Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEX Decision_Alpine Preliminary Plat_15-0000181 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Alpine Nursery Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat LUA15-000018 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FINAL DECISION SUMMARY The applicant requests preliminary plat approval for a 27-lot residential subdivision. The preliminary plat application is approved subject to conditions. TESTIMONY Rocale Timmons, senior City of Renton planner, summarized the staff report. She noted that the applicant is proposing a 25 foot dedication for 160th Ave. S.E., which will create enough right of way to accommodate the City’s street standards. Staff determined there was existing right of way for 160th Ave SE based upon assessor maps. Steve Lee, City of Renton engineering department, stated that impacts to neighboring wells will be checked during engineering review. The groundwater level is lower than the depth of the proposed infiltration pond. Mr. Lee stated that staff assesses the depth of groundwater and the location of infiltration ponds when assessing potential impacts to wells. No red flags were raised in this case given the depth of groundwater. Maher Joudi, project engineer, noted that the trail in the tree retention tract is a soft surface trail so it will not adversely impact trees. A tree retention plan has been prepared and hasn’t yet been submitted due to timing constraints. The applicant will be paying its fair share traffic signal funds. A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 2 bioswale will be used to treat stormwater. Secondary drainage review is limited to the wall of the drainage facility, not the entire downstream system. Tom Carpenter, neighboring resident, read a written statement. He noted there is a very large concern on the part of residents that the required stop light will make conditions worse. He noted that there should not be impediments to traffic flow of the road, which serves as a 405 bypass. The traffic analysis does not yet include the areas of concern. Concentrating trees in a tree retention tract doesn’t align with the dispersed character of trees on the plateau. Mr. Carpenter requested that the examiner include language in the final decision that identifies the problems with the city’s concurrency system, which essentially authorizes any development in the city. The City’s concurrency system is atypical and violates the Growth Management Act. King County’s concurrency regulations prohibit any development on the plateau in unincorporated King County. Mr. Carpenter recognized that the City is addressing the problem, but those efforts are too late for the Alpine Meadows development. Mr. Carpenter stated that all platting on the plateau should be delayed until the City completes its work on concurrency. Robert Metcalf, neighbor, testified that many neighbors are concerned about 160th, because it is a dirt road with underground utilities. He is concerned about heavy equipment travelling over the equipment. He also questioned whether part of the road width would be paved and part not. Ms. Timmons noted that 20 feet of the width would be paved allowing for two lanes of travel. Adjoining gravel would have to be crossed to access abutting driveways. In staff rebuttal, Ms. Timmons noted that the staff report reference to the applicant was in error and that the applicant is Roy and Kim Boyer and William and Marilyn Spiry, not the Quadrant Corp. Ms. Timmons acknowledged that the City is updating its concurrency regulations. Trees will largely be concentrated in the tree retention tract, but will also be dispersed outside of the tree retention tract via a required ten foot landscape strip required all lot street frontages and this landscaped area will include trees. Maher Joudi, project engineer, noted that prior to construction the applicant would look into existing waterlines in 160th and replace them if they were not adequate. 160th will not be used for heavy equipment. The proposed pavement will be at the same level as the gravel so that the remaining gravel would serve as a shoulder to the new road. EXHIBITS Exhibits 1-17 listed on page 2 of the March 24, 2015 Staff Report, in addition to the Staff Report itself, were admitted into evidence during the public hearing. The staff powerpoint presented at the hearing was admitted as Ex. 18. A written statement from Tom Carpenter was admitted as Ex. 19. FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 3 1. Applicant. Roy and Kim Boyer; William and Merry Spiry.. 2. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on March, 24 2015 in the City of Renton Council City Chambers. 3. Project Description. The applicant requests preliminary plat approval for a 27-lot residential subdivision. The subject property is a collection of three parcels located on the south side of SE 144th St between 160th Ave SE and 161st Ave SE. The 27 lots would result in a density of 3.98 dwelling units per acre. Lot sizes would range from 8,000 square feet to 13,369 square feet. Access to the plat is proposed via an extension of 161st Ave SE and 160th Ave SE. Internal circulation terminates in a cul-de-sac in the northern portion of the property. The southern portion of the site contains grid connections from 160th to 161st Ave SE aligned with SE 145th St and SE 146th Place. The proposal includes a tree retention tract on its southern end that includes a soft surface trail that will connect 160th Ave SE to 161st Ave SE. All existing structures on site are proposed to be demolished. 3. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. As conditioned, the project will be served by adequate/appropriate infrastructure and public services as follows: A. Water and Sewer Service. Water service will be provided by Water District No. 90. The District has provided a certificate of water availability for the project. Sewer service will be provided by the City of Renton. B. Police and Fire Protection. Police and fire service would be provided by the City of Renton. Police and fire staff have determined that sufficient resources exist to serve the proposed development, subject to required code improvements and payment of required fire impact fees. C. Drainage. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate stormwater controls. The applicant submitted a drainage plan and drainage report dated January 12, 2015, Ex. 8. Staff have determined that the report demonstrates compliance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and additional City stormwater requirements, based on specific site conditions, as required by the Department of Community and Economic Development. Given the absence of any compelling evidence to the contrary and the extensive stormwater review and conditioning of the proposal, the staff’s finding of compliance with the 2009 stromwater manual is determinative on the issue of adequacy of stormwater controls. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River drainage basin. Under pre-developed conditions, site runoff sheet flows south onto neighboring properties to the south. Downstream capacity issues have been observed and the area is considered a nuisance requiring City maintenance work and there is potential for the proposal to aggravate existing or create new drainage problems. The applicant is proposing to include a pond wall of approximately 7-8-feet in height. However, due to potential seepage in and out of the pond, a SEPA mitigation measure was issued requiring additional secondary review 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 4 during final engineering design that includes hydro-geotechnical evaluations for buoyancy and lining, structural review and wall drainage relief against potential hydrostatic pressures. The secondary review shall be conducted by an independent reviewer. Additionally, the applicant would be required to provide due diligence in the grading and collection of drainage design during the construction phase so that runoff and erosion does not impact the neighboring properties which will likely include an evaluation of the overflow route conveyance capacity as part of the final TIR to ensure adequate capacity exists downstream during a 100-year event. The conditions of approval of this decision also require the creation of a homeowner’s association and City approved maintenance agreement(s) to ensure that all stormwater facilities are properly maintained. D. Parks/Open Space. City ordinances require the payment of park impact fees prior to building permit issuance. RMC 4-2-115, which governs open space requirements for residential development, does not impose any requirements for open space for residential development in the R-4 district. The impact fees provide for adequate parks and open space. E. Streets. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate streets. The City’s public works department has determined the preliminary plat street design to provide for adequate streets and conform to the City’s street standards, subject to approval of two street modifications, which is made a condition of approval. As shown in Ex. 2, all proposed lots have access to a public street. As with the neighboring Enclave preliminary plat recently approved by the City, congestion is a major issue for this plat. City staff have determined that the proposal meets the City’s level of service standard in its concurrency determination, Ex. 16, and the accuracy of this determination is undisputed. In his testimony Mr. Carpenter accurately identified that the City’s level of service standards authorizes development in areas that suffer congestion that would be typically considered at failing levels in jurisdiction using more traditional intersection level of service standards as opposed to the transportation system-wide standard adopted by the City of Renton. Mr. Carpenter is likely correct that many if not most jurisdictions in Washington gage level of service on an intersection or similarly localized basis. However, RCW 36.70B.030(2)(c) and (3) essentially provides that adopted transportation level of service standards are determinative on the adequacy of transportation facilities. The Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board has also ruled that level of service is a policy choice and will be found adequate even though some areas may suffer what some consider to be failing levels of service. See West Seattle Defense Fund v. City of Seattle, Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, Case No. 94-3-0016, Final Decision and Order. As recognized by Mr. Carpenter during the hearing, the Renton City Council is working on a new level of service standard that addresses a new level of service standard that may provide for a more localized assessment of transportation congestion. Unless and until that new standard is adopted (or the Council adopts some interim controls) staff and the examiner are bound by the “system-wide” level of service 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 5 standard still on the books and any decisions or conditions regarding congestion levels must be based upon the currently adopted level of service standard. Although the City’s concurrency standard is based on a system wide standard, it still also authorizes reasonable intersection specific mitigation. As a result, the applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated December 31, 2014 (Exhibit 9). The report states that the proposed development would generate approximately 267 net new daily trips. During the weekday AM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 21 net new trips (5 inbound and 16 outbound). During the weekday PM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 28 net new trips (18 inbound and 10 outbound). The report also analyzed the level of service at the following intersections: 160th Ave SE/SE 144th St and 161st Ave SE/SE 144th St. The traffic study states that these intersections will continue to operate at what staff considers to be an acceptable level of service (LOS B). The proposed project does not disclose likely impacts to the intersections of 156th Ave SE/SE144th St and 156th Ave SE/SE 142nd St. As a result a SEPA mitigation measure was issued requiring the applicant to submit a revised Traffic Study, including an analysis of impacts caused by the proposed development to the 156th Ave SE/SE144th St and the 156th Ave SE/SE 142nd St intersections, and recommend appropriate mitigation as necessary. It should be noted that the City’s Transportation Division has conducted an independent study of the existing background traffic situation at the 156th Ave SE/SE 142nd St intersection. Based on the City’s study the existing conditions warrant the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection with or without the construction of the proposed subdivision. With the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project vicinity would improve. The installation of a traffic signal is not included on the City’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), therefore transportation impacts fees would not fund the installation of a signal. Due to the existing LOS designation ‘F’ at the 156th Ave SE/SE 142nd St intersection and the fact that the required traffic impact fees would not fund a traffic signal at this intersection, a SEPA mitigation measure was issued, requiring the applicant to be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Ave SE/SE 142nd St intersection based on any new PM peak hour trips. The fee will be based on new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips x $500,000 (cost of new signal) and shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. Increased traffic created by the development would be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Currently this fee is assessed at $2,143.70 per new single- family home. The fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of building permit issuance shall be payable to the City. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 6 F. Parking. Sufficient area exists, on each lot, to accommodate the two required parking spaces per lot required by RMC 4-4-080(F)(10)(d). G. Schools. The proposal provides for adequate provisions for schools and walking conditions to and form school.  It is anticipated that the Issaquah School District can accommodate any additional students generated by this proposal at the following schools: Briarwood Elementary (1.25 miles from the subject site), Maywood Middle School (0.5 miles from the subject site) and Liberty High School (1.22 miles from the subject site). RCW 58.17.110(2) provides that no subdivision be approved without making a written finding of adequate provisions for safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school and/or bus stops. Maywood Middle is within walking distance of the subject site while Briarwood Elementary and Liberty High schools would require future students to be transported to school via bus. The bus stop for Briarwood Middle school is currently located at 160th Ave SE and 144th Ave SE. The bus stop for Liberty High School is located at SE 144th ST and 161st Ave SE. The applicant is proposing to provide street frontage improvements, including sidewalks, along the south side of the street for the frontage of the property (SE 144th St). To the east of the subject site there are intermittent sidewalks on the south side of the street with primarily a 6-9 foot shoulder delineated by a fog line. A majority of the possible school walk route is outside the City of Renton limits and is in the King County jurisdiction. The one crossing intersection in the City at 161st Ave. SE has a Stop Sign Control, which provides adequate protection for crossing children. Outside the City along SE 144th St, King County has installed 20mph School Speed Limit signing with flashing beacons and other warning signs as well as a crosswalk at the school driveway. No other improvements are necessary at this time for safe walking routes to school. A School Impact Fee, based on new single family lots, will also be required in order to mitigate the proposal’s potential impacts to Issaquah School District. The fee is payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of building permit application. Currently the fee is assessed at $4,560.00 per single family residence. 4. Adverse Impacts. There are no adverse impacts associated with the proposal as conditioned. Adequate public facilities and drainage control are provided as determined in Finding of Fact No. 3. The proposal involves single-family housing at a density 3.98 dwelling units per acre, which is allowed for the R-4 zoning district. This is a legislatively set standard of what is considered a compatible density for the area. Consequently, there are no issues of compatibility with surrounding development based on density. There are no critical areas on the project site. There were some concerns expressed about how 160th would be developed, but these concerns were adequately addressed during the hearing by staff and the applicant. 160th will be paved to a sufficient width to accommodate two-way traffic on public right of way. There was a comment made that 160th is a private road, but no evidence was presented to support this position and staff demonstrated through their review of assessor maps that there will be sufficient public right of way once the applicant makes its required dedications to accommodate a two lane public road. Final engineering review will ensure that underground utilities in 160th do not become harmed by the 160th road improvements 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 7 and the construction equipment used to develop the proposed subdivision. There were also concerns raised about impacts to adjoining wells. As testified by staff, the groundwater levels and location of the infiltration pond don’t raise any red flags about potential impacts to wells. No evidence was submitted identifying any potential adverse impact to the wells. In the absence of any such evidence and the analysis provided by staff, it cannot be concluded that the proposal creates any risk to wells. The proposal retains a sufficient amount of trees as set by City standards. The applicant submitted a Tree Arborist Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated Consulting Arborist (dated January 5, 2015) (Exhibit 13). There are a total of 598 trees located on site. The applicant is required to retain 30 percent of the trees located on site that are not located within critical areas, proposed rights-of-way and access easements. Of the 598 trees located on site, 260 trees would be excluded from the tree retention requirements. The provided tree retention worksheet indicates 14 trees are considered dead diseased or dangerous, and 246 trees are located within proposed public streets. Therefore, the applicant would be required to retain at least 102 trees on site. The applicant has proposed to retain 102 trees thereby complying with Tree Retention requirements of the code (Exhibit 12). The proposed tree retention plan does not reflect the revised plat plan submitted on March 3, 2015 (Exhibit 15). A detailed tree retention plan, complying with RMC 4-4-130, will be required to be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. The conditions of approval and SEPA mitigation measures include requirements that assure that the tree retention plan will be maintained in perpetuity and is responsive to changes in project design submitted after submission of the tree retention plan. Conclusions of Law 1. Authority. RMC 4-7-020(C) and 4-7-050(D)(5) provide that the Hearing Examiner shall hold a hearing and issue a final decision on preliminary plat applications. 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The property is zoned R-4. The comprehensive plan designations is Residential Low Density (RLD). 3. Review Criteria. Chapter 4-7 RMC governs the criteria for subdivision review. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. RMC 4-7-080(B): A subdivision shall be consistent with the following principles of acceptability: 1. Legal Lots: Create legal building sites which comply with all provisions of the City Zoning Code. 2. Access: Establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel. 3. Physical Characteristics: Have suitable physical characteristics. A proposed plat may be denied because of flood, inundation, or wetland conditions. Construction of protective improvements may be required as a condition of approval, and such improvements shall be noted on the final plat. 4. Drainage: Make adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies and sanitary wastes. 4. As to compliance with the Zoning Code, pages 7-8 of the staff report is adopted by reference as if set forth in full. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3(E), each lot has access to a public road. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, there are no critical areas on the project site and no other physical characteristics evident from the record that have not been adequately addressed by the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 8 proposal. No flooding problems are anticipated because as determined in Finding of Fact No. 3 the proposal is served by adequate/appropriate stormwater facilities and the project is not located in any critical area, which includes floodplains. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3, the proposal provides for adequate public facilities. 5. RMC 4-7-080(I)(1): …The Hearing Examiner shall assure conformance with the general purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and adopted standards… 6. The proposed preliminary play is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan as outlined in pages 6-7 of the staff report, which is incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-7-120(A): No plan for the replatting, subdivision, or dedication of any areas shall be approved by the Hearing Examiner unless the streets shown therein are connected by surfaced road or street (according to City specifications) to an existing street or highway. 7. All of the internal roads of the proposed subdivision connect to existing public roads, specifically 160th and 161st Ave SE. RMC 4-7-120(B): The location of all streets shall conform to any adopted plans for streets in the City. 8. The City’s adopted street plans are not addressed in the staff report or anywhere else in the administrative record. The proposal provides for connections to all adjoining through streets, which should assure conformance to any applicable street plan. RMC 4-7-120(C): If a subdivision is located in the area of an officially designed [sic] trail, provisions shall be made for reservation of the right-of-way or for easements to the City for trail purposes. 9. The subdivision is not located in the area of an officially designated trail. The applicant is proposing a soft surface trail through its tree retention tract in order to connect 160th Ave SE to 161st Ave SE. RMC 4-7-130(C): A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication shall be prepared in conformance with the following provisions: 1. Land Unsuitable for Subdivision: Land which is found to be unsuitable for subdivision includes land with features likely to be harmful to the safety and general health of the future residents (such as lands adversely affected by flooding, steep slopes, or rock formations). Land which the Department or the Hearing Examiner considers inappropriate for subdivision shall not be subdivided unless adequate safeguards are provided against these adverse conditions. a. Flooding/Inundation: If any portion of the land within the boundary of a preliminary plat is subject to flooding or inundation, that portion of the subdivision must have the approval of the State according to chapter 86.16 RCW before the Department and the Hearing Examiner shall consider such subdivision. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 9 b. Steep Slopes: A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication which would result in the creation of a lot or lots that primarily have slopes forty percent (40%) or greater as measured per RMC 4-3- 050J1a, without adequate area at lesser slopes upon which development may occur, shall not be approved. … 3. Land Clearing and Tree Retention: Shall comply with RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations. 4. Streams: a. Preservation: Every reasonable effort shall be made to preserve existing streams, bodies of water, and wetland areas. b. Method: If a stream passes through any of the subject property, a plan shall be presented which indicates how the stream will be preserved. The methodologies used should include an overflow area, and an attempt to minimize the disturbance of the natural channel and stream bed. c. Culverting: The piping or tunneling of water shall be discouraged and allowed only when going under streets. d. Clean Water: Every effort shall be made to keep all streams and bodies of water clear of debris and pollutants. 10. The criterion is met. The land is suitable for subdivision as the stormwater design assures that it will not contribute to flooding and that water quality will not be adversely affected. Development will not encroach into critical areas or adversely affect streams or any bodies of water as there are no critical areas, streams or other bodies of water on site. No piping or tunneling of streams is proposed. Trees will be retained as required by RMC 4-4-130 as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. RMC 4-7-140: Approval of all subdivisions located in either single family residential or multi- family residential zones as defined in the Zoning Code shall be contingent upon the subdivider’s dedication of land or providing fees in lieu of dedication to the City, all as necessary to mitigate the adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreation service levels. The requirements and procedures for this mitigation shall be per the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Resolution. 11. City ordinances require the payment of park impact fees prior to building permit issuance. RMC 4-7-150(A): The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing streets unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. Prior to approving a street system that does not extend or connect, the Reviewing Official shall find that such exception shall meet the requirements of subsection E3 of this Section. The roadway classifications shall be as defined and designated by the Department. 12. The proposal connects to all adjoining existing streets. 160th Ave SE is not extended to the southern property line in anticipation of any future extension of that street, because the property to the south has already been platted as discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 16. RMC 4-7-150(B): All proposed street names shall be approved by the City. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 10 13. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-150(C): Streets intersecting with existing or proposed public highways, major or secondary arterials shall be held to a minimum. 14. The proposal does not intersect with an arterial or public highway. RMC 4-7-150(D): The alignment of all streets shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved. Street alignment offsets of less than one hundred twenty five feet (125') are not desirable, but may be approved by the Department upon a showing of need but only after provision of all necessary safety measures. 15. As determined in Finding of Fact 3, the Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the adequacy of streets, which includes compliance with applicable street standards except for two standards that need approval of a street standard modification. Approval of these modifications is made a condition of approval. RMC 4-7-150(E): 1. Grid: A grid street pattern shall be used to connect existing and new development and shall be the predominant street pattern in any subdivision permitted by this Section. 2. Linkages: Linkages, including streets, sidewalks, pedestrian or bike paths, shall be provided within and between neighborhoods when they can create a continuous and interconnected network of roads and pathways. Implementation of this requirement shall comply with Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Objective T-A and Policies T-9 through T-16 and Community Design Element, Objective CD-M and Policies CD-50 and CD-60. 3. Exceptions: a. The grid pattern may be adjusted to a “flexible grid” by reducing the number of linkages or the alignment between roads, where the following factors are present on site: i. Infeasible due to topographical/environmental constraints; and/or ii. Substantial improvements are existing. 4. Connections: Prior to adoption of a complete grid street plan, reasonable connections that link existing portions of the grid system shall be made. At a minimum, stub streets shall be required within subdivisions to allow future connectivity. 5. Alley Access: Alley access is the preferred street pattern except for properties in the Residential Low Density land use designation. The Residential Low Density land use designation includes the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 11 RC, R-1, and R-4 zones. Prior to approval of a plat without alley access, the Reviewing Official shall evaluate an alley layout and determine that the use of alley(s) is not feasible… 6. Alternative Configurations: Offset or loop roads are the preferred alternative configurations. 7. Cul-de-Sac Streets: Cul-de-sac streets may only be permitted by the Reviewing Official where due to demonstrable physical constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. 16. The proposal connects to all adjoining through streets. The property is located in the RLD designation so alley access is not encouraged. There is insufficient space for offset or loop roads. A cul-de-sac is necessary because there is no present or future road connection available between 160 and 161st in the southern portion of the plat. An extension of 160th Ave SE to the southern property line would normally be required to maintain a grid pattern, but that is not feasible for this project. The  original  plan  did  include  this  extension.    However,   the  existing  subdivision  abutting  the  subject  property  to  the  south  was  constructed  in  the  1980’s   and   is   therefore   not   likely   to   be   redeveloped   in   the   near   future.     There   is   however,   property   immediately  to  the  southwest  which  has  potential  to  redevelop.  As  a  result,    staff’s  preliminary   comments    recommended  160th  Ave  SE  be  realigned  in  manner  that  would  allow  for  the  extension   of  160th  Ave  SE  to  SE  148th  St  and  not  require  dedications  from  the  existing  subdivision  abutting  the   property   to   the   south.     The   revised   plat   plan,   submitted   by   the   applicant  includes   a   taper/realignment  of  160th  Ave  SE  to  eliminate  the  need  for  the  dedications  from  the  properties   abutting  to  the  south  (Exhibit  15).    A  street  modification  is  needed  in  order  to  modify  the  street   cross-­‐section  south  of  proposed  Road  ‘A’  to  achieve  the  realignment.    Therefore  the  conditions  of   approval  require  a  street  modification  be  submitted  to,  and  approved  by,  the  Current  Planning   Project  Manager  prior  to  engineering  permit  approval  for  a  modification  of  the  160th  Ave  SE  street   cross  section,  south  of  Road  ‘A’,  in  order  to  realign  the  extension  of  160th  Ave  SE  to  the  west.    Staff   would  be  supportive  of  such  a  request  to  the  extent  a  pedestrian  connection  is  provided  from  160th   Ave  SE  to  161st  Ave  SE  along  the  southern  portion  boundary  of  the  site  as  well  as  the  revised  design   being  a  more  desirable  alignment  to  the  City.       RMC 4-7-150(F): All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee. 17. As proposed and as shall be required during engineering review. RMC 4-7-150(G): Streets that may be extended in the event of future adjacent platting shall be required to be dedicated to the plat boundary line. Extensions of greater depth than an average lot shall be improved with temporary turnarounds. Dedication of a full-width boundary street shall be required in certain instances to facilitate future development. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 12 18. As determined in Conclusion of Law No. 16, 160th Ave SE is not a street that can be construed as subject to potential future extension due to the development of the plat to the south. There are no other future street extensions available for the proposal. RMC 4-7-170(A): Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. 19. As depicted in Ex. 15, the side lines are in conformance with the requirement quoted above. RMC 4-7-170(B): Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement street per the requirements of the street standards. 20. As previously determined, each lot has access to a public street. RMC 4-7-170(C): The size, shape, and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated. Further subdivision of lots within a plat approved through the provisions of this Chapter must be consistent with the then-current applicable maximum density requirement as measured within the plat as a whole. 21. As previously determined, the proposed lots comply with the zoning standards of the R-4 zone, which includes area, width and density. RMC 4-7-170(D): Width between side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the side lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent (80%) of the required lot width except in the cases of (1) pipestem lots, which shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20') and (2) lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). 22. As shown in Ex. 15, the requirement is satisfied. RMC 4-7-170(E): All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of fifteen feet (15'). 23. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-190(A): Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees, watercourses, and similar community assets. Such natural features should be preserved, thereby adding attractiveness and value to the property. 24. There are no critical areas or any other significant natural features at the project site. RMC 4-7-200(A): Unless septic tanks are specifically approved by the Public Works Department and the King County Health Department, sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 13 eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 25. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-200(B): An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. The drainage system shall include detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include detention capacity for future development of the lots. Water quality features shall also be designed to provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat. 26. The proposal provides for adequate drainage that is in conformance with applicable City drainage standards as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. The City’s stormwater standards, which are incorporated into the technical information report and will be further implemented during civil plan review, ensure compliance with all of the standards in the criterion quoted above. RMC 4-7-200(C): The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department requirements. 27. Compliance will be assured during civil plan review prior to final plat approval. RMC 4-7-200(D): All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. 28. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-200(E): Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. 29. As conditioned. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 14 RMC 4-7-210: A. MONUMENTS: Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling corner of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department. All surveys shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. B. SURVEY: All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards. C. STREET SIGNS: The subdivider shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision. 30. As conditioned. DECISION The proposed preliminary plat is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with mitigation measures issued as part of the Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance for the proposal. 2. All proposed street names shall be approved by the City. 3. All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of fifteen feet (15'). 4. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 5. All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service connections, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department of Public Works. 6. Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line by Applicant as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The applicant shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 15 provide maps and specifications to the applicant and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. 7. The applicant shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision prior to final plat approval. 8. All structures proposed for removal shall be demolished and all inspections complete prior to Final Plat approval. 9. The applicant shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable deed restriction on the property title of the tree protection tract. Such deed restriction shall prohibit development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract except for the purposes of installing Administrator approved amenities or habitat enhancement activities, as part of an enhancement project, which has received prior written approval from the City. A covenant shall be placed on the tract restricting its separate sale and shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the recording of the Final Plat. 10. The applicant shall place permanent fencing on the perimeter of the tree protection tract. This shall be accomplished by installing a wood, split-rail fence with applicable signage. The Administrator may approve pedestrian-sized openings for the purpose of facilitating passive recreation within the tract for the benefit of the community. The Administrator may authorize alternate styles and/or materials for the required fencing. The proposed fencing shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 11. A street modification shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval for a modification of the 160th Ave SE street cross section, south of Road ‘A’, in order to realign the extension of 160th Ave SE to the west. 12. A street modification shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to engineering permit approval, for a modification to reduce the required right-of-way width of Road ‘A’ from 53 feet to 47 feet. 13. The applicant shall be required to record a public access easement across the proposed soft surface trail extended from the termination of 160thAve SE sidewalk, through the proposed Tree Retention Tract (Tract ‘C’), to 161st Ave SE. The easement shall be recorded prior to, or concurrent with, the recording of the Final Plat. 14. A covenant shall be recorded on the face of the plat restricting vehicular access for proposed Lots 17-20 to the proposed public alley/unnamed road and proposed Lots 1-8, 21-27 from Road ‘B’. Additionally, proposed Lots 17-20’s front yards and front façade/elevations shall be oriented to the north (SE 144th St). 15. The applicant shall be required to create a homeowners’ association and maintenance agreement(s) for the shared utilities, stormwater facilities, and maintenance and responsibilities for all shared improvements of this development. A draft of the document(s) shall be submitted to Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the recording of the final plat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT - 16 DATED this 6th day of April, 2015. City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the hearing examiner’s decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner’s decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13) and RMC 4-8-100(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office, Renton City Hall – 7th floor, (425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.