HomeMy WebLinkAboutMindys Place, Preliminary Plat - Reconsideration IIBEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER 1.M Mlr_� V MILE THE CITY I
OFRENTON
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
Re: Mindy's Place
Preliminary Plat
LUA14-000093
A Reconsideration Decision was issued at the request of the applicant for the above -
captioned matter on June 30, 2014 to clarify that a cedar fencing requirement along
the southern property line of the project was limited to the southern property line of
Lot 5 with the understanding that the City's stormwater regulations would require
fencing along the border of the stormwater tract as well. An opportunity for comment
from the adjoining property owner, Jerry Smith, was not provided because at the
hearing it appeared that Mr. Smith and the Applicant had agreed to limit the fencing
in this manner. Subsequent to issuance of the Reconsideration Decision, Mr. Smith
advised staff that he did not agree that the fencing should be limited to his shared
property line with Lot 5 and the stormwater tract and that the fencing should cover
the entire southern property line. Consequently, consideration of the applicant's
reconsideration request was reopened through August 18, 2014 to provide Mr. Smith
an opportunity to respond and the applicant an opportunity to reply. Mr. Smith
provided comments on August 6, 2014. The applicant's submitted a reply on August
15, 2014 in two separate submissions from Hans Korve and Wayne Jones.
In the comments submitted on reconsideration, the applicant and Mr. Smith agree that
6 foot cedar fencing should also be placed along the southern lot line of the storm
water tract. Condition 14 will be further clarified to require cedar fencing along this
portion of the tract.
Mr. Smith requests fencing along the southern border of the sensitive areas tract as
well. Mr. Smith bases his request for fencing along the sensitive area on the premise
that people trespass onto the sensitive areas tract with motorcycles and the like.
There is no evidence in the record that this trespass has occurred. Further, it is
uncontested that such a fence would encroach into wetlands and their buffers in
P. 1 Reconsideration Decision
violation of the City's wetland regulations. Mr. Smith notes that there is currently
wire fencing along 162nd Ave. across critical areas, but as noted by the applicant this
is likely due to exemptions that apply to the placement of utilities. Regardless, even
if there were no legal justification for the existing fence encroachment, that does not
authorize a further violation of wetland regulations for this project. For these reasons,
Mr. Smith's request for additional fencing must be denied.
The original decision issued for the above -captioned matter shall remain unchanged
except that Condition 14 shall be replaced with the following:
14. A six foot tall cedar fence shall be installed along the southern property line of
Lot 5 and the southern property line of the stormwater tract.
Dated this 29th day of August, 2014.
RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the hearing
examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC
4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's
decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the
date of the hearing examiner's decision. A request for
reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within
this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13)
and RMC 4-8-100(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period
shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration.
Additional information regarding the appeal process may be
p. 2 Reconsideration Decision
obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7th
floor, (425) 430-6510.
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for
property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of
revaluation.
p. 3 Reconsideration Decision