The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutC_City Response to Applicant Reconsideration Request_Solera Master Plan_190118.pdfDenis Law Mayor City Clerk-Jason A.Seth,CMC January 18, 2019 Jeremy Febus KPFF 1601 5th Avenue, 1600 Seattle, WA 98101 Subject: City's Reply to Quadrant's Response to Reconsideration RE: Solera Master Plan, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use and Street Modification (LUA-18-000490) Dear Mr. Febus: Enclosed please find the City's Reply to Quadrant Corporation's Response to Reconsideration on 1/16/2019) dated January 18, 2019. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Sincerely, Jas n S. eth, CMC City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera,Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Kyle Wunderlin, Planning Technician Julia Medzegian,City Council Liaison Parties of Record(8) 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057 • (425)430-6510/Fax (425)430-6516 • rentonwa.gov lb sm Denis Law Mayor i"" 110 Community&Economic Development C.E."Chip'Vincent,Administrator January 18, 2019 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton,WA 98057 SUBJECT:Reply to Reconsideration Solera Master Plan,2902 NE Sunset Blvd,LUA18-000490,SA-M,PP,CU-H, MOD Dear Mr. Examiner: Please accept the City's following reply to the Applicant's January 16, 2019 Response to Reconsideration for the Solera Master Plan. The City and Applicant appear to be in agreement on Conditions #12, #33, and #34, recommended in the City's Request for Reconsideration,and therefore the City's reply will be limited to Condition 18. The City disagrees with the Applicant's assertion that Condition #18 lacks code or legal authority to impose the condition on the land use decision.The performance measures(Condition#18)for the graphic representation of the phasing plan(Exhibit 12)were recommended to the Hearing Examiner because Exhibit 12 lacked the specificity needed to ensure compliance with applicable Renton Municipal Code (RMC) development regulations.The most fundamental of those regulations is the allowance for attached dwelling units within the Center Village(CV)zone. Pursuant to the project's vested Zoning Use Table RMC 4-2-060, attached dwelling units are permitted in the CV zone based on condition#73. RMC 4-2-080A.73 states: Garden style apartments are prohibited.Within the Center Village Zone,ground floor commercial development at a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the frontage of the building is required for all residential projects on parcels abutting NE Sunset Boulevard east of Harrington Ave NE. The garden style apartment prohibition is not applicable as the Applicant proposes flats and townhomes. However,the remaining condition is relevant as the subject property abuts NE Sunset Blvd east of Harrington Ave NE. Standalone attached dwelling units are not permitted in the CV zone at this location pursuant to the City's Zoning Use Table. 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057• rentonwa.gov Additionally,the City's development regulations require projects to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. RMC 4-2-020A states: Approval of projects in the zones is contingent upon the determination that the proposed developments are consistent with the purpose of the zone and the purpose and intent of the land use designations and guiding policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the Center Village(CV)zone as identified in RMC 4-2-020L.1 is: The purpose of the Center Village Zone(CV) is to provide an opportunity for concentrated mixed- use residential and commercial redevelopment designed to urban rather than suburban development standards that supports transit-oriented development and pedestrian activity. Use allowances promote commercial and retail development opportunities for residents to shop locally. Uses and standards allow complementary, high-density residential development, and discourage garden-style, multi-family development. The City disagrees with the Applicant's assertion that Condition#18 lacks a nexus to a project impact. Condition 18 ensures that the project does not result in a nonconforming land use should the Applicant not find a mixed use development partner and develop the Phase II townhomes prior to Phase I. As provided in the above- referenced RMC 4-2-060 and 080A.73, attached dwellings for the subject property are required to contain commercial frontage.The Applicant's interest in the property lie in the non-commercial townhome component of the project. Without the mixed use buildings on the subject property's frontage,the townhome element would not be permitted. The townhomes are subordinate and ancillary to the master plan and provide a transition to the land use pattern of the abutting properties.Condition#18 mitigates the development impact of removing the existing 100,000+ square feet of commercial buildings on the subject property and constructing low density residential-only development in a commercial zone that would otherwise not permit it. Condition #18 ensures the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Center Village (CV) zone as required in the above-referenced RMC 4-2-020A and 020L.1.The City's adopted legislative plan for the CV zone is for a concentrated mixed use and commercial redevelopment of the existing single-story commercial strip malls and surface parking lot dominated development pattern that currently exists. Mixed-use and high density residential development that supports transit-oriented development are the types of private investment that the City expects following the substantial public investment in the area, which not only included the actual infrastructure improvements, but also the City adopted Planned Action EIS (Exhibit 30) that reviewed the environmental impacts of the City's desire to increase the density of the neighborhood. Condition#18 mitigates the development impact of not fulfilling the density and intensity that the CV zone and Planned Action Ordinance require (Exhibit 29),should the applicant not find a mixed use development partner. Pursuant to RMC 4-2-120A, the minimum density permitted in the CV zone is 20 dwelling units per net acre. Should the Applicant not find a mixed-use development partner, one (1) block of townhomes would result in approximately eight (8) dwelling units per net acre for the subject property and the project would fall well short of the CV zone's code required minimum density. The City disagrees with the Applicant's assertion that an unfounded fear drives the reasoning for Condition#18. The Applicant has stated they have accepted the phasing plan and in their words"is binding on Quadrant and its development partners." However, the Applicant's own requested relief in the form of a revised Condition #18 does not meet the intent of the phasing plan and further indicates the need for performance measures should the applicant not find a mixed-use development partner. The Applicant's proposed condition allows the second townhome phase to receive Certificates of Occupancy before substantial completion of the first mixe-use building. This condition could result in one (1) block of townhomes to be completed with either significant delay of the remaining phases or the Applicant walking away from the remaining phases with their costs recouped from the 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057• rentonwa.gov one(1)and only townhome block(Phase II).The City requests the Hearing Examiner deny the Applicant's proposed revised Condition#18. The Applicant's Reconsideration Request and follow up Response has indicated they do not have a development partner for either of the mixed-use blocks. This admission is of fundamental concern to the City with how the Applicant foresees their obligation in following through with the Phasing Plan and why performance measures of Condition#18 are needed.The Applicant's Reconsideration filings suggest they would be ready to move on Phase II townhome construction with no time horizon for the mixed-use blocks other than a commitment to hire consultants to prepare building and construction permit documents.To this end,performance or surety is justified as the Applicant has shown in their filings that the phasing numbers do not matter as they do not intend to follow the sequencing of the Phasing Plan because they do not have a partner to do so. In closing,the City does not intend to force an"extreme version"of the CV zone vision on the project applicant as they claim, but instead the City aims to ensure the Applicant constructs the master plan in the order as identified in Exhibit 12, thereby ensuring compliance with the use provisions of the CV zone. Condition #18 was recommended to the Hearing Examiner to comply with the Zoning Use Table requirements (RMC 4-2-060), compliance with purpose of the CV zone (RMC 4-2-020L.1), and compliance with the CV minimum density requirement (RMC 4-2-120A). Condition#18 protects against the impact of a newly constructed townhome only project that would not be compliant with the development regulations or comprehensive plan should the Applicant be unable to find a mixed-use development partner. Furthermore, Condition #18 is reasonable as it provides for three (3) options to comply with the phasing plan. The City requests the Hearing Examiner grant approval of the proposed Conditions listed in the City's December 21, 2018 Request for Reconsideration. Sincerely, r r Matt Herrera,AICP Senior Planner cc: Jennifer Henning,Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee,Current Planning Manager Leslie Clark,Senior Assistant City Attorney Cynthia Moya,City Clerk Specialist Ann Fowler,Civil Engineer 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057• rentonwa.gov