Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA77-001
s.4,\' z i. y n• R,—I v, 11 z ',!.. i• II• ` II'4. .ICI I I •. 6 I I'Ir e , i . i . i '4 S , 1..\,. . . tp 1 I .,,.. III`,.I. ..i 1 ' ., '' '1d,' I` , '-•, i,•/ , I^ 0 1s I. ,)III. II t, ` 1 IT'*•'!i ,`' r • 1• • I,• Y d 1. 77,..772.77 1 I ,II Ii • • i 1 r, wj' • I•. i 1, I .I t ;'tI. • : I ..: N. y` 5 • '4.( J, 1 r. 1"‘ '':. • -:'—'.. w 't IFF3 a e L11 r " D1NI ' 4s • ) •- r--j 1 1 1. R oa . a xl a 1 Vl it,.,„........ d-, I 1 1, I.i.a 1 1 n t ' ri. l Z 2 _ z • ::5. ., s , Tt i .[[is c'•• i 4 t n r"-el: V:5-- 1/ 73 .,. '3.: ., ., ,... ,,,t_ ,.., 4,,,. _____„ ,. 4,....i...,.R. tt. f L• r T itig,,L r. r/. 0 '-1 •lt, Z f G Om®ilt •• 0 .::,.. i.39 14 s ..T• r 'a> e' n, W a S .j.• a nn'}.., ,... ! ip.... f-lia :. a ..I I t lc r , • z - _ t - .. P ' r/ ® '•3:II ,",o ,.1'. 41' 1,J`'a/11 r t I,•-Y ! 4 . 6 .z N. 14TM per,t _ Y_9 Q • i..— ,, . .7 a - V/ © ' F,I T• - .. ^W o l 1•d® B •I z \ !jut,'212- E .77_. S z ra. j , e..•- 'ale ,.~.. I X., `r„-_ r„" a•.,, t .' 4 ,.d65 • /, eSGi i Lf G•ir• • 1 4 e Ji 37 A ... d' , l• > •, a• 1 -11la iG 1`T' t, 35 . t•ra 4 / N '' h ,'. ; x'14.---' l'' I'1.11 .I 1 III z I jui..71.,,it,r,i IJ '•' . °1` 1l.1-r111•I'1'i • t 14Vt.:,+ , 3z °" I 1 :.; •11: L11•4.1..I''H [_W:Wi,i_:,...,:1I I''1 I*II d ' 11 p I, 1'f:I.,f, ,.1_. r, , L I i,• w 22 • 3-• 0 .':..•..•I 3 Gs IMP i I I s. , r • •e I ate'-- ,„•,, 701 N! N , h,, l• N:7rw rg Z-_ i Lr7... 1 LA,2y ti 1S \..°, r 0 I - ^ r..:l.. 1 .. I7 /• 1.;•9 'Z I • 2 1 ` 7n1' , IP% i I I i APPL I CANT W(LL//\ L , /A c.. LA L5 ii-Fi L N JR, TOTAL AREA I Di S16- S9—r7,' PRINCIPAL ACCESSX. Sk..),Ni =T 1 (_,'(D. E XI S-1 I NG ZONING 4—2 EXISTING USE 7)`v1/49 Q —5)N,(_-l- -- F-F<N\1 >` y- RI'DI=NL PROPOSED USE Rp,S+RuaAN.—r 1 P, ii L. • v•S {r,4F5 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN ,Lf,yj . -N•S14 1`r'\ ) T— i\-, N 1 COMMENTS l J t U OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY o RENTON,WASHINGTON POST OFFICE BOX 626 100 2nd AVENUE BUILDING m RENTON.WASHINGTON 98055 255-8678 6,Q` LAWRENCE J.WARREN, CITY ATTORNEY DANIEL KELLOGG, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY ogT4-® SEP1 ® December 13, 1977 Mayor Charles J. DelaurentiQEC e: Members of Renton City Council CITRentonMunicipalBuilding Renton, Washington 98055 gj'(29' 'FN°TsOptieN Re: Leslie Adams , et ux vs City of Ren Dear Mayor and Members of Council : This is to advise you that the undersigned appeared in. Superior Court on December 8, 1977 to argue the Writ of Certiorari on the McLaughlin Rezone.After reviewing the trial briefs and listening to arguments of counsel and reviewing the record, the Judge decided that the City' s actions were not arbitrary and capricious and therefore dismissed the Writ . If you have any questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours , Lawrence J{ Warren LJW:bjm CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO.3130 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON FROM J RESIDENCE DISTRICT (R-2) TO BUSINESS DISTRICT B-1) WHEREAS under Chapter 7, Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 known as the "Code of General Ordinances of 0 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 District (R-2) ; and WHEREAS a proper petition for change of zone classification of said property has been filed with the Planning Department on or about November 19, 1976 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 January 31, 1977, which said hearing was continued for additional testimony on February 22, 1977, and WHEREAS an appeal was, duly filed by an aggrieved party with the City Council on or about March 7, 1977, and WHEREAS the City Council fixed and established April 4, 1977 as the date for review of the Hearing Examiner's decision and recommendations, and WHEREAS 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 Business District (B-1) as hereinbelow specified; 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- That portion of the southeast 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of said Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 E. , W.M. , described as follows: beginniig at a point on the east line of said subdivision 326.30' northerly from the southeast corner thereof; thence continuing northerly along said easterly line a distance of 163.60' to a point 489.90' northerly of said southeast corner; thence north 88°53'O8" west to the easterly margin of Puget .Sound Power and Light Company's transmission line right-of-way; thence satherly along said easterly margin to a point bearing north 88°53'08" west from the point of beginning; thence south 88°53'08" east to the point of beginning. LIN Said property located approximately 300' north of North 12th Street, along the easterly edge of the existing powerline easement and approximately 100 G feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard) Si, AND FURTHER SUBJECT to the following conditions which are covenants running with the land: 1. The height of any and all structures located on the above described property shall not exceed 15 feet from the presently existing grade on Sunset Boulevard, fronting subject property. 2. Petitioner-Owner to install and maintain site- obscuring 5 foot fence (minimum height) on top of the rockery to be located along the north, south and east property lines of subject property. 3. To install and maintain a 5 foot planting strip adjacent to Sunset Boulevard 4. To file an appropriate storm water run-off plan with the Public Works Department subject to the approval and acceptance thereof by said Department. 5. Maintain, wherever physically possible the existing evergreen trees located on the eastern property line so that same will constitute a natural buffer between the proposed commercial development and adjacent residential property. 6. To install and maintain illumination in such manner as to minimize the glare from subject property to adjacent properties located on Monroe Avenue N.E. 7. Coordinate with the Planning Department the design and color of thebuilding so as not to visually detract from adjacent residences. 8. Install and maintain adequate landscaping on the eastern property line adjacent to the screening fence to minimize visual impact of the proposed development on subject property. 2- SECTION II: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five (5) days after its 'publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 25th day of Apriil;, Delores A. Mead, CIt ;'Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 25th day of Ap**T•,, 19.77. . ., 153 ra' • u1.4.e4i.At---' • • L Charle J. Delaurenti, Mayor ' Approved as to form: A G rard M. Shellan, City Attorney • Date of Publication: 4-29-77 3_ s,,...,frj14)4141/6- i .06 „0"(.117e-r,Ok,i. lk,.,744CYllG ei2,3 s,••,A GSt .65),.,, •/?•,,,&Ob.,' , 0(ij::• • •ye"'::,,,i. -.VIVz;`,./,. 1•••60,i 2) 11 -.-----• 6-'."7//7 .1,1/7 •ozha Poiit ,,o,..0.:•.'•;oor abeg tii P- " 36 N. A.," '.?-a %No',,,...•' e anco"")°,44-84.v.:-,.,at, tf..--.e.g. osi,• 'so of-•i Affidavit of Publication u.....r_ 06,; Y„, .rthi..‘1cmle,,, Y.., yro.,,...•,.),,.,,,,.,,, i,,:•• niataly-1,0N 000 / g, INLE.Sunset Bitievu e....P.47.7,„6:"'-'1 STATE OF WASHINGTON i•-,A10 FURTHER SUBJECTiti COUNTY OF KING SS. 0.4fie ,folloWing.,c.onditiops'?, It WhiCh.'•are.-'dovenanta rup-ji ning,with the land: if:... 1.Th'e height of any,andl77----..'' ;-:...:•••,•'. : •,..-"..•,• ...":"',,%•:', .all.structures located,Bet ty...titorri.s being first duly sworn on CITY•O • •. ' , . ;on ,the 'above 'de-) RENTON,WASHINGTON . scribed,property shall? ORCINANCE'NO:,,B130 ' ; '' not,•exceed ..15 -feeiloath,deposes and says that..S 11 e...is the ch.i.e.f:..cl ark of '' ,AN, ORDINANCE..OF ,...." fronfthe.pre§ently.:ekI THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4) (. THE CITYOFRENTON, . . . isting grader on Sunset times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and •W A S'171 I-N,G T 0"N ,. . 'Boulevard', frontingii has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred :,CHANGING.THE•ZON- ; ': .subjegt,property.', to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- ING, CLASSIFICATION , . 2. Petitioner-Owner to in:•,d paper published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington, OF CERTAIN PROPER'. ,. - , stall and maintain site-,`; and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained . TIES WITHIN.THE'CITY. : ' obscuring foot fenCe:';at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper,That the Renton ' OF'RENTON,FROg RE- ' - .; top Of,the rOCkery trilik minimum' height) on T: '17 .Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the 'SIDENCE DISTRIC ( Superior Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, 2)'TO.:BUSINESS ,DIS " " located along' th.iiii TRiCT(6$4):,-.,,':: " .- ''.• northi,spUth,and,east) Washington That the annexed is a Ord er. 3130 WHEREAS'under ohapt- ' ,property lines; of sub717;Title•IV(Buildingnegu- •:. ject property. '':'..,;,,•.:., qlations) of Ordinance. No. . .3.Toinstall and meintaih? 1682:knoWnAs the-Codeof. -. ,.• . a 5,foot.,planting:striP1GeneralOrdinance8;.of.the 'adjaCent to- Siinse,t1 City of Renton'!'; a's - ' .BOuleyard. as it was published in regular issues(and .'amended,and the maps and ," 4.To file an appropriate'i not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period retiorteadoptedArCconjuric- : •, storm; 'water rurf,eff.1 tion•therewith;the,property : plan 'with' the .P.ublic..:, hereinbelow...described.has,... . ,'' Works', DepartMent; one heretofore been zoned as..: . ..subject to the approval 1 Residence;'' t.., (13;2); --.. '"encriceePtance there-.1ofconsecutiveissues,commencing on the biatriC and,. • - ' , . . 'Of-by:Said Department,% 29th Apri 1 77 and WHEREAS,a,proper.pet-' : ".-5. Maintain, whereverdayof19endingthe ,ition':Jor..'change,,oll,zone '..,'.. ": physically,Possiblethe i• clasaIficatiOn of.saicfproper-: ' - 'existing evergreen ty ,has• been,,filed.with the ',: - ' trees located on. the day of 19 both dates Planning Department'on or '. eastern• property. line I,, about,:November'19;0.1976', '•' ' so..that'sanie will coninclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- 1 scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee ;which petition'was duly,re- , . stitute a natural buffer ferred to.the Hearing.Exa-.,, .. ,'between the,proposed'! 86.ni miner 'for investigation; ,' ,. commercials'zievelop-' charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ W hich :study:endHpublic,'hearing,. ,.' mentand adjaCent re-has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the , and a',publio:hearingihaving • sidential property. .,, first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent ,been held"thereon on or, : , 6.'To Installand'rnaintain I insertion. • 1 about:January -Bli, ,1977,, , ' , 'illumination. In.such Which,said:hearingwas.con- , ' manner as to minimize i xs,..3.-„'.2 i ..tinued for„additional' tes- . the:glare.from'subject?le.-. ....... `-` '--- :,.timony.",pp ,F..ebruaiy. '22,'•'•; • property to adjacent, 1977,and: -'", ., properties located on Clerk WHEREAS: -an appeal. ,• 'Monroe Avenue-Isi:E." 'iwas, 'duly, filed 'by an,..ag7 .' '7. Coordinate' with the, 1riOed,party with the•City ; . '.,"Planning:-.Department9thCounci(on orabout March.7,: ' "•• the design and ofcolorSubscribedandsworntobeforemethisdayof : 1977;and '.. . • ' • • the building,so as.not' WHE9EAS ;the''City. ', to vi§ually detractirom IApri11977copricit-',.fixed,ancf Pstati.-. ' adjacent'residences:: 1 liShedApril•4,1;1.977 As-the , .0. 8'.'Install. and. maintain'ga- Gs datkfor reviel,wof tha.Hear- ',. • adequate. landscaping mg Examiners,decisionend.. .. , .'Onithe eaatern, roper- Notary Public n and for the State of W ington, ,recornmendritions,;•and.'?'' '..• ' 'ty line:adjacent'to the., residing at Kent, County. • 1 , WHEREAS .the City- .- screening fence 'to;: Council''having duly,corisi- •,-: -. •minimize visualimpaetideredall: matters,'relevant.," , .of,the. proposed' de-;.1 thereto',.and all parties hay- , .:' .velopment on subject iPassedbytheLegislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June l'iirig.been.,heardeppearing.in'. '' prOplarty,.•, - " .. . I9th, 1955. OsuppOrt.thereof.orinoppoel; . SECTION'II:'This Ora-:. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, !flan thereto,.NOW'THERE ,'nence, 'shall be ,effectIVelFOREuponitspassage, approval,adopted by the newspapers of the State. i• . THE CITY:COUNCIL,OF ,and five„.(5),days after Its,.! THE,'CITY,.,OF RENTON,. .•publioatidp.- -: WASHINGTON, 'DO OR.- ' PASSED BY THE CITY DAIN.AS FOLLOWS:." ,. . COUNCIL this 25th day of' i. SECTION•l:'The,1011ow- -1,April, 1977: ingtleacribedpioperty In the , -'-, .', Delores'A.'Mead': V.P.C.Form No.87 Olty- of" Renton :Is hereby . . .City Clerkrezonedto,Suainess'District•: .. APPROVED ,BY THE' P-1.)'..as .it e rein bel.o.w• ,MAYOR this 25th j day,Of i' specified;,'the-:Planning.01-° April,'*E97,7: l rector is•hereby.authorized '.•" -Charles J. Delaurenti land directed to'change-the ..". •' ,'.' . . , ••' Mayor:. maps.,'of, •the,.ZohIngi3Ord17 'Approved,, s:to'fOrm: ' ....,, 1 nance, as amended;.to...evk Gerard M, Stiellan'. i dence.said rezoning,to-wit: City Attorney ' - .' •;That portion of the south- ' Published in,The Renton.• s; past 14 of theeoutheast• •Record-Chronlcle.April' 29,',. W of.the southwest 1/4 of .1977. R4327 ni- : . I • , Renton City Council 4/11./77 - Page 5 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS (Cont'd) First Reading The Ways and Means Committee recommended first reading of an ordi- McLaughlin Rezone nance changing the zoning classification of property from Residence R-001-77 District (R-2) to Business District (B-1 ) , known as the McLaughlin Rezone. After reading, it was MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, TO REFER BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2103 The Ways and Means Committee recommended adoption of a Resolution L. I.D. 304 setting a hearing date of May 9, 1977 on L. I.D. 304, Sanitary Aloha Ranch Sewers in the Aloha Ranch Addition. Following reading, it was Sewers- Public MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY BRUCE, THE RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED AS Hearing 5/9/77 READ. MOTION CARRIED. Renton Waterfront Councilman Stredicke inquired on the status of Environmental Impact Restaurant Statement on the Renton Waterfront Restaurant and was informed by Planning Director Ericksen that it had been filed with the city and the"State Department of Ecology, but nothing had come back. Parking Problems Councilman Stredicke inquired on the problem of parking in the area of 3904 N.E. llth Court, numerous vehicles parked in such a way to prevent residents from entrance and egress to their drive- ways. Mayor Delaurenti said he would have a report on it next week. Councilman Stredicke said he had received a letter from Mrs. Fisher, 200 .Garden Ave. N. relative to parking and wondered if the Administration had done anything about it. Mayor Delaurenti advised that Bryant Motors had been contacted and he had talked to Mrs. Fisher and that violators would be ticketed.. Adjournment MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :15 P.M. Maxine E. Motor, Deputy City Clerk jt V EX;P111 22 . CITY OF RENTON WARRANT DISTRIBUTION 4/11/77 FUND - • TOTAL WARRANTS MACHINE VOIDS: NO.# 13313 - #I33I6 S CURRENT FUND 67,, 366t23 PARKS AND' REC.REATION FUND S11, 356407 ARTERIAL STREET FUND 759t27 STREET FUND 9, 593424 LIBRARY FUND 2, 937177 CETA FUND 2, 054146 ANT!RECESSION FUND 1, 228.01 WATERWORKS UTILITIY FUND A674, 375t98 AIRPORT FUND 67,534487 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 12•436115 FIREMEN PENSION 2, 468480 TOTAL OF ALL WARRANTS 192, 113105 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBERS OF THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE OF THE ' RENTON CITY COUNCIL, NAVINO RECEIVED DEPARTMENTAL CERTIFICATION THAT J MERCHANDISE AND/OR SERVICES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED .OR RENDERED, DO HEREBY APPROVE FOR PAYMENT VOUCHERS NO, 13317 THROUGH NO. 13479 IN THE AMOUNT OF S192, 113.85 T S 11TO DAY OF APRIL 19774 COMMITTEE CHAIRr1AN ..'•`- MEMBER w 4r ! L . "1 Lj4'/ MEMBER • r - • • ./ • w .. - * ., February 28, 1977 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON RECONSIDERATION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: William L. McLaughlin FILE NO. R-001-77 LOCATION: PropeAWR ocated approximately 300 feet north of Norte th Street, along the easterly edge of the existing power line easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Reconsideration by the Hearing Examiner of the McLaughlin request for rezone from R-2 to B-l. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Recommend denial of rezone. RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner: Recommend approval with additional conditions . PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received REPORT: by the Examiner on January 24 , 1977. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing letters from adjacent property owners , 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 February 22 , 1977, at 9 :00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. The Hearing Examiner noted that additional information was received t1at was not available at the time of the original hearing on the McLaughlin rezone request. Since this information may have a bearing on the final report, this hearing was scheduled for reconsideration. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. Michael Smith, Planning Department, gave a brief summary of the Planning Department staff report presented at the previous hearinglon January 31, 1977. The Examiner asked the applicant, Mr. William L. McLaughlin, if, he wished to present additional information for reconsideration. The applicant indicated he had no additional information to present at this time. The Examiner reported receiving six letters of opposition within the appeal period set by ordinance. The following letters ”re read and entered into the record at this time: Exhibit #4: Letter from Mr. William H. Schreven, dated February 12 , 1977 . Exhibit #5: Letter from Mr. Eugene R. Methven, dated February 12, 1977 . Exhibit #6 : Letter from Bernard W. and Mary E. Spunaugle, dated February 12 , 1977 . Exhibit #7: Letter from The Leslie E. Adams Family, dated February 12 , 1977. R-001-77 Page Two Reconsideration ' Exhibit #8 : Letter from Mr. & Mrs . George G. Johnson, Mr. Mrs . Dennis Vadney, and Mr. & Mrs . Chester P. Baze, dated February 12 , 1977 . Exhibit #9 : Letter from the Dennis G. Ossenkop Family, dated February 12 , 1977 . The Examiner requested comments from participants' expressing opposition to the Examiner's report, dated February 7, 1977. Speaking in opposition were: Mr . Eugene R. Methven 1316 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, Washington 98055 Mrs . George Johnson 1300 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. Wesley Adams 1209 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. Dennis Vadney 1210 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton,, Washington 98055 Mrs . Kathy Ossenkop 3316 N.E. 12th Street Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. Dennis Ossenkop 3316 N.E. 12th Street Renton, Washington 98055 Among objections to the proposed rezone were factors of obstruction of views by parking lot lighting, destruction of trees, noise level increase, exhaust fume increase because of traffic, color of proposed buildings , elevation of slope cut, commercial development encroaching on residential areas , building height, ingress and egress from businesses , type of fencing in regards to noise obstruction, possible down-zoning to GS-1 zone, and compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Regarding the subject of potential lighting, the applicant indicated that the lighting on the proposed development would be located in the front of the parking area which would be shaded from residential areas. He also reported that no lighting or signing would be located on top of the structure . In response to complaints from residents regarding parking lot lighting from Shuck's Auto Parts store, which was recently completed and located adjacent to the proposed building site, the Examiner stated that he would report the problem to the Public Works Department for investigation. Mr. McLaughlin requested permission to illustrate the proposed building and site on the chalkboard and explained that the slope cut would not exceed 15 feet and the building height would be restricted to 15 feet and would not obstruct residential views . He also reported that all ingress and egress would be channeled from Sunset Boulevard. The applicant indicated that the alternative to the proposed building on the rezoned property would be to construct a duplex or townhouse within existing zoning,, which allows a height limit of 35 feet. He felt this proposal would obstruct views and create more problems for adjacent residents than the subject request. He also indicated a willingness to provide fencing which would be designed to obstruct noise and exhaust fumes . R-001-77 Page Three Reconsideration In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding trees located on the proposed site, Mr. McLaughlin indicated that some trees would be required to be removed, but the trees located above the slope cut on property owned by Mr. Brown would remain. Mrs . Johnson stated that the zoning of the property had notchanged since the applicant .had purchased it. The applicant •responded that a structure had existed on the property at the time of purchase, but had been removed at the request of the city because of its age and condition. The applicant had intended to rehabilitate the structure. The Examiner asked for concluding comments from Mr. Smith, Planning Department . Mr. Smith indicated that the staff report, as originally submitted, remains as the department recommendation. However, if the rezone were granted, he would recommend additional conditions to be met which include: adequate setbacks of a minimum of 10 feet from the property line; a landscaped buffer of 10 feet on top of the retaining wall with an architecturally designed fence which would be compatible with the adjacent area and would screen noise; design control on the building in relation to color; compliance with Mining, Grading and Excavation Ordinance; controlled lighting; controlled hours of operation; landscaping; and signing control. The Examiner summarized the hearing by stating that a definite need exists for buffers, setbacks, screening, and landscaping. He felt that the topography proposed for the property and height limitation of 15 feet would create a buffer between the R-2 and B-1 zones. The R-2 zone previously allowed clinics and offices , but now the ordinance precludes these uses and allows only townhouses and duplexes . The reconsideration hearing on Item #R-001-77 was concluded at 10 :20 a.m. by the Examiner. FINDINGS , CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS : Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS : 1 . The application was reconsidered on February 22, 1977. In attendance were residents residing on Monroe Avenue N.E. between Sunset Boulevard N.E. and N.E. 12th Street and the applicant. 2. The major issues discussed by the adjacent residents expressing their concern were as follows: a. Glare from lights of existing and future businesses . b . Increase in density. c. Slope cut and its impact on trees and vegetation. d. Destruction of trees. e. Increase in noise level. f. Increase in exhaust fumes and its effect on residents . g. Consideration of potential down-zone. h. Extension of commercial zoning to Monroe Avenue N.E. i . Views and their retention. j . Establishment of cocktail lounge within the proposed restaurant and the potential noise of traffic and patrons at late hours . R-001-77 Page Four Reconsideration 3. Mr. McLaughlin, the applicant for the rezone, noted the following concerns : a . A former commercial building existed on the site and the city requested it to be removed due to the age of the structure. b : ' Ha emphasized that the cut of the bank will ,be limited to a . 15 foot height limit from the existing grade on Sunset Boulevard. c. The alternative to the commercial development would be to construct duplexes which can be built to a height of 35 feet. He stated that the existing height limit of the commercial building is 15 feet. d. The ingress and egress will be from Sunset Boulevard and the traffic flow generated by the patrons should not affect the adjacent property owners any more than existing traffic on Sunset Boulevard. e. Lights will not be installed on top of the buildings and parking lights for the parking lots will be shielded so as not to affect adjacent properties . f. He agreed that some trees will be removed. However, he noted that additional trees on the Brown property will remain. 4 . Planning Department commented on the following items : a . Trees would have to be removed. b . If rezone is granted, would like conditions stipulated to include at least a 10-foot setback from the east property line. c. Design control regulations on the building. d. Screening fence on the east property line to go with appropriate landscaping which should serve -as a. noise barrier and be architecturally designed. e. Install a 14 foot landscape strip adjacent to Sunset Boulevard. f. Prohibit roof mounted signs . The Examiner considered the additional comments and information, revisited the property and has come to the following conclusions: CONCLUSIONS : 1. Addressing all the concerns voiced at the hearing would be extremely difficult without an outright prohibition of any construction. 2. It can be assumed that the property owner has certain rights to develop his property. Adjacent property owners and residents in this area also have certain rights to maintain the integrity of their area within the laws and codes of the city. 3. New development should have a minimum disruption on the environment of the area within the zones allowed by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 4 . Major issues noted include glare from lights, increased density, slope cut, destruction of trees , noise level increase, additional exhaust fumes and impairment of views . These issues will apply to development under the existing R-2 zone and development under a proposed commercial zone. R-001-77 Page Six Mr. Dennis Ossenkop Mr. William H. Schreven TRANSMITTED THIS 28th day of February, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Don J. Smith, Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Ordinance No. 3071, Section 4-3015, request for reconsideration or notice of appeal must be filed in writing on or before March 8, 1977. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedures , 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 of the conclusion of the hearing. 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. N R-001-77 Page Five Reconsideration 5 . Construction of a two-story duplex could conceivably extend approximately 25 feet above the existing grade, although ,a 35-foot height limit is allowed by ordinance. A series of duplexes could be built adjacent to the east property line, at one duplex per 7200 square feet. The effect of this construction would severely impair views and would increase the existing density of the property. Trees could be" removed at the option of the' applicant. . The duplex ' would be of 'a 'residential character and would be' compatible to residential uses; however, the impact of the buildings could be significant to adjacent residences. 6 . It can be assumed that the R-2 zoning fronting Monroe Street can be built to R-2 standards to permit duplexes and townhouses . 7. In the Examiner' s opinion, the proposed commercial building built to a height not to exceed 15 feet would minimize the visual impact from the residents abutting Monroe Avenue N.E. The views would be maintained. 8. In the Examiner' s opinion, the proposed slope cut and rock wall , if accompanied by a sight-obscuring, noise-reducing screening fence, together with appropriate landscaping, would provide a visual separation between the adjacent R-2 zone and the contemplated structure. Therefore, the Examiner feels in considering the alternative: for development, it appears that the proposed commercial structure built to a grade level to Sunset Boulevard and constructed to a height not to exceed 15 feet would provide a minimum impairment to the residential character of those uses abutting Monroe Avenue N.E. The topographic relief that would be created as a result of the slope cut would provide a major barrier to prohibit possible commercial extension onto those areas adjacent to Monroe Avenue N.E. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval subject to the following additional conditions: 1. Shield lights to minimize glare from properties located on Monroe Avenue N.E. 2 . Coordinate with the Planning Department the design and color of the building so as not to visually detract from. adjacent residences. 3. Install landscaping on the eastern property line adjacent to the screening fence to minimize visual impact of the proposed development. These conditions are in addition to those imposed at the hearing on January 31, .1977. ORDERED THIS 28th day of February, 1977. Aoee Ma• •t Land Use ng Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 28th day of February, 1t by certified mail to the parties of record:. Mr. Eugene R. Methven Mrs . George Johnson Mr. Wesley Adams Mr. Dennis Vadney Mrs . Kathy .Ossenkop I, 0 4 2abir. laW:sifft2:1,.: Cra's.Var,s 7.7f42..... ittlitaMseak,tss=a,..3.,,,,..: . q'O..1..C.Mr..: , I A-.' 14:•', 4. ,17.;'..-? 0 _ ...,_ -,,,,"—' n ,., t".I F 1,.-: . 311. 1. c.::. .'‘ a•F: ::r: 5!" 1" ' 1".;:i 11" • "-'—.".‘21...:' .•• ;11T .. •• : 1•.:•..•-4'••'..t.is G-It00 ri'';•• .*--\:- ' - .111,:.;1; • ids I: ' .4-. 1 't•;-:-.. , 4:4,41,44,. • • - . %,.. • n, co.: .i 417: 4j44111 TI;1- ' •. i (" 4/ 1•17:i:N... I p1 ss Is- s in-'', . t. 441#7;/!7•••1 NW • J g i setIpm 1, d — ' ; 4,4•,.'.91:7 N.PZe.''' 1- - .' -.itg,--to`i.i.7 t.. • C)&03:1' 4 1, .., a.rn ...j. .. . •,S Vst..,-. 1 '' •" . ..;' ,..,• • F 2•047.4 i \ i ...ail''''71.7wcy:. ,.. MN 'siir : G R-3 .. :, - - 1„1 al i 2 . A A-3 as 13 ,,,.7112 A kt r i t Cii ti 1 4; ....,, ,;t_-1 _____ -; . ft-2 30,,,5i1-11911 _ 1 ., E.r' p,e; .4 • . ' .‘ill—: .-1.: ! lb i-. , -:.11n, • , orQ,... irC:P—.C4altni '..la139411.7141 WI. gisi ORM ":21 Co 1144 .. 4 1411 MOW .13 -1E- -- ••4;319, --b-r,..- pi 5 . Iv._ ipoi . / - ....,Iii: lid 0 il - ..9"' is, / i Lit at.,',..11 iL, e9,4-6-jr,Lrit)is 18 lk ' 4•4",/ -. ,.:11 I/ Ma:_...gcgrr 7. °..F17:joior 1,,.).• .„It .:i s' 4 • ,.., .k. ia c L1C1 - , •,-, j„,...411/ nen ,innimiNAN, :7,a. 0 own ..rinalri ... - J t. . ..,.. e, 4:,:f.,-,iii tti i S 61 ' L.' I":. 02.. • rion_._, ...v,w4o Nit • - ••ri • 4 ,. ..- .... ormil . ......e.y. . al.": 1163n. =ARM:a.•ga, "'••'••' L-_,. Nr N. • ,,,--N4 A, i ,..: ![1,.. vie l'• n. _ids,. t , • . . . 7...."1: 1 • "•••°". ff- it..., 4/ -1 ::::i 2 .1... '•yipigingtimAl \,, j ' .710....L..eiafeatiillilben 1 din. m.-710, . ;22. 4,-; 'IRA c' '' 1 ; FTTI T."' 1° 7 . r'....', ''''..• i'itiF.V.Ilt ., 47 1, r A. tir,-::::11 1...,'..dtd..1,- :. ., ip. .1):1••-rtt ga I .1.1,..::: '• '.•X.T... • f:.,"401, WSW L; 1 .4./' R .,1 ,-- ; 1 . .1141-, ' .. I . ' ... II': .:.:,. . goo. e ::. lipmt4iti,:ea......>• 4) : ,.,: I : ; ....,,, fii. ... It,-FH . . P—I. ..• ., ,i I i R-I 5 • . . p. .4..e. 76ci 4 , • ..,____.,0 i•, .: . 1„0,1•,..1:1_,L411 I 1 dant;; ..-•g &NB.I Z•171444;., . ,.k :* . IStk } ..-1 7 I I 1-:I:11111'7.1 r I 4* " 51"4!.. i r0 i 11 . ii REZONE.: , • . .. . WILLIAM L. 'MC LAUGHLIN, JR..; Appl . R-001-77; rezone from R-2 to B-1; property located on Sunset Boulevard between N.E. 12th Street and Monroe Avenue N.E. APPLICANT WILLIAM L. MC LAUGHLIN, JR. TOTAL AREA ±10,595 sq. ft. ACCESS N.E. Sunset Boulevard PRINCIPAL EX!S R-2ilNGZONING EXISTING USE Two Single Family Residences PROPOSED USE. Restaurant and Retail .BUsinesS COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Low Density Multi-family . COMMENTS RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON a :/4 /. .i4F.Anom EXAMINER I IAN 1 1 1977 PM fifil. 7,8t9s10.11112,11213141516 o i r- 1.44;:i ‘.°4 ,1' • t 13 ' 0 018110 g'%trtbegApcts" tiV: 1 tZ I GS.,I ht FR-7', e ZI467074-2, 'e-tii CI El Bfrfr• 04113anorI0I47 4 weiett s„ ,er)f,„A 0 0 .d D is 3 . 2.4.„,.., coma. 4 i 4iS :.: is E? 13,Apl .-0.11 2 0 Cr5 0'1 hie /51ilsr if 1 I TIE::: • • a ri` j liti: N u kola • 1111.111 • LP*. s.c.als, id gesso/our. ?.. , avt satlieirm cr.er9PODNI/ 0u.B 2 & 9 e Teltarele4 ‘ v aiff. lii ;_vaii21 xis ivy ' ,111 3 1 5 Zsa. „" ViEio• I 0 lal ci 0 ° EP E. 81J 1 13;1 0 0 h°4rDe- ii 'PA in 1 I I It a c3 0 0 C3 CP C:1 Er1 , ayr NE- 11,11 Pi.•I zi 1 1 vi 0 tzi ritr, 0ci L--4mbi.stik. C4 it . [7 I q I a iiiii6 1 t4 a 4.., 3 [2] 1:;73 On ED cn 1=10 il " 4 al ft z h--TE- n .----Pw-----. v A lit..1 Ki.Eviam4 . 1its4lit UM seas sictecr sac Ej cr- LJ .In DO c) RECEIVED Wit MILWOUNI Lc) c) . CITY.OF RENTON Rum*- kie.R-001-Ti LI) HEARING EXAMINER. 0 r- IAN 1 I.1971 r- AM PM 7 " C rke.1,-;-,Ai2I 1324+ Monroe Av N.E. Renton, Washington February 12, 1977 Mr. James L. Magstadt Land Use Hearing Examiner City Hall Renton, Washington Dear Sir: It has come to my attention that a request to rezone to B-1 a property N.E. of Sunset Boulevard presently zoned R-2 has been filed by William L. McLaughlin, Hearing Examiner File R-001-77. As a homeowner at 1324 Monroe Avenue N.E., a few hundred feet east of the property in question, I feel it is my right to disagree with the Hearing Examiner's recom- mendation to rezone. The following are some of my reasons for disagreeing. First, we have more than enough commercial property in the area. Construction is underway now on a full shopping center, directly across Sunset Boulevard from the property in question. About one block south on Sunset is an operating shopping center. North on Sunset about one-half mile is a proposed shopping center site. About one-fourth mile north on Sunset are three or four apartment complexes. In a residential area, enough is enough. If this rezone is granted the adjacent property owners would be within their rights to demand the same consideration. Mr. McLaughlin states that he would construct a more effective buffer than the private residences now afford. His definition of a buffer differs::'from mine. An effective buffer, in my opinion is the existing powerline easement. Any commercial building east of the powerline would negate that buffer. Mr. McLaughlin also states that he talked to neighbors, and there were no adjoining property owners opposed. I feel they were not opposed because they fully intend , if this rezone is granted, to apply for a rezone of their property further en- croaching into the residential area. Finally, I feel any further commercial development in this immediate area will negatively affect property values of homeowners. Re spe(ctfully,, William H. Schreven Copies to: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER EXHIBIT NO. Fr-p 1 1977 AM PM 7i8'9:i0,ltil2 i ,R?E s,4,5r6 ITEMNO. ,P— O`D " 77 2-12-77 To: James L. Magstadt Land Use Hearing Examiner Subject: File 0-001-77 (Mr. W. L. McLaughlin) Dear Sir: I feel that allowing this piece of property to be rezoned from the present R-2 to the proposed use of B-1 will put pressure on the adjoining residences which are now somewhat buffered by the existing comprehensive plan. I have owned my house and property on the east side of Monroe Avenue NorthEast, which is directly looking down on to the area owned by Mr. W. L. McLaughlin for 16 years. If you do grant rezone, despite the existing comprehensive plan and strong feelings of affected residents, I would like to request that the planting. strip around the borders contain no growth that could reach heights which would eventually block the Seattle skyline view of most residences on the east side of Monroe Avenue NorthEast. Sincerely, gene R. Methven 316 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, WA 98055 Copies to: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director RECEIVED qt. ,. CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT NO. HEARING EXAMINER FFBA41977 7 4`17 AM PM 3'sl lei O. 71819iMin1I21l i2s3141506 1400 Monroe Av. N. E. Renton, Washington February 12, 1977 Mr. James L. Magstadt Land Use Hearing Examiner City Hall Renton, Washington Dear Sir: We, as senbr citizens are concerned about further rezoning of Mr. McLaughlin's property from R-2 to B-1. We, at our age, do not feel that we need any more business places closer to our residence. Our home at 1400 Monroe Avenue NorthEast is almost paid for. We have paid taxes for almost twenty years, and have tried to be law-abiding citizens. We feel that the noise and confusion that we have at the present is enough without adding any more. It is our feeling that the McLaughlin rezone would make the buffer zone smaller, and since the reservoir is at the back of our property, our neighborhood would become isolated as single family dwellings, and property values would plunge to an all time low. It would also decrease the quality of living in the area, even further. Yours truly, n Yw.). Bernard W. Spun "gle I *-0.-a-cfr Mary Spuray_gle Copies to: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER EXHIBIT NO. 6Ni p AM FEP 1 A 1977 PM 718,9t14,11e(Zi 1,2 s31415,f EIT 7Z . . Monroe Av. N.E. Renton, Wa. '98055 Mr. James L. Magstadt Office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner City Hall File No. R-001-77 Renton, Washington 98055 W. L. McLaughlin Dear Sir: First, we totally disagree with your recommendation. There are presently eight restaurants, five beauty salons, seven realtors and one TV shop in the immediate Highlands area. We find no reason for any more encroachment by business into this area, or are you planning on following Seattle's footsteps by continuing to move the people further and further out of the city by continuing to rezone residential areas into business or apartment zoning? As for buffer zones, the best one is one that is already there, the power line. If this buffer is crossed once, what is to stop it a second or third time? Nothing: Although Mr. McLaughlin states that a rockery and fence along his property would do the trick. If Mr. McLaughlin does get his way and the business line moves east, then the adjoining owners, Mr. Brown and Mr. Beach would undoubtedly want a change also. Mr. Brown was one of the persons back in 1967 who tried to rezone to R-3, and his daughter now owns the property south of him. Mr. Brown used to own the property tat Mr. McLaughlin now owns, and it seems obvious to us that Mr. McLaughlin has plans for apartment zoning in the future as does Mr. Brown. This would definitely cause a loss in property value to single family dwellings such as ours. As for leaving the trees on the property, Mr. McLaughlin stated he must build east of the power line if anywhere. Because of the small area he has to build on the trees would have to be removed to make room for the buildings. If a sixty foot wide business strip went all the way to 12th Avenue North, then 90% of the trees would be cut down, because they are located in that sixty foot wide strip. Has Mr. McLaughlin considered the problems of traffic coming in and out, not to mention the noise level? And lastly, I would like to know which restaurants actually did contact Mr. McLaughlin about a possible site for their restaurant. Respectfully, Q d 4.1 Theh Lesliwer-6ee E. Adams Family Copies to: jJ Q Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director RECt1WO CITY OF RENTOI HEARING EXAMviINER EXHIBIT NO. 7 A,....1 FF 1977 AM Pit ITEM NO. !e, 4'07- 77 7,8,91IOd ELF 7 February 12, 1977 Mr. James L. Magstadt Office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner City Hall RE: FILE NO. R-001-77 Renton, Washington 98055 W. L. McLaughlin Dear Sir: After reading the Planning Commission Report plus your report and recommendation re the above property rezone, many thoughts and concerns were aroused by residents on Monroe Avenue North East. Our protest of the proposed rezone action from R-2 to B-1 for the McLaughlin property is partly based on the domino effect of spot zoning within the present comprehensive plan, and its future effects on existing single family residences which represent about 150 years of ownership by present owner-residents. We feel this rezone, decreasing the buffer-zone to East of the powerline could ultimately give due cause for the present R-2 zoning of properties adjacent to the McLaughlin land to be revised for even higher density and height of housing. These factors could further add to the noise, confusion, pollution and blight in the area, to say nothing of lowered property values and death of a "greenbelt" neighborhood. The eastern border of most homes on the east side of Monroe Avenue North East is the Renton City Reservoir. Basically, we are an area of older homes, but ownership has remained quite stable. However, our city fathers seem to have deserted this calibre of tax-paying, law-abiding citizens in favor of commer- cial interests which create blight and decay on the citizens of the existing single-family residences. Our taxes have been used to finance and support many city operations and departments, including the planning commission. In this instance, we cannot understand how officials can disregard the agency' s recommendation that is trying to protect citizens, and promote orderly growth within the community. Sincerely yours, u S J// 7 // Mr. and Mrs. Geor , Johnson ",7 1300 Monroe Av.N. Rento a c i.e.., Mr. and Mrs. Dennis Vadney 1210 Monroe Av. N.E. Renton Copies to:ri-p h BgMayorCharlesJ. Delaurenti Mr. an Mrs. ester ze Council President George J. Perry 1216 Monroe Av. N.E. Renton Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT NO. V HEARING EXAMINEREXHIBIT FEP141977 BEM NO. tr® 6 0 /-7 7 AM PM 74809,10,1111211,2,3,415,E i I' 3316 N.E. 12th Street Renton, Washington February 12, 1977 Mr. James -L. Magstadt Office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner City Hall File No. R-001-77 Renton, Washington Mr. W.L. McLaughlin) Dear Sir: We are. writing to oppose the rezoning of this piece of property from R-2 to B-1. We have. been at this residence corner of N.E. 12th 8t3 and Monroe Ave. N.E. )over ,10 years. In that time the traffic on N.E. 12th St. has 'doubled due to rezoning of Honeydew residential area. The traffic noise is so bad we can't hear inside our house with the.• front door open. The hot rod drivers at night wake us from a restful sleep. The only peace we have is in the back half of our home that faces Monroe, Ave. N.E. At present Monroe Ave. N.E. is a quiet, peaceful , . ' residential street. Recently additional noise has bombarded " us from the area of the Shucks business development when dense ground cover and trees were removed. Removal of this natural growth now allows traffic noise from Sunset Highway to permeate our home on the northwest side. If you grant Mr. McLaughlin his request the Sunset highway buffer area will be further distroyed plus additional business traffic on our only quiet street Monroe Ave. N.E. We will then have noise surrounding us from south, west and east. Our backyard will no longer give us a quiet retreat. Another factor you may not consider is business lighting which .,has .already invaded the privacy in one-fourth of our home. If you grant Mr. McLaughlin his request and further businesses develop west and northwest of us, then one-half of our home will be blighted with lights at. night. In summary let us say, at present our only saving grace is the forested buffer area existing east of Sunset Highway; it serves as a noise and lighting barrier. In this time of energy conservation, we don't want to have to sell and move further out from town for the peace of residential living. We ask you to please seriously consider the climate of our residential neighborhood. Sincerely, . y /n ^ X MI1 NO. the Dennis G. Ossenkop Family E N® Al-0 e /- 7 7 Mr. Dennis G. OssenkopTKathleenA. Ossenkop (Mrs. ) Allen Ossenkop age .10 RECEIVEDAliciaOssenkopage9 CITY ®F RNTrJNCopiesto: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti HEARING EXAMINER Council President George J. Perry FEB 1 41977 Councilman Richard M. Stredicke AM PM Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director 7,8,9,f0gli1'2r'' s" ". 4 6 A OF R•,' 4 4 0 THE CITY OF RENTONr• © MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o . L CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER op JAMES L. MAGSTADT , 235 -2 593 4t fo SE PI February 14 , 1977 RE : File No . R-001-77 William L. McLaughlin, Jr. TO: Parties of Record, File No . R-001-77 FROM: James L. Magstadt, Hearing Examiner Since the hearing held on January 31, 1977, regarding the referenced application, the office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner has received a significant amount of correspondence from property owners on Monroe Avenue N.E. transmitting further input relating to the McLaughlin request for rezone. It has also come to our attention that the notice of public hearing was not posted on Monroe Avenue N.E. prior to the hearing. It is the Examiner' s opinion that the residents abutting Monroe Avenue N.E . did not have ample opportunity to present their arguments in an open forum. I am, therefore, setting the date of February 22 , 1977, to re-hear the McLaughlin request for rezone and to receive any additional input that was not previously presented at the hearing on January 31, 1977. The re-hearing will be held at 9 :00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. The Planning Department staff report, Examiner' s decision, plat plans , and copies of all correspondence regarding this matter are on file in the Examiner' s office and can be reviewed prior to the hearing. ce ely, rel 41 //r James L, , agstadt Hearin; xaminer JLM:m'; Fe ,Iary 7, 1977 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: William L. McLaughlin FILE NO. R-001-77 LOCATION: Property located approximately 300 feet north of North 12th Street, along the easterly edge of the existing power line easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E . Sunset Boulevard. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests a rezone from R-2 to B-1 . A conceptual site plan for possible development of the site has also been submitted with the application. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Recommend denial of rezone. RECOMMENDATION: • Hearing Examiner:Recommend approval with conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received REPORT: by the Examiner on January 24 , 1977. 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 January 31, 1977, at 9 : 00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. Mr. McLaughlin stated that he had received and reviewed the staff report. Planning Department staff report was entered into the record by reference. Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director, summarized the Planning Department report at the request of the Examiner and made the following exceptions to the report: Page 3 , Item H. Applicable sections of' the. 'Zoning Code : The Zoning Ordinance, while previously allowing professional offices and medical clinics in an R-2 (duplex) zone by special permit, now precludes office use according to the latest amendment to the ordinance. Page 4 , Item I . Applicable sections of the Comprehensive Plan or other official city documents : Item 4 should be added with reference to the Parking and Loading Ordinance regarding off-street parking and improvements . Mr. Ericksen indicated that there was no additional correspondence from city departments, and entered the following exhibits : Exhibit 1: Zoning Map. Exhibit 2 : Land Use Site Map. The Examiner asked Mr. Ericksen if the amendment deleting professional offices and clinics in an R-2 zone would change the Planning Department final decision. Mr. Ericksen indicated that it would not. R-001-77 Page Two Mr. Ericksen entered the following exhibit: Exhibit 3: Site map submitted by applicant on November 19 , 1976 , designating proposed use. Mr. Ericksen explained that the site map outlines the proposed use of the property including the general layout of parking and commercial facilities . He reported that the applicant has proposed in his application to excavate and lower the elevation of the property and place a rockery on the eastern and northern boundaries of the property. The Examiner requested information regarding the power line right-of- way. Mr. Ericksen noted on the map the property line of the power line right-of-way and indicated that the total dimension of the right- of-way is approximately 100 feet and within approximately 10 feet of the front of the proposed structure. The Examiner questioned the Planning Director regarding the possibility of building upon existing property which is zoned B-1. Mr. Ericksen responded that the triangular section of property on Sunset Boulevard contains 3 ,300 feet and could accommodate a commercial building. The Examiner asked for comments from the applicant. Speaking in response was : Mr. William L. McLaughlin, Jr. 10630 S.E. 176th Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. McLaughlin made the following references to the Planning Department report: Page 4 , Item I-1. Clarified that the area to the east of the property is zoned R-2 rather than R-1 , apartment property. Page 4, Item I-2. Applicant felt that because of the way the property is situated, the Planning Department should be able to make a favorable decision. He reported that the property to the east has a cut of 15 feet, beyond that to the east is a gradual slope of 15 to 20 feet to Monroe Avenue, . and 'to the south the property has already been cut (Shuck property) to a 10 foot height. The applicant indicated that he' is the owner of the property to the north which is zoned R-2 and B-1. Page 4 , Item I-3. The applicant felt that the project would not cause blight to the area due to the fact that most of the residences bordering the property are old and are about to be removed. He also reported that he had contacted the residents in the area and found that there were no objections to this project proposal . Page 4 , Item I-3 . 4 . The applicant disagreed that there would be any impact on property values in the immediate area. In regard to ingress or egress , he reported that the location would be on the western portion of the property which fronts Sunset Boulevard. Page 5 , Item 0-1 . The applicant asked the Planning Director for the date of the latest revision to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Ericksen responded that a portion had been revised in August of 1976 , but the area in question had not been updated since 1967. The applicant indicated that the property had been vacant for some time because of the -Commercial development in the area and has been zoned since 1957. Page 5 , Item 0-2 . The applicant explained that the power line right- of-way crosses the property and leaves a triangular piece with a required 20-foot setback because Sunset Boulevard is a State highway. This leaves 2 ,000 square feet of property for a possible building site including the 100 feet of power line right-of-way. To utilize the property to the best advantage , construction of the building should be done on the back of the property with parking fronting Sunset Boulevard to allow for expedient ingress and egress . R-001-77 Page Three Page 5 , Item 0-3. The applicant felt that allowing the property to remain at its present grade would not create a greater buffer than the proposed building set to a grade level with Sunset Boulevard. He also indicated that he does not anticipate the strip will continue to the east, and reported that he is the owner of the property to the north. Mr. McLaughlin indicated that he has owned the property for five to six years and intends on retaining it. In response to concerns of the Planning Department regarding the type of restaurant contained in the complex, he reported that three family-oriented restauraterrs have contacted him and have shown interest in the site. He indicated that he would agree to restrict restaurant signing to the face of the building only. The applicant stated that he would agree to put an additional five- foot landscape buffer strip on the eastern and northern rockeries and has also agreed to the 15-foot building height, in addition to accomplishing the grading that is shown on the plan. Speaking on the rezone request was : Mr. Clark Teegarden 264 Seneca Place N.W. Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. Teegarden stated that he is a member of the Renton Planning Commission. He indicated that in the Planning Department report, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan calls for low density multiple family zoning in this area. He noted that the Commission does not go against the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and could not therefore grant the rezone. This matter previously came to the attention of the Commission by the staff and the City Attorney's office, and he felt that the incorporation of the Hearing Examiner' s office does not change the basic concept of the Plan. He further stated that the proper procedure would be to change the Land Use Plan before the zoning is granted. He felt flexibility should be allowed, but consideration should be given to whether the property agrees with the Land Use Plan, and in this case, the Planning Department staff agrees that the property does not agree with the Plan. He indicated that the Commission should proceed with hearings on changes in the' Plan. The Planning Director noted that the Planning Commission is studying the Highlands area with reference to review of the Comprehensive Plan. He indicated for the record that a 15-foot rockery would be required on the property lines. Such an excavation would have an impact on adjacent property aside from the drainage and runoff and that a five-foot landscape buffer would not screen adjacent properties . Other impacts would be considered environmental with reference to future impact on properties to the northeast and south. The applicant owns the property to the north extension of the proposed commercial zone which would have to be considered for future zoning. Mr. Ericksen stated that a low-density category is appropriate in this area. The existing R-2 zone does not allow offices and clinics , and a clinic would be incompatible with residential use properties on Monroe Avenue with reference to the Planning Department report and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. He indicated that the lines between designations on the plan are a flexible boundary. The Planning Director referred. to Item I . 1-3 of the Planning Department report, .which states that the zoning should encourage. business development but not encroach upon residential areas . The impact in this matter would have definite effects and would cause pressure in the future to rezone adjacent properties . Mr. McLaughlin responded that the impact of the cut proposed is not as Mr. Ericksen stated as the Shuck project has already made a cut similar to the cut proposed by the applicant. A five-foot planting strip or screening fence on top of the rockery is proposed and would be more of a buffer than the existing residences . R-001-77 Page Four The Examiner asked the applicant if he would agree to restrictive covenants with a 15-foot height maximum for the structure. Mr. McLaughlin responded that the maximum height would be from 12 to 14 feet as illustrated on the proposed plan. The Examiner requested additional information from the applicant regarding restaurant signing. In response, Mr. McLaughlin reported that there would be no lights or revolving signs located on the building roof and signing would be limited to the face of the building. The Examiner asked Mr. McLaughlin if he was advised by the staff that the application was not in compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Mr. McLaughlin stated that he was not sure. The Examiner asked Mr. Ericksen how much flexibility in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan would be allowed in this case. Mr. Ericksen responded that "the Comprehensive Plan is. a flexible document and the flexibility depends upon the situation and terrain. Normally, the property can vary depending on the line from 25 to 50 to 100 feet depending upon the circumstances involved. " He indicated that if the request is justified for the applicant's property, it would be justified for the Shuck property and future property located to the south to N.E. 12th and to the north. The line would have to be moved to the east to make the easterly property line uniform, and the rezone would make it a total commercial development in that area. Mr. McLaughlin stated that in reference to the 60-foot strip of property east of the power line right-of-way, the development already on Sunset Boulevard would discourage potential builders from building on property near a Shuck 's or a service station. No further testimony was given. The hearing on Item R-001-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10 : 15 a.m. Note: A complete record of the hearing is available in the Hearing Examiner' s office . FINDINGS , CONCLUSIONS, & RECOMMENDATIONS : Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS : The Planning Department report sets forth the issues , applicable policies and provisions and departmental recommendations in this matter, and is attached to this report for reference. 1. The Planning Director noted that the R-2 zone formerly allowed office and medical clinics . This zone has been recently amended to allow only duplexes and townhouses . 2 . Mr. McLaughlin maintains that the proposed commercial use would be an extension of property that has been zoned B-1 , commercial) since 1957. This extension would be accommodated by grading the existing R-2 property to the same grade as the B-1 property adjacent to Sunset Boulevard. 3. Mr. McLaughlin owns the existing residences located on the eastern portion of his property now zoned R-2 . He proposes to remove these homes as part of the total development proposal. Mr. McLaughlin also owns the property to the north presently inhabited by two single-family residences . 4 . Mr. McLaughlin asserts that a five-foot landscape buffer or a screening fence located on the eastern line of his property would provide a more effective buffer from the existing and proposed commercial uses to the west of the property than the existing single-family residences. R-001-77 Page Five FINDINGS : 5. Mr. McLaughlin is willing to provide restrictions on the property binding him to the grading plan as submitted, to maintain a 15-foot maximum height limit on the proposed structure, and to install a screening buffer on the eastern and northern property lines . He is also agreeable to restricting signing to signs located on the face of the building. 6 . Mr. McLaughlin stated that he had talked to the neighbors and that there were no objections to this proposal. There were no adjoining property owners opposing the request. 7. Mr. Clark Teegarden, Planning Commission member, noted the staff report indicated the application does not agree with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the application should be denied and the area should be referred to the Planning Commission for consideration when amending the existing Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 8. Shuck' s Auto Parts store , located to the south of the property, has just completed grading and a similar cut exists which would be similar to the grading proposed by Mr. McLaughlin. 9 . The Planning Director noted that, "the Comprehensive Plan is a flexible document and the flexibility depends upon the situation and terrain. Normally, the property can vary depending on the line from 25 to 50 to 100 feet depending upon circumstances involved. " 10 . Mr. Ericksen indicated that if the request is justified for the applicant's property, it would be justified for the Shuck property and future property located to the south to N.E. 12th Street and to the north. The line would have to be moved to the east to make the easterly property line uniform, and the rezone would make the area a total commercial development. 11 . The existing R-2 property, if utilized for duplex purposes , would directly front a proposed neighborhood shopping center and major arterial. 12 . R-2 property abutting Monroe Avenue east of the subject property is utilized by older single-family residences that are situated at an elevation of 30 to 40 feet from the proposed finished grade. These residences front Monroe Avenue and have existing vegetation consisting of trees , shrubs , etc . on their western property line. 13. Ordinance No. 3071 (Section 4-3014) states that before a reclassification of property is recommended, at least one of the following circumstances shall be found to apply: c) That since the last previous land use analysis of the area and area zoning of the subject property, permitted private development or other circumstances affecting the property have undergone significant and material change. This area was last analyzed by the Planning Commission in 1967 . Property directly opposite this property and west of Sunset Boulevard, 7. 78 acres, is presently being developed as a neighborhood shopping center. The adjacent property to the south has recently been cleared and developed by an auto parts store. These recent developments have, in the Examiner' s opinion, significantly undergone a material change . R-001-77 Page Six FINDINGS: 14 . R.C.W. 35A.63.061, defines Comprehensive Land Use Plan: A land-use element that designates the proposed general location and extent of the use of land. " emphasis added) The term "general" implies that the plan is not intended to be specific but rather broad or flexible in its approach and application. The plan summarizes policies and proposals and does not indicate specific locations or detailed regulations. Ordinance No. 2142 - Ordinance adopting Comprehensive Land Use Plan - (Land Use Report, 1965 ) - an element of the Comprehensive Plan : Page 16 : General Development Plans . . ':Those maps included in this report are not intended to show the precise limits of any proposed land use , but are intended for use as guides in directing the growth and development of the community. " (emphasis added) Ordinance No. 2142 , No. 1 - The "Land Use Map. . . illustrates in broad and general terms the foreseeable development of the City of Renton. " emphasis added) Those statements continue to emphasize the general nature and intent of the use of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 15. Land Use Report, 1965 (a Comprehensive Plan element) Page 17, Objectives: 6) "Encourage the development and utilization of land to its highest and best use in such a way as to promote the best interest of the community and contribute to its overall attractiveness and desirability as a place in which to work, shop, live and play. " 16 . Land Use Report, Ordinance No. 2153 , Page 17: Objectives: 1) "Prevent blight by protecting residential and other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would contribute to premature decay and obsolescence and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns . " Several older single-family residences exist on the property. If these continue in their existing condition without major improvements , a blighted condition will be perpetuated. The option under the existing R-2 designation would be to replace these homes with duplex or townhouse units . These units would directly abut an existing commercial zone , would face a major arterial and a recently constructed neighborhood shopping center. There is not an apparent physical buffer between the duplex and commercial uses . Property directly east of the McLaughlin property has an elevation -change. of- 15 to 20 feet and is screened from the commercial area by a large stand of existing evergreens , approximately 30 to 45 feet in height. This property is also zoned R-2 , but can be protected "from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses" by elements not readily available to the McLaughlin property. R-001-77 Page Seven CONCLUSIONS : 1. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan map designates a portion 60 ° x 163' ) of the McLaughlin property as low-density multi-family. A power line right-of-way of approximately 100 feet traverses the property and is apparently intended to serve as a buffer between the existing B-1 (commercial) zone and the adjacent property designated as R-2 (duplex) zone, which is directly east of the power. line right-of- way and extends to Monroe Avenue. 2 . In the Examiner's opinion, the McLaughlin R-2 property is not a desirable residential area. The power line right-of- way may spatially separate and buffer the B-1 and R-2 zones , but it does not visually buffer the R-2 zone from encroaching and recently constructed commercial uses. Property zoned R-2 that abuts Monroe is visually and physically screened from commercial uses and activities by a 15-foot to 20-foot elevation change and a stand of evergreen trees . 3. Grading the 60-foot width of R-2 property east of the power line right-of-way, installing a 15-foot rock wall and providing a screening and landscaping buffer on top of the wall would accommodate the, objective, as noted in the Land Use Report, of physically and visually protecting residential districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would contribute to premature decay and obsolescence and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns . 4 . Research of city and state documents , laws and ordinances note the Comprehensive Plan is intended to be used as a general guide to determine future zoning and growth patterns. 5 . Granting the zoning request with restrictions would provide a buffer from adjacent residential uses, would provide a natural extension of the existing business zoned property and would eliminate existing residential uses that are not compatible with the character and growth trend of the area. In the Examiner' s opinion, the intent of the Comprehensive Plan designations would be complied with. 6 . It is the Examiner's opinion that granting this request would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or the . - properties of other persons located in the vicinity and would not be out of harmony with the purposes and effect of the overall plan of the established zone classification and use district boundaries . 7 . Granting the request would denote that a similar request to zone properties north and south of the McLaughlin rezone would be considered and would not detract or be incompatible with the intent of the prevailing growth pattern. 8. The alternative would be to remand the request to the Planning Commission for revision of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan . In the Examiner' s opinion, the proposed change (60 ' width) would be minor and would emulate zoning reclassification through comprehensive planning which is not the intent of neighborhood and community planning. Granting the request would not materially be in disharmony with the original intent of the Comprehensive Plan to .provide compatible transition between land uses and in a manner which would not- - detract from the physical development of the community in a coordinated, unified manner. The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances both deal with the ways in which privately owned land will be used, but the Plan indicates, and should only indicate, broad categories for general areas of the city , whereas Zoning Ordinances delineate the exact boundaries of districts and specify the detailed regulations which shall apply within them. R-001-77 Page Eight CONCLUSIONS : 9 . Imposed conditions on the potential commercial development will be essential to insure that the development will be compatible and will not physically detract from the adjacent R-2 zoned property that fronts Monroe Avenue. 10 . It can be assumed that the adjacent R-2 property will eventually be developed with duplexes or townhouse uses . New development would be built on a grade approximately 10 to 20 feet above the finished grade of the McLaughlin rezone. 11. A proposed commercial building on the McLaughlin site should not extend above the grade of the adjacent property located on the east boundary of the McLaughlin site. Commercial construction above the existing grade of property fronting Monroe Avenue would detract from a desirable character for future low-density multi-family uses allowed in an R-2 zone. 12 . The proposed regrading and excavation of McLaughlin's property will alter the natural drainage pattern. A drainage plan should be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department prior to grading and construction. 13. Commercial development should be compatible with the character of the area. The shopping center to the west is maintaining a 14-foot landscape strip adjacent to Sunset Highway. This landscape area is a natural and desirable extension of landscaped areas adjacent to the Highlands Shopping Center located to the southwest of the McLaughlin property. 14 . Section 4-725 , Amendments If the Examiner, after thorough study of the proposal and the petition, determines that the reclassification or the change in use district , boundaries is advisable and in the public interest and tends to further the preservation and enjoyment of any substantial property right of the petitioner and is not materially detrimental to the public welfare or the properties of other persons located in the vicinity thereof, and is not out of harmony with the purposes and effect of the overall plan of the established zone classification and use district boundaries, then in such event, the Hearing Examiner may recommend that the Council approve the reclassification. " Approving the rezone request with restrictive covenants would, in the Examiner's opinion, comply with City policy as stated in Section 4-725 . 15. The Planning Department has declared (note Planning Department report, Section L) that the proposed rezone would not have a significant effect on the environment and has therefore issued a Declaration of Non-Significance. RECOMMENDATION: 1 . Approve the rezone request from R-2 to B-1 subject to the • filing of restrictive covenants regarding the following conditions : a. The height of structures located on the site shall not exceed 15 feet from the existing grade of Sunset Boulevard which fronts the McLaughlin property. R-001-77 Page Nine b. Install a sight-obscuring 5-foot fence (minimum height) on top of the proposed rockery along the north, south, and east property lines . c. Install and maintain a 5-foot planting strip adjacent to Sunset Boulevard. 2 . The applicant isalso requested to: a. File an acceptable storm water run-off plan with the Public Works Department. b. Maintain, where physically possible, the stand of evergreen trees on the eastern property line as a natural buffer between the proposed commercial development and the adjacent residential property. ORDERED THIS 7th day of February, 1977 . le es L. T..stadt Land Use . -aring Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 7th day of February,. 1977 by certified mail to the parties of record: William L. McLaughlin Clark Teegarden Joan A. Walker TRANSMITTED THIS 7th day of February, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Don J. Smith, Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Ordinance No. 3071, Section 4-3015 , request for reconsideration or notice of appeal must be filed in writing on or before February 14 , 1977 . Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedures , 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 of the conclusion of the hearing. 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. THE CITY OFRENTOI° MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 t: o CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 235-2550v` YD - AAbTF January 24 , 1977 William L. McLaughlin, Jr. 10630 S.E. 176th Renton, Washington 98055 REGARDING: APPLICATION FOR; REZONE--#R-001-77 f Dear Mr. McLaughlin: Attached for your information is a copy of the Planning Department Staff Report regarding the abovementioned application. If you have any questions, please contact this department. Very truly yours , Gordon Y. Ericksen_ Planning Dir.ectori- Michael L. Smith Associate Planner MLS:ms Attachment cic- A( ,.3 - D -- 7 .7 ic".._ _/1..-c- -,P- L.ct__.ci e_c_.2, _ .,. i...,,,ii. izz-,...„4.__, z"---- c--- ,_• ,...• fi,,,--z-j-_,' L._. e(._ i--- cr. _ ......_ ..„,7 ._,._ g___ z_,i„._.,. _ : - A t--A. 2.I/Lc ,---- d t.:---,I-2-c cl- ,c1.31 ,--z_z-7.-1_c•- ./e-i' --"' ILJ2 ,i-- )7Z- — r 7 C,',L.__ __.-- ...•-ll,e- C- 2.--- -1- er.-- -c. ---7'-(-.ee.Z1-4-' ------76--C...---457 - CC----t i__..L..._ 0 /1 L (.. ---,-_- c:__<:.1__-- c-E ..-z- 3 cc: 7-72-6----,s -.7--c--6..„ 2- : 'I ..4-7-6-e•--c'._..e://r Lc„.. 14-- a7 Z'(__A...e4--(_.-- ,,ZIL):L._1 /":1-6C11- . 7' A.--z,---71-4--,-i._ 72-C (..1,,c9---2--z -2--7-L_--c--,_. ..-t.-__,---(4:..„/„..e..-y'r--74.__-• '-'---2-')---2-4•Z ,-, C________ il ..,,._ 327-L 7:724-zrex.C6e/ ./1..e-s--4.- -,-4 k--- AY 277-(--1. 74-, • ,-•-/ (e•-7-,- L.' el 674.. 1:- li 4._- .,Z ell-7C- ...'i-e-V4--e-- -4-, et-A1 et 0 a A--- • n_L--_7_.--' ,Ze-L...-4_, - 4.... 2‘7,7L_C.1._-z.- 6%,Z-2 7-, a-t:z:--2..-t.: --.7"L..,,,,-- 7:17. : II 17Z17.:(.2---L7 r 4 Z-.C--' " LC I. iW 1 7172_e_ , • V • fr. 6.-": 7_ 7. 4(--- 1 i 6-A--- - • z___€,.-2,Z--•z....e___• 02___.•,_,-. c:_.,__ __ei.-•-•7-z--/2 ..-c zr RECEIVED 7TD 7---))7' CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER MAR 71977 e,--e!=-2....--.7.(--,.. ' fr- 7 ,•. ..--,/z--,—i—c-----._. AM PM z 71819t10,1111211,21%4,516.,,, 3no //ieNi2 )6 Aii, .P A e17-c- 77-1.4---,s__ PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING JANUARY 31 , 1977 APPLICANT: WILLIAM L . ' MC LAUGHLIN , JR. FILE NO : R-001177 A. SUMMARY OF REnUEST: Applicant requests a rezone from R-2 to B- 1 . A conceptual site plan for possible development of the site has also been submitted with the application . R , GENERAL INFnRMATION: 1 . Owner of Record : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN 2 . Applicant William L . McLaughlin 3 . Location : Property located approxi - mately 300 ' north of . North 12th' Street , along the easterly edge of the existing powerline ease- men-Land approximately 100 feet east of N . E . Sunset Boulevard . , 4 . Legal Description : That portion of the south- east 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of said Section 4 , Town- ship 23 North , Range. 5 E , W .M . , described as follows : beginning at a point on the east line of said sub- division 326 . 30 ' northerly from the southeast corner thereof ; thence continuing northerly . along said easterly line a distance of 163 . 60 ' to a point 489 . 90 ' northerly of' said southeast corner; thence north 88°53 ' 08" west to the easterly margin of Puget . Sound Power and Light Com- pany ' s transmission line right-of-way ; thence southerly along said easterly margin- to a point bearing north, 88°53 ' 08" west from the_ point. of begin- ning ; thence south 88°53 ' 08" east to the point of begin- ning . 5 . Size of Property : Approximately 10 ,000 sq . ft . 6 . Access : N . E . Sunset Boulevard via adjacent property owned by applicant . 7 . Existing Zone : R-2 (Residential District ) 8 . Existing Zoning in Area : R-2 (Residential District) , GS- 1 (General ' Suburban Dis- trict) and B-1 (Business District) . PLANNING DEPARTMENT' PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE TWO RE : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION 9. Comprehensive Land The Comprehensive Plan Use Plan : indicates low density multiple family residen-. tial for ' the site and surrounding area east of the powerline. easement . 10 . Notification : Notice published in Record Chronicle at least 10 days prior to hearing , notice posted on .or: near subject property .in three places , and applicant notified , according :to established legal requirements . C. PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Applicant requests zoning change from R-.2 ,to B- 1_ to allow commercial development of the property at. a future date . A general site plan was submitted with the-application indicating a possible 7000± sq . ft. building and related parking area. for a restaurant, real estate office , hair styling salon , and T. V . repair shop . However, the plan does not conform to parking and landscaping ordinance • requirements . The applicant has indicated that the plan submitted is conceptual , and only meant fo,r discussion purposes . D. HISTORY/BACKG.ROUND The site was initially rezoned from GS- 1 to R-2 by Ordi - nance. No . 1594 on February 25 , 1957 . The zoning has not changed sjnce. th.at date, although an attempt was made in 1968 to rezone the subject property , together with the property to the east along Monroe Ave. N . E'„ 'to the R-3 classification . This request was denied and R.-2 granted for that area east of the subject site along Monroe Ave . N . E . (Ordinance No . 2403) . E. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1 . Topography : The .subject property is moderately steep with a 13%± slope . The terrain rises '.steadily within the westerly 20 feet, levels off toward th.e ,center , then rises sharply again near the easterly property line. The adjacent residential property to the east rises above the level of the subject property . 2 . Soils : Arents , Alderwood 6- 15 percent slopes . These soils consist of Alderwood soils , that .have been dis- turbed through urbanization , a mixed gravelly sandy loam, slopes 6- 15 percent. This soil is moderately well drained. Permeability is moderately rapid to moderately slow , depending upon compaction during construction . Available water capacity is low; run-off is .medium 'and the erosion hazard is moderate to :severe . This soil is used for urban development. ' There are ' moderate limitations for foundations due to seasonal high water table and severe limitations ion shallow excavations and septic .tank filter fields . 3 . Vegetation : Existing groundcover consists of ever- green shrubs and grass . Hearty. pine and Douglas Fir are predominate along the eastern portion of the ' subject property. L,,`. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING .OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE THREE RE : WILLIAM L. MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION 4 . Wildlife : A variety of native birds and small mammals periodically frequent the area. 5 . Water: No streams , ponds , or other types of surface water exist on the subject site . 6 . Land Use : Two single family residences presently exist on the subject property . The site lies within an R-2 zone ( residential two-family) with B- 1 business use ) directly west (owned by the applicant ) to Sunset Boulevard. Even though the R-2 zone allows duplexes ( residential two-family) , the imme- diate area to the east and north primarily consists of single family residences . Business uses dominate the southwestern portion of the block : ARCO service station , Shuck ' s Auto Supply ( in construction ) , and a medical clinic . The powerline easement which borders the subject property on the west , although zoned B- 1 , cannot be utilized for any such buildings or structures . It can , however , be used. for necessary parking and circulation . F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS : 1 . Two single family residences exist on the site . Single family residences exist to the north and east of the subject site . The surrounding area to the north , south , and east to Monroe is presently zoned R-2 , which permits single family and duplex residences . The area east of Monroe Avenue N . E . is single family residen- tial . 2 . The adjacent property on the west is zoned B- 1 and is presently undeveloped. Commercial uses front onto Sunset Boulevard , southwest of the subject site . The new Sunset Plaza Shopping Center is presently under construction on the west side of Sunset Boulevard . G. PUBLIC SERVICES : 1 . Sewer and Water: A 12 inch water main and 8 inch sewer main presently exist along Sunset Boulevard . 2 . Fire Protection : Additional fire hydrants will be required in the area if the property is developed . 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route #42 and #107 are in close proximity to the site , approximately one-two blocks away . 4 . Schools : .The property lies within the Renton School District No .. 403 . Hillcrest Elementary School and McKnight Jr. High lie approximately within a six block radius of the site. 5 . Parks and Recreation : Playgrounds associated with Hillcrest Elementary School and McKnight Junior High School are easily accessible . H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1 . Section 4-708 , R-2 Residential District : Permitted uses within this zone include single family and duplex residential units . Apartments , townhouses , and offices also may be allowed by Special Permit within the exist- ing R-2 zone . 2 . Section 4-711 , B- 1 Business District PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE FOUR RE : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION 3 . Section 4-725 , Amendments : . . . " If the Examiner, after thorough study of the proposal and the petition , deter- mines that the reclassification or the change in use district boundaries is advisable and in the public • interest and tends to further the preservation and enjoyment of any substantial property right of the petitioner and is not materially detrimental to the public welfare or the properties of other persons located in the vicinity thereof, and is not out of harmony with the purposes and effect of the overall plan of the established zone classification and use district boundaries , then in such event, the Hearing Examiner may recommend that the Council approve the reclassification . " I , APPLICABLE. SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS : 1 . Comprehensive Plan , Policy Statement F . 1 . : . "The location of shopping areas should , generally , be such that protection is given to residential areas from unwarranted business encroachment . At the same time they should be located in areas which are convenient to potential customers . " 2 . Renton Developmental Guidelines Ordinance , Section 4-31 . 1 , 2 . : " It is the intent of this Ordinance to provide the City, especially the Planning Department and the Hearing Examiner with criteria to make . con- sistent and rational land use recommendations and decisions... 6 3. Land Use Report , Objectives , Pg . 17 : " . . . community goals and objectives : 1 . Prevent blight by protecting residential and other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would • contribute to premature. decay a,nd obsolecence , and prevent the development. of orderly growth patterns . 4. Protect property values within the community for the benefit of its residents and property owners , through the effective control of land use and the enforcement and application of building and construction codes . " J . IMPACT ON NATURAL SYSTEMS: Rezoning of the property would not have an impact on the natural systems in itself'. However, development of the property would remove vegetative cover and require exca- vation and grading of the site . The applicant proposes a cut near the east property line of approximately 15 ' supported by a rock retaining wall . Additional storm water runoff will be created by an increase in impervious structures and paving. There would also be some increase in air pollution ,' noise , and traffic with the eventual development of the subject site . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE FIVE RE: WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION K. SOCIAL IMPACTS : 1 . Land Use : The proposal would not only alter the possible land use of the subject site but may also have an effect of creating similar zoning changes that encroach further into the adjacent residential area . This may create further blight and relocation of people in the surrounding area . 2 . Population Density : Development of the wide range of uses permitted in the B- 1 zone may create more density during certain periods than if it were developed R-2 residential . 3. Health and Safety : Health and safety problems may be created in the area if certain business uses are developed . 4 . Cultural and Historical Aspects : None are known to exist on the subject property . L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended (RCW 43 . 216 ) , a Declaration of Non-significance has been issued for the subject proposal (see attached ) . M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A vicinity map is attached . N, AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: 1 . City, of Renton Building Division 2 . City of Renton Engineering Division 3 . City of Renton Utilities Division. 4. City . of ' Renton Traffic Engineering Division 5 . City of Renton Fire Department All departments contacted had no concerns regarding the subject application . 0, DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1 . The application is not compatible with the Comprehen- sive Land Use Plan , the policy statement , and sound planning and zoning principles . 2 . The powerline easement presently acts as a buffer area between the business zoning and the existing residential area to the east . Structures cannot be constructed within the easement area , although it can be used for parking and open space purposes . 3. Allowing business zoning east of the powerline would eliminate the buffer between the commercial and resi dential area and may establish a precedent for further encroachment and degradation of the residential area , as well as possible future strip commercial zoning along N . E . Sunset Boulevard . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE SIX RE : WILLIAM L. M.0 LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION 4. The site as presently zoned will permit apartments , townhouses , or professional offices and clinics by Special Permit. This , together with the remaining property to the west , will provide substantial property rights for development alternatives on the site., which can be compatible with the adjacent R-2 area . P. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION : The Planning Department recommends denial. of the subject request based on the above analysis . FPGPG3ED/ FINAL I .LARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/ N-SIGNIFICANCE Application No . R-001-77 PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . ECF- 198-77 X FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Request for rezone from R-2 Residential District •to B- 1 Business District Proponent William L . McLaughlin Location of Proposal N.E. Sunset Blvd. between N.E. 12th St. and Monroe Ave. N.1. Lead Agency City of Renton Planning Department This proposal has been determined to have not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS is x is not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 (2 ) (c ) . This decision was made after review by the lead a9ency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . • Reasons for declaration of environmental significance : 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 : Responsible Official Michael L . Smith Title ' Associate Pl . ner Date January 19 , 1977 Signature mil/' • City of Renton Planni ng -Depa rtren 5-7A Imil1' It rl W 'W!\‘ EM SUS .a. ff%S iO=1, 1 9" S 1:• 1 4.5% Alt 1 i NY 1 r - ' t... 61 ic t 0 4. Lam I o s slid til 1 1 a N 4:, e del%cEl CD CO C3 Ca CD C:3 CA a I 1 t : . „ .''''0 7:i:, I ;II -.le 1*mi09)9dr ' /tiEl 4teht i Dr9 4? h ' it '3 ' 44 I ° 4,,2, HP Crig4i Un 13 oNI a) E I ` 0 Owl, .o ti0 ( Jff,P0035 sji -2- ral :r;t1 31 Ifg! 113XV/41/4 - m. limmumr-.....- 1 S, zdadi"1121C) 0 2 U.1. khy a "i cAt El 410ceA'S 0114=VO°AVMS ' 0 FT To.,1.5 ,ri.r. 9 0?i ascioi0pi he1 D us iiiii.i sv S dl j's . : pay; Q 6, 7* ' El B .Z xiafc. ,:it os, 'ej. al . ., Q.7 isatreD lirodiaom .iikfig 9 E 0 1-ii , Q..,• o'er i 109)47 0 0 JI CII] B stvie 0 M I ram e 41 304# , .% 12GIs da----- 1 : 1 S" 'k i of volIII1:3 11151 I Z1 Az......t. . 8 ii 0 ai ti, ,0o•C modimmommome, e uu.- F ' a , r •• ;it. ,11.Ll ag1,. •, n iiii,.a l'L 1 1 I Lam. i .'. 1 ,.1 1 Mgr' ' .. G.Itoo -.1., f, 1, IkJ,' t u, i f, iLl r '•'' , a _ P_ i 11 1 i Ji•• g."'.1,#, . Lt 1 I o 1 1 u a i .. ,,R.a a [1..' t.." , a (• 17.1 . 11 11 ile"-% n.'R [M[[ 1w MoiIM°i , r 4..M M[ 1 1 o i 1,,. ,: ,., ,. - . 40,,,,m , y i G Li1 1 1 R-3 E_ 1 ......N...., 4L R....3 46 :' 4 * 9.4- 4..14/ 0 k,„:,. _ y , : -4 , _, . _.._ _ , iCtir4-.,;-•_„ cj'it)o,, e, Li- 4- u 4e1i1 1zP1• V. h, aA9.•F9 n1V13i111 f• s'- i 1 Z ‘ r lLEJrG a i.. , . 1 1 a a,',n. 1 n m a 1. 1 ; tig " V -4. 1-• ' Taram tire is itali:03. b p% XS.,it ' : f I. ? I Okrillr7:" .1 reim . : atiesion7.0%, omit=1,ww svcrii. • • i,of ar 4 '_1- 11*' .f+O ' I seae:ee'RAH 1 U® a®P 'qa , ` '_ 2- 2, ' 1 = avail*. a 3 05, 17.7.l _ii,l' w ui r 9sr 1P I, r,1 ., _ S r01116if nrr rm . c f . St!!If z.,i 4 m . '04 ' , t-=•;,. r• 1 i1 1 1'.• 'I'asL ,1 Z i- i ._.. Q}•.rr,1 24 N.E,.10 -.' ST.0 1 F 99 92 0 g N i u 7' . I,. 1; tie 11.,, a cam`, hi°111 ,_ iI NO I1147 L..-._ lii EE 111111 N, el P ih i owow • . . , , , *'TM aao REZONE : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. ; Appl . R-001-77 ; rezone from R-2 to B- 1 ; property. located; on :Sunset Boulevard between N . E . 12th Street and Monroe Avenue N . E .. .', - APPLICANT WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. TOTAL AREA ±10 ,595 sq . ft. PRINCIPAL ACCESS N . E. Sunset Boulevard EXISTING ZONING R-2 EXISTING USE Two Single Family Residences PROPOSED USE Restaurant ,and Retail Business COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Low Density Multi -family COMMENTS i if \\'. .. ffidoij . of Publication NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USESPATE 'WASHI;i. ON ss HEARING EXAMINERC,TI OF •RENTON,WASHINGTON 1_ 4 nJN /AG O/ WILL PBEBHELDH EBYRTHE RENTON LAND USE being first duly sworn on HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL oath,deposes and says that is the of CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, RENTON, WASHINGTON,THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4) ON JANUARY 31,1977,ATtimesaweek.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDERhasbeenformorethansixmonthspriortothedateofpublicationreferredTHEFOLLOWINGto, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- PETITIONS:paper published four (4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington, 1. REZONE F:and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained TO B-1 , e No. R-at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the Renton opertyRecord-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the ed on SunsetSuperiorCourtoftheCountyinwhichitispublished,to-wit,King County, Boulevard between 1- f 7 ?N.E. 12th Street and Washington.That the annexed is a Monroe Avenue N.E. 2. EXCEPTION TO SUBDIVISIONBDIVISIO Nse ..)e) r ler,ORDINANCE;file No. E-002-77; property r;t i t i o n s located in the vicinity as it was published in regular issues(and of 3 7 0 2 Lakenotinsupplementformofsaidnewspaper) once each issue for a period Washington Boulevard N. 3.WAIVER OF OFF- of consecutive issues,commencing on the SITE IMPROVE- MENTS FOR A TWO LOT SHORT PLAT; day of 19 and ending the file No. W-003-77; property located in the vicinity of 3702 Lake Washington day of 19 both dates Boulevard N. inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- 4. REZONE FROM S-1 scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee TO SR-1; file No. R- 004-77; property located at 807 UnionchargedfortheforegoingpublicationisthesumofS• • ,, which Avenue N.E.has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent 5.WAIVER OF OFF insertion.SITE IMPROVE- MENTS FOR A TWO LOT SHORT PLAT; r file No. W-006-77; property located on 1 , Jones Avenue N.E. and N.E.44th Street. Legal descriptions of all 21 applications noted above on Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of file in the Renton Planning Department. 19 ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THEfPUBLICHEARINGONNotaryPublicIndfortheStateofWashington, JANUARY 31, 1977, ATresidingatKent, King bounty. 9:00 A.M. TO EXPRESSJ THEIR OPINIONS. GORDON Y. ERICKSEN Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June RENTON PLANNING 9th, 1955. DIRECTOR Published in The Renton Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, Record-Chronicle January adopted by the newspapers of the State. 21, 1977. R4142 Ia << , /, ,, NW I ( I MI I'III.I I ( III / IN( RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING ' EXAMINER AI HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HILL ; RENNIN , WASHINGTON , ON JANUARY 31 1977 , AT 9 : 00 A. M . TO CONSIDER IIIL FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . REZONE FROM R-2 TO B- 1 ; file No . R-001- 77 ; property located on Sunset Boulevard between N . E . 12th Street and Monroe Avenue N . E . 2 . EXCEPTION TO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE ; file No . E-002-77 ; property located in the vicinity of 3702 Lake Washington Boulevard N . 3. WAIVER OF OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR A TWO LOT SHORT PLAT; file No . W-003-77 ; property located in the vicinity of 3702 Lake Washington Boulevard ' N . 4 . REZONE FROM S- 1 TO SR- 1 ; file No . R-004-77 ; property located at 807 Union Avenue N . E .• 5 . WAIVER OF -OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR A TWO LOT 'SHORT . PLAT ; file No . W-006-77 ; property located on Jones Avenue N . E . and N . E . 44th Street . Legal descriptions of all applications noted above on file in the Renton Planning Department . AIL -INILRESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE LNVI IEU TO BE PRESENT Al Ill!. PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 31 , 1977 AT 9 : 00 A . M. TO I_XPRESS THEIR OPINIONS . GORDON Y . ERICKSEN Pl1BLISHED____ ja.rua,ry._.21_,,___19.77^.__,_ RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION 1 , MICHAEL L . SMITH _ 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 LlIW : , . ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn istobeforeme , a Notary Public , on the day of :nu:,s.j 19 (( • SIGNED 1 i o THE CITY OF RENTONC, z r rs +9 f) MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 1 0 0 ""I' CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR • PLANNING i)LPARTAIENT o 235-2550 •O arfD SF PVc•- January 18 , 1977 William L. McLaughlin ,' Jr. 10630 - S. E. 17.6th Renton , WA 98055 RE : NOTICE OF APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR Application for Rezone , File No . R_001-77.._..•.._ .. Gentlemen : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the . above mentioned application on _ •January_,1.3_z _ 19.77 _ • A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set: for January _31 , 1977 Representatives of the applicant are asked to be pre- sent . 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 Mi tree Smut A sociate Planner wr CITY OF RENTON REZONE APPLICATION For Office Use Only: APPL. NO. Ae_00/._77 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 50 FEE; RECEIPT NO. /n ;5/ APPEAL FILED FILING DATE . +/f / - 'I/ 7i, CITY COUNCIL ACTION HEARING DATE I ORDINANCE NO. & DATE APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 : 1. Name W1f tIct'are . 1,p^at,64 E r,tt g,,,, • phone Z 2. Address !016%0 5 E6 = f , 'i' € ¢"k`m f C r. 3. Property petitioned for rezoning is located on tAlv LvD. between NE,. 6A and MOO e 11-Vst tSE 4 . Square footage or acreage of property .11-- j o' 5. Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach separate sheet) that portion•••ofz3$1 5 e 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the S . 1/4of said Sec. 40uesdri as follows : Beginning at a point on the east line of said subdivision 326 . 30 ' northerly " 44* from the SE corner thereof; thence continuing northerly alon7 said easterly line a distance of 163 . 60 ' to a point 489 . 90 ' northerly of said SE corner; thence north 88°53 ' 08" West to the easterly margin of Puget Sound Power & Light Company' s transmission line right of way; thence southerly along said easterly margin to a point bearing- north 88°53 ' 08" West from the point of beginning; thence south 88°53 ' 08" East to the point of beginning 6 . Existing zoning `R—A, Zoning Requested NOTE TO APPLICANT: The following factors are considered in reclass- ifying 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. Kesni f-A-0 ' X- :n. 6 e s 8 . List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area. Tito etax.ii to 110. g. Gam . To suuki 1 L Il h . I°k v •t.,. c..ot, r=71 P C* tfit.0 . E a a Q" 19ti 1 i Itt-rwee, eiOP-eit-k ''Ok brie et.t. r ? °e tP. h Al_5, 0 ors(. Wf c-- AA_01 e Toe 9 . How soon after the rezone is granted do you intend to develop the site? tom' J 10 . Two copies of plot plal! and, OV ffida-vt o ownership are required. . Planning Dept. 2-73 II 4 AFFIDAVIT I, IAMI 1A ko.. L. M R Le,t“t E-t LANs f. 171..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 this mit day of 00VC , .^ 19 7t , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at i _zZZ r C C I!//[C/ `. /` Oz/171 tA,A;; .;'t ,,,Ipt© 7' (,,-(G:'!Fit r'" N a of Notary Public) Signature of Owner) / J Address) Address) City) State) 5 -1 ( ci (, ' r Telephone) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that—the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been foundobei- o,rough and complete in every particular and to conform to the ry '1`es and nre,;g-ul\ations of the Renton Planning Department governing the fl k-inglrof1ISI.Lci44 plication . r. V iLL)LI, L.0 ,,, ,\ 1 Date Received 19 By : _ J,-s ,u'yZ IN,0.%,'.4 Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 II 7WV I i \\\.,,........________ I./. i SI. iI ! ir j ,79 I !T• Ma S! I1WS1 l 1 l 1 i 1 I 1__. 'r I yK IIIj 1 i , ty D1/ a__ 0 I+ IS >w, su ao:i I•os 4°A°s yl dp 1 IaAG if"1C- COA51.l II 11.1.1pr1 1. I C.(,.1i1,fr1441N T 1 1Kt.LONt' E 3 9 70 O 11 11 7' 140,! 104 400 777 tolRENT yN CITY LIMIT cis E 96's 6T 1 1 11 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 s 1 1 1 i_ I t f; 1., ••f Is W S€_ 6T W , t 411: tit \, L rI ! I i, 1 Ili ` I 3 3a 111 SIERRA HEIGHTS y f' 1 MI ru, no •s•9,eTinyt ELEM. SCHOOL II a S 1 20 -a illif V,il swaWSWIl t L _____-aE loo x T ' 4.71.6 4/ I 1 tl +I f' It a .e t,1 t`.i}yawn .`•I,4c{sJ•'aj,aj.,.e s '/ n".. 0: 1111. litt•'....,.1 l 1•a •. l)1'/sITI, 4, ,a I t l'i +Y 1 a I i-1:':', L, 1:...:;'21.,T1,1111:11011"LL:1;L:1;c41', ...___'0 5 16 ata# ri IP. ._J_1.-1 e le, .n u ' V 6 4` . tl to 9 `• 11',a 6t b/ lo.D I• " ss tr.++ s lr_Ir a, r / >s , a In wl: 1,11..a .1 11 I -7-.... nura.nu1 » a• W 034111111 — L1- R.r>. o 1 4 F1a0 •' i.1..s r . j .. ..ems., - p' ® as. '®r,, SII 1 . ,10 . _-,r , f 1 rI i C.' ®utti' i4/7' 1 1 lel 1..a. ZOO • / 1 1• '141LlC REST I q / I` 1@1 t .i Omi. E z19•' a, 1j•-2. ••' ILEM• f ( I et j, aill I,;rte'.7Lj",'S1' , r SCHOOI<": z s, 1 or .© ri lb,®Q r. 11 i 4 , •HIGHLANDS • s r* v 1 r• ,r1 . .-j"I 1 • © ©©rpl fd f •,. .. .•' l, PARK `' of I1yL EwI w_.ww® f a 1' r •/, a •1' l'.' ai'l e • 1 1la• I a©©1©L7Y60111110. IIimil., i is i aii rt Isin I if 11Stt0s IN 1 11 t E ycKNIGHT as ; a '. aLam_ I'L r 1 1 es Z! Ari w o fir• 4 _'`-• r SCHOOL f • .i I T0..l 1 os I r,A, . (- 214" '• ',A2. re __; 1 I % .— ___•• & ia y" li`" •" ,y IiiLT a --- 1Io 'Er W a 11 ll1 I w 1G . n , a IN am, rig -,,_,1, 12 1 i i . ' * I----* al 131 174110115 ill EA 4 MOO l \_ - Y 1'c4i q.•i11.=M F d n s . IW• s tl ®1 QaDwaeriaanoneR rfsqaMe r, mlrapja A!O m r . a till. I T.17. 10 l._ii 4 4 ti/ Alp P E to a ~ la „ 1 le s 1 a©E©).!' 7 •I i 1l. iAwv t r1 roalai'st I w f p ICI i IDM ie 1 v YONi 9e!!l5l1 1,°1', z ST se,0/4. 0 MI5 p t '' © QOQ9 aOIIDfil 3+ ar ; 2 o r 0 1 I j/, I as ay.....PAN e^eE IAGa Roman T dam' ) µ e w"... a , n 53 4, 52 _ eWfJp+<,'•aC IK AIiWp© 3N00lIle I I- a o.. a PAN PNPAI,e t gii W Ilkin dn wo a 1 ate z I .BB= r®Wip0?Ae I i i td IwQ1; :l,•$'©a D. T KIWANIS R , / V c4 4 i• Ell ZM["A =I/'ate 0 PARK nWM 611' m HONEY DEW It ii.i'® i i R°O SO/5 awl y' may© a ELEM. SCN r• l ''I SI a i,.: 7` " S " 8' , . I I Om ..• ' V ono s r...r.as am HIGHLANDS r'Ta `` a o e RIELEM. Al ISM ,. • di imi Qo"p no7E'. m 1 SCHOOL Ir e . 1':'0 a a ' . M a•irh Ns me as eaoo o --raino°,e" v.' a npo e e e m a000 EMI o m s d 0 e p0 a mg . poAn n ©^p prate e, pMOPa-e' id II w "'" Uil.SootPt m ooL l Z mC si c o ra;ooa't°oe• p is 1 A "` na a Fs=a- ;; a a!• d 22132e o I, aaeaammtEM e I e+ 0 a • e 1 I 11111a611NAt t ertificate of ,Insurance Colrp1`S%LRTIFICATE IS ISSUEL, A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS FL, 1GHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. 4v HIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED. BY THE POLICIES LISTED BELOW. NAME AND ADDRESS OF AGENCY l C 1 ZSEN AGENCY 46 54740 COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGES 2460 33rd Avenue West Seattle , Washington 98199 LETTER A American Economy Ins® Co. COMPANY BLETTER NAME AND ADDRESS OF INSURED COMPANY C William 1® McLaughlin, Jr ® LETTER 10630 S. E. 176th Street COMPANY DLETTER Renton, Washington 98055 COMPANY ELETTER This is to certify that policies of insurance listed below have been issued to the insured named above and are in force at this time. COMPANY POLICY Limits of Liability in Thousands(000) LETTER TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE EACH AGGREGATE OCCURRENCE GENERAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY $ Aq COMPREHENSIVE FORM ti ®PREMISES—OPERATIONS VIP 41702 1/21/80 PROPERTY DAMAGE $• EXPLOSION AND COLLAPSE HAZARD UNDERGROUND HAZARD PRODUCTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS HAZARD BODILY INJURY AND 1ElCONTRACTUALINSURANCEPROPERTYDAMAGE $ 300 $ 300 BROAD FORM PROPERTY COMBINED DAMAGE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS PERSONAL INJURY Applies to Products/Completed $ Operations Hazard. PERSONAL INJURY) AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY BODILY INJURY EACH PERSON) $ COMPREHENSIVE FORM BODILY INJURY $ OWNED EACH OCCURRENCE) HIRED PROPERTY DAMAGE $ NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE $ COMBINED EXCESS LIABILITY BODILY INJURY AND UMBRELLA FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE $ OTHER THAN UMBRELLA COMBINED FORM WORKERS'COMPENSATION STATUTORY and EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY EACH ACCIDENT) OTHER MIMI DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONSNEHICLES premises at 805 - 807 North 33rd Place , Renton, Washington and including 6 foot strip of alley situated on south portion of the property and rentdd from the City of Renton. Cancellation: Should any of the above descciked policies be cancelled before the expiration date thereof, the issuing com- pany will endeavor to mail VU days written notice to the below named certificate holder, but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CERTIFICATE HOLDER: 6/16/ 8 City of Renton DATE ISSUED: 8 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Wash. 98055 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 7/76 CITY OF RENTON) WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 11('.0• J FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Application No. Environmental Checklist No. PROPOSED, date: FINAL, date: il rG Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance Declaration of Non-Significance Q 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 s t 10-,ry\ L. - L(71 Lls i 3 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: i& SC (o D..to -Rio s" • 3. Date Checklist submitted 7(0 ., 4. Agency requiring Checklist C-t DC A n-6Ni 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: F-14/. - MC I.- n&- Ui Th _ o n c_ 6. Nature and brief description of the proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements , and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature) : Pao.f0s T0 cos.3c-riL cir H- ` ICt'_ wit\` D (tut- ff_erfLo, , 5-o A 1`10 `, T- e {a irl L N( u) i T Ya tt 723 C 1DO0 :9,7•7,) 3r u s Fo Y 1Q2i•-t P'v1&PLOT , 121/411 dl`I. S 11,S F-0('— A2I L -S 4y'`e o F -i.C-Z) 1•}1 ."i 1LlkiCs- cAi.o ` r '. e_.kelarmt S m-oe, 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 ) : 1c'0Qc U) L' cNL IS A-T Tiy--k E- A or I' to Necri Lc C - -E ON Sal 1. 1` •TA Y I N e3 m--1-t Q F I a'}Ia ST: 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : 1)42.cizi\N i;, 1O('7 9. List of all permits, licenses or government approvals required for the proposal federal , state and local --including rezones) : Cc- of eel& 10. • Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes , explain: RJ\C7 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal ? If yes , explain: 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: 12,e.z-oh3 F 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?1 YES MAYBE NO b) Disruptions , displacements , compaction or over- J covering of the soil? . 1 YES MAYBE NO c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? Y S MAYBE au— d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? TES-- WET NO e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , either on or off the site? Y S MAYBE 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 bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? YES MAYBE W Explanation: C3 u.c t-e-oet-e.6 W i T1-f .S uC Ai S-L 3- 2) Air. Will the proposal result in: a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? YET- MAYBE No, b) The creation of objectionable odors? Y€s MAYBE NS c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 3) Water. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents , or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? YES MAYBE NO b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? YES M YBE NO c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? YES MAYBE NO d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water 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? YES MAYBE N- f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? YES MAYBE NO g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through 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, or other substances into the ground waters? YES MAYBE NO i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? YES MAYBE NO 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 , microflora and aquatic plants)? YES MAYBE 0 b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? YES- MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? YET-S- M'-TYTE N d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 4 4 5) Fauna. Will the 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)? YES RATITE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or XX endangered species of fauna? YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement yr of fauna? l YES MAYBE NO d)' Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? 1 YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? YES MAYBE KT- Explanation: f-tA. LAG-H-T(ke F+I=OM A-V9 Si(s r1(i i.2) . 1LL 8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the U' present or planned land use of an area? YES M YBE NO Explanation: (`('oivti bi.'1rQ X 7.-OF`:F- Cik-Z, 1To Cu--.1) 9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a) Increase. in thre rate of use of any natural resources? X YES MAYBE NO b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) J in the event of an accident or upset conditions? J YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population Y of an area? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 5- 12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? YES MAYBE NO b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? YES MAYBE NO c) Impact upon existing transportation systems?X YET- MAYBE AO d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? YES MAYBE NO e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? YES MAYBE , NO f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Y-- MAYBE NO Explanation: Cis 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? YES MAYBE NO b) Police protection? YES MAYBE NO c) Schools? YES MAYBE NO d) Parks or other recreational facilities?X YES MAYBE NO e) Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? K YES MAYBE NO f) Other governmental services? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 1 YES MAYBE NO b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? YES MAYBE Nr- Explanation: 16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities : a) Power or natural gas? l YES M YBE NO b) Communications systems? YES MAYBE NO c) Water? YES MAYBE NO 6- d) Sewer or septic tanks? K YES MAYBE NO' e) Storm water drainage? YES MAYBE N0 f) Solid waste and disposal? K 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)? j( YES MAYBE NO 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? YES MAYBE, NO Explanation: 1 20) Archeological/Historical . Will the. proposal result 'in an alteration of a significant archeological or hist wical A site, structure, object or building? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: II1. 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 it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my par . Proponent: Ak(7 ,44,60-414-7/V/-L ign 141)16pen Ms. name printed) II -- Ig- G City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 INTERDEPARTMENTAL REVIEW REQUEST I 0 : J PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 7/// BUILDING DIVISION JENGINEERING DIVISION 1. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION UTILITIES DIVISION FIRE DEPARTMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENT FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ai/c/iiI4L $err Contact Person R E: L)A4, APLA uJ .-/-gym-/ ,JegZco_Jr 71-A-0c)/ - 77 1 --t,-P J-1 Please review the attached information regarding the subject proposal and return it to the Planning Department by S//.77 with your written recommendation . Your response will be included as part of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner. Thank you , PLANNING DEPARTMENT 4/ Date l V 7 I:: ROUTING FOR REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORMS TO : Finance Department Fire Department Library Department Park Department Police Department Public Works Department Building Div . Traffic Engineering Div . Engineering Div . Utilities Engineering Div. FROM: Planning Department , (signed by responsible official or his designee) 14yilatturl'ogitorkief SUBJECT : Review of ECF-Mt 77 ; Application No . : es1000/1. 77 Action Name : tot;j4k t, ,. LAI4M1 4t1261Aar. a 16 Ate/ Please review the attached . Review requested by ( date) : / f REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : G.1) 6, Comments : 3:22 4.,L.Z:',...7,.,,,/,'(-11,;(4,,7- __.-0,--, ,,,,,,.. ce.e,-- e-,,o--v'Zr:- (....... g--7,--Z., -2",--__ 72 Signature of Director or Autfli ri zed Repr'esentati ve . Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : t.A/l' b'v/.I'o.J Corn m e n t s : 4/, Wig„,, ,.: i /,rr 'i,.t/2-7 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative , Date 6-76 OVER) RI_VILW BY MIA Cl 1 YDLARTMLNT Department : Comments : A/S /ci / e- 61' 0 1.* f try, /3/7,7 Signature of Director orlAuthorized/pepresentativ'elc Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : 0 ", Itit,,ty4 1)4i ig..\ Department : An,ttelisTheir ts : V" ik‘`41.,‘ 41;: 4** 7. .1A S 4. • e: i gnat ure of Director or Authorized Representative Date. REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : -----f //7/c Comments : 77cK 5)u -/6 L/ Signature of Director or Authori etY Representative ate REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : U/ f,Iics Comments : CPc•q\c, i r 41.1cidsick 1'7?CCA( 1 c& Tcs s,4JS --/c) fi 5s c-cs-tile---4-1 f/Yi - I/1.1 1-2-6 ( lcdf jc Signature of Director or' Authorized Representative Date r I I f 1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON 1 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING 2 ; LE SL I E ADAMS, et ux. , 31 1 Plaintiffs, ) CAUSE NO. 828227 4j 1 vs. ORDER FOR ISSUANCE 5 1 OF WRIT CITY OF RENTON, a municipal 6 corporation, 7 Defendant. 8 THIS MATTER having come on regularly for hearing upon the 91 application of Leslie Adams , ' petitioner. , and affidavits in 10 support thereof, for a Writ of Certiorari directed to the 11 City of Renton, Washington, a municipal corporation, 12 requiring said body to certify to this court a transcript and 13 record of the proceedings had by the City of 14 Renton, Washington, wherein ' it passed an ordinance entitled 15 1 1 "An Ordinance of the City of Renton, Washington, Changing the 16 Zoning Classification of Certain Property within the City of 17 1 I Renton from Residence District (R-2) to Business District (B-1) "•, . 18 1 which ordinance is numbered 3130 , upon the grounds stated in 19 20 affidavits that passage of said ordinance is in violation of law 21 ' and passage of said ordinance detrimentally affects the right , of the petitioner, and it appearing from said petition and affi- 22 3 davits filed herein that this is a proper cause for the issuance of such a writ, now, therefore, 24 25 i IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a Writ of Certiorari issue out of and under the seal of this court directed to the 26 1 27 City of Renton , Washington, a municipal corpor_a: on , commanding 1 it: forthwith to certify fully and return to this court as soon S is _reasonably and 9 as e;usonabl5 possible a full complete transcript c: the i j,l I records and proceedings in sa :_ cause before it had, i i Orl." for iissuance R=3_':7L.'?G DU.NCAN.TIER RI'ULT ik C:,ti G=9rTSEV J_ y LAWYF,, of ••- --- I_,OtI NTn A,II1',_bJ,L:JYC. sr riL,: WA>4,1G?ON 91101 1. t2').9433 o a 1 with the intent .that the same be reviewed by this court as to 2 said claim by petitioner at said proceedings and judgment in said 3 cause were erroneous and contrary to law, and 4 IT IS. FURTHER ORDERED that all 'proceedings in said cause 5 be, and they hereby are, stayed pending the disposition of said 6 review by this court, provided that the petitioner files a bond 7 in the amount of $20, 000 . 00 with the above captioned court under 8 the above cause on or before June 15, 1977, which bond shall be 9 in favor of the City of Renton to hold it harmless from liability, 3.0 cost or expense by reason of any such stay of proceedings . 11 DONE IN OPEN COURT this day of May, 1977. 12 13 14 ROBERT DIXON, COURT COMMISSIONER 15 16 PRESENTED BY: 17 18 WILLIAM R. RESEBURG 19 Attorney for Plaintiffs 20 21 Approved as to folut and 22 notice ,of presentation waived: 23 24 GERARD M. SHELLAN 25 Attorney for Defendant 26 27 28 29 30 31 Order for Issuance SHELLAN 2. PAIN ATTOHN?Y9 AT LAW of Writ 100;SO.SECOND:IT,DLD.^...P.O.110X 623 RENTON. )1VA y: NC,TON D8055 2 255-8578 1 3 5 6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY 7 LESLIE ADAMS, et ux, 8 Plaintiffs NO. 828227 vs 9 RETURN OF WRIT BY, CITY OF RENTON CITY OF RENTON, a municipal 3.0 corporation, 11 Defendant 12 13 CONES aow DELORES A. MEAD, the duly appointed, acting and 14 qualified City Clerk of the City of Renton and states as follows : 15 A. I , DELORES A. MEAD, do hereby certify that I an the 16 duly appointed, acting and qualified City Clerk of the City of 17 Renton and as such the custodian of all the City ' s records . 18 19 3. I further certify that the attached record consisting 20 of the following: 21 1. Taped proceedings of records side 1 and 2 , track 1, 22 i1cLdu,„;hlin rezone , No. R-001-77 , with attached certificate by 23 Land Use Nearing Examiner; 24 2. City file entitled "Rezone appeal" - William L. 25 McLaughlin; 26 3. City file entitled 'court case" rezone - William L. 27 ;\:cLauL7hlin; 28 29 is a full, true and correct transcript of all the proceedings , 30 records , data, findings , decisions , together with exhibit , brought 31 before the City in connection with the rezoning petition of said 32 William L. McLaughlin, Jr. , and all of which records I am '')y this RETURN OF WRIT BY CITY OF RENTON SHELLAN & PAIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 100 SO.SECOND ST.BLDG..P.O.BOX 628P., 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON 98053 255-8678 1 Writ of ,Certiorari Certifying to' the above Court:, In ,testimony ,whereof I have hereunto set my hand and 1 affixed 4 ' the seal of the City rof Renton this5 day of May, 1977, 7 D Flores A. 'Mead, City Clerk of the ity of Renton 8 I' 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 3]. 32 RETURN OF WRIT BY CITY OF RENTON SHELLAN'& PAIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 100 SO.SECOND ST.BLDG..P.O.BOX 626 r • 2 RENTON. WASHINGTON-98055 255-8678 1, 11 1 e, L1 v1 \ IorNg3) 6 ArV. f f •;.1,.,, 9 it • 37 I 1.7 1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT;OF THkAtkTE OF WASHINGTON CLER IN AND FOR THZYCDVNTY .OF KING is LESLIE ADAMS, et ux, 828227 Plaintiffs, NO. 5 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSEvs• CITY OF RENTON, a Municipal ) 7 Corporation, Defendant.. This matter coming on for hearing this ! day of May, 10 1977 , upon the motion of Leslie Adams, petitioner herein, sup- ported by afiidavit executed by Leslie Adams, for a Writ of 12 Certiorari directed to the City of Renton, Washington, requiring I I! the said City of Renton, . Washington, to certify to this court 14 at a specified time and place a full transcript of the record 15 and ,proceedings had in con 'ection with the passage of Ordinance No. 3130. by the City Council, City of Renton, Washington, which 17 ordinance is entitled "An ordinance of the City of Renton, 18. Washington, changing the zoning classification of certain prop- erty within the of Renton from residence district (R-2) to 20 i business district (B-1) " , and thereupon this court review the 21, 1 same as to the claim by said Leslie Adams that passage of the 2'2 said ordinance and approval of the subject re-zone was contrary 2 I' II to law and also that issuance of any building permits on the 241 subject property be stayed pending such review; and that it 25' ?,appearing to the court that .there may be sufficient grounds for 26 such a writ to issue, and the court being fully advised in the premises, now, therefore, 2g IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the City of Renton, Washington, 29 I'a municipal corporation, the defendant in this proceeding, 30 Order to Show Cause RESEBURG.DUNCAN.THERRIAULT&ENGEBRETSEN LAWYERS 1 TIO FOURTH AND PIKE BUILDING SEATTLE WASHINGTON 96101 623.5433 ti4 AT i..\•ii 3r,•\a' ' x'• t' i•. k II 1 appear at the Commissioner's Court, Room W-623, King County 2 Courthouse, Third Avenue & James Street, Seattle, Washington, 3 at the hour of 1:30 p.m. on the 13th day of May, 1977,, and then 4 and there show cause, if any it has, why the writ prayed for 5 should not issue. 2-f /7,7- r) • (^A / AIXTDGilCOURT/COMMISSIONER 8 Presented by: 9 WILLIAM R. RESEBURG • 11 Attorney for Plaintiffs 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 I 25 26 28 79 30 I Order to Show Cause 2. txr,c.4,17:-,K47-":." , • ; 0-„•, i : : , vo ..",, t 1 N. 1,. i\.,,. 41 N kC t) l‘t, 1\. . At " A.,. . q f, 1• gTATZ e2tE v•mattflerm-} • • ca.,„,.„.., i,,e, lc- .-i,.t-,•_,•,,, -„,n,•!,:p..,,,-,:,,,,,(,.T,T, t4v•-•tli.7; CleA of tIte Superior Courtof: .4...ii,e tkate. at V11„7:1..7;4A:4,O,,4 .64 t.;•' (24--JaITA.t.7 cf 1.(iv,i,,, do Lereby certifyt'S'it..• ,E: laire::',:co-,,iii-i'i!cd 1-. :•,•-•.1,i,...ti.,;',-6,"0...1. ;‘!•,;•"-;'4- t,-;,1•. ll;:e. cri-:......i!"1 .Tznent asc-;e. ,-..•:::7-e. ':-..P1.7:,-2,,,F. c.;:. 2r.:i••:. ...-tr.e4. ,-..•:i. --;••:• ,.; •', 1 :. ..., ,•,..r•••••...0, -;•.•.••]. •L]:::: tLe- rinIne i•.: a 1-.1::::, :::::-.:', i.:•,...;:i24. 1.:4:1.:-.,eviil....,t a a:•.:<.,. ci:i ',-..,„; rind pi. th.L., ,,,vL-t 27,ereaf,„ liES-..h:NaciNy 1,1,-,-.:I:i-i,i,:ii:-...2.-j, 1... !,..,,,t 1,,,:., ., my Land r,nd ,.-...M.,,•:.:,-3 ille S.j.:::11 il ,-.•••.aid.7'.:66.4ini• Cbuii ;,,;.:;:,-1.,;•"d",,;: r- i':-..ii vl.... r....',.,.k...;-.. f...',..;.,-. ....,.....• ......,....,iiii.tveA il•ipf '''' / 7-7.9 /i,,,,...1,f. e•oa.ael.+;•••440•/ '.,;;•;11)•41..••••: ,Z,,, ri,E. -;:.2.i---f.-..,-,.::,',/i•lil...., Actir.,IL,t S,,;',1:-.'i.'Ll,." C..!ourt _Ark hr.-, ..-- ' (1.-------(1;?' ----" ---•'''' ''''''-e"----- 7...,'. ------ rvp.k‘6.,,- .4'o 4•4•0, ,,, V''''.o o'o7 o 4.4-;•CA A a ll Z.,9'11 Li$•-ii r ft,- •••-•—•,--------e. Ir:',!::-Lie4y C1‘...rlt 7 r r 3 9 to 1 , IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE TATE OF WASHINGTON I fl 2 ,IN AND FOR ,TBFT,'COUUTY-W( KING 3 LESLIE ADAMS, et ux, 4 u Plaintiffs, NO. 828227 vs. NOTICE OF APPLICATION 6 CITY OF RENTON, a Municipal FOR WRIT Corporation, 71 Defendant. 8 I 9 TO: . CITY. CITY CLERK, City of Renton, Washington; CLERK OF THE 10 CITY' COUNCIL,'. City of Renton, Washington; TO ALL OTHERS TO WHOM 11 IT MAY CONCERN. 12 YOU AND EACH OF YOU will please take notice that on the 13 13th day of May, 1977, at the hour of 1:30 p.m. , or as soon 14 thereafter as the same may be heard, the undersigned will apply 15 to the Superior Court of the State of Washington for the County 16 of King located at the King County Courthouse, 3rd Avenue and 17 James Street, Seattle, Washington, for the issuance of a Writ 18 of Certiorari and Other Orders all prayed for in the Petition 19. For Writ of CertiOrari and Other Orders, a copy of which petition 20 and the affidavit of Leslie Adams, one of the realtors, is 21 hereby a part of this notice by reference and by attachment 22 hereto of two copies of such petition and affidavit. 23 DATED this 613-- day of May, 1977. 24 25 W LIAM R. RESEBURG 26 Attorney for Plaintiffs 27 28 30 Notice of Application For Writ RESEBURG.DLNCAN THERRIAULT&ENGE9RETSEN I LAWYERS O FOURTH AND Al HE S'JlLOiNG e23 5433 1 i I li C c...: 1 ' IN THE SUPERIO "dOUAT_ OF iii0FiliE OF WASH/NGTON 2 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING c . 3 , LESLIE ADAMS, et ux, cl.. 4 ; u Plaintiffs, NO. 828227 3 r......1 APPLICATION FOR WRIT ri 6 1 CITY OF RENTON, a Municipal 7. i Corporation, 1 Defendant. 8 i S 11 r— c:. 9 ; I Comes now LESLIE ADAMS, by_ his attorney, William R. r 1 10 1 Reseburg, and petitions the above-captioned court for a Writ 1 1 of Certiorari directed to the City of Renton, Washington, for 12 ;I purposes of obtaining judicial review of the action of the City 13 ' Council of the City of Renton, Washington, in re-zoning certain 14 property which re-zone was approved by the City Council; City 15 of Renton, 'Washington, in the form of Ordinance No. 3130, 16 I entitled "An Ordinance of the City of Renton, chang- 17 ing the zoning classification of certain properties within the 18 ` City of Renton from residence district (R-2) to business district 19 1 (B-i) ",requiring the City of Renton, Washington, to certify to I 20 ' 1 this court at a specified time and place a full, transcript of 21 I the record ana&proceedings had in said cause for review herein, 22 and that thereupon the court review the same as to a claim by 23 1I said LESLIE ADAMS that the decision approving the subject re-zone by the City Council, City of Renton, Washington was improper and 25 1 contrary to law, and also that issuance of any building permits 6 I 1 covering the subject property be • stayed pending such review. 27 This application is based upon the affidavit of LESLIE ADAMS hereto attached and by this reference made a part of this application. I iid. 1 7 30 ilIIIAM R. RESEBURG Application for Writ Attorney for Plaintiffs RESEOURGS UNCAN THERRIAULT&ENGESPETSEN 5 1• LAWYER, if FOURTH AND RINE EWILDIN., SE ATTLE WASHINGTON 9-tle. 623 7.33 I • STATE OF WASHINGTON ) • ' ss. 2 i COUNTY OF KING - 3 LESLIE ADAMS, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposes and 4 says: I 6 That on the 25th day of April, 1977, the third reading of 7 ! the Ordinance No. 3130 of the City of Renton, Washington, was 8iheard at the City Council meeting, City of Renton; that said 9 .. ordinance was accepted as proposed; that said ordinance is to entitled an • Ordinance of the City of Renton, Washington, changing 11 the zoning classification' of certain properties within the City 12 of Renton from residence, district (R-2) to business district 13 (B-1) . 14 i II. 15 That 'the petitioner is an interested party in the afore • i 16 mentioned proceeding. 17 III. 18 That, on February 28, 1977, the land use hearing examiner, 19 City of Renton, after public hearings on the issue of re-zoning 20 the subject property, ordered that the re-zone be approved gran- 21 ting the application filed by William L. McLaughlin covering 22 i property located approximately 300 feet north of North 12nd Stree. , 3 along the easterly edge of .the existing power line easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard, in the 25 1 •City of Renton, Washington; that said action was taken by the 26 ,land use hearing examiner for the City of Renton under File No. 27 R-001-77; that said hearing examiner's decision was then appealed 8 to the City Council, City of Renton, Washington; that the City 29 Council then passed the ordinance identified above which action is the subject for this petition for review. Application for Writ 2. 1" IV. That n: ma"kng the aforementioned 'disposition of said 3 proceedings, the City of Renton, Washington, ' acting through the 4 City Couocil,. City. of. Renton, erred in the following particulars: 5: Approval ;of•'',the:",subj,ect 're-zone is in violation of the comprehen-' 6 Isive land use."plan. adopted by the City of Renton; approval of the lire-zone, destroys : the natural buffer provided by the power line 8 easement' which:.;,exists-'between the business zoned property fronting 9• on Sunset' B•ou"lev•ard, and ,the residential zoned property located 1Q {{ directly behind;'".that approval of said re-zone is for the benefit f the individual._owner of the subject property and at the expense 12 j and ".detriment"of the, residential land owners' whose property, is big.i . ... - •'. i i ' 13 j located` behind';:the,• subject property. • T.4: v' c o f` a writofsefeiuanTl at. 16 Certiorari/review;because,'"there is .no other means of appeal, nor 17 any •plain, speedy and adequate remedy At' Law to correct the pro- ceedings 'below. ,' r . j 9 afetiorre. ra s that. a Writ" 'a C rWBEREFORE ', ahe, "ett"fon r ..p y, 2g issue `out:``of 'tie above captioned "court: directing the City "of 21 to:=icert'if 'its record .in saidproceedings "'to . f tenton ;'Washa:ngto i r: y: P 22. 1 es of itssuch :court`.-so°;'that;:;:,t2ie:'`reasonableness.,and lawfu n s 23 ordinance .may,.be,,inquired _into_ and determined. 25 LESLIE ADAMS, Petitioner 27 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN. ',to before" me"•this:•• of"May. ;1977 .• Notary public in and for the ate of Washington, residing at Se'attl'e'. c , r. 1 f a S t`• F.w 01-7 i I1IF k p O s L A — z c+:.vd _ OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEYS RENTON,WASHINGTO si.1 POST OFFICE BOX d29. 100 2nd AVENUE BUILDING • RENTON,WASHINGTON 9,3055 255 bd78 O tiQ' GERARD M.SHELLAN,CITY ATTORNEY LAWRENCE J.WARREN. AssisiANT C,TY ATT O Rt o SE P-05 May 31, 1977 Re3 urg, Dmcan, Therriault & Fngerhretsen Attorneys at Law 710 Fourth & Pike Building Seattle, Washington 93101 Attn: M.r. William R. Reseburg Re: Adar,. vs City of Renton Dear Bill: . Thank you for your letter of ?fay 27, 1977 together with enclosures. . With your permission, we have made some changes to the proposed Order since the Writ should address itself to the City as a whole,and not to any .particular phase of City, government. We have also added to the last paragraph the particulars regarding the bondanditspurpose. If you have any question at all in this matter, please advise. We remain Very -truly yours, fi Gerard M. She l.in GNS:bjm Enc. 41 S OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY* RENTON,WASHINGTON• t POST OFFICE BOX 825, WO 2nd AVENUE BUILDING • RENTON,WASHINGTON 9E1055 255-88750gm=oft+ G O ' GERARD M.SHELLAN,CITY ATTORNEY LAWRENCE J.WARREN, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY4‘, s E Pitw. 0 May 23 , 1977 (die) Reseburg , Duncan,Therriault & Engebretsen Attorneys at Law 710 Fourth & Pike Building Seattle , WA 98101 Attention : Mr. William R. Reseburg Re :Leslie Adams , et ux vs City of Renton Dear Bill: We are handing you herewith copy of the Return of Writ as duly executed by our City Clerk. Pursuant to our understanding •' , the other day, tae have filed in Court the two City files involved that our City Clerk has prepared, together with the taped recordings of the proceedings before the Hearing E-xaminer. I have no objections if you wish to withdraw said tapes for temporary use. I think our next step would be to agree on an early trial date and I assume you will check with the Presiding Judge' s Department when same nvqould be a.vailable. We remain , Very truly yours , Gerard M. Shellan • GMS :ds Enc. k A, CERTIFICATE - I., the undersigned , Delores , A . Mead ,: City ' Clerk of the City of Renton , Washington , do hereby certify—that this is a true and correct copy of exerpts of Rentdn City Council Meetings concerning the McLaughlin- Rezone '(R-0:01 -77) and adoption of Ordinance #3130 ; 4/4/77 Public Flearin..11 / 77 First. Re.ading of the Ordinance ; 4/ 18/ 77 Secand and Final Readings of the Ordinance ; 4/25/77 Adoption of :Ordinance 4/25/77 . (Side 2 - Track 1 ) • SubCribed and Sworn this 20th day :of :MaY',: 1977 . • 2t4L_ Delores A. Mead , City Clerk Subscribed and Sworn this 20th day Of May , 1977 • 2-1-0L----- 0-4 . • Maxiffe -E . Motor Notary Public In and for the . State of Washiri-gton residing at Renton . CERI.FICATE' I . THE UND,ERSIGNED L RICK, BEELER , LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER OF: THE C I TY OF R.ENTON; :WASHINGTON CER T I FY THAT THIS I•S A TRLF:: • A,ND CORRECT CORY.:OF: LAND USE HEARING TAPES OF CASE No - R-oot -77 , WILL I AM L . .MCLAUGHL IN REZONE REQUEST FOR HEARINGS HELD ON JANUARY 31 . 1977 AND. FEBRUARY 22 , 1977 . SUBSCRIBED AND SEALED THISTHIS 19TH DAY OF MAY , 197..7 , L . RICK BEELER LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON Subscribed and Sealed this 19th Day of May, 1977, . e•e• Maxine E. Motor, Notary Public In and for the State of Washington Residing at Renton CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned,DCIOr.eS A. /Vjeaci Clerk of the City of Renton, Washington, certify that ,this is a true . eiC,a le and 1...ecolrre r t copy o 1.,. ti ...,a . /94S -ffvh1/r) mik, s4 7Subscrilk,d and Saled this_c40 Ltay of.. _ City Clerk L• aileyry t Public Notices said Section 4,Township 6' 23 North, Range o E., I W.M.,described es fol-lows:beginning eta point on'the east One of said subdivision 326.30' northerly from the south- Affidavit of Publication east corner thereof; thence continuing north- arty along said easterly line a distance of 163.60' STATE OF WASHINGTON toe point 489.90'north- COUNTY OF KING ss' eriy of said southeast. corner; thence north;', 88°53'08" west to the:l easterly margin of Puget . Bntt....l'-0orri.s being first duly sworn on Sound Power and Light Y Company's transmission line right-of-way;thence oath,deposes and says that She is the c(li.e.f...cI ark of soidherly along said eas- lady margin to a point THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE,a newspaper published four(4)bearing north 88°53'08" times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and west from the point of has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred beginning;thence south to,printed and published in the English language continually as a news-88°53'08" east to the paper published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington,point of beginning. and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained point property located at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Renton sate ote 3Uhod Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the of mapproximately Street,' north Superior Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, ofongNorththe 12teasterly edg of the existing powertne Washington.That the annexed is Or) 3131) easement and approxi- mately•100 feet east of N.E.Sunset Boulevard) AND FURTHER SUBJECT to the following conditions which are covenants run- as it was published in regular issues(and ning with the land: not in supplement form of said newspaper)once each issue for a period 1;The height of any and all structures located CITY OF. on the above do- of Otteconsecutive issues,commencing on the ' RENTON,WASHINGTON ' scribed property shall ORDINANCE NO.3130 not exceed 15 feet AN ORDINANCE OF from the presently ex- 2n`'}t day of ' " ri1 19 and ending the THE CITY OF RENTON, " 'sting grade on Sunset WASHINGTON, Boulevard, fronting CHANGING THE ZON- • subject property. ING CLASSIFICATION . 2.Petitloner-Ownertoin- day of 19 both dates OF CERTAIN PROPER- 'stall and maintain site inclusive,and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- TIES WITHIN THE CITY ' obscuring 5 foot fence scribers during all of said period.That the full amount of the fee OF RENTON FROM RE- - (minimum'height) on SIDENCE DISTRICT(R- top of the rockery to be jf,r11 2)TO BUSINESS DIS- located along the charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of$ which ' TRICT(B-1) north,south and east has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the WHEREAS under Chapt- property lines of sub- first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent or 7,Title IV(Building Rags- fact property. insertion. lotions) of Ordinance No. 3.To install and maintain 1682 known as the"Code of a 5 foot planting strip r.-f. General Ordinances of the adjacent to Sunset City of Renton", as Boulevard. Ch i f.f C 1 q rk amended,and the maps and _4.To file an appropriate 1 reports adopted In conjunc- storm water run-off lion therewth,the properly plan with the Public ' hereinbelow described has• ' Works Department Subscribed and sworn to before me this nth day of I heretofore been zoned as subject to the approval Residence District (R-2); and acceptance there- pri1 19 77 land of by said Department. WHEREAS a proper pet- 5.Maintain, 'wherever J I Lion for charge of zone physically possible the t lil...l.. l:f' classification filedf proper- existing evergreen Notary Publh n and for the State of W nngton, ty has been filed with the trees located on the residing at Kent, County. Planning Department on or eastern property line about-November 19,1976 so that same will con- which petition was duly re- stitde a natural buffer ferred to the Hearing Exa- between the proposed passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June miner for investigation, .commercial develop- 9th,1955.study and public hearing, _mast and adjacent re- and a public hearing having sidential property. Western Union Telegraph Co.rules for counting words and figures, been held thereon on ar 6.To Install and maintain adopted by the newspapers of the State. about January 31, 1977, illumination In such which said hearing was con- manner as to minimize tinued for additional toe-' the glare from subject I timony•on February'22, property to adjacent 1977,and . properties located on WHEREAS an appeal Monroe Avenue N.E. was duty nod by an ag- . 7.Coordinate with the V.P.C.Fenn No.e7 grievedparty with the City Planning Department Council on or about March 7, the design and color of 1977,end the building so as not WHEREAS the City to visually detract from Council fixed end estab- adjacent residences. lished April 4,1977 as the 8.Install'and maintain date for review of the Hear- adequate landscaping Mg Examiners decision and on the eastern proper- reconrmendationa and ty line adjacent to the WHEREAS the City screening fence to, Council having duly consi- . minimize visual impact dered at mates-relevant of the proposed de- thereto,and ell parties haw- ' velopment on subject tog been heard appearing In - property. support thereof or In appeal- :SECTION II:This Ord- lion thereto,NOW THERE-, mince shell be effective FORE upon Its passage,approval THE CITY COUNCIL OF and five(5)days after its THE CITY OF RENTON, publication. WASHINGTON, DO OR- PASSED BY THE CITY DAIN AS FOLLOWS:' COUNCIL this 26th day of SECTION I:The follow-'April,1977. Ing desadbed property In the Delores A.Mead City of Renton la hereby City Clerk rezoned to Business District APPROVED BY THE B-1:) as herelnbelow MAYOR this 25th day of specified;the.Planning DI- April,1977. rector Is hereby authorized •. Chines J.Doisurenti end directed to hihange the •. Mayor Maps of the Zoning Ordl- Approved se to form: I now,ae amended,to evl- Gerard M.Sheendancesaidrezoning,to-wt: City Attorney That pc/Mend the south- .Published In The Renton east Vi of the southeast Record-Chronicle'April 29, i 14 of the southwest Y4 of 1977.R4327_ ' f Renton City Council 5/9/77 Page 4 Consent Agenda - Continued Proclamations Proclamation of Mayor Delaurenti declared May 6 and 7, 1977 as Lions White Cane Days and urged all citizens to support the program for all state residents who may need services provided by the eye bank. Proclamations Mayor Delaurenti proclaimed May 20 and 21 , 1977 as Renton Poppy Days urging all citizens to join in wearing the Memorial Flower. Court Suit Superior Court No. 827772 filed by Dorris Catlin for compensation for condemnation and for damages to real property located at 4101 NE 25th Place, resulting from installation of water main October, 1975. Refer to City Attorney. Consent Agenda MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA, Approval INCLUDING VOUCHERS. CARRIED. Dog Leash Law Letter from Mayor Delaurenti recommended changes to the Dog License Ordinance, Title V, Chapter 16, of the City Code increasing late charge fees from $1 .00 to $10.00, deleting "at heel" from exemption to the leash law and increasing offense charges. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL REFER LETTER TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Annexation Letter from the Board of Public Works, Chairman Gonnason, reported Kent no objection to proposed annexation (Lien) to the City of Kent as reported by the King County Boundary Review Board, noting the area is outside the City's potential service area. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY GRANT, COUNCIL CONCUR IN REPORT AND FORWARD TO THE KING COUNTY BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD. CARRIED. Mini Computer Letter from Purchasing Agent Church recommended acceptance of low bid Police Department of I.B.M. Corporation in amount of $10,710 plus $578.34 tax, for a Federal Grant mini-computer data/storage unit and hard copy printer, bids opened 4/27/77. The letter reported concurrence of Police Chief Darby and Data Processing Director Torgelson. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, REFER TO THE PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE. CARRIED. McLaughlin Rezon -Show Cause, Notice of Application for Writ and Application for Writ Appealled to No. 828227 was filed by Leslie Adams, et ux, vs, the City requiring Superior Court -- full transcript of record for judicial review of re-zoning approved Hearing by the City Council in form of Ordinance 3130 entitled "An Ordinance Examiner' s No, of the City changing the zoning classification of certain properties R001-77 within the City from residence district (R-2) to business district B-1 . The plaintiffs stated rezone contrary to law and requested staying of issuance of any building permits on subject property, MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL REFER COURT CASE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Mayor Delaurenti announced receipt of check in amount of $52,500 for Earlington Park Earlington School property, has notified the School District and reports the building will be demolished without cost. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY THORPE, MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COM- MITTEE. CARRIED. Conference Council President Perry announced report on A.S.P.O. trip forthcoming. NEW BUSINESS Council President Perry noted newly adopted ordinance setting Committee of the Whole meetings second Thursday of month, will not take effect until Wednesday. Consequestly it was, MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL CANCEL 5/10/77 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOIF MEETING. CARRIED. Emergency System Councilman Stredicke called attention to letter from Paul Barden, King for King County County Council regarding the 911 emergency system extending throughout King County area. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY THORPE, REFER THAT COMMUNICATION RE 911 SYSTEM EXPANSION TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. CARRIED. Earlington Park Councilwoman Thorpe thanked the Administration for assistance and support in acquisition of the Earlington Hill park property. Renton City Council 5/9/77 Page 3 Public Hearing - Continued L.I:,D. #30.2 standards for development of public ri ht-of-way, explaining plans Street meet City' s criteria for industrial collector with 80' r/w, 44' street Improvements width and explained parkway design of proposed Longacres Parkway. Lind Ave. SW Property owner, Robert Edwards, 1913 91st NE, Bellevue, protested even though acknowledging reduction of assessment below assessed valuation of property. Frank Edwards, 12546 39th NE, Seattle, inquired regard- ing width of right-of-way for street. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL RECESS FOR 10 MINUTES. CARRIED. Council recessed at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened at 9:45 p.m. Roll Call : All Council members present except Councilman Grant. Frank Edwards explained that develop- ment of the property was not scheduled and questioned fairness of donating right-of-way for the street, then being assessed for develop- ment of same. James Gordon, Property Manager, Glacier Park, Seattle, called attention that no protests were filed by Metro, Golden Grain Macaroni Co. , Mobile Oil or Olympic Pipeline and noted area land prices and indicated brokerage advice that upon completion of improvements, ie sewer, water, street, a value of $20,000 per acre. Mr. Gordon objected to median strip design due to heavy truck turning. Don Cowles, Burling- ton Northern Industrial Development, asked alternative to median landscaping as cuts could not be determined until property developed, noting attractive development of Lind Ave north of FAI-405, objecting to increased cost with median design and noting City's responsibility to upkeep of the median. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, COUN- CIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY PERRY, Council proceed with the L. I.D. and adopt alternate "A" plan for Lind Ave. SW as recommended by the Planning Department. SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL ACCEPT REVISED PRE- L. I.D. to LIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL AND AUTHORIZE BID CALL PER ALTERNATE PLAN "A". Proceed SUBSTITUTE MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUN- CIL REFER THE L. I .D. TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. (10:13 pm) CONSENT AGENDA The following Consent Agenda items, previously distriubted to all Council members, are considered routine and are enacted by one motion unless removed by Council action for separate consideration. Vouchers The Ways and Means Committee recommended Council approval for Vouchers No. 13687 through No. 13848 in the amount of $1711297.36 having received Departmental approval as to receipt of merchandise and/or services rendered. Recommendation included for payment of LID No. 298 Revenue Warrant No. R-6 in amount of $14,566.37 and Cash Warrant No. C-8 in like amount. Council concurrence recommended. Proposed LID #306 Petition was filed for creation of a sanitary sewer between Sunset Blvd. NE and FAI-405, north of NE 7th SL. Refer to Public Works Department for certification. Appointment Letter from Mayor Delaurenti appointed B. J. Richardson, 479. Harring- Police Civil ton NE to 6-yr term in Police Civil Service Commission, term expiring Service 6/1/83. Mr. Richardson was appointed to the Commission last October to complete the unexpired term of Virginia Busato who had resigned. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Appointment Letter from Mayor Delaurenti appointed Nathaniel W. Weathers, Jr. , Park Board 3905 NE 6th St. , and Mrs. Nancy Mathews, 4125 NE 17th St. , to the Park Board to fill the two new positions authorized by recently-adopted Ordinance No. 3127. The letter recommended staggered terms of a 3-yr and a 4-yr term in order to avoid three 'positions on the board expiring at the same time; ordinance provides for 4-yr terms effective 6/1/77 through 6/1/81 . The letter also reappointed Ron Regis to the Park Board for a 4-yr term to expire 6/1/81 . Mr. Regis, 824 Jefferson NE, has served on the Park Board since 1964. Refer to the Ways and Means Committee. Use of Public Letter from DeWayne Stalvig, Secretary of the Renton Merchants Associa- Right-of-Way tion requested use of public right-of-way for annual Sidewalk Sale on 7/14 to 15 and 7/19; also requesting two, banners to be placed over right-of-way on 7/7/77 and also concession stand for the Sidewalk Sale. Refer to Public Works Department and Public Services Committee. AP't--tAL OF HEARING EXAMIN.ER ''S RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Charles J . Delaurenti - Presiding April 4 , 1977 McLaughlin Rezone 10:00 P.M. Mayor: We now open the public hearing for appeal-of the Hearing Examiner' s decision of William L. McLaughlin Rezone from R-2 to B-1 , property located in the area north Of NE 12th St. and east .of NE ,Sunset Blvd: Stredicke:Richard M. Stredicke, Council Member)„ Move for 5 minute recess.. Perry: George J. Perry, Council President) • Second. • (10:03 p.m. ) Mayor Pounds gavel ) 10:10 p.m. - Will the Clerk please call the roll . Clerk: Delores A. Mead, City Clerk) Perry Perry: Here Clkerk: Thorpe Thorpe: Patricia M. Seymour-Thorpe) Here Clerk: Stredicke Stredicke: Here Clerk: Shinpoch Shinpoch Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Council Member) Here Clerk: Bruce Bruce: Kenneth D. Bruce) .Here Clerk: Grant Grant: William J. Grant, Council Member) .Here Clerk: Clymer Clymer: Earl Clymer, Council Member) ' Here - Clerk: Roll Call , Mr. Mayor Perry: • We should receive advice from the City Attorney, , The Attorney has advised us we didn' t need a public hearing. Shellan: The damage has been done. Under the Ordinance you. don't have to set a public hearing; however, you have done that and the public is here, Perry: We can conduct what is necessary.. Shellan: The hearing would be for the purpose of presenting new evidence only. Mayor: Is there anyone in the audience that wishes. to present new evidence. Adams : My name is Leslie Adams, 1209 Monroe Ave. NE, Renton, and I have new evidence. We swore under oath and what are the rami'fication,s if there is perjury? Mayor: By Whom? Page 2 - Renton City Council - Public Hearing -, Adams : McLaughlin - man Oat made application for rezone.. Stredicke: Perjury is not a special thing,unless there is charge being made it is merely an interpretation. Adams : Quite simply, ask McLaughlin to explain business building on Page 4, 3.a . of Hearing Examiner' s report. "A former commercial building on site and City asked to be removed due to age of building. " Two houses exist; the building was down the street where Schucks have store, now. When McLaughlin bought building - it is not On property being razed. If this is legal document, it is perjury. Baxic problem. You don't have map. up. . If you have map on appeal to first hearing, it is appealed because we found out about it in the newspapers. At that point we thought it concerned, this whole property. After examination the property in front is zoned B-1 ; this is only property to back. If not zoned business, he is going to have trouble .as property is land locked, there is no way to get to it. It is 60 ft. strip to .the south, is land locked • to the north and south. It is a good place for a park,, and would like the City to develop it. Perry: Could we have map put up? Clymer: Is this item 4.b. or 4.c. on the agenda? Perry: The appeal to this rezone and complete folders :In our folder of 3/14/77 'and at that time when folders returned to the secretary upstairs , she took out and placed the material on your desks., It seems to me when public hearing is granted to individual , every courtesy should be made ,to supply what is neces- sary to make their appeal . Maybe Council did vote for this public hearing when I wasn't here but it seems to me what this man says I don't understand and have to m ake decision and should have this'"before us. You can 't tell me. Seems to me these things should have. been on Council '.s desk - should have been with this agenda. Stredicke: Council person who is paid $400 per month has ,responsibility. If Council people cannot provide same material knowing there'is a hearing on agenda and bring that material , I can' t see the citypuinping. out 72 more copies for this meeting because they just did it three weeks ago. They will have to pump out again unless it is saved. Clymer: I will take issue as there wasn' t any 'maps, 'no presentation or such, this Gentleman should be given courtesy of something 'on the board to talk on. Thorpe: Seems to me there was no formal presentation, a. staff' presen,tation would be in order. I have no aversion to 'bringing the material, but when I called the office at 5:00 p.m. , couldn' t find out and can' t bring material if you don 't know what is on agenda. Think Mr. ClyMer's :point is well taken. Key thing, is public is here. Materials. to review shoul-d be here. Page 3 Renton City Council - McLa' 'tin Rezone 4/4.77 Perry: Would like to make suggestion. We hear public and continue to next Monday and then have staff give us presentation. At the same time will schedule field trip for next Saturday and we will look at. McLaughlin: (William McLaughlin, 10630 SE 176th, Renton) We had two publci hearings already; It was my understanding the new Hearing Examiner. Ordinance was set up to eliminate all of this , now we are going to have a fourth public hearing . As far as perjury is concerned don' t know what was meant, there was a building and I tore it down, that' s what I d.id. Hearing• Examiner has heard this twice. ' It is mu experience when I put rezones, through, .Kin,g County,. appeal on rezone aught to be handled by Council ; not at a public hearing. You have had decision of person receiving $24,000 per year which is more than $400. Examiner told . - you twice he concurred with this rezone. If you want to bring us down for rezone, let me know and I will make application here: . As far as Clymer not having this information, he should .have:be.en at last meeting. Also, some of these people who say they didn'.t get material., I have read about. it in the Record Chronicle: Maybe they don't get the paper, Would hate to see another continuation. I have been six months now. Mayor: Mr. Clymer has been seriously ill and he has r.ight... . , Stredicke: Every person sitting on the Council regardless of,whether we pay someone 24,000 a year still can got 'for judgement and. can get additional testimony for whatever reason we want; some of the wisdom is still . here on the Council and Attorney will tell you that. Mayor: Is there any additional new evidence? Grant: I move to close the hearing. Perry: Second. Mayor: Moved by Grant, Seconded by Perry, Council .ciose the hearing, , Mayor: All those in favor say Aye; opposed No. The Ayes have it, Motion .Carried. Perry: Move we concur in recommendation of. the Hearing Examiner. Bruce: Second Mayor: Moved by Perry, Seconded by- Bruce, Counci,l'.Con'cur• in the, recommendation of the Hearing Examiner. Stredicke: On motion, I would ask if elected Council persons prior to voting whether they have looked at this piece of property and, know what the rezone is and ' that you are familiar with property. Clymer: I! have not been at Council for some time, -Wi l,l abstain '- I, should 'not vote, I have not read it, know nothing about .it .and .abstain for that reason. Stredicke: Was this rezone, before the Council now, the same rezone I have asked relative . to two pieces of correspondence received by City. Council •members. Page 4 Renton City C^- rci1 Perry: Is this advised for green belt? People paid $25. Stredicke: This is public hearing and we have not had those two documents brought before us. Clymer: Have right of protest citizen in mind in, this situation-; and sense tonight Council is going to accept these things. We are having travesty on rights of individual to act on something and not giving individual. _materials in folder. Suggest you can appeal to court. Mayor: Yes . Stredicke: Why we are here tonight for public hearing, appeal filed on Hearing Examiner's decision with City Council with dollars put up to file appeal . My question is relative to documents that accompanies that payment and whether or not those have been presented to Council and presented to this public hearing. City Clerk: (Delores A. Mead, City Clerk) The letter of appeal was read March 14, when this hearing was set. Would reread the 'letter of appeal if you would ask to have read. Perry: Letter was addressed to myself and thought everyone got it. Do know there was packet made. Thorpe: Recall receiving information and did receive. . Do have questions as to appropriateness of rezone; whether adequate covenants that would protect development of area. Recognize`B-1 zoning is loosely worded, part of zoning code and don' t think adequate in ;as much as Council is not willing to receive staff presentation --= it was' set for public hearing and there has been no staff presentation. Thorpe: Motion on .floor is approval and I will haveto vote against it because matter has not been adequately reviewed nor,appeal. reviewed: Page 5 April 4, 1977 Council Meeting McLaughlin Rezone Perry So another hearing was set and the other hearing that was set, the citizens made their complaints known and this settlement came out and there is covenants required on both and if you wish I will read them, but there is protection in the recommendations. There are three, four, five, six, seven, eight recommendations for covenants. Coucilman Perry then read the restrictive covenants in Ordinance No. 3130. ) These conditions are in addition to those imposed at the hearing of January 31 . ; Mayor There is a motion on the floor.. All in favor of the motion. . . . Stredicke Mr. Mayor, the motion on the floor is, to 'approve:..the':zoning; for what property? Mayor The William M. McLaughlin property located o.n 'N.E, 12th St. from R-2 to B-i , and east of N.E. Sunset Blvd. Stredicke Is that the property outlined in red on the .map? What does it have to do with Sunset Highway 'l,andscaping if we are talking about an interior piece of property that is being rezoned. Mayor Mr. Ericksen, can you answer that? • Ericksen The landscaping on Sunset is required by the parking and loading ordinance. I 'm not sure what the reference really meant. Stredicke Is the landscaping the requirement of the zoning for parking when it is developed or does it have to do.with the rezoning Of that property? Rezone, not building a house, just rezoning. Ericksen The Parking and Loading -ordinance requires landscaping along the public right-of-way and that's part of the rezone. Stredicke I just want to be sure you're not talking about the property all the way out to Sunset Highway, just talking about this particular piece of property that is being rezoned. Clymer Mr. Mayor, I assume that the. part that he read about maintaining trees on the easterly portion. of the land, northis this direction, then one would assume this is west and east is here, what are the trees on this plan that you have .to maintain' ?. Ericksen The trees, Mr. Mayor, are located where the building is proposed to be located, the proposed development. would: involve excavation of the hillside area, the trees there, for the most part, would be removed as well as the two houses that are located there. There are some trees on the adjacent property to the_ eat that would remain, of course, under different ownership. Page 6 4. April 4, 1977 Council Meeting McLaughlin Rezone Page Two Clymer Wait a minute, you said he had to file restrictive covenants, how can he sign them on someone else's property? Ericksen Mr. Mayor, the way the covenant is stated, he would try= to retain the trees. Clymer Read that again, will you please, on the restrictive covenants. Perry Maintain, where physically possible the stand of evergreen trees on the eastern property line as a-_natural; buffer between the proposed commercial development and .the ,adjacent'residentialproperty. Clymer Where is the adjacent property? Perry Right above it. Clymer Just east of it there.right on the' property 'line, at least I ,notice quite a few trees in there, I;.don't understand, are there trees in there or are' there not? Perry There are some trees in there,: Mayor What is the setback to the property line :Mr.. Ericksen? Ericksen The setback is probably less than five feet, from my knowledge, I 'm just judging from the drawing. Clymer Mr. Mayor, it seems to that they ,are talking about trees that are on another piece of property, that may or;may not be owned by Mr. McLaughlin, ,hopefully they are' owned..by him, but even then if I went down for a rezone on a piece ,of property that I, owned and they said well , Mr. Clymer, we'll give it to,you if thatpiece of property that you own on the other side of town,:,, ifyou'll keep the trees . there: No way. If the 'land is next to you ,or, a mile away, how can you make a commitment on anotner piece of property unless it is included in the rezone? We will try,: which Mayor,Mayor, I hope that the next time that someone appeals one of these things and if the Council is going to' have' a':hea'ri'ng on .i t, that we will be better prepared than we were tonight. Mayor There is a motion on the floor to, concur in the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation. All in favor. . :. . : ; Stredicke Mr. Mayor, the Hearing Examiner's recommendation was to grant the rezone with those conditions that Perry listed, the subject property in red. That means that the one piece of property inaudible) , that's the piece of property we are talking about, not the other one. So what you see there as far as buildings :.ar."e' not. word inaudible). Page 7 April 4, 1977. Council Meeting McLaughlin Rezone Page Three Clymer Mr. Mayor, roll call please. Mayor Inaudible) Clymer Inaudible) Right here it says:-. real estate .office,, 1 ,000 square feet; hair styling shop, 1 ,500 square .feet;: TV repair shop, 1 ,500 square feet, a restaurant, 3,000 square feet Mayor Roll Call has been asked for: City Clerk ROLL CALL: PERRY, AYE; .THORPE,._NO;` STREDICKE, NO;" SHINPOCH, AYE; Mead BRUCE, AYE; GRANT, AYE; CLYMER, ABSTAIN:. ROLL CALL, MR. MAYOR, FOUR AYES, TWO NOS, ONE ABSTENTION: Mayor MOTION CARRIED. Perry I MOVE THIS ACTION BE REFERRED TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE FOR PROPER LEGISLATION. Bruce SECOND THE MOTION. Mayor ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED. CARRIED. Stredicke Are the appellants advised, or have they been advised, that the action of the Council is now with the courts? Mayor Yes inaudible) . Adams I want to pursue that perjury bit. : .How do I do that. . . (inaudible) . Mayor Mr. Shellan. Shellan This Council wouldn 't have any jurisdiction over perjury, it would be a criminal matter and you would have to report it to the prose- cuting attorney: Adams Why does he stand up and swear to tell the truth then'. Is it their responsibility to file the court complaint or.. do I , as an individual , have to? Shellan No, you as an individual would have to because the Council is a legis- lative body, they don't press perjury. charges . inaudible) because this is a criminal charge. . . . . ... .'(Inaudible) : One of the, Mr. Mayor, do we get our twenty-five dollars back ,since we did not Appellants have a hearing?. Mayor Answer is inaudible. Page 8 April 11 ; •1977 Council Meeting Ordinance on McLaughlin Rezone Clymer , We have an ordinance on the McLaughlin. rezone, this is for first reading only, some of the covenants have not been okayed yet and inaudible) . First reading only,. Deputy City An ordinance of the. City of Renton, Washington changing the zoning Clerk Motor classification of certain properties wi.thin .the .City of Renton from Residence District R-2 to Business District B-1 . Perry Mr. Mayor, I would MOVE THIS ORDINANCE BE REFERRED BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. . Shinpoch . SECOND THE MOTION. Mayor It has been MOVED BY COUNCILMAN PERRY, •SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN SHINPOCH, TO RETURN THE ORDINANCE BACK TO THE .WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. Stredicke In regard to ,this rezone ordinance, .do we .have restrictive covenants or have conditions that:'were:agreed toror.:imposed•. by :the Hearing Examiner been recorded as a matter of record with the city and King County? Clymer That's the reason why it's only going on first reading. The Hearing Examiner, as Perry read on the Public 'Hearing the other night .that were incorporated in the ordinance,. but it has not been agreed to by Mr. McLaughlin at this time,. as:far as our committee knows. Mayor ' Question on-the motion. Refer it `back to the Ways and' Means Committee. All in favor signify by saying Aye. Opposed;'. Motion -Carried. . Apri l 18' Council Meeting McLaughlin'Or,dinance Page 9 April 18, 197/ City Council Meeting Mc6aughlin. Rezone Ordinance Attorney understand the w.rezone, ent -through a.,_hearing' process in which for Appellants the hearing examiner made his decision, the Tdecision. was appealed to this body who apparently affirmed the decision that the hearing examiner made. There has -been a good deal 'of -indication to me from people Mr., Adams and some of the other$ in the area.that a full hearing was not had before this body'at the time. it was brought up, which • was apparently two weeks ago, April the fourth. I .believe the ordi- nance and.your own reg:ulations :.require that a full and fair hearing be given. I realize' that. it.'s ,an appellant procedure that there is some hesitance on the part of 'the ,Council members. on what the actual procedure is, but it seems that.. the',people :are entitled .to a pre- sentation of both' sides of th'e• issue and' this would require., in this case, a referral •to fsomekindo sub-group, or/cemmittee and presentation from a member of either' side as .to. what the issue is before the decision of the hearing examiner would be affirmed. Our status here tonight is :primarily, I-. .guess you .would call it a motion to a motion to reconsider or/reopen the decision of this body that this body made to affirm the hearing' examiner's decision. I haven't had an opportunity to review the .ordinance or actually the facts findings that .the hearing .examiner'made., but I guess that the-Very first glance at ,the 'ordinance, it appears that there is a requirement RENTON CITY COUNCIL 1 Regular Meeting May 2 , 1977 Municipal Building Monday , 8 : 00 P . M . Council Meeting MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor C. J. Delaurenti led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the regular meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF EARL CLYMER, Council President Pro tem; KENNETH D. BRUCE, BARBARA COUNCIL Y. SHINPOCH, RICHARD M. STREDICKE. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS WILLIAM J. GRANT, GEORGE J. PERRY, and PATRICIA M. SEYMOUR-THORPE BE EXCUSED. CARRIED. Councilwoman Patricia M. Seymour-Thorpe arrived at 8:15 p.m. CITY OFFICIALS C. J. DELAURENTI , Mayor; G. M. SHELLAN, City Attorney, GWEN MARSHALL, Finance Director; DEL MEAD, City Clerk; DON CUSTER, Administrative Assistant; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Director; CAPT. PHELAN, Police Department Rep. ; RICHARD GEISSLER, Acting Fire Chief; MIKE SMITH, Plan- ning Department Rep. ; JOLLY SUE BAKER, Housing Development Coordinator. PRESS DON SMITH, Renton Record Chronicle; MARK PELLEGRINO, Renton Tribune MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL APPROVE MINUTES OF APRIL 25, 1977 AS WRITTEN. Councilman Stredicke added Page 3, 7th paragraph: Use of traffic flagmen: MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY THORPE REFER SUB- JECT TO THE ADMINISTRATION TO STUDY AND REPORT BACK. CARRIED. Also added, Page 4, McLaughlin Rezone Ordinance #3130 - Reasons for motion to reject ordinance: On basis of error in judgment and in the facts , resulting in intrusion into single family area, that the rezone be denied. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL AMEND MOTION TO INCLUDE ADDITIONS. CARRIED. MOTION AS AMENDED, CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having, been posted, pub- LID No. 302 lished and mailed, Mayor Delaurenti opened the public hearing, con- Street tinued from 4/11/77, to consider the preliminary assessment roll for Improvements Local Improvement District No. 302 to construct and improve Lind Ave. Lind Ave. S.W. SW between SW 16th St. and SW 43rd St. Assessment roll total : 1 ,895,793.80. City Clerk Mead read letters of protest from Douglas F. Albert, Federal Way, Attorney for Robert Edwards and Frank Edwards , Jr., property owners , protested proposed assessment of street, plus right-of-way, plus fill , plus latecomers assessment for water, totals 119,939.65; noting assessed valuation for tax purposes of $77,000 for property. The letter explained present condition is a swamp requiring substantial fill which would amount to $38,880 per acre or $583.200 for filling. The letter noted to assess property as proposed would result in taking the property without compensation. Letter from Douglas F. Albert, Federal Way, Attorney representing Mildred Summers , property owner, protested assessment in total amount of $119,939 including latecomers assessment for water in amount of $64,000 and fill for portion of Lind Ave. SW. ; also noting fill needed, plus the assessments of $119,939.65 require $703,139 to be expended to make Mrs. Summers' property usable. Letter from Public Works Director Gonnason reported protest letters received amounts to 9.07% of the total cost. Public Works Director Gonnason used wall map to explain area, proposed street improvements including grading, draining, to- gether with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights and underground utilities. Gonnason explained water assessment available on latecomer's agreement and can be added to total assessment if so desired. Gonnason explained break down of costs which include the street improvements, right-of-way acquisition, water line costs on those desiring and fill charges to the Edwards' and Summers' properties; further explaining all other property filled and paid by property owners, therefore fill V needed for portions of Lind Ave was charged to the Summers' and Edwards properties. Gonnason explained assessed valuation which was necessary to support the LID. Gonnason showed cross section of street, 4-lane (44-ft. curb to curb) with planter strip and sidewalks to be installed at later date. Audience comment: Mr. Summers, 37904 Third Ave. SW, Federal Way, pro- tested on behalf of his wife, Mildred, cannot_afford assessments; Prop- erty over assessed at $77,000 and have not been able to lower; cannot sell property at $60,000; have been told it would value $125,000 to 135,000 when LID improvements complete and explained injustice in pos'i- ble loss of property. Bob Edwards, 19310 NE 14th, Bellevue, noted prior joint ownership with Summers, that property recently divided and is a lake, also noted property over assessed. Doug Weston, 21318 109th SE, Kent, made inquiry regarding effect of the LID on Lind Ave. from SW 16th to Grady Way and was advised by Public Works Director Gonnason Renton City Council 5/2/77 Page 2 Public Hearing - Continued LID #302 of future need to widen overpass to 4-lane with increase of traffic. Lind Ave. SW Councilman Stredicke questioned need for sidewalks in industrial development and suggested tree-lined median with boulevard effect. Gonnason explained design meets City's subdivision ordinance for industrial section and was worked out with the Planning Department; that median planting strip could be alternative. Councilwoman Thorpe asked for inclusion of bikeways . Upon Council inquiry, Gonnason explained petition filed requesting improvement which represented 62. 17% of the total front footage, petitibn signed by two property owners: Glacier Park and Martin Seelig. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND BY THORPE, COUNCIL CLOSE THE HEARING. CARRIED. Councilman Clymer noted two problem areas: Assessment for fill against individual prop- erty owners when benefit to entire project; and need for appraisal of the property prior to and after improvemets. At suggestion of City Attorney Shellan to continue hearing for further study, it was MOVED Hearing Continued BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL RECONSIDER AND REOPEN THE to 5/9/77 PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, TO CONTINUE HEARING FOR ONE WEEK. Councilwoman Thorpe noted concerns re LID and asked consideration of design for major arterial through valley, requirement for fill in light of wetlands preservation policy, payment for fill , esthetic bikeways and landscaping. Mayor Delaurenti noted the Administration working on these items! MOTION TO CONTINUE HEARING, CARRIED.9: 10 p.m. ) PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and Street Vacation published, Mayor Delaurenti opened the public hearing to consider the Mt.Olivet Way vacation of Mt. Olivet Way located at MtdOlivet Cemetery as petitioned by James R. Colt, President, American Memorial Services, Inc. and continued from March 28, 1977'. Letter frthm Board of Public Works Chairman Gonnason noted review of the proposed vacation, that the Board found that the subject right-of-way is not essential to public access or the city street system and had no objections to the proposed vacation, subject to payment of fee in the amount of 1/2 of the appraised value of the property as determined by staff appraisal . The letter further noted no utility easements are required. Public Works Director Gonnason used wall map to explain area, noting Mr. Colt met with the Department and had reported access into the cemetery was planned. Mayor Delaurenti asked to reviewhproposed plan. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, COUNCIL INSTRUCT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO OBTAIN APPRAISAL AND NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS OF COUNCIL'S INTEREST IN ACCESS TO THE CEMETERY. Councilman Clymer asked the City Hearing Continued Attorney re conflict of interest if family members buried at this to 6/6/77 cemetery, being advised by Mr. Shellan that conflict would exist if Council member was a proprietor of property affected, that cemeteries are regulated by State statutes , that owner is required to provide access to lots he sells, that Council should hear plans prior to any vacation. PM1OTION CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO JUNE 6, 1977. MOTION CARRIED. Recess MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL RECESS FOR 10 MINUTES. CARRIED. Council recessed at 9:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: CLYMER, BRUCE, SIIINPOCII, STREDICKE AND THORPE. CONSENT AGENDA The following Consent Agenda items, previ usly distributed to all Council members, are considered routine and are enacted by one motion unless removed by Council action for separate consideration. Proclamations Proclamation of Mayor Delaurenti declared iiMay9 through May 15, 1977 Municipal Clerk' s as Municipal Clerk' s Week in recognition of vital services rendered Week and personal dedication to the community. Youth Day Proclamation of Mayor Delaurenti declared May 1 , as Youth Day and week beginning May 1 , as Youth Week as designated by the Elks Lodges honoring America' s junior citizens. Unanticipated Letter from Planning Director Ericksen no ed approval was granted Revenue from at Council meeting of 4/25/77 for transfer of HUD Fellowship funds University Work to Planning Department salary account. Thee letter requested an Study Program ordinance be enacted to increase the appropriation by $3,200 from unanticipated revenue to be received from the U of W for reimbursement of salary paid to a Work Study student through the City's payroll system. Recommendation: Refer to Ways & Means Committee. CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 3130 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON FROM RESIDENCE DISTRICT (R-2) TO BUSINESS DISTRICT B-1) 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 District (R-2) ; and WHEREAS a proper petition for change of zone classification of said property has been filed with the Planning Department on dr about November 19, 1976 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 January 31, 1977, which said hearing was continued for additional testimony on February 22, 1977, and WHEREAS an appeal was duly filed by an aggrieved party with the City Council on or about March 7, 1977, and WHEREAS the City Council fixed and established April 4, 1977 as the date for review of the Hearing Examiner's decision and recommendations, and WHEREAS 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 Business District (B-1) as hereinbelow specified; 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- That portion of the southeast 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of said Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 E. , W.M., described as follows: beginning at a point on the east line of said subdivision 326.30' northerly from the southeast corner thereof; thence continuing northerly along said easterly line a distance of 163.60' to a point 489.90' northerly of said southeast corner; thence north 88°53'08" west to the easterly margin of Puget .Sound Power and Light Company's transmission line right-of-way; thence satherly along said easterly margin to a point bearing north 88°53'08" west from the point of beginning; thence south 88°53'08" east to the point of beginning. ON Said property located approximately 300' north of North 12th Street, along the easterly edge of the existing powerline easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard) i3 AND FURTHER SUBJECT to the following conditions which are covenants running with the land: 1. The height of any and all structures located on the above described property shall not exceed 15 feet from the presently existing grade on Sunset Boulevard, fronting subject property. 2. Petitioner-owner to install and maintain site- obscuring 5 foot fence (minimum height) on top of the rockery to be located along the north, south and east property lines of subject property. 3. To install and maintain a 5 foot planting strip adjacent to Sunset Boulevard 4. To file an appropriate storm water run-off plan with the Public Works Department subject to the approval and acceptance thereof by said Department. 5. Maintain, wherever physically possible the existing evergreen trees located on the eastern property line so that same will constitute a natural buffer between the proposed commercial development and adjacent residential property. 6. To install and maintain illumination in such manner as to minimize the glare from subject property to adjacent properties located on Monroe Avenue N.E. 7. Coordinate with the Planning Department the design and color of thebuilding so as not to visually detract from adjacent residences. 8. Install and maintain adequate landscaping on the eastern property line adjacent to the screening fence to minimize visual impact of the proposed development on subject property. 2- SECTION II: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five (5) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 25th day of Apr.il,, •1977. Via., Delores A. Mead, CIt t:Clerk 12 APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 25th day of Apra]'., 5,a4V,ZiLix,:tv Charle J. Delaurenti, Mayor ' Approved as to form: s'Act 14 /44 G rard M. Shellan, City Attorney Date of Publication: 4-29-77 Renton City gun 1 4/25/77 Page 4 Ordinances and Resolutions - Continued Ordinance #3129 The Ways and Means Committee report reco,mrnended second and final Amending 'Pet readings of an Ordinance relating to dog licenses for seeing eye Licensing dogs belonging to blind persons.. Following readings; it was MOVED BY. Removing Fee for CLYMER, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE- AS READ. ROLL CALL': Lead Dog of Blind ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. .(Fi,rst. reading '4/18/77) . dinance #3130 IThe Ways and Means Committee report recommended second and final readings McLaughlin Rezon of an Ordinance which had been held' for one week as directed 4/18/77 re- R=001-77 garding the McLaughlin Rezone from.R72. to', 6-1 with covenants included in the ordinance. Committee- Chairman:Clyiier introduced William Reseburgt . . 710 4th & Pike Bldg, Seattle,- .attorney for. McLaughlin rezone appellants. Mr. Reseburg, noted review of material s.ince 'first reading of the ordinance on 4/18, recognizing covenants as substantial protection to land owners, however, reporting primary' concern of land owners 'b,ei.ng' • fear this rezone is encroaching on buffer 'zone ..that exists between com- , mercial and residential single' family-, specifically; that' rezone will set a precedent allowing other land .owner.s to rezone and asked Council response for matter of record. .City Attorney Shellan 'noted that all rezoning matters •considered individually' as to. merits and are not Clerk to Record automatic. Mr.Reseburg then indicated approval of Ordinance. Wall map Covenants used to explain property located on west side of Monroe, 100 ft: east of NE Sunset Blvd. and north of -NE 12th .St. .. George Johnson, 1300 ,Monroe . Ave. NE, residing across street from designated property, .noted numerous attempts and hearings since 1962 to'rezone said. property and residents' attempts to preserve residential neighborhood, regretting loss of buffer area. Moved by Stredicke, Seconded by. Thorpe Ordinance not be advanced but be rejected. City Attorney She Ilan noted' need for compliance with appearance of fairness , recalling appeal ' and hearing, that if• procedure is changed, , notification will need to be made. , William McLaughlin, 10630 SE 176th, noted approval Of covenants by area residents ,. concern being for future development of adjacent properties: Motion to reject ordinance, Failed. MOVED BY'GRANT, . SECONDED BY BRUCE, ORDINANCE BE ADVANCED TO SECOND AND FINAL ,READINGS: ' Following reading' by the City Clerk, it was MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY CLYMER,• COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE • AS .READ. ROLL CALL: 5 AYES: •:SHINPOCH',' 'BRUCE, GRANT, CLYMER, STREDICKE who:declared intent to asked .for reconsideration next week.' ONE NO THORPE. asking record to ind_i:cate' she still has qualmsin spite of coverw nts. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Reseburg reported desire to. review entire matter 'if Council amenable to reopen ,hearing. Councilman Stredicke withdrew his intent to ask for reconsideration of mo.tion .and asked record be .changed to record ..NO vote. First Reading The Ways and Means Committee:report recommended.:first reading of an West Hill Ordinance annex'ina certain 'City Owned aronertv'. known as West Hill Annexation Reservoir site and West Hill Annexation. Following reading, it was' MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY GRANT, ORDINANCE BE REFERRED BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. . CARRIED. First Reading The Ways and Means Committee report recommended first reading 'of an Special Meetings Ordinance changing the meeting •time ,of :Special Meetings (Committee of the Whole) of the City Council to 2nd'Thursday Of each month. ' Following. .' " reading, it was MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, COUNCIL REFER ORDINANCE BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS .cOMM,ITTEE. CARRIED. First Reading The committee report recommended first., readin:g. of an •Ordinance' amending Industrial the platting fees on industrial property`'as 'requested by the Planning Subdivision Fees Department. Following reading, it was. MOVED BY STREDICKE,, SECONDED- BY GRANT, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS :COMMITTE.E PENDING REPORT 'FROM COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE. C'ARRIED, Resolution #2104 The committee. report recommended reading and adoption of a Resolution Requests funding urging the State legislative. bodies to, take steps to allocate.funds for . for Wetlands acquisi'tion..of wetlands for protection of wildlife : Following reading; it was MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY GRANT, COUNCIL ADOPT:THE .RESOLUTION . AS READ. MOTION CARRIED. Resolution #2105 The committee report recommended reading andadoption :of a Resolution' '-• Surplus Trackage declaring .certain ties; switches and trackage located at .Lake Washington Acquired from Beach Park as., surp.lus and auth:ori'zing, the Purchasing. Agent:,to advertise J.H. Baxter Co. . for sale. Following readingHt was..MO,VED.,`BY GRANT, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL ADOPT RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRI,ED'.: FtIe : Renton City Council e 4/18/77 Page 4 A9CorrespondenceandCurrentBusiness •- Coned Referendum 29 ments are that project must be under contract with DSHS within o. Funds - Continued from date of approval , that if construction contract is not signet. during 12 months allowed, funds revert to other projects; noting inflation decreasing value of Referendum 29 funds. MOVED BY THORPE, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL REFER THE LETTER TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Administrative Assistant Custer discussed City's portion of $117,500 Referendum 29 funds' split with' Greenwood by Region 4, or $58,000. Councilman Clymer noted two directions being taken by Council and Administration and asked for better communication. Councilwoman Thorpe requested copy of application be furnished Council members, being in agreement with Admisi'strative Assistant Custer. Frank Cenkovich, 2625 Benson Rd.S. , Senior Citizens Advisory Committee, inquired re delay , asking that .no funds be lost. OLD BUSINESS Committee of the whole report submitted by Council President Perry Committee of Whole recommending Council approval of, the Master Plan of the Lake Washington Meeting 4/12/77 Beach Park. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, COUNCIL CONCUR IN Park Plan • RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. Wetlands The Committee of the Whole recommended that the Mayor be requested to prepare a •report for the next Committee of the Whole meeting indicating the status of financing and acquisition of wetlands, includ- ing the status of the 39 acres set aside by Burlington Northern. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. Wetlands The Committee of the Whole recommended that the Administration pursue all avenues of funding, including contacting our local legislators for recommendations of sources for funds .to acquire the additional 39 acres set aside by Burlington. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION AND RESOLUTION BE PREPARED THAT MAYOR CONTACT OUR LEGISLATORS TO RESEARCH AND REPORT BACK. AMENDMENT BY ' PERRY, SECONDED BY THORPE, MATTER OF RESOLUTION BE REFERRED TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE TO PRESENT TO COUNCIL NEXT MONDAY. Recess and MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, COUNCIL RECESS FOR 10 MINUTES Executive Session ' Council recessed at 9:35 p.m. and upon convening, Roll was called: PresentPERRY, THORPE, STREDICKE, GRANT .AND 'CLYMER. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND BY GRANT, COUNCIL EXCUSE COUNCILWOMAN SHINPOCH (LEFT MEETING) . CARRIED. MOVED BY PERRY, SECOND THORPE, COUNCIL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. Asked to attend: City Attorney Shellan, Jolly Baker; Plan- ning Director Ericksen. CARRIED. Time: 9:52 p.m. Council reconvened at 10:30 p.m. Roll Call : PERRY, THORPE, STREDICKE, GRANT, CLYMER. ORDINANCES & MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY GRANT, COUNCIL SUSPEND RULES AND ADVANCE RESOLUTIONS TO ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. CARRIED. Ordinance #3126 Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented committee report Comprehensive Plan recommending second and final readings for an ordinance amending the Ripley Lane N. & Comprehensive' Plan regarding Misty Cove- area (Lake Washington) ; first Misty Cove reading 4/11/77. Following readingsof the ordinance amending City' s Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Ripley Lane N. , it was MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY GRANT, COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. McLaughlin Rezone The Ways and Means Committee report recommended second and final R-001-77 readings of an ordinance regarding the McLaughlin Rezone from R-2 to Ordinance Held Business District containing various' covenants which have been One Week approved by the property owner and the City Clerk instructed to record Isame with the King County Records. Following readings, it was MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY GRANT, COUNCIL ADOPT- ORDINANCE AS READ. Attorney William Reseburg, 710 4th & Pike Bldg. , Seattle, explained he had been contacted by Leslie Adams and others 'who had filed appeal of the McLaughlin Rezone (R-001-77) , who had indicated dissatisfaction that full hearing was not held two weeks ago. City Attorney Shellan reviewed provisions of the Hearing Examiner ordinance wherein there is no requirement for public hearing unless 'a substantial error committed by Land Use Hearing Examiner; Sheilah reviewed appeal hearing when new evidence was called for, .that Council found no gross error; also reviewing hearings before the Examiner, noting three hearings have been held; noting. additional restrictions ' added.' . Mr. Reseburg was furnished copy of the' proposed ordinance. Reseburg, requested reopening of the procedure so that both sides could be presented'. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY CLYMER, SUBSTITUTE. MOTION, COUNCIL REFER REZONE ORDINANCE BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE TO HOLD FOR ONE WEEK, r'APPTcn I ------' 2- —. ---1_, t:// / i- C). ‘ -1:( ‘ . • ii '4' / 411 ) (!;.J.,1:.1-;" IV J6 --1,- :•-; .Le ,t2,.-3,-;„•„.1.,:., 4 IPPall'ifv.hi, • -7. 0 T I-1 E CITY OF REN1O7N MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 S 4.44,,64 •= , s; "'*, Z'.CHARLES j,:pELAURENTI 1 MAYOR DELORES A. MEAD A CITY CLERK 4T ' Os'eDSEP1 I April 12, 1977 Mr. William L . MCLaUghtin, Jr: . • 10630 S.E. 176th . . . . • . : Renton, Washington ' ,98055: RE': • REZONE ORDINANCE AND COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE LAND' '' Dear Mr. McLaughlin! . ' ' ! . - • - We enclose herewith copy.of proposed ordinance rezoning your property from ,R-2 -0, 13-L5pOje4 to, conditions and covenants as listed on page 2. . ':- Will you' please iridicate'your.acknowledgment of receipt after review of the conditions, sign 'and return the document, upon re- ceipt of which we Shallforward same to the City Council. for adoption. The ordinance will then be recorded in the King County Department of Record S and :published. We will forward a Completed dopy for your records. YOurt ver) . truly, CITY OF RENTON ljelores A. Mead DM:bh City Clerk Enc 131I t.•• t,l) ' V--PI d- , 1 11,0, - • '45,*: At . , <ThA4 :''* . )\ : ' Elts.\ i 1 , os • v_ • \ I 1V <4.. L I t-.4.\I dC.:.. • N. e,N.),, (..:41 y.s., C) - t--•. 4\44 CI: .e c' ,..,,-.k; \) t‘ . ,,•‘',,,c, s :,' 1) v, 4, . , AX'.- 4 THE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o h :k, °'' CHARLES.J:DELAURENTI , MAYOR DELORES A. MEAD o CITY CLERK ogTED SEP1 April 12, 1977' Mr, William` L. McLaughlin, :ar,: 10630 S.E. 176th Renton, Washington 98055 RE: REZONE .ORDINANCE AND COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE ,LAND Dear Mr. McLaughlin: : ...` We enclose herewith copy of proposed ordinance rezoning your property from R-2 'to B-1:'subj,ect to conditions and covenants as listed on page.2: Will you ,please indicate .,your ;acknowledgment of receipt after review of the' condi ti o:ns,' :s.i'gn ;and return the document, upon re- ceipt of whi ch we shal:l: forward same to the Gi ty Counci 1 for adoption; The ordinance will then. be'recorded in the King County Department of Records and.',published: . :;= We will forward, a completed-;copy for your records. Yours very, truly, CITY QF. RENTON Delores A. Mead DM:bh City Clerk Enc. RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting April 11 , 1977 Municipal Building Monday, 8:00 P.M. Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the regular meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF GEORGE J. PERRY, Council President; PATRICIA M. SEYMOUR-THORPE, COUNCIL RICHARD M. STREDICKE, BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, KENNETH D. BRUCE, WILLIAM J. GRANT AND EARL CLYMER. CITY OFFICIALS C. J. DELAURENTI, Mayor; G. M. SHELLAN, City Attorney; GWEN MARSHALL, IN ATTENDANCE Finance Director; MAXINE E. MOTOR, Deputy City Clerk; DON CUSTER, Administrative Assistant; GORDON Y. ERICKSEN, Planning Director; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Director; RICHARD GEISSLER, Acting Fire Chief; HUGH DARBY, Police Chief; GENE COULON, Parks & Recreation Director. PRESS DON SMITH, Renton Record Chronicle; MARK PELLEGRINO, Renton Tribune. MINUTE APPROVAL Councilman Stredicke mentioned the correction to the 3/28/77 minutes 3/28/77 and requested at the previous meeting, correction recorded in the 4/4/77 4/4/77 minutes. Councilman Stredicke requested change in Paragraph 5, Page 5, 4/4/77 minutes from "Resolution" to "Ordinance" . MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY CLYMER, TO CHANGE "RESOLUTION" TO "ORDINANCE" . MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Thorpe requested addition to Mr. Gonnason's statements on Page 2 re Heather Downs Annexation "and it would not require any additional personnel" ; Page 3, re McLaughlin Rezone, add that Mr. Clymer's abstention was also due to there not being any packets of information furnished and no presentation given by staff at the hearing. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, THE MINUTES OF 3/28/77, AS AMENDED, AND THE MINUTES OF 4/4/77, AS AMENDED, BE APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING MOVED BY BRUCE, SECONDED BY PERRY, THE FIRST ITEM OF PUBLIC HEARING Proposed BE ON THE PARK COMMISSION, FOLLOWED BY THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 0. Ordinance Creat- PARK SUPERINTENDENT. MOTION CARRIED. This being the date set ing & Establish- and public notices having been posted and published according to ing a City Park law, Mayor Delaurenti opened the public hearing to consider a Commission proposed ordinance creating and establishing a City Park Commission. Deputy City Clerk Motor read the proposed ordinance in its entirety. The proposed ordinance would create a Board of Park Commissioners , consisting of seven members to be appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation or concurrence of a majority of the members of the City Council ; for a term of four years. The Board would serve Audience as an advisory body to the Mayor and City Council . Brian McGraw, Comment 404 S. E. 4th St. , Director of Pony Baseball , Inc. , spoke in favor of keeping the Park Board and the Park Department as presently set up as Renton has one of the best park systems in the state. Grace Van Horn, 10814 Forest Ave. S. , Seattle, representing the Recreation Committee of Greater Seattle, said the committee felt that three members were too few, and there should be seven members . Ron Regis , 874 Jefferson Ave. N.E. , member of the Park Board , spoke in favor of keeping the Park Board as it was set up at present with three members, he felt that increasing it to seven members would not increase effectiveness and the Board should keep its autonomy. Councilman Stredicke questioned Mr. Regis on expan- sion of the Park Board from three to seven members. Councilwoman Thorpe questioned him on the Earlington Park site. Councilman Grant commented he favored retaining the autonomy of the Board, but would like to see some expansion of the members. Councilwoman Thorpe explained provisions of the proposed ordinance and that it con- CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned, lie I o hL i A. Mead Clerk of fha>, City of Renton, Washington, certify, that this is a true e CC" ! 8K$a S' a1 1 'and correct copy ofi vyh_ /Ain t Subscribed and Seated this_.11tf'_._.day of hl,4yr ,19_17. City Clerk Renton City Council 4/11/77 - Page 2 Public Hearing - (Continued) City Park tained definitions of parks to include undeveloped areas and annual Commission accountability of the Park Commission to the city as to how money had been spent. Bill File, 3040 S.E. 17th Place, Commissioner of the Greater Renton Pony League, spoke in favor of keeping the system as it was since it has worked out so well , Renton having one of the finest park systems. Joan Moffett, 3709 Meadow Ave. N. , a member of the Park Board, said the board recognized the need for parks in undeveloped areas, but their main responsibility was to maintain what they have and add to it when the money was available; Lake Washington Beach Park presently the number one priority as it would serve the most people. E. L. Bradshaw, 13104 S.E. 162nd Place, spoke on behalf of the Little League, said they have had excellent coopera- tion with the Park Department and that Renton was No. 1 on the list for a choice for state playoffs. Dennis Vadney, 1210 Monroe Ave. N.E. , favored retention of the Park Board, $tat'nq need to have a board that can make decisions quickly. Upon inquiry by Councilman Stredicke as to whether the Council had the authority to rescind action by the Park Board, City Attorney Shellan replied that once the money had been appropriated, the Board can spend it without coming back to the Council . MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY BRUCE, THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Shinpoch spoke in favor of increasing the Board to five members to give a better representation of public input. Moved by Grant, seconded by Thorpe, to amend Section II of ordinance to read five (5) members instead of seven (7) members. Substitute Motion by Stredicke, seconded by Shinpoch, to refer to the Ways & Means Committee with instructions to leave the ordinance the way it is with exception of removing appointment of department head from the Board and placing in the hands of the Mayor and increas- ing membership to five people. Moved by Grant, seconded by Perry, the ordinance be tabled. Roll Call : AYE, 3: Perry, Bruce, Grant. NO, 4: Thorpe, Stredicke, Shinpoch and Clymer. Motion failed. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY GRANT, KEEP THE EXISTING ORDINANCE AND LEAVE THE PARK BOARD AS IT IS PRESENTLY CONSTITUTED. It was MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH TO AMEND THE EXISTING ORDINANCE TO INCREASE THE BOARD MEMBERSHIP TO FI vt. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CLYMER, TO REFER TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Stredicke requested the committee to update definitions and terminology in the present ordinance. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and public notices having been posted and Proposed Ordi- published according to law, Mayor Delaurenti opened the public hear- nance Establish- ing to consider a proposed ordinance establishing position of Park ing position of Superintendent. The Clerk read the ordinance in its entirety. The Park Superin- proposed ordinance provides for appointment by the Mayor of a Super- tendent intendent who is specially trained and qualified, subject to confirma- tion by the Council , specifying the education and experience required Audience and the general duties. Joan Moffett inquired as to the meaning of Comment ex-officio" . Ron Heiret, Park Superintendent, said the term Superin- tendent had been changed since the original ordinance and the title was now Park Director. Gary Masterjohn, 3016 Benson Road S. , said he was involved with Little League and was happy with the Park Board and felt they should be left with the authority to hire the right . person for Park Director. Dennis Vadney also spoke in favor of the Park Board having authority to hire. Bill File also spoke in favor of the Park Board as the Mayor has the authority to appoint the Board. Upon inquiry by Councilman Stredicke, City Attorney Shellan replied the Park Board appoints the Park Director, but the appointment has to be approved -by the City Council . Grace Van Horn inquired how much the Park Department Budget was for the year and was told it was close to a million dollars . MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY CLYMER, THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY GRANT, TO REFER ORIGINAL ORDINANCE TO THE MAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, UPDATE STANDARDS AND INCORPORATE IN PREVIOUS ORDINANCE.CARRIED. Recess MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL RECESS FOR 10 MINUTES. CARRIED. Council recessed at 9:52 p.m. and reconvened at 10:05 p.m. with all Council members presently as previously stated. Renton City Council 4/11/77 - Page 5 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS (Cont'd) First Reading The Ways and Means Committee recommended first reading of an ordi- McLaughlin Rezone nance changing the zoning classification of property from Residence R-001-77 District (R-2) to Business District (B-1 ) , known as the McLaughlin Rezone. After reading, it was MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, TO REFER BACK TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2103 The Ways and Means Committee recommended adoption of a Resolution L. I.D. 304 setting a hearing date of May 9, 1977 on L.I .D. 304, Sanitary Aloha Ranch Sewers in the Aloha Ranch Addition. Following reading, it was Sewers - Public MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY BRUCE, THE RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED AS Hearing 5/9/77 READ. MOTION CARRIED. Renton Waterfront Councilman Stredicke inquired on the status of Environmental Impact Restaurant Statement on the Renton Waterfront Restaurant and was informed by Planning Director Ericksen that it had been filed with the city and the State Department of Ecology, but nothing had come back. Parking Problems Councilman Stredicke inquired on the problem of parking in the area of 3904 N.E. llth Court, numerous vehicles parked in such a way to prevent residents from entrance and egress to their drive- ways. Mayor Delaurenti said he would have a report on it next week. Councilman Stredicke said he had received a letter from Mrs. Fisher, 200.Garden Ave. N. relative to parking and wondered if the Administration had done anything about it. Mayor Delaurenti advised that Bryant Motors had been contacted and he had talked to Mrs. Fisher and that violators would be ticketed: Adjournment MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :15 P.M. s e2 Maxine E. Motor, Deputy City Clerk jt EXP111 22 CITY OF RENTON WARRANT DISTRIBUTION 4/11/77 FUND TOTAL WARRANTS MACHINE VOIDS: NO,1 13313 - Ill3316 CURRENT FUND 67, 366e23 PARES AND RECREATION FUND 911, 356107 ARTERIAL STREET FUND 6759e27 STREET FUND 49,593224 LIBRARY FUND 42, 937477 CETA FUND 2, 054, 46 ANT!RECESSION FUND S1, 228.01 WATERWORKS UTILIYIY FUND 74, 378e98 AIRPORT FUND 67,534.87 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 12, 436, 15 FIREMEN PENSION 62, 468. 80 TOTAL OF ALL WARRANTS 61920113e85 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBERS OF THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE OF THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL, HAVING RECEIVED DEPARTMENTAL CERTIFICATION THAT MERCHANDISE AND/OR SERVICES NAVE BEEN RECEIVED OR RENDERED, DO HEREBY APPROVE FOR PAYMENT VOUCHERS NO. 13317 THROUGH O. 13479 IN THE AMOUNT OF 4192, 113. 85 TNIS 11TM DAY OF APRIL 1977. Nc; tAtifrjCOMMITTEECHAIR'1AM .- -..', ,MEMBER H r :o• L f a MEMBER - - . . .I '.' • w - +r .. Renton City Council 4/4/77 Page 3 Public Hearing - Continued Reconsideration MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Comprehensive Plan MOVED BY THORPE, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, PROPERTY NORTH OF MISTY COVE Ripley Lane N. APARTMENTS BE DESIGNATED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS MISTY COVE APARTMENTS BE DESIGNATED AS MEDIUM DENSITY. ROLL CALL WAS TAKEN BY THE CLERK: ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS VOTED AYE. CARRIED. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, REFER MATTER TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Recess MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Council recessed at 10:03 pm. Upon reconvening, Roll was Called. All Council Members were present. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted, pub- Appeal of lished and mailed according to law, Mayor Delaurenti opened the pub- McLaughlin Rezone lic hearing to consider appeal of the Land Use Hearing Examiner' s R-OOl-77 decision of the William L. McLaughlin Rezone from R-2 to B-1 of property located approximately 300 feet north of N. E. 12th Street, along the easterly edge of the existing power line easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Blvd. Appeal of the decision for rezone was filed by Dennis G. and Kathleen Ossenkop, 3316 N. E. 12th St. , Leslie E. and Iris A. Adams, along with eleven other residents of Monroe Ave. N.E. The letter of protest charged arbitrary and capricous reasoning was used to arrive at the decision recommending rezone and listed objections , ' noting acceptable R-2 uses exist. The protest letter was presented to the City Council on 3/14 along with Hearing Examiner' s recommendation for the rezone from R-2 to B-1 , which records indicated 1/31/77 hearing by the Examiner and 2/22/77 reconsideration due to opposition and additional information. The Planning Department recommended denial of the rezone. Upon inquiry by Council President Perry, City Attorney Shellan advised the hearing would be for new evidence only. Leslie Adams, 1209 Monroe Ave. NE, claimed perjury committed by William McLaughlin at Public Hearings conducted by the Hearing Examiner, noting Page 4 of the Examiner's report, disputing Findings; noting property to be rezoned is land locked and requested a park. William McLaughlin 10630 SE 176th, requested decision be made without further hearings , McLaughlin 3 explaining moving of buildings and disputed the perjury charges. Rezone MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL CLOSE THE HEARING. CARRIED. Approved I MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER (REZONING PROPERTY FROM R-2 TO B-1 ) . Council- man Clymer explained intent to abstain from voting due to recent absence due to illness. Upon inquiry by Councilman Stredicke, City Clerk Mead explained letter of protest had been read at the 3/14/77 meeting. Councilwoman Thorpe inquired as to covenants to protect the area and was advised by Councilman Perry of recommended restric- tions. ROLL CALL VOTE: 4-AYE: PERRY, SHINPOCH, BRUCE, GRANT; 2-NO: THORPE AND STREDICKE; ONE ABSTENTION: CLYMER. MOTION CARRIED APPROVING McLAUGHLIN REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL REFER THIS ACTION TO THE •WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Upon inquiry by Appellants, City Attorney Shellan advised recourse was to. the court. CONSENT AGENDA The following Consent Agenda items, previously distributed to all Council members, are considered routine and are enacted by one motion unless removed for separate consideration by Council action. Claim for Claim for Damages was filed for Bennett Paul Slothower, 517 S. 17th, Damages for broken arm due to fall while in Library; amount of claim undeter- Slothower mined as yet. Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Carrier. City-owned Letter from Mayor Delaurenti reported information re Councilman Property at Stredicke' s request about City-owned property known as "Well Site No. 7" Aberdeen NE & located on the northwest corner of Aberdeen Ave. NE and NE 24th St. NE 24th St. The letter reported the City executed an option to purchase the .43 acres 10/2/59 and permission granted to dig a test well to determine supply, etc. ; On 4/29/60 the City entered into agreement to purchase property for $2,000 and make water service available to certain prop- erty of the seller adjacent to the well site; and in 1960 the Waterworks Utility became a "Classified Utility" and has been so designated since. Renton City Council 4/4/77 Page 4 Consent Agenda - Continued Appointments Letter from Mayor Delaurenti reported terms of Gwen Dupree, Lilly Human Rights and Kodama, Pat Sado and Albert Talley on the Human Rights and Affairs Affairs Commission Commission will expire on 4/24/77; noting Mrs. Dupree, Mrs. Kodama and Mrs. Sado unavailable for reappoint; Mr. Talley available for reappointment. The following, reappointment and appointments were recommended: Albert Talley, 13042 144th SE, first appointed in 1975 and current Commission Chairman; Shirlee Kinney, 3613 NE 12th Street Renton, Personnel Director of Seattle engineering firm; Clifford Rost, 927 N. First St. , Apt. 3, self-employed; Marlene Walkama, 12116 138th Pl. SE, Reading Specialist with the Renton School District. Refer to the Ways and Means Committee. Aloha Ranch Letter from City Clerk Mead presented petition which had been filed Sewers -LID 304 for sanitary sewer installation in Aloha Ranch (LID #304). The Pub- lic Works Department checked ownerships of the property and find the Public Hearing signatures on the petition to be valid and represent :56.25% of the 5/9/77 property within the plat of Aloha Ranch, considering that each lot receives equal benefit from 'installation of the improvement. The Clerk' s letter recommended 5/9/77 for public hearing -,on the prelimin- ary assessment roll , with referral to the Ways & Means Committee for the necessary resolution. Consent Agenda MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY BRUCE, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT Approval AGENDA AS RECOMMENDED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS Aloha Ranch Letter from City Clerk Mead reported petition has been filed for Undergrounding undergrounding of utilities in the area of Aloha Ranch (LID #305) . LID 305 The Public Works Department advises ownerships of the property have been checked and the signatures found valid; and also advises that considering the petition proposes the assessment for the underground improvements not to exceed $10.00 per benefitted front foot, the signatures on the petition represent 43.68% of the front footage within the plat of Aloha Ranch. The Clerk's letter recommended that the petition be referred to the Public Services Committee for recom- mendation and to the Ways and Means Committee for legislation as may be necessary. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY PERRY. REFER THE PETITION TO THE PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDATION AND TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Energy Letter from Mayor Delaurenti provided information from Deputy Public Conservation Works Director Bennett of steps taken in the City's energy conserva- tion program. requesting Puget Sound Power & Light Co. to de-activate 100 additional street light luminaires, anticipating no severe traffic or security problems. The lights in question are located: Talbot Rd.S. , Puget Drive, Rainier Ave. , N 4th St. , Logan Ave. N. , Edmonds Ave NE, NE 28th St. , Kennewick P1 . NE. , NE 27th St. ,and will be de-activated for an indefinite period of time. (Information) Puget Sound Letter from Mayor Delaurenti attached copy of a letter from Charles Council of Hill , Snohomish County Commissioner and President of the Puget Sound Government Council of Governments, requesting that the City enter into an "Inter- local Agreement" to formally effect- membership in the restructured PSCOG. The Mayor's letter recommended that the Council adopt a reso- lution authorizing the City to enter into an Interlocal Agreement . and authorizing him to execute same on behalf of the City. The letter explained the agreement represents considerable effort to restructure area's Regional Planning Agency due to widespread dissension among the members of the former Puget Sound Governmental Conference; noting key difference in provisions of the proposed Interlocal Agreement and operations of the PSGC is that, whenever possible, County Sub- regional Councils will direct most PSCOG activities. The letter reported Renton's dues for PSCOG computed on base data of City's population two years prior to the year the dues are payable - $2,120. Dues have been included in the 1977 Budget as approved by Council . The letter further recommended referral to the Ways and Means Committee. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION APPROVING AGREEMENT AND REFER TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. 111 Renton City Council 3/14/77 Page 2 Consent Agenda - Continued Appointment Letter from Mayor Delaurenti appointed Wayne E. Regnier, 12652 SE Board of Ethics 160th St. , Renton, to the Board of Ethics to complete the term of Mrs. Maxine Pearman who has resigned. The letter noted appointment effective through 12/31/79 and that Mr. Regnier is Carpenter's Union business representative and delegate to the King County Labor Council . Recommendation: Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Proclamation Mayor Delaurenti proclaimed March 14-18, 1977 as National Employ the Older Worker Week in Renton and urged all employers to give special consideration to those men and women over 40 years of age. Appointment to Letter from Mayor Delaurenti recommended permanent appointment of Police Officer Joseph W. Peach as Police Officer in the Renton Police Department J. W. Peach as of March 1 , 1977, having successfully completed his 6-months probationary period. Recommendation: Council concurrence. Vouchers The Ways and Means Committee recommeneded Council authorization for payment of Vouchers 12959 through 13161 in the amount of $197,030.09 having received departmental certification as to receipt of merchan- dise and/or services. Vouchers 12935 through 12958 machine voided. Council concurrence recommended. Consent Agenda MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY GRANT, COUNCIL APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA Approval AS AMENDED WITH REMOVAL OF FOLLOWING TWO ITEMS. CARRIED. McLaughlin Rezone Land Use Hearing Examiner, James L. Magstadt, submitted records of R-001-77 and William L. McLaughlin for rezone from R-2 to B-1 for property located Reconsideration approximately 300 feet north of N. E. 12th St. , along the easterly edge of the existing power line easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard. The records indicate 1/31/77 hearing and 2/22/77 reconsideration due to opposition and additional information. The summary of recommendation: Planning Department recommended denial of rezone and Hearing Examiner recommended approval with addi- tional conditions. Appeal of Decision Appeal of Hearing Examinert decision was filed by Dennis G. and McLaughlin Rezone Kathleen Ossenkop, 3316 N. E. 12th St. , Leslie E. and Iris A. Adams , R-001-77A along with eleven other residents of Monroe Ave. N. E. regarding the Willaim L. McLaughlin rezone from R-2 to B-1 of property located north of N. E. 12th St. and east of N.E. Sunset Blvd. Letter of protest charged arbitrary and captricous reasoning was used to arrive at the decision recommending rezone and listed objections , noting accept- able R-2 uses exist. Upon inquiry by Council President Perry, City Attorney Shellan noted ordinance does not require a hearing by the Council , but requires study of findingsof the Examiner. City Clerk Public Hearing Mead noted the filing of $25 appeal fee and the referral for establish- 4/4/77 ment of procedure. MOVED BY GRANT, SECOND BY THORPE, COUNCIL REFER THE McLAUGHLIN REZONE AND APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR PUBLIC HEAR- ING ON APRIL 4, 1977. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS SW 43rd St. Letter from Public Works Director Gonnason submitted Grant Offer from 3-Lane Improvement the Federal Economic Development Administration in amount of $348,000 Joint Project . for the first phase of SW 43rd Street 3-lane improvement with the with Kent addition of turning lane between East Valley Rd. and West Valley Rd. , except for that portion including the railroad tracks and Springbrook Creek, including asphalt overlay of two-lane portion and street light- ing. The letter explained joint project with City of Kent requires 67,000 local matching funds from both City of Kent and City of Renton providing total of $569,000, which includes $87,000 State Economics Assistance Authority grant approved by Council 6/76. The letter ex- plained requirement for completion of project within eight months of EDA grant approval. The letter explained 3/17/77 deadline established by EDA for acceptance of grant offer and noted request has been made for extension to 3/31/77 to allow time for both cities to complete the necessary formalities. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL CON- CUR IN RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. CARRIED. RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting March 14, 1977 Municipal Building Monday , 8: 00 P . M. Council Chambers MINUTES ' CALL TO ORDER Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the regular meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF GEORGE PERRY, Council President; WILLIAM J. GRANT, BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, COUNCIL RICHARD M. STREDICKE AND PATRICIA M. SEYMOUR-THORPE. MOVED BY COUNCIL- • MAN STREDICKE, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMEN EARL CLYMER AND KENNETH D. BRUCE. CARRIED. CITY OFFICIALS C. J. . DELAURENTI , Mayor; G. M. SHELLAN, City Attorney; DEL MEAD, City IN ATTENDANCE Clerk; WILLIAM BENNETT, Deputy Finance Director; DON LUSTER, Adminis- trative Asst. ; WARREN GONNASON, Public Works Director; GORDON ERICKSEN, Planning Director; RICHARD GEISSLER, Acting Fire Chief; HUGH DARBY, Police Chief. PRESS MARK PELLEGRINO, Renton Tribune; DON .SMITH, Renton Record Chronicle. MINUTE.APPROVAL MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, COUNCIL APPROVE MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 1977 COUNCIL MEETING AND MARCH 8,, 1977 AS WRITTEN. CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted, pub- lished and mailed according to law, Mayor Delaurenti opened the public hearing continued from 2/28/77 in order that new assessments could , be determined reflecting 6-inch line for single family residences and 8-inch line for proposed multiple residential property located within the proposed L. I .D. No. 303, water mains, hydrants and appurtenances thereto in the vicinity of N. 33rd. Place between Lake Washington Blvd. N. and Burnett Ave. N. City Clerk Mead read letters of protest from James R. Fawcett, 3313 Burnett Ave. N. ; Mr. and Mrs. P. M. Everett, 811 N. 33rd Place; Yvonne A. Lucker, Trustee, 4137 ,94th SE, Mercer Island. (Letter from Robert A. Fawcett not germane to,°this , LID. ) Letter from Public Works Director reported as of 8:00 p.m. the three protest letters received amount to 37.93% of the total cost. Public . Works Director Gonnason explained the revised LID preliminary assess- ment roll- in the amount of $18,156.20, redistributing costs by reduc- ing single family assessments from $2,195. 32 to $1 ,951 .37 and $1 ,850.60 to $1 ,644.96. Persons present making inquiries: Bill McLaughlin, .10630 'S.E. 176th, Renton favored the LID. James R. Fawcett and Eleanor Everett protested cost and need. Public Works Director Gonnason explained protest- ing parties were the three single family owners of four lots and that the other five lots had single owner favoring the LID that fire flow was needed for development of multiple family residences. Upon inquiry by Councilman Stredicke, City Attorney Shellan explained state provi- sions for deferred payments for elderly or low-income parties and that provisions must be included at beginning and sale of bonds may be hampered. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED. BY PERRY, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC L. I.D #303 HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY GRANT, SECONDED BY STREDICKE,: COUNCIL Terminated TERMINATED LID 303 WATER MAINS IN N. 33rd. MOTION CARRIED, LID QUASHED, MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY GRANT, MATTER OF L.I.D. LINE PLACEMENT General LID Line ON RIGHT-OF-WAY BE REFERRED TO -THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. Placement • MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT AGENDA The following Consent Agenda items, previously distributed to all Council members, are considered routine and are enacted by one motion unless removed for separate consideration by. Council action. Travel Request Letter from Sharon T. Green, Personnel Director, requested Council Personnel Director authorization to attend the meeting of Executive Board of the Washing- ton Council of- Public Personnel Administrators on March 31 , 1977 in Ellensburg for which funds budgeted. Recommendation: Council concurrence. Renton City Council 3/14/77 Page 3 Correspondence and Current Business - Continued Request for Letter from David A. Kalamar, Vice President of Melridge, Inc. , Abandonment of petitioned the city to abandon and relinquish all claims to portion Easement ' of perpetual easement being used for water main purposes, which is to be replaced by a perpetual easement granted to the city in the vicinity of Lind Ave. SW and the Northern Pacific R.R. right-of-way. Upon inquiry by Councilman Grant, Public Works Director Gonnason explained the expansion of building facility requires relocation of the water line with abandonment of the easement and granting of new easement to complete line placement. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL REFER THE MATTER TO THE PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Waste Paper Letter from Mayor Delaurenti submitted proposed contract from Weyer- Recycling haeuser Company for waste paperj'ecycling, which had been referred to the city by Weyerhaeuser Co. representative Ken White. The letter recommended referral to the Public Services Committee for review. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY GRANT, CONCUR 'IN THE MAYOR'S REQUEST. Councilman Stredicke noted pending consideration from Renton firm relative to recycling. Mr. White being present,explained collection process. MOTION CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Mr. Bill McLaughlin, asked regarding LID #303 (see earlier) and was advised by Mayor Delaurenti that if 60% of cost bearing owners protest Bill McLaughlin then council cannot proceed with the LID. City Attorney Shellan re Rezone and advised that without LID,, the developer installs necessary water and Utilities sewer lines and negotiates with city for up to 15 year late-comers agreement to recover portion of costs in the event others use line at a later date. Mr. McLaughlin also inquired of rezone (see earlier) noting three hearings to date with elapse of five months since rezone requested and explained County procedures. Upon discussion of need to:receive agenda material at earlier time in order to review prior to' council meeting, it was MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL PROCEDURES IN AREA OF TIME OF AGENDA BE REFERRED TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED'. Mayor Delaurenti noted need for records of Hearing Examiner appeals to reach council members immediately. Glencoe. Park Charles Blanton, 2008 Vashon Ave. N.E. , reported McGrath Homes proceed- ing to build on two lots on which negotiations were proceeding for exchange with two city owned lots for park purposes. Mr. Blanton noted meeting for three months planning the park. Public Works Direc- tor Gonnason reported building permits had been issued. Pat Kissinger 2014 Vashon Ave. N. E. , noted lots had been bulldozed and foundations laid out, noting need for immediate action to preserve park. Council- woman Seymour-Thorpe recalled events in meetings with neighborhood, that on 11/22/76 Council approved the Community Services Committee to proceed, that in 1/77 Council approved Resolution trading property, Planning Dept. had been instructed to draft plans. Councilwoman Thorpe explained being advised March 10, of McGrath's 3/2 deadline for exchange of property, asking why property exchange had not been consummated. John Amico, 2015 Vashon Ave. N.E. , asked that the city take immediate action. Community Services Councilwoman Seymour-Thorpe presented Community Services Committee Committee Report report noting review of 3/10/77 memo from Public Works Director Gonnason and Finance Director Marshall with regard to the McGrath Glencoe Park Glencoe property exchange. The report recommended that the City proceed with the property exchange and the matter be referred to the Ways and Means Committee for the necessary funding. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY GRANT, CITY COUNCIL GO ON RECORD AS ACCEPTING THAT REPORT AND INSTRUCTING THE ADMINISTRATION AND LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO TAKE STEPS NECESSARY. TO EFFECT PROPERTY EXCHANGE. CARRIED. Recess MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Council recessed at 9:42 pm; all Council members were present when roll was called upon reconvening. Planning & Planning & Development Committee Chairman Perry presented committee Development report from 3/8 meeting with Chamber of Commerce Committee on Economic Committee Report Development concerning the matter of economic development in Renton. Renton City Council 3/14/77 Page 4 OLD BUSINESS - Continued - Planning & Development Committee Report - Continued Economic The report observed that applicants requesting preparatory information Development for applications from the Planning Staff feel they do not get suffi- cient information on problematical applications. and are instead given ordinances to review. The report recommended that this is an internal problem and will discuss the matter with the Mayor and Planning Direc- tor. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND BY PERRY, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOM- MENDATION AND REFER MATTER TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND MAYOR. CARRIED. Parking-in L-1 Zone The Planning and Development committeereport observed complaints voiced in regard to parking requirements in L-1 zones and recommended referral to the Planning Commission to be considered during their review of ordinances. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY PERRY., COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT AND REFER PARKING REQUIREMENTS TO THE, PLANNING COMMISSION. CARRIED. The report further noted for informa- tion: (a). Commendations were given to the city for the expeditious way matters are handled before the Hearing Examiner. (b). Discuss- ion in regard to Renton's. role in the Green River Soil Conservation drainage plan. Ways & Means Acting Chairwoman Shinpoch presented Ways & Means Committee report Committee Report recommending appointment of Walt Dragin to the Fire Civil Service... Appointment Commission. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, COUNCIL CONCUR Walt Dragin IN RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Travel The Ways & Means Committee report recommended council concurrence in attendance of Planning Director Ericksen at the ASPO Conference. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY GRANT, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Monster Road Council President Perry presented letter for the record resolving Railroad that the City of Renton is unalterably opposed tothe present clos- Crossing ing of the so-called Monster Road Crossing - identified as "Case No. TR-91 5., City of Renton vs Burlington Northern, Inc. , et al ," and instead urges appropriate and timely improvements and better- ments to the existing crossing by barriers, signalization and site improvements since its present state is extremely dangerous and inadequate. The City further determines that any closing at this time would not be in the best public interest inasmuch as it would divert and channel existing traffic unto already heavily burdened highways, city streets and the Grady Way bridge, all of which would have to absorb considerable heavy truck and other traffic now using the Monster Road crossing. Furthermore, the present condition of the Grady Way bridge is such that extensive repair and replacement would have to be undertaken in order to accommodate such traffic. The City is also cognizant of the fact that the traffic pattern and configuration of inter-connecting freeways and other arterials in the immediate vicinity of the crossing is an extremely complex and busy one which will further impede any quick response by emergency vehicles of the Cities of Renton, Tukwila, and other municipal entities if such closing takes effect. The City of Renton further finds and concludes that any such closing of the Monster Road'. crossing, although of possible financial benefit to the railroads involved, would impose a heavy financial burden on the City to make such improvements, and would also be costly to the various business and industrial interests now utilizing such crossing. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL ADOPT THE DECLARATION OF RESOLUTION. CARRIED. Community Services Community Services Committee Chairwoman Seymour-Thorpe presented Committee Report committee report presenting ordinances re Park Board and Park Super- Park Board & intendent and recommended that a public hearing be set for April. 11 , Park Superintendent 1977 for these ordinances. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY THORPE, Ordinances COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT SETTING PUBLIC HEARING AND REFER Public Hearing 4/11 'ORDINANCES TO THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO THE HEARING. CARRIED. 111 ZA/LI V";7 7 i e'")/11)(j '//f/ 3316 N.E. 12th Street Renton, Washington March 4, 1977 RECEIVED Mr. Perry, President MAR f' 1977 Renton City Council 200 Mill Ave. S. CiTy COUNCILRenton, Washington File No. : R-001. 77 RENTON, %A Dear Mr. Perry and Council Members: We wish to appeal the Hearing Examiners decision granting B-1 (business use) zoning to Mr McLaughlins ' R-2 residential district) zoned property. Arbitrary and capricous reasoning was used to arrive at the decision, as the following quotes from Hearing Examiners conclusions dated Feb. 28, 1977: 1. "Addressing all the concerns voiced at the hearing would be extremely difficult without an out- right prohibition of any construction. " Indeed, the property area in question lends itself to a variety of acceptable R-2 (residential uses) . 2. "It can be assumed that the property owner has certain rights to develop his property. Adjacent property owners and residents in this area also have certain rights to maintain the integrity of their area within the laws and codes of the city. " We, would now like to quote- some of these "laws and codes of the city" which relate directly to change in use (rezoning) and the "Comprehensive Plan". A. "If the Examiner, after thorough study of the proposal and the petition, determines that the reclassification or the change in use district boundaries is advisable and in the public interest and tends to further the preservation and enjoyment of any substantial property right of the petitioner and is not materially detrimental to the public welfare or the properties of other persons located nn the vicinity thereof, ana is not out of harmony witEthe purposes and effect of the overall plan of the established zone classification and use district boundaries, then in such event, the Hearing Examiner may recommend that the. Council approve the reclassification. " B. "The location of shopping areas should, generally, be such that protection is given to residential areas from unwarranted business encroach- msnz. C. "Prevent blight by protecting residential and other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would con- tribute to premature decay and obsolecence and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns. " r 2 D. "Protect property values within the community ror the benefit of its residents and and property owners, through the effective control of land use and the enforcement and application of building and construction codes. " Judging from these quotes, rezoning a resid- detial area hinges on preserving the rights of the public , and may Only be granted when it is adequately proven to be in the publics interest, when protection is given from unwarranted business encroachment, and when there is no evidence property values and blight may occur. The rights of the petitioner to develop his property is self evident as long as he does not infringe on the rights of others. The Examiners position is in contradiction to the cities codes and laws as evidenced by the following facts: A. The proposed business use is a duplication of public services which already exist and are in walking distance. B. Blight has become a problem to four single family dwellings in the area, two of which occupy the property in question. C. A B-1 rezone would be out .of harmony with the purpose and effect of ttEe overall plan because directly adjoining the west of said property is the powerline easement. This easement presently acts as a buffer area between business zoning and the existing residential area to the east. Structures cannot be built within the easement area. D. Allowing business zoning east of the powerline would eliminate the buffer between the commercial and residential area and establish a precedent for further unwarranted business encroach- ment of the residential area. 3. "New development should have a minimum disruption on the environment of the area within the zones allowed by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. " We do not consider these items merely' a minimum disruption on the environment: A. Removal of hearty pine and Douglas Fir. B. An erosion hazard considered to be moderate to severe by the Planning Department. C. Additional need for storm water runoff. D. Increase in air and noise pollution. 4. "Major issues noted include glare from lights, increased density, slope cut, destruction of trees, noise level increase, additional exhaust fumes and impairment of views. These issues will apply to development under the existingR zone and cTevelopment under a proposed- commercial zone. " We feel the density and use periods, the noise , exhaust fumes, arid lights of a restaurant with cocktail lounge is significantly greater than that of any R-2 s 1 11 ` R , 1 i----- -4-\• RECEIVE® 1 1 CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINES MAR 71977 3316 N.E. 12th Street AM Renton, Washington 7,819,10,11,12,1,213,4I5,o March 4, 197`] i Mr. Perry, President Renton City Council 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton, Washington File No. : R-001-77 Dear Mr. Perry and Council Members: We wish to appeal the Hearing Examiners decision granting B-1 (business use) zoning to Mr McLaughlinS ' R-2 residential district) zoned property. Arbitrary and capricous reasoning was used to arrive at the decision, as the following quotes from Hearing Examiners conclusions dated Feb. 28, 1977: 1. "Addressing all the concerns voiced at the hearing would be extremely difficult without an out- right prohibition of any constructiot. " Indeed, 'the property area in question lends itself to a variety of acceptable R-2 (residential uses). 2. "It can be assumed that the property owner has certain rights to develop his property. Adjacent property owners and residents in this area also have certain rights to maintain the integrity of their area within the laws and codes of the city. " We would now like to quote some of these "laws and • codes of the city" which relate directly to change in use (rezoning) and the "Comprehensive Plan". A. "If the Examiner, after thorough study of the proposal and the petition, determines that the reclassification or the change in use district boundaries is advisable and in the public interest and tends to further the preservation and enjoymentN, of any substantial property right of the petitioner and is not materially detrimental to the public welfare or the properties of other persons located , in the vicinity thereof, and is not out of harmony with the purposes and effect of the overall plan of the established zone classification and use district boundaries, then in such event, the Hearing Examiner may recommend that the Council approve the reclassification. " B. "The location of shopping areas should, generally, be such that protection is given to residential areas from unwarranted business encroach- ment. „ C. "Prevent blight by protecting residential Iand other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would con- tribute to premature decay and obsolecence and prevent the development of orderly growth- patterns. " I o 3 residential use. .The slope cut would be a public hazard and would destroy the current grade level that facilitates the existing powerline easement buffer area between business and reidentiãl areas. The trees and grade indeed compliment an R-2 zone for landscaping purposes. 5. "Construction of a two-story duplex could conceivably extend approximately 25 feet above the existing grade , although a 35 foot height limit is allowed by ordinance. A series of duplexes could be built adjacent to the east property line , at one duplex per 7200 square feet. The effect of this construction would severely impair views and would increase the existing density of the property. Trees could be removed at the option of the applicant. The duplex would be of a residential character and would be compatible to residential uses; however, the impact of the buildings could be significant to adjacent residences. " At one duplex per 7700 square feet on 0,000 square feet of property, one could hardly build a "series of duplexes" on this amount of area! We realize "the impact of the buildings could be significant to adjacent residences, " and that is the reason for our appeal and intention to seek down zoning. 6. "It can be assumed that the R-2 zoning fronting Monroe Street can be built to R-2 standards to permit duplexes and townhouses. " Because it is our intention to down zone this area, this statement by the Examiner cannot be 'assumed". In 1968 when the City rezoned this area from GS-1 to R-2 it failed to place a height restriction and therefore all the residents on the east side of Monroe Ave N.E. face having their views distroyed by construction. 7. "In the Examiner' s opinion, the proposed commercial building built to a height not to exceed 15 feet would minimize the visual impact from the residents abutting Monroe Avenue N.E. The views would be maintained. " The immediate property blocking views from the east of Monroe Ave. N.E. is not the property in question owned by Mr.McLaughlin. It is a combination of the R-2 zoned properties owned by both Mr.McLaughlin and Mr. Brown that threaten the views. Grade distruction would indeed affect and intensify the visual impact of buildings on Mr.McLaughlins property especially with removal of the trees. In addition the spacial relationship of the buffer zone (powerline easement area) would be distroyed. Grade and space aide in sheltering the visual impact. We intend to preserve our views by down zoning in this area. 8. "In the Examiner ' s opinion, the proposed slope cut and rock wall , if accompanied by sight-obscuring, noise - reducing screening fence , together with appropriate land- scaping, would provide a visual separation between the 4 4 adjacent R-2 zone and the contemplated structure. Solid concrete or lead is the Only effective means of reducing noise. We feel the Examiner failed to even include in his report the "visual separation" barriers recommended by the Planning Commission. The trees are a visual barrier to the encroaching business district, their removal would further blight our properties by permeating our homes. with lights from the new shopping plaza. In. summary, - we . disagree with :the ,obviously biased conclusions arrived at by the Examiner. The zoning of the petitioners property has been R-2 since purchase and there are acceptable alternatives for development. B-1 zoning of said property is not in the public interest , disruption of the environment must occur and business encroachment ddstroys the existing harmony of a buffer area between business and residential. We are appealing the Examiners decision and request an .evening Public Hearing through the City Council. Sincerely, Residents and Property Owners within Vicinity j .J c 44(z 1 /iQee 1(o N E, 1 a`` Si', 'en"n, d` C ti7 l.gLOq 49 LA, E. 1"/ ; 11,E I i I ' 71EL4./1 4..,. i i --) O ,-( fil e•-vim-e- at.,-e, rm c_ j-V :7/.7, erz%-• LI-.(=.i. ,'-r - i 2 7A..6,...42(:-jz_2„)6-74._,L.6•,-(•;•--,-// - / .—b'U J 5 copies to: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen; ,Planning Director Warren C. Gonnason , rublic Works Director pIf 1G-'k' s aFff 011 Renton City Council 3/7/77 Page 3 Correspondence and Current Business - Continued Lease for • Letter from Mayor Delaurenti submitted current lease agreement with Sartori School the Renton School District covering the space used for senior citizens' recreation activities at Sartori School . The letter noted Parks and Recreation Director Gene Coulon recommended that the lease be renewed for another three years effective 7/1/77. The Mayor's letter concurred the recommendation and requested Council ' s authorization to proceed with the lease renewal . MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL REFER REQUEST TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT ' Harry G. Bostick, 3527 Shattuck S. , received Mayor's Proclamation for Quality Week. Monster Road Kay Johnson, 300 Rainier Ave. N. , inquired re Monster Road railroad RR X' ing crossing, noting matter in the Public Services Committee. Council President Perry distributed copies of letter from the Mayor and Council President to Washington Utilities and Transportation Committee Commis- sioners Elmer Hundley, Frank Foley and Senator R. Bailey in Olympia re the crossing. The letter asked the Commission give attention to public safety and noted Monster Road is essential to efficient flow of traffic around Longacres and into Renton. Councilman Stredicke asked that request for signalization at that crossing be included and was advised by Public Works Director Gonnason of application made by city for lighting, signalization and gates for that crossing, having been advised by the Public Works and Transportation Committee and confirmed by Council that crossing should not be closed. Stredicke noted Grady Way bridge inadequate from load standpoint to handle increased traffic in the event of the closing and asked authorization to send letter to the Utilities Commission to include signalization and reopening of the hearing. Public Works Director Gonnason noted Hearing scheduled for 3/15/77, Fir. Johnson noted city will be required to do repair on the bridge, that it is a matter of shifting unsafe conditions from the Mons- ter Rd. crossing to Grady Way by Totem Distributors, noting large trucks would have to swing into oncoming traffic in several different situations. Johnson noted railroad's refusal to participate . Stredicke _ suggested opening of access from the Metro plant to Grady Way. Discus- sion ensued of problem created for industrial firms- for access. Moved by Shinpoch, seconded by Perry, Mayor and Council President be authori- zed to sign and to send letter to Utilities and Transportation Commis- sion. SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY THORPE, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, LETTER BE REDRAFTED TO INCLUDE SAFETY MEASURES AND PROPER SIGNALIZATION OF CROSS- ING. MOTION CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS BY COUNCIL Planning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Perry submitted committee Development report explained that at the request of the Park Board and consultants Committee Report the committee met with them on 3/2/77 to review the master plan for development of the Lake Washington Beach Park_Extension. The report Lake Washington recommended Council approval of the master plan for the Lake Washington Beach Park Beach Park Extension following review, recommending referral to the Extension Committee of the Whole meeting of April 12, for review and concurrence. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY THORPE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT AND THAT COUNCIL REFER MASTER PLAN REVIEW TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR 4/12/77 MEETING. CARRIED. Hearing Examiner Councilman Stredicke noted receipt of appeal of Hearing Examiner Appeal decesion regarding the McLaughlin rezone of property in Renton High- lands. Councilman Perry noted payment of $25 fee for appeal which was filed today. City Attorney Shellan noted that if applicant is not satisfied with decision of Hearing Examiner, applicant may request Examiner to review within 14 days or may direct appeal to Council --in which case a $25 fee exists; the Council will then review record as prepared by Hearing Examiner. Upon further inquiry, Shellan noted _the matter has not reached the Council as yet. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED Recess BY PERRY, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. The Council reces- sed at 9:30 p.m. and upon reconvening, the Roll was called. All Council members were present as previously shown: Perry, Shinpoch, Stredicke 4 and Thorpe. 10 Renton City Council 3/7/77 Page 4 Old Business Continued Horizons Councilman Stredicke reported Renton Horizons Committee meeting was , Committee held wherein Robert Lester was named Chairman, Meeting Objectives -'. Lindsey Johnstone and 4th of July picnic - John and Becky Cleere. Stredicke explained the Renton Horizons Committee was encouraging community events and programs in the area similar to the Bicentennial program. Community Community Services Committee Chairwoman Seymour-Thorpe submitted com- Services mittee report announced receipt of proposed CATV Ordinance regulating Corrmit cable operations within the city as required by federal law and r,ecom- CATV Ordinance mended that a public hearing be set for March 21 , on the proposed ordinance. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN COMMITTEE REPORT AND SET DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING MARCH 21 , 1977. CARRIED. CATV Agreement The Community Services Committee report recommended the administration be authorized to sign the agreement for renewal of the CATV contract for services, subject to approval by the City Attorney as to form, noting Seattle City approval has been given. MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT. Upon request, .Councilwoman Thorpe noted CATV Ordinance contains special senior citizen rate, which is only city in state which does according to Mr. Hurd, CATV Coordinator. MOTION CARRIED. Utility Tax MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL REFER THE SUBJECT OF for Cable TV INCREASED UTILITY TAX ON CABLE TV TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE. • CARRIED. Earlington Area Councilwoman Seymour-Thorpe _reminded the administration that meetings Park were pending regarding the proposed park in Earlington area, awaiting report from administration re existing building and purchase of property; also noting residents in the area were anxious to meet. NEW BUSINESS Councilwoman Thorpe inquired of the City Attorney re enforcement of industrial park regulations concerning unkept landscaping, being Landscaping advised of civil and criminal penalties, that restrictive covenants Industrial Park are enforced through Superior Court of King County. The City Attorney further advised for noncompliance, notices be sent and if not observed, suit begun. lRipley Lane N: MOVED BY THORPE, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL RECONSIDER COUNCIL'S i Comprehensive PREVIOUS ACTION REGARDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR RIPLEY LANE AREA. Plan CARRIED. City Attorney Shellan advised need for public hearing if Reconsideration ; any change in Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Moved by Shinpoch, Second 4/4/77 by Seymour-Thorpe, Council set date of public hearing for this matter on April 25, 1977. SUBSTITUTION MOTION BY THROPE, SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON RIPLEY LANE N. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APRIL 4, 1977. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ways & Means j Ways and Means Committee report was submitted by Acting Chairwoman Committee Report Shinpoch recommending second and final readings of an ordinance rezoning Norwood Rezone 1 certain property B-1 in the Kennydale area on N. 30th St. , known as the Norwood Rezone. Following readings, it was MOVED BY SHINPOCH, i SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: 3-AYE PERRY, SHINPOCH, STREDICKE. ONE NO- 'THORPE. City Attorney Shellan I advised the ordinance needs affirmative vote of four council members Ordinance Tabled for adoption (majority of quorum) , MOTION FAILED. MOVED5Y STREDICKE, for One Week ' SECONDED BY PERRY, COUNCIL PLACE REZONE ORDINANCE ON TABLE FOR ONE WEEK FOR PURPOSE OF RECONSIDERATION. CARRIED. Ordinance #3114! The Ways and Means Committee report recommended second and final read- Spendiff Rezone! ings of an ordinance rezoning certain property from S-1 to SR-1 located at 807 Union Ave. N.E. Following reading, it was MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. (First reading 2/28/77)1 First Reading The Ways and Means Committee report recommended first reading of an MacPherson Rezone ordinance rezoning certain property to R-1 generally known as the Monroe NE/NE loth MacPherson Rezone. Following reading, it was MOVED BY PERRY, SECONDED BY SHINPOCH, REFER BACK TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. R-00I-77 Page Two Reconsideration Exhibit #8: Letter from Mr. & Mrs . George G. Johnson, Mr. Mrs . Dennis Vadney, and Mr. & Mrs . Chester P . Baze, dated February 12 , 1977 . Exhibit #9 : Letter from the Dennis G. Ossenkop Family, dated February 12 , 1977 . The Examiner requested comments from participants expressing opposition to the Examiner's report, dated February 7, 1977 . Speaking in opposition were: Mr . Eugene R. Methven 1316 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, Washington 98055 Mrs . George Johnson 1300 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. Wesley Adams 1209 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. Dennis Vadney 1210 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, Washington 98055 Mrs . Kathy Ossenkop 3316 N.E. 12th Street- Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. Dennis Ossenkop 3316 N.E. 12th Street Renton, Washington 98055 Among objections to the proposed rezone were factors of obstruction of views by parking lot lighting, destruction of trees, noise level increase, exhaust fume increase because of traffic, color of proposed buildings , elevation of slope cut, commercial development encroaching on residential areas-, building height, ingress and egress from businesses , type of fencing in regards to noise obstruction, possible down-zoning to GS-1 zone, and compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Regarding the subject of potential lighting, the applicant indicated that the \lighting on the proposed development would be located in the front of the parking area which would be shaded from residential areas. He also reported that no lighting or signing would be located on top of the structure . In response to complaints from residents regarding parking lot lighting from Shuck 's Auto Parts store, which was recently completed an located adjacent to the proposed building site, the Examiner sta ed that he would report the problem to the Public Works Department f r investigation. Mr. McLaughlin requested permission to illustrate the proposed building and site on the chalkboard and explained that the slope cut would not exceed 15 feet and the building height would be restricted to 15 feet and would not obstruct residential views . He also reported that all ingress and egress would be channeled from Sunset Boulevard. The applicant indicated that the alternative to the proposed building on the rezoned property would be to construct a duplex or townhouse within existing zoning, which allows a height limit of 35 feet. He felt this proposal would obstruct views and create more problems for adjacent residents than the subject request. He also indicated a willingness to provide fencing which would be designed to obstruct noise and exhaust fumes . February 28, 1977 3 - / ®7 7 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON RECONSIDERATION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: William L. McLaughlin FILE NO. R-001-77 LOCATION: Property located approximately 300 feet north of Nofit 12th Street, along the easterly edge of the existing power line easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Reconsideration by the Hearing Examiner of the McLaughlin request for rezone from R-2 to B-1 . SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Recommend denial of rezone. RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner: Recommend approval..with additional conditions . PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received REPORT: by the Examiner on January 24 , 1977. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing letters from adjacent property owners , 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 February 22 , 1977, at 9 :00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. The Hearing Examiner noted that additional information was received that was not available at the 'time of the original hearing on the McLaughlin rezone request. Since this information may have a bearing on the final report, this hearing was scheduled, for reconsideration. Parties wishing to testify were sworn . Michael Smith, Planning Department, gave a brief summary of the Planning Department staff report presented at the previous hearing on January 31, 1977. The Examiner asked the applicant, Mr. William L. McLaughlin, if he wished to present additional information for reconsideration. The applicant indicated he had no additional information to present at this time. The Examiner reported receiving six letters of opposition within the appeal period set by ordinance. The following letters were read and entered into the record at this time: Exhibit #4': Letter. from Mr. William H. Schreven,...-dated. • February 12 , 1977 . Exhibit #5: Letter from Mr. Eugene R. Methven, dated February 12, 1977 . Exhibit #6 : Letter from Bernard W. and Mary E. Spunaugle , dated February 12 , 1977 . Exhibit #7 : Letter from The Leslie E. Adams Family, dated February 12 , 1977. c r• R-001-77 ' Page Four Reconsideration 3. Mr. McLaughlin, the applicant for the rezone, noted the following concerns : a. A former commercial building existed on the site and the city, requested it to be removed due to the age of the structure. be.., He emphasized that the cut of the bank will be. limited to a 15 foot height limit from the existing grade on Sunset Boulevard. r i c. The alternative to the commercial development would be to construct duplexes which can be built to a height of 35 feet. He stated that the existing height limit of the commercial building is 15 feet. d. The ingress and egress will be from Sunset Boulevard and the traffic flow generated by the patrons should not affect the adjacent property owners any more than existing traffic on Sunset Boulevard. e. Lights will not be installed on top of the buildings and parking lights for the parking lots will be shielded so as not to affect adjacent properties . f. He agreed that some trees will be removed. However, he noted that additional trees on the Brown property will remain. 4 . Planning Department commented on the following items : a. Trees would have to be removed. b . If rezone is granted, would like conditions stipulated to include at least a 10-foot setback from the east property line. c. Design control regulations on the building. d. Screening fence on the east property line to go with appropriate landscaping which should serve as a noise barrier and be architecturally designed. e. Install a 14 foot landscape strip adjacent to Sunset Boulevard. f. Prohibit roof mounted signs . The Examiner considered the additional comments and information, revisited the property and has come to the following conclusions: CONCLUSIONS : 1. Addressing all the concerns voiced at the hearing would be extremely difficult without an outright prohibition of any construction. 2. It can be assumed that the property owner has certain rights to develop his property. Adjacent property owners and residents in this area also have certain rights to maintain the integrity of their area within the laws and codes of the city. 3. New development should have a minimum disruption on the environment of the area within the zones allowed by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 4 . Major issues noted include glare from lights, increased density, slope cut, destruction of trees , noise level increase, additional exhaust fumes and impairment of views . These issues will apply to development under the existing R-2 zone and development under a proposed commercial zone. R-001-77 Page Three Reconsideration In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding trees located on the proposed site, Mr. McLaughlin indicated that some trees would be required to be removed, but the trees located above the slope cut on property owned by Mr. Brown would remain. Mrs . Johnson stated that the zoning of the property had not changed since the applicant had purchased it. The applicant responded that a structure had existed on the property at the time of purchase', but had been removed at the request of the city because of its age and condition. The applicant had intended to rehabilitate the structure. The Examiner asked for concluding comments from Mr. Smith, Planning Department. Mr. Smith indicated that the staff report, as originally submitted, remains as the department recommendation. However, if the rezone were granted, he would recommend additional conditions to be met which include: adequate setbacks of a minimum of 10 feet from the property line; a landscaped buffer of 10 feet on top of the retaining wall with an architecturally designed fence which would be compatible with the adjacent area and would screen noise; design control on the building in relation to color; compliance with Mining, Grading and Excavation Ordinance; controlled lighting; controlled hours of operation; landscaping; and signing control. The Examiner summarized the hearing by stating that a definite need exists for buffers, setbacks , screening, and landscaping. He felt. , that the topography proposed for the property and height limitation of 15 feet would create a buffer between the R-2 and B=1` zones . The R-2 zone previously allowed clinics and offices, but now the ordinance precludes these uses and allows only townhouses and duplexes. The reconsideration hearing on Item #R-001-77 was concluded at 10 :20 a.m. by the Examiner. FINDINGS , CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS : 1. The application was reconsidered on February 22, 1977. In attendance were residents residing on Monroe Avenue N.E. between Sunset Boulevard N.E. and N.E. 12th Street and the applicant. 2. The major issues discussed by the adjacent residents expressing their concern were as follows: a. Glare from lights of existing and future businesses . b. Increase in density. c. Slope cut and its impact on trees and vegetation. d. Destruction of trees . e. Increase in noise level. f. Increase in exhaust fumes and its effect on residents . g. Consideration of potential down-zone. h. Extension of commercial zoning to Monroe Avenue N.E. i . Views and their retention. j . "Establishment of cocktail lounge within the proposed restaurant and the potential noise of traffic and patrons at late hours . R-001-77 Page Six Mr. Dennis Ossenkop Mr. William H. Schreven TRANSMITTED THIS 28th day of February, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Don J. Smith, Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Ordinance No. 3071, Section 4-3015, request for reconsideration or notice of appeal must be filed in writing on or before March 8, 1977. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedures , 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 of the conclusion of the hearing. 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. w f y R-OOl-77 Page Five Reconsideration 5 . . Construction of a two-story duplex could conceivably e'xendf approximately 25 feet above the existing grade, 'although a 35-foot height limit is allowed by ordinance. A series ofiduplexes could be built adjacent to the east property line, at one duplex per 7200 square feet. The effect of this construction would severely impair views and would increase the existing density of the property. Trees could be removed at the option of the applicant. The duplex would be' of. a residential character and would. be .Compatible to residential uses; however, the impact of the buildings could be significant to adjacent residences. 6 . It can be assumed that the R-2 zoning fronting Monroe Street can be built to R-2 standards to permit duplexes and townhouses . 7. In the Examiner' s opinion, the proposed commercial building built to a height not to exceed 15 feet would minimize the visual impact from the residents abutting Monroe Avenue N.E. The views would be maintained. 8. In the Examiner' s opinion, the proposed slope cut and rock wall, if accompanied' by a sight-obscuring, noise-reducing screening fence, together with appropriate landscaping, would provide a , visual separation between the adjacent R-2 zone and the contemplated structure . Therefore, the Examiner feels in considering the alternative for development,. it' appears that the proposed commercial structure built to a grade level to Sunset Boulevard and constructed to a height not to exceed 15 feet would provide a minimum impairment to the residential character of those uses abutting Monroe Avenue N.E. The topographic relief that would be created as a result of the slope cut would provide a major barrier to prohibit possible commercial extension onto those areas adjacent to Monroe Avenue N.E. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval subject to the following additional conditions: 1. Shield lights to minimize glare from properties located on Monroe Avenue N.E. 2. Coordinate with the Planning Department the design and color of the building so as not to visually detract from adjacent residences. 3. Install landscaping on the eastern property line adjacent to the screening fence to minimize visual impact of the proposed development. These conditions are in addition to those imposed at the hearing on January 31, 1977. ORDERED THIS 28th day of February, 1977. r Ma f, .dt Land Use ng Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 28th day of February, l' -by certified mail to the parties of record: Mr. Eugene R. Methven Mrs . George Johnson Mr. Wesley Adams Mr. Dennis Vadney Mrs . Kathy Ossenkdp R-001-77 Page Two Mr. Ericksen entered the following exhibit: Exhibit 3: Site map submitted by applicant on November 19 , 1976 , designating proposed use. Mr. Ericksen explained that the site map outlines the proposed use of the property including the general layout of parking and commercial facilities . He reported that the applicant has proposed in his application to excavate and lower the elevation of the property and place a rockery on the eastern and northern boundaries of the property. The Examiner requested information regarding the power line right-of- way. Mr. Ericksen noted on the map the property line of the power line right-of-way and indicated that the total dimension of the right- of-way is approximately 100 feet and within approximately 10 feet of the front of the proposed structure. The Examiner questioned the Planning Director regarding the possibility of building upon existing property which is zoned B-1. Mr. , Ericksen responded that the triangular section of property on Sunset Boulevard contains 3 ,300 feet and could accommodate a commercial building. The Examiner asked for comments from the applicant. Speaking in response was : Mr. William L. McLaughlin, Jr. 10630 S.E. 176th Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. McLaughlin made the following references to the Planning Department report: Page 4 , Item I-1. Clarified that the area to the east of the property is zoned R-2 rather than R-1 , apartment property. Page 4 , Item i-2e Applicant felt that because of the way the property is situated, the Planning Department should be able to make a favorable decision. He reported that the property to the east has a cut of 15 feet, beyond that to the east is a gradual slope of 15 to 20 feet to Monroe Avenue, and to the south the property has already been cut (Shuck property) to a 10 foot height. The applicant indicated that he is the owner of the property to the north which is zoned R-2 and B-1. Page 4 , Item I-3. The applicant felt that the project would not cause blight to the area due to the fact that most of the residences bordering the property are old and are about to be removed. He also reported that he had contacted the residents in the area and found that there were no objections to this project proposal . Page 4, Item I-3.4 . . The applicant disagreed that there would be any impact on property values in the immediate area. In regard to ingress or egress , he reported that the location would be on the western portion of the property which fronts Sunset Boulevard. Page 5 , Item 0-1. The applicant asked the Planning Director for the date of the latest revision to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Ericksen responded that a portion had been revised in August of 1976 , but the area in question had not been updated since 1967. The_ applicant _indicated that the property had been vacant for. some time because of the commercial development in the' area''and has been zoned since 1957. Page 5 , Item 0-2 . The applicant explained that the power line right- of-way crosses the property and leaves a triangular piece with a required 20-foot setback because Sunset Boulevard is a State highway. This leaves 2 ,000 square feet of property for a possible building site including the 100 feet of power line right-of-way. To utilize the property to the best advantage, construction of the building should be done on the back of the property with parking fronting Sunset Boulevard to allow for expedient ingress and egress . F . .4i' `ary' 7, 1977 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: William L. McLaughlin FILE NO. R-001-77 LOCATION: Property located approximately 300 feet north of North 12th Street, along the easterly edge of the existing power line easement and approximately. 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests a rezone from R-2 to B-1. A conceptual site plan for possible development of the site has also been submitted with the application. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Recommend denial of rezone. RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner:Recommend approval with conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received REPORT: by the Examiner on January 24, 1977. 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 January 31 , 1977, at 9 : 00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. Mr. McLaughlin stated that he had received and reviewed the staff report. Planning Department staff report was entered into the record by reference. Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director, summarized , the Planning Department report at the request of the Examiner and made the following exceptions to the report: Page 3, Item H. Applicable sections of the Zoning Code:. The Zoning Ordinance, while previously allowing professional offices ' and medical clinics in an R-2 (duplex) zone by special permit, now precludes office use according to the latest amendment to the ordinance. Page 4 , Item I . Applicable sections of the Comprehensive Plan or other official city documents : Item 4 should be added with reference to the Parking and Loading Ordinance regarding off-street parking and improvements . Mr. Ericksen indicated that there was no additional correspondence from city departments, ' and entered the following exhibits : Exhibit 1: , Zoning Map. Exhibit 2 : Land Use Site Map. The Examiner asked Mr. Ericksen if the amendment deleting professional offices and clinics in an R-2 zone would change the Planning Department final decision. Mr. Ericksen indicated that it would not. R-001-77 Page Four The Examiner asked the applicant if he would agree to restrictive covenants with a 15-foot height maximum for the structure. Mr. McLaughlin responded that the maximum height would be from 12 to 14 feet as illustrated on the proposed plan. The Examiner requested additional information from the applicant regarding restaurant signing. In response, Mr. McLaughlin reported that there would be no lights or revolving signs located on the building roof and signing would be limited to the face of the building. The Examiner asked Mr. McLaughlin if he was advised by the staff that the application was not in compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Mr. McLaughlin stated that' he was not sure. The Examiner asked Mr. Ericksen how much flexibility in the Comprehensive Land. Use Plan would be allowed in this case. Mr. Ericksen responded that "the Comprehensive Plan is a flexible document and the flexibility depends upon the situation and terrain. Normally, the property can vary depending on the line from 25 to 50 to 100 feet depending upon the circumstances involved. " He indicated that if the request is justified for the applicant's property, it would be justified for the Shuck property and future property located to the south to N.E. 12th and to the north. The line would have to be moved to the east to make the easterly property line uniform, and the rezone would make it a total commercial development in that area. Mr. McLaughlin stated that in reference to the 60-foot strip of property east of the power line right-of-way, the development already on Sunset Boulevard would discourage potential builders from building on property near a Shuck 's or a service station. No further testimony was given. The hearing on Item R-001-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10 : 15 a.m. Note: A complete record of the hearing is available in the Hearing Examiner' s office . FINDINGS , CONCLUSIONS, & RECOMMENDATIONS : Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: The Planning Department report sets forth the issues , applicable policies and provisions and departmental recommendations in this matter, and is attached to this report for reference. 1. The Planning Director noted that the R-2 zone formerly allowed office and medical clinics . This zone has been recently amended to allow only duplexes and townhouses . 2. Mr. McLaughlin maintains that the proposed commercial use would be an extension of property that has been zoned B-1 , commercial) since 1957 . This extension would be accommodated by grading the existing R-2 property to the same grade as the B-1 property adjacent to Sunset Boulevard. 3. Mr. McLaughlin owns the existing residences located on the eastern portion of his property now zoned R-2. He proposes to remove these homes as part of the total development proposal. Mr. McLaughlin also owns the .property_ to the north presently inhabited by two single-family residences . 4 . Mr. McLaughlin asserts that a five-foot landscape buffer or a screening fence located on the eastern line of his property would provide a more effective buffer from the existing and proposed commercial uses to the west of the property than the existing single-family residences . R-031-77 Page Three Page 5g Item 0-3. The applicant felt that allowing the property to remain at its present grade would not create a greater buffer than the proposed building set to a grade level with Sunset Boulevard. He also indicated that he does not anticipate the strip will continue to the east, and reported that he is the owner of the property to the north. Mr. McLaughlin indicated that he has owned the property for five to six years and intends on retaining it. In response to concerns of the Planning Department regarding the type of restaurant contained in the complex, he reported that three family-oriented restaurateurs have contacted him and have shown interest in the site. He indicated that he would agree to restrict restaurant signing to the face of the building only. The applicant stated that he would agree to put an additional five- foot landscape buffer strip on the eastern and northern rockeries and has also agreed to the 15-foot building height, in addition to accomplishing the grading that is shown on the plan. Speaking on the rezone request was : Mr. Clark Teegarden 264 Seneca Place N.W. Renton, Washington 98055 Mr. Teegarden stated that he is a member of the Renton Planning Commission. He indicated that in the Planning Department report, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan calls for low density multiple family zoning in this area. He noted that the Commission does not go against the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and could not therefore grant the rezone. This matter previously came to the attention o'f the Commission by the staff and the City Attorney's office, and he felt that the incorporation o,f the Hearing Examiner' s office does not change the basic concept of the Plan. He further stated that the proper procedure would be to change the Land Use Plan before the zoning is 'granted. He felt flexibility should be allowed, but consideration should be given to whether the property agrees with the Land Use Plan, and in this case, the Planning Department staff agrees that the property does not agree with the Plan. He indicated that the Commission should proceed with hearings on changes in the Plan. The Planning Director noted that the Planning Commission 'is studying the Highlands area with reference to review of the Comprehensive Plan. He indicated for the record that a 15-foot rockery would be required on the property lines. Such an excavation would have an impact on adjacent property aside from the drainage and runoff and that a five-foot landscape buffer would not screen adjacent properties. Other impacts would be considered environmental with reference to future impact on properties to the northeast and south. The applicant owns the property to the north extension of the proposed commercial zone which would have to be considered for future zoning. Mr. Ericksen stated that a low-density category is appropriate in this area. The existing R-2 zone does not allow offices and clinics , and a clinic would be incompatible with residential use properties on Monroe Avenue with reference to the Planning Department report and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. He indicated that the lines between designations on the plan are a flexible boundary. The Planning Director referred to Item I . 1-3 of the Planning Department report, which states that the zoning should •ehcouraye' business development but not encroach upon residential areas . The impact in this matter would have definite effects and would cause pressure in the future to rezone adjacent properties . Mr. McLaughlin responded that the impact of the cut proposed is not as Mr. Ericksen stated as the Shuck project has already made a cut similar to the cut proposed by the applicant. A five-foot planting strip or screening fence on top of the rockery is proposed and would be more of a buffer than the existing residences . R-001-77 Page Six FINDINGS: 14 . R.C.W. 35A.63.061, defines Comprehensive Land Use Plan: A land-use element that designates the proposed general location and extent of the use of land. " emphasis added) The term "general" implies that the plan is not intended to be specific but rather broad or flexible in its approach and application. The plan summarizes policies and proposals and does not indicate specific locations or detailed regulations. Ordinance No. 2142 - Ordinance adopting Comprehensive Land Use Plan - (Land Use Report, 1965) - an element of the Comprehensive Plan : Page 16 : General Development Plans . . '.Those maps included in this report are not intended to show the precise limits of any proposed land use, but are intended for use as guides in directing the growth and development of the community. " (emphasis added) Ordinance No. 2142 , No. 1 - The "Land Use Map. . . illustrates in broad and general terms the foreseeable development of the City of Renton. " emphasis added) Those statements continue to emphasize the general nature and intent of the use of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 15. Land Use Report, 1965 (a Comprehensive Plan element) Page 17, Objectives: 6) "Encourage the development and utilization of land to its highest and best use in such a way as to promote the best interest of the community and contribute to its overall attractiveness and desirability as a place in which to work, shop, live and play. " 16 . Land Use Report, Ordinance No. 2153 , Page 17: Objectives : 1) "Prevent blight by protecting residential and other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would contribute to premature decay and obsolescence and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns . " Several older single-family residences exist on the property. If these continue in their existing condition without major improvements, a blighted condition will be perpetuated. The option under the existing R-2 designation would be to replace these homes with duplex or townhouse units . These units would directly abut an existing commercial zone, would face a major arterial and a recently constructed neighborhood shopping center. There is not an apparent physical buffer between. the duplex and commercial uses . Property directly east of the McLaughlin property has an elevation ch-ange , of 15 to 20 feet and is screened from the commercial area by a large stand of existing evergreens , approximately 30 to 45 ' feet in height. This property is also zoned R-2 , but can be protected "from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses" by elements not readily available to the McLaughlin property. R-001-77 Page Five FINDINGS: 5.. Mr. McLaughlin is willing to provide restrictions on the property binding him to the grading plan as submitted, to maintain a 15-foot maximum height limit on the proposed structure, and to install a screening buffer on the eastern and northern property lines . He is also agreeable to restricting signing to signs located on the face of the building. 6 . Mr. McLaughlin stated that he had talked to the neighbors and that there were no objections to this proposal. There were no adjoining property owners opposing the request. 7. Mr. Clark Teegarden, Planning Commission member, noted the staff report indicated the application does not agree with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the application should be denied and the area should be referred to the Planning Commission for consideration when amending the existing Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 8. Shuck' s Auto Parts store, located to the south of the property, has just completed grading and a, similar cut exists which would be similar to the grading proposed by Mr. McLaughlin. 9 . The Planning Director noted that, "the Comprehensive Plan is a flexible document and the flexibility depends upon the situation and terrain. Normally, the property can vary depending on the line from 25 to 50 to 100 feet depending upon circumstances involved. " 10 . Mr. Ericksen indicated that if the request is justified for the applicant's property, it would be justified for the Shuck property and future property located to the south to N.E. 12th Street and to the north. The line would have to be moved to the east to make the easterly property line uniform, and the rezone would make the area a total commercial development. 11 . The existing R-2 property, if utilized for duplex purposes , would directly front a proposed neighborhood shopping center and major arterial. 12 . R-2 property abutting Monroe Avenue east of the subject property is utilized by older single-family residences that are: situated at an elevation of 30 to 40 feet from the proposed finished grade. These residences front Monroe Avenue and have existing vegetation consisting of trees , shrubs , etc . on their western property line. 13. Ordinance No. 3071 (Section 4-3014) states that before a reclassification of property is recommended, at least one of the following circumstances shall be found to apply: c) That since the last previous land use analysis of the area and area zoning of the subject property, permitted private development or other circumstances affecting the property have undergone significant and material change. This area was last analyzed by the Planning Commission in 1967 . Property directly opposite this property and west of Sunset Boulevard, 7 . 78 acres , is presently being developed as a neighborhood shopping center. The adjacent property to the south has recently been cleared' and developed by an auto parts store. These recent developments have, in the Examiner' s opinion, significantly undergone a material change. R-001-77 Page Eight CONCLUSIONS : 9 . Imposed conditions on the potential commercial development will be essential to insure that the development will be compatible and will not physically detract from the adjacent R-2 zoned property that fronts Monroe Avenue . 10 . It can be assumed that the adjacent R-2 property will eventually be developed with duplexes or townhouse uses. New development would be built on a grade approximately 10 to 20 feet above the finished grade of the McLaughlin rezone. 11 . A proposed commercial building on the McLaughlin site should not extend above the grade of the adjacent property located on the east boundary of the McLaughlin site. Commercial construction above the existing grade of property fronting Monroe Avenue would detract from a desirable character for future low-density multi-family, uses allowed in an R-2 zone. 12 . The proposed regrading and excavation of McLaughlin's property will alter the natural drainage pattern. A drainage plan should be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department prior to grading and construction. 13. Commercial development should be compatible with the character of the area. The shopping center to the west is maintaining a 14-foot landscape strip adjacent to Sunset Highway. This landscape area is a natural and desirable extension of landscaped areas adjacent to the Highlands Shopping Center located to the southwest of the McLaughlin property. 14. Section 4-725, Amendments If the Examiner, after thorough study of the proposal and the petition, determines that the reclassification or the change in use district boundaries is advisable and in the public interest and tends to further the preservation and enjoyment of any substantial property right of the petitioner and is not materially detrimental to the public welfare or the properties of other persons .located in the vicinity thereof, and is not out of harmony with the purposes and effect of the overall plan of the established zone classification and use district boundaries, then in such event, the Hearing Examiner may recommend that the Council approve the reclassification, " Approving the rezone request with restrictive covenants would, in the Examiner's opinion, comply with City policy as stated in Section 4-725 . 15. The Planning Department has declared (note Planning Department report, Section L) that the proposed rezone would not have a significant effect on the environment and has therefore issued a Declaration of Non-Significance. RECOMMENDATION: 1 . Approve the rezone request from R-2 to B-1 subject to' the filing of restrictive covenants regarding the following conditions : a. The height of structures located on the site shall not exceed 15 feet from the existing grade of Sunset Boulevard which fronts the McLaughlin property. R-001-77 Page Seven CONCLUSIONS : 1. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan map designates a portion 60 ° x 163 ' ) of the McLaughlin property as low-density multi-family. A power line right-of-way of approximately 100 feet traverses the property and is apparently intended to serve as a buffer between the existing B-1 (commercial) zone and the adjacent property designated as R-2 (duplex) zone, which is directly east of the power line right-of- way and extends to Monroe Avenue. 2 . In the Examiner's opinion, the McLaughlin R-2 property is not a desirable residential area. The power line right-of- way may spatially separate and buffer the B-1 and R-2 zones , but it does not visually buffer the R-2 zone from encroaching and recently constructed commercial uses . Property zoned R-2 that abuts Monroe is visually and physically screened from commercial uses and activities by a 15-foot to 20-foot elevation change and a stand of evergreen trees . 3. Grading the 60-foot width of R-2 property east of the power line right-of-way, installing a 15-foot rock wall and providing a screening and landscaping buffer on top of the wall would accommodate the objective, as noted in the Land Use Report, of physically and visually protecting residential districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would contribute to premature decay and obsolescence and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns . 4 . Research of city and state documents, laws and ordinances note the Comprehensive Plan is intended to be used as a general guide to determine future zoning and growth patterns. 5 . Granting the zoning request with restrictions would provide a buffer from adjacent residential uses, would provide a natural extension of the existing business zoned property and would eliminate existing residential uses that are not compatible with the character 'and growth trend of the area. In the Examiner' s opinion, the intent of the Comprehensive Plan designations would be complied with. 6 . It is the Examiner's opinion that granting this request would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or the properties of other persons located in the vicinity and would not be out of harmony with the purposes and effect of the overall plan of the established zone classification and use district boundaries . 7 . Granting the request would denote that a similar request to zone properties north and south of the McLaughlin rezone would be considered and would not detract or be incompatible with the intent of the prevailing growth pattern. 8. The alternative would be to remand the request to the Planning Commission for revision of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. In the Examiner' s opinion, the proposed change (60 ' width) would be minor and would emulate zoning reclassification through comprehensive planning which is not the intent of neighborhood and community planning. Granting the request would not materially be in disharmony with the original intent of the Comprehensive Plan to provide compatible• transition between land uses and in a manner which would-hot detract from the physical development of the community in a coordinated, unified manner. 1 The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances both deal with the ways in which privately owned land will be used, but the Plan indicates , and should only indicate, broad categories for general areas of the city , whereas Zoning Ordinances delineate the exact boundaries of districts and specify the detailed regulations which shall apply within them. a R-001-77 Page Nine b. Install a sight-obscuring 5-foot fence (minimum height) on top of the proposed rockery along the north, south, and east property lines . c. Install and maintain a 5-foot planting strip adjacent to Sunset Boulevard. 2 . The applicant -is o reqa to a. File an acceptable storm water run-off plan with the Public Works Department. b. Maintain, where physically possible, the stand of evergreen trees on the eastern property line as a natural buffer between the proposed commercial development and the adjacent residential property. ORDERED THIS 7th day of February, 1977 . 402V ,,t_, i ri es L. =TstadtL11.and Use jc aring Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 7th day of February,. 1977 by certified mail to the parties of record: William L. McLaughlin Clark Teegarden Joan A. Walker TRANSMITTED THIS 7th day of February, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director . Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Don J. Smith, Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Ordinance No. 3071, Section 4-3015, request for reconsideration or notice of appeal must be filed in writing on or before February 14 , 1977. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedures , 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 of the conclusion of the hearing. 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. Plinf PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE TWO RE : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION 9 . Comprehensive Land The Comprehensive Plan Use Plan : indicates low density multiple family residen- tial for the site and surrounding -area east of the powerline easement . 10 . Notification : Notice published in Record Chronicle at least 10 days prior to hearing , notice posted on or near subject property in three places , and applicant notified , according to established legal requirements . C. PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Applicant requests zoning change from R-2 to B- 1 to allow commercial development of the property at a future date . A general site plan was submitted with the application indicating a possible 7000± sq . ft. building and related parking area for a restaurant , real estate office , hair styling salon , and T . V . repair shop . However , the plan does not conform to parking and landscaping ordinance requirements . The applicant has indicated that the plan submitted is conceptual , and only meant for discussion purposes . D s HISTORY/BACKGROUND The site was initially rezoned from GS- 1 to R-2 by Ordi - nance No . 1594 on February 25 , 1957 . The zoning has not changed since that date , although an attempt was made in 1968 to rezone the subject property , together with the property to the east along Monroe Ave. N . E . , to the R-3 classification . This request was denied and R-2 granted for that area east of the subject site along Monroe Ave . N . E . (Ordinance No . 2403 ) . E. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1 . Topography : The subject property is moderately steep with a 13%± slope . The terrain rises steadily within the westerly 20 feet, levels off toward the center , then rises sharply again near the easterly property line . The adjacent residential property to the east rises above the level of the subject property. 2 . Soils : Arents, Alderwood 6- 15 percent slopes . These soils consist of Alderwood soils that have been dis- turbed through urbanization , a mixed gravelly sandy loam, slopes 6- 15 percent. This soil is moderately well drained . Permeability is moderately rapid to moderately slow , depending upon compaction during construction . Available water capacity is low; run-off is medium and the erosion hazard is moderate to severe . This soil is used for urban development. There are moderate limitations for foundations due to seasonal high water table and severe limitations on shallow excavations and septic tank filter fields . 3 . Vegetation : Existing groundcover consists of ever- green shrubs and grass . Hearty pine and Douglas Fir are predominate along the eastern portion of the subject property. A•J. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING JANUARY 31 , 1977 APPLICANT': , W.ILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. FILE NO : R-001-77 A. SUMMARY OF REOUEST: Applicant requests a rezone from R-2 to B- 1 . A conceptual site plan for possible development of the site has also been submitted with the application . P, GFNFRAL INFnPMATIfN : 1 . Owner of Record : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN 2 . Applicant William L . McLaughlin 3 . Location : Property located approxi - mately 300 ' north of North 12th Street , along the easterly edge of the existing powerline ease- ment and approximately 100 feet east of N . E . Sunset Boulevard . 4 . Legal Description : That portion of the south- east 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of said Section 4 , Town- ship 23 North , Range 5 E , W . M . , described as follows : beginning at a point on the east line of said sub- division 326 . 30 ' northerly from the southeast corner thereof; thence continuing northerly along said easterly line a distance of 163 . 60 ' to :a point 489 . 90 ' northerly of said southeast corner; thence north 88°53 ' 08" west to the . easterly margin of Puget Sound Power and Light Com- pany ' s transmission line right-of-way; thence southerly along said easterly margin to a point bearing north 88°53 ' 08" west from the point of begin- ning ; thence south 88°53 ' 08" east to the point of begin- ning . 5 . Size of Property : Approximately 10 ,000 sq . ft. 6 . Access : N . E . Sunset Boulevard via adjacent property owned by applicant . 7 . Existing Zone : R-2 ( Residential District) 8 . Existing Zoning in Area : R-2 ( Residential District) , GS- 1 (General Suburban Dis- trict) and B-1 (Business District ) . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE FOUR RE : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION 3 . Section 4-725 , Amendments : . . . " If the Examiner, after thorough study of the proposal and the petition , deter- mines that the reclassification or the change in use. district boundaries is advisable and in the , public interest and tends to further the preservation and enjoyment of any substantial property right of the petitioner and is not materially detrimental to the public welfare or the properties of other persons located in the vicinity thereof, and is not out of harmony with the purposes and effect of the overall plan of the established zone classification and use district boundaries , then in such event, the Hearing Examiner may recommend that the Council approve the reclassification . " I . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS : 1 . Comprehensive Plan , Policy Statement F . 1 . : "The location of shopping areas should , generally , be such that protection is given to residential areas from unwarranted business encroachment . At the same time they should be located in areas which are convenient to potential customers . " 2 . Renton Developmental Guidelines Ordinance , Section 4-31 . 1 , 2 . : " It is the intent of this Ordinance to provide the City, especially the Planning Department and the Hearing Examiner with criteria to make con- sistent and rational land use 'recommendations and decisions... " 3. Land Use Report , Objectives , Pg . 17 : " . . . community goals and objectives : 1 . Prevent blight by protecting residential and other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would contribute to premature decay and obsolecence , and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns . 4. Protect property values within the community for the benefit of its residents and property owners , through the effective control of land use and the enforcement and application of building and construction codes . " J . IMPACT ON NATURAL SYSTEMS : Rezoning of the property would not have an impact on the natural systems in itself . However, development of the property would remove vegetative cover and require exca- vation and grading of the site . The applicant proposes a cut near the east property line of approximately 15 ' supported by a rock retaining wall . Additional storm water runoff will be created by an increase in impervious structures and paving . There would also be some increase • in air pollution , noise , and traffic with the eventual development of the subject site . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE THREE RE : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION 4 . Wildlife : A variety of native birds and small mammals periodically frequent the area . 5 . Water : No streams , ponds , or other types of surface water exist on the subject site . 6 . Land Use : Two single family residences presently exist on the subject property. The site lies within an R-2 zone ( residential two-family) with B- 1 business use ) directly west (owned by the applicant) to Sunset Boulevard . Even though the R-2 zone allows duplexes ( residential two-family) , the imme- diate area to the east and north primarily consists of single family residences . Business uses dominate the southwestern portion of the block : ARCO service station , Shuck ' s Auto Supply .( in construction ) , and a medical clinic . The powerline easement which borders the subject property on the west , although zoned B- 1 , cannot be utilized for any such buildings or structures . It can , however, be used for necessary parking and circulation . F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: 1 . Two single family residences exist on the site . Single family residences exist to the north and east of the subject site . The surrounding area to the north , south , and east to Monroe is presently zoned R-2 , which permits single family and duplex residences . The area east of Monroe Avenue N . E . is single family residen- tial . 2 . The adjacent property on the west is zoned B- i and is presently undeveloped . Commercial uses front onto Sunset Boulevard , southwest of the subject site . The new Sunset Plaza Shopping Center is presently under construction on the west side of Sunset Boulevard . G. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1 . Sewer and Water: A 12 inch water main and 8 inch sewer main presently exist along Sunset Boulevard . 2 . Fire Protection : Additional fire hydrants will be required in the area if the property is developed . 3. Transit: Metro Transit Route #42 and #107 are in close proximity to the site , approximately one-two blocks away . 4 . Schools : The property lies within the Renton School District No . 403. Hillcrest Elementary School and McKnight Jr. High lie approximately within a six block radius of the site. 5 . Parks and Recreation : Playgrounds associated with Hillcrest Elementary School and McKnight Junior. High School are easily accessible . H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1 . Section 4-708 , R-2 Residential District : Permitted uses within this zone include single family and duplex residential units . Apartments , townhouses , and offices also may be allowed by Special Permit within the exist- ing R-2 zone . , 2 . Section 4-711 , B-1 Business District PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE SIX RE : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION 4 . The site as presently zoned will permit apartments , townhouses , or professional offices and clinics by Special Permit. This , together with the remaining property to the west, will provide substantial property rights for development alternatives on the site, which can be compatible with the adjacent R-2 area . P. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION : The Planning Department recommends denial of the subject request based on the above analysis . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 31 , 1977 PAGE FIVE RE : WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. APPLICATION K, SOCIAL IMPACTS : 1 . Land Use : The proposal would not only alter the possible land use of the subject site but may also have an effect of creating similar zoning changes that encroach further into the adjacent residential area . This may create further blight and relocation of people in the surrounding area . 2 . Population Density : Development of the wide range of uses permitted in the B- 1 zone may create more density during certain periods than if it were , developed R-2 residential . 3. Health and Safety : Health and safety problems may be created in the area if certain business uses are developed . 4 . Cultural and Historical Aspects : None are known to exist on the subject property . L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION : Pursuant to the City of .Renton Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended ( RCW 43 . 216 ) ,. a Declaration of Non-significance has been issued for the subject proposal (see attached ) . M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION : A vicinity map is attached . N. AGENCIE-S/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: 1 . City of Renton Building Division 2 . City of Renton Engineering Division 3 . City of Renton Utilities Division 4. City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division 5 . City of Renton Fire Department All departments contacted had no concerns regarding the subject application . 0, DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1 . The application is not compatible with the Comprehen- sive Land Use Plan , the policy statement, and sound planning and zoning principles . 2 . The powerline easement presently acts as a buffer area between the business zoning and the existing residential area to the east . Structures cannot be constructed within the easement area , although it can be used for parking and open space purposes . 3. Allowing business zoning east of the powerline would eliminate the buffer between the commercial and resi - dential area and may establish a precedent for further encroachment and degradation of the residential area , as well as possible future strip commercial zoning along N . E . Sunset Boulevard . I • . t51YL . '.'JWm-f Jl'.•a.1O9.d')LLRI&iSN.'C•`_._--..,`...na—_ fa • r•- ter:. 7 . '(".: .'" ''''('ll'Vii G*00 t' ' k ' Il 9` iv., Cl , A POIeSoul. 11., a 1'YryA` G i .: . 4 ! poi . A A 1; r..,: ib: ' kli A4 7•111 4 3.--. IL ...‘ . a R•3 i .4 r • .S r. liIZ II ig, .. opt ../.4t g 1 T 5" / —..I.1 'reilf"..1 gl.•.1 ' Aa_ ..,f..1111,' r Fl_. ; q O a• ilC.A.:: n. `71f a MR n i a ie fr1 'e' tt '1 W., ,`., ` 1 i ''.1-,i• "r lll3 a. 6..ilur n '''1u 14.. H l .• •... , 11•1'r ; , R n 1 , h .1 • lei trigip11:1j . o 1. .o . .. , I. I. ., p I 4 4 j1'1'L•1''_L.L t_LI N ,,;''• i' • .'Th"1 em—G-7 n • i • l . TTTT i 1 ii.'..0 fin'; . a REZONE: WILLIAM L. MC. I_AUGHLIN, JR: ; App,1 . R-001-77; rezone from R-2 to B-1; J property located on Sunset Boulevard between N.E. 12th Street and Monroe Avenue N.E-. APPLICANT WILLIAM L. MC LAUGHLIN, JR. TOTAL AREA ±10,595 sq. ft. PRINCIPAL ACCESS . N.E. Sunset Boulevard. EX?S1ING ZONING R-2 EXISTING USE Two Single Family Residences PROPOSED USE Restaurant and Retail Business COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Low Density Multi-family COMMENTS RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON 1--x-jtt1,<-c/;r} / NEARING EXAMINER I Ir1N 11971 Am PM 7,R,4s10111,I2,11213141516 •' e B r b 84 gi,i7r-,fivGs— ® D Ea a Irt-74'i 111 ® e I3 1j 13ane Fow AAC f4q° o FLAzAiBE4 A-fi r In ?AC Af9 I 7 2 0 G5061B@ ,APr hiE 13 .5 5 3 v J leo r i.r dam.n 333 • rfrvir9 pv r 44.E 1 Ej MIL V u44 . t Ze4 toIV nl7 s o 5, i7.......I b"%rpe-1t, 0 4 1 14 u ® ® ® Qa ® -- Ale /iv PL.. slll,.. Et! gTh—Ji—TrT-------g Sr o n I o ci 0 R Q ; E ®ZC3 nED >t ® 2 ptil1:4147ifimiammi III 1 sc%o,e6 I'a Z.GO° sjeer sae CD 0- If) o RECEIVED WM. Pe NI O CITY OF RENTON germs- 140•R-00l®77 LI) HEARING EXAMINER o Info ' 11977 N AM PM 7 c' " "^ ': _I!:?.`E.415,6 ilk Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. Set t .. tO°x'iS being first duly sworn on oath,deposes and says that'h° is the chief clerk of THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4) times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- paper published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington, 4 ,- - •lnanditisnowandduringallofsaidtimewasprintedinanofficemaintainedCITYr.1O,,F RENTON 4attheaforesaidplaceofpublicationofsaidnewspaper.That the Renton NOTICETOFRecord-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the PUBLIC•HEARINGJ' 'x`Superior Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, BY RENTO , : CITY COUNCIL , r.v, Washington-That the annexed is a..--NoticP...a.01/9.4.0 hearing NOTICE IS" HEREBY• GIVEN that the Ron'City`e'nt Council has fixed the4tfildayiv of April,1977,at-8:00 p;mint'. the Council Chambers,ofthe,+ Renton Municipal"Builiiing4asitwaspublishedinregularissues(and Renton,Washington asit e,not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period time and place forra4'public'; hearing to.consider;theufoi- lowing: 1 k' of one consecutive issues,commencing on the• Appeal of HearingExa, miner decision re arair rezone from R-2464-13,-8t.I"i day of ii,T'cli 19.7.7....,and ending the on property located;apz l proximately 300",feet:;i; north of N.E..12th,Street;:,r, along the easterlye dge.;day of 19 both dates of the existing polder line inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- easement and approxi':=Y scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee mately 100 feet'+eastt,off '•N.E. Sunset„Boulleyard•4" File No. R-00.1=774464 ,r4r;charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $16,47, which fi d has beenpaid in full at the rate of Any and all interested Vt s'•ted t per folio of one hundred words for the 1 persons, are invited,-to: e''first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent present to voice'.,a Koval,,rtinsertion. on ,.,._I disapproval or"opiriions•on`r. same. CITY OF RENTO Delores A'?Meatl'{{ Ci''•Olerk1 7 ),'' - l Published in-The Renton;,. Record-Chronicle.March 1 8 a tt1 1977.R4252.. 1=>, 'f x,yk,'1 Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of March 19 77 Notary Public ' and for the State of Was ' gton, residing at Kent, King ounty. Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9th, 1955. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. V.P.C.Form No.87 v+- L _ f CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 4th . ' • , day of April 19 77 , at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, as the time, and place f he followinorapublichearingtoconsidert g Appeal of Hearing Examiner decision regarding rezone from R-2 to B-1 on property located approximately 300 feet north of N•,E;, 12th Street,- along the easterly edge of the existing power line easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard. File No. R-001-77. Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval, disapproval or opinions on same. CITY OF RENTON Q. Delores A. • Mead, City Clerk DATE OF PUBLICATION 3-18-77 CERTIFICATION STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. COUNTY OF KING I , L. <5-i C L , ftA/419 s hereby vi fy that1Nre 5) copies of the 'above notice were pfisted by me in - or more conspicuous places on the property described and two copies were posted at the Re ton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave, South, Renton, WA on date of v 19 77 . S i g n e Cf7` ATTEST: otary Public .in, and for the State of Washington, residing. in Renton 6/76 7.ii' i:.: '}4,r i '_`tr. ~• i , _. ti.._ r..jSJ .«_ V,,4 i..,•.,-,. r-r+ . ,,. r ~rt''•' 7 4it ',' i 4,)' G:t.-//7 ' .- ' — Ai YA/, ' 2--- zzi'ase .7,15/y4 77t,-0.,!•./e7i , -. . . ,‘,.. , iz /4/27,/. .. •,/,.. , ‘7.7' . .. . • 0 . M Se--/ v ' re. 7a/ Jc.0- J Ij7O/ ' 0' 7'`vt ' j09/7/ .o'/ ' LJ Ir THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 z o o CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR DELORES A. MEAD A CITY CLERK 04:4T D SEPS <<, March 21 ,. 1977 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING-REZONE APPEAL STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. COUNTY OF KING DELORES A. MEAD, City Clerk of the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 21st day of March, 1977, at the hour 5:00p.m. , your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by First Class Mail , a true and correct copy of NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING REZONE, R001-77, William L. McLaughlin rezone appealed by Ossenkop & Adams, mailed to parties of record per attached list. Delores A. Mead, Uilty Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 21st day of March, 1977 Maxine E. Motor, Notary Public in and for the State of Washington., residing in Renton I . IIntllirll,' ;, INTER-OFFICE MEMOR" "„SUM r.._ March 15, 77 F. TO. Les Phillips Public Works Dept. FROM:Del Mead, City Clerk SUBJECT:Notice of Public Hearing - Rezone - File R-001-77 please post and return certified copy as per usual procedure. Thanks. Del Notices of Public Hearing sent to: Earl McLaughlin Ray Brown Dennis G. Ossenkop Leslie E. Adams Dennis L. Vadney Chester G. Baze Bernard W. Spunaugle Eugene R. Methven Bruce Kimming William Schreven Mayor Delaurenti R. Stredicke G. Ericksen W. Gonnason Examiner's office 1i_ Notice of Public Hearing copy sent 3/21/77 to: Earl McLaughlin 1408 Monroe N.E. Renton, Wn. 98055 Ray Brown 1309 Monroe N.E. Renton, Wn. 98055 CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 4th . day of April 19 77 , at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, as the time and place for a public hearing to consider the following: Appeal of Hearing Examiner decision regarding rezone from R-2 to B-1 on property located approximately 300 feet north of N,:/ : 12th Street, along the easterly edge of the existing power line easement and approximately 100 feet east of N.E. Sunset Boulevard. File No. R-001-77. Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval , disapproval or opinions on same. CITY OF RENTON Q. ?Va.of Delores A. Mead, City Clerk DATE OF PUBLICATION 3-18-77 CERTIFICATION STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. COUNTY OF KING I , hereby certify that copies of the above notice were posted by me in three or more conspicuous places on the property described and two copies were posted at the Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave. South, Renton, WA on date of 19 Signed ATTEST: Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing in Renton 6/76 f C 1........ y.-i . - r F` r.,.• ri .1w,i ,Y, 1 dN ,-.Te•ta liytIr.1,,mi i.'.-1_,• . .,n3a1 n' e e-R_1 i P "• .,,,_. 4.y.j ,7,•f'•• ° a•. nlaa.1o,i a."Iasi' I } s r y, 4t a. 1' i. Io.,ar I Lc,'{ M G—It00 -i-;.. Ly 1t D -,. a '. '•,1'1.1:• 4 4:,:ti, .. •,.,..., , , , i4. 1'" a:' i e , •1 ,' r r Inc• -- ST - . • rAW ` ice + T : .}, •• P ` r,.I 11 I Ill 7 ,a I , :.- " S t:nvFsiw 1 J i. ..rifi • :' t m` _ % 11 it VIR i 41/4 •... A 44-.,.t:.a• iolty 7 & r I 1 I sr,drti.:„ -w -e,.re 4" ' ''' - . ' 1 ,,I.I.u. PM 1 1 :::,.., ::::::: , 04 Ilk, 1 14 b Li ..4. nik 3iiii , 1 1140 a 1 R-3 kiim e 2- tni si---•.2' li-2 1. : jj,..- , , I i ... a ..' ': .1 i_li!vg-/ - . A _ J o c 1Y 1 i1 r l a W t 11 1 I,. 1 II__ _1 NIP- , n 4' 4, • Te- I I RIMQ14'- /y I I I it' •' ViliA940-ilk® .03•• likli , t0 o . 111 r I J..QW•Q' ' 9U31. MLO1[ 10 A A s ®fir?'_ d b• F,," ?' • 'i , t1 UM ae C39 Zi ,y ¢:®;1;1' '_•-. sn - 4 pip •. /7,-,0111‘tve . , itip , 4 zu p' 4_ A, -' 1 • 1 I.-, A.ve,:, . , •., . d la "d W.pi to [Sxr\l nslit j' i sl+ •,,t,,, V<I4I ill tip,.tii,ilf 4 Z L' a 1 1/2. r 4a ,.: ma 515,4.4,1:,,....,:•,, 44• 6 e• lli aee.t...1/5)Qm1 O 1P a., - i' ,. _ .r 10• I-• • ,,,. ' ,. . 1-- 1rkt, 4•' NI > t t a art 'i >Q9 ni01iif2 7l 1 Z u.- ilia-,. n1 3 i pig ]4 ./.....• N 10,'M iT. 1. T pp 4 v 53 I. a t.a a,e'"..Ir -:.1., . '. , W .51 %1111 8 ' 11 •. . I 1 awl ' ss J11 .. 'f: ..:0;11 - • • rit NOR gir 43 1 N4ii1' El y ems, I .+ i' ti ,., GS.. is " lis l a c"— pi pn••.D• T 1..4i= no, I M. •!IPI Qf , ems.e e ei. es•e s•e Fr 'El id 1< _ t:I iI ..i. ... ,..---it;to 0. ,, a. seems G 7 0' f rr I v©-i m T. 1 18884.1.e._ is•IL I' I. • '' , .. 1 II heft. :. Qgpr>aivseg _ REZONE.: WILLIAM L . 'MC LAUGHLIN , JR. ; App1 . R-001-77 ; rezone' from . R-2 to B- 1 ; property located, on Sunset ' Boulevard between N . E . 1.2th Street and Monroe Avenue N . E: APPLICANT' WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. TOTAL AREA ±10 , 595 sq . ft. PRINCIPAL ACCESS • N . E . Sunset Boulevard . EXISTING ZONING R-2 EXISTING USE Two Single Family Residences PROPOSED USE Restaurant and -Retail Business COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN I Low Density Multi -family COMMENTS C.:I?... q,',..:;; 19iii•Initiked i El i8 lioviiseluctio t: i 100 ;17,3„ 4v 41° 0 Ci , 4 gilltil E . ' ' e Oo az) 1 son: . t 10 111 IJ akr. oIQ it a calor: s.e. 0 to v 40 7 4[ 3ftt o a 1.3 3itrr. s4kopro46( ceNniss. IS s.c. rl Ix fix 3igii.j..s.r.93,...hpr- 5 7 a5•Iass, al n isle ifigST11 . iiiii SR 'd i La w 4% s . An cr. 0 PP 9a3,,, re-Y I 7 C 0 '8 leam.:ty r—dfrete° slr. sctAmic 0 eftett fIti.cm0 p 4.ReD34Aft. 747t.1 .. ," kite i 1: ig4. 0 0 . w sly Qto a it..9),,,• fr,, I 1::3 CO CP Ca CFI 'anlifI IL,I tie 11 Pi. . sl®w.a. I ao 0 L:=3 CJ 0 [3 la 1 gosb Q L L tie CL ----------21----: I--10, Rail s k=_,.. ANNInsaai SCALE 111111008 SECT sIYE CD WM, metAllefout4 RECEIVED RizomE- MO.g-00I'-77 CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER JAN 3 11977 f AM PM 7181.9r10111c12i1 ." :'441516 i l-a- 2 A CITY - OF RE-NTOi'J .. FINANCE'-DEP ARTMENTME N 0I 4 E SH SON 9RNTOWAiNG 80'55 s 9 RECEIVED OF --., - -.12— -f :-y/,'9" —./ DOLLARS FOR yii 1 a..i! 5 J r. i O A R HANEMAS L- G EW R T R• E 0A -E 'D-IFI c I . 1I i_. e i a.•`s p 1+ /: ' 4••t• • 1, l '.ijl iiii" Q 1 L iCII L• ro1 +•1 r:. — - a'll ii"= e-i, It00 ''''' '.. 'k';:: \ -- - :t1:=1.:-14 ri,,,„ _ , it t r I I .-, .4,11; • .,Ali au 11 . 11 I 1 ,11 I m f1 Wl©,il.id 0 4 s R-3 G ii..,.......SIP r..° 1 rim 1 .. 44 4r4r y x4fo i 11 1 R,..2. 1 f hat VI '- .- ilfe Pri.c.i I-ft to tl N' r .iii I 1' L re e 1 t% 1 1 I 'I a iil r?, 9 ,5J 7 4, ;=-3 P.731'1E: EV 17°4Ri- 4 /y LA IN IV igiViiii;i; 03 I n61., I t i 40.17o0Ci impmin6 ji te, !`l'_I,o 59 f !fl 3 , A• 1 1 4 otike. i.it, o V s4 T.. t' 0 a tc,s3 ilji , n Rft 5 eTMmai Or...w 0i nag ` .. wa . esrprms gni i. G tea"v4', = N o A oO r7Of1 K • T 1 O a `...! "1..1- u t IIe ,2 / il iwa"— m©.. 32 r 111 .. 10mulgi $.,I 4g.ei„i lro 1 si N 3 Ley 1 1 1M 4 7 . C3 lap• Al h il i 00 r , •1 W —' 4 a..r 3 d a. ' `. h c. -ti 1 I 1 i.k tii . ' ;', ' ems I 4 1• i pippraft .'. 1.11'....7'110. . V. - Z ' -11,-..,(. i. 'AU! ' - KI '464 .. ,04/ N71" I.I I It. _ e eneto r_._r_._L ft • i:1 4 r' - 9 <) e -i o oiii. ties®E ' ``G'7 0' REZONE : WILLIAM L. MC LAUGHLIN , JR. ; Appl . R-001-77 ; rezone from R-2 to B- 1 ; property located on Sunset Boulevard between N . E . 12th Street and Monroe Avenue N . E . APPLICANT WILLIAM L . MC LAUGHLIN , JR. TOTAL AREA ±10 ,595 sq . ft. PRINCIPAL ACCESS N . E. Sunset Boulevard EXISTING ZONING R-2 EXISTING USE Two Single Family Residences PROPOSED USE Restaurant and Retail Business COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Low Density Multi -family COMMENTS'. 4 1- -iir- clip 0 i 8 g-rig kzI QS7\I 0 13awl444ftEhr. • irlY 111 I yos III 7-7--------..........7 4 Z Weiron. e L3I 41 I] tc o 0 to v LtoEl1:111 vr. ( furkiica) LYI ti Q.C4 146/4m.0"z softer faAzA 3 n 3„,. SAtlytklir Cerift. iti si . 1:-.? 9 Eivr. B Arll..„-±. 2 0 Gc5401 ge 13r71sr itiAQ' I r:::11'''' tr. 4 1 140 El 17 s•c•ea: es: Ill Reset/oh&4% sattrr. 6.r 0 bail' 9 31 IV 4'B 3 pi 1;1;fr_ts 18gme -ITY 4 cu„,, SS. Pe . Arie Myna- dv L'e' \- ollef. II 41' Li'Di 0 Ns am ' s vie lajui 0 1 ,0 nal E=I 10.1:343 cp 14' /mit; Li. 6 41 0 a ol, Co;18113 F' 0 44f- f-',......... 1 cOf if I NE • /I•ns 40 1 iii S 4 0 1=1 1::JR.91 2n 0 E3saw.gh. 0 •2... r i 2 Lla ?..: 11 23 11:1 -rzi i=n C:3 (f.;) b. n - s.r F1,4 Ft... iwit-, 1si..4 4/ wa IseALE er-zcol sufbeer sae C3 _ , wit MeLed4tui4 RazoNse- OM R-•001-77 1PROPOSED/FINAL .LARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE. -SIGNIFICANCE Application No. R-001-77 PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . ECF- 198-77 XO FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Request for rezone from R-2 Residential District to B- 1 Business District Proponent William L. McLaughlin Location of Proposal N.E. Sunset Blvd. between N.E. 12th St. and Monroe Ave. N.E. Lead Agency City of Renton Planning Department This proposal has been determined to 0 have • MI not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS is pis 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 : 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 : Responsible Official Michael L . Smith Title Associate P1 ner Date January 19, 1977 Signature City of Renton 4MW4.4:ef Planning -Department 5-76