signature of Director or Authorized Representative ► Date ROUTING FOR REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORMS TO: O Finance. Department Fire Department Library Department Park Department Police Department 0 Public Works Department . . 09 Building Div. .!, Engineering Div . CO Traffic Engineering Div . 0 Utilities Engineering Div . FROM: Planning Department , ( signed by responsible official or his designee) 0-11 -7.P ''�I�t.�AL:L_ S W11 i 4 1- SUBJECT : Review of ECF- 377-.74 ; Application No . : 1.2- Z, /c-74 Action Name : AgiArJ e4ATm ) A;.-Z•,Kikr * Please review the attached. Review requested . by (date) : 6i ahy Note : Responses to be written in ink. REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : ZD6 Comments : 1 �1 G �,�/i C'tG G�- _ _rya-„�cy�''i 4/ /E'-/ --- 69—Z 7-7) Signature of ' ector or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : f /c2:- DCf`0/aiG'iiLl' l 1/4 Comments : .A.'G .S'/G'G.i. /If 0-tti ---1 /1-(//'/Ic_ C C.`JVV/i 'D:c�/`71A-ii/z , (1 / ,_(.. S A AZP ,.Signature of Director or Authoriz Representative Date ' I J . :.' % . S' j✓ Ai a Je'✓ Y e 'JPn.-i.f . - /de 71 -7 v"•_ // . j i ? /�L s C._/ c,K:/.�a,<:.'a-- et N• ,'rec. . 1 .. �' S• / Q• . /1- �C� ✓G A►� u�h�s , Y C/� (it-ire. Q!'L '• 14 b'Y A'e e.r- AzV e, A/4", C O,^c f s 7L:.-n 0. -`--- C« V1. w � � S � i7i i j /S cX✓ain., � S,: 3) S °/11.—.-j/ ars 60 N-, �,,GIA( ..cdr,` ve 64 '-e ✓ is' f 1 1 i f L, Ti..... r(✓IS I, . i ; 1-) . Z U tJ S 7-A'1-( i., A-ri- „ q-„ WATI1-ice /rt A-a)s in--!)/rt -j. 12.1? 1) - /z- ' ' -4- S ,. OP-( SIri?.. 1-4,i . ,-r.,yrv. 1 1 Z) I-1H --/ -tl/.•-fig f::. f J,•-+ /--, T-, SJ1wlo-'1•1 l.r' 'k/.1/r/t.UI!'fr•.c , r 137 ,. 1 f L, /sc4 Mr ,IL'f/4Il .4.. I'd; W L /'4P j ;y' I. • ' i i (C:.;:: ' . . • �.'4Y'' a4.• ti y�, a s '.t ROUTING FOR REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORMS TO: Finance Department Fire Department Library bepartment Park Department Police Department ►:< Public Works Department 0 Building Div. 0 Engineering Div. 0 Traffic Engineering Div. e Utilities Engineering Div . FROM: Planning Department , ( signed by responsible official or his designee ) Vz-ii-7,P f I LOWS:L ` f ; - SUBJECT : Review of ECF- 377-74 ; Application No . : - 2- /cI-74 Action Name : As2JAN1 EiAATIA ) V --)' Th Please review the attached. Review requested by (date) : 31 Z17) I Note : Responses to be written in ink. REVIEW BY OTHER. CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : ZD6 Comments : ` ¢. i • Signature of actor or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department: /// ,OG r/akT'/, 12 -/ Comments : /t-'G ,S i G-LV i i"/C'/fi47--( // (/'/C (1Z-itiv/eGiv/`-jG A-;/7z e 1:7 Signature of Director or Authoriz Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : ~h Comments : JUo ;, • g/,21 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative , Date ROUTING SCHEDULE FOR APPLICATION . TO : O Finance Department 8 Fire Department Library Department Park Department . • 8Police Department Public Works Department O Building Div . 0/ 0 Engineering Div . AL...., , 0z) lAA-Tik_ 0 Traffic Engineering Div . 0 Utilities Engineering Div . FROM: Planning Department , ( signed by responsible official or ; his designee ) 'v ►LO11Ll wit Tlt DATE : .} L / /'4Y I PLEASE REVIEW THIS APPLICATION FOR : Aa--)ANJ r-t�A i i i' fitc-TIF f - L•141 --7 REZONE . t r ,..- i'.•• Li MAJOR PLAT SITE APPROVAL SHORT PLAT SPECIAL PERMIT WAIVER • SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT OR EXEMPTION AND RETURN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE , BEFORE ,/ ?. / 1,Y , REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : ". L-- Comment's : i._.-;.:- ,,,,/ • 7, :•,,/ Signatst4 :tof Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : 1-=LL ` '' / • / !1'` •; / LC A . — — Co�mments nr1-c . L '--•-I C `t..,0 :�CA'k,,c . i /%. ,. . i ' , •');;. / 1 .'` h. , 1 / ,, /• ?1. /` 1 4: L 1.•/ ,/ c'. / it •/r , •% /. (C l /'./ l , , , 1•(,/^.•'t. • Signature of Director or Agthorized Representative Date / • • REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : N c_ • Signature of Director or Authorized Representative /Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : El Comments . �- � Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : C! • / ? 'ram I� U Comments` Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : • • Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date } C.a.' . `7J✓S . G.)at v T Opt?/ -e'n.'/i o"� /e..x1_ H ? /u S C.ti.7 CIA-,4_ rs..... v-P._ I.e ', i 7 / n'Y� r J� / /y/ A E. V F S T `�v ✓�I�1 e vt�S Y Pi� tie.r r 2.dC. O�, i, 4beyatCe...r. A/ve, /y,e cQ,nc/ Si-%``� 0 Ge.✓4./ v>• 3 J ��ii . a r G P . / G r •-• , • • ak-- , .ma c • f. i i UTi • 4r /A' J • l �i U I;) S A•A- c 1;2 /,r„�.i0 4...,r WA,TIie‘. •/r1 .Ac 'if ri-.I2t,"t'1./. I • Ia/i•4QQ — lZ.. ' t 4. 8 " p).°' SiIT'/E )':l,:.l}+.• I.{ -'1,rvr I Z) . I`H/A -•/ i-f A--I i . t (a J,,-, /.a TU Si . ' l.t I .1;/' /1 it 1'J ra�;:..c.r I z) /, 1.f Sai re 1.vt�•••/i+,i't .4. git wi i•t. i • o . . i . . . . . . . . , . . . I • . . . . . . . . . , . . . . ! . . . • . . . . . . . . . . .,. W . . , . . . , . . . . . . • . I . . , . . . ., t , • . • . . . . . . , • .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . .. • , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . „ . , . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . .. . , .. ; • . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. • . . .• . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . , • . • . . . , . . . , •. . . . . . . . . . . . ; , . . . • . . .. . • .• . . .. • 1 :\. - :, ,c .__-- -,-- * - ,1--__.--7---. _.-------- - - ---• - -`:`-- -' � '-1,`,,,-- x'f f�rw: , p#a:�+ mod_ f x k r - - ,•3 i. w,, , + 1 , \, \\\...\.; !. _.1 . ; ., , •' . ,, :. , zz:d!,,,,,..,:i • ro 1' I'I '1 2.,, 264 270 zLs '.ii�{y--->dr z4'�' ..,m - , x%- - ' '' \ee+ ;I'' za 1 N E L 1 b?N _...y T y a, —I + „ MI % n\L_ 1�' :9o�--�3 yi"�• �L -...--+ Z44 R '_4i _]. Z2d 2Y9 .",i r h >+ � -� Y FI K ITl I �I Meg GS"all4. ..-_ t • Z r /pSq 2d9 zee. z'.9 2G7 e48- 2.4 j__ 2D d= -•�•� I ' Q n• x• ��u ! !1a V I1 111 F —_ _ 1 a .n � • -. BEACH 1 I !1\ \V. •.__ -9 1 -_. ' • a Ai o , .. ......• • r•1 n --� r ' G-'71?00 • W 4•/ , I o —I IL t . Y 1,xi Va\J•E c.� Z• 4N� /1'4' R-3 . , ; 8 1 ,s. „ _, IP' 1 a.: _ •• h • x r _ ,~• 1" ._ _ • 35 1 ter:A.o,1, )i -;I. ''''',.4Y.' ‘.. RM ID—A•-I•,.P.-I.' .v :k_:Br_ I 53 M P 1, ti 1 "rr7.1�` rL1,�1: j •.i._;� ._�i+ _J NAI 'N Y - L I • .. t : • 0 ..., • -rel. . ci.- -..i. :- ...(:•.t..,;-.:,..,-f,::,..,,,...',...ITI ,,r,..1,f,..5.FL"L Ltik4. ti&;7 6.....=%-'::• -,--'1i Go. 5.-:A ; , La .. / is.,. : ....';•y--- ._,...., „_, r. t.._.,,,,,.!-;.,-:, , ...- . 1)1-.14, 4 ., e..:',.!:(:-.' ';'. ...''''. 7,‘/. --' -':-.1..,:. -,6,. ,0---9—"A4-:;\ ' L `� • x --__-• !I .9 1. 11.�1ilaoi .._ ���I 1 1 ._ -• _ •~• i•. i •,T '•, • 'e• • ` • r 4 • 4 ?' i ,1f• 1' ,� .+••-,a_ �.(_• , !* `',.•/ "�' ;',,'14 .1J'Ii Zy•\ •_ 1 L `! N" i -]L. J 1.•.J lc I T=-7T- ig --r-rTrT"' } \1 +- •• '•• +.�'•.:Ja rn`, • -- 5 _ v • REZONE , ' ARJAN BHATIA, APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-1 TO R-4, FILE NO. R-214-78; property located on Aberdeen Avenue N.E. between Sunset Boulevard N.E. . and N.E. ; 12th in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. l APPLICANT ' Arjan Bhatia 1 OTAL AREA ±0.85 acres (37,200 ft 2,) PRINCIPAL : ACCESS Aberdeen Ave. N.E. and Sunset Blvd. N.E. and N.E. 12th E X! S-1 I NG ZONING G-7200 EXISTING USE , Undeveloped PROPOSED iSE R-4 (Apartment/Condominium Buildings) • COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN High Density Multiple Family COMMENTS • I • - o . ' (., li ' 19 �� a l_I E] D D �o �i ❑ k ? , �`�i �5'o ❑ ID / �aa 17 0 d r' 2 — 2 1 • 0 ,,,, • 16 r- lil S Lak,7 I-1 1 m / P4 a R r3 CD--; 0 _} r e r r r - aY r r r r r El , I U 41' u,,,, 11,,, AAA',.,2s. .. r h . '1' , 1:k II Z to i Q s 0 1. 9 • 03 .' ) 0 4 1. L1 VIc 8 - - -= w . ❑ 0 1 EL ® O 6 ii9 Ell .r.1 5 •-•.) 0 (tf. •()0 9 b Cam ' _ _ :_ i5c:El.... \ *.. i z ; -r: ...t 11 01111111 -111 : r-3 1 0 C. lit ;1 WI 87-. t � C' �] � � � S � � m E I ca Sc,ALE, a 200 , ' . i , _ ..4 r.4TeX ', SVQNET Sr is^ ki,�A 3 dammit AR�r1 N 44 L Teri i-�:m . REzDNE V�--r*,..s d _ y 1 .i t ',1x , ! r P,,d Cam:•I A _ .; = , ,r Y. T . ` '{, a 11 \ NO I I 291 296 270 24S 11'�irc Za'7 L '�, , 2�4 209 y , . ' I \ \a:1 q• .: ! :,1'�\ ,I .�� ' •��,¢-- "= oL_ i 'I as i ,a .�.ajzy --.t s _ .. , G s,,..?At 1 Z89 28C t6� 246- Z4— Z9: ?,29 ° 2 • t w a :� q �°" 6 a 1r 1�' {f o Ls ,n , I ph. aw^� ,BEACH �' irliat '!I' \\ . . .--.,c . r.. - .�I o�� .A� �� nICI a' +: _ N E 27 , .474/...,..Il ',1A •'"/; ,'..... .,)--,- `RI R.3 • -... . .• �`' 11,:zt 0.aJe A • cr.„ • 41i / .• I� - ' - w f - i ..__-.._. ... • /hl 59 CO, e _ �`,e_. a '13 .7 ,l ell r°V 9 i• •r` ,... ,., . \ .R... . „.„4,...,., . . ,, M .., ....,„• • , 1 y 't , ''re- 'rrT:.rr.�T-tT.Tr.7- a•1 - ••}1• _ ''�.11 r % ., . a. , 0..;.) 1(4e:, • .., ,..., 4.4 ' !! 0.‘d . v.iN . , 3. •k a t ir•;rI „ l�tt M " S' I (\ .� _i • . r, .• ' '-�.1 ' •1 �� s V•i 1 is I !,rr ,I 3 ,, ti.o .:w L` • N` 5s -1 r � , !� � .rT � Y�', 'I ° ,2 1 � I r •, • •K Q = ' 1 a s $I I , • ` � : ' . - •. Jam_ t•w' . . = .• , I h1 s 1 ' I 1 1I ., ,- :J%: !i \2J ** •`R4, ;4! .r•;' „1 •r .! ' .15 l' J 1 I, ,i•. ,., , ▪ - •`c(,•: . a JB t' ' i _ L- tIL r M • • _.� 'T-rT^-1• ` r D: i ` TT4_°--t`. It• :: ` _, /j : . ..�,1} i Itnl, ?�o\' , � y J Q • -h •1 . • REZONE ' . ARJAN BHATIA; APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-1 TO R-4, FILE NO. R-214-78; property located on Aberdeen Avenue N.E. between Sunset Boulevard N.E. and N.E. 12th in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Avenue N.E. I APPL I CANT Aran Bhatia l OTAL AREA ±0.85 acres (37,200 ft?1) J I PRINCIPAL ACCESS Aberdeen Ave. N.E. and Sunset Blvd. N.E. and N.E. 12th • E X! S.l I NG ZONING G-7200 EXISTING I U S E Undeveloped - PROPOSED ; USE_ R-4 (Apartment/Condominium Buildings) COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN High Density Multiple Family COMMENTS ! :1 • . I i W- ... . -.• ,, ,,.._.,,....,..;•,„....,!.: :. .2••, •,, 19 w • . pP5‘' � D6 F D /. 16 r- - - - - Li 0 .:, 0 15 O 1, 1 CC i \ i �. ! 4 a � r3 11--; U C: . r r r r, r. r r. r - - s r r r r , D . 0 4,21 El En Q w y `i d C . g g 9 • ta ..s4 0 - , " t � z , . '4: 119 ET . . ,C3-,rik _ , 'i, 1 1. 5 O r o 0 C . ' .\ b f ` m z CI '11(\*i , i Hirtj � . rt _n W U �v� 8TH Si: i �1C7► Q 8 9, dl N . i. .'' -. . . . 1, \14 ' 1 ' ' . . .. G V BjE'P Si 7E. Z.::2...'... i . REzDNE R--"1_a - S 1 PROPOSED/FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application N . R-214-78 ❑o PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . 377-78 ❑X FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Applicant requests rezone from R-1, Single Family Residence District, to R-4, Residential Multiple Family. Proponent Arjan Bhatia On Aberdeen Ave. N.E. between Sunset Blvd. N.E. and . Location of Proposal N.E. 12th in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Averdeen Ave. N.E. Lead Agency . Renton Planning Department This proposal, has been determined to ❑ have ❑ not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS ❑ is ® is not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 (2 ) (c ) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . Reasons for declaration of environmental/significance : The declaration of non-significance is for the rezone request only and does not apply to any specific development plan. The proposed request is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. However, suitable landscape/buffer and preservation of significant trees as part of site development shall be required to' mitigate potential impacts of such development. Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a (proposed/final ) declaration of non-significance : . Should the request be approved, at the time of development the applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Zoning Code, and suitable development standards and landscaping will be necessary as mitigating measures. Responsible Official Gordon Y. Ericksen Title Planni it jor . . Date 8/30/78 � L Signature City of Renton Planning Department' 5-76 PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT ru'HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: ARJAN BHATIA, REZONE FILE NUMBER R-214-78 SEPTEMBER ' 5, 1978 PAGE TWO • . 2. Soils: The eastern 2/3 of the subject site contains Ragnar- ' • Indianola association, sloping (RdC) . Permeability is rapid, available water capacity is moderate to moderately high, runoff is slow to medium, and the erosion hazard is slight to moderate: This soil i.s used for timber and for urban development. The. western 1/3 of the subject site contains Ragnar-Indianola asso- ciation, moderately steep (RdE) . Permeability is rapid, avail- • able water capacity is moderate, runoff is medium to rapid, and the erosion hazard is moderate to severe. This soil is used for timber. . 3. Vegetation: The site, is heavily wooded with dense stands of alder mixed with cedars adjacent to Aberdeen Avenue N.E. and native underbrush throughout the, site. 4. Wildlife: Existing vegetation .on the site may provide suitable habitat for birds and small mammals . 5. Water: There is no surface water evident, on the site. 6. Land Use: The site itself is presently undeveloped. Adjacent properties to the north and south contain single family residences.' Single family residences exist across Aberdeen Avenue N. E. also. A:small unit apartment complex consisting of two 'buildings is under construction to the southwest of the subject site. The adjacent property to the west consists of the Puget Sound Power and Light Company transmission line right-of-way. F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: The area is principally single family residential in nature with some scattered multiple family housing. • G. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1 . Water and Sewer: Immediately across Aberdeen Avenue N.E. is lo- cated an existing 4-inch watermain while approximately 100 feet to the southeast on Sunset Boulevard N.E. is a 2-inch main. An ex- isting 10-inch sanitary sewer is located on the east side of Aberdeen Avenue N.E. and an 8-inch sewer extends along Sunset Boulevard N. E. approximately 100 feet southeast of the subject site. • 2. FiIre Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department as per ordinance requirements. • 3. Transit: METRO Transit Route 107 operates along Sunset Boulevard NJE. within 1/4 of a 'mlle to the south of the subject site. 4. Schools: The Highlands Elementary School is located approximately 1/2 mile southeast of the subject site and McKnight Junior High Sdhool is within 1/2 mile northeast and Hazen Senior High School is approximately 1 1/2 miles to the east. 5. Pjirks: Lake Washington Beach Park is approximately 2/3 of a mile northwest of the site with Windsor Hills Park located 3/4 of a mile to the south and Kennydale Lions Park within one mile to the north. H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE Z.ONING CODE: 1. Section 4-706, R-1 , Residence Single Family. 2. Section 4-709B, R-4, Residential Multiple Family . • • • • • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING • SEPTEMBER 5, 1978 APPLICANT: ARJAN BHATIA FILE NUMBER: R-214-78, REZONE A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests the approval of a rezone from R-1 to R-4 to permit future development of the site for multiple family housing. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: Arjan Bhatia 2. Applicant: Arjan Bhatia 3. Location: On Aberdeen Ave. N.E: between Sunset Boulevard N.E. and N.E. 12th in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Avenue N. E. 4. Legal Description: . A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. 5. Size of Property: ±0.85 acres or 37,200 square feet 6. Access: Via Aberdeen Avenue N. E. 7. Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residence District 8. Existing Zoning in Area: G-7200, Single Family Residence District; R-1, Single Family Residence District; B-1, Business Use. 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: High Density Multiple Family, 10. Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice wa's properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three places on or. near the site as required by City Ordinance. C. PURPOSE OF REQUEST: To obtain the proper zoning classification which will allow the applicant to develop the property for multiple family use. D. HISTORY/BACKGROUND: The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance No. 1795 dated October 7, 1959. E. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1 . Topography: The site slopes downward from east to west at a total slope of approximately 15'/,. This includes an 8'.i: slope for approxi- mately the east 350 feet and the remainder drops off very sharply. • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PPELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: ARJAN BHATIA, REZONE FILE NUMBER R-214-78 SEPTEMBER 5, 1978 PAGE FOUR best use in such a way as to promote the best interest of the com- munity and contribute to its overall attractiveness and desirability as a place in which to work, shop, live, and play. " 3. Although some existing R-4 zoning is located north of the site, a • more. recent rezone to R-3 was approved in 1967 on a parcel approxi - mately 200 feet south of the subject site. A similar density devel - • oprient (18 dwelling units) to that which is. proposed for the subject site is being constructed on this R-3 property. In fact, if .the sub • - ject site was rezoned to R-3, a gross density of ap'proximately' 25 dwelling units is permitted. However, it is questionable whether even this many units can be constructed on the site given the exist- ing narrow width of the site, steep topography, and Puget Power powerline easement which present development limitations particu- larly in, the westerly portion of the site. • 4. The subject Site contains' 'certain , significant trees especially in the westerly portion. These should be retained as much as possible aspart of site development. ' A negative declaration of environmental impact has been issued subject to this provision as a mitigating measure of development impacts. The Comprehensive Plan land use report, 1965, p. 11', states• that "residentail development may be successfully planned to take good advantage of the amenities which such locations often provide. Natural features such as rock out- croppings, streams, stands of native trees, and views often avail - able from these locations should be used to greatest advantage. " ' 5. Items 1 through 4 establish the need for rezone to an R-3 zone in lieu of R-4 zoning; and conditions which protect adjacent single family uses and. the' existing character of the site. Such conditions could include preservation of significant trees' and vegetation, pro- vijsions of setbacks and landscape buffers Suitable to protect adja- cent properties, provisions of detailed site development and land- sclape .plans. 6. The applicant has prepared a conceptual site development plan. Such plan is quite sketchy and will need refinement to conform to ordinance standards and any conditions established with the rezone. Silte plans are generally not considered necessary as part of a rezone application• and review process. The staff recommendation , therefore, has not specifically considered such site plans. • 7.. Suitable utilities and access are available to the subject site. However, development of the property will require certain utility extensions. and/or upgrading of- existing facilities. (See Utilities Division report for further comments. ) I ' 8. Also see attached Fire Department and Engineering Division comments regarding Fire Code, access, and storm drainage requirements as part of specific site development. P. PLANNI1,NG DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: • Approved rezone to R-3 based on the above analysis subject to the follow- ing conditions 'to be established as restrictive covenants, which together will serve' to mitigate environmental impacts of property and' fulfill ob • - jectives of the Comprehensive Plan as mentioned in items . 1 through 5 above: 1. Setbacks -- Minimum 30-foot setback shall be provided .along Aberdeen Avenue N.E. A minimum 10-foot setback shall be provided along the north and south property lines. A minimum 50-foot setback shall be provided along the west property line. • 2. Landscaping -- A minimum 20-foot landscape strip shall be provided . along Aberdeen 'Avenue N.E.. A 'minimum 10-foot landscape .strip suit- able for screening purposes shall be provided along. the north and •sciut'h property lines. A minimum 50-foot natural buffer shall he preserved and maintained along the west property line. A .detailed • i'LA'r'" I%G jEPAR T MEN I _ PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: ARJAN BHATIA, REZONE FILE NUMBER R-214-78 SEPTEMBER 5, 1978 PAGE THREE • I . A.PPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: Comprehensive Plan, 1965, Land Use Report, Objective 6, p. 18. J. IMPACT ON THE NATURAL SYSTEMS: • • Rezoning of the subject site will not have a direct impact on the natural systems . .However, subsequent site development will disturb soil and vegetation, increase storm water runoff, and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. However, through proper development con- trols and procedures , these impacts can be mitigated. • K. SOCIAL IMPACTS: Development of the subject sit will result in a small population increase and provide opprotunities for increased social interaction among the area • residents. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton' s Environmental Ordinance and the 'State Environmental Policy Act of .1971, as amended, RCW 43-21C, a declaration of non-significance has been issued for the subject rezone. This neg- ative declaration is based upon provision of suitable development pro- cedures and standards should the request be approved. • M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A vicinity map and a site map are attached. N. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: • 1. City of Renton Building Division. 2. City of Renton Engineering Division. 3. City of Renton Traffice Engineering Division. 4. City of Renton Utilities Division. 5. City of Renton Fire Department. • 0. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1 . The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map element which designates the site and surrounding areas as potential high density multiple family. However, existing single family resi • - dential uses and zoning are located both south and north of the sub- ject site. Other apartment developments are being constructed in the area ( i .e. , approximately 200 feet south of the site, site clearing has occurred on R-4 zoned property north of the site) . 2. Although the area may be in transition from single family residence to mUltiple..family, this transition has been historically'quite slow in this area. Certain measures to protect surrounding single family residence users should be provided as conditions of any rezone and site development. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, 1965, p. 17, objective 4, states that "property values should be protected within the community for the benefit of its residents and property owners, through effective control of land use and enforcement and applica- tion of building and construction codes. Objective 6 also encour- ages "the development and utilization of land to its highest and PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: ARJAN BHATIA, REZONE FILE NUMBER R-214-78 SEPTEMBER 5, 1978 PAGE FIVE landscape plan of the entire site development shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department. No significant trees shall be cut or cleared without prior approval of the Planning Department. (Also see environmental impact declaration of non- significance. ) Page 1 COMMENTS ON PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation by Planning Discussion Applicant's Recommendation P.0 Approve re-zone to R-3 1. The R-4 request is not based on simply the no. Re-zone to R-4 as requested. (Rather than R-4) of units- the principle argument used by Planning in their R-3 recommendation. The parking underneath + sewer considerations (based on building design considerations) will necessitate the height restrictions more consistent with R-4 zoning. Actual units to be built will obviously depend upon economics and other practical considerations; and should not be pre-limited by Planning to R-3; especially when the comprehensive plan calls for R-4 zoning for the property. 2. There is no Puget Power easement on the property (Report Section 0.3) . This right of way is behind (west) of the property & is separate (not included in 37,200 sq ft) . This should have no effect on the zoning request. 3. Most of the re-zoned properties ( 3 out of 4) on Aberdeen Ave NE have R-4 zone, consistent with the comprehensive plan. Lot 11 is "more" similar to R-4 zoned lots (# 13,14,15) than with R-3 zoned lot (#8) . Steeper slope makes the property amenable to R-4 zoning. 4. Property values of adjacent lots will go up if P.1 SET BACK RESTRICTIONS R-4 zoning per compreh. lan is allowed. 30' setback from Aberdeen No major objection. However, this is consider- Minimum setback conforming ed un-necessary. Slope of property provides to building code is adequate natural buffer from the street. Depending upon sewer, lesser setback may become necessary from design point of view. RECEIVED- _- - - _ CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER • S E P 51978 .NO o AM PM .. 7t8i9,t0111t12il12o3,41.5,6 P_..' M NO X-02 /7- 7, • RECEIVED . CITY 'OF RENTON: HEARING EXAMINER "EP 51978 • • • • AM . • PM " "71R,9:t0o111t2►1 i21<<7i6 EA • -40 _ _ _ `` --ate • • -140 ---.- -- �._.__ .... - - .-- ---- - -160 ,:-,,___•-_ -•4- _ --+--...... +---- - -- -•. - -180 }--.,,,---. - _- -- -_- _.. -_...__-..... -238 -220 --,._._.-. ,--...._--. __ __ _-___,__ --- _ - - -260 ._-,.- . � ._.... . _. .._...---... ..-.. . - . -280 - - - '-- -_,--- - _.._.. ._.._.. - -r • -300 .- ..• -340 ' • -360 __. -.-.- ._-}---- - --- - 1 - --- - - - --- ___ - _- - -- • -400 -. - ----__--.-_•---•--•-.__•-_-•-•--------- +_ ._...---- ---,-- -- - - .460 _....-...L-i_........ . -__-....+..__..-_ ............ 0 20 40 60 801001201401601802002E0840260250300320340360380400420440460480500520540560580600 • 3 1V� INTO. �-e7 / 7, Page 2 • Recommenadtion by Planning Discussion Applicant's Recommendation SET BACK RESTRICTIONS (Contd.) 10' side setbacks Strongly object to this. The property is very R-4 zoning, with associated • narrow (62.5' wide) ; and specifying 10' set- implied 8' side setbacks makes back on each side will limit design options special setback limitations severely. Also R-4 zone provides for 8' side unnecessary. setbacks for 3 level buildings (R-3 requires only 5') . R-4 will automatically provide adequate side setbacks. 50' back setback This is unnecessary, because there is 60' No special setback for back, Puget Power right of way plus a lot of open need to be specified. space on the back of the property- P.2 LANDSCAPING Front 20' landscaping strip A landscaping strip of width required by code Landscaping requirement, if ought to be sufficient. The steep slope of the any, should be to whatever property provides a natural buffer from the is in the existing code. street 10' side landscaping strip The lot width of 62.5' is not large enough Side landscaping strip to support 10' strips on each side, as well restrictions should not be as the driveway & parking requirements. This imposed. requirement by Planning will impose severe design limitations & hardship. 50' natural buffer on west side Unnecessary, in view of 60' right of way of The buffer requirement is not Puget Power, & additional open space on west necessary and should not be side of Puget Power's right of way. imposed. No significant trees to be cut without Planning approval No objection; however this ought to be the None subject of a general ordinance and not this re-zoning request. • • A • ,. - NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON', ON SEPTEMBER 5 , 19 78 , AT 9 : 00 A. M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ' PETITIONS": 1 . BILL DUNIJ ( SPRINGBROOK SHORT PLAT) , Files 197-78 , W-198-78 , and E-206-78 , APPLICATIONS FOR FOUR-LOT SHORT PLAT , WAIVER OF OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS , AND EXCEPTION TO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE ; property located between State Route 167 and Springbrook Road approximately one-third of a mile south of the intersection of South 26th Street and Talbot Road . 2 . DR . EUGENE W . BRAIN/VALLEY GENERAL HOSPITAL , File 213-78 , APPLICATION FOR THREE-LOT SHORT PLAT; property located in the vicinity of the northwest 1 corner of Talbot Road South and S .W . 43rd Street , including 3817 Talbot Road South . 3 ., ARJAN BHATIA , ile R-214-78 , APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-1 TO R-4; pro -e-r4y l-ocated on Aberdeen Ave . N . E . between Sunset Boulevard N . E . and N . E . 12th in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Ave . N . E . Legal descriptions of files noted above on file in the Renton Planning Department . I i • ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 5 , 1978 AT 9 : 00 A. M. TO EXPRESS THEIiR OPINIONS . GORDON Y . ERICKSEN PUBLISHED August 25 , 1978 RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I , STEV,E MUNSON , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me ; a Notary Public , on the 23rd day of August , (�1 19Z8 SIGNED N Tc, OX Nes\ce. 8506 Qth 025�t.1C P. 0. x 61 Renton, as4 9'8055 43/ August 15, - ING The City of Renton Rentori, Wa 98055 • Attn: Planning Department Gentlemen: Enclosed is my application for re-zoning- of a site, approximately 37,000 sq ft, to R-4 classification. This request is in conformance . with the current city's comprehensive zoning plan. At. prepent, I contemplate constructing an 18 unit apartment/condo building on the site. A concept for the layout of the building, is shown in the plot plan. This layout may be modified, if for some . reason it violates the current city code for R-4 zoning. The re-zoning of the property, and construction of the building • will help alleviate the current "in-city" housing shortage. Thank you. Sincerely Arjan Bhatia OVA° AFFIDAVIT 0a vs Pk1G 15 z zNNI N G 121E I, n-r eel .o , being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me 4,4 this / ,S`— day of , 197f, Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at (Name of Notary Public) (Si " ature of Owner) // 3506 south :1.25 •chi; P. . 61 (Address) 7 (Address) Renton cJ a 93055 (City) (State) Homo 772- 196 0f:_:ice° 773-i1, 1. (Telephone) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application . Date Received , , 19 By: Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 • r�U i� ry. CITY OF RENTON • OF RE/1/; � REZONE APPLICATION anti) 0 2 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY • LAND USE HEARING AUG 15 1918 APPLICATION NO. \"c2I'7 7i� EXAMINER 'S ACTION , APPLICATION FEE $ ( JO jpO APPEAL FILED RECEIPT NO. �Dln CITY COUNCIL ACTION "'N zze FILING DATE - I6-7% ORDINANCE NO. AND DATE HEARING DATE • APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 : • 1 . Name Phone 717- 1g6 Address 350. :.>o�?•1-,31. 125th. P. 0, Box 6j 4 Renton, ja. 93055.. 3. Property petitioned for rezoning is located on :J e:cdeen between •P,iva N and m41 12i:11 4 . Square footage or acreage of property' '37,200 squaa.e feet 5 . Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a separate sheet) Tract 11 of ila Ties Garen ',Jame Tracts, as per plat :cecordLed. in volume 3 of Plats, on page 33, 'e co•_d s of Kin;" County,, dashin ton; L'.X.Cs E'T the North 374 feet thereof. Situate in the county og 1(i:nF"L State of iiashin;ton. • 6 . Existing Zoning Zoning Requested ? - NOTE TO APPLICANT: The following factors are considered in reclassifying property. Evidence or additional information to substantiate your request may be attached to this sheet. (See Application Procedure Sheet for specific requirements. ) Submit this form in duplicate. 7. Proposed use of site .'.)artrient/3ondo construction 8. List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area. Plantation of trees to "hide" the build in. from the street and. to ee sD the but ict i r-9 a _ far away from the road. as possible. It say be noted that the quality of construetii is likely to improve the general appearance of the neighborhood, which cOILF8t5 of o lc4 raTt-c(OW(l Wouues 9 . How soon after the rezone is granted do you intend to develop the site? Within three months 10 . _Two copies of plot plan and affidavit of ownership are required. Planning Dept. 1-77 F /> 14IYY b CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON • 2 AUG 15 1978 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM \\7_, ............ �.G DEPP� • FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ',ff Application No. Environmental Checklist No. ,ECF (377-78' PROPOSED, date: FINAL, date: ElDeclaration of Significance O Declaration of Significance EiDeclaration of Non-Significance Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: • Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals. The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are rele- vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with- out unnecessary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, with- out duplicating paperwork in the future. NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State of Washington for various types of proposals. Many of the questions may not apply to your proposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next question. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent e:i°,jan 3 ct-t. 2. ;Address and phone number of Proponent: 8506 south 125th, P. f. nox 61, 98055 • 3. Date Checklist submitted Atig 15, 1978 • 4. Agency requiring Checklist t;wi;;i' of 0h1tont— 1-'1ar/112.11 ,'_Sorg. • 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: Uone 6. Nature, and brief d. c, ption f t_Oe proposal (including but not limited to its • Ye p e4ra]Fee�s i.g' ,fi, n 'eme41ts •ankPl ithWfalaCtirv"a ibew i3.1:111cimt air 'ae i ratehitect ailnir taRtditepotelit's $'to:Oexan ;r t�ote)in r-rantc ,. The buildim3 will meet all bu .t! ^' Cotn ordinances pC ': .if'y k; 'co 2.-4 711te:. °{rrt 4st 17!TM :Tr t !i rmA. in the area In `, 1lch the site 3 ?o mte . -2- 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : Located on Aberdeen Ave NE, approx 200 ft from intersection of sunset Blvd NE and • Aberdeen Ave JAE, Property is 37,200 sq ft; borders on west side with the Puget snuml Pnwpr Tight rig}-it of Yay ether " is a 1 are e open space botw en freeway 405 and the west side of theproperty. Slopes down from the road (Aberdeen Ave NE) all the way to the freeway. The property is very deep (S90 to 60O fE 3eep).. 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : June 1979 9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposal (federal , state and local --including rezones) : • Building permit from the City of Renton 10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes , explain: May construct additional units at some future date, in conformance with t-4 zoning, provided the additional. construction is economically and environmentally �tisfiria1jj , • 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: No • 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: NnnF II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) (1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? - YES MAYBE NO (b) Disruptions, displacements , compaction or over- covering of the soil? • YES MAYBE NO (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief X features? YEr- MAYBE F (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any X unique geologic or physical' features? VET— M N- (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , X either on or off the site? YES RATIFE NO (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the X bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? YES MAYBE NU— Explanation: -3- (2) Air. Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X YEs- MAYBE KU— (b) The creation of objectionable odors? X Y€s- MAYBE au- (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or x regionally? YrS MAYBE Explanation: (3) Water. Will the proposal result' in: . (a) Changes ih currents, or the course of direction of X water movements. in either marine or fresh waters? YES' MBE NB (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or, X the rate and amount of surface water runoff? YES NPR 0— (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X YES MAYBE NU— (d) Change in the amount_ of surface water in any water X body? YES MAYBE NO (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X YES MAYBE W (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of x ground waters? • 1E - MAYBE NO (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through X interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? YES MAYBE NO (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, Y or other substances into the ground waters? YET— MAYS€ R0 (i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available X for public water supplies? YET— MAYBE N0 Explanation: ' (4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, X microflora and aquatic plants)? Y1 MAYBE iW (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or X endangered species of flora? Y€s— RITE(c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area. or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing x species? YET— MAYBE ff x (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Y11— r NT Explanation: 7 -4- (5) Fauna. Will th,e proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? X Yt MAYBE NO (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? X YES M YBE NO (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or 'result in a barrier to the migration or movement X of fauna? YOB MAYBE NO (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X YET— MAYBE NO Explanation: (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or X glare? • YES MAYBE 0— Normal increasfh resulting from residential electrical use Explanation: • by the 18 families residing on the property (8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in ,the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X YET— M—ATTE NO Explanation: (9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of= a,n • explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides, chemicals or radiation) X in the event of an accident or upset conditions? YES MAYBEWO-- Explanation: • • (11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location. distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X Y! JiAYBE NZr) Explanation: This proposal if implemented, will provide housing for 18 families. e £ yl + L' -5- (12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X YES MAYBE NO • Explanation: This s project will hell, alleviate the current shorty e of (13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: • (a); Generation of additional vehicular movement? X YES MAYBE '^NO • (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? 1{ YES M 1� YBE NO (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? .� YES- MAYBE NU (d) Alterations to •present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods.' YES M YBE NO (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X • YET- MAYBE NO (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? ri TES-- MAYBE NO Explanation: The additional vehicular movement is that resin tini; i roll location of iG additional families in the area. • (14) Public Services'. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or • result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas : (a) Fire protection? X YES MAYBE NU— (b) Police protection? YES MATTE NO (c) Schools? f� YES MAYBE NO (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? YES MAYBE NO (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? A YES MAYBE NO (f) Other governmental services? YES' M NO Explanation: These add±tronal services are for the 13 families will that reside on the prope Ly, The .I�^act. is ne,11J bl e (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: • (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? YES MATTE NO (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require • the development of new sources of energy? YES MAYBE 1W Explanation: (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations. to the following utilities: . (a) Power or natural gas? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Communications systems? n YES M NO (c) Water? X YES MAYBE NO -6- (d) Sewer or septic tanks? jC YES MAYBE NO (e) Storm water drainage? ?i YES MAYBE N- (f) Solid waste and disposal? YES- MAYBE NO Explanation: (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? YES MAYBE WO-- Explanation: (18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? • YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? -i YES MAYBE Explanation: (20) Archeological Historical . Will the proposal, result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: III. SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any decla- ration of non-significance that tt might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Al Proponent: (sign °) .1. ei. .i: i$iL (name printed) City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 _ - THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 95055 /L °' CHARLES J. DELAURENTI MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT <t‘ 235 -2530 Pf0 SEP�E:O August 23 , 1978 Arjan Bhatia 8506 South 125th P . O . Box 61 Renton , Washington . 98055 RE : NOTICE OF APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR REZONE FROM R- 1 TO R-4 , file no . R-214-78_;� property located on Aberdeen Avenue N . E . between Sunset Boulevard N . E . and N . E. 12th in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Avenue N . E . Dear Mr. Bhatia : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on August 15 , 1978 . A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for September 5 , 1978 at 9 : 00 a . m. • Representatives of the applicant are asked to be present . All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing . If you have any further questions , please call the Renton Planning Department , 235-2550 . Very truly yours , Gordon Y . Ericksen Planning Director i----) / // rr By : Mi'chael L . Smith , Senior Planner • • Page 3 SUMMARY • RE-ZONE TO R-4 WITHOUT ANY RESTRICTIONS, EXCEPT THOSE ALREADY IMPOSED BY THE BUILDING CODE. THIS PROPERTY IS SIMILAR TO THOSE ALREADY ZONED R-4 IN THE VICINITY; AND THESE , R-4 'ZONED PROPERTIES HAVE NO SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS . BECAUSE OF STEEPER SLOPE OF. THE PROPERTY, THERE IS A NATURAL BUFFER FROM THE ROAD. THEREFORE THE SPECIAL LANDSCAPING RESTRICTIONS ARE NOT NECESSARY. TO ENABLE FLEXIBILITY IN DESIGN OF THE BUILDING REQUIRED BECAUSE OF NARROW WIDTH OF LOT AND BECAUSE OF THE SEWER SITUATION, AND TO MAKE THE ZONING CONSISTENT WITH THAT IN THE _COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, R-4 ZONING SHOULD . BE ALLOWED. • • • AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING State of Washington) County of King ) • Marilyn' J. Petersen , being first duly sworn, upon • Oath disposes and states: That on the 14th day of September , 19 78 , affiant deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below-entitled application or petition. • / 11 Subscribed and sworn this \ - day of �QT\p b Q 19 `1 . Notary Public in and for the State • • of Washington, residing at Renton . Application, Petition or Case : Arlan Bhatia, R-214-78 (The mi.nwta contain a o6 .the paAties ot5 neco' d) - . of R� I c-(' 7, 4 riv1 eti kv �1 Ho THE CITY OF RENTON ©: I Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 z ► 1 o j CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER p4) ��R- L. RICK BE Fe.34. 593 44-0 SEPW1 ! ' ' k r, September 21, 1978 r.,-�. _ 1 1,I Members, Renton City Council CLERK,s OFi��f Renton, Washington RE: File No. R-214-78; Arjan Bhatia Request for Rezone. Dear Council Members: I Attached is the Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the referenced rezone request,...dated September 14, 1978. The appeal period for the application expires on September 28, 1978, and the report is being forwarded to you for review by the Planning and Development Committee following the seven-day period from the date of publication. The complete file will be transmitted to the City Clerk on September 29, 1978, and will be placed on the Council agenda on October 9, 1978. If you !require additional assistance or information regarding: this matter; please contact the undersigned. Sinee-ely;` -) /ram •' L. Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner 1 cc: Planning Department City Clerk 1 1 • \T OF o. THE CITY OF RENTON V © MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o o CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 11. �q. L. RICK BEELER . 235-2593 �,pgTFD SE P1 September 29, 1978 Mr. Arj!an Bhatia 8506 S. 125th Renton, WA 98055 RE: , File No. R-214-78; Arjan Bhatia Request for Rezone. Dear Mr. Bhatia: This is to notify you that the above referenced request, which was approved subject to conditions as noted on the Examiner's report of • September 14, 1978, has not been appealed within the time period established by ordinance, and therefore, this application is being submitted to the City Clerk for.transmittal to the City Council for final approval. You will receive notification of final approval upon adoption of an ordinance by the City Council. Sincerely, ►a�- . •ick Beeler Hearing Examiner cc: Planning Department City Clerk' RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting October 9 , .1978 Municipal Building Monday , 8: 00 P .M. Council Chambers AGENDA' 1 . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. CALL ITO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES OF OCTOBER 2, 1978 4. AUDIENCE COMMENT 5. OLD BUSINESS BY COUNCIL 6. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 7. CONSENT AGENDA - The following items are distributed to all Council Members for study and are adopted by one motion without discussion unless so requested. a. Bid opening 10/4/78 Ripley Lane NE Sewer Replacement; one bid received. Refer to the Utilities Committee. b. Appointment by Mayor Delaurenti of James J. Bryant permanent appointment as Police Officer effective 10/17/78. Concur. c. Summons and Complaint #851612 Myrtle Beckstrom vs Officer Richard Mecham and wife and Officer Kathy Iles and husband and the City in amount of $100,500 for personal damages. Refer to City Attorney/Insurance Carrier. d. Claim for Damages filed by Nancy J. Peterson, 8317 Wolcott S. , Seattle, personal damages $401 .45. Refer to City Attorney/Insurance Carrier. --Hearing Examiner's recommendation R-214-78 Arjan Bhatia Rezone to R-3 with conditions located on Aberdeen NE near Sunset NE. Refer to Ways and Means Committee for ordinance. f. Hearing Examiner's recommendation R-208-78 Cascadia Properties Corp. Rezone to B-1 with restrictive covenants, property on Lake Ave. S. between S. Victoria St. and S. 2nd St. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. g. Mayor's Notice of Hearing on planned use of Federal Shared Revenue Funds. 8. CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS 10/2 3/7 8lnfo. a. 1Human Rights and Affairs Commission - Adult Mobile Home Parks 9. NEW (BUSINESS . 10. AUDIENCE COMMENT 11 , EXECUTIVE SESSION 12. ADJOURNMENT Renton City Council 10/9/78 Page 3 Consent Agenda Continued Claim for , Claim for Damages filed by Nancy J. Peterson, 8317 Wolcott S. , Damages 1 Seattle, for personal damages (broken foot in fall from swing alleged) in amount of $401 .45. Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Carrier. �Arjan Bhatia Hearing- Examiner decision for approval of rezone from R-1 to R-3 Rezone R-214-78 with conditions granted to Arjan Bhatia on property located on Aberdeen Ave NE Aberdeen. Ave. NE between Sunset Blvd. NE and NE 12th St. in the vicinity of 951 and 957 Aberdeen Ave. NE. Council refer to Ways and Means Committee for ordinance. Cascadia ' Hearing Examination decision for approval of rezone from R-1 to Properties Corp. B-1 with restrictive covenants, property located on Lake Ave. S. Rezone R-208-78 between South Victoria St. and S. Second St. Refer to Ways and Means Committee for ordinance. Consent Agenda MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND SHANE, ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Approval CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Albert Talley, Chairperson, Human Rights and Affairs Commission, advised research of the Council referral re issue of Adults Only adult only restrictions for mobile home parks and other rental living units. The letter reported findings that adult only restriction is acceptable legally and ethically, there being no j state law prohibiting the restriction and litigation at the Federal level from other areas has upheld the owner's right to establish age requirements. The letter further stated the Commissions belief that it is not ethically wrong to determine occupancy on the basis 1 of age. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND THO.RPE, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE REPORT AND COPY OF THE REPORT BE PROVIDED TO THE LEISURE ESTATES MOBILE HOME PARK RESIDENTS WHO HAD EXPRESSED CONCERN OVER REFERRAL. Councilman. Perry requested the City Clerkialso provide copy of the report to other interested party, James VanOsdell . Councilwoman Shinpoch requested the Council President to thank the Human Rights Commission for prompt response. MOTION CARRIED. Summons and Summons and Complaint was filed against the City. of Renton by Complaint Lakeview Towers Associates by Robert E. McBeth, Attorney, listing Lakeview Towers First Cause of Action: Quiet Title. Claim as regards vacation of a portion of Lind Ave. NW which was denied by the City Council at publi'c hearing 10/2/78 continued from 9/25/78. Second Cause of Action: Equal protection claim/arbitrary and capricous conduct. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL REFER THE MATTER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. (Councilwoman Shinpoch requested the record indicate she took no part in any discussion or action on this matter. ) CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Councilman Perry called attention to the need for container for placing spent oil by home mechanics. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND CLYMER, Used Oil REFER THE MATTER OF SELF-SERVICE GAS STATIONS PROVIDING CONTAINER Container ! FOR USED OIL TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE FOR PROPER LEGISLATION. CARRIED. Street Debris Councilwoman Thorpe noted concern for injured child alleging street debris near Shattuck and 26th left by contractor and requested the Administration monitor situation to prevent recurrence. Mayor Delaurenti noted, action being taken; however, noted trucks are overloading. Annexation Councilman Stredicke requested additional information be provided regarding Cascadia Annexation prior to public meeting scheduled 10/23/78. Councilman Shane called attention to need for fiscal impact statement as previously used by the city with the Boundary Review Board which estimated cost to City from various departments as pertained to police and fire services, streets, utilities, etc. Moved by Clymer, Second Thorpe, refer subject of fiscal impact statement re annexations to the Ways and Means Committee. FAILED. 1 Renton City Council 10/9/78 Page 4 Executive MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL HOLD EXECUTIVE SESSION Session TO DISCUSS THE SUBJECT OF 21-R LABOR CONTRACT ONLY. CARRIED. Council moved to Executive Session at 9:07 p.m. and convened by Motion of the Council at 9:30 p.m. Q. 71-2_e_etd. Delores A. Mead, City Clerk BID TABULAT ION 5HEETT 9- PR O J EC T RIPLEY LANE NE SEWER REPLACEMENT DATE. - October 4, 1978 BIDDER BID Frank Coluccio Construction 9600 Empire Way South Seattle. WA 98118 AA.BB.EEO $24.862.131 41 C THE CITY OF RENTON Q MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MiLI AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 z ► o O-$) CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER p �42- L. RICK BE 4).3 F,L•' 593 4,AltED SEPIt' n ,� ro September 21, 1978 ^- rs . ; -" • rye Members, Renton City Council `c �L.L� , G; Renton, Washington RE: File No. R-214-78; Ajan Bhatia Request for Rezone. Dear Council Members: Attached is the Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the referenced rezone request, dated September 14, 1978. The appeal period for the application expires on September 28, 1978, and the report is being forwarded to you for review by the Planning and Development Committee following the seven-day period from the date of publication. The complete file will be transmitted to the City Clerk on September 29, 1978, and will be placed on the Council agenda on October 9, 1978. If you require additional assistance or information regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Sin.eerely, ) L. Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner cc: Planning Department City Clerk qL. qL ai 9—i t:',, L I 16 a '5 V [1-] i4 '4 cz ELI L.3. CD ; 0 j 4 0- - - - - -�-- _ D G _ i 0 I a ..{ I CO 1\ c to �, gi g rig - SI <1 I Ilt 0 4 IL ,„ 0 1 Vb 1 • e • 11 � 0 D Ili s v. ' CI .74" 6 • eN.41 rt, cisi 0, ,s,045. z. %---r --1-2_ . .' % 5 a P 0 14,. �Q 9 cm� o Lai 1:2a f� . a-4 co D '--1:r E:j , r---i 70 . 1:\ w. s 1'1211 03 i 0 ,m—t.Zy ......., 1 C") EP z w -� 7 w 8 INVC:g _ 8 sr - -- m e in z. [mud] : __ • Sc.ALE:- .10a 2001 o €T Sere iv. I ARTAN e)M A r.,I a REZONE P - .: , , y q— OF 4 •v. ; 0 THE CITY OF RENTON \O 'Z' MUNICIPAL BUILDING . 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH.98055 z 0 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER Q- L. RICK BEELER . 235-2593 44TEO SEP1t�O October '25, 1978 Mr. Arjan Bhatia 8506 S. 125th Renton, WA 98055 RE: File No. R-214-78; Arjan Bhatia Request for Rezone. Dear Mr. Bhatia: This is to notify you that the above referenced request was approved at the meeting of the Renton City Council of October 23, 1978 by adoption of Ordinance No. 3258. Sincer#1y,. L. Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner cc: vCity Clerk Planning Department bZ7r �,13 r, j •' G\IN{ °��Vt1gSt`,�o (.\ \Q q C '41�o f`,r��7 \ r1 ) - OF I .?> db 0 THE CITY OF RENTON c.) z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI MAYOR DELORES A. MEAD 0 co- CITY CLERK 0 94, 64"sEP October 26, 197S 1— Arjan Bhatia 8506 South 125th Renton, Washington 98055 RE: REZONE R-214-78 Dear Mr. Bhatia: The Renton City Council, during its regular meeting on Monday, October 23, 1978 has adopted Ordinance 13258. A copy is enclosed for your information. Yours very truly, CITY OF RENTON Delores A. Mead, C.M. C. City Clerk DAM:jeb Enclosure • Renton City Council 10/17/78 Page 3 Old Business. Continued Councilman Shane Motion by Councilman Shane that all city employees' wages be based on cost of living, failed for lack of a second. Motion by Shane to place 2% tax on gambling at Longacres, failed for lack of a second. Utilities Utilities Committee Chairman Shane presented committee report Committee Report recommending concurrence in Public Works Department report Ripley Lane accepting the bid of Frank Coluccio Construction Co. for the Sewer Replacement Ripley Lane replacement sanitary sewer project (S-189) in amount Bid Award I of $24,862.81 . MOVED BY SHANE, SECOND PERRY, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT AND AWARD BID. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ordinance #3255 Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented following H. Syrstad Rezone ordinances for second and final readings: An ordinance read rezoning property located on S.Puget Drive from GS-1 to SR-1 , known as the Harold Syrstad Rezone R-211-78. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND SHINPOCH, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance #3256 An ordinance was placed on second and final readings rezoning G. Volchok Rezone property located at 22nd St. and SR-167 Valley Freeway from G to Manufacturing Park, known as the Gary Volchok rezone R-212-78. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND SHANE, ADOPT ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. First Reading The Ways and Means Committee recommended first reading and referral Ordinances I back to committee for the following two ordinances: Cascadia Rezone An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of prop- R-208-78 I ertyllocated on Lake Ave. S. between S. Victoria St. and S. 2nd St. from R-1 to B-1 , known as the Cascadia rezone R-208-78. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND SH•INPOCH, REFER BACK TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. (Restrictive Covenants) A. Bhatia. Rezone An ordinance was read rezoning property located at Aberdeen NE R-214-78 I between Sunset Blvd. NE and NE 12th St. in vicinity of 951 Aberdeen Ave. NE, from R-1 to R-3 residence district, known as the Arjan Bhatia rezone R-214-78. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND SHANE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Tax Levy 1 Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke noted tax levies ordinance would be adopted next week, as the material and informa- tion needed is now being received from King County. CONSENT AGENDA These items are distributed to all Council Members for study and are adopted by one motion •of the Council without discussion, unless requested. Adopting motion follows items. Damages Claim Claim for Damages was filed by T. W. Parker, Attorney for Henry C. Sasse III, 2004 139th P1 . SE, Bellevue, in amount of $2,500 claiming damage to home on Talbot Road. Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Carrier. Appointment Letter from Mayor Delaurenti announced appointment of Joan Yoshitomi to Municipal Arts Commission completing the term.of Harriet Gruhn, effective to 12/31/79. Refer to the Ways and Mean. Committee. Consent Agenda MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND SHINPOCH, COUNCIL ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA Approval AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. • Renton City Council 10/16/78 Page 4 , CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS Development 'and Letter from Del Bennett, President, Belterra Development Corp. , Subdivision Bellevue, explained that since terminating employment with the City Regulations he has been involved with various governmental jurisdictions in the development of single-family subdivisions. Mr. Bennett noted Revision to the City of Renton is the only governmental agency that requires Current Platting a public hearing on a final plat, which hearing delays the process Process Asked by two months. Mr. Bennett requested opportunity to appear before the Committee as a Whole to suggest policies reducing redtape. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND SHANE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE REQUEST TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. Councilwoman Shinpoch requested that the Administration make written material available with staff input; Mayor Delaurenti being in agreement. CARRIED. Appreciation Letter from Service Laundry and Dry Cleaners expressed appreciation of Fire Dept. of the fast action by the Renton Fire Department at the occasion of a fire at their plant. Mayor Delaurenti asked that copy of the letter be furnished the Fire Department. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY SHANE, SECOND PERRY, FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENTS BE PROVIDED BY THE ADMINISTRATION FOR EACH PROPOSED ANNEXATION. CARRIED. Coun- cilwoman Shinpoch noted her similar request a year ago. First Class Motion by Councilman Shane for study to become first class Status city and ascertain revenue, failed for lack of a second. Councilman Perry noted advantages of being OMC city. Councilman Shane requested Mayor's Assistant make investigation re first class. Adjournment MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND CLYMER, COUNCIL MEETING ADJOURN. CARRIED. 10:20 p.m. — Delores A. Mead, City Clerk . I l� .-�,ram , 7kT 'I - ::;CITY QF4 j' 2ttiTStriinittievi. ., ' a R__,A V- '7r i .tt adTON,WSFIINGTON — 5n1957 ^; n �, NMACElNO 3b8;' Aw ��e . )nr "-A ` OAIDNANC OF '• 4SECTIOHll` iTh rd i- THE CITY OF RENTON, Hance shall'be.affeCtive1up- 1 W A S H 1 N G T 0 N on its passage,approval and CHANGING THE ZON- five(5)days after its publica- ING CLASSIFICATION tion. • OF CERTAIN PROPER- PASSED BY THE CITY Affidavit of Publication TIES WITHIN THE CITY COUNCIL this 23rd day of OF RENTON FROM RE- October, 1978. SIDENCE SINGLE Delores A. Mead STATE OF WASHINGTON FAMILY DISTRICT(R-1) City. Clerk COUNTY OF KING ss. TO RESIDENCE DIS- 'APPROVED BY THE I TRICT(R-3)(R-214-78) MAYOR this 23rd day of WHEREAS under Chap- October, 1978. ter 7,Title IV(Building Regu- Charles J. Delaurenti IatIons) of Ordinance No. Mayor Jan.1.Ce...? Z" being first duly sworn on 1628 known as the"Code of Approved as to form: General Ordinances of the Lawrence J.Warren City of Renton,"as amend- City Attorney oath,deposes and says that.shg.is the Cla •Q, `...C�:erk of ed, and the maps and re- Published in The Renton. THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4 ports adopted in conjunction Record-Chronicle October times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now an' therewith, the property 27, 1978. R5208 I' has been for more then six months prior to the date of publication referre heretnbelow described has __ __ J to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news heretofore been zones as - ,paper published fourI,(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington Residence Single Family and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintainer District(R-I);and at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the'lento WHEREAS a proper peti- Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of ti; lion for Change of zone Superior Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County classification of said proper- Record-Chronicle been filed with the Ord* 3h,5� Planning Department on or` Washington.That the annexed is a about August 15, 1978 which petition was duly fe- fened to the Hearing Ex- i aminer for Investigation, i study and I public hearing, as it was published in regular issues(a and a public hearing having not in supplement for in of said newspaper) once each issue for a peri about Sept mereon j978r and said matter having been one duly considered by the Hear- of consecutive issues,commencing on2 t In9 Examiner and said zon- ing request being in confor- 7e mitt' with the City s Com- 7 day of �, �• ,'19 ,and ending prehensive Plan,as amend- I ed, and the City Council having duly considered all j matters relevant thereto day of ,19 ,both dl and all parties having been inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its Ell heard appearing in support scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the thereof or in o pposition thereto,NOW THEREFORE charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ 5 'wE C�COUNCIL OF has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for, THE CITY OF RENTON, first insertion and WASHINGTON D per folio of one hundred words for each subseq DAIN AS FOLLOWS: OR- SECTION 1:The following described property in the �� 4 I-12�s City of Renton is hereby rezoned to Residence Dis- • e ief clerk trio (R-3) as hereinbelow specified;subject to the find- I Ings, conclusions and deci- '� • sion dated September 14, Subscribed and sworn to before me this d 1978 of the City's Hearing Examiner; the Planning Di- Qt"i�r► 19 I 78 rector Is hereby authorized and directed to change the . maps of the Zoning Ordi- , 2 nance, as amended,to evi- Notary Pu lic n and for the State of Was ' dance said rezoning,to-wit: residing at Kent,Ki { ! Tract 11 of Harries / f Garden Home Tracts,as per plat recorded in volume of Plats, on —Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effectivep page 38,34 records of King 9th, 1955. ; County, Washington, I I 'EXCEPT the north 37V2 —Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and fi feet thereof,situate in the adopted by the newspapers of the State. I County of King,State of I Washington i (Property located on Aberdeen Avenue N.E. ' between Sunset i - _- - -Boulevard N.E.and N.E.. V.P.C.Form No.87