Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1Land Use Application Information APPLICANT: KUSHAI_ VARMA & KAJAL RAM, 2609 NE 5TH COURT, RENTON 98056 FILE No.: LUA-08-123, V-A, V-A PROJECT NAME. RAM SHORT PLAT VARIANCE APPEAL PROPERTY LOCATION: 3629 NE 6TH STREET, RENTON PUBLIC HEARING ❑ATE. FEBRUARY 10, 2009 HEARING EXAMINERS RECOMMENDATION: APPEAL DENIED REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION: Date Received: Response _ r APPEAL. Date Received: Date Response: CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: Date of Approval• Ordinance/Resolution No.: Date of Ordinance/Resolution: MYLAR TO COUNTY FOR RECORDING: Date: Mylar Recording:_ CROSS REFERENCES: OTHER REMARKS: k s PARTIES OF RECORD RAM SHORT PLAT VARIANCE LUA08-123, V-A, V-A Tom Touma Touma Engineers & Land Surveyors 6632 S 191st Place ste: #E102 Kent, WA 98032 tel: (425) 251-0665 (contact) Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram 2609 NE 5th Court Renton, WA 98056 tel: (206) 353-3168 (owner / applicant) Updated: 12/30/08 (Page 1 of 1) N7 �p aIg jPi E� oll 12 I T o,� she .sL� i � i MthJa.tae 1 ® I ®o �= I 'o s l c+ $• 4`�9 `°• ! I 6 •'� N. In e I `^ f u r , 4� E. ?TH ST. ,a . 11Lw 1 I N E r/� y t 1IjIS I I ! O NI NII / L� N _'l M ! �'LL 1�� liy W t I+� i4 �sII V• I 9 F - 7 O - . D6TH 904d�Ix r 360i S T39a . n 13a SD °�2 34 5 I $c- N3 m xo V 3 10� p 8 lZS ,2 O- l00 N.E. �2D004 �4�.ji°r A214 , 14 15 16 17 p .IL18 17na M37 -- r 6 F 7 F ' 13 2q'31 90 45Z8 a 5 14 IB a 17 t9. Lb Z5 19 Z W.07 � �-- - — - �= �— . � i _ �- 6g 159-59 � ° 20 19 20 ; 94.06 ��; • " — - . % '— —154bg � 8751 TT. ; T 23 -Ia 24 25 all I rf ( TRACT 'A'27 R e 5TH Pi. N.E. gTH ID9r.Z3 _ _ -=N :.: o >L ' 4f •sr n.ra N 2RI f8`.. ,..si s7 s7 31 7• L. Sf 40 I l65.3 •` T.L,Z9 M M �y �N rF / ti ti iOc Iii�� LEIDA E. SNYDERT. 0 _ 33 II Z _rz5 J ' Liu 7 SER r10E '` Q I i ILL. € y 7 Z. I w � 4.76 Ac Al z T.L 49 0.49A4 a Q � , rL. 136 �3 J L 755.33 - I.09 Ac . .n r.[,CL �� PH E I 12 UNITS PHASE 13 ' Jt z ' � � UNIT h i 1 1625 Izz3a t s - THELMA t McCAt+�N try. i _ _3.03 T.L, r76 I_ fi5.4o I i _. I LPri, 1 - I ,�,� I I 4.11 ^• rI 6 - !� ra .rc 13 d g" ` N n1 4 - , I 'I � � L1.In 16 f 17 , c16 * sa r� 638 -R 9 r iW sl_ IV. E.15TH PL. t N i 54.11 S2 152 � C r � � �r I ' j5 • - 6 0 p• 'I' r _ � a, ` � I "' 10 17 35,a 65 a S a^}°rri n 61 8 �} 2 + I • z 1 12 Is..r6L:J r I- 1f361 fa8 J4p T z ( 5 6 � 6 p V 8s, �v al 5[ 53- 54 55 56 5, 57 58 d '^ N. E. � 5 r 59 ° .L.Z ^84 83 85 l#6 87 ��b5 BO = si. +s.s. C 64 63 .62r 61 _ 60 VIPfz 59 uj 79 - s �j o 0.55 Rc. 3 E a ,. ,e 67 r. L? 7e N T.t.z lui zo V. E.s," 5TH ST. 5' 134 az 4 rz-q -� ,,.• T o 77 7^ S 71 ' 70 : 69 68 °y' L. /33� 'y a, 4z0-14 5�7 2'zs-si 210. 4 �6 '` r 73 r 11 rr i TL,ffJ6 M b _N y 3 7`E f<S,SX 75 r ��' „ - fIi E x i8 •'� ss a � r.L,f6y 4 �; Z�05s,.T .4s Jt 4.04 Ac. I PleE PARK I LLu P. 6- P. & L CO.1 u 1. 03 4L sue. s ra rrow_1 9 � r: C. 16� b �aa 200 6 C I SOY E. I)RNIELSQN JERRY C. Y. Wl3 (I) q v c Zoo 7S ! j+ N IS 3.90Ac. e ,� 0.56 AC. Sy.P..76 _81-_ T..L.52 T.L, 1946 r' I /5o I I , i t a 0.131 AC. �z (2) m I , si L.1 `Aar F rFq,,r��NING 10 2008 • D DENSITY WORKSHEET City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, VITA 98055 Phone:425-430-7200 Fax 425-430-7231 1. Gross area of property; VClTy OF Rem- NWG OCT 2 8 2808 RECEIVE,) 1 44,503 square feet 2. Deduction: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. Public street Private access easements* Critical Areas` Total excluded area: 3. Subtract Line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide lien 3 by 43,560 for net acreage 5, Number of dwelling units or lots planned 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density 9, 581 2 9,581 square feet 3 34,922 square feet 4 0.802 acres 5 6 unit/lots 6 7.48 du/acre * Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways" Critical Areas buffers are not deducted/excluded. ** Alleys (public or private) donor have to be excluded, Project: Ram Short Plat Date June 1 ,2007 o AREA 7C BE CEDICATEC---^-- _ LEGEND ti 0 Pif NAIL i �k ex a4GN !N cA$E LA 'T 24 42 ^; FX RFRAR j PIPE AS A'O?Fp cn nc __ 11 c. a_ cr ;,7-..+,,, $--. ❑� ta--98'3� 5 D r - . • .SET RFRAR & CAP of �- CUAR7CR CCFNE"R �% LOT 2 0' LOT 1 a; C, 53,E I' W" 7 E 52191/ � � i �'. _ — EX HOUSE`3�f 1I 1 W: x=. I 1-Sl SQ.iL I 'I W' Imo:_ it 0 I ca LOT .A i r I 1 1 �Fl.f8r LOT 5 r �� ,- '-� WILL SIAXING ETAII. I o �a7 r; J L Lt ' IF ., y QUEEN SORT PLAT 3629 NE 8TH STREET --RENTON, WASHINCT N _\ f � tw - '- SHRUB PLANTING DF TAII Y I _ ,.ICI i:l I1 III "III III v 0 raY n- rY �E r,TOILH rcr riio � R N 6 L . IJ l s f II F r A�JI V? L= 4 MIA :,Fl l I ail pi= r ES F ' _ _- m C.SV k5 .';?TI r-,':'I'.:% - I.I I I I.. 5 S <.... r ... __. cC .0 F" r 1 I T(�} CT, -IlJ� TJ1Lii Tya .,0 E 1 t1 Tn= REND WA. 48W 7k:1. 42) 395 _-wo FAY l42) 795-%4 7 __-- CITY OF RENTON SHORT PLAT RENTON, WASHINGTON NEW OR'V,.TE FA.SFi,IENT FOR !N;;RLSS, FGRFS & JTIUTIES MAIi`,T=NAf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l OF COVFNANT THE O'VNER` OF LAND EMDRACEC 07HIN THIS SHORT PLAT, IN RLILRN FOR THE P.FNFFITS 10 ACCRUE FROM THIS SU501VISION, D'r SIGNING HE:q:CN COVENANT AND AGREE TU CONVEY THE ©LNEFICIA.L INTEREST TEN THE NEW EASEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS SHORT PLAT TO ANY AND K'_L 'UTURL PURCHASERS OE T`E LCTS, OR U= ANY SJDC•I VISIONS THEREOF. THIS COVENANT SHALL RUN WITH TIC LAND AS SHOWN DN 71-16 SHCPT PLAT, CER fILICATION KNOW ALL PEOPLE BY THESE PRESENTS that we, the undwffW d ow,mme If Interest In the kmr hereby ehcr, suholNtlen, hn •erehy math a o"11 s,.hdl vision :herefq deC;gre this mop to be She gr,phic r,pr e,t,tiq of the a and thn: Ngrl s hdl,s'lon in anode -th the lase cr xn. ord in. cccarc a with the des're of :„a Inners IN WTNESS WHEREOF w Iel our honde and secs, KUSHAL S. VARMA KA.IAL A. RAY AC:��rvOiNL=JLM�^!TS Stake of Weehington Coe ty of _ I cmtify Nat I know or hex eotlefoctvy eWtlen- that signed Lhie imitaim nt mtl acknaWetlgetl It to be (his/her) free and vgWnta-y act lo, the uu and purpo menllaned in the inekry L. APPROVALS, CITY OF RENTON Adm Ylletrgtar of Planning/Bulldlhg/Pu Mid Works Examined and qpp d this day & Adminietrolor LEGEND m rx NAIL a EX WW W C45E EX REPAR / PPE AS NOTED 49 &rREBAP s c4P r-tr c] QUARTER CaW&R DEPAR?MELT OF ASS( SS',1ENT5 I RE' ORGING N0. Fe Intl and apprgved ihie _ day al 2p_ Answer ?0_ SCALE VOI,-. /P A-,,_ PORTION OF SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SEC 9, TWN 23 N, RG 5 E, W.M, LUA—XX-7CXX—SF LND—xx—xxx l� NE I erlf ST Al SURVEY NOTES: z 6WAVARY AAD TD-OGRAPRIC SURLY PfRfMKV ['� RAv cvRiYER �625 X 0711 STD NE 5th STREET BELL EWE WA ssppb va. 425 747-0775 —T-- -- - - - _ _ PIS 213164 ME SURVEY ACCURACY MEETS OR EHCEEDs Io AREA TO BE DEO CA El f 1 — - LREElMt UO 1 $ WAC 332-130-090 FIELD EQUIPMENT 062305-8036 Aeawnt Number �__�...-_ 47H YT 5865707E 1 S00 URVEYED BY FIELD TRAVERSE NCYNITY MAP 1 RASS of BEARING: SOV1 LINE OF THE 5E 114 L-3a}6B 1 SEC 9-23-5 (N 89taB'47" K - - - - -- ll In - . 1 BENCHMARK: CITY of RENrinN MON �u5o3 TOP OF L10NC NON _I oWto-W M- ed rtm'25.iX1 I AT THE SOUTHEAS7 CORNER of SECTION 2, TOWN51i 23 NORTH, RANGE LOT 2 �j 1`4 i 1 S EAST, W.M. ELEVATION - IO .02 IDT ffiZ6 d .666. =, f. LOT 7 ,D LOT 1 501} SF ,r� I I SITS DATA LOT 2 4656 5F y LOT 3 6T63 Sr. A645 SF top SF LOT . 5''7Q Sc. _ 1 TOTAL AREA - 44,503 SQUARE FEET(1.02 AC LCT 5 5774 �', 4649 SF 5'kEEL H/W AiiEA - 9,Sh`. S:LAPE FEt? C-22 AC) LCT b SE33 S=, 4657 W ri'r PFOPOSEJ NUMBER OF - 6 J75' T 5s Ir J.2 I 1 LOTS CENSIrr - ,5 III/ACRE - E7 LD HOUH3E 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 1 U -1 I m - in - " 1 -HE NORTH 3i A.LF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE L'J `0')THWEST QUARTER OF THE W0_T-iEAST GUAR'EF', Or SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, 1 EXCEPT TH£ WEST 525 FEET THEREOF a LOT 4 4 !� Z LLJ V6E Gl /U5NAL Q aNMD 5 VARMA AND KAJAL A. RAM 15, TRFF RE5ETIvATIC4 Imo. 1 1 2007 A6E0?T7EEN PLACE NE EASEMENT -- I LOT 5 RRENTCN, WAS 9RO56 Signature o1 Notory Pu6kia I]o[ed My eppoh,"ent eimtrn _ 15' PIZVA? SANITARY I+, A^IO STORM EASEMENT C? AgTTIFSIt PROTECTION NOTICE Make of Whehington I L seazA'Lg'LttS57 - 1 I � VIE L07S CREATED HEREIN FALL WTHIN ZNL' 2 OF RENTONS AOUTFER County or I a I 1 - 'n PR07ECVON AREA AND ARE SUBJECT 7D THE RE04REMENTS OF NE On this — day of 20_, personally o I I LOT 6 1 C17Y OF RENTCW CIRDWANCE ,j4967 AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO appeared to me known to be the ri 1 I 6,a33 , I. 1 4 4740. THIS CJWS SOLE" SOURCE OF DRINKING WATER IS SUPPLIED of the corporation that the 1 ( FROM A SHALLOW AQUIFER UNDER THE GTYS SURFALL. THERE IS NC executed foregoing Inslyment, and co the ea�d I I 1 I NATURAL BARRIER BETWEEN THE WATER TABLE AND GROUND SURFACE instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said I I I t EXTREME CARE SHOULD BE EXERCISED WEN NANpl1NG ANY CfgUID corpora{ion. for the urea and purposes therein mention, and 1 I- - - - - - - - 1i5.61 L .f 2D.W 2.&oc' 1 SUBSTANCE OTHER THAN WATER TO PROTECT FROM CONTACT WITH THE an oath stated that he/she woe duly autilorizsd to execute ___Y_ GROUND 54JRFACL IT15 THE HOMEOWNERS RESPCWV IL1TY TO PROTECT IIIsaid ihstrurrafnt and that the seal affixed is the corporate w 568WI9'E THE 6YTYS DRINKING WATER. semi of said corporation. Z 1 __4 __10 SAT41TARI EASEMENT Witness my !land and official seal hereto affixed the day and first 5TONE LANE PLAT a S 1/4 COR SEC. 9 10 ?RIVATE STORM u year above written EASEMENT p C.O.R. MGM iii!5O2 te 2" BRASS MC W/PUNCH ON m Y 4" CONIC FILLED PIPE IN CASE ry Notory Pubiic in odd for the Washington Notary (Print} State of W NE 4th STREET EE1324.46' � - MEAS. I I - SE COR SEC. 9 �` a - My Appointment Expires S89'OB'47"F ' -- - r � C.O.R. MON 35g3 --'r1 Dote 2648.12' MEAS.' �.7ININNCA�CRET'E U S89'06'05"E 2648-09' C.O.R. MON. DOWN RECORDERS CERTIFICATENo LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE _ Filed for record -hisday o' 20_ _tM1 This map cor,ectly repress-ts c. 51;rvey mOce ! �F eT �! QUEEN SHORT PLAT C' -Tit ar fnci .r my direction in corformC'i e / !t� ` iOUMA EAIG/NEERS 3629 NE STH STREET n book _oi at a e _ p y c' l}'e eque.i rr7u rements cf the 5.r '.vey c�ecoreing fy 1 RENTON. WASHINGTON rf ttG:,nir H. TGumd - Ac: O[ the Le(;Jest of KI'SHAL VARf�7A 7 WEST VALLEY EXECUTIVE PARK ❑wN 6,' DATE J013 Nil. in June 200 ro ,�� 6632 SOUTH 1919T PUCE, SUITE E-102 'KENT, WA M032 PRONE (425j 251-0665 FAX (425) 251-0025 DAN - JUNE, 20'7 91'--o^l� �81 L CtiV]. B, SCALE SWEET � 2 M1iar. Sup'.. Df I Oertifl�ate INo- 947D MHT No1E� OF CITY OF RENTON SHORT PLAT RENTON, WASHINGTON i I -I EK HOL� . n LOT 3 ID -- '� S86'59 t3'E,1'-5.38' .LOT 4' j 15. TREE RISE aT-mm I l-Ltf F,hSEMENT I II UD�`� O ah0 5'ORA1 EASEMENT N J I 1 RECOF,CING NO, V0+-.11PAGE LEGEND 0 EX SSMHc DECIDUOUS TREE o so o ao w ❑ EX CA TCJ7 BASIN TYPE t ® EX CATCH BASIN TYPE ? _ CONLfER 1REE Su ALE. z WATER VALVE l .� HEDGE C RRE HYDRANT D£CIOUOUS TREE TO PORTION C'F f WATER METER BE REWOVEO + IRRIGATION VALVE a al�n TO SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SEC 9, TWN 23 N, RG 5 E. W.M. P WAIER BLOW OFF ll Rt-or m rFLFPxaNE CABINET POLE GUY POLE LUA—XX—XXX—SHPL M CABLE rV CABINET r� MAIL BOX LND-XX-XXX 41 GAS VALVE ROCKLRY 92 GAS METER 7ELEPIII IS MON IN CASE AfE 61R ST - .� MANHOLE ® POHER VAULT 0 LIGHT POLE * SURFACE BRASS MONUMENT 0 PK NAIL 4b� !I YARD LIGHT 0 FOUND REBAR d' CAP OR IRON PIPE- 0 MONI70I WELL - - - - - EX WATER LINE X t Q' PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON POLE- EX SANITARY SEWER LINE --- -- — EX STORM iJNE n IRON FFNCF TWO POST SL[}I ® TRAFFIC JVJVCTIGN BOX NE 47B ST CYIFiJV11C4�7 I CEME7ARY 100.00, VC HONJTY MAP Poi STA - 2+92.73 PN ELEV - 470.52 &D - 2-20 " n SURVEY NOTES: K - 45.50 µ S '} 80UNDARY AND TU OWAPtlC SMKr PEFFMWO Sr CART N i L PAN NESS M2S SE 49TH ST. N w BElLMe WA 98006 r, PLS 21364 404 - - - .� ..... SURVEY ACCURACY MEETS OR OCEEDS 396 � WAC V2-13E-09c sit_c equlrMEN7 392 _ -- SOKKIA SE73811 SU�?l'E"EJ EfN FIELD TRAVERSE 364 -- -- ,RAS+S Or 9EAR+N6, SO�ii: UN� of 7<rE SE 1/4 SEC 9-23--5 (N e9V8'47- Wf 3 JA T i11 F';.F_ 4 386 _—_ A &F'VCUMARX' CITY pG R�,'NY�}N uphgtStl3 'C,° Pc fCNC MfiN -. .,- y A-, iHt SOUTNEASi CORNER OF SECIO 9, TONNSIIP 2J Q' RANf 5 EAST, W.M. ELEVATION - 401.0.7 2+00 3+pp NE BTH STREET LOW POINT ELEY - 390.07 LOW PANT STA - 1r36.41 PN STA - 1+40 ,yi + '19'E 1,552 FYI f V-496.84 1 LOT 6 j 0.00' VC 1DOAD' VC I 140.00 VC c PaHT ELEv a 302.27 PqT STh - 2+46,95 S PN STA - 3}Sp _ PN STA - 2+50 3210.00(WINs kl '�' PA ELEY =S9B.00 yt y� 4.H' - _332 j u1 t - 16 +C�—�Si5.67 �. � r� 392 m - -`-. -- .. .m � ::....:.1392 _ m 388 w � 388 364 - 1 3134 sTGN., T 364 _UD . MANITARY 8F 10' Po'fAT LASLVLv- 7376 37 o _ - 2 II `` .57a na - — ----� _ � ID w,� Y 1-00 2+0r 3-00 4+20 Z 6 SIN Z z o NE 4th STREET 1324-06' MEAS. 5 1/4 COR SEC. 9 S89'08'47'E 2548.12' MEAS f�71R � C.O.R. MOM #E5C2 $89'06'05'E 2645.09' C.O.R. 2" BRASS DISC W/PUNCH ON SEC. 9 4" CONC FlLLED PIPE IN CASE aN 1503 1/8" COPPE PIN IN CONCRETE MON. GOWN 0.7' IN CASE, QUEEN AVENUE NE QUEEN SHORT PLAT TOUMA ENGINEERS TOP0, GRADING, UTILITIES AND TREES INVENTORY PLAN WEST VALLEY EXECUTIVE PARK ,,AN py DATF, J0A NO 643z SOUTH 191ST PLACE, SUITE E-102 -KENT. WA 9803; DAN "TINE, 2007 917-00,-051 PHONE (425) 251-p685 FAX (425) 251--0625 C�'KC. B" SCALE I SHEFT MILT N'JTLD 2 OF 2 RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting April 27, 2009 Council Chambers Monday, 7 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Law called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL OF RANDY CORM AN, Council President; GREG TAYLOR,- RICH ZWICKER; COUNCILMEMBERS TERRI BRIT RE; KING PARKER; DON PERSSON; MARCIE PALMER. CITY STAFF IN DENIS LAW, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative Officer; ATTENDANCE LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney, BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; ALEX PIETSCH, Community and Economic Development Administrator; GREGG ZIMMER.MAN, Public Works Administrator, MARTY WINE, Assistant CAO; DEPUTY CHIEF MARK PETERSON, Fire Department; COMMANDER CHARLES KARLEWICZ, Police Department. PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Law was read declaring April 26 to May 2, 2009 to be National Crime Victims' "National Crime Victims' Rights Week" in the City of Renton and encouraging Rights Week - all citizens to join in this special observance. MOVED BY TAYLOR, April 26 to May 2, 2009 SECONDED BY BRIE RE, COUNCIL CONCUR 1N THE PROCLAMATION. CARRIED. (Police Commander Charles Karlewicz accepted the proclamation. APPEAL Planning & Development Committee Appeal: Ram Short Plat Variance, Vanna & Ram, V-08-123 Planning and Development Committee Chair Parker presented a report regarding the Ram Short Plat Variance appeal. The Committee heard the appeal on 4/23/2009. Pursuant to RMC 4-8-11017, the Committee's decision and recommendation is limited to the record, which consists of, but is not limited to the Hearing Examiner's Report, the Notice of Appeal, and the submissions and presentation made by the parties. (The subject property is a plat located on 3619 Queen Ave. NE, Renton, WA. In Ian earlier proceeding, the applicants Kursal Varma and Kajal Ram were granted approval for a six (6) lot short plat on the property, subject to specific conditions. One of those conditions was to remove the existing house on the subject property in order to meet the necessary setback requirements. Months thereafter, the applicants applied for two variances on the subject property: 1) from the Iandscaping requirements, and 2) from the minimum E setback standards. The purpose of the two variances was to enable the applicants to retain the existing house as part of the six lot subdivision. After reviewing the request City staff denied both variances, finding that it failed to meet the four requisite criteria set forth in RMC 4-9-250B5. The appellants appealed this decision to the Hearing Examiner. After a public hearing was held on 2/10/2009, the Hearing Examiner issued his decision on 2/24/2009, affirming the denial of the variance, and finding that the applicants failed to meet their burden to show that the City's decision was arbitrary and capricious or made in error. The appellants filed a timely appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Decision, and accordingly, appeared before the Planning and Development Committee to present their case. Having considered the comments made by and on behalf of the appellants, and having reviewed the files and evidence in this matter, the Committee makes the following recommendations to the City Council: April 27, 2009 Renton City Council Minutes Page 121 1. That the City Council finds that the Hearing Examiner did not make any error of fact or law in affirming the denial of the variance_ 2. That the City Council adopt all the Findings and Conclusions set forth in the Hearing Examiner's Report dated 2/24/2009. 3. That the City Council affirms the decision made by the Hearing Examiner to deny the variance. Councilmembcr Parker explained that the City has development standards that need to be adhered to, and what the appellants were proposing would not work. He emphasized that City officials and staff are sensitive to citizen requests, however, decisions that are made must meet City regulations and be in the best interests for the community. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY BRIERS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Howard McOmber (Renton) suggested that the City perform the following two Citizen Comment: McOmber - proposals as an effort to increase communications with the public: 1) conduct a Townhall Meeting Event in townhall meeting event in the Renton Highlands to allow citizens an opportunity Renton Highlands & 2009 to express concerns and opinions with City officials, and 2) publish a paper Budget outlining the recent measures that the City has taken as an effort to minimize costs and operate within a reduced budget without raising taxes. CONSENT AGENDA Items listed on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council Meeting minutes of 4/20/2009, Council concur. 4/20/2009 Police: Memorandum of Administrative. Judicial, and Legal Services Department recommended approval Understanding, Edward Byrne of a Memorandum of Understanding with 19 participating jurisdictions, which Memorial Justice Assistance outlines their responsibilities related to the 2009 Recovery Act: Edward Byrne Grant Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program, Council concur. City Clerk: Quarterly Contract City Clerk subnutted quarterly contract list for period of i/i/2009 through List, 1/1/2009 to 3/31/2009 3/31/2009 and expiration report for agreements expiring 4/1/2009 to 9/30/2009. Information. Annexation: Shamrock, Community and Economic Development Department recommended a public NE 1 Oth St & Jericho PINE hearing be set on 5,/18/2009 to consider the proposed Shamrock Annexation and R-4 zoning of approximately 124 acres located generally south of NE loth St. and east of Jericho P1. NE. Council concur. Fire: 2009 Storm Event, WA Fire and Emergency Services Department recommended approval of an State Military Department agreement with the Washington State Military Department for a public Grant assistance grant to receive up to 75 percent of the eligible non -insurance covered damages sustained by the City during the January 2009 storm event. Estimated eligible expenses are in excess of $4.8 million. Council concur. Lease: Addendum #2, Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an addendum to AirO Inc, LAG-03-002 airport lease LAG-03-002, with AirO, Inc., to defer rent payments and late fees to 8/15/2009 in exchange for a significant penalty and collateral. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. Utility: City I96 Zone Water Utility Systems Division recommended approval of a contract in the amount of Reservoir Evaluation, RW $69,043.35 with R.W. Beek for consultant services for evaluation of a site for a Beck future City 196 zone water reservoir in the Black River quarry area. Council concur. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT APPROVED BY April 27, 2009 CITY COUNCIL Date R7 ,g0o RAM SHORT PLAT VARIANCE APPEAL File LUA 05-123, V-A, V-A (Referred April 6, 2009) The Planning and Development Committee ("Committee") heard this appeal on April 23, 2009. Pursuant to RMC 4-5-11 OF, the Committee's decision and recommendation is limited to the record, which consists of, but is not limited to the Hearing Examiner's Report, the Notice of Appeal and the submissions and presentation made by the Parties. The subject property is a plat located on 3619 Queen Ave NE, Renton, WA. In an earlier proceeding, Applicants Kursal Varma and Kajal Ram ("Applicants") were granted approval for a six (6) lot short plat on the property, subject to specific conditions. One of those conditions was to remove the existing house on the subject property in order to meet the necessary setback requirements. Months thereafter, Applicants applied for two variances on the subject property: 1) from the landscaping requirements and 2) from the minimum setback standards. The purpose of these two variances was to enable Applicants to retain the existing house as part of the six lot subdivision. After reviewing the request, City Staff denied both variances, finding that it failed to meet the four requisite criteria set forth in RMC 4-9-250135. Appellants appealed this decision to the Hearing Examiner. After a hearing held on February 10, 2001, the Hearing Examiner issued his decision on February 24, 2009, affirming the denial of the variance, and finding that Applicants failed to meet their burden to show that the City's decision was arbitrary and capricious or made in error. Appellant filed a timely app al of the Hearing Examiner's Decision, and accordingly, appeared before the Planning J Development Committee to present their case. Having considered the comments made by and on behalf of the Appellant, and having reviewed the files and evidence in this matter, this Committee makes the following recommendations to the City Council: 1. That the City Councilfinds that the Hearing Examiner did not make any error of fact or law in affirming the denial of the variance. 2. That the City Council adopt all the Findings and Conclusions set forth in the Hearing Examiner's Report dated February 24, 2009 RAM Variance Appeal April 27, 2009 Page 2 3. That the City Council a ertm the decision made by the Hearing Examiner to deny the variance. FF KING PARKER, Chair n cc: Alex Pietsch Chip Vincent Jennifer Henning Rocale Timmons Fred Kaufman Kushal Varna & Kajal Ram, Applicants-W-a dily eferk Ann Nielsen April 6, 2009 Renton City Council Minutes Page 99 Appointment: Advisory Mayor Law appointed Kathleen Booher to the' Advisory Commission on Commission on Diversity Diversity for an unexpired term expiring 12/31/2009 (position previously held by Jennifer Knickerbocker). Refer to Community Services Committee. Utility: Release of Easement City Clerk submits request for release of easement by Kristine Maristela, Request, Certified Land Certified Land Services Corporation, for approximately 1,347 square feet of Services Corporation property located in the area of 536 - 606 Mill Ave. S. Refer to Utilities Committee. Appeal: Ram Short Plat City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Ram Variance, Varma & Ram, Short Plat Variance (V-08-123); appeal filed by Kushal Varma and Kajal Ram; V-08-123 accompanied by required fee. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. CED: Multi -Family Housing Cormmunity and Economic Development Department recommended approval of Property Tax Exemption, the multi -family housing property tax agreement for the Liberty Square Liberty Square Apartments Apartments project. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Lease: Park & Ride Garage Community Services Department recommended approval of Amendment Two Agreement, City Center of LAG-04-003, King County Park & Ride Garage agreement, to extend the Parking Garage, King County termination date to 12/31/2009 at existing rates and conditions. Refer to Finance Convnittee. Finance: Carry Forward Finance and Information Services Department requested approval of the carry Ordinance forward ordinance in the amount of $37,203,924, which increases the 2009 Budget by carrying forward funds from 2008 for projects that were not completed in 2008. Refer to Finance Committee_ Transportation: Stage II Lake Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of a contract in the Washington Trail South Lake amount of S72,464 with WHPacific for the Stage II Lake Washington Trail Connector, WHPacific South Lake Connector project. Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Utilities Committee Chair Zwicker presented a report reconnuending Utilities Committee concurrence in the staff recommendation that the Earlington Sanitary Sewer SAD: Earlington Sanitary Interceptor Special Assessment District No. 0038 be approved. The Special Sewer Interceptor Assessment District wilt establish new connection charges of residential units as shown in Zone "A" on the Earlington Sanitary Sewer Interceptor Special Assessment District Map as $6,512.40 per dwelling unit. New connections of residential units as shown in Zone `B" on the Earlington Sanitary Sewer Interceptor Special Assessment District Map shall pay a fee of $7,366.22 per dwelling unit. In addition, simple interest will accrue at a rate of 5.30 percent for a period of ten years. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance finalizing the Earlington Sanitary Sewer Interceptor Special Assessment District be presented for first reading. MOVED BY Z.WICKFR, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page for 100 ordinance.) Community Services Community Services Committee Chair Briere presented a report recommending Committee concurrence in Mayor Law's appointment of Robert J. Ingersoll (Airport Appointment: Airport Leaseholder alternate position) to the Airport Advisory Committee for an Advisory Connnittee unexpired term expiring on May 7, 2010. MOVED BY BRIERS, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT_ CARRIED. f OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al #� <3, al,= Submitting Data: For Agenda of: April 6, 2009 Dept/Div/Board: AJLS/City Clerk Staff Contact: Bonnie 1. Walton Agenda Status Consent ................ X Public Hearing........ Subject: Correspondence...... . Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated February 24, 2009, Ordinance ............. regarding Ram Short Plat Variance. Resolution ............. (File No. LUA-08-123, V-A) Old Business.......... New Business......... Exhibits: ■ City Clerk's letter (3/18/2009) Study Sessions........ • Appeal by Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram (3/10/2009) Information............ ■ Hearing Examiners' Decision (2/24/2009) Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Planning and Development Committee Legal Dept..... _ .... _ Finance Dept. _ ..... . Other..... . ............ Fiscal Impact: NIA Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment........ Amount Budgeted........ Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget .... City Share Total Project... SUMMARY OF ACTION: Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the Ram Short Plat Variance, located at 3629 NE 6" St and filed on March 10, 2009, by Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram, accompanied by the required $75 fee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council to take action on the Ram Short Plat Variance appeal. cc: Jennifer Henning Rentonnetfdgnbill/ bh CITY OF RENTON + ♦ City Clerk Denis Law, Mayor Bonnie I. Walton March 18, 2009 APPEAL FILED BY: Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated February 24, 2009, regarding Ram Short Plat Variance, 3629 NE 6t" Street. (File No. LUA-08-123) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Rare Short Plat: Variance has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11OF, within five.days of receipt of the . notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of recordmay submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing. of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5:00 p.m., Monday, March 30; 2009_ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 23,_2009, in the Council Chambers, 7"' Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code see tion regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached, Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless. a showing can be made that additional evidence could.not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. For additional information:or assistance, please: call me at 425-430-6510 Sincerely, 7TiYi:C.G � GCJQ� Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Attachments 1055 South Grady Way - kenton, Washington 98057 - (425) 430-6510 / FAX (425) 430-6516. ® This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE CITY OF RENTON A OPEAL TO RENTON CITY COUNCIL OF HEARIP .XAMINER'S DECISION/RECOP ENDATION MAR 10 20 9 7 1 / fRECEWD APPLICATION NAMEFILE NO.��� The undersigned interested party hereby files its Noticc of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of- the Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated V- k •C 200 rl. 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: Name: +--c--P` Address: y q S-TH C-1 C, 0 S- ( Phone Number: Email: _ - REPRE ENTATIVL (IF ANY): Name: Address: Phone Number: Email: 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors or law or [act upon which this appeal is based: Finding of Fact_: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) Is No. En -or: ----. -- -- Correction: Conclusions: No.14' Error: Correction: Other: No. Error: Correction: 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) Reverse the decision or recomrrrcnclation and grant the following relief: Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows - Other: Appellant[Representative Signature Type/Printed Name Date NOTE.: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter S, of the Renton VIuiiicipal Code, and Section 4-8-110P, for specific appeal procedures. C' LAY,f We i`FC,,, 7�a 1 WR'f%5� �CYIn,44,- Pehnr15 , Clop Vlncx��— Fie Kc�u,�vncrs2 City of Renton Municipal Co'-- Title IV, Chanter 8, Section 110 — Appeals 4-8-11 OC4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council — Procedures 1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Cleric shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. {Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993) 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-I-050F1, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-05OF2 and F3, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. 9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-I3-1982) 10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) CITY OF RENTON MAR 10 2009 December 24, 2008 ` RECEPAD To Whom It May Concern: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE The purpose of this letter is to appeal the decision of the planning department for the denial of the variances that was proposed in order to maintain the house on lot 3 and the landscaping variance. It has become necessary for us to keep the house to cope with the changes taking place in the real estate market. We have looked at other options as well including the possibility of moving the house and removing a portion of the house to meet the set back requirement. Both of these options are Oo costly and would place a huge financial burden, and also it will be a huge disruption to the day to day lives of my family since the house is our current residence. Removing the house will make this project unprofitable since the project development cost will remain almost the same but the revenue will be significantly decreased. As both options currently stand, it will be more beneficial for us to discontinue this project in its entirety due to the lack of revenue. We feel that the following revision to the site plan will help elevate some of our financial burden and help us to go forward with the project. 1. Keep house on lot 3 House currently meets setback requirements but after the dedication as required by the City of 20 feet off Queen Ave NE the house will no longer meet this requirement. However, if the house is ever demolished then any new house built will be subject to the setback requirements in place at that time and we would be willing to comply with the city codes for building setback. Another critical issue that our project will address for the City is the public safety hazard that exists due to the lack of walkway on Queen Ave NE & 6t' St. The completion of our project will lead to a walkway for the pedestrians in the area which includes the kids being dropped off after school at the cross junction of 6`" St and Queen Ave NE. Currently our property is not fenced and we have pedestrians using it to limit the risk of walking on the narrow Queen Ave NE road. We have had several residents explain that their use of our property is mandated because a walkway does not exist on NE 601 or Queen Ave NE. The current traffic is a concern for my family because we have unknown individuals on our property at any given time. We have restrained from placing a fence because of the kids who will be affected by this action. We have inquired with the City regarding any plans to eliminate this safety hazard and we were notified that there currently are no plans in the works due to lack of funding. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the proposed changes. We would welcome any City official to our site to visually explain our proposal and demonstrate the public safety hazard identified. We would like to work with the City to ensure a solution is reached for the best interest of our neighbors, the City and us. Sincerely, Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram February 24, 2009 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION APPELLANT: Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram 2609 NE 5`i' Court Renton, WA 98056 Ram Short Plat Variance Appeal LUA-08-123, V-A, V-A After reviewing the Appellant's written requests for a hearing and examining available infonnation on file, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The following minutes are a summary of the February 10, 2009 hearing. The legal record is retarded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, February 10, 2009, at 10:42 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record! Exhibit No. 1: Hearing Examiner's file containing the original appeal letter and notification of this hearing. Exhibit No. 2: Staffs yellow file Exhibit No. A: Vicinity Map Exhibit No. B: House Short Plat Plan with Retention of Exhibit No. 3: Series of Photographs of property Exhibit No. C, Short Plat Plan with House showing Fireplace Exhibit No. D: Relation to Site Photograph showing Fireplace in Exhibit No. E: Aerial photo of Site Exhibit No. F: Photograph of NE 6 Street looking West to East Parties Present: Rocale Timmons, Assistant Planner Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-0&-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 2 Kushal Varma, Owner (Appellant) Tom Touma, Engineer The Examiner stated that there are two variances; front yard landscaping and front yard setback. The short plat was approved subject to removal of a house that N iolated setback standards and would not be able to comply with the landscape standards along the frontage of the property. Kushal Varma stated that the existing house is his current residence. Removing the house would create a hardship on his family_ The way the house is currently sitting, it does meet the 20-foot setback, but with the improvement on the Queen Avenue side, they would no longer be in compliance. The staff suggested that the house could be moved to meet the requirements but that would create a bigger financial burden and it is not feasible for them to move the house or his family. Ms. Timmons stated that the house does meet the north side yard setback and the required setback on Queen is 15-feet for the primary structure. Mr. Varma further stated that there is no garage in the font facing Queen, the parking is located at the rear of the house. On completion of this particular project all the neighbors will be served with sidewalk and a wider road, which will allow pedestrian traffic more room. NE 6"' and Queen do not currently have sidewalks. There are school busses that drop off children on NE 6"' and there currently is no place for the children to walk, they use his driveway as a sidewalk. He showed a set of five photos with the roadway, school busses and children walking. Upon questioning by Ms. Nielsen, Mr. Varma stated that (lie short plat was originally approved subject to the removal of the house in question today. They have changed some of the windows and painted the house. This was done with full knowledge that the house might have Icy be removed. The hardship would be financial as well as having to move his family from the house. In the appeal letter, Mr. Varma stated that removing the house would make the project unprofitable, the development costs would remain the same but the revenue would be significantly decreased. He is trying to not Iose more money on this development. Mr. Touma stated that they would like to ]seep the house until such time when the economy is in a better place, based on economics, this move would greatly impact the family. The house is 50 years old and would need to be removed or refurbished. The Examiner stated that the premise for the application initially was that this house would be removed. It was a condition that the applicant came in with in order to get the short plat processed and approved. Ms. Nielsen moved for a summary judgment insofar as the appellant has failed to meet his burden to overcome the City's determination at this point. Case law supports that strain or financial burden is generally ruled out. The Examiner denied the dismissal. Ms. Timmons entered a list of exhibits, which showed the exterior wall for the chimney on the existing home and its location to the property line, a line on a photograph showing where the sidewalk would be located and a third photo showing a tree that is part of the subject site. The property protrudes into NE Oh and Queen Avenue N quite a distance. Mr. Varma stated that the chimney has now been removed Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 3 The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 11:18 am. FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The appellants, Kursal Varma and Kajal Ram, filed an appeal of the denials of two variances from the Zoning Code. The appellant seeks to retain an existing home that would provide an approximately 3.2 foot front yard and insufficient room for a required five (5) foot landscape strip. 2. The appeal was filed in a timely manner. The subject site is located at 3629 NE 61s Street in the City of Renton. The property is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of NE 6th Street and Queen Avenue NE. 4. The appellant has proposed to subdivide an approximately 44,432 square foot parcel into six lots. Proposed Lot 1 would be a corner lot at Queen and NE 6th. Proposed Lot 2 would be west of Proposed Lot 1. Proposed Lots 3 to 6 would span the lot in an east to west direction with Proposed Lot 3 immediately south of Proposed Lots 1 and 2. Proposed Lot 3 would front along Queen Avenue NE. 5. There is an existing home on the subject site. That home is located on what would be Proposed Lot 3. 6. The proposed plat was altered in response to a requirement to preserve significant trees and to accommodate right-of-way dedications. As part of the original application and plat the appellant agreed to remove the existing home since it would intrude into a required front yard setback and required landscape strip along Queen Avenue NE. 7. Code requires a 15-foot setback along Queen as well as a five-foot landscape strip. The home would be situated approximately 3.2 feet from the street or 11.8 feet less than the required 15 feet. The 3.2-foot setback would also mean the lot could not provide the required five feet of landscaping along Queen. The proposed plat was approved with the understanding that the non -conforming home would be removed. The plans showed its proposed removal. 9. Somewhere in the interim between application and the filing of the appeal, the appellant and his family moved into the non -conforming residence. Subsequent to the approval of the plat the appellant also applied for variances to allow less than the required 15 foot front yard and less than the required five feet of landscaping along the frontage, proposing instead to provide 3.2 of front yard setback and similar landscaping depth. to. The appellant alleges that the plat cannot be profitably developed if the existing home is demolished and moving his fanuly out of the home would be a hardship. The allegations are that providing the required yard and landscaping would create an undue hardship. In order to accommodate the yard and landscaping, the appellant alleges that the home would either have to be demolished or moved. The appellant alleges that the economics of the situation and inconvenience of moving would create an undue hardship that the variances would put right. Walgreen's Sign Appeal I UA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 4 11. Staff found that the applicant did not suffer undue hardship due to any special circurnstarice related to lot's size, shape or topography. They found that the appellant either has reasonable use of the site in its current condition, with one conforming home or that, dividing the site according to code provides a reasonable use of the subject site even if the existing home has to be removed or relocated. Staff found that approving either variance would grant the appellant a special privilege not afforded to other similarly located property in that zone. 12. The appellant moved into the home after beginning this process. Any claim of inconvenience was created by the appellant's actions knowing the home was to be demolished as part of his submitted plat application. 13. Variance Criteria are contained in Section 4-9.250B.5: a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the: strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated; c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; d_ That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose, (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) CONCLUSIONS: 1. The appellant has the burden of demonstrating that the decision of the City Official was either in error, or was otherwise contrary to law or constitutional provisions, or was arbitrary and capricious (Section 4-8-110(E)(7)(b). The appellant has not demonstrated that the action of the City should be reversed, The appeal is denied. 2. Arbitrary and capricious action has been defined as willful and unreasoning action in disregard of the facts and circumstances. A decision, when exercised honestly and upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances, is not arbitrary or capricious (Northern Pacific Transport Co. v Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, 69 Wn. 2d 472, 478 (1966). An action is likewise clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing body, on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. (Ancheta v Daly, 77 Wn. 2d 2S5, 259 (1969). An appellant body should not necessarily substitute its judgment for the underlying agency with expertise in a matter unless appropriate. 4. The decision to deny the variances was appropriate. As has been said many times before, a variance is not appropriate unless it meets all of the criteria and not just one or two criteria. Another issue to emphasize is that economic issues are not considered in dealing with a variance. There must be a physical limitation and not a fiscal limitation that deprives the applicant of reasonable use of the property. The Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 5 applicant voluntarily entered into this plat process and as part of that application, the applicant agreed that the existing home would have to be removed or, at least, modified in some fashion_ The home's location would violate current Zoning provisions by providing substantially less than the required front yard along a street and not providing the required five-foot landscape strip. The applicant can readily divide the lot according to current zoning standards and create reasonably sized lots and construct homes on those lots. In no way does the Zoning Code deprive the appellant of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. 5. Will having to move out of the home be an inconvenience? Certainly. Will having to demolish a reasonable home be economically distressful? Probably, although in return the applicant creates additional saleable lots. The profit might be less but that is the appiicant/appellant's choice, When the platting process began, the appellant did not reside in the home and so made a choice that should not affect City Zoning regulations. The failure to provide the required front yard setback might not appear to creatc any hardship but a standard setback along a street frontage is generally maintained. It provides an open appearance and allows those at their front door or in their front yard to scan the streetscape on either side. The setback also removes the home from immediate traffic impacts of noise and fumes. The concept of a standard setback is so consistent in code that homes located on corner Iots are generally required to provide the setback along both street frontages so neighbors, again, have sightlines that are not visually interrupted by homes where a front yard should be located. 7. Approval of either of these variances would be a grant of special privilege. Almost every new plat is based on the redevelopment of existing underlying plats and/or lots. In many of those cases existing homes are poorly located in terms of setbacks or yard requirements vis-a-vis new or existing code standards. In all those cases the applicants agree to remove or relocate those homes to conform with current zoning. This is almost so routine as to be a known standard. If the appellant were given a variance or variances all of those similarly situated, that is those redeveloping lots, would equally demand to retain non -conforming structures. Approving these variances would create an undue precedent and a special privilege. Is this the minimum variance to provide reasonable use of the subject site? The appellant would appear to be dictating the standards by insisting the home must remain where it is. Obviously, if the appellant is not willing to alter or move the existing home, the minimum variance relief is the full extent of the yard reduction. In this case, there is no way that the applicant can vary its construction or location to allow a smaller deviation from the Code standards. But no variance is really necessary toallow reasonable use of the subject site. 9. The decision below was appropriate. In order for a variance to be approved it must satisfy all four (4) criteria. It is not sufficient to satisfy one or another of the criteria or even three of the criteria. There is no undue hardship. The appellant has reasonable use of the subject site. The economics of the situation were appropriately disregarded by staff, as was the supposed inconvenience in having to move or relocate the appellant's family. This appellant applied for the underlying plat knowing full well the home would have to be removed or moved so any hardship was created by the appellant, not the imposition of the regulations. Under those circumstances staff could not approve the variances and their decision should stand. 10. The decision below should not be reversed without a clear showing that the decision is clearly erroneous or arbitrary and capricious. This office has found that the decision below was sound and the decision below is affirmed. DECISION: The decision is affirmed and the appeal is denied. Walgreen's Sign Appeal I,UA-0a-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 6 ORDERED THIS 24"` day of February 2009 qzj �VQ_tlu FRED J. KAurNAN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 24rh day of February 2009 to the parties of record: Rocale Timmons Ann Nielsen Tom Touma Development Services .Assistant City Attorney Touma Engineers & Land Surveyors City of Renton City of Renton 6632 S 191" Place, Ste. E-102 K.ushal Varma 2609 NE 5"' Court Renton, WA 98056 TRANSMITTED THIS 241h day of February 2009 to the following: Mayor Denis Law Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Renton Reporter Kent, WA 98032 Dave I'argas, Fire Larry NIcckling; Building Official Planrzir, Commission Traiisport�ttion Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter S, Section 1000of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writiniz on or before 5:00p.m., March_ 10, 2009. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, er7-ors 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 a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 .m. March 10 2009. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Recision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the tile. You [nay contact this office for information on formatting covenants. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-135, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 7 The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. March 18, 2009 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING ) BONNIE I. WALTON, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that I am 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 18th day of March, 2009, at the hour of 5:00 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail to all parties of record, notice of appeal filed by Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation regarding the Rain Short Plat Variance Appeal. (File No. LUA-08- 123, V) Bonnie I. Walton, City CIerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 18th day of March, 2009. NOT 1�. Cyntha R. Moya ` J�, �.� m. A Notary Public in and for the State of Y '.e� lc �' Washington, residing in Renton14 My commission expires: 8/27/2010 ,kv ....l�(���► 6 "R o CITY )F RENTON ♦ ♦ City Clerk ha Denis Law, Mayor Bonnie I. Walton March 18, 2009 APPEAL FILED BY: Kushal Varma & KaJal Ram RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated February 24, 2009, regarding Ram Short Plat Variance, 3629 NE 61h Street. (File No. LUA-08-123) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Ram Short Plat Variance has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 OF, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5:00 p.m., Monday, March 30, 2009. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the tivritten appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 23, 2009, in the Council Chambers, 7th Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code section regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. For additional information or assistance, please call me at 425-430-6510. Sincerely, Bonnie 1. Walton City Clerk Attachments 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 - (425) 430-6510 / FAX (425) 430-6516 This paper cOntair is 50'%• recycled material, 30%post consumer RENTQN AHEAD OF TIME CURVE CITY OF RENTON A IDPEAL TO RENTON CITY COUN"" OF HEARII EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECO ENDATION MAR 14 2009 �' n ? RECEA&D APPLICATION NAME �� FILE NO. LALW°FNE--�6 The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated �"� t c_1 _ 20 0 01• 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: REPRESENTATIVI (IF ANY): Name: ►-�,.�c— is � Name: 1 ""[[ 0 Address: 41 sr. i7�� Address.3 Cl Phone Number: Email: Phone Number: Email: 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based: Finding of Fact: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) No. 3 Error: ` P-'t� �... '�,. S c:f#�u* q. -� 2- Correction: Conclusions: No. v� Error: Correction: Other: No. Error: Correction: 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) Reverse the decision or recommendations and grant the following relief: Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for fur-ther consideration as follows: Other: Appellant/Representative Signature Type/Printed Name Date NOTE: Please refer to Title 1V, Chapter 8, of the Rentoi Municipal Code, and Section 4-8-114F, for specific appeal procedures. CC', LArv-1 0d.yNcv., i'iei/ WeLi 's� O-enin'J v Nenn nc� , Clop Vincev? Fwd Rau,Fwa.vG City of Renton Municipal Cod -'tle W, Chapter 8, Section 110 = Appeals 4-8-11 OC4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council — Procedures 1. Time for Appeal. Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3_ Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993) 6, Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F1, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. S. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-05OF2 and F3, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. 9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record, The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982) 10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) CITY OF RENTON MAR 10 2009 1-0 December 24, 2008 A/W RECEVED To Whom It May Concern: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE The purpose of this letter is to appeal the decision of the planning department for the denial of the variances that was proposed in order to maintain the house on lot 3 and the landscaping variance. It has become necessary for us to keep the house to cope with the changes taking place in the real estate market. We have looked at other options as well including the possibility of moving the house and removing a portion of the house to meet the set back requirement. Both of these options are 40o costly and would place a huge financial burden, and also it will be a huge disruption to the day to day lives of my family since the house is our current residence. Removing the house will make this project unprofitable since the project development cost will remain almost the same but the revenue will be significantly decreased. As both options currently stand, it will be more beneficial for us to discontinue this project in its entirety due to the lack of revenue. We feel that the following revision to the site plan will help elevate some of our financial burden and help us to go forward with the project. 1. Keep house on lot 3 House currently meets setback requirements but after the dedication as required by the City of 20 feet off Queen Ave NE the house will no longer meet this requirement. However, if the house is ever demolished then any new house built will be subject to the setback requirements in place at that time and we would be willing to comply with the city codes for building setback. Another critical issue that our project will address for the City is the public safety hazard that exists due to the lack of walkway on Queen Ave NE & e St. The completion of our project will lead to a walkway for the pedestrians in the area which includes the kids being dropped off after school at the cross junction of 6 h St and Queen Ave NE. Currently our property is not fenced and we have pedestrians using it to limit the risk of walking on the narrow Queen Ave NE road. We have had several residents explain that their use of our property is mandated because a walkway does not exist on NE 6t' or Queen Ave NE. The current traffic is a concern for my family because we have unknown individuals on our property at any given time. We have restrained from placing a fence because of the kids who will be affected by this action. We have inquired with the City regarding any plans to eliminate this safety hazard and we were notified that there currently are no plans in the works due to lack of funding. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the proposed changes. We would welcome any City official to our site to visually explain our proposal and demonstrate the public safety hazard identified. We would like to work with the City to ensure a solution is reached for the best interest of our neighbors, the City and us. Sincerely, Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram CITY Of RENTON PEAL TO RENI'ON CITY COUNT OF HEARIN _ EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECO-.__.iENDATION MAR 10 2009 Z ­t)r�"'' RECENED APPLICATION NAME rti� »>� �" '`'�. FILE NO.1S1C'",9QLBROF The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated L _ 20 " 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: Name: Kye , :___ 'S Address: tea ��' •���� A.- &rr, C Phone Number: REPRESENTATIVE (IF ANY): Name: t C�­. ;)'�, "4 , - Address:'' .L ; 2- Phone Number: 7--5 1 (ra �- �; - �- ; Email: - Email: 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based: Finding of Fact: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) No. Error:= �-�- c� . ( i _ c-1�-c A= _ G �` f Z-,` • �? _ Correction: Conclusions: No, 4' Error: 11 Correction: Other: No. Error: Correction: 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following relief: Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows: Other: Appellant/Representative Signature Type/Printed Name Date NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 8, oaf the Reniol Municipal Code, and Section 4-8-110F, for specific appeal procedures. acJ 1 wet r, act\, 71kfl WCH-} j J-eklno,rr•. f!�h,i,,',J, Ckir V,V—,Le1O- 0-ecl r�Llit L't1cL"L City of Renton Municipal Q Title fV Chapter 8 Section 110 — Appe 4-8-110C4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council — Procedures 1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993) 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050FI, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050172 and F3, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. 9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982) 10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) CITY OF RENTON �, � �' MAR 10 2009 I+ December 24, 2008 `YW RECEVl. RS OFFICE To Whom It May Concern: CITY C The purpose of this letter is to appeal the decision of the planning department for the denial of the variances that was proposed in order to maintain the house on lot 3 and the landscaping variance. It has become necessary for us to keep the house to cope with the changes taking place in the real estate market. We have looked at other options as well including the possibility of moving the house and removing a portion of the house to meet the set back requirement. Both of these options are *0o costly and would place a huge financial burden, and also it will be a huge disruption to the day to day lives of my family since the house is our current residence. Removing the house will make this project unprofitable since the project development cost will remain almost the same but the revenue will be significantly decreased. As both options currently stand, it will be more beneficial for us to discontinue this project in its entirety due to the lack of revenue. We feel that the following revision to the site plan will help elevate some of our financial burden and help us to go forward with the project. 1. Keep house on lot 3 House currently meets setback requirements but after the dedication as required by the City of 20 feet off Queen Ave NE the house will no longer meet this requirement. However, if the house is ever demolished then any new house built will be subject to the setback requirements in place at that time and we would be willing to comply with the city codes for building setback. Another critical issue that our project will address for the City is the public safety hazard that exists due to the lack of walkway on Queen Ave NE & 6a' St. The completion of our project will lead to a walkway for the pedestrians in the area which includes the kids being dropped off after school at the cross junction of 6a' St and Queen Ave NE. Currently our property is not fenced and we have pedestrians using it to limit the risk of walking on the narrow Queen Ave NE road. We have had several residents explain that their use of our property is mandated because a walkway does not exist on NE 6n' or Queen Ave NE. The current traffic is a concern for my family because we have unknown individuals on our property at any given time. We have restrained from placing a fence because of the kids who will be affected by this action. We have inquired with the City regarding any plans to eliminate this safety hazard and we were notified that there currently are no plans in the works due to lack of funding. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the proposed changes. We would welcome any City official to our site to visually explain our proposal and demonstrate the public safety hazard identified. We would like to work with the City to ensure a solution is reached for the best interest of our neighbors, the City and us. Sincerely, Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram February 24, 2009 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION APPELLANT: Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram 2609 NE 5t' Court Renton, WA 98056 Ram Short Plat Variance Appeal LUA-08-123, V-A, V-A After reviewing the Appellant's written requests for a hearing and examining available information on file, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The following minutes are a surnmary of the February 10, 2009 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, February 10, 2009, at 10:42 a.m_ in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall, Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Hearing Examiner's file containing the original appeal letter and notification of this hearing. Exhibit No. 2: Staff s yellow file Exhibit No. A: Vicinity Map Exhibit No. B: House Short Plat Plan with Retention of Exhibit No. 3: Series of Photographs of property Exhibit No. C: Short Plat Plan with 1-Iouse showing Fireplace Exhibit No. D: Relation to Site Photograph showing Fireplace in Exhibit No. E: Aerial photo of Site Exhibit No. F: Photograph of NE 6 Street lookin West to East Parties Present: Rocale Timmons, Assistant Planner Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 2 Kushal Varma, Owner (Appellant) Tom Touma, Engineer The Examiner stated that there are two variances; front yard landscaping and front yard setback. The short plat was approved subject to removal of a house that violated setback standards and would not be able to comply with the landscape standards along the frontage of the property. Kushal Varma stated that the existing house is his current residence. Removing the house would create a hardship on his family. The way the house is currently sitting, it does meet the 20-foot setback, but with the improvement on the Queen Avenue side, they would no longer be in compliance. The staff suggested that the house could be moved to meet the requirements but that would create a bigger financial burden and it is not feasible for them to move the house or his family. Ms. Timmons stated that the house does meet the north side yard setback and the required setback on Queen is 15-feet for the primary structure. Mr. Varma further stated that there is no garage in the front facing Queen, the parking is located at the rear of the house. On completion of this particular project all the neighbors will be served with sidewalk and a wider road, which will allow pedestrian traffic more room. NE 6`h and Queen do not currently have sidewalks. There are school busses that drop off children on NE 6"' and there currently is no place for the children to walk, they use his driveway as a sidewalk. He showed a set of five photos with the roadway, school busses and children walking. Upon questioning by Ms_ Nielsen Mr. Varna stated that the short plat was originally approved subject to the removal of the house in question today. They have changed some of the windows and painted the house. This was done with full knowledge that the house might have to be removed. The hardship would be financial as well as having to move his family from the house. In the appeal letter, Mr. Varma stated that removing the house would make the project unprofitable, the development costs would remain the same but the revenue would be significantly decreased. He is trying to not lose more money on this development. Mr. Touma stated that they would like to keep the house until such time when the economy is in a better place, based on economics, this move would greatly impact the family. The house is 50 years old and would need to be removed or refurbished. The Examiner stated that the premise for the application initially was that this house would be removed. It was a condition that the applicant came in with in order to get the short plat processed and approved. Ms. Nielsen moved for a summary judgment insofar as the appellant has failed to meet his burden to overcome the City's determination at this point. Case law supports that strain or financial burden is generally ruled out. The Examiner denied the dismissal. Ms. Timmons entered a list of exhibits, which showed the exterior wall for the chimney on the existing home and its location to the property line, a line on a photograph showing where the sidewalk would be located and a third photo showing a tree that is part of the subject site. The property protrudes into NE 60' and Queen Avenue N quite a distance. Mr. Varna stated that the chimney has now been removed Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 3 The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 11:18 am. FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: The appellants, Kursal Vanna and Kajal Ram, filed an appeal of the denials of two variances from the Zoning Code. The appellant seeks to retain an existing home that would provide an approximately 3.2 foot front yard and insufficient room for a required five (5 ) foot landscape strip. 2. The appeal was filed in a timely manner. The subject site is located at 3629 NE 6"' Street in the City of Renton. The property is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of NE 6th Street and Queen Avenue NE. 4. The appellant has proposed to subdivide an approximately 44,432 square foot parcel into six lots. Proposed Lot 1 would be a corner lot at Queen and NE 6th. Proposed Lot 2 would be west of Proposed Lot 1. Proposed Lots 3 to 6 would span the lot in an east to west direction with Proposed Lot 3 immediately south of Proposed Lots 1 and 2. Proposed Lot 3 would front along Queen Avenue NE. 5. There is an existing home on the subject site. That home is located on what would be Proposed Lot 3. 6. The proposed plat was altered in response to a requirement to preserve significant trees and to accommodate right-of-way dedications. As part of the original application and plat the appellant agreed to remove the existing home since it would intrude into a required front yard setback and required landscape strip along Queen Avenue NE. 7. Code requires a 15-foot setback along Queen as well as a five-foot Iandscape strip. The home would be situated approximately 3.2 feet from the street or 11.8 feet less than the required 15 feet. The 3.2-foot setback would also mean the lot could not provide the required five feet of landscaping along Queen. S. The proposed plat was approved with the understanding that the non -conforming home would be removed. The plans showed its proposed removal. Somewhere in the interim between application and the filing of the appeal, the appellant and his family moved into the non -conforming residence. Subsequent to the approval of the plat the appellant also applied for variances to allow less than the required 15 foot front yard and less than the required five feet of landscaping along the frontage, proposing instead to provide 3.2 of front yard setback and similar landscaping depth. 10. The appellant alleges that the plat cannot be pro-fitably developed if the existing home is demolished and moving his family out of the home would be a hardship. The allegations are that providing the required yard and landscaping would create an undue hardship. In order to accommodate the yard and landscaping, the appellant alleges that the home would either have to be demolished or moved. The appellant alleges that the economics of the situation and inconvenience of moving would create an undue hardship that the variances would put right. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 4 11. Staff found that the applicant did not suffer undue hardship due to any special circumstance related to lot � s size, shape or topography. They found that the appellant either has reasonable use of the site in its current condition, with one conforming home or that, dividing the site according to code provides a reasonable use of the subject site even if the existing home has to be removed or relocated. Staff found that approving either variance would grant the appellant a special privilege not afforded to other similarly located property in that zone. 12. The appellant moved into the home after beginning this process. Any claim of inconvenience was created by the appellant's actions knowing the home was to be demolished as part of his submitted plat application. 13. Variance Criteria are contained in Section 4-9.250B.5: a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated; c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; d. That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) CONCLUSIONS: The appellant has the burden of demonstrating that the decision of the City Official was either in error, or was otherwise contrary to law or constitutional provisions, or was arbitrary and capricious (Section 4-8-110(E)(7)(b). The appellant has not demonstrated that the action of the City should be reversed. The appeal is denied. 2. Arbitrary and capricious action has been defined as willful and unreasoning action in disregard of the facts and circumstances. A decision, when exercised honestly and upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances, is not arbitrary or capricious (Northern Pacific Transport Co. v Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, 69 Wn. 2d 472, 478 (1966). An action is likewise clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing body, on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. (Ancheta v Daly, 77 Wn. 2d 255, 259 (1969). An appellant body should not necessarily substitute its judgment for the underlying agency with expertise in a matter unless appropriate. 4. The decision to deny the variances was appropriate. As has been said many times before, a variance is not appropriate unless it meets all of the criteria and not just one or two criteria. Another issue to emphasize is that economic issues are not considered in dealing with a variance. There must be a physical limitation and not a fiscal limitation that deprives the applicant of reasonable use of the property. The Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 5 applicant voluntarily entered into this plat process and as part of that application, the applicant agreed that the existing home would have to be removed or, at least, modified in some fashion. The home's location would violate current Zoning provisions by providing substantially less than the required front yard along a street and not providing the required five-foot landscape strip. The applicant can readily divide the lot according to current zoning standards and create reasonably sized lots and construct homes on those lots. In no way does the Zoning Code deprive the appellant of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. 5. Will having to move out of the home be an inconvenience? Certainly. Will having to demolish a reasonable home be economically distressful? Probably, although in return the applicant creates additional saleable lots. The profit might be less but that is the applicant/appellant's choice. When the platting process began, the appellant did not reside in the home and so made a choice that should not affect City Zoning regulations. 6. The failure to provide the required front yard setback might not appear to create any hardship but a standard setback along a street frontage is generally maintained. It provides an open appearance and alloys those at their front door or in their front yard to scan the streetscape on either side. The setback also removes the home from immediate traffic impacts of noise and fumes. The concept of a standard setback is so consistent in code that homes located on corner lots are generally required to provide the setback along both street frontages so neighbors, again, have sightlines that are not visually interrupted by homes where a front yard should be located. Approval of either of these variances would be a grant of special privilege. Almost every new plat is based on the redevelopment of existing underlying plats and/or lots. In many of those cases existing homes are poorly located in terms of setbacks or yard requirements vis-a-vis new or existing code standards. In all those cases the applicants agree to remove or relocate those homes to conform with current zoning. This is almost so routine as to be a known standard. If the appellant were given a variance or variances all of those similarly situated, that is those redeveloping lots, would equally demand to retain non -conforming structures. Approving these variances would create an undue precedent and a special privilege. Is this the minimum variance to provide reasonable use of the subject site? The appellant would appear to be dictating the standards by insisting the home must remain where it is. Obviously, if the appellant is not willing to alter or move the existing home, the minimum variance relief is the full extent of the yard reduction. In this case, there is no way that the applicant can vary its construction or location to allow a smaller deviation from the Code standards. But no variance is really necessary to allow reasonable use of the subiect site. The decision below was appropriate. In order for a variance to be approved it must satisfy all four (4) criteria. It is not sufficient to satisfy one or another of the criteria or even three of the criteria. There is no undue hardship. The appellant has reasonable use of the subject site. The economics of the situation were appropriately disregarded by staff, as was the supposed inconvenience in having to move or relocate the appellant's family. This appellant applied for the underlying plat knowing full well the home would have to be removed or moved so any hardship was created by the appellant, not the imposition of the regulations. Under those circumstances staff could not approve the variances and their decision should stand. 10. The decision below should not be reversed without a clear showing that the decision is clearly erroneous or arbitrary and capricious. This office has found that the decision below was sound and the decision below is affirmed. DECISION: The decision is affirmed and the appeal is denied. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 6 ORDERED THIS 24`f' day of February 2009 qaj- � 14-mv FRED J. KA AN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 24rh day of February 2009 to the parties of record: Rocale Timmons Ann Nielsen Tom Touma Development Services Assistant City Attorney Touma Engineers & Land Surveyors City of Renton City of Renton 6632 S 191" Place, Ste. E-102 Kent, WA 98032 Kushal Varma 2609 NE 5' Court Renton, WA 98056 TRANSMITTED THIS 24`b day of February 2009 to the following: Mayor Denis Law Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Renton Reporter Dave Pargas, Fire Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Pursuant to Title N, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., March 10, 2009. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. Ana eal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 .m. March 10 2009. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be re uired prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the tile. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 7 The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a Iand use decision may not communicate in private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the cortimunication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. �Y CITY OF RENTON City Clerk Division + ,A + 1055 South Grady Way NT� Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6510 Receipt1335 Date 3 " ( U u l ❑ Cash ❑ Copy Fee ❑ Notary Service heck No. �' ppeal Fee ❑ Description: L u A 'C� `rS' 3 -� 1�a S i Funds Received From: Name Yo �zo _ Address City/Zip` 4,, 1,�2� ':4';'10 Amount $ "1 City Staff Signature Clerk's Office Distribution List Appeal, Ram Short Plat Variance Located at: 3629 NE 6th St File No. LUA-08-123, V March 10, 2009 ✓ 1 Renton R orter ✓ 2 City Attorney Larry Warren Ann Nielsen 1 City Council * Julia Medze 'an ''l CED Alex Pietsch /1 Assistant Fire Marshal David Par as 7 Planning Commission Judith Subia 2 ✓ Parties of Record* (see attached list 1 PW/Administration GreggZimmerman ✓ 6 PW/Development Services Neil Watts — Jennifer Henning r Stacy Tucker ✓ Rocale Timmons ✓ Janet Conklin LaiTy Mecklin ✓ 1 PW/Trans ortation Services Peter Hahn 1 PW/Utilities & Tech Services Lys Hornsb 1 LUA-08-123 • *City Clerk's Letter & POR List only Kushal Varna & Kajal Ram 2609 NE 5th Court Renton, WA 98056 Tom Touma Touma Engincers & Ladd Survey 6632 S 191 " Place, Ste E-102 Kent, WA 98032 �S �i � '� �^�. Qr. n" R.. � R dew Vi;�?1s:. 'S., 1,.... �/ - - : r ,,, _ � �.a� � i < '� �'' 1 �� —�-- ��r� `. — � _ _ v 1 l � � rt �:�-` �� _- h _ -. - - I.��a, _ _ � � �� _ -'Fr t. f�� y'H^'?w�'p .. y CYO_;----_�.____ _._ ''i ., 1 ,u T,♦: -- -, CITY OF RENTON Office of the City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way - Renton WA 98057 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a; Public Notice was published on January 30, 2009. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $84.00. Linda M. Mills Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter Subscri ed and sworn to me this 30th day of January. 2009. Kathy Dalse otary Public fo he State of Washington, Residing in Covington, Washington P. D. Number: stop, �110,, ;pra,q� °�••, iWAS S- —..NO TICE OF APPEAL HEARING RENrON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON An appeal Hearin,. will be held by the Menton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the sevonth floor of Renton City Hull, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on February 10, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the following petitions: Rant Short Plat Variances Appeal LUA08-123, V-A, V-A Locution: 3619 Queen Ave NE. Appeal of admininistrauve decision to deny 2 variances. Variances fnarn the landscaping, & setback standards were needed to allow an existing residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed 6-lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Legal descriptions of the files noted abme are on file in the City Clerk'ti Ullice, Sercnth Floor, City Hall. Renton. All interested permins are invited to he pre cnt at the Public Flearin, to express their upiniow, Questions should be d1VWCd 10 011� Iiearine Examiner at 425-430-6515. Published in the Renton Reporter on January 30, 2009. #178376. CITY OF RENTON A.. ,AL TO RENTON CITY COUNCIL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISIONIRECOMMENDATION MAR 10 2009 2 RECEIVED APPLICATION NAME ����w� '. FILE NO_ 1T AL6RQE& The undersigned interested party hereby files its Noticc of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated _ t 0 - 20 ID 01. 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: Name: VVJB. �a Address: kk-'�4" y q ,. S-s CJT 51 �LL Phone Number: Email: _ REPRESENTATPVL (IF ANY): Name: t o 0� Address: t063°1- S 10t SOT ---j, .-, 9 %-,D 2 Phone Number: �'�-'� -I- Email. 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based: Finding of Fact: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) No. _� Error: Lt Correction: Conclusions: No. 7 Error: Correction: Other: No. Error: Correction: 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED_ The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following relief. - Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows: Other: Appellant/Representative Signature Type/Printed Name Date NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 8, of the Renton Municipal Code, and Section 4-8-110F, for specific appeal procedures. ', LAv-rj WiLir► -r,, 7 e- / WalffS) Je+,n,4cr chip Vinc.e.,,� Fted Xauj»,a*-L City of Renton Municipai %.ode; Title IV, Chanter 8, Section 110 - Ar, is 4-8-110C4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council - Procedures 1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993) 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F1, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 9 10. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F2 and F3, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982) Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) CITY OF RENTON MAR 10 2009 1 `o December 24, 2008`YW RECENOE0 CITY CLERKS OFFICE To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to appeal the decision of the planning department for the denial of the variances that was proposed in order to maintain the house on lot 3 and the landscaping variance. It has become necessary for us to keep the house to cope with the changes taking place in the real estate market. We have looked at other options as well including the possibility of moving the house and removing a portion of the house to meet the set back requirement. Both of these options are Joo costly and would place a huge financial burden, and also it will be a huge disruption to the day to day lives of my family since the house is our current residence. Removing the house will make this project unprofitable since the project development cost will remain almost the same but the revenue will be significantly decreased. As both options currently stand, it will be more beneficial for us to discontinue this project in its entirety due to the lack of revenue. We feel that the following revision to the site plan will help elevate some of our financial burden and help us to go forward with the project. 1. Keep house on lot 3 House currently meets setback requirements but after the dedication as required by the City of 20 feet off Queen Ave NE the house will no longer meet this requirement. However, if the house is ever demolished then any new house built will be subject to the setback requirements in place at that time and we would be willing to comply with the city codes for building setback. Another critical issue that our project will address for the City is the public safety hazard that exists due to the lack of walkway on Queen Ave NE & 61h St. The completion of our project will lead to a walkway for the pedestrians in the area which includes the kids being dropped off after school at the cross junction of 6m St and Queen Ave NE. Currently our property is not fenced and we have pedestrians using it to limit the risk of walking on the narrow Queen Ave NE road. We have had several residents explain that their use of our property is mandated because a walkway does not exist on NE a or Queen Ave NE. The current traffic is a concern for my family because we have unknown individuals on our property at any given time. We have restrained from placing a fence because of the kids who will be affected by this action. We have inquired with the City regarding any plans to eliminate this safety hazard and we were notified that there currently are no plans in the works due to lack of funding. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the proposed changes. We would welcome any City official to our site to visually explain our proposal and demonstrate the public safety hazard identified. We would like to work with the City to ensure a solution is reached for the best interest of our neighbors, the City and us. Sincerely, Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram February 24, 2009 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION APPELLANT: Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram 2609 NE 5"' Court Renton, WA 98056 Ram Short Plat Variance Appeal LUA-08-123, V-A, V-A After reviewing the Appellant's written requests for a hearing and examining available information on file, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The following minutes are a summary of the February 10, 2009 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, February 10, 2009, at 10:42 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Hearing Examiner's file containing the original appeal letter and notification of this hearing. Exhibit No. 2: Staff's yellow file Exhibit No. A: Vicinity Map Exhibit No. B: House Short Plat Plan with Retention of Exhibit No. 3: Series of Photographs of property Exhibit No. C: Short Plat Plan with House showing Fireplace Exhibit No. D: Relation to Site Photograph showing Fireplace in Exhibit No. E: Aerial photo of Site Exhibit No. F: Photograph of NE 6h Street looking West to East Parties Present: Rocale Timmons, Assistant Planner Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 2 Kushal Varma, Owner (Appellant) Tom Touma, Engineer The Examiner stated that there are two variances; front yard landscaping and front yard setback. The short plat was approved subject to removal of a house that violated setback standards and would not be able to comply with the landscape standards along the frontage of the property. Kushal Varma stated that the existing house is his current residence. Removing the house would create a hardship on his family. The way the house is currently sitting, it does meet the 20-foot setback, but with the improvement on the Queen Avenue side, they would no longer be in compliance. The staff suggested that the house could be moved to meet the requirements but that would create a bigger financial burden and it is not feasible for them to move the house or his family. Ms. Timmons stated that the house does meet the north side yard setback and the required se ac - an Queen is 15-feet for the primary structure. Mr. Varma further stated that there is no garage in the front facing Queen, the parking is located at the rear of the house. On completion of this particular project all the neighbors will be served with sidewalk and a wider road, which will allow pedestrian traffic more room. NE 6"` and Queen do not currently have sidewalks. There are school busses that drop off children on NE 6°i and there currently is no place for the children to walk, they use his driveway as a sidewalk. He showed a set of five photos with the roadway, school busses and children walking. Upon questioning by Ms. Nielsen, Mr. Varma stated that the short plat was originally approved subject to the removal of the house in question today. They have changed some of the windows and painted the house. This was done with full knowledge that the house might have to be removed. The hardship would be financial as well as having to move his family from the house. In the appeal letter, Mr. Varma stated that removing the house would make the project unprofitable, the development costs would remain the same but the revenue would be significantly decreased. He is trying to not lose more money on this development. Mr. To stated that they would like to keep the house until such time when the economy is in a better place, based on economics, this move would greatly impact the family. The house is 50 yeArs old and.would need to be removed or refurbished. The Examiner stated that the premise for the application initially was that this house would be removed. It was a condition that the applicant came in with in order to get the short plat processed and approved. Ms. Nielsen moved for a summary judgment insofar as the appellant has failed to meet his burden to overcome the City's determination at this point. Case law supports that strain or financial burden is generally ruled out. The Examiner denied the dismissal. Ms. Timmons entered a list of exhibits, which showed the exterior wall for the chimney on the existing home and its location to the property line, a line on a photograph showing where the sidewalk would be located and a third photo showing a tree that is part of the subject site. The property protrudes into NE 6"' and Queen Avenue N quite a distance. Mr. Varma stated that the chimney has now been removed. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 3 The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 11:18 am. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following. - FINDINGS: 1. The appellants, Kursal Vanua and Kajal Ram, filed an appeal of the denials of two variances from the Zoning Code. The appellant seeks to retain an existing home that would provide an approximately 3.2 foot front yard and insufficient room for a required five (5) foot landscape strip. 2. The appeal was filed in a timely manner. The subject site is located at 3629 NE 6'h Street in the City of Renton. The property is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of NE 6th Street and Queen Avenue NE. 4. The appellant has proposed to subdivide an approximately 44,432 square foot parcel into six lots. Proposed Lot 1 would be a comer lot at Queen and NE 6th. Proposed Lot 2 would be west of Proposed Lot 1. Proposed Lots 3 to 6 would span the lot in an east to west direction with Proposed Lot 3 immediately south of Proposed Lots 1 and 2. Proposed Lot 3 would front along Queen Avenue NE. 5. There is an existing home on the subject site. That home is located on what would be Proposed Lot 3. The proposed plat was altered in response to a requirement to preserve significant trees and to accommodate right-of-way dedications. As part of the original application and plat the appellant agreed to remove the existing home since it would intrude into a required front yard setback and required landscape strip along Queen Avenue NE. 7. Code requires a 15-foot setback along Queen as well as a five-foot landscape strip. The home would be situated approximately 3.2 feet from the street or 11.8 feet less than the required 15 feet_ The 3.2-foot setback would also.mean•the lot could not provide the required five feet of landscaping along Queen. 8. The proposed plat was approved with the understanding that the non -conforming home would be removed. The plans showed its proposed removal. 9. Somewhere in the interim between application and the filing of the appeal, the appellant and his family moved into the non -conforming residence. Subsequent to the approval of the plat the appellant also applied for variances to allow less than the required 15 foot front yard and less than the required five feet of landscaping along the frontage, proposing instead to provide 3.2 of front yard setback and similar landscaping depth. 10. The appellant alleges that the plat cannot be profitably developed if the existing home is demolished and moving his family out of the home would be a hardship. The allegations are that providing the required yard and landscaping would create an undue hardship. 1n order to accommodate the yard and landscaping, the appellant alleges that the home would either have to be demolished or moved. The appellant alleges that the economics of the situation and inconvenience of moving would create an undue hardship that the variances would put right. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 4 11. Staff found that the applicant did not suffer undue hardship due to any special circumstance related to lot's size, shape or topography. They found that the appellant either has reasonable use of the site in its current condition, with one conforming home or that, dividing the site according to code provides a reasonable use of the subject site even if the existing home has to be removed or relocated. Staff found that approving either variance would grant the appellant a special privilege not afforded to other similarly located property in that zone. 12. The appellant moved into the home after beginning this process. Any claim of inconvenience was created by the appellant's actions knowing the home was to be demolished as part of his submitted plat application. 13. Variance Criteria are contained in Section 4-9.250B.5: a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated; c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; d. That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) CONCLUSIONS: 1. The appellant has the burden of demonstrating that the decision of the City Official was either in error, or was otherwise contrary to law or constitutional provisions, or was arbitrary and capricious (Section 4-8 -1 10(E)(7)(b). The appellant has not demonstrated that the action, of the City should be reversed. The appeal is denied. 2. Arbitrary and capricious action has been defined as willful and unreasoning action in disregard of the facts and circumstances. A decision, when exercised honestly and upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances, is not arbitrary or capricious (Northern Pacific Transport Co. v Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, 69 Wn. 2d 472,478 (1966). 3. An action is likewise clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing body, on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. (Ancheta v Daly, 77 Wn. 2d 255, 259 (1969). An appellant body should not necessarily substitute its judgment for the underlying agency with expertise in a matter unless appropriate. 4. The decision to deny the variances was appropriate. As has been said many times before, a variance is not appropriate unless it meets all of the criteria and not just one or two criteria. Another issue to emphasize is that economic issues are not considered in dealing with a variance. There must be a physical limitation and not a fiscal limitation that deprives the applicant of reasonable use of the property. The Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 5 applicant voluntarily entered into this plat process and as part of that application, the applicant agreed that the existing home would have to be removed or, at least, modified in some fashion. The home's location would violate current Zoning provisions by providing substantially less than the required front yard along a street and not providing the required five-foot landscape strip. The applicant can readily divide the lot according to current zoning standards and create reasonably sized lots and construct homes on those lots. In no way does the Zoning Code deprive the appellant of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. 5. Will having to move out of the home be an inconvenience? Certainly. Will having to demolish a reasonable home be economically distressful? Probably, although in return the applicant creates additional saleable lots. The profit might be less but that is the appl ic ant/appell ant's choice. When the platting process began, the appellant did not reside in the home and so made a choice that should not affect City Zoning regulations. 6. The failure to provide the required front yard setback might not appear to create any hardship but a standard setback along a street frontage is generally maintained. It provides an open appearance and allows those at their front door or in their front yard to scan the streetscape on either side. The setback also removes the home from immediate traffic impacts of noise and fumes. The concept of a standard setback is so consistent in code that homes located on corner lots are generally required to provide the setback along both street frontages so neighbors, again, have sightlines that are not visually interrupted by homes where a front yard should be located. 7_ Approval of either of these variances would be a grant of special privilege. Almost every new plat is based on the redevelopment of existing underlying plats and/or lots. In many of those cases existing homes are poorly located in terms of setbacks or yard requirements vis-A-vis new or existing code standards. In all those cases the applicants agree to remove or relocate those homes to conform with current zoning. This is almost so routine as to be a known standard. If the appellant were given a variance or variances all of those similarly situated, that is those redeveloping lots, would equally demand to retain non -conforming structures. Approving these variances would create an undue precedent and a special privilege. Is this the minimum variance to provide reasonable use of the subject site? The appellant would appear to be dictating the standards by insisting the home must remain where it is. Obviously, if the appellant is not willing to alter or move the existing home, the minimum variance relief is the full extent of the yard reduction. In this case, there is no way that the applicant can vary its construction or location to allow a smaller deviation from the Code standards. But no variance is really necessary toallow reasonable use of the subject site. 9. The decision below was appropriate. In order for a variance to be approved it must satisfy all four (4) criteria. It is not sufficient to satisfy one or another of the criteria or even three of the criteria. There is no undue hardship. The appellant has reasonable use of the subject site. The economics of the situation were appropriately disregarded by staff, as was the supposed inconvenience in having to move or relocate the appellant's family. This appellant applied for the underlying plat knowing full well the home would have to be removed or moved so any hardship was created by the appellant, not the imposition of the regulations. Under those circumstances staff could not approve the variances and their decision should stand. 10. The decision below should not be reversed without a clear showing that the decision is clearly erroneous or arbitrary and capricious. This office has found that the decision below was sound and the decision below is affirmed. DECISION: The decision is affirmed and the appeal is denied. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 6 ORDERED THIS 24th day of February 2009 q�zj �V4-�,V ��� FRED J. KA AN HEARING E INER TRANSMITTED THIS 24rh day of February 2009 to the parties of record: Rocale Timmons Ann Nielsen Tom Touma Development Services Assistant City Attorney Touma Engineers & Land Surveyors City of Renton City of Renton 6632 S 191st Place, Ste. E-I 02 Kent, WA 98032 Kushal Var-na 2609 NE 5`E' Court Renton, WA 98056 TRANSMITTED THIS 24tb day of February 2009 to the following: Mayor Denis Law Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Renton Reporter Dave Pargas, Fire Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 n.m., lVMar!.h 10, 2009. Any aggrievedperson feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 .m. March 10 2009. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processiniz of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. or Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 7 The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. �Y CITY OF RENTON � rii City Clerk Division (Ss'z + 1055 South Grady Way NTH Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6510 Receipt QUJ Date U r ❑ Cash ❑ Copy Fee ❑ Notary Service heck No. �Mppeal Fee ❑ Description: 0"( Lt,i A -0'3 1, Funds Received From: 't1 Amount $ "1 Name;, Gi �t�1aM V�1tl Address City/Zip City Staff Signature AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. County of King ) Nancy Thompson being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the 24"' day of February 2009, aftiant deposited via the United States Mail a sealed envelope(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. Signature: f t en. SUBSCRIBED AND SffPPN to before me this-' day of � :�� , 2009. tfjlr r �.�� ilt ro o�af,��%Gc�: ty \y gx��'� Nota Public irr;and for the State a ashington 3 � Residing at _ therein. Application, Petition or Case No.: Rarn Short Plat Variance Appeal LtJA 08-123, V-A, V-A The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record. le February 24, 2009 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION APPELLANT: Kushal Varna & Kajal Ram 2609 NE 5t'' Court Renton, WA 98056 Ram Short Plat Variance Appeal LUA-08-123, V-A, V-A After reviewing the Appellant's written requests for a hearing and examining available information on file, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The following minutes are a sunimary of the February 10, 2009 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, February 10, 2009, at 10:42 a.m.. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Hearing Examiner's file containing the original appeal letter and notification of this hearing. Exhibit No. 2: Staffs yellow file Exhibit No. A: Vicinity Map Exhibit No. B: House Short Plat Plan with Retention of Exhibit No. 3: Series of Photographs of property Exhibit No. C: Short Plat Plan with l louse showing Fireplace Exhibit No. D: Relation to Site Photograph showing Fireplace in Exhibit No. E: Aerial photo of Site Exhibit No. F: Photograph of NE 6` Street looking West to East Parties Present: Rocale Timmons, Assistant Planner Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 2 Kushal Vanna, Owner (Appellant) Tom Touma, Engineer The Examiner stated that there are two variances; front yard landscaping and front yard setback. The short plat was approved subject to removal of a house that violated setback standards and would not be able to comply with the landscape standards along the frontage of the property. Kushal Varma stated that the existing house is his current residence. Removing the house would create a hardship on his family. The way the house is currently sitting, it does meet the 20-foot setback, but with the improvement on the Queen Avenue side, they would no longer be in compliance. The staff suggested that the house could be moved to meet the requirements but that would create a bigger financial burden and it is not feasible for them to move the house or his family. Ms. Timmons stated that the house does meet the north side yard setback and the required setback on Queen is 15-feet for the primary structure. Mr. Varma further stated that there is no garage in the front facing Queen, the parking is located at the rear of the house. On completion of this particular project all the neighbors will be served with sidewalk and a wider road, which will allow pedestrian traffic more room. NE 6 h and Queen do not currently have sidewalks. There are school busses that drop off children on NE 6t' and there currently is no place for the children to walk, they use his driveway as a sidewalk. He showed a set of five photos with the roadway, school busses and children walking. Upon questioning by Ms. Nielsen Mr. Varma stated that the short plat was originally approved subject to the removal of the house in question today. They have changed some of the windows and painted the house. This was done with full knowledge that the house might have to be removed. The hardship would be financial as well as having to move his family from the house. In the appeal letter, Mr. Varma stated that removing the house would make the project unprofitable, the development costs would remain the same but the revenue would be significantly decreased. He is trying to not lose more money on this development. Mr. Touma stated that they would like to keep the house until such time when the economy is in a better place, based on economics, this move would greatly impact the family. The house is 50 years old and would need to be removed or refurbished. The Examiner stated that the premise for the application initially was that this house would be removed. It was a condition that the applicant came in with in order to get the short plat processed and approved. Ms. Nielsen moved for a summary judgment insofar as the appellant has failed to meet his burden to overcome the City's determination at this point. Case law supports that strain or financial burden is generally ruled out. The Examiner denied the dismissal. Ms. Timmons entered a list of exhibits, which showed the exterior wall for the chimney on the existing home and its location to the property line, a line on a photograph showing where the sidewalk would be located and a third photo showing a tree that is part of the subject site. The property protrudes into NE 6 h and Queen Avenue N quite a distance. Mr. Varma stated that the chimney has now been removed. 4r Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 3 The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 11:18 am. FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: The appellants, Kursal Varma and Kajal Ram, filed an appeal of the denials of two variances from the Zoning Code. The appellant seeks to retain an existing home that would provide an approximately 3.2 foot front yard and insufficient room for a required five (5) foot landscape strip. 2. The appeal was filed in a timely manner. The subject site is located at 3629 NE 6"' Street in the City of Renton. The property is located on the southwest comer of the intersection of NE 6th Street and Queen Avenue NE. 4. The appellant has proposed to subdivide an approximately 44,432 square foot parcel into six lots. Proposed Lot 1 would be a corner lot at Queen and NE 6th. Proposed Lot 2 would be west of Proposed Lot 1. Proposed Lots 3 to 6 would span the lot in an east to west direction with Proposed Lot 3 immediately south of Proposed Lots 1 and 2. Proposed Lot 3 would front along Queen Avenue NE. There is an existing home on the subject site. That home is located on what would be Proposed Lot 3. 6. The proposed plat was altered in response to a requirement to preserve significant trees and to accommodate right-of-way dedications. As part of the original application and plat the appellant agreed to remove the existing home since it would intrude into a required front yard setback and required landscape strip along Queen Avenue NE. 7. Code requires a 15-foot setback along Queen as well as a five-foot landscape strip. The home would be situated approximately 3.2 feet from the street or 11.8 feet less than the required 15 feet. The 3.2-foot setback would also mean the lot could not provide the required five feet of landscaping along Queen. The proposed plat was approved with the understanding that the non -conforming home would be removed. The plans showed its proposed removal. Somewhere in the interim between application and the filing of the appeal, the appellant and his family moved into the non -conforming residence. Subsequent to the approval of the plat the appellant also applied for variances to allow less than the required 15 foot front yard and less than the required five feet of landscaping along the frontage, proposing instead to provide 3.2 of front yard setback and similar landscaping depth. 10. The appellant alleges that the plat cannot be profitably developed if the existing home is demolished and moving his family out of the home would be a hardship. The allegations are that providing the required yard and landscaping would create an undue hardship. In order to accommodate the yard and landscaping, the appellant alleges that the home would either have to be demolished or moved. The appellant alleges that the economics of the situation and inconvenience of moving would create an undue hardship that the variances would put right. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 4 11. Staff found that the applicant did not suffer undue hardship due to any special circumstance related to lot's size, shape or topography. They found that the appellant either has reasonable use of the site in its current condition, with one conforming home or that, dividing the site according to code provides a reasonable use of the subject site even if the existing home has to be removed or relocated. Staff found that approving either variance would grant the appellant a special privilege not afforded to other similarly located property in that zone. 12. The appellant moved into the home after beginning this process. Any claim of inconvenience was created by the appellant's actions knowing the home was to be demolished as part of his submitted plat application. 13. Variance Criteria are contained in Section 4-9.250B.5: a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated; c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; d. That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) CONCLUSIONS: The appellant has the burden of demonstrating that the decision of the City Official was either in error, or was otherwise contrary to law or constitutional provisions, or was arbitrary and capricious (Section 4-8-110(E)(7)(b). The appellant has not demonstrated that the action of the City should be reversed. The appeal is denied. 2. Arbitrary and capricious action has been defined as willful and unreasoning action in disregard of the facts and circumstances. A decision, when exercised honestly and upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances, is not arbitrary or capricious (Northern Pacific Transport Co. v Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, 69 Wn. 2d 472, 478 (1966). An action is likewise clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing body, on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. (Ancheta v Daly, 77 Wn. 2d 255, 259 (1969). An appellant body should not necessarily substitute its judgment for the underlying agency with expertise in a matter unless appropriate. 4. The decision to deny the variances was appropriate. As has been said many times before, a variance is not appropriate unless it meets all of the criteria and not just one or two criteria. Another issue to emphasize is that economic issues are not considered in dealing with a variance. There must be a physical limitation and not a fiscal limitation that deprives the applicant of reasonable use of the property. The Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 5 applicant voluntarily entered into this plat process and as part of that application, the applicant agreed that the existing home would have to be removed or, at least, modified in some fashion. The home's location would violate current Zoning provisions by providing substantially less than the required front yard along a street and not providing the required five-foot landscape strip. The applicant can readily divide the lot according to current zoning standards and create reasonably sized lots and construct homes on those lots. In no way does the Zoning Code deprive the appellant of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. Will having to move out of the home be an inconvenience? Certainly. Will having to demolish a reasonable home be economically distressful? Probably, although in return the applicant creates additional saleable lots. The profit might be less but that is the applicant/appellant's choice. When the platting process began, the appellant did not reside in the home and so made a choice that should not affect City Zoning regulations. 6. The failure to provide the required front yard setback might not appear to create any hardship but a standard setback along a street frontage is generally maintained. It provides an open appearance and allows those at their front door or in their front yard to scan the streetscape on either side. The setback also removes the home from immediate traffic impacts of noise and fumes. The concept of a standard setback is so consistent in code that homes located on corner lots are generally required to provide the setback along both street frontages so neighbors, again, have sightlines that are not visually interrupted by homes where a front yard should be located. Approval of either of these variances would be a grant of special privilege. Almost every new plat is based on the redevelopment of existing underlying plats and/or lots. In many of those cases existing homes are poorly located in terms of setbacks or yard requirements vis-a-vis new or existing code standards. In all those cases the applicants agree to remove or relocate those homes to conform with current zoning. This is almost so routine as to be a known standard. If the appellant were given a variance or variances all of those similarly situated, that is those redeveloping lots, would equally demand to retain non -conforming structures. Approving these variances would create an undue precedent and a special privilege. Is this the minimum variance to provide reasonable use of the subject site? The appellant would appear to be dictating the standards by insisting the home must remain where it is. Obviously, if the appellant is not willing to alter or move the existing home, the minimum variance relief is the full extent of the yard reduction. In this case, there is no way that the applicant can vary its construction or location to allow a smaller deviation from the Code standards. But no variance is really necessary to allow reasonable use of the subject site. The decision below was appropriate. In order for a variance to be approved it must satisfy all four (4) criteria. It is not sufficient to satisfy one or another of the criteria or even three of the criteria. There is no undue hardship. The appellant has reasonable use of the subject site. The economics of the situation were appropriately disregarded by staff, as was the supposed inconvenience in having to move or relocate the appellant's family. This appellant applied for the underlying plat knowing full well the home would have to be removed or moved so any hardship was created by the appellant, not the imposition of the regulations. Under those circumstances staff could not approve the variances and their decision should stand. 10. The decision below should not be reversed without a clear showing that the decision is clearly erroneous or arbitrary and capricious. This office has found that the decision below was sound and the decision below is affirmed. DECISION: The decision is affirmed and the appeal is denied_ Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 6 ORDERED THIS 20 day of February 2009 -Ta� � V4-x" FRED J. KAUTMAN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 24rh day of February 2009 to the parties of record: Rocale Timmons Ann Nielsen Tom Touma Development Services Assistant City Attorney Touma Engineers & Land Surveyors City of Renton City of Renton 6632 S 19Vs Place, Ste. E-102 Kent, WA 98032 Kushal Varma 2609 NE 5t' Court Renton, WA 98056 TRANSMITTED THIS 24t' day of February 2009 to the following: Mayor Denis Law Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Renton Reporter Dave Pargas, Fire Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., March 10, 2009. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., March 10, 2009. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processinp,of the tile. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. Walgreen's Sign Appeal LUA-08-136, V-A February 24, 2009 Page 7 The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. City of Renton REPORT Department of Community and Economic Development & ADMINISTRA TIVE VARIANCE DECISION LAND USE A CTION Decision Date: December 9, 2008 Project Name: Ram Short Plat Variances Owner/Applicant: Kursal Varma & Kajal Ram, 2609 NE 50` Court, Renton, WA 98056 Contact: Tom or Dan Touma, Touma Engineers, 6632 S 19151 Place Ste# E102, Kent, WA 98032 File Number: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A Project Manager: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner Project Summary: The applicant is requesting, two administrative variances; one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards of the Residential-8 (R-8) du/ac zoning designation. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow an existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed six lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximately 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded. If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 11.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. There would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. Project Location: 3619 Queen Ave NE (Parcel #092305-9036) Exist. Bldg. Area: 2,370 SF Proposed New Bldg Area: NIA Site Area: 44,431 SF (1.02 ac) Total Building Area: NIA Project Location Map Department of Community and Economic Development Administrative Report and Decision Ram Short Plat Variances LUA 08-723, V-A, V-A REPORT OF DECFMBER 9, 2008 Page 2 of 6 A. Type of Land Use Action Conditional Use Binding Site Plan Site Plan Review Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Special Permit for Grade & Fill Administrative Code Determination X Administrative Variance B. Exhibits Exhibit 1: Neighborhood/Zoning Map. Exhibit 2: Preliminary Short Plat Plan Exhibit 3: Landscape Plan Exhibit 4: HEX Reconsideration Response C. Project Description /Background: The applicant has requested two Administrative Variances from RMC 4-2-110A in order to allow an existing residence to remain on the site following the recording of a preliminary approved 6-lot short plat (Ram Short Plat LUA07-140). The entire parcel is 44,431 SF (1.01 acres) in area and would be eventually divided into six lots, of which the existing residence would be located on proposed Lot 3. Lot 3 would be approximately 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. As part of the preliminary approval of the Ram Short Plat the applicant was required to dedicate 25 feet in width along NE 6`i' Street and 20 feet in width along Queen Ave NE (approximately 9,581 square feet in area) for half - street improvements along the parcel's street frontages. Due to the street dedication the existing single-family residence, located 31 feet away from the new property line, would become a non -conforming structure. The applicant originally proposed to remove the residence in order to conform with the development standards of the R-8 zone. As part of that same preliminary approval, staff recommended that the applicant be required to retain 8 specific trees on the site, in order to meet the City's tree retention requirements. The applicant requested a reconsideration (dated August 12, 2008) of the short plat decision and conditions; in which an alternative short plat plan was proposed to meet the tree retention requirements of RMC4-4-130 without retaining the 8 specific trees. The short plat plan included a 15-foot wide easement along the western border of Lots 4-6; and would allow for the retention of 8 different trees on the site. As part of the alternate short plat design, the applicant also requested modifications to the original short plat plan, which included the retention of the existing single-family residence, to accommodate the proposed tree retention easement. On August 20, 2008 a letter was sent to City's Hearing Examiner in which staff recommended approval of the alternate short plan with respect to the 15-foot tree retention easement. However, it was noted that the existing residence would encroach into the front yard setback and that a variance was unlikely to be supported by the Planning Director; as it would be difficult for the applicant to meet all variance decision criteria. The Hearing Examiner responded to the reconsideration request in a letter (Exhibit 4), dated August 25, 2008, where it was noted that the 6-lot short plat was approved however, it was approved with the removal of the existing residence. The development standards of the R-8 zone require a minimum setback for front yards of 15 feet for the primary structure. The applicant is proposing a reduction of the required setback for the existing house to 3.2 feet, 11.8 feet less than the 15-foot minimum setback. The development standards also require a minimum on -site Department of Community and Economic Development Administrative Report and Decision Rani Short Plat Variances LUA 08-123, V-A, V--A REPORT OF DECEMBER 9, 2008 Page 3 of b landscape strip along all street frontages of 5 feet in width. The applicant is proposing to not provide any landscaping on Lot 3, 5 feet less than the 5-foot minimum requirement. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. Findings, Conclusion, and Decision Having reviewed the written record in the matter, the City now makes and enters the following: D. Findings Request; The applicant has requested two Administrative Variances from the setback and landscaping standards in Residential — 8 (R-8) zoning designation. The variances are requested from RMC 4-2-110A, which requires a 15-foot setback for front yards and a 5-foot wide on -site landscape strip along the street frontage. The applicant is requesting the variances in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). 2. Administrative Variance: The applicant's Administrative Variance application complies with the requirements for information for a variance. The applicant's plat plan and other project drawings are attached to this report. 3. Existing Land Use: Land uses surrounding the subject site include: North: R-8 zone, developed as single-family residential; South: R-10 zone, developed as single-family residential; East: R-8 zone and R-10 zones, developed as single-family and multi -family residential, and; West: R-8, developed as single- family residential. 4. Consistency with Variance Criteria: Section 4-9-250B5 lists four criteria that the Zoning Administrator is asked to consider the following four criteria, along with all other relevant information, in making a decision on an Administrative Variance application. The variance criteria are as follows: a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; Setback Variance: The applicant contends that undue hardship is suffered due to their inability to build a new house on proposed Lot 3 because of difficult financial markets. The applicant contends it is not cost effective to remove a portion of or demolish the existing house in the current economic times. Staff cannot speak to the impact of the financial markets on the applicant; however staff does not concur that the difficult financial markets create an undue hardship for this specific site. The proposed variance is not necessitated because of size, shape, topography, Iocation or surroundings of the subject property. Therefore the strict application of the Zoning Code is not found to deprive the subject owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity under identical zone classifications. Alternatively, the applicant could relocate the existing residence without demolishing all or portions of the residence and meet the minimum setback requirements in the R-8 zoning designation. Departmeni of Community and Economic Development Administrative Reporl and Decision Ram Short Plat Variances LUA 08-123, V-A, V-A REPORT OF DECEMBER 9, 2008 Page 4 of G Landscape Variance: The landscape variance is only necessitated if the setback variance is approved. Staff does not support the landscape variance for proposed Lot #3 as the need for the variance is necessitated due to a self imposed hardship. b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated, - Setback Variance: The applicant contends that the granting of the setback variance, for Lot 3, would benefit the public welfare because it would ensure the rights of the property owner. Staff concurs that the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property or improvements. The granting of the variance would allow for the retention of an existing residence. Landscape Variance: The applicant contends that the granting of the landscape variance, for Lot 3, would benefit the public welfare because it would ensure the rights of the property owner. Staff concurs that the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property or improvements. The granting of the variance would allow for the retention of an existing residence. c. That approval shall not constitute a grant ofspecial privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated, and; Setback Variance: The approval of the setback variance request, for Lot 3, would be a grant of special privilege, as other property owners in the vicinity and within other R-8 zoned areas would not be permitted to reduce the front yard setback, when the hardship is not created due to specific site constraints. Landscape Width Variance: The landscape variance is only necessitated if the setback variance is approved. The setback variance, if approved, would be a grant of special privilege (see discussion above). Therefore the landscaping variance would not be supported. d. That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose_ Setback Variance: The applicant states that the requested setback variance, for Lot 3, is the minimum variance necessary to allow the existing residence to remain on the site. Staff does not concur; the applicant could relocate the existing residence without demolishing all or portions of the structure and come into conformance with the setback requirements of the R-8 zoning designation. Therefore the requested variance is not the minimum variance that would accomplish the desire to retain the existing residence. Department of Community and Economic Development Administrative Report and Decision Ram Short Plat Variances LUA 08-123, V A, V--A REPORT OF DECEMBER 9,200,5 Page 6 of 6 Land Use Action Appeals The administrative land use decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within 14 days of the date of approval. An appeal of the decision must be filed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). RMC Title N, Section 4-8-11.13, governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and requires that such appeals be filed directly with the Office of the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be made in writing on or before 5:00 PM on December 24`", 2008, and must be accompanied by a $75.00 fee and other specific requirements. THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning the land use decision. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial decision, but to Appeals to the Hearing Examiner as well. All communications after the decision/approval date must be made in writing through the Hearing Examiner. All communications are public record and this permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence in writing. Any violation of this doctrine could result in the invalidation of the appeal by the Court. Department of Community and Economic Development Administrative Report and Decision Ram Short Plat Variances LUA 08-123, V A, V-A REPORT OF DECEMBER 9, 1008 Page 5 of 6 Landscape Variance: The landscape variance is only necessitated if the setback variance is approved. The setback variance is not the minimum variance that would accomplish the desire to retain the existing residence (see discussion above). Therefore the landscaping variance would not be supported. E. Conclusions The subject site is located at 3619 Queen Ave NE in the R-8 single-family residential zone. The City of Renton Development Standards, RMC 4-2-110A, requires a 15-foot minimum front yard setback for primary structures and a 5-foot wide on -site landscape strip along the street frontage. The recommendation of staff is to deny the two variance requests because they do not meet three of the four criteria found in RMC 4-9-250B5. Specifically, the applicant has not demonstrated that they suffer undue hardship and the request would constitute granting a special privilege. It is feasible for the subject parcel to be developed and meet the setback and lanscaping requirements of RMC 4-2- 110A. F. Decision The Administrative Variances for the Ram Short Plat File No. LUA 08-123, V-A, V-A are denied. SIGNATURE: C.E. Vincent, Planning Director TRANSMITTED this I#h day of December, 2008 to the applicant, contact and owner; Kursal Var-na & Kajal Ram Tom or Dan Tourna 2609 NE 5`h Court Touma Engineers Renton, WA 98056 6632 S 191" Place Ste# El02 Kent, WA 98032 TRANSMITTED this I01h day of December, 2008 to the parties of'record., No parties of record. TRANSMITTED this 10't' day of December, 2008 to the following. Neil Watts, Development Services Director Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Larry Meckling, Building Official Fire Marshal Date y CITY -� RENTON Denis Law, Mayor February 3, 2009 Kashal Varrna Kajal Ram 2609 NE 5"' Court Renton, WA 98056 RE: Ram Short Plat Variance Appeal LUA 08-123. V-A, V-A Dear Mr. Varma: This office has received your appeal letter on the above referenced matter. Hearing Examiner Fred J. Kaufman Please be advised that the appeal hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, February 10, 2009 not to start before 9:30 a.m. The bearing will take place in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. The address is 1055 S Grady Way in Renton. If this office can provide any further assistance, please address those comments in writing. Sincerely, Nancy Thompson Secretary to Hearing Examiner City of Renton Encl: Copy of Appeal Letter cc: Ann Nielsen Assistant City Attorney Neil Watts, Development Serviccs Director Chip Vincent, Planning Director Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Roeale Timmons, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Parties of Record: Torn Touma Touma Engineers & Land Surveyors 6632 19151 Place, Ste. E 102 Kent, WA 98032 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 - (425) 430-6515 8 This paper centaii is 5056 1 �cyran material, 30% post consumer RENTON A1-.1F.:11) 0F `j-3E CURVI, December 24, 2008 To Whom It May Concern: -QS-1�23, V 6� V-R 1_, , i'F 1 l �arn 5i�urt Pear Va r, encr_s The purpose of this letter is to appeal the decision of the planning department for the denial of the variances that was proposed in order to maintain the house on lot 3 and the landscaping variance. It has become necessary for us to keep the house to cope with the changes taking place in the real estate market. We have looked at other options as well including the possibility of moving the house and removing a portion of the house to meet the set back requirement. Both of these options are too costly and would place a huge financial burden, and also it will be a huge disruption to the day to day lives of my family since the house is our current residence. Removing the house will make this project unprofitable since the project development cost will remain almost the same but the revenue will be significantly decreased. As both options currently stand, it will be more beneficial for us to discontinue this project in its entirety due to the lack of revenue. We feel that the following revision to the site plan will help elevate some of our financial burden and help us to go forward with the project. 1. Keep house on lot 3 House currently meets setback requirements but after the dedication as required by the City of 20 feet off Queen Ave NE the house will no longer meet this requirement. However, if the house is ever demolished then any new house built will be subject to the setback requirements in place at that time and we would be willing to comply with the city codes for building setback. Another critical issue that our project will address for the City is the public safety hazard that exists due to the lack of walkway on Queen Ave NE & 6`r' St. The completion of our project will lead to a walkway for the pedestrians in the area which includes the kids being dropped off after school at the cross junction of 6t' St and Queen Ave NE. Currently our property is not fenced and we have pedestrians using it to limit the risk of walking on the narrow Queen Ave NE road. We have had several residents explain that their use of our property is mandated because a walkway does not exist on NE 6d' or Queen Ave NE. The current traffic is a concern for my family because we have unknown individuals on our property at any given time. We have restrained from placing a fence because of the kids who will be affected by this action. We have inquired with the City regarding any plans to eliminate this safety hazard and we were notified that there currently are no plans in the works due to lack of funding. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the proposed changes. We would welcome any City official to our site to visually explain our proposal and demonstrate the public safety hazard identified. We would like to work with the City to ensure a solution is reached for the best interest of our neighbors, the City and us. Sincerely, Kusbal Varma & Kaj al Ram ed: �dy A -Homey" 11fei1 !�/a s; �►�r�n,{er ehriir�9, Chr� 1/�'►�ccnt Ty CITY OF RENTON O O City Clerk Division * " 1055 South Grady Way �N a� Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6510 Receipt 1272 Date Z Lam+ [7 ❑ Cash ❑ Copy Fee ❑ Notary Service y Check No. Appeal Fee ❑ Description: Lu P1- 0s, a Funds Received From: Amount $ 75 Name a Ica Address �x (c C� ' � CA City/Zip City Staff Signature Y CI.T — OF RE ■ TON `�7, Denis Law, Mayor + Ilk February 3, 2009 Kushal Varma Kajal Raze 2609 NE 501 Court Renton, WA 98056 RE: Ram Short Plat Variance Appeal LUA 08-123. V-A, V-A Dear Mr. Varma: This office has received your appeal letter on the above referenced matter. Hearing Examiner Fred J. Kaufman Please be advised that the appeal hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, February 10, 2009 not to start before 9:30 a.m. The hearing will take place in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. The address is 1055 S Grady Way in Renton. If this office can provide any further assistance, please address those comments in writing. Sincerely, Nancy Thompson Secretary to Hearing Examiner City of Renton Friel: Copy of Appeal Letter cc: Ann Nielsen Assistant City Attorney Neil Watts, Development Services Director Chip Vincent, Planning Director Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Rocale Timmons, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Parties of Record: Tom Touma Touma Engineers & Land Surveyors 6632 19151 Place, Ste. E 102 Kent, WA 98032 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 - (425) 430-6515 SThispapwucniuh,!:.S,,-'c^cycledmatenal,30%post consumer RENTON' AHEAD OF THE CURVii December 24, 2008 To Whom It May Concern: �LLe 11-6?-42311/_61 f, J V-'9 Plaf var1-vezS The purpose of this letter is to appeal the decision of the planning department for the denial of the variances that was proposed in order to maintain the house on lot 3 and the landscaping variance. It has become necessary for us to keep the house to cope with the changes taking place in the real estate market. We have looked at other options as well including the possibility of moving the house and removing a portion of the house to meet the set back requirement. Both of these options are too costly and would place a huge financial burden, and also it will be a huge disruption to the day to day lives of my family since the house is our current residence. Removing the house will make this project unprofitable since the project development cost will remain almost the same but the revenue will be significantly decreased. As both options currently stand, it will be more beneficial for us to discontinue this project in its entirety due to the lack of revenue. We feet that the following revision to the site plan will help elevate some of our financial burden and help us to go forward with the project. 1. Keep house on lot 3 House currently meets setback requirements but after the dedication as required by the City of 20 feet off Queen Ave NE the house will no longer meet this requirement. However, if the house is ever demolished then any new house built will be subject to the setback requirements in place at that time and we would be willing to comply with the city codes for building setback. Another critical issue that our project will address for the City is the public safety hazard that exists due to the lack of walkway on Queen Ave NE & 6"' St. The completion of our project will lead to a walkway for the pedestrians in the area which includes the kids being dropped off after school at the cross junction of a St and Queen Ave NE. Currently our property is not fenced and we have pedestrians using it to limit the risk of walking on the narrow Queen Ave NE road. We have had several residents explain that their use of our property is mandated because a walkway does not exist on NE 6d' or Queen Ave NE. The current traffic is a concern for my family because we have unknown individuals on our property at any given time. We have restrained from placing a fence because of the kids who will be affected by this action. We have inquired with the City regarding any plans to eliminate this safety hazard and we were notified that there currently are no plans in the works due to lack of funding. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the proposed changes. We would welcome any City official to our site to visually explain our proposal and demonstrate the public safety hazard identified. We would like to work with the City to ensure a solution is reached for the best interest of our neighbors, the City and us. Sincerely Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram de: 211y A om ey/ A/e i i k16? f; s, Je�z ►{er f enn;, y, C ,�O !lairccnt DEC 2 4 2008 December 24, 2008 3 s Ss PM. CITY CLERKS ���r To Whom It May Concern: Gil �� / 3� V ►� f V-A - PqA § or t Pla-F Va ro aims The purpose of this letter is to appeal the decision of the planning department for the denial of the variances that was proposed in order to maintain the house on lot 3 and the landscaping variance. It has become necessary for us to keep the house to cope with the changes taking place in the real estate market. We have looked at other options as well including the possibility of moving the house and removing a portion of the house to meet the set back requirement. Both of these options are too costly and would place a huge financial burden, and also it will be a huge disruption to the day to day lives of my family since the house is our current residence. Removing the house will make this project unprofitable since the project development cost will remain almost the same but the revenue will be significantly decreased. As both options currently stand, it will be more beneficial for us to discontinue this project in its entirety due to the lack of revenue. We feel that the following revision to the site plan will help elevate some of our financial burden and help us to go forward with the project. 1. Keep house on lot 3 House currently meets setback requirements but after the dedication as required by the City of 20 feet off Queen Ave NE the house will no longer meet this requirement. However, if the house is ever demolished then any new house built will be subject to the setback requirements in place at that time and we would be willing to comply with the city codes for building setback. Another critical issue that our project will address for the City is the public safety hazard that exists due to the lack of walkway on Queen Ave NE & 6h St. The completion of our project will lead to a walkway for the pedestrians in the area which includes the kids being dropped off after school at the cross junction of 6t' St and Queen Ave NE. Currently our property is not fenced and we have pedestrians using it to limit the risk of walking on the narrow Queen Ave NE road. We have had several residents explain that their use of our property is mandated because a walkway does not exist on NE 6 h or Queen Ave NE. The current traffic is a concern for my family because we have unknown individuals on our property at any given time. We have restrained from placing a fence because of the kids who will be affected by this action. We have inquired with the City regarding any plans to eliminate this safety hazard and we were notified that there currently are no plans in the works due to lack of funding. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the proposed changes. We would welcome any City official to our site to visually explain our proposal and demonstrate the public safety hazard identified. We would like to work with the City to ensure a solution is reached for the best interest of our neighbors, the City and us. Sincerely, Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram ee: ddy %47Yoo? ey f Ne i 1 k/4 Hs Jc n er &wn y, chip Coil cent 1 �SY CITY OF RENTON O City Clerk Division + + 1055 South Grady Way GTo Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6510 Receipt w1272 Date 11Ll T U ❑ Cash Cl Copy Fee ❑ Notary Service Check NoYPAppeal Fee ❑ Description: Funds Received From: NameG k j W vtil1. _ Address 1a0 C� �}�: j(-A City/Zip Div Amount $ 75 City Staff Signature �SY CITY OF RENTON O City Clerk Division + + 1055 South Grady Way GTo Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6510 Receipt w1272 Date 11Ll T U ❑ Cash Cl Copy Fee ❑ Notary Service Check NoYPAppeal Fee ❑ Description: Funds Received From: NameG k j W vtil1. _ Address 1a0 C� �}�: j(-A City/Zip Div Amount $ 75 City Staff Signature REPORT DECISION City of Renton Department of Communky and Economic Development ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE LAND USE ACTION Decision Date: December 9, 2008 Project Name: Ram Short Plat Variances Owner/Applicant: Kursal Varma & Kajal Ram, 2609 NE 5`� Court, Renton, WA 98056 Contact: Tom or Dan Touma, 1'ouma Engineers, 6632 S 19151 Place Ste# E102, Kent, WA 98032 File Number: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A Project Manager: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner Project Summary: The applicant is requesting two administrative variances; one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards of the Residential-S (R-8) du/ac zoning designation. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow an existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed six lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximately 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded. If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 11.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. There would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. Project Location: 3619 Queen Ave NE (Parcel '092305-9036) Exist. Bldg. Area: 2,370 SF Proposed New Bldg Area: NIA Site Area: 44,431 SF (1.02 ac) Total Building Area: NIA Project Location Map Department of Community and Economic Development Administrative Report and Decision Ram Short Plat Variances LUA 08-123, V-A, V-A REPORT OF DECEMBER 9, 2008 Pagc 2 of 6 A. Type of Land Use Action Conditional Use Binding Site Plan Site Plan Review Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Special Permit for Grade & Fill Administrative Code Determination X Administrative Variance B. Exhibits Exhibit 1: Neighborhood/Zoning Map. Exhibit 2: Preliminary Short Plat Plan Exhibit 3: Landscape Plan Exhibit 4: HEX Reconsideration Response C. Project Description /Background: The applicant has requested two Administrative Variances from RMC 4-2-110A in order to allow an existing residence to remain on the site following the recording of a preliminary approved 6-lot short plat (Ram Short Plat LUA07-140). The entire parcel is 44,431 SF (1.01 acres) in area and would be eventually divided into six lots, of which the existing residence would be located on proposed Lot 3. Lot 3 would be approximately 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. As part of the preliminary approval of the Ram Short Plat the applicant was required to dedicate 25 feet in width along NE 6"' Street and 20 feet in width along Queen Ave NE (approximately 9,581 square feet in area) for half - street improvements along the parcel's street frontages. Due to the street dedication the existing single-family residence, located 3.2 feet away from the new property line, would become a non -conforming structure. The applicant originally proposed to remove the residence in order to conform with the development standards of the R-8 zone. As part of that same preliminary approval, staff recommended that the applicant be required to retain 8 specific trees on the site, in order to meet the City's tree retention requirements. The applicant requested a reconsideration (dated August 12, 2008) of the short plat decision and conditions; in which an alternative short plat plan was proposed to meet the tree retention requirements of RMC44-130 without retaining the 8 specific trees. The short plat plan included a 15-foot wide easement along the western border of Lots 4-6; and would allow for the retention of 8 different trees on the site. As part of the alternate short plat design, the applicant also requested modifications to the original short plat plan, which included the retention of the existing single-family residence, to accommodate the proposed tree retention easement. On August 20, 2008 a letter was sent to City's Hearing Examiner in which staff recommended approval of the alternate short plan with respect to the 15-foot tree retention easement. However, it was noted that the existing residence would encroach into the front yard setback and that a variance was unlikely to be supported by the Planning Director; as it would be difficult for the applicant to meet all variance decision criteria. The Hearing Examiner responded to the reconsideration request in a letter (Exhibit 4), dated August 25, 2008, where it was noted that the 6-lot short plat was approved however, it was approved with the removal of the existing residence. The development standards of the R-8 zone require a minimum setback for front yards of 15 feet for the primary structure. The applicant is proposing a reduction of the required setback for the existing house to 3.2 feet, 11.8 feet less than the 15-foot minimum setback. The development standards also require a minimum on -site Department of Community and Economic Development Administrative Report and Decision: Ram Short Plat Variances LUA 08-I23, V-A, V-A REPORT OF DECEMBER 9, 2008 Page 3 of 6 landscape strip along all street frontages of 5 feet in width. The applicant is proposing to not provide any landscaping on Lot 3, 5 feet less than the 5-foot minimum requirement. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. Findings, Conclusion, and Decision Having reviewed the written record in the matter, the City now makes and enters the following: D. Findings 1. Request: The applicant has requested two Administrative Variances from the setback and landscaping standards in Residential— 8 (R-8) zoning designation. The variances are requested from RMC 4-2-110A, which requires a 15-foot setback for front yards and a 5-foot wide on -site landscape strip along the street frontage. The applicant is requesting the variances in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). 2. Administrative Variance: The applicant's Administrative Variance application complies with the requirements for information for a variance. The applicant's plat plan and other project drawings are attached to this report. 3. Existing Land Use: Land uses surrounding the subject site include: North: R-8 zone, developed as single-family residential; South: R-10 zone, developed as single-family residential; East: R-8 zone and R-10 zones, developed as single-family and multi -family residential, and; West: R-8, developed as single- family residential. 4. Consistency with Variance Criteria: Section 4-9-250135 lists four criteria that the Zoning Administrator is asked to consider the following four criteria, along with all other relevant information, in making a decision on an Administrative Variance application. The variance criteria are as follows: a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; Setback Variance: The applicant contends that undue hardship is suffered due to their inability to build a new house on proposed Lot 3 because of difficult financial markets. The applicant contends it is not cost effective to remove a portion of or demolish the existing house in the current economic times. Staff cannot speak to the impact of the financial markets on the applicant; however staff does not concur that the difficult financial markets create an undue hardship for this specific site. The proposed variance is not necessitated because of size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property. Therefore the strict application of the Zoning Code is not found to deprive the subject owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity under identical zone classifications. Alternatively, the applicant could relocate the existing residence without demolishing all or portions of the residence and meet the minimum setback requirements in the R-8 zoning designation. Department of Community and Economic Development Administralive Report and Decision Ram Short Plat Variances LUA 08-123, V-A, VIA REPORT OFDECEMBER 9, 2008 Page 4 of 6 Landscape Variance: The landscape variance is only necessitated if the setback variance is approved. Staff does not support the landscape variance for proposed Lot #3 as the need for the variance is necessitated due to a self imposed hardship. b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated, - Setback Variance: The applicant contends that the granting of the setback variance, for Lot 3, would benefit the public welfare because it would ensure the rights of the property owner. Staff concurs that the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property or improvements. The granting of the variance would allow for the retention of an existing residence. Landscape Variance: The applicant contends that the granting of the landscape variance, for Lot 3, would benefit the public welfare because it would ensure the rights of the property owner. Staff concurs that the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property or improvements. The granting of the variance would allow for the retention of an existing residence. c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated, and; Setback Variance: The approval of the setback variance request, for Lot 3, would be a grant of special privilege, as other property owners in the vicinity and within other R-8 zoned areas would not be permitted to reduce the front yard setback, when the hardship is not created due to specific site constraints. Landscape Width Variance: The landscape variance is only necessitated if the setback variance is approved. The setback variance, if approved, would be a grant of special privilege (see discussion above). Therefore the landscaping variance would not be supported. d. That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. Setback Variance: The applicant states that the requested setback variance, for Lot 3, is the minimum variance necessary to allow the existing residence to remain on the site. Staff does not concur; the applicant could relocate the existing residence without demolishing all or portions of the structure and come into conformance with the setback requirements of the R-8 zoning designation. Therefore the requested variance is not the minimum variance that would accomplish the desire to retain the existing residence. Department of Community and Economic Development Administrative Report and Decision Ram Short PIat Variances LUA 08-I23, V-A, V-A REPORT OF DECEMBER 9, 2008 Page 6 of 6 Land Use Action Appeals The administrative land use decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within 14 days of the date of approval. An appeal of the decision must be filed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). RMC Title N, Section 4-8-11,B, governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and requires that such appeals be filed directly with the Office of the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be made in writing on or before 5:00 PM on December 24`h, 2008, and must be accompanied by a $75.00 fee and other specific requirements. THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning the land use decision. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial decision, but to Appeals to the Hearing Examiner as well. All communications after the decision/approval date must be made in writing through the Hearing Examiner. All communications are public record and this permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence in writing. Any violation of this doctrine could result in the invalidation of the appeal by the Court. Department of Community and Economic Development Administrative Report and Decision Ram Short Plat Variances LUA 08-123, V-A, VIA REPORT OF DECEMBER 9, 2008 Page 5 of 6 Landscape Variance: The landscape variance is only necessitated if the setback variance is approved. The setback variance is not the minimum variance that would accomplish the desire to retain the existing residence (see discussion above). Therefore the landscaping variance would not be supported. E. Conclusions 1. The subject site is located at 3619 Queen Ave NE in the R-8 single-family residential zone. The City of Renton Development Standards, RMC 4-2-110A, requires a 15-foot minimum front yard setback for primary structures and a 5-foot wide on -site landscape strip along the street frontage. The recommendation of staff is to deny the two variance requests because they do not meet three of the four criteria found in RMC 4-9-250135. Specifically, the applicant has not demonstrated that they suffer undue hardship and the request would constitute granting a special privilege. It is feasible for the subject parcel to be developed and meet the setback and lanscaping requirements of RMC 4-2- 110A. F. Decision The Administrative Variances for the Ram Short Plat File No. LUA 08-123, V-A, V-A are denied. SIGNATURE: C.E. Vincent, Planning Director TRANSMITTED this le day of December, 2008 to the applicant, cowact and owner: Kursal Varma & Kajal Ram Tom or Dan Touma 2609 NE 5`h Court Touma Engineers Renton, WA 98056 6632 S 1915L Place Ste# E102 Kent, WA 98032 TRANSMITTED this 101h day of December, 2008 to the parties of record: No parties of record. TRANSMITTED this 100 day of December, 2008 to the following. Neil Watts, Development Services Director Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Larry Meckling, Building Official Fire Marshal - t'Z_1 10 /0 Date D5 - 04 T23N R5E E 1/2 CA I I CA I R-8 +'flyN'`` CA F5 - 16 T: EXHIBIT 1 _ E5 +i'&'} + ZONING r 0 200 400 .� 09 T23N R5E E 1/2 — T i'"VL�TECHTICAI,Si:RVi('E5 _ �R�L.,. Feet L' �r ; Q 07715lOS �J 14.800 53419 CITY OF RENTON SHORT PLAT RENTON, WASHINGTON NEW PRIVATE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS & UTILITIES MAINTLNANGL AGRLEMEN 1 NOT£: NEW PRIVATE EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES IS TO BE CREATED UPON THE SALE OF LOTS SHOWN ON THIS SHORT PLAT. THE OWNERS OF LOTS 3, 4. 5 AND 6 SHALL HAVE AN EQUAL AND UNDIVIDED INTEREST n THE OWNERSHIP AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT APPURTENANCES. THESE APPURTENANCES AND MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBWTIES INCLUDE THE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD, DRAINAGE PIPES, AND STORM WATER QUALITY WITHIN THIS EASEMENT, PRIVATE SIGNAGE, AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE NOT OWNED BY THE CITY OF RENTON OR OTHER UI,LJTY PROVIDERS. MAINTENANCE COSTS SHALL BE SHARED EQUALLY, PARKING ON THE PAVING IN THE ACCESS EASEMENT IS PROHIBITED, UNLESS PAVEMENT WIDTH IS GREATER THAN 2C FEET_ DECLARATION OF COVENANT THE OWNERS DF LAND EMFRACFC WITHIN THIS SNORT PLAT. IN RETURN FOR THE BENEFITS TO ACCRUE FROM THIS SUBDIVISION, BY SIGNING HEREON COVENANT AND AGREE "O CONVEY THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST IN THE NEW EASEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS SHURT OLA'" TO ANY AND ALL FUTURE PURCHASERS Of' THE L07S, OR OF ANY SUBDIVISIONS THEREOF. THIS COVENANT SHALL RUN WITH THE LAND AS SHOI&N ON THIS SHORT PLAY. CFRTIFI%ATIi1N KNOW A.: PECVL[ BY T,IESF PRESENTS that we, the -1 er,iI owne•e of enter eat In the land herby ah,,t eubdlNd,d, do hereby meke a Mort avbdiAelpn tnm Harry dKI0re tnle m p to be the Grop,i lc repre6wrtct:pn of the e- cna that short subdrvie'e iary mede with th.e free Decent a^d nac oerdcnco wl:h the daaire o! lneowners IN M7 E79 w EPE.nc we set a.r nine] and sea a. KUSiAL S. vARMA KAJAL A. RAM ACKNOWLEDOVENIS State of Waehington County at I cenlly that 14nae or hn,e •allefaclary evldmce Thal •Igned thl. InIn—ent mtl aaluwweagtd it Yo be (hfe/her) W end voluntmy act fa Inv uaee and purpmas mentl-ed In the in•INT-L Signature of Nofary Public Dated My appalntment exp Use State of Washington County cr 0. this _ day of 20_ personally appeared to me known to he the of the corporation that executed foregoing instrument, Intl ocknowledged the said Instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mention, and on oath stated that he/she was duly authorized to execute the sold instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate sed of acid corporation. Wltnes9 my hand end official seal hereto of5xed the day and year first above written Notary Public in and for the State of Wcahingtan Notary (Print) My Appointment Expires Dote APPPOVALS: 'ITV OF RE, Atlmtnstratar of Plcnning/Bullding/Pu6tic Work, Cxominetl one apprawad thic _ day of Adminl•trotcr LEGEND DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS Eramined and approved thh - day of 20_ Asai... Deputy Aa••aear Account Number 062305-9036 0 AY ma $ EX WI W CASE p Ell REaO / Pbet AS NOTED M-7 R R & CAP r--O=-QUARTER COPAIER XCRPN CORNER NE 6tt, STREET ! o AREA TO Of DEDICATED 111 " 588'57'07"E I T I 1 F------I r-T.Y.an. I d fto-Be .56. 20.00' 1 26.Ca Re25,00 ! LOT 2 � L07 1 rp 1 LOT LOT 1 Sa,3 5F O� LOT 2 46ee 5F L7- 3 5.f3 S,. LO- a 5770 SP. A64E SF S79'S"3Ti- 5 5774 Sr 6649 it LCY G 64?7 SF 1652 SF ct ' 6'7 lA ___ S; S:•�SEM j I Ex Nou�E I ..•_ 9 - m _ I - m n 2 I TSBB'Sg'19'E_11533' - � N 1 1 LpJ 1 >ar o LOT # S HT S _ ELI -Sise'5g'WE_, SAS' - � vp�i d IG' TRCE PESERIATIa — EASEMLHr b LOT 5 5, 114_ ,.1 � U ', 5' PSTORM' LAN ENT ANC STORM EASEMENT I I� I S. [� I 51t259'19"�ILi52' - �UI I Iv 0 1 I LOT B I I I _ _ ` } I �D.00l1 26.00' EXHIBIT 2 RECORDING NO. VOL,/PAGE DORTiOd OF SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SEC 9, TWIN 23 N, RG 5 E, WI SURVEY NOTES: BIXMpARY ANp TrIPDriR4PMC ,QIRLEY PERFOI BY CRY L VAN NESS 71625 SE 4977I Sr HLILEV7E, JVA AM PH. 425 747-0775 PLS. 21354 SURVEY ACCURACY MEETS OR LXCEEDS gi WAr: 332-130-090 rr FIELD E(WIPMENT 50KKIA SET3BII SURVEYED BY FIELD TRAVERSE WONITY MAP BASIS OF REARING: SOO TN LINE OF THE SE f% 5Ec 4-23-5 fN e5v8'47" WJ BENCHMARK: C17Y OF RENTDN MON O)scj TOP OF CONc wov AT THE 5011, 71YEA57 CORNER OF =710Y 9, TDN I741F 23 NO 77i, RANGE 5 EAST. W.M. ELEVATION - 407.02 z' �i O z wL LUA—XX—XXX—SHPL NE am sT i AJ& Y S t5 ; ty C$1 AL 4 R ST GRm *UC0 CIEMETARY SITE DATA reTAL AREA - 44,503 SQUARE FEET's,02 AC) STREET R/W AREA - 9585 SaUAR� FFF7 0.7Z AC) 20NE - PS PRFOSED NUMBER OF LOTS - 6 CEn>ITY - 7,5 DJ/ACRE LEGAL ]DESCRIPTION: HE NORTH HALF OF T`tE NORTHEAST QUART-cR .O7 `fJE SOUTHWEST GUARTER OF THE 'KOU7HEAST QUAR7ER GF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON. EXCEPT THE WEST 525 FEET THEREOF owm/mVEMPER KUSHAL S. VARMA AND KAJAL A. RAM 2007 ABEROEEN PLACE NE RRENTON, WAS 91 AQUIFER PROTECTION NOTICE THE LOTS 0?EATED HEREIN FALL WTHIN ZONE 2 OF RENTON'S AQUIFER PROTEC770N AREA AND ARE SUBJECT TO 7HE REQUIREMENTS CF THE CITY OF RQYTON ORDWANCE 14M7 AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO 4740. 7MS C17YS SOLE' SOURCE OF DI WATER IS SUPPLIED FROM A SHALLOW AOWFER UNDER THE fJTYS SURFACE. THERE IS NO NATURAL BARRIER BETREEN THE WATER TABLE AND GROUND STIRFACE EX7RFME CARE SEWED BE EXERCISED W IEN HANDLING ANY DOWD SUBSTANCE OTHER THAN WATER TO PR07ECT FROM CONTACT WTH THE GROUND SURFACE IT 7S TH£ hOYEOIWERS RESPQNS18JL1TY TO PROTECT THE C(TYS DRYNKING WATER. :•. t CLOP JI 4-r iP CITY Ofi r 1EN7'p t,INjNG OCT 2 0 2008 w CD C 0 R MON 41503 � MON. DOWN RR0,7fNfNNCASECRETE RECEIVE,) ,) Q V t � RECORDER'S CERTIFICATENo, — Filec for record .hls_day of __,20A at d in Lookof et page of the request Of Mauna H. TDmo LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE This map ComeCtly represents c sup ,ev mode by me or ;Under my directicn in cnr=nrmnnce with th.e requirernenis Of theRENTON, St:rvey Recording Act of the request of KUSHF.._ V4131,,1A In June 2.20 % Certiricate No. 94'0 as r. � of *' �G 7 w,� % l , 70 / / I. 9 , TiJii E WA ENGINEERS WEST VALLEY EXECUTIVE PARK 6632 90107H 191ST PLACE, SUITE E-102 • KENT, WA RM32 PHONE (425) 25,-06e5 FA% (425) 251-0825 QUEEN SHORT PLAT 3629 NE 6TH STREET WASHINGTON OWN aY DAN '' nATE d'JNE. 2007 .Jag NO. 977-00,-067 CHKD. B" MHT SCALE NOTED SHEET i i OF 2 Mgr 5� T of Records 9 ' pt LEGEND PY 10AJL Ex .Uaw rrd B�sE O cX ftFBAR J PiPE AS N'05 40 6F' RFBAP & CAP =V OL`A-T7EA COPN,P. ��� sr� nuN caaN�P i re, o ARE '70 HE fp )0 F:: rrw nu p�asA.4r nc vas � Qaita =.88 3� 55' •. S1JN 'tl% V—"L �� 4r7 AS SrrC"NY LOT, nor 7 c H } W aW�WN v f S -.. - 1 I • il'f f' j� � 1 sL c�, r7a � 35T xq it r •La r a�Fr ,oyr, Q � • L ccyy � y ` I � E4 t A£U' 3 a I oT, J r0 no rA 1`, �VR'Jr,'r SAFaf T;,fit tecr M. ;• -�' I I V - ..�rkF.nwrt.D �S7hK1Nt; 1PiEt �E FAIL ii � .�r JAB N.FS I r' I i. y P �n STILNi !,ANY PL4T 10 PRi`iAT1= ��ORis i d E nsFmEr� EXHIBIT 3 QUEEN SHORT PLAT 3E29 NE 6TH STRYF7 RENZON, 'VJA5HIh'GTON 1 i WH 3 P,0-s � 5`.:..fvs ft eS e '. crA • �-v1i5L r]yq A. SHRUP FLAWING DUAIL Dkxe CWME oryQFy N OCT 2 0 RECEIV,CD P d- W W:lw,�vl`'41 Y J ftga NRW{���ry�'pN�ldp�a'y rw r[svJS At[E z a "I W 171ac gN np Nh"N aryl' lil f 'xJrrw,e fi 57 dF2F ;lltiw Y -! ear ILI U� t- ovr Eu:a ao mrxn ALB 1F k AGt]K n1; FLY Ted „1ftGrYANCC Ar 1 UC is el AIL aELltl!,En FECo T'j HMn IFISFE 2l ��YS 5' A I. WFV [ TORrL_ JILL FL rsTrl,G ARIAS V� nL 31". i t 1. V- - a WDS N 110 (SN :,R MA T7- RCAN71 F111P rlL Mr'r_n!I, S kNP 'AECR [ a' lAT2 iPI XA QN A. R PLA- hJ SJ9STt1 i `CND 4A1N J util E7 ihS.h` OF L.ANr IPe R�CN1Tt"_7 ANG "'Y RF 4Va Oi{ P4 AC ANY -0 CINIRj SAT15;-Acj `I L "�TF khC PR,7M ALL Lpir,690 0 UPI TII TI � 5'SRVIh^� LT .L4 t� '4l C' e. trP, �ECXUL'1)5 T` U hIPER , F4S PEC 5M N \ V4 <qC.E R04T POLL 4�h'IrLGCrC' TREE- n M. 4..L +.�L roA TCF, d1 ., .V: NV Ai -AM_ 6}_ rIL1 T,AC. 1Y_Ic_6� emu.. - __ IY EAGLE DESIGN 7SD ?E loth TREE•F 14MV bF!:fl. WA. ""I TEL 14251 326-a59F] Fty (4251 39C-04v J C 1 r __ T � + ` :-1 + Hearing Examiner �? �`\�i1 4 Denis Law, Mayor Fred J. Kaufman ust 25, 2008 Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram 2609 NE 5th Court Renton, Wa 98056 Re: Ram Short Plat, LUA-07-140, SHPL-H, ECF, Request for Reconsideration Dear Applicants: The applicant has asked for a reconsideration of the decision that required the retention of eight (8) specific trees suggesting an alternative plan. That plan was submitted to staff for analysis. The plan would create a 15-foot wide easement along the western border of Proposed Lots 4 to 6. That easement would protect eight trees as required by staff. The new plan would also relocate a drainage easement 15 feet to the east and that, too, was supported by staff. The plan would alter the shape of Proposed tots 1 and 2. Staff found that Proposed tots 1 and 2 would be somewhat irregular in shape. Finally, the applicant sought to retain an existing home rather than remove it, The existing home would intrude into the required 20-foot front yard setback and would require a variance. Staff indicated that while a variance request has not been submitted, it would be unlikely that they could support such a request. It appears that the redesigned six -lot plat would still serve the public use and interest. It provides reasonably rectangular lots and retains the appropriate number of trees. This office cannot comment on the proposal to retain the existing home since that requires a separate review of a variance. This office will only approve the proposed lot lines but the original submitted plat application called for the removal of the existing home and that.is what has been reviewed and that is solely what is being approved at this time. The proposed plat with the removal of the existing home is approved. In conclusion, a six -lot plat is approved but at this time the existing home shall be removed or the applicant shall seek a variance to allow a front yard setback of less than the required depth. The following conditions shall apply 1. The applicant shall comply with the ERC conditions. 2. The applicant shall dedicate 25 feet along NE 6th Street and 20 feet along Queen Avenue NE. 3. The existing home shall be removed or the applicant shall seek and be granted a variance to allow a front yard setback of less than the required depth. If this office can provide any further assistance please feel free to write. There shall be a new 14-day appeal period, which shall expire no later than 5:00pm, September 8, 2008. Sincerely, Fred Kaufmani t Hearing Examiner City of Renton cc: Chip Vincent, Planning Director EXHIBIT 4 Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner Tom Touma — —� Parties of Record 1055 South Grad Way - Renton Washington 98057 - 425 430-6515 RIN Y Y b ( ) �ktt;t At) OF THE [;U'RG This Pape" ro�•ta.�n< 5:F>-. n_�:�;�r,led material. 304v Fast consumes r City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 26, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 APPLICANT: Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram PLANNER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: Ram Short Plat Variance PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 44,503 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,370 square feet LOCATION: 3629 NE 6`r' Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA(gross) NIA WORK ORDER NO: 77979 1t)'c PLEASE RETURN TO R4CALE TIMMONS)N CURRENT PLANNING 6TH FLOOR SUMMARY O( PROPOSAL: The applicant is quesking two admintrative variances; one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards. The admiftkitrative variances: re needed in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed 6-lot Ram Short t (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximatly 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 12.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. There would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Envrronmewal Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housin Aesthelics Li htlGlare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additionaWormation is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authotized Representative . Z 1-o� Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: A� COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 26, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 APPLICANT: Kushal Varma & Ka'al Ram PLANNER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: Ram Short Plat Variance PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson R E- G E' SITE AREA: 44,503 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,370 s u ;t 0. " LOCATION: 3629 NE 61h Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA(gross) N/A WORK ORDER NO: 77979 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting two administrative variances; one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed 6-lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximatly 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 12.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. Thcre would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additioral landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e_y. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Fnergy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS •f r/'7/l � � � Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services HiStpriC/GilitUral Preservaliorr Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas m which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where addition�rmation is needed to properly assess this proposal, Signature of Dire r Authorized Representative Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 26, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 APPLICANT: Kushal Varma & Ka'al Ram PLANNER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: Ram Short Plat Variance .. PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 44,503 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,370 s uare feet LOCATION: 3629 NE 6"' Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA(gross) N/A WORK ORDER NO: 77979 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting two administrative variances; one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed 6-lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximatly 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. If the variances arc approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 12.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. There would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land'Shureiiav Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilith"s Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural PresPrvatlon Airport Environment 10.000 Feel 14.000 Foal We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where addition or anon is needed to properly assess this proposal. &gnatur of Director or Authorized Representative Date y a FIRE and EMERGENCY SERVICES �. ,- DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: 11 / 18/08 TO: Mike Dotson, Plan Reviewer CC: Rocale Timmons, Planner FROM: Bill Flora, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal SUBJECT: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A Ram Short Plat Variance Renton Fire & Emergency Services Comments: There are no code related comments at this time. i:lerc`,ram short plat variance erc comments.doc City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 26, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 APPLICANT: Kushal Varma & Ka'al Ram PLANNER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: Ram Short Plat Variance PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 44,503 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,370 square feet LOCATION: 3629 NE 6"' Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA(gross) NIA WORK ORDER NO: 77979 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting two administrative variances; one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed 6-fat Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximatly 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 12.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. There would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth, Air Water Plants Lund/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Erwryy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS 5"4 Z / 0V C/71.�� Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Nousrn Aesthetics Li ht/Glare Recreation Uliiilies Transportation Public Services HistoriclGulturW Preservation Airport Env;rnnmenl 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to (hose areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal /l R � 1 off/ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative /I Z1 g/a Date City of Renton Departmerll of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIFWING DEPARTMENT: �- 62ZM.&__ COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 26, 2008 .. APPLICATION NO: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 _ r_ APPLICANT: Kushal Varma & Ka'al Ram PLANNER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: Ram Short Plat Variance PLAN REVIEWER: Mike DotsonU' SITE AREA: 44,503 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,370 sgVf LOCATION: 3629 NE 6'h Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA(gross) NIA WORK ORDER NO: 77979 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting two administrative variances; one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed 6-lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximatly 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 12.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. There would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g- Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants LandlShor0me Use Animals _ Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS Ali' C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS A L' N'. Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housin Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation t/tilities Transportation Public Services HisluaclCultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Few 14, 000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas whey ?dditional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. re oTDirectortj-Authorized iRepre"sentative /rZ-167 Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: P_f COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 26, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 0- APPLICANT: Kushal Varma & i Ram PLANNER: Rocale Timmons �- y PROJECT TITLE: Ram Short Plat Variance PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson O SITE AREA: 44,503 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,370 square feet-<X LOCATION: 3629 NE 6`' Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross)NIA rrlZ N WORK ORDER NO: 77979 )Z M SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting two administrative variances; one from the landscaping recwements and the other from the setback standards. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed 6-lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximatly 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 12.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. There would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Faith Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Heaith Energy/ Naturai Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS I %% C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major impacts More information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li htlGlare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services NistorWCult Ural Preservation Airport Environment i0, 000 Feet i4,000 Feet awe 7: aO We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where ad4tional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. ZZ- .. _a. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: i i COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 26, 2008 APPLICATION NO: LUA08-123, V-A, V-A DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 APPLICANT: Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram PLANNER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: Ram Short Plat Variance PLAN REVIEWER: Mike Dotson EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,370 square feet SITE AREA: 44,503 square feet LOCATION: 3629 NE 61" Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) NIA WORK ORDER NO: 77979 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting two administrative variances; one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain on Lot 3 of the proposed 6-lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximatly 5,763 in area, after the proposed short plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8. If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 12.8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. Therc would also be no front yard landscaping; a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Piants LandlShoreiine use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B_ POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation uNities Transportation Public Services Historic/cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10.000 Feet 14.000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas m which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. or Authorized Representative uzo/ _ Datts s: + + .,u NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals, PROJECT NAMEINUMBER: Ram Short Plat Variance I LUA08-123, V-A. V-A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting two administrative variances: one from the landscaping requirements and the other from the setback standards. The administrative variances are needed in order to allow and existing single-family residence to remain or Lot 3 c)f the proposed 6-lot Ram Short Plat (LUA07-140). Lot 3 would be approximatly 5,763 in area, after the proposed shori plat is recorded, and is zoned R-8, If the variances are approved; Lot 3 would have a front -yard setback of 3.2 feet at its closest point, 12 8 feet less than the 15-foot required setback. There would also be no front yard landscaping a 5-foot landscape strip is required by code. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaping on Lots 1 and 2 to mitigate for the absence of landscaping on Lot 3. PROJECT LOCATION; 3629 NE 51' Street PUBLIC APPROVALS: Adminislra:ive Variance approval APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: I ow Tor:rria iouma Engineers & Land Surveyors; Tel: (425) 251-0665 Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on November 26, 2008. If you have questions about this croposal. or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project P:danayer at (425) 430-7219 Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: October 20, 2008 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: November 12, 2008 DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: November 12, 2008 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Divisio-r. 10b5 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, File Name 1 No.: Ram Short Plat Variance / LUA08-123. V-A V-A NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 12th day of November, 2008, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Accptance Letter and NOA documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Tom Touma, Touma Engineers Contact Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram Owners/Applicant Surrounding Property Owners See Attached (Signature of Sender STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. YNN Dated: t•. =�� ` ..,.�,, . , t Notary Public in anPor the State of 1& °hjgi0i' 'a1, Notary (Print): My appointment expires: _ r�' `If/riAl�?�g L`M1 -6 Ram Short Plat Variance Prq LUA08-123, V-A, V-A 14-123 894475032005 ADAMS JEFFREY A+LESLIE B 19413 SE MAY VALLEY RD ISSAQUAH WA 98027 894475019002 ALLERT DANIELLE R 533 QUEEN PL NE RENTON WA 98056 041800037008 BEAN TREVOR 3619 NE 6TH PL RENTON WA 98056 337770020002 BUI PHUONG THI B 451 BRONSON WAY NE RENTON WA 98056 041800039509 CALDERON-FRUCTUOSO DAVID+VA 3525 NE 6TH PL RENTON WA 98056 041800053500 CATUZO TAMERA 3606 NE 6TH PL RENTON WA 98056 894475039000 COAN JAMES A SR+RONDA J 529 REDMOND PL RENTON WA 98056 894475035008 AGUILLON CARLOS U+CECILIA G 505 REDMOND PL NE RENTON WA 98056 802974011008 BATISTA LINDOLFO 519 QUEEN AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 894475024002 BLANKENSHIP LISA L 511 QUEEN PL NE RENTON WA 98056 041800046009 BYRON MICHAEL W+STACEY E 13434 178TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98059 042000010506 CARPITA TIMOTHY 3 3710 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 894475004004 CHENEY LAWRENCE+SARAH AP 3711 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 894475034001 COLELLA WILLIAM L 3730 NE 5TH ST RENTON WA 98056 041800044509 041800039004 DAILEY LORRI A DANG THIET 3534 NE 6TH ST 7683 SE 27TH ST #198 RENTON WA 98056 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 802974009002 337770019004 DEWOLF CHAD D+ROGERS KIMBERLY FARMER DAN A 554 OLYMPIA AVE NE 527 QUEEN AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98057 041800038006 894475011009 HACKENBERGER CLAUS HARRIS HELEN PO BOX 2254 3735 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 041800044004 AKONGO ANNUCIATA 3528 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 894475002008 BAYSA MARISA N & CHALISE BELTRAN COSME 3703 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 894475008005 BORIMSKY EUGENE R+NESTEROVA 3723 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 894475018004 CADWELL HYUN SOOK 539 QUEEN PL NE RENTON WA 98056 041800045506 CASEM LEANDRO+CHARLENE 3610 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 802974002007 CLAYTON JUSTIN M 509 QUEEN AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 041800045001 CRUZ GERMAN PENA+MARIA M SO 3604 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 894475016008 DEL FIERRO DEBORAH 3 3716 NE 5TH PL RENTON WA 98056 041800047007 FREDERICKS MARK L+KIMBERLY 3628 NE 6TH ST RENTON, WA 98056 894475020000 HAUGEN HARRY AUSTIN HAUGEN CAROL B 527 QUEEN PL NE RENTON WA 98056 041900002001 802974010000 894475012007 HERCHELRODE STEVEN HSIEH JERRY+JEN CHEN HUANG WEN FANG+FENG ZHU LI+RI 3523 NE 6TH ST 521 QUEEN AVE NE YANG RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 3740 NE 5TH PL RENTON WA 98056 802974004003 042000007007 041900004502 HUYNH CUONG+TU UYEN T JOHNSON MICHAEL D KAIMAKIS PAUL & SANDRA 517 QUEEN AVE NE 17225 NE 15TH PL 2033 144TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98056 BELLEVUE WA 98008 BELLEVUE WA 98007 894475021008 894475022006 337770018006 KANG DAVID+MARNET HONG KANG KI SUNG+SEON P KHUU NGHIA+DANG HA 521 QUEEN PL NE 519 QUEEN PL NE 558 OLYMPIA AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 894475013005 041800047502 337770017008 KOEHLER YVONNE L KRASS KENNETH J KUNDROTAS KAZIMIERAS A 3734 NE 5TH PL 24 ROY ST #311 562 OLYMPIA AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 SEATTLE WA 98109 RENTON WA 98056 802974006008 042000007502 041800054508 LE NGOCNGA THI LEWANDOWSKI JOZEF LOCKLEER RUBY PO BOX 3022 3719 NE 6TH PL 3618 NE 6TH PL BELLEVUE WA 98009 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 042000011009 041800046504 041900004007 LOPEZ JOSE LUIS SEGUNDO MABLE GEORGE C MADDEN GREGG A 3716 NE 6TH ST 3622 NE 6TH ST 3617 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 894475026007 042000009508 894475007007 MAZHUKHIN MIKHAIL+LARISSA MCKENZIE MICHELLE L MELLOR JONATHAN W+STACEY L 11635 1ST AVE S #309 614 QUEEN AVE NE 3721 NE 6TH ST SEATTLE WA 98168 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 041800036000 802974012006 337770016000 MORIN VICTORIA J NGO DUC T+LIEN TRAN NGUYEN MAI HOA THI 3631 NE 6TH PL 513 QUEEN AVE NE 566 OLYMPIA AVE NE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 042000008500 041900002506 894475023004 NGUYEN PHUONG UYEN THI ONEIL DOLORES L ONG DUSTIN C 2205 NE 6TH CT 3529 NE SIXTH ST 515 QUENN PL NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 041800036505 894475029001 042000002008 05HEROFF SAMUEL A PAMBOUKAS NIKO PEREYDA MIGUEL A+MAIA M 3625 NE 6TH PL 3713 NE 5TH ST 3700 NE 6TH PL RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 M 802974013004 802974007006 894475028003 PERLEBERG JESSE E+KIMBERLY PHAM CHUNG PHUOC PHAM HUNG+HA PHUONG 511 QUEEN AVE NE 531 QUEEN AVE NE 3709 NE 5TH ST RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 041800037503 041800038501 894475010001 RABLE TAMI M REICHOW FAMILY LLC REYNAGA ARMANDO+NOEMI GARIC CARPENTER GAIL M 26409 148TH AVE SE 3731 NE 6TH ST 12648 SE 161ST ST KENT WA 98042 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98058 894475042004 042000009003 041900003009 RIENTI DEBORAH J RISINGER ROBERT R ROBINSON DARRELL C 522 QUEEN PL NE 618 QUEEN AVE NE 3605 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 894475009003 802974001009 894475043002 SALONGA LERRICK S+ROEL S SANCHEZ FIDENCIO A+ARVIZU HILDA SANKAR MOHAN KUMAR GOWRI+LA 3725 NE 6TH ST 518 QUEEN PL NE RENTON WA 98056 507 QUEEN AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 894475025009 894475036006 042000011504 SANTOS RANDY SCHAFER LANE A SEATTLE REDEVELOPMENT 509 QUEEN PL NE 511 REDMOND PL NE PO BOX 2566 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 802974008004 894475041006 041800054003 SINGH SARAH A SMITH CARMENCITA A SODEN COLLEEN PO BOX 18825 528 QUEEN PL NE 1819 232ND SEATTLE WA 98118 RENTON WA 98056 DES MOINES WA 98198 041900003504 042000008005 894475006009 STA MARIA PAMFILO SUNG WILLIAM+IN OK THOMAS STEVEN J+GINA Y STA MARIA ANGELITA D 3713 NE 6TH PL 3715 NE 6TH ST 814 S 28TH CT RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 894475037004 802974014002 894475044000 TORGERSON JOLENE M TOSTENRUDE JOSEPH M+JANELLE TRAN MINH XUAN & NGA H 517 REDMOND PL NE 503 QUEEN AVE NE 512 QUEEN PL NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 802974003005 894475017006 894475001000 TUBERA BENJAMIN M+MARIA UNG WILSON W VAGUE MAUREEN ROSEMARIE 545 QUEEN PL NE 3701 NE 6TH ST 515 QUEEN AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056-7405 802974005000 092305903608 894475027005 VALDRIGHI MARIE J VARMA KUSHAL S+KAJAL A RAM VASQUEZ STEVE 523 QUEEN AVE NE 3629 NE 6TH ST 501 QUEEN PL NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 894475094005 694475003006 VILLAGE ON UNION HOMEOWNERS VO TRINH THI PO BOX 2288 3705 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 894475038002 042000010001 WILKS GERALDINE E WIRTH ROBERT L 523 REDMOND PL NE 3704 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 894475045007 894475005001 WONG MAN TAT+NICOLE U YAN HON NGAN 508 QUEEN PL NE 3713 NE 6TH ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 894475015000 YIU YEUNG FU MEI LING YEUNG 3722 NE 5TH PL RENTON WA 98056 894475040008 WHITMIRE DONNA V 533 REDMOND PL NE RENTON WA 98056 894475033003 WOLF CYNTHIA A 3724 NE 5TH ST RENTON WA 98056 894475014003 YIM LEND 3728 NE 5TH PL RENTON WA 98056 Y `T� Denis Law, Mayor November 12, 2008 Tom Touma Touma Engineers & Land Surveyors 6632 S 191" Place #E-102 Kent, WA 98032 Subject: Ram Short Plat Variance LUA08-123, V-A, V-A Dear Mr. Touma: CITI �3F RENTON Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. You will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. Sincerely, R ale Timmons Associate Planner cc: Kushal Varma & Kajal Ram / Owner(s) 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 This paper cc r itau is K'ic recycled material 30 % post consumer RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE City of Renton Q0tUn°F"`, LAND USE PERMIT ac" ot°a vSn MASTER APPLICATION aEc�' PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: ADDRESS: 2 C) CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: _ COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER CONTACT PERSON NAME: _ COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: (a �*� +?- � •t�� \S ` fit_— ��k r �''�_ CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: Q ;web/p w/d a vserv/form s/p l an n i ngJm ante ra pp. do c PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: PROJECTIADDRESS(SYLOCATION AND ZIP CODE: iota �r.1 s(t, KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): EXISTING LAND USE(S): - �-\ D C--Ij 'T i PROPOSED LAND USE(S): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: S � ►; - t r � .�a < PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): EXISTING ZONING: - PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): SITE AREA (in square feet): 4A�- L SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: N•A, PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): -1 •/- -g NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 09/19/O5 1= PROJECT INFORMAT NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): I SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): lIJ A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 0 '0'. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): )j it', SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): V) ' A NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): u \ t NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): ION continued PROJECT VALUE: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE ❑ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. ❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft_ ❑ SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES sq. ft. ❑ WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included SITUATE IN THE Sf- QUARTER OF SECTION , TOWNSHIP 23, RANGE b , IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/A' � hl�+-����•- �, , declare that I am (please check one) '± the current owner of the property involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and ans�re�s herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that r? ~ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be Wxilqattheir free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. (Signature of OwnerlRepresentative) (Signature of OwnerlRepresentative) w,���•' •tea*aa,a• a Nota' ublic i nd f !h State of Washington Notary (Print) su ki21 t� -5l /1/G Sf? L Erra11► My appointment expires: Att 6 20 A I Q:weblpw/devserv!forms/planninglmasterapp.doc 2 091 t 9/G5 09/1012008 NED 15!40 FAX 4254307300 City Of Renton D5/1E10N6F PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMfTTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Calculations 1 Construction Mitigation Description 2 AND d ................ t Density Worksheet 4 Z001/002 Post-[t* Fax Note 7671 Date �ql 0 1 '0 'P' A +A j Phhon�e4 Flhgne lax 15' Z -2- Faulf 141,51 .. . . . . . . . . . This requirement may be waived bf- 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: 2- Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section DATE: KD 4. Planning Section OEYELoph#e, P,, CITY Op;�Ltz _ I wol�pft OCT 2 n o.NvvEB\FWMDEVSERVIFormsT]anriing\wafvarofsubmitmlreQs.)ds IC U(JO 02108 09/10/2008 wEn 15.40 FAX "'54307300 City of Renton oS/SDNSF PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: R i, � 2, Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section DATE: i 4. Planning Section U 002/002 a:1WFMPMDEV$ERWofms%Pl3nninglwaiverufsubmiftalregs.xls 02108 . 7 PROJECT NARRATIVE FOR RAM SHORT PLAT VARIANCE cr ay MF�17 OCT 2 0U r The subject property covers an area of approximately 1.02 acres with 0.22 acres to be dedicated for right of way. The property is situated in the northeast portion of the city. The site is bounded on the south by the Stone Lane Plat, bounded on the east by Queen Ave. NE and on the north by NE 6`h Street, and on the west by Hilltop apartments and Albert Balchs President Park 2 plat. Access to the property will be from Queen Ave. NE. The existing street improvements on the east side of Queen Ave NE consist of 16 feet of asphalt pavement with curb and gutter. The present zoning is residential — 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8). This zoning designation allows for a minimum lot size of 4500 square feet and a maximum density of ten (8) dwelling units per developed acre_ The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Single -Family Residence, which is consistent with present zoning. The setbacks allowed in the SF zone are as follows: front yard setbacks, 20 feet; rear yard setbacks, 20 feet, and side yards setbacks, 5 feet on all interior lots, and 15 feet on corner lots. The proposed short plat provides five new single family homes. The existing house is planned to remain. The owner is planning on applying for a variance for the front side building setback line. The reason for the variance is because of the 25' dedication of Right of Way on Queen Ave NE. The distance from the NE corner of the existing home is 3.2' feet to the new Westerly margin of Queen Ave NE, The density for the developed portion calculates at 7 .48 dwelling unit per net developed acre. The project area has moderate slopes ranging generally from 5% to 6%. The slopes oriented from east to west to adjacent properties on the west_ The soils are designated as Alderwood (AgC) in the King County Soil Survey. The proposed street dedication of Queen Avenue NE will be 20 feet per City of Renton Public Works Memo. The proposed street dedication of NE 6cn Strect will be 25 feet per agreement with the applicant and City of Renton Public Works. The proposed street section will consist of widening Queen Ave. NE and NE 6"' Street to 32' of paving with curb gutter and sidewalk adjacent to the west side of Queen and south of NE 6' Street. In accordance with Residential Development Standards 4-2-110, a 5-foot strip of landscaping is required along non -arterial public streets. The landscaping strip will be installed along the entire frontage of the short plat, except for an area in front of proposed Lot 3. There exists a house situated within proposed Lot 3 of the short plat which the owner is planning to keep on the property. The dedication of 20 feet for public right of wav, installation of off -site improvements consisting of curbs, gutters and sidewalks have reduced the front yard setback for the proposed Lot 3 to mealy 3.2 feet. The restricted front yard does not provide sufficient area for installation of a five-foot landscaping strip. In the future when the housing market is improved, it is possible to demolish the existing house and replace it with a new house; then the owners will adhere to the City code requirements as it pertains to the installation of a 5-foot landscaping strip. The north portion of the project site is occupied with an existing residence and associated landscaping. The existing single family residence is planned to remain. The rest of the property is covered with native brush and second growth, and several 12" to 24" fir trees. Majority of existing trees on site will be removed because majority of those trees that fall within the proposed right of way dedication and building envelope. Applicant will comply with City of Renton ordnance 45304_ Refer to tree plans to reflect those trees to be removed. 4P� The surface water on the site sheet flows to the west. During a site visit in June 2007 we did not note any concentrated flows on the property. Surface flow will generally drain west and southerly, for most of the site. The flow from the site will be intercepted with underground storm system situated along the westerly boundary of the site and directing the flow east toward Queen Avenue NE. Queen Ave NE has its storm drainage consisting of catch basins and conveyance pipes directing developed runoff south. The flow is then connected to storm system situated on NE 4`k' Street. Sanitary sewer, and water mains exist in the adjacent streets. The estimated construction cost of proposed frontage road improvements is approximately $130,000. The development of this short plat and associated utilities extension do not require great amount of grading_ Estimate quantity of material to be removed and/or replaced is less than 1250 cubic yards. r k Mr. Karen K. Kittrick Development Engineering Supervisor City of Renton 1055 Grady Way South Renton, WA 98055 RE: RAM Short Plat —Lan d sc aping Variance D£YELOPM�NT PLANNINgctober 14, 2008 CITY OF RENTON OCT 2 0 2008 RECEIVED We request a variance from the City Residential Development Standards 4-2-110 to modify proposed landscaping requirements for proposed Lot 3 of the above referenced short plat. The Code requires 5-foot of landscaping strip abutting non -arterial public streets for short plats submitted after November 10, 2004. There exists a house within the proposed Lot 3 which the owner is planning to keep on the property. The front yard for the existing house on Lot 3 measures 3.20 feet from the cast boundary of the property. A previous request for variance was submitted pertaining to the short front yard building setbacks, and currently is being reviewed by the City staff. The lack of sufficient width to comply with the landscaping requirement in front of Lot 3, we proposed to provide equivalent area of landscaping to be placed on Lots I and 2. This landscaping condition will remain as proposed until such time the existing house is removed and a new house is constructed. Upon construction of new house on this Lot 3, the required 5-foot landscaping strip will be installed in accordance with City Codes. The following justification for the above -referenced variance is written in a format acceptable to the Hearing Examiner. a. " That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, and location of surroundings of the .subject property;, and the strict application of the Building & Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property, owners in the vicinity and under identical classifications " Discussion: The variance request is to eliminate landscaping strip along the frontage of proposed Lot 3 of the Ram Short plat adjacent public street There exists a house within the proposed Lot 3 which the owner is planning to keep on the property. The dedication of 20 feet for public right of way, installation of off -site improvements consisting of curbs, gutters and sidewalks and entire half street improvements have reduced the front yard setback for the existing house to merely 3.20 feet. The restricted front yard does not provide sufficient width for installation of landscaping strip. In the future when the housing market is improved, it is possible to remove or demolish the house mid build a new house. Then the applicant will adhere to the code requirements as it relates to installation of landscaping strip.- " That the granting of the variance will not he materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated " The applicant feels the variance is necessary in order to keep the house in this development. The applicant/owner is willing to provide equivalent landscaping area required in front of Lot 3 and place it on Lots 1 and 2 This will ensure the rights of the property owner, which would be enjoyed by other properties in under the similar circumstances. C. "That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone ir7 which the subjectproperty is situated" Discussion -The proposed waiver is not detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property in the vicinity. This variance may be considered as temporary until the housing market is improved and a new house is built in accordance with the City's Code requirements and comply with proper landscaping requirements. d. "What the approval as determined by the City staff is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired Purpose " Discussion: The approval of this variance is minimal, and it would not have an impact upon the desired purpose of installing a landscaping strip in front of Lot 3 of the proposed short plat. This variance may be considered as temporary until existing house is replaced with a new home with proper front yard setback which may allow for installation of the required width of landscaping strip in accordance with City Codes and Regulations. This variance will not have no appreciable impact upon adjacent properties.. Based on the justifications identified above, the applicant requests this variance from the City Code to be approved. TOUMA EirYGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS, PLLC September 30, 200$$ Mr. Karen K. Kittrick D.-YELd'(Pme9T PLANNING C Development Engineering Supervisor TOF Fit+NTiJ City of Renton OCT 2 1055 Grady Way South Renton, WA 98055 IIEGNEI) RE: RAM Short Plat Building Setback Variance We request a variance from the City Improvement Standards, 4-9-250.D to reduce building setback for front yard of proposed Lot 3 within above reference short plats. There exists a house within the proposed Lot 3 which the owner is planning to keep on the property. The front yard for the existing house on Lot 3 measures 3.20 feet from the east boundary of the property. The dedication of twenty feet for public street (Queen Avenue NE) along the east boundary of the entire parcel resulted in non-conformance condition as it relates to the front yard setback of 20.00 feet. The following justification for the abovc-referenced variance is written in a format acceptable to the Hearing Examiner. a. " That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, and location of surroundings of the subject property;, and the strict application of'the Building c& Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical classifications " Discussion: The variance request is to reduce rear yard setback for the existing house on Lot 3 from 20.00 feet to 3.20 feet. This would allow the existing house to remain on the property. The dedication of 20 feet for public right of way, installation of off -site improvements consisting of curbs, gutters and sidewalks, and entire half street improvements have reduced the front yard setback for he existing house to merely 3.20 feet. Today's housing market and difficult financial environment do not provide cost effective alternatives to remove the existing or to demolish the house and build a new house. In the future when the economy and housing market has unproved it is possible to remove or demolish the house and build a new house. In an Improved financial Market the applicant will adhere to the code requirements as it relates to front building setbacks. "That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated, " The applicant feels the variance is necessary in order to keep the house in this development. This will ensure the rights of the property owner, which would be enjoyed by other properties in under the similar circumstances. "That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated " Discussion -The proposed waiver is not detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property in the vicinity. This variance may be considered as temporary until the economy and housing market has improved and a new house is built in accordance with the City's Code requirements and comply with proper front yard setbacks. d. " That the approval as determined by the City stgff is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. " Discussion: The approval of this variance is minimal, and it would not have an impact upon the desired purpose of retaining the two homes, and developing the site into single family lots within the designated SF zone. This variance will not have no appreciable impact upon either the vehicular or pedestrian traffic within and adjacent to the proposed development. Based on the justifications identified above, the applicant requests this variance from the City Code to be approved. 6632 S. 191 st PI., Suite E-102 • Kent, Washington 98032 • Phone: (425) 251-0665 • Fax: (425) 251-0625 e-mail: mhtouma@aol.com LOT 910 LOT 1 5013 SF LOT 2 4666 SF LOT 3 6763 SF. 5427 SF LOT 4 5770 SF, 45M SF LOT 5 5774 SF, 4523 SF LOT 6 6933 SF, 4627 SF —S8B'5707'E ` — K% Cow qF g l 5 AREA TO BE DEDICATED I t o n I N N S88'57'07"E E L�38.69 I Ton=24.42 ' Ddto�88'39'56' 1 =15�d- � I I I 20.00' i 26.00' I LOT 2 I I LCT 1 i I I J• � I � I T. S. W 55.66 57953'37 F 62 79' I I EX15i1NG �' I HOUSE TO I LOT 3 LREMAIN I I I 6,753. s.f. Jo in e I (5,427. &1.) I 6 ro I is c" I 3 o l I LOT 4 c I 5,770. ni. o f I W T I I (4,52D. l a _ I c� L z N l o z 15' TREE RESERVATION L—I I EASEMENT o I LOT 5 I o I o I 5,774. s.f. o I I (4.523. sf.) I n I ci 10' PIRVATE SANITARY AND STORM EASEMENT I I` — J Iv r — — — —— — —- Irn I I r 5 I I LOT 6 o I e I I 6,933. SLA I I (4,527, nf.) I L__ _L I I — — 20.OD� I 26.00' 115.61 w I I 58B591,9"E z 8 Lj w k_JD' SANITARY EASEMENT Q Z 7 I I STONE LANE PLAT v W a S 1 /4 CDR SEC. 9 10' PRIVATE STORM > - C.O.R. MOM #1502 EASEMENT n Q a 2" BRASS DISC W/PUNCH ON STONE LANE PLAT o0 0 0 4" CONC FILLED PIPE IN CASE NE 4th STREET 1324.06' MEAS. 6• j S69'OW47'E 2648.12' MEAS. - SE COR SEC. 9 C.O.R. MON 1503 1/8" COPPER PIN IN CONCRETE MON. DOWN 0.7' IN CASE. 46 CHICAG( ILL INSURANCE COMPANY 701 FIFTH AVENUE, #3400, SEA=, WA 98104 PHONE: (206)628-5623 FAK (206)628-5657 ORDER NO: 001198382 YOUR NO: 3629 N-E. 6TH Y L0f t ANINVOO: CITY pP ALW OCT 2 0 2008 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMITMENT RECEVEL) L 0 R D L R R E F E R& N C S I N H 0 R N A T I O N SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER: 1 OF THE SECOND CERTIFICATE SELLER: PURCHkSER/BORROWER: IWSHAL S. VARMA PROPERTY ADDRESS: 3629 NORTHEAST 6TH STREET RENTON, WASHINGTON 98056 Our Title Commitment dated 11/07/07 at 8:00 A-M_ is supplemented as follows: x PARAGRAPH NUMBER(S) 5 HAS (HAVE.) BEEN AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: r 1. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER I OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES): YKAR: 2008 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 02305-9036-08 LEVY CODE_ 2100 ASSESSED VALUE -LAND: $ 295,000.00 ASSESSED VALUE -IMPROVEMENTS: $ 132,000.00 GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES: BILLED: $ 4,187.24 PAID: $ 2,093.62 UNPAID_ $ 2,093.62 0 F THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGE IN THIS COMMITMENT SINCE NOVEMBER 7, 2007, EXCEPT THE MATTERS NOTED HEREINABOVE. OCT0BER 2, 2008 AUTHORIZED BY: MIKE HARRI5 SEE. NEXT PAGE Mjn%cQM/KnA10FA C HCAGO 11TLE INSL ANCE COMPANY Order No.: 1198382 YourNa.: 3629 N.E. 6TH ST Unit No.: I o SUPPLEMENTAL COMMITMENT {Continued) NOTE: THE FOLLOWING PARTIES HAVE BEEN SENT A COPY OF THIS SUPPLEMENTAL COMMITMENT: TOUMA ENGINEERS & LAND S[IRVEYC)RS DAN KUSHAL VARMA 2/2 svri.c0M2/RD+/M CHICAGO TI I LE INSURANCE COMPANY 701 FIFTH AVENUE, #3400, SEATTLE, WA 99104 Order No.: 001198382 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 3629 NORTHEAST GTH STREET Your No.: 3629 N.E. 6TH ST RENTON, WASHINGTON 98056 TOUMA ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 6632 S 191ST PLACE, SUITE #E102 KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 ATTN: DAN E/1/1 Enclosed are your materials on the above transaction, if you have any questions regarding these materials, please contact us. Thank you for this opportunity to serve you. < C C C C C C<{{ C C C G C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C G«<{ C< C]>»»»»»»> 7»» 7» 7] 7»»>]» 7»] UNIT' 10 - YOUR COMPLETE BUILDER/DEVELOPER SERVICE CENTER WE HAVE EXPANDED TO SERVE ALL YOUR TITLE INSURANCE NEEDS RELATED TO LAND ACQUISITI ON, DEVELOPMENT FINANCING AND PROPERTY SUBDIVISION. MIKEHARRIS TITLE OFFICER (206) 628-5623 (I= -MAIL: MICHAEL.HARRIS@CTT_COM) RANDY RIEMAN TITLE OFFICER/CONDO COORDINATOR (206) 370-3135 (E-MAIL: RANDY.RIEMAN@CTT.COM) BOB BLOEDEL SENT OR STD.0 EXAMINER FAX NUMBER: (206) 628-5657 < C C < C C C < C C C { { C { { C C { C C C C C C C { < C C C C C C { C G » ] » ] » » ? » > ? > ] » » ] » » » » > » » ] > ? TrrLET8/RDA/09W 'HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP AN' i a400 COLMSIA CENTER, 701 STIR AVE SECOND CER'T'IFICATE 8EATTLE, WA 98104 Order No.: 1198382 SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE Certificate for Filing Proposed Short Plat In the matter of the short plat submitted for your approval, this Company has examined the records of the County Auditor and County Clerk of KING County, Washington, and the records of the Clerk of the United States Courts holding terms in said County, and from such examination hereby certifies that the title to the following described land situate in said KI NG County, to -wit: SEE SCHEDULE. A (NEXT PAGE) VESTED IN: KUSHAL S. VARMA AND KAJAL A_ RAM, HUSBAND AND WIFE EXCEPTIONS: SEE SCHEDULE B ATTACHED CHARGE: $ 2 0 0. 0 0 TAX: $ 17.60 Records examined to November 7, 2 0 0 7 at 8: 0 0 A. M. CHICAGO TTFLE INSURANCE COMPANY BOle` HARRIS/RIEMAN Title Officer (206)628-�)e23 SHPLATA/1 2-5-90/EK ,HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP Order No.: 1198382 SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE A (Continued) LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF ,SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE WEST 525 FEET THEREOF. CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Order No.: 1198382 SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B This certificate does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following exceptions: GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. B. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. C. Encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, and any other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises. D. Easements or claims of easements not shown by the public records. E. Any lien, or right to lien, for contributions to employee benefit funds, or for state workers' compensation, or for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, all as imposed bylaw, and not shown by the public records. F. Liens under the Workmen's Compensation Act not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity or garbage removal. H. General taxes not now payable; matters relating to special assessments and special levies, if any, preceding or in the same becoming a lien. 1. Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; Indian tribal codes or regulations, Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. J. Water rights, claims, or title to water. K. THIS REPORT IS ISSUED AND ACCEPTED UPON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS($1000.00). SHPLAM/031694/soc CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 'HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COM� ` A B c s n Order No.: 1198382 SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B (Continued) EXCEPTIONS 1. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: POSTAL TELEGRAPH CABLE CO. PURPOSE: POLE LINE AND GUY WIRES AREA AFFECTED: A PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AND OTHER PROPERTY RECORDED: NOVEMBER 23, 1910 RECORDING NUMBER: 717663 2_ RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS CONTAINED IN DEED FROM NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY: RESERVING AND EXCEPTING FROM SAID LANDS SO MUCH OR SUCH PORTIONS THEREOF AS ARE OR MAY BE MINERAL LANDS OR CONTAIN COAL OR IRON, AND ALSO THE USE AND THE RIGHT AND TITLE TO THE USE OF SUCH SURFACE GROUND AS MAY BE NECESSARY FOR GROUND OPERATIONS AND THE RIGHT OF ACCESS TO SUCH RESERVED AND EXCEPTED MINERAL LANDS, INCLUDING LANDS CONTAINING COAL OR IRON, FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORING, DEVELOPING AND WORKING THE SAME. RECORDING NUMBER: 234123 3. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF NOTICE OF CHARGES BY WATER, SEWER, AND/OR STORM AND SURFACE WATER UTILITIES, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9606210966. 4. MATTERS DISCLOSED BY SURVEY RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9606219004, AS FOLLOWS: LOCATION OF 6' HIGH WOODEN FENCE IN RELATION TO A SOUTHERLY PORTION OF THE WEST LINE, AND ANY ADVERSE RIGHTS STEMMING THEREFROM. 5. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER 1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES): YEAR: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: ASSESSED VALUE -LAND: ASSESSED VALUE -IMPROVEMENT'S GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES 2007 092305-9036-08 2100 $ 257,000.00 $ 141,000.00 BILLED: $ 4,365.63 PAID: $ 4,365.63 UNPAID: $ 0.00 CHICAM) TffLE INSURANCE COMPANY 'HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COM— ` A- L SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B (Continued) EXCEPTIONS x 6. DEED OF TRUST AND THE 'PERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: TRUSTEE. BENEFICIARY: AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: LOAN NUMBER: Order No.: 119 B 3 8 2 KUSHAL S. VARMA AND KAJAL A. RAM, HUSBAND AND WIFE TICOR TITLE COMPANY WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA $ 417,000.00 MAY 9, 2007 MAY 17, 2007 20070517001764 3013679539-048 THE AMOUNT NOW SECURED BY SAID DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS UPON WHICH THE SAME CAN BE DISCHARGED OR ASSUMED SHOULD BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE HOLDER OF THE INDEBTEDNESS SECURED_ 7. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN THIS COMMITMENT IS BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION AND THE PUBLIC RECORDS AS DEFINED IN THE POLICY TO ISSUE. THE PARTIES TO THE FORTHCOMING TRANSACTION MUST NOTIFY THE TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY PRIOR TO CLOSING IF THE DESCRIPTION DOES NOT CONFORM TO THEIR EXPECTATIONS. r NOTE 1: THE FOLLOWING MAY BE USED AS AN ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON THE DOCUMENTS TO BE RECORDED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF RCW 64.04, SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WHICH MUST ALSO APPEAR IN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT: PTN SW SE, SECTION 9-23-5. THE TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER FOR SAID PREMISES IS 092305-9036-08. END OF SCHEDULE B SH P 1..ATB3/ 12-12-90 / H K CHICAG O TITLE- INSURANCE. COMPANY ' CHICAGO TIT: .NSURANCE COMPANY 701 FIFTH AVENUE, #3400, SEA.TTLE, WA 98104 PHONE: (206)62 8-5623 IMPORTANT: This is not a Survey_ It is hunished as a convenience to locate the land indicated hereon with reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by reason of reliance hereon_ Southwest 1/ of the Southeast 1/ of Section 9-23-5 MAP Yule tilluul;3Muul AFTER RECORDING MAIL TO: Kushat S. Varma and Kajal A. Ram 2007 Aberdeen Place NE Renton, WA 98056 Filed for Record at Request of: Ticor Title Company nC'OR ` rMF STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED THE GRANTOR(S) 07- Robert L. Wonio, a single person for and in consideration of Ten Dollars and Other Good and Valuable Consideration in hand paid, conveys, and warrants to Kushal S. Varma and Kajal A. Ram, husband and wife the following described real estate, situated in the County of King. State of Washington. The north half of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; EXCEPT the west 525 feet thereof. Subject to easements, covenants, conditions and restrictlons shown on Exhibit 'A' as hereto attached and by this reference made a part hereof. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number. 092305-903"!) Dated: June 14, 2005 ��� Robert L. Wonio STATE OF Washington COUNTY OF King I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Robert L Wonio is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned In the Instrument. Witness hand and official seal, this the �-,lay of June, 2005 Notary Public irl and for the State of Washington. e. Residing at: Q' l lj�i ��1 �� ,�*' 9� 1R;Y My Appointment Expires: (SEAL) PUBOG ,oz �N v,. Escrow No.: 834271041 E213171i 06/t7/2OO5 12:45 KING COUNTY, UA TAK SALE f4Pr, 308,00 PRGE001 OF 001 2MU6110U1 i/ UO2 EXHIBIT "A" TO STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED WONIO TO VARMA AND RANT RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS CONTAINED IN DEED FROM NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY: Reserving and excepting from said lands so much or sneh portions thereof as are or may be mineral lands or contain coal or iron, and also the use and the right and title to the use of such surface ground as may be necessary for mining operations and the right of access to such reserved and excepted mineral lands, including lands containing coal or iron, for the purpose of exploring, developing and working the same, RECORD NUMBER: 234123 AN EASEMENT AFFECTING A PORTION OF SAID PREMISES FOR THE PURPOSES STATED THEREIN: IN FAVOR OF: FOR: DISCLOSED BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: AFFECT'S: PostaI Telegraph Cable Co. Pole Uzi and gay wires November 23,1910 717663 The description contained therein is not sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described. NOTICE OF SEWER AND/OR WATER CONNECTION CHARGE: GIVEN BY: City of Renton DATED: June 10, 1996 RECORDED: June 21,1996 RECORDING NUMBER: 9606210966 The following matter(s) disclosed by survey recorded under Recording Number 9606219004: Wooden fence does not conform to a portion of the west line #s Z � � 4 4P► }... � • � $ K ■ C! k e r W4 ~ M PL 0 o� U. ■ r WHEN RECORDED RETURN 10 4046ce of the t;t} :!.:rk Renton finding 200 MW AVenuc South Renton 9baRv tL �f LU GEITE f, the , {Nerk of the City of tianton, VhsHngtone cergy that this �s a true and correct copy ai l Mscribed wdS121 0� e* CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 4612 AN' ORDINANCE OF TEE CITY OF RENTON, WASBINGTON, rs.STABLISHING An ASSESSMENT DISTRXCI' FOR SANITARY SRWXR STRvIC9 nq A PORTI0N OF THE SOUTH HIGHLANDS, HEATHER DOWNS, AND NAPLEWOOD SAE -BASINS AM ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF THE CHARGE UPON CONNECTION TO THE FACILITIES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. There is hereby created a Sanitary Sewer Service Special Assessment District for the area served by.tbe East Renton Sanitary Sewer Interceptor in the northeast quadrant of the IA City of Renton and a portion of its urban growth area within 0 C* 9 unincorporated King County, which area is more particularly described in Exhibit "'AM attached hereto. A map of the service area is attached as Exhibit ^g_- The recording of this document is to provide notification of potential connection and interest charges. While this connection charge may be paid at any time, the City does not require payment until. such time as the parcel is connected to and thus benefiting from the sewer facilities. The property may be sold or in any other way change hands without triggering the requirement, by the City, of payment of the charges associated with this district. Ii. Persons connecting to the sanitary sewer facilities in this Special Assessment District and which properties O g . ORDINANCE 4612 have not been charged or assessed with all casts of the East Renton Sanitary Sewer Interceptor, as detailed in this ordinance, shall pay, in addition to the payment of the connection permit fee and in addition to the system development charge, the following additional fees: A. Per Unit charge. New connections of residential, dwelling units or equivalents shall pay a fee of $224.52 per dwelling unit and all other uses shall pay a unit charge of $4.06 9 per square foot of property. Those properties included within this Special Assessment District and which may be assessed a charge thereunder are included within the boundary legally described in Exhibit "A" and which boundary is shown on the mC.p attached as Exhibit "H." W SECTION III. In addition to. the aforestated charges, there shall be a charge of 4.11$ per annum added to the per Unit Charge. GD ' The. interest charge shall accrue for no more than ten (10) years from the date this ordinance becomes effective. Interest charges will be simple interest and not compound interest. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval., and thirty (34) days after publication`. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this LQ�Lh day of June 1996. i y )Marilyn(Ji eteisen, city Clerk op DEgANcE 9 612 APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 10th day of June 1996_ Jes a Tanner, Mayor AP11 as to f orm : Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 6/14196 ORD.S76:5/20/96:as. i C!] Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR THE CITY OF RENTON - EAST RENTON INTERCEPTOR Portions of Sections 8, 9, 10. 11, 14. 15, lb. 17, 21 and 22 all in Township 23N. Range 5E W_M. in King County, Washington Section B, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 8, Township 23N. Range 5E W.M. lying East of the East right-of-way line of SR-405 and South of the following described line: Beginning at the intersection of the East line of said Section 8 with the centerline of NE 7th Street; thence Westerly along said centerline of NE 7th Street to its intersection with the centerline of Sunset Boulevard NE; thence Northerly along the centerline of Sunset Boulevard NE to the North line of the Southeast V4 of said Section S; thence West along said North line to the Fast right-of-way line of SR 405 and the terminus of said line. Q� Section 9, Township 23K Range 5E W.M. flN All of that portion of Section 9, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. lying South and East of the following described line: 0? Beginning on the centerline of NE 7th Street at its intersection with the centerline of Edmonds Avenue NE; thence Easterly along the centerline of NE 7th Street to its intersection with the centerline of Monroe Avenue NE; thence North along said centerline to the South line of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 9; them East along said South line to its intersection with the centerline of Redmond Avenue NE; thence Northerly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of NE 10th Street; thence East along said centerline to the East line of said Section 9 and the terminus of said line. Section 10, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 10, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. lying Southerly and Westerly of the following described line: Beginning on the Vilest line of Section 10 at its intersection with the North line of the South 1h of the North 1/2 of said Section 10; thence East along said North line to its intersection with the centerline of 142nd Avenue SE; thence Southerly along said centerline to its intersection with the North line of the Southeast 1/4 of said Section 10; thence East along said North line to its intersection with the East line of said Section 10 and the terminus of said line. F:bxTI�+AElR�e¢•aTsi+�gE'YtSE!}511�LSQAL dos Legal Description of the SDI Assessr, mt District r the City o Renton- East Renton Interceptor � Page Z of 3 Section 11, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 11. Township 23N, Range 5E W.M.. Section 14, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 14. Township 23N, Range 5E. W.M. described as follows: All of the Northwest Y4 of said section, together with the Southwest V4 of said section, except the South 12 of the Southeast 1/4 of said Southwest Y4 and except the plat of McIntire Hornesites and '/z of streets adjacent as recorded In the Book of Plats. Volume 58, Page 82. Records of King County, Washington, and except the South 151.55 feet of the East 239,435 feet of Tract 6. Block 1 of Cedar Rive' Five Acre Tracts as recorded in the Book of Plats, Volume 16, Page 52, Records of King County, Washington, less 'A2 of the street abutting said portion of Tract 6, Block 1, and less T act 6, Block 2 of said Cedar River Five Acre Tracts, less 'h of j} the street adjacent to said Tract 6, Block 2, and except the South 82.785 feet of 4? the East 150 feet of Tract 5, Block 2 of said Cedar River Five Acre Tracts and less Ih the street adjacent to said portion of Tract 5, Block 2. (D (,D Section 15, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. M - A.11 of that portion of Section 15, Township 23N, Range 5E. W.M., except the Southwest Va of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest V4 of said section. Section 16, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 16, Towrship 23N, Range 5E W.M., except that portion of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of the said Section 16 lying East of the East line of the Plat of Maplewood Division No. 2 as recorded in the Book of Plats Volume 39. page 39, records of King County Washington and its Northerly extension to the North lime of said Southeast A of the Southeast V4 of the said Section 16 and except that portion of said section lying Southerly of the Northerly right -of way line of SR 169 Maple Valley Highway). Section 17, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 17, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M., lying Northeasterly of the Northeasterly right-of-way of SR 169 (Maple Valley Highway) and Easterly of the East right-of-way line of S rR-405 less that portion lying generally West of the East and Southeasterly line of Bronson Way NE bring FtiDA7,A1REmtcaLa? VMEnSADLEGAI.Wc Iegal Description of the Special Assessmenf District for the City o Renton — fast Renton Inter tar pi e 3 0 3 between the South line of the NE 3rd Street and the Northeasterly margin of SR 405. Section 21, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All that portion of Section 21, Township 23N, R 5E W.M. lying Northeasterly of the Northeasterly right-of-way line of SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway) and West of the East line of the Plat of Maplewood Division No. 2 as recorded in the Book of Plats, volume 39, page 39, Records of King County, Washington. Section 22, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 22, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. described as follows: All of the Northwest V4of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 22 lying Northerly of the Southerly line of the Plat of Maplewood Heights as recorded in the Book of Plats, volume 78, pages i through 4, Records of King County. Washington. Together with the North 227. 11 feet of the 'West. 97.02 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 22. F:rowraw �n f r�drsr�3wE++�sEas►,a�Fc'.0 doc I W 6 u ti-.z 14 (1114 Lu z 4% L �1'F RT -S Z P R E '3 r E NIT I A i't K law VQ L, 49- 3 Lj > A'. 4 3 uj z.s. yo-u ircwie vo r ale%fe-4e Z-3; 3jp3j " "We COI z D I ey Me by a IbIl The 1h h,11, 1h, 7�lhe�zrl 1A, -,ou,64 a,-Y&�Meoffl 9. lown,rAp .13 -4 1-his rurveq, was "re'a-ee'l Aw Me w .9-23 5 efxe, e,4o,d Z6—e 02" a S,p�� Na-96. .4 eel? 4 f h Ave. N, Sla I.V� 2.W ASV A-eeo-v sw 1/41'' RECORDER' CERTIFICATE SURVEYOR'a --C E R I I F I C A T E AAROE R ASSOCIAT'tS- 5 LYR V E Y-­ F C.).-IR ,1,7 6 Amboum tsolBlvd, ROBEf Z-T 10 WAThrssurvG of 14 6�,' 1walk �Y, ,,;1 0, LWale, N�y Seoftle, WA 9614 :�:Wo col?Aimancc u/Ilh Nye rtralrerner w"Me- 243-5B89 AWN. Oy R66el wom� rP96 L CHKO, ay SCALE SHEET 5u0/- 0/1 A-0-arl--ue. e ex/v - do li 20070517001764.001 Return To: WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK FA 2210 ENTERPRISE DR FLORENCE, SC 29501 DOC OPS M/S FSCE 440 20070517001764 TICDR NATIONRL DT 58.00 PAGE901 DF 026 KING COUNTY1411A4 Assessor's Parcel or Account Number; 092305-99035-08 Abbreviated Legal Description_ PTN SE 1 /4, SEC 9, TWP 23N, RGE 5E W.M. [Include lot, block and plat or section. township and xangel Full legal description located on page 3 Trustee: T I COR TITLE COMPANY iSpace Above This Line Far Recording Data] N13 DEED OF TRUST 3013579539-048 TR TIT ' LQ- �[�v [- 1 DEFINITIONS Words used in multiple sections of this document are defined below and other words are defined in Sections 3, 11, 13, 18, 20 and 21. Certain rules regarding the usage of words used in this document are also provided in Section lb. (A) "Security Instrument" means this document, which is dated MAY 09, 2007 together with all Riders to this document. (B)'Borrower" is Kl1SHAL S VARMA AND, KA.lAL A RAM, HUSBAND AND WIFE Borrower is the trustor under this Security Instrument. (C) "Lender" is WASH 1 NGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA WASHINGTON-Single Family -Fannie MaeWreddie Mac UNIFORM INSTRUMENT Form 3048 1101 4VMP1=`M�::Po1Inir�.a. ,�,_"�' IIIN�II�IVI��II�N���I II�N�ENIAI���I 20070517001764.002 Lender is a FEDERAL SAV I NGS 13ANK organized and existing under the laws of THE UN I TED STATES OF AMER I CA Lender's address is 2273 N . GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY, SUITE 14, HENDERSON , NV 89014 Lender is the beneficiary under this Security instrument. (D) "Trustee" is T I COR T I T L E COMPANY (E) "Note" means the promissory note signed by Borrower and dated MAY 09, 2007 The Note states that Borrower owes Lender FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTEEN THOUSAND AND p 0 / 10 0 Dollars (U.S. S 417,000.00 ) plus interest. Borrower has promised to pay this debt in regular Periodic Payments and to pay the debt in full not later than JUNE 01 , 2037 (F) "Property" means the property that is described below under the beading "Transfer of Rights in the Property." (G) "Loan" means the debt evidenced by the Note, plus interest, any prepayment charges and late charges due under the Note, and all surns due under this Security Instrument, plus interest. (H) "Riders" means all Riders to this Security Instrument that are executed by Borrower. The following Riders are to be executed by Borrower [check box as applicable]: 0 Adjustable Rate Rider f—] Condominium Rider Second Home Rider Balloon Rider El Planned Unit Development Rider F—X] 1-4 Family Rider ❑ VA Rider Q Biweekly Payment Rider 0 Other(s) [specify] REGULAR RIDER (I) "Applicable Law" means all controlling applicable federal, state and local statutes, regulations, ordinances and administrative rules and orders (that have the effect of law) as well as all applicable final, non -appealable judicial opinions. (7) "Community Association Dues, Fees, and Assessments" means all dues, fees, assessments and other charges that are imposed on Borrower or the Property by a condominium association, homeowners association or similar organization. W "Electronic Funds Transfer" means any transfer of funds, other than a transaction originated by check, draft, or similar paper instrument, which is initiated through an electronic terminal, telephonic instrument, computer, or magnetic tape so as to order, instruct, or authorize a financial institution to debit or credit an account. Such term includes, but is not limited to, point -of -sale transfers, automated teller machine transactions, transfers initiated by telephone, wire transfers, and automated clearinghouse transfers. W "Escrow Items" means those items that arc described in Section 3. (M) "Miscellaneous Proceeds" means any compensation, settlement, award of damages, or proceeds paid by any third party (other than insurance proceeds paid under the coverages described in Section 5) for. W damage to, or destruction of, the Property; (ii) condemnation or other taking of all or any part of the Property; (iii) conveyance in lieu of condemnation; or (iv) misrepresentations of, or omissions as to, the value andlor condition of the Property. (N) "Mortgage Insurance" means insurance protecting Lender against the nonpayment of, or default on, the Loan. (0) "Periodic Payment" means the regularly scheduled amount due for W principal and interest under the Note, plus (n) any amounts under Section 3 of this Security Instrument. (P) "RESPA" means the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (12 U.S.C. Section 2601 et seq.) and its implementing regulation, Regulation X (24 C.F.R. Part 3500), as they might be amended from time to time, or any additional or successor legislation or regulation that governs the same subject matter_ As used in this Security instrument, "RESPA" refers to all requirements and Initisls��r'1� 4=� 6(W A) (0012) Page 2 of 15 Form 3048 1101 20070517001764,003 restrictions that are imposed in regard to a "federally related mortgage loan" even if the Loan does not qualify as a "federally related mortgage loan" under RESPA. (Q) "Successor in Interest of Borrower" means any party that has taken title to the property, whether or not that party has assumed Borrower's obligations under the Note andfor this Security Instrument. TRANSFER OF RIGHTS IN THE PROPERTY This Security Instrument secures to Lender: (i) the repayment of the Loan, and all renewals, extensions and modifications of the Note; and (ii) the performance of Borrower's covenants and agreements under this Security Instrument and the Note. For this purpose, Borrower irrevocably grants and conveys to Trustee, in trust, with power of sale, the following described property located in the COUNTY of K I NO [Type of Recording Jurisdiction3 [Name of Recording Jurisdiction] THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE WEST 525 FEET THEREOF. Parcel ID Number: 092305_99036-08 3629 NE 5TH ST RENTON ("Property Address"): which currently has the address of {Street] (City], Washington 9B056 (Zip Code) TOC3RTHER WITH all the improvernents now or hereafter erected on the property, and all easements, appurtenances, and fixtures now or hereafter a part of the property. All replacements and additions shall also be covered by this Security Instrument. All of the foregoing is referred to in this Security Instrument as the "Property." BORROWER COVENANTS that Borrower is lawfully seised of the estate hereby conveyed and has the right to grant and convey the Property and that the Property is unencumbered, except for encumbrances of record. Borrower warrants and will defend generally the title to the Property against all claims and demands, subject to any encumbrances of record. THIS SECURITY INSTRUMENT combines uniform covenants for national use and nonuniform covenants with limited variations by jurisdiction to constitute a uniform security instrument covering real property. UNIFORM COVENANTS. Borrower and bender covenant and agree as follows: 1. Payment of Principal, Interest, Escrow Items, Prepayment Charges, and Late Charges. Borrower shall pay when due the principal of, and interest on, the 1dfebQt evidenced by the Initiah: 11' f qZk- 6(WA) (0012) Page 3 of 15 Form 3048 1101 20070517001764.004 Note and any prepayment charges and late charges due under the Note. Borrower shall also pay funds for Escrow Items pursuant to Section 3. Payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument shall be made in U.S_ currency_ However, if any check or other instrument received by Lender as payment under the Note or this Security Instrument is returned to Lender unpaid, Lender may require that any or all subsequent payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument be made in one or more of the following forms, as selected by Lender. (a) cash; (b) money order; (c) certified check, bank check, treasurer's check or casbier's check, provided any such check is drawn upon an institution whose deposits are insured by a federal agency, instrumentality, or entity; or (d) Electronic Funds Transfer. Payments are deemed received by Lender when received at the location designated in the Note or at such other location as may be designated by Lender in accordance with the notice provisions in Section 15. Lender may return any payment or partial payment if the payment or partial payments are insufficient to bring the Loan current. Lender may accept any payment or partial payment insufficient to bring the Loan current, without waiver of any rights hereunder or prejudice to its rights to refuse such payment or partial payments in the future, but Lender is not obligated to apply such payments at the time such payments are accepted. If each Periodic Payment is applied as of its scheduled due date, then Lender need not pay interest on unapplied funds. Lender may hold such unapplied funds until Borrower makes payment to bring the Loan current_ If Borrower does not do so within a reasonable period of time, Lender shall either apply such funds or return them to Borrower_ If not applied earlier, such funds will be applied to the outstanding principal balance under the Note immediately prior to foreclosure. No offset or claim wbich Borrower might have now or in the future against Lender shall relieve Borrower from making payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument or performing the covenants and agreements secured by this Security Instrument_ 2. Application of Payments or Proceeds. Except as otherwise described in this Section 2, all payments accepted and applied by Lender shall be applied in the following order of priority: (a) interest due under the Note; (b) principal due under the Note; (c) amounts due under Section 3, Such payments shall be applied to each Periodic Payment in the order in which it became due. Any remaining amounts shalJ be applied first to late charges, second to any other amounts due under this Security Instrument, and then to reduce the principal balance of the Note. If Lender receives a payment from Borrower for a delinquent Periodic Payment which includes a sufficient amount to pay any late charge due, the payment may be applied to the delinquent payment and the late charge, If more than one Periodic Payment is outstanding. Lender may apply any payment received from Borrower to the repayment of the Periodic Payments if, and to the extent that, each payment can be paid in full. To the extent that any excess exists after the payment is applied to the full payment of one or more Periodic Payments, such excess may be applied to any late charges due. Voluntary prepayments shall be applied first to any prepayment charges and then as described in the Note. Any application of payments, insurance proceeds, or Miscellaneous Proceeds to principal due under the Note shall not extend or postpone the due date, or change the amount, of the Periodic Payments. 3_ Funds for Escrow Items. Borrower shall pay to Lender on the day Periodic Payments are due under the Note, until the Note is paid in full, a sum (the "Funds") to provide for payment of amounts due for: (a) taxes and assessments and other items which can attain priority over this Security instrument as a lien or encumbrance on the Property; (b) leasehold payments or ground rents on the Property, if any; (c) premiums for any and all insurance required by Lender under Section 5; and (d) Mortgage Insurance premiums, if any, or any sums payable by Borrower to Lender in lieu of the payment of Mortgage Insurance premiums in accordance with the provisions of Section 10, These items are called "Escrow Items." At origination or at any time during the Initials: -6(wa) (oa12) Page 4 of 15 Form 3049 1101 2007061700176d.005 term of the Loan, Lender may require that Community Association Dues, Fees, and Assessments, if any, be escrowed by Borrower, and such dues, fees and assessments shall be an Escrow Item. Borrower shall promptly furnish to Leader all notices of amounts to be paid under this Section. Borrower shall pay Lender the Funds for Escrow Items unless Lender waives Borrower's obligation to pay the Funds for any or all Escrow Items. Lender may waive Borrower's obligation to pay to Lender Funds for any or all Escrow Items at any time. Any such waiver may only be in writing. In the event of such waiver, Borrower shall pay directly, when and where payable, the amounts due for any Escrow Items for which payment of Funds has been waived by Lender and, if Lender requires, shall furnish to Lender receipts evidencing such payment within such time period as Lender may require. Borrower's obligation to make such payments and to provide receipts shall for all purposes be deemed to be a covenant and agreement contained in this Security Instrument, as the phrase "covenant and agreement" is used in Section 9. If Borrower is obligated to pay Escrow Items directly, pursuant to a waiver, and Borrower fails to pay the amount due for an Escrow Item, Lender may exercise its rights under Section 9 and pay such amount and Borrower shall then be obligated under Section 9 to repay to Lender any such amount. Lender may revoke the waiver as to any or all Escrow Items at any time by a notice given in accordance with Section 15 and, upon such revocation, Borrower shall pay to Lender all Funds, and in such amounts, that are then required under this Section 3. Lender may, at any time, collect and hold Funds in an amount (a) sufficient to permit Lender to apply the Funds at the time specified under RESPA, and (b) not to exceed the maximum amount a lender can require under RESPA. Lender shall estimate the amount of Funds due on the basis of current data and reasonable estimates of expenditures of future Escrow Items or otherwise in accordance with Applicable Law. The Funds shall be held in an institution whose deposits are insured by a federal agency, instrumentality, or entity (including Lender, if Lender is an institution whose deposits are so insured) or in any, Federal Home Loan Bank. Lender shall apply the Funds to pay the Escrow Items no later than the time specified under RESPA. Lender shall not charge Borrower for holding and applying the Funds, annually analyzing the escrow account, or verifying the Escrow Items, unless Lender pays Borrower interest on the Funds and Applicable Law permits Lender to make such a charge. Unless an agreement is made in writing or Applicable Law requires interest to be paid on the Funds, Lender shall not be required to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on the Funds. Borrower and Lender can agree in writing, however, that interest shall be paid on the Funds. Lender shall give to Borrower, without charge, an annual accounting of the Funds as required by RESPA. If there is a surplus of Funds held in escrow, as defined under RESPA, Lender shall account to 'Borrower for the excess funds in accordance with RESPA. If there is a shortage of Funds held in escrow, as defined under RESPA, Fender shall notify Borrower as required by RESPA, and Borrower shall pay to Lender the amount necessary to make up the shortage in accordance with RESPA, but in no more than 12 monthly payments. If there is a deficiency of Funds held in escrow, as defined under RESPA, Lender shall notify Borrower as required by RESPA, and Borrower shall pay to Lender the amount necessary to make up the deficiency in accordance with RESPA, but in no more than 12 monthly payments. Upon payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument, Lender shall promptly refund to Borrower any Funds held by Lender. 4. Charges; Liens. Borrower shall pay all taxes, assessments, charges, fines, and impositions attributable to the Property which can attain priority over this Security Instrument, leasehold payments or ground rents on the Property, if any, and Community Association Dues, Fees, and Assessments, if any. To the extent that these items are Escrow Items, Borrower shall pay them in the manner provided in Section 3. Initials�N"` jW- -6(WA.l (0012) page 5 of 15 Form 3048 1101 20070517001764.006 Borrower shall promptly discharge any lien which has priority over this Security Instrument unless Borrower; (a) agrees in writing to the payment of the obligation secured by the lien in a manner acceptable to Lender, but only so lung as Borrower is performing such agreement; (b) contests the lien in good faith by, or defends against enforcement of the lien in, legal proceedings which in Lender's opinion operate to prevent the enforcement of the lien while those proceedings are pending, but only until such proceedings are concluded; or (c) secures from the holder of the lien an agreement satisfactory to Lender subordinating the lien to this Security Instrument, if Lender determines that any part of the Property is subject to a lien which can attain priority over this Security Instrument, Lender may give Borrower a notice identifying the lien. Within 10 days of the date on which that notice is given, .Borrower shall satisfy the lien or take one or more of the actions set forth above in this Section 4. Lender may require Borrower to pay a one-time charge for a real estate tax verification andlor reporting service used by Lender in connection with this Loan. 5.. Property Insurance. Borrower shall keep the improvements now existing or hereafter erected on the Property insured against loss by fire, hazards included within the term "extended coverage," and any other hazards including, but not limited to, earthquakes and floods, for which Lender requires insurance- This insurance shall be maintained in the amounts (including deductible levels) and for the periods that Lender requires. What Lender requires pursuant to the preceding sentences can change during the term of the Loan. The insurance carrier providing the insurance shall be chosen by Borrower subject to Lender's right to disapprove Borrower's choice, which right shall not be exercised unreasonably. Lender may require Borrower to pay, in connection with this Loan, either: (a) a one-time charge for flood zone determination, certification and tracking services; or (b) a onetime charge for flood zone determination and certification services and subsequent charges each time remappings or similar changes occur which reasonably might affect such determination or certification. Borrower shall also be responsible for the payment of any fees imposed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in connection with the review of any flood zone determination resulting from an objection by Borrower. If Borrower fails to maintain any of the coverages described above, Lender may obtain insurance coverage, at Lender's option and Borrower's expense. Lender is under no obligation to purchase any particular type or amount of coverage. Therefore, such coverage shall cover Lender, but might or might not protect Borrower, Borrower's equity in the Property, or the contents of the Property, against any risk, hazard or liability and might provide greater or lesser coverage than was previously in effect. Borrower acknowledges that the cost of the insurance coverage so obtained might significantly exceed the cost of insurance that Borrower could have obtained. Any amounts disbursed by Lender under this section 5 shall become additional debt of Borrower secured by this Security Instrument. These amounts shall bear interest at the Note rate from the date of disbursement and shall be payable, with such interest, upon notice from Lender to Borrower requesting payment. All insurance policies required by Lender and renewals of such policies shall be subject to Lender's right to disapprove such policies, shall include a standard mortgage clause, and shall name Lender as mortgagee andlor as an additional loss payee. Lender shall have the right to hold the policies and renewal certificates. If Lender requires, Borrower shall promptly give to Lender all receipts of paid premiums and renewal notices. If Borrower obtains any form of insurance coverage, not otherwise required by Lender, for damage to, or destruction of, the Property, such policy shall include a standard mortgage clause and shall name Lender as mortgagee and/or as an additional loss payee. In the event of loss, Borrower shall give prompt notice to the insurance carrier and Lender, Lender may make proof of loss if not made promptly by Borrower. Unless Lender and Borrower otherwise agree in writing, any insurance proceeds, whether or not the underlying insurance was Initials- �-,�- 6(WA) (0012) Page 6 of 15 Form 3048 1101 20070517001764.007 required by Lender, shall be applied to restoration or repair of the Property, if the restoration or repair is economically feasible and Lender's security is not lessened. During such repair and restoration period, Lender shall have the right to hold such insurance proceeds until Lender has had an opportunity to inspect such Property to ensure the work has been completed to Lender's satisfaction, provided that such inspection shall be undertaken promptly. Lender may disburse proceeds for the repairs and restoration in a single payment or in a series of progress payments as the work is completed. Unless an agreement is made in writing or Applicable Law requires interest to be paid on such insurance proceeds, Lender shall not be required to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on such proceeds. Pees for public adjusters, or other third parties, retained by Borrower shall not be paid out of the insurance proceeds and shall be the sole obligation of Borrower. If the restoration or repair is not economically feasible or Lender's security would be lessened, the insurance proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument, whether or not then due, with the excess, if any, paid to Borrower. Such insurance proceeds shall be, applied in the order provided for in Section 2. If Borrower abandons the Property, Lender may file, negotiate and settle any available insurance claim and related matters. If Borrower does not respond within 30 days to a notice from Lender that the insurance carrier has offered to settle a claim, then Leader may negotiate and settle the claim. The 30-day period w1J1 begin when the notice is given. In either event, or if Lender acquires the Property under Section 22 or otherwise, Borrower hereby assigns to Lender (a) Borrower's rights to any insurance proceeds in an amount not to exceed the amounts unpaid under the Note or this Security Instrument, and (b) any other of Borrower's rights (other than the right to any refund of unearned premiums paid by Borrower) under all insurance policies covering the Property, insofar as such rights are applicable to the coverage of the Property. Lender may use the insurance proceeds either to repair or restore the Property or to pay amounts unpaid under the Note or this Security Instrument, -whether or not then due. b. Occupancy. Borrower shall occupy, establish, and use the Property as Borrower's principal residence within 50 days after the execution of this Security Instrument and shall continue to occupy the Property as Borrower's principal residence for at least one year after the date of occupancy, unless Lender otherwise agrees in writing, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, or unless extenuating circumstances exist which are beyond Borrower's control. 7., Preservation, Maintenance and Protection of the Property; Inspections. Borrower shall not destroy, damage or impair the Property, allow the Property to deteriorate or commit waste on the Property. Whether or not Borrower is residing in the Property, Borrower shall maintain the Property in order to prevent the Property from deteriorating or decreasing in value due to its condition. Unless it is determined pursuant to Section 5 that repair or restoration is not economically feasible, Borrower shall promptly repair the Property if damaged to avoid further deterioration or damage. If insurance or condemnation proceeds are paid in connection with damage to, or the taking of, the Property, Borrower shall be responsible for repairing or restoring the Property only if Lender has released proceeds for such purposes. Lender may disburse proceeds for the repairs and restoration in a single payment or in a series of progress payments as the work is completed. If the insurance or condemnation proceeds are not sufficient to repair or restore the Property, Borrower is not relieved of Borrower's obligation for the completion of such repair or restoration. Lender or its agent may mare reasonable entries upon and inspections of the Property. If it has reasonable cause, Lender may inspect the interior of the improvements on the Property. Lender shall give Borrower notice at the time of or prior to such an interior inspection specifying such reasonable cause. Initials (W® 6(WA) WOW Page 7 of 15 Form 3048 1101 20070517001764.008 8. Borrower's Loan Application. Borrower shall be in default if, during the Loan application process, Borrower or any persons or entities acting at the direction of Borrower or with Borrower's knowledge or consent gave materially false, misleading, or inaccurate information or statements to Lender (or failed to provide Lender with material information) in connection with the Loan. Material representations include, but are not limited to, representations concerning Borrower's occupancy of the Property as Borrower's principal residence, 9. Protection of Lender's Interest in the Property and Rights Under this Security Instrument, If (a) Borrower fails to perform the covenants and agreements contained in this Security Instrument, (b) there is a legal proceeding that might significantly affect Lender's interest in the Property andlor rights under this Security Instrument (such as a proceeding in bankruptcy, probate, for condemnation or forfeiture, for enforcement of a lien which may attain priority over this Security Instrument or to enforce laws or regulations), or (c) Borrower has abandoned the Property, then Lender may do and pay for whatever is reasonable or appropriate to protect Lender's interest in the Property and rights under this Secwity Instrument, including protecting andlor assessing the value of the Property, and securing andlor repairing the Property. Lender's actions can include, but are not limited to: (a) paying any sums secured by a lien which has priority over this Security Instrument; (b) appearing in court; and (c) paying reasonable attorneys' fees to protect its interest in the Property andlor rights under this Security Instrument, including its secured position in a bankruptcy proceeding. Securing the Property includes, but is not limited to, entering the Property to make repairs, change locks, replace or board up doors and windows, drain water from pipes, eliminate building or other code violations or dangerous conditions, and have utilities turned on or off. Although Lender may take action under this Section 9, Lender does not have to do so and is not under any duty or obligation to do so. It is agreed that Lender incurs no liability for not taking any or all actions authorized under this Section 9. Any amounts disbursed by Lender under this Section 9 shall become additional debt of Borrower secured by this Security Instrument. These amounts shall bear interest at the Note rate from the date of disbursement and shall be payable, with such interest, upon notice from Lender to Borrower requesting payment. If this Security Instrument is on a leasehold, Borrower shall comply with all the provisions of the lease. If Borrower acquires fee title to the Property, the leasehold and the fee title shall not merge: unless bender agrees to the merger in writing. 10. Mortgage Insurance. If Lender required Mortgage Insurance as a condition of making the Loan, Borrower shall pay the premiums required to maintain the Mortgage Insurance in effect. If, for any reason, the Mortgage Insurance coverage required by Lender ceases to be available from the mortgage insurer that previously provided such insurance and Borrower was required to make separately designated payments toward the premiums for Mortgage Insurance, Borrower shall pay the premiums required to obtain coverage substantially equivalent to the Mortgage Insurance previously in effect, at a cost substantially equivalent to the cost to Borrower of the Mortgage Insurance previously in effect, from an alternate mortgage insurer selected by Lender. If substantially equivalent Mortgage Insurance coverage is not available, Borrower shall continue to pay to Lender the amount of the separately designated payments that were due when the insurance coverage ceased to be in effect. Lender will accept, use and retain these payments as a non-refundable loss reserve in lieu of Mortgage Insurance. Such loss reserve shall be non-refundable, notwithstanding the fact that the Loan is ultimately paid in full, and Lender shall not be required to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on such loss reserve. Lender can no longer require loss reserve payments if Mortgage Insurance coverage (in the amount and for the period that Lender requires) provided by an insurer selected by Lender again becomes available, is obtained, and Lender requires separately designated payments toward the premiums for Mortgage Insurance_ If bender required Mortgage Insurance as a condition of malting the Loan and lnit�als: (C b(WA) (0012) page 8 of 15 Farm 3048 1101 20070517001764.009 Borrower was required to make separately designated payments toward the premiums for Mortgage Insurance, Borrower shall pay the premiums required to maintain Mortgage Insurance in effect, or to provide a non-refundable loss reserve, until Lender's requirement for Mortgage Insurance ends in accordance with any written agreement between Borrower and Lender providing for such termination or until termination is required by Applicable Law. Nothing in this Section 10 affects Borrower's obligation to pay interest at the rate provided in the Note. Mortgage Insurance reimburses Lender (or any entity that purchases the Note) for certain losses it may incur if Borrower does not repay the Loan as agreed. Borrower is not a party to the Mortgage Insurance. Mortgage insurers evaluate their total risk on all such insurance in force from time to time, and may enter into agreements with other parties that share or modify their risk, or reduce losses. These agreements are on terms and conditions that are satisfactory to the mortgage insurer and the other party (or parties) to these agreements. These agreements may require the mortgage insurer to make payments using any source of funds that the mortgage insurer may have available (which. may include funds obtained from Mortgage Insurance premiums). As a result of these agreements, Lender, any purchaser of the Note, another insurer, any reinsurer, any other entity, or any affiliate of say of the foregoing, may receive (directly or indirectly) amounts that derive from (or might be characterized as) a portion of Borrower's payments for Mortgage Insurance, in exchange for sharing or modifying the mortgage insurer's risk, or reducing losses. If such agreement provides that an affiliate of Lender takes a share of the insurer's risk in exchange for a share of the premiums paid to the insurer, the arrangement is often termed "captive reinsurance." Further - (a) Any such agreements will not affect the amounts that Borrower has agreed to pay for Mortgage Insurance, or any other terms of the Loan. Such agreements will not increase the amount Borrower will owe for Mortgage insurance, and they will not entitle Borrower to any refund. (b) Any such agreements will not affect the rights Borrower has - if any - with respect to the Mortgage Insurance under the Homeowners Protection. Act of 1998 or any other law. These rights may include the right to receive certain disclosures, to request and obtain cancellation of the Mortgage Insurance, to have the Mortgage Insurance terminated automatically, andlor to receive a refund of any Mortgage Insurance premiums that were unearned at the time of such cancellation or termination. 11. Assignment of Miscellaneous Proceeds; Forfeiture. All Miscellaneous Proceeds are hereby assigned to and shall be paid to Lender. If the Property is damaged, such Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied to restoration or repair of the Property, if the restoration or repair is economically feasible and Leader's security is not lessened. During such repair and restoration period, Lender shall have the right to hold such Miscellaneous Proceeds until Lender has had an opportunity to inspect such Property to ensure the work has been completed to Lender's satisfaction, provided that such inspection shall be undertaken promptly. Lender may pay for the repairs and restoration in a single disbursement or in a series of progress payments as the work is completed. Unless an agreement is made in writing or Applicable Law requires interest to be paid on such Miscellaneous Proceeds, Lender shall not be required to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on such Miscellaneous Proceeds. If the restoration or repair is not economically feasible or Lender's security would be lessened, the Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument, whether or not then due, with the excess, if any, paid to Borrower. Such Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied in the order provided for in Section 2. In the event of a total taking, destruction, or loss in value of the Property, the Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument, whether or not then due, with the excess, if any, paid to Borrower. In the event of a partial taking, destruction, or loss in value of the Property in which the fair market value of the Property immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value is equal to or greater than the amount of the sums secured by this Security Instrument immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value, unless Borrower and Lender otherwise agree in writing, the sums secured by this Security Instrument shall be reduced by the amount of the Miscellaneous Proceeds multiplied by the following fraction_ (a) the total amount of the sums secured immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value divided by (b) the fair 1.� Initials (-6(WA) (0012) Page 9 of 35 Form 3048 110) 20070517001764,010 market value of the Property immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value. Any balance shall be paid to Borrower, In the event of a partial taking, destruction, or loss in value of the Property in which the fair market value of the Property immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value is less than the amount of the sums secured immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value, unless Borrower and Lender otherwise agree in writing, the Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument whether or not the sums are then due. . If the Property is abandoned by Borrower, or if, after notice by Lender to Borrower that the Opposing Party (as defined in the next sentence) offers to make an award to settle a claim for damages, Borrower fails to respond to Lender within 30 days after the date the notice is given, Lender is authorized to collect and apply the Miscellaneous Proceeds either to restoration or repair of the Property or to the sums secured by this Security Instrument, whether or not then due. "Opposing Party" means the third party that owes Borrower Miscellaneous Proceeds or the party against whom Borrower has a right of action in regard to Miscellaneous Proceeds. Borrower shall be in default if any action or proceeding, whether civil or criminal, is begun that, in Lender's judgment, could result in forfeiture of the Property or other material impairment of Lender's interest in the Property or rights under this Security Instrument. Borrower can cure such a default and, if acceleration has occurred, reinstate as provided in Section 19, by causing the action or proceeding to be dismissed with a ruling that, in Lender's judgment, precludes forfeiture of the Property or other material impairment of Lender's interest in the Property or rights under this Security Instrument. The proceeds of any award or claim for damages that are attributable to the impairment of Lender's interest in the Property are hereby assigned and shall be paid to Lender. All Miscellaneous Proceeds that are not applied to restoration or repair of the Property shall be alied in the order provided for in Section 2. I2, Borrower Not Released; Forbearance By Lender Not a Waiver. Extension of the time for payment or modification of amortization of the sums secured by this Security Instrument granted by Lender to Borrower or any Successor in Interest of Borrower shall not operate to release the liability of Borrower or any Successors in Interest of Borrower. Lender shall not be required to commence proceedings against any Successor in Interest of Borrower or to refuse to extend time for payment or otherwise modify amortization of the sums secured by this Security Instrument by reason of any demand made by the original Borrower or any Successors in Interest of Borrower. Any forbearance by Lender in exercising any right or remedy including, without limitation, Lender's acceptance of payments from third persons, entities or Successors in Interest of Borrower or in amounts less than the amount then due, shall not be a waiver of or preclude the exercise of any right or remedy, 13. Joint and Several Liability; Co-signers; Successors and Assigns Bound. Borrower covenants and agrees that Borrower's obligations and liability shall be joint and several. However, an Borrower who co-signs this Security Instrument but does not execute the Note (a "co-signer"): (aT is co-signing this Security Instrument only to mortgage, grant and convey the co-signer's interest in the Property under the terms of this Security instrument; (b) is not personally obligated to pay the sums secured by this Security Instrument; and (c) agrees that Lender and any other Borrower can agree to extend, modify, forbear or make any accommodations with regard to the terms of this Security Instrument or the Note without the co-signer's consent. Subject to the provisions of Section 19, any Successor in Interest of Borrower who assumes Borrower's obligations under this Security Instrument in writing, and is approved by Lender, shall obtain all of Borrower's rights and benefits under thus Security Instrument. Borrower shall not be released from Borrower's obligations and liability under this Security Instrument unless Lender a&rces to such release in writing. The covenants and agreements of this Security Instrument shall bind (except as provided in Section 20) and benefit the successors and assigns of Lender. 14. Loan Charges. Lender may charge Borrower fees for services performed in connection with Borrower's default, for the purpose of protecting Lender's interest in the Property and rights under this Security Instrument, including, but not limited to, attorneys' fees, property inspection and valuation fees. In regard to any other fees, the absence of express authority in this Security Instrument to charge a specific fee to Borrower shall not be construed as a prohibition on the charging of such fee. Lender may not charge fees that are expressly prohibited by this Security Instrument or by Applicable Law. Initials: (® 5(WA) (0012) Pap,,- 10 of 35 Form 3048 1101 20070517001764.011 If the Loan is subject to a law which sets maximum loan charges, and that law is finally interpreted so that the interest or other loan char es collected or to be collected in connection with the Loan exceed the permitted limits, then: (a� any such loan charge shall be reduced by the amount necessary to reduce the charge to the Permitted limit; and (b) any sums already collected from Borrower which exceeded permitted limits will be refunded to Borrower. Lender may choose to make this refund by reducing the principal owed under the Note or by making a direct payment to Borrower. If a refund reduces principal, the reduction will be treated as a partial prepayment without any prepayment charge whether or not a prepayment charge is provided for under the Note). Borrower's acceptance of any such refund made by direct payment to Borrower will constitute a waiver of any right of action Borrower might have arising out of such. overcharge. 15. Notices. All notices given by Borrower or Lender in connection with this Security Instrument must be in writing. Any notice to Borrower in connection with this Security Instrument shall be deemed to have been given to Borrowei when mailed by first class mail or when actually delivered to Borrower's notice address if sent by other means. Notice to any one Borrower shall constitute notice to all Borrowers unless Applicable Law expressly requires otherwise. The notice address shall be the Property Address unless Borrower has designated a substitute notice address by notice to Lender. Borrower shall promptly notify Lender of Borrower's change of address. If Lender specifies a procedure for reporting Borrower's change of address, then Borrower shall only report a change of address through that specified procedure_ There may be only one designated notice address under this Security Instrument at any one time_ Any notice to Lender shall be given by delivering it or by mailing it by first class mail to Lender's address stated herein unless Lender has designated another address by notice to Borrower. Any notice in connection with this Security Instrument shall not be deemed to have been given to Lender until actually received by Lender. If any notice. required by this Security Instrument is also required under Applicable Law, the Applicable Law requirement will satisfy the corresponding requirement under this Security Instrument. 16. Governing Law; Severability; Rules of Construction. This Security Instrument shall be governed by federal law and the law of the jurisdiction in which the Property is located. All rights and obligations contained in this Security Instrument are subject to any requirements and limitations of Applicable Law. Applicable Law might explicitly or implicitly allow the parties to agree by contract or it might be silent, but such silence shall not be construed as a prohibition against agreement by contract_ In the event that any provision or clause of this Security Instrument or the Note conflicts with Applicable Law, such conflict shall not affect other Provisions of this Security Instrument or the Note which can be given effect without the conflicting provision. As used in this Security Instrument: (a) words of the masculine gender shall mean and include corresponding neuter words or words of the feminine gender; (b) words in the singular shall mean and include the plural and vice versa; and (c) the word "may" gives sole discretion without any obligation to take any action. 17. Borrower's Copy. Borrower shall be given one copy of the Note and of this Security instrument. 18. Transfer of the Property or a Beneficial Interest in Borrower. As used in this Section 18, "Interest in the Property" means any legal or beneficial interest in the Property, including, but not limited to, those beneficial interests transferred in a bond for deed, contract for deed, installment sales contract or escrow agreement, the intent of which is the transfer of title by Borrower at a future date to apurchaser_ If all or any part of the Property or any Interest in the Property is sold or transferred (or if Borrower is not a natural person and a beneficial interest in Borrower is sold or transferred) without Lender's prior written consent, Lender may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument. However, this option shall not be exercised by Lender if such exercise is prohibited by Applicable Law. If Lender exercises this option, Lender shall give Borrower notice of acceleration. The notice shall provide a period of not less than 30 days from the data the notice is given in accordance with Section 15 within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Security Instrument. If Borrower fails to pay these sums prior to the expiration of this period, Lender may invoke any remedies permitted by this Security Instrument without further notice or demand on Borrower. Initials• ��� 6(WA) (0012) Page 11 of 15 Farm 3048 1101 20070517001764.012 19. Borrower's Right to Reinstate After Acceleration. If Borrower meets certain conditions, Borrower shall have the right to have enforcement of this Security Instrument discontinued at any time prior to the earliest of: (a) five days before sale of the Property pursuant to any - power of sale contained in this Security Instrument; (b} such other period as Applicable Law might specify for the termination of Borrower's right to reinstate; or (c) entry of a judgment enforcing this Security Instrument, Those conditions are that Borrower: (a) pays Lender all sums which then would be due under this Security Instrument and the Note as if no acceleration had occurred; (b) cures any default of any other covenants or agreements; (c) pays all expenses incurred in enforcing this Security Instrument, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees, property inspection and valuation fees, and other fees incurred for the purpose of protecting Lender's interest in the Property and rights under this Security Instrument; and (d) takes such action as Lender may reasonably require to assure that Lender's interest in the Property and rights under this Security Instrument, and Borrower's obligation to pay the sums secured by this Security Instrument, shall continue unchanged. Lender may require that Borrower pay such reinstatement sums and expenses in one or more of the following forms, as selected by Lender: (a) cash; (b) money order; (c) certified check, bank check, treasurer's check or cashier's check, provided any such check is drawn upon an institution whose deposits are insured by a federal agency, instrumentality or entity; or (d) Electronic Funds Transfer. Upon reinstatement by Borrower, this Security Instrument and obligations secured hereby shall remain fully effective as if no acceleration had occurred. However, this right to reinstate shall not apply in the case of acceleration under Section 18. 20. Sale of Note- Change of Loan Servicer; Notice of Grievance, The Note or a partial interest in the Note together with this Security Instrument) can be sold one or more times without prior notice to Borrower. A sale might result in a change in the entity (known as the "Loan Servicer") that collects Periodic Payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument and performs other mortgage loan servicing obligations under the Note, this Security Instrument, and Applicable Law. There also might be one or more changes of the Loan Servicer unrelated to a sale of the Note. If there is a change of the Loan Servicer, Borrower will be given written notice of the change which will state the name and address of the new Loan Servicer, the address to which payments should be made and any other information RESPA requires in connection with a notice of transfer of servicing. If the Note is sold and thereafter the Loan is serviced by a Loan Servicer other than the purchaser of the Note, the mortgage loan servicing obligations to Borrower will remain with the Loan Servicer or be transferred to a successor Loan Servicer and are not assumed by the Note purchaser unless otherwise provided by the Note purchaser. Neither Borrower nor Lender may commence, join, or be joined to any judicial action (as either an individual litigant or the member of a class) that arises from the other party's actions pursuant to this Security Instrument or that alleges that the other party has breached any provision of, or any duty owed by reason of, this Security Instrument, until such Borrower or !.ender has notified the other party (with such notice given in compliance with the requirements of Section 15) of such alleged breach and afforded the other party hereto a reasonable ecriod after the giving of such notice to take corrective action. If Applicable Law provides a time period which must elapse before certain action can be taken, that time period will be deemed to be reasonable for purposes of this paragraph. The notice of acceleration and opportunity to cure given to Borrower pursuant to Section 22 and the notice of acceleration given to Borrower pursuant to Section 18 shall be deemed to satisfy the notice and opportunity to take corrective action provisions of this Section 20, 21. Hazardous Substances. As used in this Section 21. (a) "Hazardous Substances" are those substances defined as toxic or hazardous substances, pollutants, or wastes by Environmental Law and the following substances; gasoline, kerosene, other flammable or toxic petroleum products, toxic pesticides and herbicides, volatile solvents, materials containing asbestos or formaldehyde, and radioactive materials; (b) "Environmental Law" means federal laws and laws of the jurisdiction where the Property is located that relate to health, safety or environmental protection; (c) "Environmental Cleanup" includes any response action, remedial action, or removal action, as defined in Environmental Law; and (d) an "Environmental Condition" means a condition that can cause, contribute to, or otherwise trigger an Environmental Cleanup. Borrower shall not cause or permit the presence, use, disposal, storage, or release of any Hazardous Substances, or threaten to release any Hazardous Substances, (o��n��or in the Property. Initials /+*` �® b(WA) (0012) page 12 of 15 Form 3049 1101 20070517001764.013 Borrower shall not do, nor allow anyone else to do, anything affecting the Property (a) that is in violation of any Environmental Law, N which creates an Environmental Condition, or (c) which, due to the presence, use, or release of a Hazardous Substance, creates a condition that adversely affects the value of the Property. 'Ihe preceding two sentences shall not apply to the presence, use, or storage on the Property of small quantities of Hazardous Substances that are generally recognized to be appropriate to normal residential uses and to maintenance of the Property (including, but not limited to, hazardous substances in consumer products). Borrower shall promptly give Lender written notice of (a) any investigation, claim, demand, lawsuit or other action by any governmental or regulatory agency or private party involving the Property and any Hazardous Substance or Environmental Law of which Borrower has actual knowledge, (b) any Environmental Condition, including but not limited to, any spilling, leaking, discharge, release or threat of release of any Hazardous Substance, and (c) any condition caused by the presence, use or release of a Hazardous Substance which adversely affects the value of the Property. If Borrower learns, or is notified by any governmental or regulatory authority, or any private party, that any removal or other rernediation of any Hazardous Substance affecting the Property is necessary, Borrower shall promptly take all necessary remedial actions in accordance with Environmental Law. Nothing herein shall create any obligation on Lender for an Environmental Cleanup. NON -UNIFORM COVENANTS. Borrower and Lender further covenant and agree as follows: 22. Acceleration; Remedies. Lender shall give notice to Borrower prior to acceleration following Borrower's breach of any covenant or agreement in this Security Instrumient (but not prior to acceleration under Section 18 unless Applicable Law provides otherwise). The notice shall specify: (a) the default; (b) the action required to cure the default; (c) a date, not less than 30 days from the date the notice is given to Borrower, by which the default must be cured; and (d) that failure to cure the default on or before the date specified in the notice may result in acceleration of the sums secured by this Security Instrument and sale of the Property at public auction at a date not less than 120 days in the future. The notice shall further inform Borrower of the right to reinstate after acceleration, the right to bring a court action to assert the non-existence of a default or any other defense of Borrower to acceleration and sale, and any other matters required to be included in the notice by Applicable Law. If the default is not cured on or before the date specified in the notice, Lender at its option, may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument without further demand and may invoke the power of sale andlor any other remedies permitted by Applicable Law. Lender shall be entitled to collect all expenses incurred in pursuing the remedies provided in this Section 22, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of title evidence. If bender invokes the power of sale, Lender shall give written notice to Trustee of the occurrence of an event of default and of Lender's election to cause the Property to be sold. Trustee and Lender shall take such action regarding notice of sale and shall give such notices to Borrower and to other persons as Applicable Law may require. After the time required by Applicable Law and after publication of the notice of sale, Trustee, without demand on Borrower, shall sell the Property at public auction to the highest bidder at the tirne and place and under the terms designated in the notice of sale in one or more ,parcels and in any order Trustee determines. Trustee may postpone sale of the Property for a period or periods permitted by Applicable Law by public announcement at the time and place fixed in the notice of sale. Lender or its designee may purchase the Property at any sale. Trustee shall deliver to the purchaser Trustee's deed conveying the Property without any covenant or warranty, expressed or implied. The recitals in the Trustee's deed shall be prima facie evidence of the truth of the statements made therein. Trustee shall apply the proceeds of the sale in the following order; (a) to all expenses of the sale, including, but not limited to, reasonable Trustee's and attorneys' fees; (b) to all sums secured by this Security Instrument; and (c) any excess to the person or persons legally entitled to it or to the clerk of the superior court of the county in which the sale took place. Initials: 4-6(WA) (0012) Page 13 of 15 Form 3048 1101 20070517001764.014 ZiNA2 23. Ret onveyance. Upon payment of all sums secured by this Security Instrument, Lender shall request Trustee to reconvey the Property and shall surrender this Security Instrument and all notes evidencing debt secured by this Security Instrument to Trustee. Trustee shall reconvey the Property without warranty to the person or persons legally entitled to it. Such person or persons shall pay any recordation costs and the Trustee's fee for preparing the reconveyance. 24. Substitute Trustee. In accordance with Applicable Law, Lender may from time to tirne appoint a successor trustee to any Trustee appointed hereunder who has ceased to act. Without conveyance of the Property, the successor trustee shall succeed to all the title, power and duties conferred upon Trustee herein and by Applicable Law. 25- Use of Property. The Property is not used principally for agricultural purposes. 26. Attorneys' Fees. Lender shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in any action or proceeding to construe or enforce any term of this Security Instrument. The term "attorneys' fees," whenever used in this Security Instrument, shall include without limitation attorneys' fees incurred by Lender in any bankruptcy proceeding or on appeal. ORAL AGREEMENTS OR ORAL COMMITMENTS TO LOAN MONEY, EXTEND CREDIT, OR TO FORBEAR FROM ENFORCING REPAYMENT OF A DEBT ARE NOT ENFORCEABLE UNDER WASHINGTON LAW. BY SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and covenants contained in this Security Instrument and in any Rider executed by Borrower and recorded with it. Witnesses: (Seal) -Borrower KUSHAL S VARMA 1�j4,q- P,-,, (Seal) -Borrower KAJAL A RAM -Borrower _ (Seal) -Borrower _ (Seal) -Borrower _ (Seal) -Borrower _ (Seal) -Borrower _ (Seal) -Borrower (=% 6(WA) (0412) Page 14 of 15 Porm 3048 V01 20070517001764,015 STATE OF jI�Oin la County of -"IG- On this day personally appeared before me. I ss: KUSHAL S VARMA, KAJAL A RAM to me known to be the individual(s) described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that helshelthey signed the same as hislherltheir free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. 1n � GIVEN under my hand and official seal this l� day of G�'i 900 No rp blic in a r the State of residing at My Appointment Expires onf ]ff?1C{ BRIDGE t L. �BRUC�E caM�a. #17328+8 M NOTARY PtMUC • CAS �EH 310, 2011 Comm. Initials: l/P — (=®OWA) (0012) Page 15 of 15 Form 3048 1101 20070517001764.016 LGLQ LEGAL DESCRIPTION 301$679539-048 THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W,M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE WEST 525 FEET THEREOF, 20070517001764.017 N13 REGULAR RIDER RRRR N13 3013679539-048 This rider is made this 9TH day of MAY , 2007, and is incorporated into and shall be deemed to amend and supplement the Mortgage, Deed of Trust or Security Deed (the "Security Instrument") of the same date which Borrower has given to secure Borrower's Note of the same date (the "Note") to WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA (the 'Lender"). The Security Instrument covers the Property described in it and located at 3629 NE 6TH ST, RENTON, WA 96056 Modifications. In addition to the covenants and agreements made in the Security Instrument, the Lender and Borrower further covenant and agree as follows, A. CHANGES AND ADDITIONS TO THE SECURITY INSTRUMENT AND OTHER RIDERS This Rider makes certain changes and additions to the attached Security Instrument and other Riders. Whenever the terms, conditions and promises contained in the Security Instrument and other Riders differ or are in conflict with this Rider, the provisions of this Rider will control. B. ADDITIONAL CHARGES Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in provisions of the Security Instrument, unless applicable law provides otherwise, I agree to pay certain reasonable charges (including any attorney's fees actually incurred by Lender for the review and preparation of documents) associated with the servicing of this loan, including, but not limited to: i) processing dishonored checks and insurance loss payments; ii) processing my request for an ownership transfer, partial release, grant of easement, modification and other agreement(s); iii) responding to my request for copies of loan documents and/or a loan payment history; and iv) preparation of an assignment, discharge or satisfaction of Security Instrument. VeTsion 2.0 081271991 Page 1 of 2 k'S��Initials LA170USA 20070517001764.018 C_ RIDER VOID IF MORTGAGE SOLI? TO FNMA, GNMA, FELMC, RISC OR SMSC If the Federal National Mortgage Association ("FNMA"), Government National Mortgage Association ("GNMA"), Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("FHLMC"), Residential Funding Corporation ("RFC") or Sears Mortgage Securities Corporation ("SMSC") buys all or some of the Lender's rights under the Security Instrument and the Note, the promises and agreements in this Rider will no longer have any force or effect, except those promises and agreements which are accepted by the purchasing organization. BY SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and provisions contained in this Regular Rider. Witness: Signature: PRINT Name: Signature: PRINT' Name: Signature: PRINT Name: Signature: PRINT Name: KUSHAL S VARMA Borrower KAJAt_ A RAM Borrower Borrower Borrower Version 2.0 112102197) Page 2 of 2 Lanousa 20070517001764.019 R2US 3013679539-048 N13 FIXED/ADJUTSTABLE RATE RIDER (LIBOR One -Yeah Index (As Published to The Wall Street Journafl - Rate Caps) THIS FIXED/ADJUSTABLE RATE RIDER is made this 97H day of MAY 2007 , and is incorporated into and shall be deemed to amend and supplement the Mortgage, Deed of Trust, or Security Deed (the "Security Instrument") of the same date given by the undersigned ("Borrower") to secure Borrower's Fixed/Adjustable Rate Note (the "Note") to WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA ("Lender") of the same date and covering the property described in the Security Instrument and located at 3629 NE 6TH ST RENTON, WA 98056 (Property Address) THE NOTE PROVIDES FOR A CHANGE IN BORROWER'S FIXED INTEREST RATE TO AN ADJUSTABLE INTEREST RATE. THE NOTE LIMITS THE AMOUNT BORROWER'S ADJUSTABLE INTEREST RATE CAN CHANGE AT ANY ONE TIME AND THE MAXIMUM RATE BORROWER MUST PAY, ADDITIONAL COVENANTS. In addition to the covenants and agreements made in the Security Instrument, Borrower and Lender further covenant and agree as follows: A. ADJUSTABLE RATE AND MONTHLY PAYMENT CHANGES The Note provides for an initial fixed interest rate of 7.500 90. The Note also provides for a change in the initial fixed rate to an adjustable interest rate, as follows 4. ADJUSTABLE INTEREST RATE AND MONTHLY PAYMENT CHANGES (A) Change Dates The initial fixed interest rate I will pay will change to an adjustable interest rate on the first day of JUNE 01 , 2014 , and the adjustable interest rate I will pay may change on that day every 12th month thereafter. The date on which my initial fixed interest rate changes to an adjustable interest rate, and each date on which my adjustable interest rate could change, is called a "Change Date." MULTISTATE FIXED/ADJUSTABLE RATE RIDER - WSJ One -Year LIBOR - Single Family - Fannie Mae Uniform Instrument Form 3187 6101 -16SR f04 01) Page Z of 4 Initials VMP Mortgage Solutions 800) 21-7 20070517001764.020 (B) The Index Beginning with the first Change Date, my adjustable interest rate will be based on an Index- The "Index" is the average of interbank offered rates for one-year U-S. dollar --denominated deposits in the London market ("LIBOR"), as published in The Wall Street Journal. The most recent Index figure available as of the date 45 days before each Change Date is called the "Current Index." If the Index is no longer available, the Note Holder will choose a new index that is based upon comparable information. The Note Holder will give me notice of this choice. (C) Calculation of Changes Before each Change Date, the Note Holder will calculate my new interest rate by adding Two AND 251100 percentage points ( 2,250 0/6) to the Current index. The Note Holder will then round the result of this addition to the nearest one -eighth of one percentage point (0.125%) Subject to the limits stated in Section 4(D) below, this rounded amount will be my new interest rate until the next Change Date. The Note Holder will then determine the amount of the monthly payment that would be sufficient to repay the unpaid principal that I am expected to owe at the Change Date in full on the Maturity Date at my new interest rate in substantially equal payments. The result of this calculation will be the new amount of my monthly payment. (D) Limits on Interest Rate Changes The interest rate I am required to pay at the first Change Date will not be greater than 12,500 % or less than 2.500 %_ Thereafter, my adjustable interest rate will never be increased or decreased on any single Change Date by more than two percentage points from the rate of interest I have been paying for the preceding 12 months. My interest rate will never be greater than 12,500 %. (E) Effective Date of Changes My new interest rate will become effective on each Change Date. I will pay the amount of my new monthly payment beginning on the first monthly payment date after the Change Date until the amount of my monthly payment changes again. (F) Notice of Changes The Note Holder will deliver or mail to me a notice of any changes in my initial fixed interest rate to an adjustable interest rate and of any changes in my adjustable interest rate before the effective date of any change. The notice will include the amount of my monthly payment, any information required by law to be given to me and also the title and telephone number of a person who will answer any question I may have regarding the notice. B. TRANSFER OF THE PROPERTY OR A BENEFICIAL INTEREST IN BORROWER 1. Until Borrower's initial fixed interest rate changes to an adjustable interest rate under the terms stated in Section A above, Uniform Covenant 18 of the Security Instrument shall read as follows: lnitials �4 (=-16811 (0401) Page 2 of 4 Form 3187 6101 20070517001764.021 Transfer of the Property or a Beneficial Interest in Borrower. As used in this Section 18, "Interest in the Property" means any legal or beneficial interest in the Property, including, but not limited to, those beneficial interests transferred in a bond for deed, contract for deed, installment sales contract or escrow agreement, the intent of which is the transfer of title by Borrower at a future date to a purchaser. If all or any part of the Property or any Interest in the Property is sold or transferred (or if Borrower is not a natural person and a beneficial interest in Borrower is sold or transferred) without Lender's prior written consent, Lender may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument However, this option shall not be exercised by Lender if such exercise is prohibited by Applicable Law. If Lender exercises this option, Lender shall give Borrower notice of acceleration_ The notice shall provide a period of not less than 30 days from the date the notice is given in accordance with Section 15 within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Security Instrument If Borrower fails to pay these sums prior to the expiration of this period, Lender may invoke any remedies permitted by this Security Instrument without further notice or demand on Borrower. 2 When Borrower's initial fixed interest rate changes to an adjustable interest rate under the terms stated in Section A above, Uniform Covenant 18 of the Security Instrument described in Section B 1 above shall then cease to be in effect, and the provisions of Uniform Covenant 18 of the Security Instrument shall be amended to read as follows. Transfer of the Property or a Beneficial Interest in Borrower. As used in this Section 18, "Interest in the Property' means any legal or beneficial interest in the Property, including, but not limited to, those beneficial interests transferred in a bond for deed, contract for deed, installment sales contract or escrow agreement, the intent of which is the transfer of title by Borrower at a future date to a purchaser. If all or any part of the Property or any Interest in the Property is sold or transferred (or if Borrower is not a natural person and a beneficial interest in Borrower is sold or transferred) without Lender's prior written consent. Lender may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument However, this option shall not be exercised by Lender if such exercise is prohibited by Applicable Law. Lender also shall not exercise this option if: (a) Borrower causes to be submitted to Lender information required by Lender to evaluate the intended transferee as if a new loan were being made to the transferee; and (b) Lender reasonably determines that Lender's security will not be impaired by the loan assumption and that the risk of a breach of any covenant or agreement in this Security instrument is acceptable to Lender. To the extent permitted by Applicable taw, Lender may charge a reasonable fee as a condition to Lender's consent to the loan assumption. Lender also may require the transferee to sign an assumption agreement that is acceptable to Lender and that obligates the transferee to keep all the promises and agreements made in the Note and in this Security Instrument Borrower will continue to be obligated under the Note and this Security Instrument unless Lender releases Borrower in writing. Initials: V f r'7e-- (M,3-16SR 10401) Page 3 of 4 Form 3187 6101 20070517001764.022 If Lender exercises the option to require immediate payment in full, Lender shall give Borrower notice of acceleration. The notice shall provide a period of not less than 30 days from the date the notice is given in accordance with Section 15 within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Security Instrument If Borrower fails to pay these sums prior to the expiration of this period, Lender may invoke any remedies permitted by this Security Instrument without further notice or demand on Borrower. BY SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and covenants contained in this Fixed/Adjustable Rate Rider_ -16811 (0401) (Seal) -Borrower {Seal] -Borrower (Seal) -Borrower (Seal) -Borrower V , (Seal) -Borrower KUSHAL S VARMA Ai^1I (Seal) -Borrower KAJAL A RAM Page 4 of 4 (Seal) -Borrower (Seal) -Borrower Form 3187 6101 20070517001764.023 57US 1-4 FAMILY RIDER 3013679539-048 N13 (Assignment of Rents) THIS 1-4 FAMILY RIDER is made this 9TH day of MAY 2007 , and is incorporated into and shall be deemed to amend and supplement the Mortgage, Deed of Trust, or Security Deed (the "Security Instrument") of the same date given by the undersigned (the "Borrower") to secure Borrower's Note to WASH I NGTON MUTUAL. BANK, FA (the "Lender") of the same date and covering the Property described in the Security Instrument and located at: 3629 NE 6TH ST, RENTON, WA 9B456 [Property Address] 1-4 FAMILY COVENANTS. In addition to the covenants and agreements made in the Security Instrument, Borrower and bender further covenant and agree as follows: A. ADDITIONAL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE SECURITY INSTRUMENT. In addition to the Property described in Security Instrument, the following items now or hereafter attached to the Property to the extent they are fixtures are added to the Property description, and shall also constitute the Property covered by the Security Instrument: building materials, appliances and goods of every nature 'whatsoever now or hereafter located in, on, or used, or intended to be used in connection with the Property, including, but not limited to, those for the purposes of supplying or distributing heating, cooling, electricity, gas, water, air and light, fire prevention and extinguishing apparatus, security and access control apparatus, plumbing, bath tubs, water heaters, water closets, sinks, ranges, stoves, refrigerators, dishwashers, disposals, washers, dryers, awnings, storm windows, storm doors, screens, blinds, shades, curtains and curtain rods, attached mirrors, cabinets, paneling and attached floor coverings, MI of which, including replacements and additions thereto, shall be deemed to be and remain a part of the MULTISTATE 1-4 FAMILY RIDER —Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac UNIFORM INSTRUMENT �Fgrpti� 0 1/01 Page 1 of 4 Initials; 57R (OOM) VMP MORTGAGE FORMS - (NO)521-7291 20070517001764.024 Property covered by the Security Instrument. All of the foregoing together with the Property described in the Security Instrument (or the leasehold estate if the Security Instrument is on a leasehold) are referred to in this 1-4 Family Rider and the Security Instrument as the "Property.- B. USE OF PROPERTY; COMPLIANCE WITH LAW. Borrower shall not seek, agree to or make a change in the use of the Property or its zoning classification, unless Lender has agreed in writing to the change. Borrower shall comply with all laws, ordinances, regulations and requirements of any governmental body applicable to the Property. C. SUBORDINATE LIENS. Except as permitted by federal law, Borrower shall not allow any lien inferior to the Security Instrument to be perfected against the Property without Lender's prior written permission. D. RENT LOSS INSURANCE_ Borrower shall maintain insurance against rent loss in addition to the other hazards for which insurance is required by Section 5. E. "BORROWER'S RIGHT TO REINSTATE" DELETED. Section 19 is deleted. F. BORROWER'S OCCUPANCY. Unless Lender and Borrower otherwise agree in writing, Section 6 concerning Borrower's occupancy of the Property is deleted. G. ASSIGNMENT OF LEASES. Upon Lender's request after default, Borrower shall assign to Lender all leases of the Property and all security deposits :made in connection with leases of the Property. Upon the assignment, Lender shall have the right to modify, extend or terminate the existing leases and to execute new leases, in Lender's sole discretion. As used in this paragraph G, the word "lease" shall mean "sublease" if the Security Instrument is on a leasehold. H. ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS; APPOINTMENT OF RECEIVER; LENDER IN POSSESSION. Borrower absolutely and unconditionally assigns and transfers to Lender all the rents and revcnues ("Rents") of the Property, regardless of to whom the Rents of the Property are payable. Borrower authorizes Lender or Lender's agents to collect the Rents, and agrees that each tenant of the Property shall pay the Rents to Lender or Lender's agents. However, Borrower shall receive the Rents until: (i) Lender has given Borrower notice of default pursuant to Section 22 of the Security Instrument, and (R) Lender has given notice to the tenant(s) that the Rents are to be paid to Lender or Lender's agent. This assignment of Rents constitutes an absolute assignment and not an assignment for additional security only. Initials: 4=® 57R 9001)8) Page 2. of 4 Form 3170 1/01 20070517001764.025 , IL ! If Lender gives notice of default to Borrower. (i) all Rents received by Borrower shall be held by Borrower as trustee for the benefit of Lender only, to be applied to the sums secured by the Security Instrument; (ii) Lender shall be entitled to collect and receive all of the Rents of the Property; (iii) Borrower agrees that each tenant of the Property shall pay all Rents due and unpaid to Lender or Lender's agents upon Lender's written demand to the tenant; (iv) unless applicable law provides otherwise, all Rents collected by Lender or Lender's agents shall be applied first to the costs of taking control of and managing the Property and collecting the Rents, including, but not limited to, attome-y's fees, receiver's fees, premiums on receiver's bonds, repair and maintenance costs, insurance premiums, taxes, assessments and other charges on the Property, and there to the sums secured by the Security Instrument; (v) Lender, Lender's agents or any judicially appointed receiver shall be liable to account for only those Rents actually received; and (vi) Lender shall be entitled to have a receiver appointed to take possession of and manage the Property and collect the Rents and profits derived from the Property without any showing as to the inadequacy of the Property as security. If the Rents of the property are not sufficient to cover the costs of taking control of and managing the Property and of collecting the Rents any funds expended by Lender for such purposes shall become indebtedness of Borrower to Lender secured by the Security Instrument pursuant to Section 9. Borrower represents and warrants that Borrower has not executed any prior assignment of the Rents and has not performed, and will not perform, any act that would prevent Lender from exercising its rights under this paragraph. Lender, or Lender's agents or a judicially appointed receiver, shall not be required to enter upon, take control of or maintain the Property before or after giving notice of default to Borrower. However, Lender, or Lender's agents or a judicially appointed receiver, may do so at any time when a default occurs. Any application of Rents shall not cure or waive any default or invalidate any other right or remedy of Lender. This assignment of Rents of the Property shall terminate when all the sums secured by the Security instrument are paid in full_ I. CROSS -DEFAULT PROVISION. Borrower's default or breach under any note or agreement in which Lender has an interest shall be a breach under the Security Instrument and Lender may invoke any of the remedies permitted by the Security Instrument. [nitials:ky- F/Nz tM 57R (0008) Page 3 of A Form 3170 1/D1 20070517001764.026 BY SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and provisions contained in this 1-4 Family Rider. (M' 57R (0006) _ (Seal ) -Borrower _ (Seal) -Dorrower _ (Seal) -Borrower -Borrower KUSHAL S VARMA KAJAL A RAM Page 4 of 4 _ (Seat) -Borrower ( Seal ) -Borrower _ (Seal) -Borrower (Seal) -Borrower Form 3170 1101 Printed: 10-20-2008 Payment Made CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 ?t.,&N EKG OF SEWOK Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUA08-123 10/20/2008 10:08 AM Total Payment: 150.00 Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Receipt Number: Payee: Kujal Ram Trans Account Code Description Amount 5022 000.345.81.00,0019 Variance Fees 150.00 Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment Check 1581 150.90 Account Balances Trans Account Code Description Balance Due 3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation e_ .00 5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees .00 5007 030.345,61,00.0003 Appeals/Waivers .00 5008 000.345-81.00.0004 Binding Sit_e0hnLi ilat .00 5009 00C.345.81.00.0006 Conditional 7:e Yens .00 5010 003.345.81.00,0007 Environmental Re•.l. .00 5011 000.345.81,00.0008 Prelim/'Tentative Pial. .00 5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Flat .00 5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUI7 .0,? 5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Fill nq }'.n.; .00 5015 000.:345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjus:yow .00 5016 000,345.81.00.0013 Mobile home Park:; .00 5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone 00 5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Jegeta nn t•9qmr, .00 50i9 000.345.61.00.0016 Shoreline Subs- ,-.. .00 5020 000.345,81.00,0011 Site Plan App ovwi 00 5021 000,345.81.00.0018 Temp Use, Hobby k, bu:nc .00 5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees .00 5024 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Arprcv:l Kee .00 5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive PiaK nmend .00 5909 000.341.50.00.0029 Booklets/EI5/�'_;��'.e:.; 00 5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) .00 5954 650-237.00.00.0000 Do NOT USE - USE 39S4 .00 5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage .00 5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax .00 Remaining Balance Due: $+0.00 00 2 0 20 ReCF.j E1D R0805439 APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS RECORDING NO. VOL./PAGE CITY OF RENTON SHORT PLAT RENTON, WASHINGTON NEW PRIVATE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS &c UTILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT NOTE; NEW PRIVATE EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES IS TO BE CREATED UPON THE SALE OF LOTS SHOWN ON THIS SHORT PLAT. THE OWNERS OF LOTS 3, 4, 5 AND 6 SHALL HAVE AN EQUAL AND UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN THE OWNERSHIP AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT APPURTENANCES, THESE APPURTENANCES AND MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES INCLUDE .THE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD, DRAINAGE .PIPES, AND STORM WATER QUALITY WITHIN THIS EASEMENT, PRIVATE SIGNAGE, AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE NOT OWNED BY THE CITY OF RENTON OR OTHER UTILITY PROVIDERS. MAINTENANCE COSTS SHALL BE SHARED EQUALLY. PARKING ON THE PAVING IN THE ACCESS EASEMENT IS PROHIBITED, UNLESS PAVEMENT WIDTH IS GREATER THAN 20 FEET. DECLARATION OF COVENANT THE OWNERS OF LAND EMBRACED WITHIN THIS SHORT PLAT, IN RETURN FOR THE BENEFITS TO ACCRUE FROM THIS SUBDIVISION, BY SIGNING HEREON COVENANT AND AGREE TO CONVEY THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST IN THE NEW EASEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS SHORT PLAT TO ANY AND ALL FUTURE PURCHASERS OF THE LOTS, OR OF ANY SUBDIVISIONS THEREOF. THIS COVENANT SHALL RUN WITH THE LAND AS SHOWN ON THIS SHORT PLAT. CERTIFICATION KNOW ALL PEOPLE BY THESE PRESENTS that we, the undersigned owners of interest in the land hereby short subdivided, do hereby make a short subdivision therefore declare this map to be the graphic representation of the same, and that short subdivision is made with the free consent and in accordance with the desire of the owners IN WITNESS WHEREOF we set our hands and seals. KUSHAL S. VARMA KAJAL A. RAM ACKNOWLEDGMENTS State of Washington County of I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this Instrument and acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Signature of Notary Public Dated My appointment expires State of Washington County of On this day of _, 20—, personally appeared ,_ to me known to be the of the corporation that executed foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mention, and on oath stated that he/she was duly authorized to execute the said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. Witness my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) My Appointment Expires Date RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE No. Filed for record this day of ,20 at in book of at page at the request of Mounlr H. Touma Mgr. -- Supt. of Records CITY OF RENTON Administrator of Planning/Building/Public Works Examined and approved this ____ day of 20 Administrator LEGEND PK NAIL. EX MON IN CASE EX REBAR / WIPE AS NOTED SET REBAR & CAP QUARTER CORNER SECTION CORNER Examined and approved this day of _, 20 Assessor sor Deputy Assessor Account Number 062305-9036 NE 6th STREET 0 AREA TO BE DEDICATED I I Ui S88°57'07"E 1 N L=38.69 I -1 - man=24r I W�- Delta=88'3 '56" 20.00 26.00' �- I 4 R=25.00 LOT 2 � LOT 1 d� 6 f • �— SCALE: 40 0 20 40 so 160 PORTION OF SW 1 /4 OF SE +1 /4 OF SEC 9, TWN 23 N, RG 5 E, WOM LU A-- XX— XXX— SH PL. LND--XX--X X BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY GARY L. VAN NESS 11625 SE 49 7H ST. BELLEVUE, WA 98006 PH. 425 747 0776 PLS. 21364 SURVEY ACCURACY MEETS OR EXCEEDS WAC 332-130-090 FIELD EQUIPMENT NE 6TH ST SITE 141 d W �J ct a � 0 o NE 47H ST GREENWOOD CEMETAR Y SURVEYED BY AFIELD TRAVERSE MINI TY MAP BASIS OF BEARING: SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 114 SEC 9-23-5 (N 89'08'47" W) ..-. BENCHMARK: CITY OF RENTON MON #1503 TOP OF CONC MON AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. ELEVA -ION = 401.02 LOT SIDE I 4,66 . s.. 0) b 5,013. s.f. ! 1 1 LOT 1 5013 SF SITE DATA LOT 2 4666 SF LOT 3 6763 SF, �. - f I LOT 4 5770 SF, STREET R TOTAL AREA - 44,503 SQUARE FEET(1.02 AC W AREA - 9,585 SQUARE FEET ()0.22 AC) LOT 5 5774 SF, � r f LOT 6 6933 SF, / E 62.�� I PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS- 6 � �.�' -- ,�� I �5°!415� !r 3. DENSITY = 7.5 DU/ACRE I I LO 3 Ei 351 Oq R'E I ! 6,� 00 I UGAL DESCRIPTION. c' - -THE -NFTH HALE 0E�-iC�RTHF-AST {.� IQRR _OF TkE � _�- ! I � I -�- � - �__�__ SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE WOUTHEAST QUARTER OF 00 SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN n S88.59'1"F_ 115. I KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, I Ljj I I 1 > EXCEPT THE WEST 525 FEET THEREOF ! I LOT 4 ! C) 1 x 0 5,770. s.f. I 0 _ �- u7 a I o Z LLJ � I I I �1 O S88°59'19"E-115.45! rI cnZ KUSHAL S. VARMA AND KAJAL A. RAM 15' TREE RESERVATION - I I 1 2007 ABERDEEN PLACE NE E1- ! I 1 RREN TON, WAS 98056 EASEMENT LOT 5 o 0 ! ! 5, 774. s. f. ! .-. LO r' 15' PIRVATE SANITARY Q -- AND STORM EASEMENT — — _ _ — _ _j LO I U AQUEFER PROTECTION NOTICE S88'S9' 1'' E-11.5.52r' _ I THE L O TS CREA T ED HEREIN FALL Wi THIN ZONE 2 OF REN TONS A QUIFER ! I I PROTECTION AREA AND ARE SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOT fi I c CITY OF RENTON ORDINANCE #43b7 AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 1 ! 6, 933. S. f. I 0 I 4740. THIS Cl TY S SOLE SOURCE OF DRINKING WA TER IS SUPPLIED I I I 0 1 FROM A SHALLOW AQUIFER UNDER THE CI TY'S SURFACE. THERE IS NO I I NATURAL BARRIER BETWEEN THE WA TER TABLE AND GROUND SURFACE. ! I I 1 EXTREME CARE SHOULD BE EXERCISED WHEN HANDLING ANY LIQUID ! --. - - - --- - - 20.00' 26.00' SUBSTANCE OTHER THAN WA 7ER TO PROTECT FROM CONTACT WITH THE 115.61 GROUND SURFA CE. - IT IS THE HOMEOWNERS 'RESPONSIBILI TY TO PROTECT w S8 '59A19"E THE Cl TY'S DRINKING WA TER. Z ! ! w .! },,10' SANITARY EASEMENT Z I STONE LANE PLAT W w S 1 /4 COR SEC. 9 EASEMENT NT PRIVATE STORM 0 4 O C;,D.R. MOM Z QL�p 2BRASS DISC W/PUNCH ON N o ClrrpE N1NG w z 4"' CONC FILLED PIPE IN CASE ._ NE 4th STREET 1324.06' MEAS. _� 1 SE C0R SEC, 9 OCT 2 .,� C.O.R. MON #1503 S89'08'47"E 2648.12' MEAS. 1 /8" COPPER PIN IN CONCRETE S89°06'05"E MON. DOWN 0.7' IN CASE. 0 2648.09 C.O.R. LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE f. �. 0QUEEN SHORT PLAT This ma correctly represents a survey made ao w p y p . r. "1 3629 NE f TH STREET b me or under m direction in conformance TOUMA G1N�S y y RENTON, WASHINGTON With the requirements of the Survey Recording Act at the request o KUSHAL VARMA WEST VALLEY EXECUTIVE -PARK DWN. BY DATE JOB NO. in June 2007 A , x- 70 �� �' 6632 SOUTH 191ST PLACE, SUITE E-102 ° KENT, WA 98032 DAN T. JUNE, 2007 917---001--061 PHONE (425) 251-0665 FAX (425) 251-0625 LAB CHKD. BY SCALE SHEET EXPIR 6/22/09 Certificate No. 9470 MHT NOTED OF 2 . . . . . . . . . ... RECORDING NO. VOL./PAGE EX CS RIM EL =388.63 ��Q INV EL =386.98 0 EX C8 RIM EL -- INV EL =38 4.51 .. s 1414' f ;<: _.t� i �. ;. 7r 54.00 36.75 I ''i 1 L=38.69 >e Tan=2 2 !� Delta c8'*39'S6 :: d' R=2 .00 ' • �,^ LOT C) CD r ,- PF / 0 I 62. go E HOUS I I 1,351 sq.fL r I 4 I �9'X20'PARIN Or i LOpb \ 00 Y4'', 12' DRIVEWAY I I I ;' } I S885919 E115.3A C( OT 4x (t r Q �- 8F I I 104F }" ` I•: aF' 8 S9fi 15.45 Ci 15 TREE RESERVATION A.,:ii EASEMENT 1 ` 8F I 1 a 0 15 PRRVATE SANITARY AND STORM EASEMENT Lo 1 E 115.52',,` F e�-0�R ., •� r1 �3AR LOT 8. U�D�.. I PO 1 :r S88'�9�19"', 4 y ; co NEW GB - 2 10' SANITARY EASEMENT RIM EL - 43 I � I INV EL 70.92 I I STONE LANE PLAT 10' PRIVATE STORM I EASEMENT i 71 w 0 z `JOHE LAINIE PL_,j ..I_ EX CH RIM EL=372.57 INV EL =367.50 NE 4th STREET 1324.06' S 1/4 COR SEC. 9 $89'08'47"E / S89006'05"E C.O.R. MOM #1502 2BRASS DISC W/PUNCH ON 4„ CONC FILLED PIPE IN CASE MEAS. -` P u Z� W W_ CAI C 2648.12' MEAS. 2648.09' C.O.R. . EX SSMH RIM EL-390,58 INV EL =380.28 EX C8 RIM EL-390.47 INV EL=389.27 y4- EX CB -TYP 2 RIM EL=391.02 INV EL= 383.01 E-W INV EL= 386.02 NW INV EL-387.00 NE U a a EX c8 -- RIM EL=385.54 IWEL =381.89 NEW CB - TYP 2 RIM £L =383 t INV EL-369.75 z w Z 0 z D 3+59-53 EX CH RIM EL =391.40 INV EL=387.60 0 EX SSMH ❑ EX CA TCH BASIN TYPE 1 Q EX CATCH BASIN TYPE 2 x WA TER VAL VE - FIRE HYDRANT ® WA TER METER ® IRRIGA TION VALVE ? WA TER BLOW OFF CO TELEPHONE CABINET CM CABLE TV CABINET M GAS VALVE ® GAS METER TELEPHONE MANHOLE © POWER VAULT LIGHT POLE YARD LIGHT 0 MONI TORING WELL S H PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON POLE �- SIGN TWO POST SIGN ® TRAFFIC JUNCTION BOX 400 396 392 388 384 380 DATUM ELEV 376, 375.00 LO cc n DECIDUOUS TREE 40 a 20 40 a0 160 CONIFER TREE SCALE: CD 1 HEDGE DEC IDUOUS TREE TO PORTION OF R'EMO VED CONIFER TREE TO SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SEC 9, TWN 23 N, RG 5 E, W.M, BE REMO VED -o- UTILITY POLE E------ GUY POLE LU A-- X X -XX- SH P L © MAIL BOX LN D - X - XX X Cx--D(� ROCKER Y Q MON IN CASE SURFACE :BRASS MONUMENT 0 PK NAIL 0 FOUND REBAR & CAP OR IRON PIPE -- --- --- EX WA TER LINE EX SANITARY SEWER LINE --- ----- EX STORM LINE a o IRON FENCE NE 67H ST EZZ z Q SI TEZZ � z � a NE 4 TH ST GREENWOOD CEMETARY MINI TY MAP SURVEY NOTES: BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY GARY L, VAN NESS 11625SE49THST. BELLEVUE, WA 98006 PH 425 747 0776 PLS. 21364 SURVEY ACCURACY MEETS OR EXCEEDS WAC 332-130--090 FIELD EQUIPMENT SOKKIA S.ET3BIl SURVEYED BY FIELD TRAVERSE BASIS OF BEARING: SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 114 SEC 9-23---5 (N 89'08'47" W) -- Y BENCHMARK - CI TY- Or-RtNTOrV -M'0N- #1503 TOP OF CONC MOIV AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SEC77ON 9, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. ELEVATION = 401.02 2+00 3+00 NE 6TH STREET LOW POINT ELEV = 390.07 LOW POINT STA = 1 +36.41 PVI STA = 1 +40 PVI ELEV = 389.84 A.D. = 4.88 K= S. 20 I I I I V 100.00, VC 1 Q0.00 VC O C-4 a o `q HIGH POINT ELEV = 392,27 0 o + o + o �, + m cv HIGH POINT STA = 2+48.95 v �? PVI STA = 3+50 r- K w� PVI STA = 2+50 Cb PVl ELEV = 390.00 In w cW� PVI ELEV -� 393.00 V) w c A. _ -8.12 + to } .� m m A.D. = 5 88rh K = 16.33 �- 00 --- -gym 388 - -_ _.. _ ___..___. _........... .__.__-__.._392 _....___ - _ _ _ ..._.._ 380 376 __.__ ...__w_ .. _ _ _ _- - - - DATUM EL32 _ . . 370.00 Lq �m 000 �Cy, mm , 0)00 �; 00 ui rq tn to to 1 +00 2+00 3+00 4+00 C.O.R. /S� ECOR SEC. 9 V. O al R\. MON #1503 1 /8" COPPER PIN IN CONCRETE MON. DOWN 0.7 IN CASE. 9470 ' rs� .L LAB 6/22/09 QUEEN AVENUE NE TOUMA ENGINEERS WEST VALLEY EXECUTIVE PARK 6632 SOUTH 191 ST PLACE, SUITE E--102 • KENT, WA 98032 PHONE (425) 251-0665 FAX (425) 251-0625 392 388 384 380 376 372 QEVELUPM7' P�,ghJNING Cl7Y Ory � RENI'ON W OCT 2 0 200$ HECEIVEU 0 QUEEN SHORT PLAT DWN. BY DAN T. CHKD. BY MHT TOPO, GRADING, UTILITIES AND TREES INVENTORY PLAN DATE JOB NO. JUNE, 2007 917-001-061 SCALE SHEET r� r� NOTED L OF L