Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPreliminary and Final PUD and CU -- Renton High School1 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 PUD AND CU - 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Renton High School Replacement and Site Expansion Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use LUA25-000343, PUD, CU-H, LC )))) ) )))) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION SUMMARY The Applicant is requesting Preliminary and Final Planned Urban Development (PUD) and conditional use permit (CUP) approvals to reconstruct and expand the Renton High School campus at 400 S 2nd St. The proposal is approved subject to conditions. TESTIMONY A computer-generated transcript of the hearing has been prepared to provide an overview of the hearing testimony. No members of the public testified. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only as Appendix A. EXHIBITS Exhibits 1-36 listed on the City’s exhibit list presented at the January 13, 2026 hearing were admitted into the record during the hearing. The Applicant’s PowerPoint presentation at the hearing was admitted as Exhibit 37. 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 PUD AND CU - 2 FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Applicant. Brianne Tomlin, Renton School District, 7812 S 124th St, Seattle, WA 98178. 2. Hearing. A hybrid virtual and in-person hearing was held at 11:00 am on January 13, 2026 in the Council Chambers of Renton City Hall and via Zoom. 3. Project Description. The Applicant is requesting Preliminary and Final PUD and CUP approvals to reconstruct and expand the Renton High School campus at 400 S 2nd St. The PUD is requested to waive numerous development standards as outlined in the table below. The CUP is required for the proposed school use. The site is approximately 35.2 acres and is developed with the original 1931 school building, an annex classroom building, gymnasium, Ikea Center for the Performing Arts (IPAC), sports fields, and associated surface parking. The site also includes the former Renton High School vocational training building which currently serves as the Renton School District central warehouse. There are no natural features at the project site such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats. As identified in Finding of Fact No. 5, any trees removed will be done consistently with the City’s tree retention standards. The Applicant proposes to expand the site through the on-going acquisition of approximately 42 single- family and commercial properties on the block bounded by Logan Ave S, S Tobin St, Shattuck Ave S, and Airport Way, as well as two (2) properties off of Lake Ave S. The 42 properties total approximately ten (10) acres in area. The Applicant proposes to preserve and renovate approximately 93,500 square feet of existing buildings (the original 1931 building and IPAC), demolish the remaining structures, and construct a new 310,000 square foot three-story classroom building and three (3) small accessory buildings totaling 6,270 square feet. Upon completion, the campus will total approximately 409,770 square feet of building area, include 476 parking spaces, and a new bus load/unload zone along Logan Ave S. Vehicular access is proposed via two (2) driveways on S 2nd St, one (1) driveway on Lake Ave S, and gated/event access at Logan Ave S and S Tobin St, with pedestrian circulation improved through frontage improvements and off-site intersection upgrades. The project also includes athletic field lighting poles up to 77 feet (77’) in height. Construction of the new campus will be phased with work beginning in summer 2026 with parking and frontage improvements, followed by construction of the new high school starting September 2026. The new building is expected to open in fall 2028. Demolition of existing buildings and completion of athletic fields, parking, and frontage improvements will occur in 2028–2029, with final site work continuing through September 2030. 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 PUD AND CU - 3 The PUD process is used to waive development standards in exchange for superior project design and public benefit. The waivers sought by the Applicant are as follows: RMC Code Citation Required Standard Modification RMC 4-2-100 Zoning Standards Tables There are three (3) separate tables dealing with the various zones (R-8, CA, and CD) which contain the minimum and, in some cases, maximum requirements of the zone. The application of a single zoning classification (CD) and corresponding Design District ‘A’ for the entire site for the purposes of review. RMC 4-2-120A Development Standards for Commercial Zones Maximum secondary front yard setback along a street is 15 feet, or 25 feet for any portion of a building over 25 feet. Library portion of the building is setback greater than 25 feet in order to provide space for landscape buffer along Logan Ave S. RMC 4-2-120A Development Standards for Commercial Zones If the CD lot abuts a lot zoned residential, then there shall be a 15-foot landscaped strip or a 5-foot wide sight- obscuring landscaped strip and a solid 6-foot high barrier along the common boundary with an additional 5-foot setback from the barrier. Widths of buffer abutting to residential vary from 8 to 15 feet; existing fence type varies from chain-link to solid board. RMC 4-2-120A Development Standards for Commercial Zones Max height is 150 feet, or 20 feet more than the maximum height allowed in the abutting residential zone (44 feet based on abutting R-8 zone). Building is 65 feet tall and field lights range between 46 and 75 feet tall. RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Districts (Surface Parking Location) No surface parking between a building and the front or side street. Parking must be screened by buildings or landscaping. Student drop-off lane and parallel visitor parking located between the IPAC and S 2nd St, with screening provided primarily through site design and landscaping. RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Districts (Vehicular Access Location) Parking should be accessed from alleys or side streets rather than primary streets. Student and visitor parking/drop-off accessed primarily from S 2nd St, with secondary access from Lake Ave S. 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 PUD AND CU - 4 RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Districts (Surface Parking) Parking areas shall be fully screened from adjacent streets. Student parking lot is located adjacent to the side of the 1930s building and adjacent to S 2nd St. It is partially screened with the exception of areas where the sidewalk is expanded. RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Districts (Recreation Areas and Common Open Space) Provide at least three (3) lineal feet of seating area (bench, ledge, etc.) or one individual seat per sixty (60) square feet of plaza area or open space. The proposal is required to provide 17,813 SF of common open space (17,849 SF provided), which requires 297 seats or 892 LF of seating. The proposal is providing 260 LF/17 seats. RMC 4-3-100 (Ground Level Details) Any facade visible to the public shall be comprised of at least seventy five percent (75%) transparent windows and/or doors for at least the portion of the ground floor facade that is between four feet (4') and eight feet (8') above ground (as measured on the true elevation). The Logan Ave facade (2,843 SF of ground floor facade) has 53 percent (53%) transparency. RMC 4-4-070 (Street Frontage Landscaping) 10 feet of on-site landscaping to be provided along public street frontages (i.e., Airport Way, Shattuck Ave S, and S Tobin St, which are not in the CD zone). Variable 5 to 10 feet of landscaping provided along Airport Way; Other frontages meet code. RMC 4-4-070 (Landscape Buffers) 10-foot fully sight-obscuring or 15-foot partially sight- obscuring buffer required along shared property lines when a commercial zone abuts a residential zone. Applicable on S Tobin St where abutting residential. Widths of buffer adjacent to residential vary from 8 to 15 feet; existing fence type varies from chain-link to solid board. RMC 4-4-040 (Fence Height) Fences within 15 feet of front/secondary yards ≤ 48 inches; chain-link prohibited in CD zone (unless vinyl- coated). Outfield chain-link fences (with wind screens) up to 8 feet tall along Airport Way and Logan Ave S, located approximately 5 feet from property line. Ornamental 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 PUD AND CU - 5 fencing up to 6 to 8 feet provided along street frontages. RMC 4-4-090 (Refuse & Recycling Enclosures) Enclosures must have 6-foot walls, 12-foot minimum gate width, and 15-foot vertical clearance. Refuse enclosure walls are proposed at 11 to 12 feet, with 8-foot gate panels and vertical clearances of 11 to 12 feet. RMC 4-4-090 (Screening of Refuse Areas) Enclosures must be surrounded by a 6-foot wall or fence. Refuse areas enclosed with 11-foot and 12-foot high walls and 10.5 to 11 foot gates to screen equipment and serve adjacent mechanical yard. RMC 4-4-090 (Refuse Area Gate Width & Clearance) Minimum 12-foot-wide gate opening with 15-foot vertical clearance. Gate openings reduced to 8 feet (6.5 feet for smaller dumpsters) with enclosure roof clearances of 10.5 to 12 feet due to scale and operational constraints. RMC 4-4-130 (Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations) Administrator may allow fee- in-lieu of tree replacement. Allow for potential off-site planting to supplement fee- in-lieu replacement. RMC 4-6-060 (Streets) 12-foot-wide sidewalk on all streets in the City Center Planning Area. The sidewalk width includes street tree grates for locating street trees. Sidewalk widths vary from 5 feet to 8 feet on frontages, except for 12 feet on Logan Ave S (a pedestrian street) and on S 2nd St the existing sidewalk is to remain until the City improvement project. 4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate and appropriate infrastructure and public services as follows: A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sewer service will be provided by the City of Renton. B. Police and Fire Protection. Police service will be provided by the City of Renton Police Department and fire service by the Renton Regional Fire Authority. 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 PUD AND CU - 6 Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development if the Applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. A Fire Impact Fee based on number of students is required to mitigate the proposal’s potential impacts to City emergency services. The Fire Impact Fee, based on the City of Renton Fee Schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance, would be imposed during building permit review. C. Drainage. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate stormwater drainage facilities. The proposal is subject to full drainage review under the 2022 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. As required by state law, the Manual adopts all known, available and reasonable methods of stormwater prevention, control and treatment (AKART). See RCW 90.52.040 and RCW 90.48.010. The Manual generally requires that the proposal not generate off-site flows that exceed pre-developed forested conditions of the project site. The Manual also incorporates the latest feasible technology on assuring adequate water treatment. The Applicant submitted a Technical Information Report, prepared by prepared by AHBL, dated September 2025 (Exhibit 13). Public works staff have determined that the TIR establishes compliance with the Manual for this stage of review. The proposed stormwater system will discharge into the Cit’s stormwater system. Because more than 5,000 square feet of new plus replaced impervious surface will be created, enhanced basic water quality treatment is required. Flow control facilities are proposed to detain stormwater and limit post-development discharge rates to existing (pre-project) conditions. Conveyance improvements include new storm pipe networks that collect runoff from roofs, paved areas, and athletic fields and route it through approved Best Management Practices (BMPs) prior to connection to the City system. D. Parks/Open Space. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate parks and open space. The project provides a comprehensive system of outdoor recreation and gathering spaces that exceeds what would otherwise be required through standard development regulations. The campus includes multiple competitive-level athletic facilities, including baseball, softball, and multipurpose fields, indoor courts, and associated spectator and concessions areas. These facilities are designed for both school programming and public use outside school hours through permitted community access. Two (2) pedestrian plazas — one (1) at the primary entry and one (1) north of the classroom building — establish identifiable gathering areas that function as extensions of the academic environment while supporting informal community use. The project also provides enhanced sidewalks, including a widened 12-foot (12’) pedestrian corridor in key locations along S 2nd St and Logan Ave S, improving comfort and accessibility for students and the public. Together, these features create active and passive open spaces that support both 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 PUD AND CU - 7 educational and community needs and represent a level of recreational investment not typically required absent the PUD. As identified in COL No. 17 below, the project site is required to provide pedestrian oriented open space that comprises at least 1% of the lot area + 1% of the building area. The proposal includes a functional network of outdoor areas that support student arrival, informal gathering, circulation, and outdoor learning, consistent with pedestrian oriented open space requirements. The current submittal, however, does not clearly quantify the total square footage of pedestrian- oriented space or demonstrate that all spaces counted include the minimum required elements such as seating and lighting. A condition of approval requires the submission of this information as consistent with open space requirements for planning staff approval prior to issuance of the civil construction permit. E. Streets. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate streets. The proposal has been designed and staff has recommended several conditions adopted by this decision that provide for safe and efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation by incorporating a well linked and defined pedestrian and vehicular circulation system on-site that is integrated into adjoining streets and sidewalks. The proposal has also been reviewed by City Public Works staff and found to preliminarily comply with City street standards. The Transportation Technical Report, prepared by Heffron Transportation Inc, dated September 16, 2025, evaluated campus operations at a planned enrollment of up to approximately 1,600 students. When accounting for demolition of former on-site residential and commercial uses, the project is expected to generate an overall decrease of approximately 610 daily vehicle trips. Peak-hour impacts are modest as the site would see an increase of approximately 18 trips during the morning arrival period, but a reduction of about 15 trips during the afternoon school- dismissal period and a reduction of roughly 69 trips during the PM commuter peak. These trip changes were evaluated at nearby intersections and were found not to result in level-of-service (congestion standard) deficiencies or warrant off-site mitigation. All evaluated intersections continue to operate at acceptable LOS standards. Emergency access has been coordinated with the City and Renton Regional Fire Authority. The reconstructed S Tobin St fire lane, gated secondary access points, and clear apparatus routes provide multiple points of entry to interior areas of the site. The proposed circulation system represents a superior configuration compared to conventional development patterns. The PUD allows coordinated reconfiguration of driveways, removal of redundant access points, and consolidation of internal circulation that improves safety and clarity of movement. Vehicular entries are placed to maximize sight distance and reduce turning 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 PUD AND CU - 8 conflicts, while pedestrian routes are prioritized and aligned with primary building entrances. Bus loading is relocated to Logan Ave S to minimize internal conflicts and improve route efficiency, while student drop-off areas are expanded and separated from staff and service access. Strategic use of gated access points provides additional capacity for event traffic without introducing through-traffic during school hours. Parking areas are broken into smaller groupings and screened with landscaping that achieves full ground coverage, reducing visual prominence and softening edges along adjacent streets. Collectively, these measures create safer pedestrian conditions, improved site legibility, and more efficient circulation than would likely result without the flexibility afforded by the PUD. One comment letter, Ex. 28, questioned the accuracy of the Ex. 15 traffic report. The letter asserted that the traffic forecasts didn’t consider impacts caused by the proposed street vacation. The traffic report did model traffic circulation with the street vacation and the impacts of those changes were factored into projected traffic volumes. See e.g. Section 3.2.5 of the traffic report, testimony of McBrian. Assertions were also made in the Ex. 28 letter that various people such as students and homeowners would not be driving. As noted by the Applicant’s traffic engineer in his response, Ex. 30, those changes were immaterial or already reflected in the traffic counts taken to estimate future traffic. If the factors listed in the Ex. 28 comment letter were not included in the traffic forecasts and made a material difference, the impacts of the proposal would be overstated. Off- site mitigation is required when total congestion delays exceed adopted City standards. The worse the anticipated traffic generation from all sources, the greater the chance that set congestion levels will be exceeded requiring the Applicant to pay its proportionate share to fix the problem. If the report underreported trip forecasts because less people are driving then anticipated, that would result in less mitigation required of the Applicant. The traffic report was prepared by a traffic engineer using standards of the profession to estimate trip generation and impacts. There was no compelling evidence that the analysis of the engineer was missing any material information or was erroneous in any material way. F. Parking. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate parking. Parking regulations for Senior high schools: public, parochial and private require a minimum and maximum of 1.0 per employee plus 1.0 space for every 10 students enrolled. In addition, if buses for the private transportation of children are kept at the school, 1.0 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. Based on an estimated 1,600 students (160 spaces) and approximately 150 full- and part-time staff (150 spaces), the required 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 PUD AND CU - 9 parking for the school component is 310 stalls. Because four (4) small buses would be kept on- site, four (4) bus parking spaces are also required. Parking for the district administrative offices located in the 1930s building is calculated at one (1) space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. With approximately 76,000 square feet of office use, a total of 76 spaces would ordinarily be required; however, no minimum is required for commercial uses in the CD zone, resulting in a code range of zero (0) to 76 possible required spaces. Finally, parking for the outdoor and indoor athletic and assembly facilities is calculated at one (1) space for every four (4) fixed spectator seats or one (1) space per 1,000 square feet of assembly space, whichever is greater. With 551 fixed spectator seats, the athletic facilities require 138 parking spaces. When all applicable uses are considered together, the combined parking obligation for the site ranges from approximately 448 to 524 off-street stalls (depending on whether district office parking is counted at the high end of the optional range). The proposal provides 476 striped vehicle spaces, plus an additional 48 convertible event spaces, resulting in a total functional capacity of 524 stalls and demonstrating compliance with the City’s parking standards for joint- use facilities. Bicycle parking is provided consistent with RMC 4-4-080, which requires bicycle facilities equal to ten percent (10%) of the required vehicle parking, or 45 stalls (10% of 448 stalls = 44.8). The Applicant proposes a combination of short-term and long-term bicycle racks placed in strategic locations across the site to support both daily commuting and recreational use. The project provides parking areas that are distributed, screened, and integrated into the campus design rather than configured as large uninterrupted expanses. Two (2) primary parking lots serve staff, visitors, and event users, supplemented by strategically placed parallel and aisle- adjacent stalls along internal drives. This arrangement allows the overall supply to meet City requirements while minimizing the footprint of any single parking field and reducing the need for additional maneuvering aisles. Parking is organized to relate logically to the functions it serves, including proximity to the main entry, IPAC, and athletic facilities, while maintaining separation from primary pedestrian plazas and learning spaces. Landscaping, shade trees, lighting, and internal pedestrian pathways are incorporated consistent with RMC 4-4-080. Perimeter buffers and interior landscaping provide visual relief and screening from surrounding streets and adjacent uses. Parking areas located along internal drives help calm vehicle speeds and create additional buffer between sidewalks and travel lanes. The combination of distributed lots, landscaped screening, and efficient stall placement results 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 PUD AND CU - 10 in parking areas that function effectively while supporting a more pedestrian-focused campus environment. 5. Adverse Impacts. As conditioned, there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. Adequate public facilities are provided as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. Pertinent impacts are more specifically addressed as follows: A. Compatibility. The proposal is compatible with surrounding development. Overall, through strategic building placement, significant open space buffers, and architectural modulation, the project successfully transitions between the larger institutional campus environment and adjacent residential and mixed-use areas, preserving neighborhood scale and character. The proposed project balances the larger civic scale appropriate for a regional public high school while maintaining compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods and adjacent uses. The primary academic building ranges up to three (3) stories whose mass is concentrated near S 2nd St and Logan Ave S, locations characterized by wider arterials, commercial activity, and larger structures, including the existing IPAC and the multi-story municipal parking garage across the intersection of Logan Ave S and S 2nd St. This siting strategy places the greatest height and activity at the edges of the campus that can best accommodate it, while stepping down intensity toward the west and north where lower-scale residential and campus-support uses occur. Along Lake Ave S and the western edge of the campus, existing residential properties are buffered by large expanses of athletic fields, track facilities, and landscaped areas. These open spaces create substantial building separation and reduce visual bulk, ensuring a gentle transition from school facilities to nearby homes. No new tall buildings are proposed in proximity to residential edges, and the track field is intentionally designed for practice use only — without spectator seating or lighting — further reducing potential visual and activity impacts. Architecturally, the new high school employs modulation, facade articulation, and varied roof forms to break down perceived massing. The building composition ties visually to both the retained historic 1931 structure and the IPAC through compatible materials, color palettes, and horizontal proportions. These design techniques help integrate the new construction into the established campus fabric while presenting a civic presence appropriate to its function. The site remains appropriate for the high school use and does not represent an over- concentration of similar uses, as no other schools are located within the immediate area. The surrounding urban context already functions around Renton High School, and the proposed work largely enhances existing functions rather than introducing a new institutional use. The Applicant notes the campus location is the most viable opportunity to accommodate needed educational and athletic programming within the school district, after evaluating alternative siting constraints. Approving the proposal enables the school to continue as a community anchor within an area served by robust transportation and civic infrastructure. 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 PUD AND CU - 11 B. Tree Retention. The proposal complies with the City’s tree retention standards, thus ensuring that in conjunction with the City’s landscaping requirements that impacts to wildlife habitat and aesthetics are adequately mitigated. The City’s adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations (4-4-130) require the retention of 30 percent of protected trees. excluding those located in future right-of-way dedication, those deemed hazardous, or those within critical areas. The Applicant submitted a Tree Retention/Land Clearing Plan (Arborist Report) prepared by Atlas Technical Consultants LLC, dated September 4, 2025 (Exhibit 12). . The report identifies 212 significant (protected) trees, resulting in 64 trees that must be retained. Due to site and design constraints, the Applicant only proposes retention of 28 trees. To ensure appropriate mitigation for the credit shortfall, staff supports allowing tree replacement requirements to be met through a combination of approaches, including, in order of preference: on-site planting where feasible, off-site planting on other Renton School District properties within the City, and payment of fee- in-lieu to the City’s Urban Forestry Program. To meet the City’s tree retention standards, a condition of approval requires that the Applicant mitigate the deficit in required tree credits in the following order of preference, subject to City approval prior to civil construction permit issuance: (1) tree planting on-site to the maximum extent feasible; (2) tree planting on other Renton School District properties located within the City of Renton; and (3) payment of fee-in-lieu for any remaining credits that cannot reasonably be accommodated through on-site or off-site planting. C. Critical Areas. The proposal complies with the City’s critical area regulations and thus is found to adequately mitigate against significant adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive areas. The project site is encumbered by geologically hazardous areas and wellhead protection areas. As conditioned by this decision, the Applicant’s proposed work within these areas will be in conformance with the City’s critical area regulations and for that reason the work is not considered to create any adverse significant impacts. A discussion of each type of critical area follows. 1. Geologically Hazardous Areas. City mapping identifies the Renton High School campus as being located within an area of high seismic hazard and with limited areas of mapped potential landslide hazard associated primarily with localized grade changes and historic fill conditions. As such, the Applicant submitted a Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report, prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., dated September 3, 2025 (Exhibit 14). The geotechnical evaluation concludes that the proposed construction, including new foundations, utilities, grading activities, and athletic field improvements, can be safely supported provided the recommendations in the report are implemented. Where improvements occur near steeper grade transitions or existing retaining structures, the report provides construction controls to avoid destabilization, 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 PUD AND CU - 12 including temporary shoring, equipment setbacks, and careful management of stormwater during construction. A condition of approval requires that prior to issuance of the civil construction permit, the Applicant shall submit a supplemental geotechnical memorandum prepared by the project geotechnical engineer confirming that the final grading plan, utility alignments, retaining wall designs, and foundation systems are consistent with the assumptions and recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Engineering Report. The memorandum shall identify any additional construction recommendations, temporary shoring needs, equipment setbacks, or stormwater controls warranted by the final design. 2. Wellhead Protection Area. According to COR Maps, the site is located within both the Downtown Wellhead Protection Zones 1 and 2. The eastern portion of the site is located in Zone 1 while the western portion of the site is located in Zone 2. Open facilities and open conveyance systems in either zone may require a liner in accordance with the 2022 Renton Surface Water Design Manual. No open facilities or convenance systems are proposed and therefore the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) for stormwater control is preferable. BMPs that rely on infiltration are prohibited in the Wellhead Protection Zone 1 but are allowed in Zone 2. The proposed mixed-use building does not typically represent a type of use that would potentially harm the city’s groundwater. Fill is anticipated to be brought on the site and therefore any offsite fill materials shall be from a verifiable source in order to ensure it is clear of contaminants. The city’s grading and excavation regulations require that when imported fill is in excess of 50 cubic yards within a Wellhead Protection Zone, a source statement certified by a qualified professional be provided or confirmation that the fill was obtained from a WSDOT approved source. D. Light, Glare and Noise. The proposal will not create any significant light and glare impacts. Field lighting and site lighting are designed to be shielded, downcast and aimed to the play area to minimize light spill. The school district’s lighting is proposed to be turned off by 10:00 p.m. when in use during the darker months of the year. The design and specification for exterior lighting would meet all of the International Dark Sky “Principles for Responsible Outdoor Lighting.” The Lighting Study (Exhibit 16) demonstrates spill illumination between 0 and 0.09 footcandles at the site edges, and athletic lighting remains below FAA height thresholds. Light mitigation is included in the school district’s MDNS (Exhibit 27) and the conditions of approval. Long-term noise sources such as student activities and periodic evening sports events are consistent with existing conditions on a long-standing school campus. Truck delivery noise impacts should be minimal as delivery access will be limited to the Logan Ave S bus pick - up and drop-off lane on the east portion of the subject site. The noise of school children playing or congregating outside will be an impact limited during the school day. Acceptable levels of noise are also set by the City’s noise ordinance. 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 PUD AND CU - 13 E. Privacy. The proposal provides for adequate internal and external privacy of proposed and adjacent residential uses. The project provides appropriate visual separation, noise buffering, and screening given the institutional nature of the campus and the limited number of nearby residential properties. No new dwelling units are proposed as part of the redevelopment. The remaining off-site residential uses are located primarily along Lake Ave S and the non-vacated portion of S Tobin St at the northwest edge of the campus. In this area, the proposal reduces the overall activity intensity by converting the existing spectator ballfields to a practice-only track and field facility with no lighting and no spectator seating. The large open-space buffer created by these athletic fields, combined with retained and supplemental landscaping, provides a physical and visual separation between school functions and adjacent homes. Existing fencing and vegetation along residential edges would be retained where feasible, and additional landscape buffers are proposed to enhance screening and privacy. Parking areas, mechanical equipment, refuse facilities, and student activity zones are located primarily within the interior of the site or along street frontages that do not abut residential properties, and would be screened consistent with applicable City standards. F. Building Orientation. The dwelling units are oriented to take maximum advantage of available views. The proposed building orientation takes advantage of the site’s topography and urban context to enhance views and create an active, outward-facing campus. The new classroom building is oriented primarily toward S 2nd St and Logan Ave S, with generous glazing that frames views toward downtown Renton and landscaped plazas while creating transparency and visual interest along public frontages. This orientation reinforces the school’s civic presence and supports a pedestrian-oriented streetscape consistent with the Urban Design District standards. Internal courtyards and plazas provide additional views to landscaped areas and athletic fields, allowing both interior learning spaces and exterior gathering areas to benefit from open-space vistas rather than being focused on parking or service functions. Overall, the building location and orientation enhance visual connectivity, leverage site features, and contribute to a well-organized campus layout. 6. Superiority in Design. The proposal is superior to that which would result without using the PUD regulations. Planning staff in the staff report have found that the use of the PUD provisions allows for an integrated, campus-scale design solution that balances building orientation, pedestrian movement, circulation, safety, and site programming in a way that would not be achievable under strict application of the development standards. The proposed project replaces an aging and functionally outdated high school campus with a modernized facility that continues to serve the same student population while better supporting academic, athletic, and community needs. Unlike a new school built in an unserved area, this project reinforces the historic role of Renton High School within the downtown and surrounding 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 PUD AND CU - 14 neighborhoods, while improving safety, accessibility, and environmental performance. The PUD enables a site design that orients buildings, plazas, and primary entries toward surrounding streets and public spaces, consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-52, which calls for buildings to face streets or common areas rather than parking lots. The project also incorporates pedestrian pathways, plazas, landscaping, and outdoor gathering areas that create clear edges, entries, and identifiable public spaces, consistent with Policy LU-51 and Goal LU-FF, which emphasize human-scale design and enhancement of community identity. Without the flexibility provided through the PUD, the campus would be constrained by multiple zoning districts, frontage standards, and dimensional requirements that would fragment circulation and reduce opportunities for cohesive open space and safety-focused campus organization. The PUD allows coordinated placement of the new high school building, renovation of the 1930 historic structure, and arrangement of athletic facilities in a manner that supports secure internal circulation, improved pedestrian connectivity, and clear hierarchy of vehicular and bus movements. These features result in a more functional and unified campus than would otherwise occur. The requested modifications primarily relate to parking and circulation placement, fencing height, and landscaping transitions, all of which are integrated into an overall design strategy intended to improve student safety, operational efficiency, and neighborhood compatibility. The development is located within an existing school site surrounded by a mix of commercial, institutional, and residential uses. The redevelopment maintains school use in this location, improves visual quality along S 2nd St and Logan Ave S, and provides enhanced pedestrian connections while buffering athletic activities where feasible. For these reasons, the proposed project represents a superior design outcome when compared to development under strict application of the code, and the requested deviations are not anticipated to be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. 7. Public Benefit. The proposal provides for numerous public benefits beyond those possible under applicable zoning district regulations. As a public educational facility, the project supports long-term community investment, academic achievement, and equitable access to learning opportunities for current and future students. The redevelopment replaces outdated facilities with modernized classrooms, career-technical education spaces, science labs, arts and athletic facilities, and support services designed to meet contemporary educational needs. These improvements contribute directly to community well-being and help implement the City’s adopted goals related to quality public services, neighborhood vitality, and downtown reinvestment. The PUD allows a comprehensive campus design that improves circulation, safety, and connectivity beyond what would otherwise occur. The project includes a clear separation of bus traffic, general vehicular access, and pedestrian movement; enhanced frontage improvements and pedestrian crossings; and reconfigured site access that reduces conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians. These design features promote safer walking and biking routes for students and the larger community. The campus also incorporates plazas, outdoor gathering areas, landscaping, and improved athletic and recreational facilities that can support school functions as well as community events and youth programs, thereby extending the public benefit beyond the school day. 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 PUD AND CU - 15 The project retains and rehabilitates the historic 1930 Renton High School building, preserving an important cultural and architectural landmark that contributes to the City’s identity. The preservation effort, combined with new construction designed to complement the surrounding urban context, strengthens neighborhood character, and supports Comprehensive Plan policies related to design quality and sense of place. Additionally, the project consolidates fragmented parcels, improves stormwater management, and upgrades utilities and infrastructure in ways that would not be triggered by maintaining the existing campus in its current condition. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Authority. RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies each of the permits under review as either Type II or Type III permits. RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under “the highest-number procedure.” The Type III plat review is the “highest-number procedure” and therefore must be employed for all of the permit 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/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The project site is apportioned amounts three zoning districts: Commercial Arterial (CA)), Center Downtown (CD) and Residential-8 (R-8). The project site is also located with Urban Design District ‘A’, Urban Design District ‘D’ and City Center Sign Regulation Area. The comprehensive plan land use designations for the site are apportioned between Commercial & Mixed Use (CMU) and Residential Medium Density (RMD) 3. Review Criteria. RMC 4-9-150 governs preliminary and final PUD review criteria. RMC 4-9- 030F governs the conditional use criteria for height increases and RMC 4-9-030C governs the conditional use. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. All applicable criterion quoted below are met for the reasons identified in the corresponding conclusions of law. Preliminary PUD RMC 4-9-150(B)(2): Code Provisions That May Be Modified: a. In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of chapter 4-2 RMC, chapter 4-4 RMC, RMC 4-6-060 and chapter 4-7 RMC, except as listed in subsection B3 of this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. b. An Applicant may request additional modifications from the requirements of this Title, except those listed in subsection B3 of this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PUD AND CU - 16 4. The criterion is met. As shown in FOF No. 3, the requested revisions are limited to Chapter 4- 2, 4-3 and 4-4 regulations as authorized above. None of the Chapter 4-3 requested modifications are prohibited by RMC 4-9-150B3. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 1. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is following the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which will result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. 5. The criterion is met. The purposes of the PUD regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-150(A), are to preserve and protect the natural features of the land and to encourage innovation and creativity in development of residential uses. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 3, there are no natural features to protect at the project site. There are some large trees, but they will be removed in conformance with the City’s tree retention standards as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5B. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the reasons identified in Finding No. 19 of the staff report. The proposal is superior to that which could be produced without a PUD for the reasons identified in FOF No. 6. The proposal will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties because it will not result in any significant adverse impacts for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 2. Public Benefit Required: In addition, Applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than will result from the development of the subject site without the proposed planned urban development: a. Protects critical areas that will not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or c. Public Facilities: Provides public facilities that could not be required by the City for development of the subject property without a planned urban development. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PUD AND CU - 17 d. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that will result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: ... 6. The criterion is met. The proposal provides for public benefit for the elements quoted above as determined in Finding of Fact No. 7. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. 7. The criterion is met for the reasons identified at Finding of Fact No. 5(A) and (D). RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria … b. Circulation: i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. 8. The criterion is met. The proposal provides for adequate streets and pedestrian facilities as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4E. 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 PUD AND CU - 18 RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria … b. Circulation: … ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. 9. The proposal meets this requirement as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4E. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria … b. Circulation: … iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. 10. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 4E, the proposal provides for a well-integrated system of internal pedestrian improvements that ultimately connect to required frontage pedestrian improvements. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria … b. Circulation: … 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 PUD AND CU - 19 iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. 11. As conditioned, the proposal provides for safe and efficient access for emergency vehicles as determined in FOF No. 4E. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria c. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. 12. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4 and as conditioned, the proposal is served by sufficient public infrastructure and services to serve the development. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria … e. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. 13. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF 5E. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 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 PUD AND CU - 20 … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria … f. Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. 14. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5F. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. … 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria … g. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. 15. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF 4F. RMC 4-9-150(D)(4): Each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the development standards contained in subsection E of this Section, the underlying zone, and any overlay districts; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been requested pursuant to subsection B2 of this Section. 16. As discussed below, the proposal complies with all development standards imposed by RMC 4-9-150(E). With the exception of the proposed PUD modifications, the proposal is compliant with the standards of the underlying zones for the reasons identified in Finding No. 20 of the staff report and design district standards (as modified by the PUD) for the reasons identified in Finding No. 25 of the staff report. RMC 4-9-150(E)((1): Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for residential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments are described below. … 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 PUD AND CU - 21 c. Mixed Use Nonresidential Portions, or Commercial, or Industrial Uses: The following subsections specify common open space requirements applicable to nonresidential portions of mixed use developments or to single use commercial or industrial developments: i. All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian- oriented space according to the following formula: 1% of the lot area + 1% of the building area = Minimum amount of pedestrian-oriented space… 17. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 4D. RMC 4-9-150(E)(3): Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: a. Installation: All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the Applicants and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. b. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. 18. As Conditioned. RMC 4-9-150(E)(4)(a): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: a. Installation: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9- 060… 19. As Conditioned. RMC 4-9-150(E)(4)(b): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: 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 PUD AND CU - 22 … b. Maintenance: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or by the property owners’ association, or the agent(s) thereof. In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners’ association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 20. As conditioned. Final PUD RMC 4-9-150G6: Review and Approval of Final Plan: The final plan shall be reviewed by the applicable City departments, in the manner prescribed for preliminary plans, to determine if the final plan is in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary plan and is consistent with the purposes and review criteria of this Section. The Community and Economic Development Administrator shall make a decision to approve, approve with conditions or deny the final plan. The decision shall include a description of the elements of the approved planned urban development, including land uses, number of units, phasing, the effective date of approval and of expiration, time limits, required improvements and the schedule for implementation, and any conditions that may apply to the planned urban development. 21. The final PUD is approved by this decision, with the information required above more particularly described as follows: A. Authorized land uses, number of units and conditions of approval. The final PUD is approved as depicted in Ex. 3 and described in Finding of Fact No. 3, subject to the conditions listed in the Decision section. B. Phasing. The Renton High School Replacement Project is designed to be constructed in multiple coordinated phases, with each phase containing sufficient parking, utilities, access, landscaping, and functional open space to operate as a stable and safe environment. C. Effective date. The effective date of approval is the signature date in the Decision section. D. Time limits. This PUD approval shall expire after two years. The Applicant shall, within two (2) years of the signature date of this decision, submit complete building permit applications to the Department of Community and Economic Development. E. Expiration. Expiration of an approved final plan planned urban development shall be defined as failure to initiate construction of the planned urban development or failure to submit a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PUD AND CU - 23 complete building permit application within the approved final plan time limits. Expiration can only occur if no on-site construction has begun or the expiration of building permits has occurred. F. Required improvements. Required improvements and the implementation schedule thereof is as required in the conditions of approval of this Decision as well as Finding No. 24 of the staff report, Infrastructure an Services. 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. 22. The criterion is met. The proposal is consistent with the City’s development standards and comprehensive plan for the reasons identified in Findings 17-23 of the staff report. 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. 23. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5A. 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. 25. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned and mitigated, there are no 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. 26. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any adverse aesthetic impacts or any other impacts that would create compatibility problems. RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available. 27. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4F. 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 PUD AND CU - 24 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. 28. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4E. 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. 29. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5D, the proposal will not create any significant noise, light and 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. 30. The criterion is met. Landscaping is provided throughout the site in accordance with City requirements as determined by City planning staff and is strategically used to buffer sensitive edges, soften built features, and enhance the pedestrian environment. The landscape plans emphasize native and drought-tolerant species that are well-suited to long-term campus maintenance and stormwater performance. Enhanced buffers are located along property lines shared with residential uses, around parking areas, and along the perimeter of athletic fields to reduce views, improve privacy, and help disperse noise. DECISION The proposed preliminary and final PUD and conditional use permit applications as described in FOF No. 3 meet all applicable criteria quoted in this decision and for that reason are APPROVED subject to the following conditions of approval below: 1. The Applicant shall comply with the modified mitigation measures issued as part of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) issued by the Renton School District on December 2, 2025. 2. The Applicant shall record a formal Lot Combination to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The lot combination shall include all high school campus parcels as part of the project. The instrument shall be recorded prior to the issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 3. The Applicant shall mitigate the deficit in required tree credits in the following order of preference: (1) tree planting on-site to the maximum extent feasible; (2) tree planting on other Renton School District properties located within the City of Renton; and (3) payment of fee-in-lieu for any remaining credits that cannot reasonably be accommodated through on-site or off-site planting. Prior 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 PUD AND CU - 25 to civil construction permit issuance, the Applicant shall submit a Tree Credit Mitigation Plan identifying proposed planting locations, tree species and sizes, total credit values, installation and maintenance responsibilities, and the number of remaining credits (if any) to be satisfied by fee-in-lieu. Off-site planting locations shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, and any remaining fee-in-lieu amount shall be paid in full prior to issuance of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 4. 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 are located out of public ROW view, active common open spaces, and they shall not displace required landscaping 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 permit issuance. In addition, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the Applicant be required to submit a rooftop equipment exhibit with the elevation plans associated with the building permit application. The exhibit shall provide cross section details and identify proposed rooftop screening that is integral and complementary to the architecture of the buildings. The exhibit shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager. 5. The Applicant shall submit a construction outreach and traffic communication plan to notify neighbors, road users, and affected agencies prior to major roadway disruption. 6. The Applicant shall submit a Pedestrian-Oriented Space Plan with the civil construction permit submittal. The plan shall: (1) calculate the total amount of pedestrian-oriented space required and provided; (2) clearly identify on the site and landscape plans each area proposed to count toward the requirement; and (3) demonstrate that every counted area includes all required elements, including: accessible paved surfaces, average illumination of at least four (4) foot-candles on the ground, and durable seating provided at a minimum rate of three linear feet (3’) per sixty (60) square feet of plaza/open space. The plan shall also include cut-sheets for proposed lighting and site furnishings. The Pedestrian-Oriented Space Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to issuance of the civil construction permit. 7. The Applicant shall submit a supplemental geotechnical memorandum prepared by the project geotechnical engineer confirming that the final grading plan, utility alignments, retaining wall designs, and foundation systems are consistent with the assumptions and recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Engineering Report. The memorandum shall identify any additional construction recommendations, temporary shoring needs, equipment setbacks, or stormwater controls warranted by the final design. The memorandum shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and Development Engineering Reviewer and incorporated into the civil construction drawings. All geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented during construction. 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 PUD AND CU - 26 8.The design and specification for exterior lighting shall meet all International Dark Sky “Principles for Responsible Outdoor Lighting.” 9.Installation and maintenance of common open space and common facilities shall conform to RMC 4-9-150(E)(3) and (4). DATED this 30th day of January 2026. ___________________________ City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-080(G) provides that the consolidated Type III applications subject to this decision are subject to appeal to .ing County Superior Court as governed by the Land Use Petition Act (LUPA), Chapter 36.70C RC:. Appeals must be filed and served as required by LUPA within 21 days of the issuance of this decision. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.