HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-21-2024 - HEX Decision - Dreamliner - LUA-23-0003551
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 1
CAO VARIANCE -1
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
RE: Dreamliner LLC Mixed Use
Conditional Use, Site Plan and
Modification
PR23-000125
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
FINAL DECISION
Summary
Lavina Wadhwani of Veer Architecture, PLLC requests approvals of site plan, conditional use permit
and street modification applications to construct a 30-dwelling unit commercial/residential mixed-use
building at 511 Airport Way. The applications are approved subject to conditions.
Testimony
A computer-generated transcript of the hearing has been prepared to provide an overview of the
hearing testimony. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only as Appendix A.
Exhibits
Exhibits 1—3 as shown on the “Exhibits” list presented during the May 7, 2024 hearing were entered
into the record during the h6earing.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 2
CAO VARIANCE - 2
1. Applicant. Lavina Wadhwani, Veer Architecture, PLLC, 10655 NE 4th St Suite #707,
Bellevue, WA 98005
2. Hearing. A virtual hearing was held on the applications on May 7, 2024 at 11 am in the City
of Renton Council chambers, Zoom ID No. 946 7233 4580.
3. Project Description. Lavina Wadhwani of Veer Architecture, PLLC requests approvals of site
plan, conditional use permit and street modification applications to construct a commercial/residential
mixed-use building at 511 Airport Way. The building would include 30 dwelling units, 3,192 square
feet of ground floor commercial space, and 38 on-site parking spaces. Two (2) commercial spaces,
1,800 square feet and 1,392 square feet each, are proposed on the ground floor. All parking spaces are
within on-site structured parking. Access is proposed from Airport Way and S Tillicum St. The subject
property is 0.36-acres (16,010 square feet) in area.
The Applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-6-060F.2 to modify the Principal Arterial
Street section classification for Airport Way. To meet the City’s complete street standards for Principal
Arterial Streets a minimum right-of-way width of 125 feet (125’) for a seven (7) lane street is required;
half street improvements as taken from the right-of-way centerline would be required. This would
include 88 feet (88’) paved width (44 feet (44’) each side) not including parking, an eight-foot (8’)
wide parking lane, bicycle facilities, a one half-foot (0.5’) wide curb, an eight-foot (8’) wide planting
strip, an eight-foot (8’) wide sidewalk, street trees and storm drainage improvements on each side. The
current right-of-way width for Airport Way, as measured using the King County Assessor’s Map, is
approximately 80 feet (80’) with approximately 78 feet (78’) of paving. Dedication of approximately
22.5 feet (22.5’) would be required.
The Applicant has proposed a modified Primary Arterial Street standard containing a right-of-way
width of approximately 91.5 feet (91.5’). The modified street would retain the existing curb location
and pavement width on the south side of Airport Way, an eight-foot (8’) wide landscaping planter, an
eight-foot (8’) wide sidewalk, a one half-foot (0.5’) wide curb and one-foot (1’) wide clear width back
of sidewalk. A right-of-way dedication of approximately 11.5 feet (11.5’) is proposed.
4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate and
appropriate infrastructure and public services. Infrastructure and public services are more directly
addressed as follows:
A. Water and Sewer Service. The project is located within the City’s water and sewer service
areas. The Applicant will be extending water and sewer from existing mains to the
proposal.
B. Fire and Police. The City of Renton will provide police service and the Renton Regional
Fire Authority will provide fire service. Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 3
CAO VARIANCE - 3
sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development with the
improvements and fire impact fees required of the project.
C. Drainage. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate drainage facilities since
its proposed stormwater controls have been found by City staff to conform to the City’s
stormwater regulations.
The proposal is subject to the 2022 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. The
Manual generally requires that the proposal not generate off-site flows that exceed pre-
developed forested conditions of the project site. A Technical Information Report,
Exhibit 4, has been prepared by the Applicant and found to conform to the Manual for
this level of review. As detailed in the report, a Level 1 downstream analysis was
performed as part of the TIR. The downstream drainage paths were field inspected on
October 29, 2020 for existing drainage problems. The analysis concluded there were no
existing drainage problems before discharging to the Cedar River. As the project would
drain to the Cedar River downstream of the Taylor Creek confluence, the project meets
the direct discharge exemption per Section 1.2.3.1 of the RSWDM. Therefore, no flow
control facilities are required for the project. Erosion control measures are proposed per
the temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan and Best Management Practices
(BMPs).
A new eight-inch (8”) storm drain connection is proposed. It would connect into an
existing 12 inch (12”) public storm main in Airport Way.
D. Parks/Open Space. The proposal provides for adequate parks and open space.
Portions of the project are located within Design Districts A or D, which both have
similar open space requirements. The Applicant proposes 30 attached dwelling units
which requires a minimum of 1,500 square feet of common open space and/or recreation
area to be incorporated into the building. The floor and landscape plans detail open space
and recreational areas of 2,121 square feet. The interior amenities include a 520 square
foot club room on the third level and a 620 square foot club room on the fifth level. It is
unclear what amenities would be provided in the club rooms. As such, a condition of
approval requires that the Applicant submit revised floor plans with the building permit
identifying amenities, such as exercise equipment or seating/entertainment areas within
the club room areas.
The exterior amenities include two (2) open air terraces. Both are located on the third
level. One (1) at 598 square feet is located on the northern façade. It includes seating,
vegetation in planters and a sink/grill area. The other is 383 square feet and is located on
the southern façade. It only includes planters with vegetation.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 4
CAO VARIANCE - 4
A Park Impact Fee will be required for the future dwellings. The current Park Impact Fee
is $2,222.84 per each new multi-family dwelling unit within a multi-family project of five
(5) or more units. Assessed fees are based on the City of Renton Fee Schedule. The fee is
calculated and paid at time of building permit issuance.
E. Transportation and Circulation. The proposal is served by adequate and appropriate
transportation facilities.
A Traffic Impact Analysis is required when a project proposal results in 20 new a.m. or
p.m. peak hour trips. A Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 7), prepared by Transpo Group,
LLC, dated January 2024, was submitted with the application. The analysis indicates the
proposal is anticipated to generate 312 weekday net new daily trips with 19 weekday
a.m. peak hour trips and 33 weekday p.m. peak hour trips. According to the Traffic
Impact Analysis there is no increased delay at the studied intersections with the addition
of the project traffic. Additionally, all studied intersections comply with the City’s LOS
D standard in both the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours after project completion. The
Airport Way access is approximately 140 feet (140’) from a bend in the road and posted
speed is 35 miles per hour. The analysis shows sufficient sight lines are provided at the
proposed Airport Way access with the City of Renton’s entering and stopping sight
distance requirements being met in both the eastbound and westbound directions.
However, the site access analysis based its results on right-turn movement. As such, to
ensure that the projected results are maintained for Airport Way, staff recommends as a
condition of approval that the Applicant provide revised civil construction plans showing
the installation of preventative measures within the Airport Way right-of-way such that
the Airport Way driveway is restricted to a right-in and right-out only driveway.
Vehicle access to the site is from Airport Way and S Tillicum St. Access from Airport
Way has been used because while the project abuts S Tillicum St, it is deficient in width
for emergency vehicle access.
City staff have also determined in the staff report that the proposed circulation system
provides for desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and
adjacent properties because of the inclusion of a new eight-foot (8’) wide sidewalk along
Airport Way and entryways with pedestrian connections to the sidewalk.
Loading and delivery would occur in the parking garage access via Airport Way and S
Tillicum St.
F. Schools. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate school facilities.
It is anticipated that the Renton School District can accommodate any additional students
generated by this proposal at the following schools: Bryn Mawr Elementary School,
Dimmitt Middle School and Renton High School. Any new elementary or middle school
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 5
CAO VARIANCE - 5
students from the proposed development would be bussed to their respective schools. The
stop for elementary school students is located at Logan Ave S / Renton High School
driveway approximately 700 feet (700’) from the project site. Students would walk east
on Airport Way until the intersection with Logan Ave S then south to the Renton High
School driveway. The stop for middle school students is located at the intersection of
Logan Ave S and S Tobin St approximately 415 feet (415’) from the project site.
Students would walk east on Airport Way until the intersection with Logan Ave S then
south to the intersection with S Tobin St. To get to Renton High School, high school
students would have the same distance and route as elementary school students.
A School Impact Fee, based on new dwelling units, would be required in order to
mitigate the proposal’s potential impacts to the Renton School District. The fee is
payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code. Currently the fee is
assessed at $4,257.00 per multi-family unit.
G. Refuse and Recycling. The proposal complies with applicable refuse and recycling
regulations and thus provides for adequate and appropriate facilities to address solid
waste impacts.
RMC 4-4-090D1a requires a minimum of one and one-half (1-1/2) square feet per
dwelling unit in multi-family residences shall be provided for recyclables deposit
areas, except where the development is participating in a City-sponsored program in
which individual recycling bins are used for curbside collection. A minimum of three
(3) square feet per dwelling unit shall be provided for refuse deposit areas. A total
minimum area of eighty (80) square feet shall be provided for refuse and recyclables
deposit areas.
With the 30 proposed dwelling units, development a minimum of 90 square feet is
required for refuse deposit areas with a minimum of 45 square feet required for
recycling deposit areas. For the commercial portion of the development, it is unknown
based on the use what the specific minimum size needed would be. Of the
requirements listed in RMC 4-4-090E, Commercial, Industrial, and Other
Nonresidential Developments – Additional Requirements for Deposit and Collection
Areas, retail developments have the greater minimum requirement. Because tenants
are unknown at this time, and a retail use is a potential use within the commercial
spaces, the retail development standards will be used as retail would be the most
intensive use possible. A minimum of 33 square feet is required for refuse deposit
areas with a minimum of 17 square feet is required for recycling deposit areas. A
combined 185 square feet is required.
Per the submitted floor plans (Exhibit 27), one (1) 217.5 square foot location is
provided on the ground floor for refuse and recyclable deposit area. An additional 108
square feet deposit area with trash chute to the ground floor is provided for on the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 6
CAO VARIANCE - 6
second level. Two (2) 128-square foot deposit areas with trash chute to the ground
floor are provided on the third and fourth level. A 127-square foot deposit area with
trash chute to the ground floor is provided on the fifth level. The deposit area is
incorporated within the building along the southern façade externally accessed from S
Tillicum St. Per the provided building elevations (Exhibit 16) would be externally
accessed via a nine and a half – foot tall by 10-foot wide (9.5’ x 10’) roll up door from
the S Tillicum St. Per RMC 4-4-090C10, Minimum Gate Opening and Minimum
Vertical Clearance, the enclosure entrance needs to have a minimum width of 12 feet
(12’). As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval the Applicant submit
revised building designs with the building permit which provides an enclosure
meeting applicable requirements within RMC 4-4-090, Refuse and Recyclables
Standards. The design shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to building permit issuance
H. Parking. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate parking because the
proposed parking complies with the City’s parking standards.
Thirty (30) dwelling units are proposed: 14 within the CA zone and 16 within the CD
zone. A minimum of 14 stalls is required with a maximum of 25 stalls permitted within
the CA zone. A minimum and maximum of 16 stalls is required for the CD zone. A
minimum of 30 total stalls is required with a maximum of 41 total stalls is permitted for
residential parking. Three thousand one hundred and ninety-two (3,192) square feet of
commercial space is proposed with the CA zone; none is proposed within the CD zone. A
minimum of eight (8) stalls is required with a maximum of 16 stalls permitted.
Combining the residential and commercial parking requirements a minimum of 38 total
stalls is required with a maximum of 57 stalls permitted. The Applicant is proposed 38
stalls, or the minimum amount of parking required for the proposed uses
I. Landscaping. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate landscaping by
conforming to the City’s landscaping standards.
The Applicant’s conceptual landscape plan (Exhibit 3) identifies plantings to go within
the on-site 10-foot (10’) landscaping strip within the CA zone. Proposed plantings
include trees, shrubs and groundcover. Additional shrubs are proposed along an inset
area on the western façade. A tree, ground cover and shrubs are proposed within an inset
landscaping area along S Tillicum St with Japanese Sky Holly proposed in three (3)
locations abutting the on-site parking structure. Staff received comment from the
Duwamish Tribe (Exhibit 8) strongly recommending native vegetation be used. As
currently proposed the vegetation is a mix of native and non-native species. As such, a
condition of approval the Applicant submit revised landscape plans with the construction
permit application that provides native vegetation to the greatest extent possible. A
narrative shall be provided from a Washington licensed landscape architect identifying
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 7
CAO VARIANCE - 7
why native vegetation could not be used in specific instances, why vegetation has been
chosen for the specific area and what measures need to be incorporated to ensure the
long-term health and survival of the landscaping.
Four (4) mature Norway Maples, ranging in Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) from 14
inches (14”) to 24 inches (24”) are currently within the existing landscaping strip in the
right-of-way (ROW) of Airport Way (Exhibit 26). These trees are proposed to remain as
street trees with no new plantings proposed. Site development work, specifically access
and frontage improvements would be conducted within the dripline of the existing trees.
As such, a condition of approval requires the Applicant to provide an updated arborist
report with the construction permit application. The updated report shall identify
measures needed to ensure the long-term health and viability of the trees. If the arborist
determines that existing street tree(s) cannot be maintained based on the scope of
proposed work, then new street trees shall be planted at a 1:1 ratio of removed trees to
new trees. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted with the construction permit
application showing newly planted street tree species chosen from the City of Renton
Approved Tree List & Spacing Guidelines.
J. Transit and Bicycle. The proposal complies with City bicycle parking requirements and
thus provides for adequate bicycle facilities. Transit is also easily accessible.
RMC 4-4-080F11 requires bicycle parking spaces at the rate of one-half (0.5) bicycle
parking space per each attached dwelling unit. Thirty (30) dwelling units are proposed
requiring a minimum of 15 bicycle parking stalls. Eight (8) stalls are provided for the
commercial spaces requiring a minimum of one (1) bicycle parking stall. A minimum of
16 total bicycle stalls are required. Seventeen (17) bicycle parking stalls are provided.
Fifteen (15) six feet deep by two feet wide (6’x2’) stalls are provided within a bike room
on the ground floor; an additional two (2) bike lockers of the same size are provided
within the on-site parking structure (Exhibit 28). The Applicant did not provide sufficient
details to determine if the bicycle parking standards are being met. For example, it is not
clear how the user would be able to lock their bicycle to a rack at two (2) or more points.
As such, to ensure bicycle parking meets standards, a condition of approval requires that
the Applicant provide revised drawings showing the location of provided bicycle stalls
and identifying how the stalls will meet applicable standards in RMC 4-4-080F.11.
Access to the transit center located approximately three (3) blocks to the south on Logan
Ave S is provided via public sidewalk.
5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. On
March 25, 2025 the City issued a Mitigated Determination of Non-significance (MDNS) for the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 8
CAO VARIANCE - 8
project. Adequate infrastructure serves the site as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. Impacts are
more specifically addressed as follows:
A. Views. The proposal is similar in scale and height to nearby developments, such as
Merrill Gardens and Camellia Court to the southeast of the project. Views of Lake
Washington and the Cedar River would not be impacted as those features are both
blocked by exiting development prior to construction of the Dreamliner project. No
obstruction of other existing views of natural features is anticipated.
B. Compatibility. The proposal is compatible with surrounding use.
Surrounding properties are mixed use as well. Applicable land use and design standards
as addressed elsewhere in this decision ensure that the proposal is aesthetically
compatible with surrounding uses. Pursuant to those standards, the building includes
building step backs and articulations on the northern, western and southern façades. The
northern and southern facades include a recessed outdoor terrace area for tenant
recreation. The building conforms around the terraces to keep it open to the sky for the
entire height of the building. The step-backs and articulation reduce the overall bulk and
scale of the building and prevent it from becoming a large featureless box.
C. Light, glare, noise and privacy. The proposal will not create any significant adverse light,
noise or glare impacts and will not impact privacy.
The Applicant has submitted a lighting plan to establish conformance to the City’s
lighting standards. See Ex. 31. Sconce lighting is shown on the northern façade at
ground level. It does not appear that there is any lighting proposed specific to the building
entrances (Exhibit 31). As such to ensure that pedestrian scale lighting is provided at the
primary entrances, a condition of approval, the Applicant submit revised elevations with
the building permit application which provides pedestrian scale lighting through down
lighting provided within the associated entrance awnings.
Five (5) sconces are provided on the front façade within the CA zone; three (3) are
associated with one (1) commercial space and two (2) with the other. An additional three
(3) exterior lights are proposed with one (1) over the entrance of the riser room and two
(2) more framing the structured parking entrance. Three (3) sconces and what is identified
as an exterior light are proposed on the northern façade. Twelve (12) identified exterior
lights are proposed on the rear (southern) façade with six (6) at a height of 18 feet (18’)
above grade and the reminder located lower at the refuse and recycling entrance, the
secondary structured parking entrance, an emergency pedestrian entrance and between the
wall cut outs. Provided recommended conditions of approval are met, additional down
lighting would be provided at the commercial spaces. Extending the lighting along the
southern façade would continue the rhythm of the ground level detail on the front façade
and provide lighting along S Tillicum St. Therefore, a condition of approval requires the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 9
CAO VARIANCE -9
Applicant submit revised elevations within the building permit application that provides
additional sconce lighting along the southern façade at intervals between the conditioned
windows.
Awnings are located over the commercial spaces, but it does not appear that they include
lighting. To ensure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, staff recommends as a
condition of approval the Applicant submit revised elevations with the building permit
application that provides additional downlighting within the entirety of all front façade
awnings. The additional lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning
Project Manager prior to building permit approval.
The building design provides privacy and noise reduction as the residential dwellings
units are stepped back and elevated from Airport Way and S Tillicum St.
D.Critical Areas. The project site is located in a high seismic area and a critical aquifer
area. The proposal is found to adequately avoid impacts to these critical areas since it
conforms to the City’s critical area regulations as provided in further detail below.
i.Seismic Hazard. RMC 4-3-050F2aii requires the Applicant to submit a geotechnical
report for high seismic areas that establishes that the site can safely accommodate the
proposal and that the proposal will not jeopardize other critical areas or destabilize
adjoining properties. The Applicant has complied with RMC 4-3-050F2aii and for
this reason there are no adverse impacts anticipated due to the presence of the seismic
hazard area.
The submitted geotechnical report, Ex. 6, states that boring results indicate that the
subsurface conditions at the site include very soft to very stiff silt with varying
amounts of sand and very loose to very dense sand with varying amounts of silt and
gravel and gravel with varying amounts of silt and sand. Groundwater was
encountered at approximately 10 feet (10’) during subsurface exploration. The
submitted geotechnical report states that per the Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of
King County, Washington the area is mapped as having a moderate to high
liquefaction susceptibility during a seismic event. The report concludes that based on
the liquefaction analysis the native soil below the groundwater table would liquefy
under severe earthquake ground motions (Magnitude 7 and horizontal acceleration of
0.535g with settlement in the range of six to eight inches (6” – 8”).
The report recommends foundations be supported on conventional spread footings
bearing on a subgrade improvement with Geopiers or Aggregate piers. A Technical
Memorandum (Exhibit 14) from The Riley Group, Inc. dated April 24, 2023,
reiterates the need for installing of aggregate piers to mitigate the predicated
settlements and allow suitable support for the building. It is also recommended that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 10
CAO VARIANCE - 10
slab-on-grade floors and slabs for the building be supported on a subgrade improved
with Geopiers or Aggregate piers.
SEPA mitigation measures were included with the environmental threshold
determination that the project comply with the recommendations of the geotechnical
report and any updated reports and that the geotechnical engineer reviews the
construction and building plans to verify the recommendations and specifications are
consistent with the geotechnical report.
ii. Aquifer Recharge. The City of Renton mapping system has identified the site as
being located in the Downtown Wellhead Protection Zone 1. The site’s proposed
residential use is not indicative of a type of use that would potentially harm the City’s
groundwater. no groundwater will be withdrawn, and no waste material will be
discharged into the ground. If more than 100 cubic yards of fill are imported, a fill
material source statement is required that is certified by a professional engineer or
geologist licensed by the State of Washington identifying each source location of the
fill.
6. Tree Retention. Beyond the City’s critical area regulations, the only regulations requiring
protection of vegetation are the City’s tree retention standards. As conditioned, the proposal meets the
City’s tree retention standards and thus is found to adequately protect and retain site trees.
The City’s adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations (4-4-130) require the retention of
30 percent of trees in a residential development. Tree credit requirements shall apply at a minimum
rate of thirty (30) credits per net acre based on values for existing or new trees as provided in RMC 4-
4-130H.1.b.v. No trees are present on-site, significant or otherwise. A minimum of 10 tree credits
(0.32 acres x 30 tree credits per acre = 9.6 tree credits, rounded up to 10) are needed for the entire
project site. Per the submitted landscape plan seven (7) trees are proposed: four (4) River Birch, one
(1) Norway Maple, two (2) White Oak. The River Birch and Norway Maple are classified as Large
Specie trees with the White Oak being a Medium Specie tree. A total of 10 tree credits are being
proposed.
Conclusions of Law
1. Authority The conditional use permit and site plan applications require hearing examiner
review and final approval. The modification and site plan requests are subject to staff approval when
reviewed separately, but are consolidated with hearing examiner review for this application.
The proposal is subject to Type III hearing examiner conditional use permit review because it involves
a density that exceeds 150 dwelling units per acre in the CD zone. See RMC 4-2-120B. The site plan
application requires Type III hearing examiner review because the proposal exceeds four stories. See
RMC 4-9-200D2biv. RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to be collectively processed
under “the highest-number procedure.” The Type III review is the “highest-number procedure” for the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 11
CAO VARIANCE - 11
permit applications identified above and therefore must be employed for the conditional use, site plan
and street modification applications. As outlined in RMC 4-8-080(G), the hearing examiner is
authorized to hold hearings and issue final decisions on Type III applications subject to closed record
appeal to the Renton City Council.
2. Zoning/Design District/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is split zoned
Commercial Arterial (CA) and Center Downtown (CD). The CA portion of the project is within Urban
Design District D; the CD portion is within Urban Design District A. Its comprehensive plan land use
designation is Commercial Mixed Use (CMU).
3. Review Criteria/Adoption of Staff Findings and Conclusions of Street Modifications.
Conditional use criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-030(D). Site Plan criteria are governed by RMC 4-
9-200.E.3. All applicable review criteria for the conditional use and site plan applications are quoted
below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law.
The criteria for the request street design modification request identified in Finding of Fact No. 3 is
governed by RMC 4-9-250.D.2. The findings and conclusions of Finding No. 25 of the staff report are
adopted by this reference in full to conclude that all review criteria for the requested street modification
are met.
CONDITIONAL USE
The Administrator or designee or the Hearing Examiner shall consider, as applicable, the following
factors for all applications:
RMC 4-9-030(C)(1): Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be
compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the
zoning regulations and any other plans, programs, maps or ordinances of the City of Renton.
4. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and
development standards, including those of Design District A and D, as outlined in Findings No. 17-
21 of the staff report, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(2): Appropriate Location: The proposed location shall not result in the
detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the immediate area of the
proposed use. The proposed location shall be suited for the proposed use.
5. For the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4 and 5, the proposal is compatible with
surrounding uses, will be served by adequate infrastructure and will not create significant adverse
impacts to adjoining properties. For these reasons the proposed location is suited for the proposed
use. The detailed design standards of Design Districts A and D break up the mass of the building
thus preventing any semblance of overconcentration of large multi-family structures in the vicinity or
at the project site.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location
shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 12
CAO VARIANCE - 12
6. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned, there are no significant adverse
impacts associated with the proposal, so it will not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on
adjacent property.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and
character of the neighborhood.
7. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5B, the proposed use is compatible with the scale and
character of the neighborhood.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available.
8. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4H, the site is served by adequate parking.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(6): Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and
shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area.
9. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4E, the proposal provides for safe circulation and adequate
traffic mitigation and facilities.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(7): Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the
proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated.
10. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5C, the proposal will not result in any adverse light,
noise or glare impacts.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(8): Landscaping: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by
buildings, paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adjacent
properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use.
11. The criterion is met. As shown in the landscaping plan, all areas not paved are landscaped.
SITE PLAN
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3): Criteria: The Administrator or designee must find a proposed project to be in
compliance with the following:
a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals,
including:
i. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives, and
policies, especially those of the applicable land use designation; the Community Design
Element; and any applicable adopted Neighborhood Plan;
ii. Applicable land use regulations;
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 13
CAO VARIANCE - 13
iii. Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and
iv. Design Regulations: Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in RMC
4-3-100.
12. As concluded in Conclusion of Law No. 4, the proposal is consistent with the City’s
comprehensive plan, development regulations and design standards.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(b): Off-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and
uses, including:
i. Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a
particular portion of the site;
ii. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways
and adjacent properties;
iii. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities,
rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from
surrounding properties;
iv. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to
attractive natural features;
v. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and
surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the
appearance of the project; and
vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid
excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets.
13. As conditioned, the criteria quoted above are met. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4E, the
proposal provides for desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and adjacent
properties. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4G, the proposal complies with the City’s refuse
and recycling standards. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5A, the proposal will not adversely
affect any views. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4I, the proposal is consistent with the City’s
landscaping standards. The proposal will not create any significant light impacts, including excessive
brightness or glare, for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 5C. A condition of approval
requires screening of rooftop equipment and utilities. The loading and delivery area occur in the
parking garage access via Airport Way and S Tillicum St.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, including:
i. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement,
spacing and orientation;
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 14
CAO VARIANCE - 14
ii. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural
characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and
vehicle needs;
iii. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and
soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces;
and
iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide
shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance
the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting
areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements.
14. The criteria quoted above are met. Privacy impacts are adequately addressed as identified in
Finding of Fact No. 5C. Due to compliance with the City’s critical areas ordinance, there are no
natural features adversely affected by the proposal. The scale of the structure is adequately mitigated
through the extensive design standards of Design District A and D, as partially addressed in Finding
of Fact No. 5B and discussed at length in the staff report.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all
users, including:
i. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets
rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the
site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties;
ii. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system,
including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points,
drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways;
iii. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian
areas;
iv. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and
v. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas,
buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties.
15. The proposal provides for safe and efficient access and vehicular and pedestrian circulation
as required by the criterion above for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4E. Transit and
bicycle facilities are available as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4J. The loading and delivery
area occur in the parking garage access via Airport Way and S Tillicum St.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 15
CAO VARIANCE - 15
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(e): Open Space: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project
focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users
of the site.
16. The proposal provides for adequate open space as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4D.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(f): Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to
shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines.
17. There are no view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier affected by the proposal as determined
in Finding of Fact No. 5A. The proposal also does not include any shorelines and is in no position to
provide public access to them.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural
systems where applicable.
18. The City’s critical area regulations identify and adequately protect all natural systems of
significance. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5D, the project protects all affected critical areas
as required by the critical area regulations.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and
facilities to accommodate the proposed use.
19. The project is served by adequate services and facilities as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(i): Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development phases
and estimated time frames, for phased projects.
20. There is no phasing plan proposed
DECISION
The site plan, conditional use, and street modification requests meet all applicable review criteria for
the reasons identified in the Conclusions of Law of this decision and are approved, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The Applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the
Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated dated April 8, 2024.
2. The Applicant shall provide documentation from the Federal Aviation Administration
demonstrating compliance with the Part 77 Horizontal Surface Height Limit. Compliance
shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
construction permit issuance.
3. The Applicant shall submit revised landscape plans with the construction permit application
that provides native vegetation to the greatest extent possible. A narrative shall be provided
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 16
CAO VARIANCE - 16
from a Washington licensed landscape architect identifying why native vegetation could not
be used in specific instances, why vegetation has been chosen for the specific area and what
measures need to be incorporated to ensure the long-term health and survival of the
landscaping. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to civil construction permit issuance.
4. The Applicant shall provide an updated arborist report with the construction permit
application. The updated report shall identify measures needed to ensure the long-term
health and viability of the trees. The report shall be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. If the arborist determines
that existing street tree(s) cannot be maintained based on the scope of proposed work, then
new street trees shall be planted at a 1:1 ratio of removed trees to new trees. A revised
landscaping plan shall be submitted with the construction permit application showing newly
planted street tree species chosen from the City of Renton Approved Tree List & Spacing
Guidelines. The revised plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning
Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance.
5. The Applicant shall submit revised building designs with the building permit which
provides an enclosure meeting applicable requirements within RMC 4-4-090, Refuse and
Recyclables Standards. The design shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning
Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
6. The Applicant shall submit revised building designs with the building permit which
provides either 45-degree parking stalls where the drive aisle is between 20 and 24 feet (20’
– 24’) in width or revise the design to include 24-foot (24’) drive aisles with 90-degree
parking. The design shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to building permit issuance.
7. The Applicant shall provide revised drawings showing the location of provided bicycle
stalls and identifying how the stalls will meet applicable standards in RMC 4-4-080F.11.
The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
building permit approval.
8. The Applicant shall provide revised building designs with the building permit application
showing a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 18 feet (18’) and a minimum clear height of
15 feet (15’) in the commercial spaces. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
9. The Applicant shall provide revised building designs with the building permit application
identifying how standards in RMC 4-4-150E.2.c – e are being met. The plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
issuance.
10. The Applicant shall submit revised floor plan drawings identifying how each unit is meeting
the storage standards of RMC 4-4-155 with the building permit application. The plan shall
be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
issuance.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 17
CAO VARIANCE - 17
11. The Applicant shall submit revised floor plan drawings identifying how each unit is meeting
the kitchen standards of RMC 4-4-155 with the building permit application. The plan shall
be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
issuance.
12. The Applicant shall submit revised floor plan drawings showing the studio unit sleeping
areas with at least one (1) side 100 percent (100%) unobstructed and open to the remainder
of the unit. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project
manager prior to building permit issuance.
13. The Applicant shall submit revised building designs with the building permit application
showing a 12-foot (12’) finished floor-to-ceiling height for the ground floor lobby space.
The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
building permit issuance.
14. The Applicant shall submit a separate detailed plan set identifying the location and
screening provided for all roof top utility/mechanical equipment with the building permit
application. The plan shall include detail sheets that provide cross section details and
identify proposed rooftop screening that is integral and complementary to architecture of the
buildings. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to building permit approval.
15. The Applicant shall submit a surface mounted utility plan that includes cross-section details
with the civil construction permit application. The Applicant shall work with franchise
utilities to ensure, as practical, utility boxes do not obstruct or displace pedestrian areas. The
plan shall provide and identify screening measures consistent with the overall design of the
development. The surface mounted utility plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil construction permit approval.
16. The Applicant shall submit revised drawings showing the area surrounding the structured
parking entrance matching the colors and materials of the commercial space facades. The
second level shall use siding materials and colors to match the surrounding façade
treatments. Glazing shall be added in place of the grills to continue the appearance of
residential and commercial spaces. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
17. The Applicant shall submit revised drawings showing the southern façade of the structure
parking with similar façade treatments as the front façade, such as glazing, materials and
sconce lighting, or as determined by the Current Planning Project Manager at the time of
building permit application. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
18. The Applicant shall submit revised floor plans with the building permit identifying
amenities, such as exercise equipment or seating/entertainment areas within the club room
areas. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to building permit issuance.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 18
CAO VARIANCE -18
19.The Applicant shall submit revised building designs with the building permit which provide
modulation meeting allowances of RMC 4-3-100E.5, Building Architectural Design:
Building Character and Massing The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
20.The Applicant shall submit revised building elevations with the building permit which
provide windows (or an equivalent design element) within the internal staircase on the south
and west facing facades to break up the building massing and increase light transmittance
into and out of the building. Revised building elevations shall be revised and approved by
the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
21.The Applicant shall provide revised drawings with the building permit which show the
sloped portions of the room with a minimum slope of one to four (1:4). The plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
issuance.
22.The Applicant shall submit revised drawings which include enhancement such as texturing,
reveals and/or coloring with a concrete coating or admixture on the southern facade. The
plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
building permit approval.
23.The Applicant shall submit revised elevations with the building permit application which
provides pedestrian scale lighting through down lighting provided within the associated
entrance awnings. The additional lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval.
24.The Applicant shall submit revised elevations within the building permit application that
provides additional sconce lighting along the southern façade at intervals between the
conditioned windows. The additional lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the
Current Planning Manger prior to building permit approval.
25.The Applicant shall submit revised elevations with the building permit application that
provides additional downlighting within the entirety of all front façade awnings. The
additional lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to building permit approval.
26.The Applicant shall provide revised civil construction plans showing the installation of
preventative measures within the Airport Way right-of-way such that the Airport Way
driveway is restricted to a right-in and right-out only driveway.
DATED this 19th day of May, 2024.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE, SITE PLAN and MOD- 19
CAO VARIANCE -19
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
As consolidated, RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies the application(s) subject to this decision as Type III
applications subject to closed record appeal to the City of Renton City Council. Appeals of the
hearing examiner’s decision must be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the
decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 -day
appeal period.
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding
any program of revaluation
Transcript by Rev.com Page 1 of 7
Appendix A
May 7, 2024 Hearing Transcript
Dreamliner Mixed Use -- PR23-000125
Examiner Olbrechts: (00:00):
All right. For the record, it's May 7th, 2020. Morning in progress. Sorry, it's May 7th, 2024. I'm Phil Berg's
Hearing examiner for the City of Renton. We have an application for conditional use permit site plan
review today for a development at 6 5 1 330 second Avenue Northeast Hearing format. Will have a
presentation from staff to give us an overview of the project. Then once the staff presentation is over,
we go on to applicant comments and not required. But if the applicant wants to address their project,
they get that chance at that time. Then when we're done with that, we'll move on to public comments.
If anyone from the public wants to participate in this, that's their chance to speak and we'll make sure
you understand how to be involved when we get to that portion of the hearing. Once we're done with
public comment, move back to staff comments to offer rebuttal evidence. Answer any questions that
were raised and the applicant gets final word. I get 10 business days, a couple of weeks to issue a final
decision. Any of those of you who want to get a copy of the decision, make sure that you've submitted
your email address to the city and Mr. SROs, how can they get that information to you for get a copy of
the decision?
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Yes, I can email it to me Here, I'll spotlight my, oh,
Examiner Olbrechts: (01:19):
There she is. Yeah, Jason ros@rewa.gov. Yeah, just go ahead and send a request for the staff report to
Ms. Cisneros and she'll be sure to get a copy of the decision to you once that's issued. So now by state
law, I'm only allowed to consider evidence that's put in the record that's composed of the testimony
provided today up until the close of the hearing, as well as exhibits that are admitted into the record
and staff has put together a staff report. I guess Mr. Ro, you're going to show us what exhibits we have
today?
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Yes,
Examiner Olbrechts: (01:53):
There we go.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
The irk report Exhibits one through 17,
Examiner Olbrechts: (02:00):
Yeah,
Transcript by Rev.com Page 2 of 7
Speaker 2 (02:04):
Is on the screen.
Examiner Olbrechts: (02:05):
Okay. Yeah, and it's composed of the site plan landscape plans. We have comments from the Duwamish
tribe, but traffic was assessed at Department of Ecology, made some comments, traffic analysis done,
hazardous material statements, building elevations to show what looks like advisory notes from staff
about what needs to be done for the project and then beyond one through 17. We also have exhibits 18
through 33 composed of the staff report, some neighborhood meeting documents, the environmental
review that was done for the project, arborist plans, floor plans, bike parking and commercial layout and
sun study, lighting plan and so on. So at this point, and then Mrs. Neros, I guess we have a couple more
added on top of 33, is that correct? Correct. Yeah, there they are. Following, we have the staff
PowerPoint. The staff's going to present the city of written maps of the project site, which will give you
aerial photographs and zoning maps and where the critical areas are located. Those are environmental
and sensitive areas. And then Google Earth showing us aerial photos of the project site as well. So that's
basically exhibits one through 36. Does anyone need to see any of these documents or have any
objection to their entry in the record? If you do, just click on the virtual hand at the bottom of your
screen and not seeing any takers there. So I will go ahead and admit exhibits one through 36. So who's
our staff lead on this one today?
Mr. Van Gordon: (03:36):
That would be me, sir.
Examiner Olbrechts: (03:37):
Okay. Mr. Van Gordon, let me swear you in. Just raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm to tell the
truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding?
Mr. Van Gordon: (03:44):
I
Examiner Olbrechts: (03:44):
Do. Great. Okay, go ahead.
Mr. Van Gordon: (03:46):
Alright, I'm going to share my screen here first. Just a minute. Okay, can folks see? There we
Examiner Olbrechts: (04:15):
Go. Okay. Yep, there it is.
Mr. Van Gordon: (04:17):
Alright, so thank you Mr Examiner. My name's Andrew Van for the record. My name's Andrew Van
Gordon. I'm an associate planner with the city of Brenton and I'm going to be making a presentation on
the streamliner LLC excuse project today. So the applicant is requesting a hearing examiner conditional
use permit, a hearing examiner site plan review, and a modification to street standards. And this is for
the benefit of a 30 unit apartment complex with a 3000 monitor, 92 square feet of ground floor,
Transcript by Rev.com Page 3 of 7
commercial and onsite structured parking. The project site encompasses five 11 airport way and that
property is currently split zones between the CA and the CD zone. So after dedication approximately
10,600 square feet on the Western portion will be within the CA zone in urban design District D and
approximately 3,500 square feet on the eastern portion of the property will be within the CD zone in
urban design District A.
(05:31):
So as I said, there would be 30 total units broken down to 16 studio units, seven one bedroom units and
seven two bedroom units. There's also two ground floor commercial spaces, one 1800 square feet and
1,392 square feet. The onsite parking is going to be accessed via two different garage access driveways
from airport way to the north and south til street, which is the alleyway to the south. The parking will
have three different levels of ground level, a mezzanine level, and a second level. And like I said, those
two garage doors are going to be the only entrances one on the north of the south. So a neighborhood
meeting was held on July 5th, 2023. There we go. The application was deemed complete on October
26th, 2023 with a 14 day comment that ended on November 9th, 2023. We did not receive comment
from the public once the notice went out, but there were two people who attended the neighborhood
meeting on July 5th.
(06:48):
We did receive comment from the Duwamish tribe regarding cultural resources, mainly with also
recommendation of using native vegetation and a second comment from ecology about soil and
groundwater contamination at 3 0 7 Airport way, which is a couple of blocks to the west of the project
site, excuse me, a seepa determination of non-significant mitigated. DNSM was issued by the city's
Environmental Review Committee or I on March 25th, 2024 with two dication measures and appeal
deadline of April 8th. A revised D-N-D-N-S-M was issued by Burke on April 8th with four mitigation
measures and an appeal deadline of April 22nd. No appeals were filed. In short, those four mitigation
measures are that the project needs to comply with the recommendations of the GEO report. The
geoengineering needs to review construction and building permits to verify compliance. Their applicant
needs to sample for onsite contamination and have found complete mitigation measures in line with the
Model Toxic Control Act and toxic Cleanup program and complete an archeological survey and
inadvertent discoveries plan. So frontage, as I said earlier, there is a modification to street standards,
which I'm going to speak to a little bit later. In short, it is to leave the existing pavement and curb
location as is. There would be a dedication behind the curb and gut would be retention of existing street
trees within a landscaping strip and increased size of sidewalk.
(08:35):
There's also onsite landscaping between the building and the right of way. This is proposed within the
portion of the project on the Western portion for within the CA zone. The ca zone does have a 15 foot
building setback with a required 10 foot onsite landscaping strip and the applicant is proposing to
landscape that entire 15 feet between the building and the right of way minus pedestrian vehicle access
points. So we found that it was consistent with relevant comprehensive plan land use policies. The
proposal would be compliant with all relevant zoning and design regulations if all conditions of approval
are complied with. There is of note, there is a conditional use permit applied for to increase the density
within the CD zone above 150 dwelling units per acre, but I'll speak to that a little bit later.
(09:32):
We found that there are safe walking routes to the school bus stops for students who may reside in the
future. Residences, police and fire indicate that there's sufficient resources to provide services. Students
would attend Bryn Mawr Divots and Renton High School and water and sewer services are provided by
Transcript by Rev.com Page 4 of 7
the city of Renton and with associated improvements being made, the applicant did submit a technical
information report by Encompass Engineering and Surveying and the project will be required to comply
with the 2022 City of Brenton surface water design manual. The applicant is proposing to connect it into
the existing public storm main and airport way, which is to the north of the project with additional fire
and water connections coming from airport way and a sewer connection to South Street to the south.
(10:25):
So as I stated a little few slides ago, the applicant has applied for a conditional use permit within the CD
zone. The maximum allowed density is 150 dwelling units per acre. However, that can be increased to
200 through the conditional use permit process. So the applicant has taken that opportunity and their
proposed density within the CD zone is 197 dwelling units per acre. So we found that it was compatible
with the comprehensive plan as it promotes maximization of land use efficiency because there'll be
more dwelling units placed in the same project site. It also supports transit use with a higher
concentration of potential users, more cost efficient for public investment infrastructure and services
with a denser, more compact project. Approximately 23% of the units within the project are intended
for two members. That's seven units, so that would be the seven two bedroom units.
(11:27):
All the units will receive light and air as they all abut the exterior walls and 38 parking stalls are
proposed. That's for the entirety of the project, which ends up being the minimum required for the
development. And so staff recommends a brick set. Does recommend approval for the project or excuse
for the conditional use street standards. So there is the street standard modification is proposed for
airport way. Airport way is a principal arterial street, a seven lane principal. Arterial street is required to
have a minimum right away width of 125 feet. This would include 88 feet of a paved width, 44 on each
side of the center line, eight foot wide parking lane, bicycle facilities, one half foot curb, eight foot wide
planning serve eight foot wide sidewalk and street trees. Storm damage improvements on each side.
The current right of way for airport way using the King County assessor's map is approximately 80 feet
with approximately 78 feet of paving.
(12:36):
To meet the prescribed standards, the project will need to dedicate to 22 and a half feet. So the
applicant is proposing to retain the existing paving and curb curb location. And behind that curb placed
an eight foot wide landscaping strip to incorporate the existing street trees eight foot sidewalk and a
one foot wide clear width packet supply. We did find that it was compatible with the comprehensive
plan and was the minimum necessary. Again, it reduces the transportation impact of growth, will
provide a compact pedestrian oriented street scape. It promotes efficient land utilization by allowing for
space that would normally be dedicated to right of way to instead be incorporated into a mixed use
project, visual continuity and identity by continuing the curb line. And it also maintains the street's
vehicle capacity while improving the sidewalk landscaping strip to meet with the Z of street tree
standards. We also found that it meets objectives and safety function of appearance, et cetera. Those
items no identify, we did not identify adverse impact. The city of Renton Transportation Department
determined that the existing curb line is sufficient and that this modified proposal would also be
sufficient. But this would ensure the least amount of alteration of airport way itself. It's more suitable
for this portion of airport way because by granting the modification, the curb line is maintained and by
maintaining that existing roadway, curb alignment, inconvenient and or potentially unsafe transition is
avoided.
(14:20):
Transcript by Rev.com Page 5 of 7
It also conforms to the intent and purposes, like I said, transportation determined that the curb line is
acceptable for the i intents and purposes of what they need. Frontage improvements would be an
upgrade from the surrounding frontage along airport way, which generally includes only a five foot
sidewalk and no planter strip. They're appropriately scaled. They do meet third parties for sidewalk and
landscaping strip width for Principal Arterial Street. And because of that are appropriately signed for an
urban context. And like I said, the existing curb line appropriate would continue to enable safe and can
be in access and travel for all. It's also shown to be justified and required as this would be impractical to
widen the existing roadway for this particular street frontage and staff does recommend approval of the
modification. So in conclusion, staff recommends approval of the project of the Dreamliner LLC mixed
use project as depicted in exhibit two, subject to the recommended 26 conditions of approval. Are there
any questions for myself?
Examiner Olbrechts: (15:28):
No, not too many. Just on the sun study, from what I recall, your staff report said that the sun study
found that there were just a couple commercial buildings that were going to be within the shade of the
building. Is that correct?
Mr. Van Gordon: (15:42):
Yeah, at certain times of day, yes. There's a two story building on the west and a one story commercial
multi-unit building on the east. And so just in specific times of day, those areas would be within some of
the shadows.
Examiner Olbrechts: (15:58):
Okay. What about the residences? So I take it the residential buildings wouldn't be in shadow. Would
their yards be in shadow though? And also I couldn't, was the written findings of the sun report, is that
in the sun exhibit or? I just recall seeing the diagram showing the shading and that was it. So I don't
know where you got the information about which buildings would be affected and that kind of thing.
Mr. Van Gordon: (16:24):
On the sun study? Yeah, it is just the diagrams. The diagrams. It does show the neighboring buildings.
Examiner Olbrechts: (16:32):
Oh, okay. Okay.
Mr. Van Gordon: (16:32):
And based on the angle of the sun, the residences to the south of it would not be in the
Examiner Olbrechts: (16:40):
Shadows. Okay. And that includes their yards though too, is that correct?
Mr. Van Gordon: (16:45):
Let me just take a
Examiner Olbrechts: (16:46):
Quick look here. Yeah, maybe show that on the screen. I'm kind of curious how that looks.
Transcript by Rev.com Page 6 of 7
Mr. Van Gordon: (16:53):
Yeah, lemme pull it up here. Yeah, so I'm going to share my screen here.
Examiner Olbrechts: (17:08):
Okay.
Mr. Van Gordon: (17:17):
Okay. So there would be some shadows within the neighboring yards. You can see it here. You are
looking at March, September 21st and oh, I'm sorry, that's going the wrong way there. December 21st in
the evening you would have, oh, I'm sorry, I'm reading this. I'm totally
Examiner Olbrechts: (17:41):
Apologize. First of all, are these buildings, they are oriented north, south, right? So north is to the top.
Sorry, yeah,
Mr. Van Gordon: (17:47):
I apologize. Actually, based on the sun studies, there would be no shadows within their
Examiner Olbrechts: (17:54):
Yards. Oh, okay.
Mr. Van Gordon: (17:56):
What we're seeing here on the south is the buildings to the south of the project site casting shadows.
Examiner Olbrechts: (18:04):
Oh, oh really? Oh, okay. Oh I see. Alright. Okay. It sounds like from the staff report, I think it kind of
identifies a mix of uses to the south. And just to confirm, there are residences directly adjoining the
project side, is that correct? Yeah,
Mr. Van Gordon: (18:23):
They are. Yes, they are adjoining to the south on the south side. South side the
Examiner Olbrechts: (18:27):
Street. Okay. And so you're saying all the shadows that are south of the building site are caused by
existing buildings, just to confirm,
Mr. Van Gordon: (18:35):
Correct? Yes, yes. Those are being tasked by the buildings to the
Examiner Olbrechts: (18:39):
South. Oh, I see. Okay. And then is there going to be a loading dock for this since it has some commercial
uses, do you know? Or loading area?
Mr. Van Gordon: (18:49):
Transcript by Rev.com Page 7 of 7
There's not a planned loading dock. My understanding was that it would be within the structured
parking.
Examiner Olbrechts: (18:55):
The structured parking. Okay. Okay. Alright, perfect. Okay, thanks Mr. Van Gordon. Alright, let's move on
to applicants. To the applicants. Want to add anything at this time? Like I mentioned initially, not
required, but if you want to add something now's the time. Any takers out there? No. Okay. Let's move
on then to public comments. And like I said before, if you want to comment at this point, just click on
the raise hand button at the bottom of your screen. Let's see if I got any takers out there. It doesn't look
like any takers. Mr. Cisneros, do you see anyone who is raising their virtual hand or know of anyone who
wants to participate today?
Mr. Van Gordon: (19:35):
I do not.
Examiner Olbrechts: (19:36):
Okay. Alright, well last chance for anyone who wants to speak. We have a lot of people watching, but
yeah, no one needs to comment. I guess that's good news for the applicant then. Pretty straightforward
project. Well I will then go ahead and adjourn the hearing if someone was trying to speak and didn't
know how. Go ahead and send an email with your comments to Ms. Ciro. She just moved over there so
you can see her email address. It's j cisneros@rentonwa.gov and just get that in by 5:00 PM tomorrow.
And if anything does come in, I'll give staff at any applicant a couple of days to respond to those written
comments as well. So absent any more comments coming in, it seems like as usual, Renton has
thoroughly addressed all the impacts here and seems like a pretty straightforward approval. So I should
be able to get that decision of approval out within the next 10 business days. So thank you everyone for
participating this morning and we're done for the morning. Have a great day.
Mr. Van Gordon: (20:33):
Recording stopped.
Examiner Olbrechts: (20:35):
Alright.
Speaker 4 (22:09):
Okay.