HomeMy WebLinkAbout2-4-2026 - HEX Decision only - Spirit and Truth CUP1
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
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
RE: In Spirit and Truth Ministries
Conditional Use Permit
File No. LUA25-000380
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION\
SUMMARY
The Applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit for the change of use of an
existing building located at 211 Morris Ave S from office to religious use. The application is
approved subject to conditions.
ORAL TESTIMONY
A computer-generated transcript of the hearing has been prepared to provide an overview of the hearing
testimony. The transcript is not intended to provide a precisely accurate rendition of testimony but
generally identifies the subjects addressed during the hearing. The transcript is provided for informational
purposes only as Appendix A.
EXHIBITS
Exhibits 1-23 presented by the City at the January 20, 2026 hearing were admitted into the
record during the hearing
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Applicant. Peik Li Pang, 5ft2 Studio Architects. 2625 Northup Way, Suite 100, Bellevue,
WA 98004.
2. Hearing. A virtual hearing was held on July 20, 2026, at 11:00 am.
Substantive:
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
3. Project Description. The Applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit for
the change of use of an existing building located at 211 Morris Ave S from office to
religious use. The project site is composed of an existing one-story 4,666-square-foot
office building on a lot approximately 12,284 square feet (0.28 acres) in size. Vehicular
access to the site will continue to be gained from an existing curb cut on Morris Ave S.
The proposal will not include structural changes or modifications to the building exterior.
No trees are proposed for removal
4. Surrounding Uses. Surrounding land uses are composed of multi-family and mixed use
development.
5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the project. A
Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) was issued for the proposal on
December 16 , 2025. Pertinent impacts are more specifically addressed as follows:
A. Critical Areas. : The project site is located within a high seismic hazard area; however,
a Geotechnical Report was not provided with the land use application materials as no
exterior improvements to the existing building are proposed. The proposed project is
limited to a change of use and interior tenant improvements. It is anticipated that the
city’s adopted building code and construction standards would adequately mitigate any
impacts of the proposed tenant improvements on the project site.
B. Public Services.
1) Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicates that sufficient resources
exist to furnish services to the proposed development.
2) Storm Water: The site is already served by stormwater facilities since it is already
developed. There are no land disturbing activities proposed; therefore, the proposal
would not be subject to compliance with the surface water regulations.
3) Water: The existing three-quarter-inch (3/4”) meter can be reused for the existing
building if sized appropriately. A backflow prevention device is required for an
irrigation meter, if applicable. A DCDA will need to be provided at the time of
building permit application if irrigation is proposed.
The development is subject to meter installation fees based on the number and size
of the meters for domestic uses and for fire sprinkler use if upgrading is required or
needed. Fees are assessed at the rate in effect at the time of 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
4) Sanitary Sewer: A grease interceptor is required for the proposed commercial
kitchen. The applicant is required to submit a revised plan showing a grease
interceptor at the time of building permit review.
C. Traffic. The proposal is not anticipated to result in new transportation impacts to the
city’s transportation system. A Traffic Impact Analysis was not required to be
submitted with the application materials as the proposal would not generate 20 new
AM or PM peak hour trips. The project proposal passed the City’s Transportation
Concurrency Test (Exhibit 20).
The site has an existing surface parking lot with a pedestrian walkway between the
building and parking stalls. City staff determined that the existing parking lot provides
safe movement for both vehicles and pedestrians.
D. Landscaping. Staff has found the site already contains landscaping consisting of small
trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Landscaping is being provided along the street frontage
The site is not proposing any site alterations, and the proposal does not meet the cost
threshold (improvements equal to or greater than fifty percent [50%] of the assessed
property valuation) that would trigger bringing the site into compliance with landscape
requirements. It is the property owner’s responsibility to maintain plantings in a
healthy, growing condition and to replace any that are dead or dying.
E. Tree Retention. No trees are proposed for removal. Therefore, the proposal would
retain 100% of all existing trees onsite, which would comply with the tree retention
requirements.
F. Parking. No new buildings or building additions are proposed; therefore, other than
compliance with the Parking Lot Design Standards, the proposed project would be
exempt from compliance with the Parking Regulations. A preliminary seating chart
shows a total of 100 loose seats for the assembly space (Exhibit 3). Based on this
information, the site is required to provide approximately 20 parking stalls to
accommodate the use. The proposed site plan would provide a total of 20 parking stalls
in the existing parking lot located both on the property and the adjacent property to the
south owned by the City of Seattle (Exhibit 2). It appears that the existing parking
would be sufficient for the proposed religious institution.
G. Noise, Light & Glare. The proposal will not generate noise, light, and glare impacts
that would unduly impact the surrounding neighborhood. No excessive noise, lighting,
or glare is expected. According to the applicant, programming including music,
sermons, and larger gatherings would occur indoors. The existing building is a
standalone building that does not have any shared walls with adjacent buildings or uses.
Furthermore, no exterior modifications that would increase potential impacts are being
proposed.
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
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Authority. RMC 4-8-080(G) provides that hearing examiner conditional use permit review
and variances are Type III applications. As Type III applications, RMC 4-8-080(G) grants
the Examiner with the authority to hold a hearing and issue a final decision, subject to
closed record appeal to the City Council.
2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The property is zoned Center Downtown
(CD); Urban District A. The Comprehensive Plan Commercial Mixed-Use (CMU).
3. Review Criteria. Conditional use criteria are set by RMC 4-9-030.
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. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. The proposal is consistent with the City’s development
standards and comprehensive plan for the reasons identified in Sections 16 and 17 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.
5. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. Staff has not found any overconcentration of churches
in the immediate area. The church also serves to compliment the diversity of uses present in
the surrounding mixed use area.
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.
6. Criterion Met. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 5.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and
character of the neighborhood.
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
7. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. The proposal involves an existing building with no
exterior alterations so the proposal will no structural impacts to compatibility with scale and
character. The proposal will otherwise not create any compatibility impacts because of its
modest size and no significant impact as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available.
8. Criterion Met. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 5.F.
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. Criterion Met. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in Findings of Fact No. 5.C.
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. Criterion Met. The criterion is met As determined in Findings of Fact No. 5.G, 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.
11. Criterion Met. The criterion is met as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5.D.
DECISION
As conditioned below, the proposed Conditional User Permit conforms to all required criteria
for approval for the reasons detailed in the Conclusions of Law above. The conditions
necessary to assure compliance and required by this Decision are as follows:
1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measure issued as part of the Determination
of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated December 16, 2025, which is:
a. The applicant shall submit an Inadvertent Discovery Plan (IDP) prepared by a
qualified professional with the civil construction permit for review and approval by
the Current Planning Project Manager prior to permit issuance. The applicant shall
provide notification to Tribes’ cultural committee prior to the start of construction.
2. The applicant shall construct a solid waste enclosure to ensure adequate screening of the
weather-proofed containers. A detailed refuse and recycling screening area plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building
occupancy.
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
3.The applicant shall supplement their site plan and submit elevation drawings with sufficient
detail to ensure design standard compliance with the newly proposed entry. The updated
site plan submittal shall also correctly reflect existing and proposed modulation of the
primary structure along Morris Ave S. These submittals shall be reviewed and approved
by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
4.The applicant shall submit elevations with the building permit application showing existing
and proposed facades to demonstrate conformance with applicable building architectural
design regulations. The elevation detail shall be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
5.The applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan at the time of civil construction permit
application that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on
adjacent properties. This plan should include details regarding pedestrian-scale lighting
around the primary building entrances. The lighting plan shall be submitted for review and
approval by the Current Planning Project Manager at the time of building permit review.
Dated this 4th day of February 2026.
______________________________
Phil Olbrechts,
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies the application(s) subject to this decision as Type III applications subject
to judicial appeal to King County Superior Court as governed by the Land Use Petition Act (LUPA),
Chapter 36.70C RCW. Appeals of this decision must be served and filed within twenty-one (21)
calendar days of issuance as required by LUPA.
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.