HomeMy WebLinkAboutLongacres Phase II CITY OF RENTON
NOV 13 2015
1 RECEIVED
2 CiTY CLERK'S OFFICE
3
4
5
6
7
8 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
9 )
10 �� Longacres Business Center Phase II � FINAL DECISION
11 Site Plan and Street Modification �
)
)
12 LUA15-000630, MOD, SA-H )
)
13 )
14
Summary
15
16 The applicant requests site plan approval and approval of a street modification for two (2) standalone
buildings totaling 260,000 square feet at a site north of the intersection of SW 27th St and Naches
1'7 Ave SW. One building will be a three-story 113,00 square foot general office use building and the
other building will be a three-story 147,000 square foot general office building. The site plan and
1 g street modification are approved with conditions.
19
20 Testimony
21 Clark Close, Senior City of Renton Planner, summarized the staff report. In response to examiner
questions, Mr. Close clarified that at a minimum the applicant would comply with the 1990
22 stormwater manual but was also voluntarily complying with some current stormwater standards. Mr.
Close also noted that there was conflicting evidence on whether the project site is in a flood zone and
23 that the applicant is being required to provide compensatory flood mitigation to avoid any potential
24 problems. Vanessa Dolbee, current planning manager, identified the factors that would be reviewed
in a biological assessment required by staff recommended conditions of approval.
25
26
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 1
1 Exhibits
2 E�ibits 1-32 identified in the "E�chibits" lists within and accompanying the staff report were
3 admitted into the record during the hearing. The staff report was admitted as Ex. 33, the City's core
planning maps, located at the City's website, were admitted as Ex. 34. Amended staff recommended
4 Condition No. 12 was admitted as Ex. 35.
5 FINDINGS OF FACT
6 Procedural:
� 1. Applicant. Molly Carson.
8
2. Hearin�. A hearing was held on the application on October 27,2015.
9
3. Proiect Descrintion. The applicant requests site plan approval and approval of a street
10 modification for two (2) standalone buildings totaling 260,000 square feet at a site north of the
11 intersection of SW 27th St and Naches Ave SW. One building (Building C) will be a three-story
113,00 square foot general office use building and the other building (Building D) will be a three-
12 story 147,000 square foot general office building. The project site is 17.38 acres in size, is vacant
and is relatively flat with a six-foot increase in overall grade. The project as approved by this
13 decision is depicted in Ex. 4, 5 and 6 as amended by Ex. 32 and the conditions of approval.
14 The street modification request is a requested modification to RMC 4-6-060. At the time of vesting
15 RMC 4-6-060 required 8 feet of landscaping, 8-foot wide sidewalks, a right of way width of 103 feet,
and an 8-foot parking lane along Oakesdale Ave SW. The applicant requests that they be allowed to
16 retain the existing 6-foot landscaping strips, 6-foot wide sidewalks, 90 feet of right of way and no
parking lane.
17
18 4. Adeauacv of Infrastructure/Public Services. The ro'ect will be served b
P J Y
19 adequate/appropriate infrastructure as conditioned by this decision. The adequacy of infrastructure
and services is more specifically addressed as follows:
20
21 A. Water and Sewer Service. Sewer and water are provided by the City of Renton. City �'I
sewer and water mains are available along Naches Avenue for connection. ',
22 i,
23 B. Fire and Police. The City of Renton will provide fire and police service. Fire and police !
department staff have determined that existing facilities are adequate to serve the
24 development.
25
26
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION-2
1 C. DrainaQe. The applicant has submitted a preliminary drainage report, Ex. 13, that staff
2 has found to be acceptable for site plan review. The applicant proposes to convey project
stormwater to a detention/wet pond located on a development tract to the north.
3
4 D. Parks/Open Space. City development standards do not impose any park or open space
requirements for commercial uses and no legal justification is found in the administrative
5 record.
6
E. Off-Site Transuortation. No significant off-site transportation impacts are anticipated and
� no off-site mitigation beyond traffic impact fees is necessary. The applicant submitted a
g Traffic Impact Analysis completed by TENW (dated August 21, 2015; Exhibit 15). The
results of the traffic study establish that the project will not lower the level of service of
� 9 affected intersections below adopted standards.
10
G. Parkin� (vehicular and bicvclel. Parking meets vested City parking standards. The
11 applicant is proposing 365 compact stalls (17%), 677 standard stalls (81%), and 21 ADA
12 stalls (2%) for a total of 1,063 parking stalls. Based on the parking regulations, Building
C would have a required minimum stall count of 339 and a maximum stall count of 509,
13 and Building D would have a required minimum stall count of 441 and a ma�cimum stall
14 count of 662. Together the two buildings would have a minimum off-street parking stall
requirement of 780 and a maximum stall requirement of 1,171. The proposed 1,063 stalls
15 fall within the minimum and maximum parking regulations of the code. So that the
16 parking is located on the same lot as the structure, a condition of approval requires that
the applicant complete a lot combination into a single lot or a lot line adjusttnent, such
1� that the required parking is on the same lot as each structure, pursuant to the minimum
1 g code standards per building. Should the applicant choose to complete a lot line adjustment
with more than one lot, a condition of approval requires that a cross access agreement
19 and/or a shared parking agreement be provided with the development.
20 �
Bicycle parking is encouraged for the development by vested development standards.
21 The staff report recommends a condition requiring 40 bicycle parking stalls, which has
22 been adopted by this decision.
23 H. Vehicular Access and
24 Internal Circulation. The proposal provides for safe and efficient access and circulation
for all users. City public works staff have reviewed the proposal and found it to provide
25 for safe and efficient access and circulation. The limited number of intersections and
26 driveway access points will increase vehicle and pedestrian safety by reducing the amount
of pedestrian and vehicle cross-over from an arterial street. All public access will be
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION-3
1 provided from either SW 27th St at Naches Ave SW or from Oakesdale Ave SW(roughly
between SW 27th St and SW 23rd St). The site access driveway on Oakesdale Ave SW
2 will be a full access driveway in order to allow all turn movements and be configured with
3 separate outbound left and right turn lanes. A center two-way left turn lane exists on
Oakesdale Ave SW which would provide a left turn lane for traffic entering the site and a
4 center refuge lane for traffic exiting the site. The site plan includes several 24-foot wide
through driveway aisles, around perimeter and portions of the interior of the site.
5 Pedestrian connections from the street to each of the two buildings will be provided if all
6 conditions of approval are met. There is also pedestrian linkage between the nearby light 'I
rail station and the project site, as depicted in Ex. 5. All public entries open to the '
� sidewalk surrounding the exterior building elevations and not into an internal driveway or
drive aisle which promote safety and efficiency. The accessible stalls are proposed as the
g nearest stalls to the front entrances for easier access.
9 As determined in the staff report, the applicant is also taking special measures to protect
10 landscaping from damage by vehicles and/or pedestrian traffic by providing defined
pedestrian and vehicular areas.
11
I. Refuse and Recvcle Enclosure. The proposal provides for adequate refuse and recyclable
12 axeas. The staff s analysis of applicable requirements, located at p. 1 of the staff report, is
13 adopted by reference.
J. Recreation. The primary open space on the subject site is located in the hardscape
14 between the two structures at the center of the site. The roughly 132-foot wide space
15 between the two buildings includes landscaping, walkways and patio areas. The open
space has the potential to serve as a distinctive focal point from within the site. Proposed
16 and conditioned landscaping would provide passive recreation opportunities for Group
17 Health employees.
18 K. Transit and Bicvcles. The subject site is located just south of Sound Transit's Tukwila
19 train station. The new office buildings would be within walking and biking distance from
20 ; this transportation hub. A bicycle lane provides bicycle access to the project site and as
previously discussed the proposal is conditioned to provide for bicycle parking.
21
22 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the project as
conditioned by this decision. Adequate infrastructure serves the site as determined in Finding of Fact
23 No. 4. Impacts are more specifically addressed as follows:
24 A. Compatibilitv. No
compatibility issues are evident from the record. The project is generally bounded by CO
25 zoning on all sides except the west property line, which is BNSF Railroad in the City of
26 Tulcwila (TUC-TOD Tulcwila Urban Center—Transit Oriented Development). The buildings
will be located towards the center of the project site with surface parking areas located around
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION-4
1 most sides of the two buildings. The proposed buildings would have a combined footprint of
86,500 square feet, resulting in a building lot coverage of approximately 11.4% across the
2 combined property. The proposal would not be an over scale structure or exhibit
3 over concentration of development as the proposal does not exceed maximum height, lot
coverage, and setback requirements. The scale, height and bulk of the proposed building are
4 also appropriate for the scale of the 17.38-acre site. The applicant has achieved compatibility
with the surrounding uses through substantial setbacks and proposed landscaping.
5 Additionally, the Green River Valley Wildlife Habitat Corridor, combined with the perimeter
6 landscape azea along the east and west property lines, creates a 30-foot wide onsite landscape
buffer that not only makes 4% of the site to suitable area for wildlife but also serves to create
� compatibility with surrounding properties.
g B. Views. There are no territorial views for which to maintain visual accessibility for on-site
g buildings. No view corridors of neighboring properties to shorelines or Mt. Rainier would be
adversely affected. No comments were submitted from adjacent properties regarding views.
10
� The a licant did not rovide an on-site li htin lan. A condition of a roval will
11 C. Li�htin�. pp p g g p pp
require the applicant to provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety
12 without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit review.
Down-lighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe vehicular movement in an area where
13 pedestrians could be walking. The conditions of approval require that the lighting plan shall
be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building
14 pernut approval.
15 D. Screenin� of Mechanical Eauipment and Refuse/RecvclinQ Area. The application has roof
16 mounted mechanical equipment on both structures that will be screened around all sides,
approximately 8 feet above the top of the parapet, in order to minimize the impacts on the
l� pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Compliance with vested rooftop screening
1 g requirements will be verified at the time of building permit construction. IYs unclear from the
record whether the refuse and recycling area will be screened from view so screening of that
19 amenity will be made a condition of approval.
20 ' E. Privacv and Noise. Given
the surrounding commercial uses and zoning, the proposal is not anticipated to create any
21 significant noise or privacy impacts. Existing noise within the vicinity of the subject site is
22 primarily composed of vehicles on the abutting streets (SW 27th St and Oakesdale Ave
SW), the rail line located immediately west of the site, and the Tukwila Sounder Station
23 located northwest of the proposed campus style buildings. It is anticipated that most of the
noise impacts would occur during the construction phase of the project. The site is
24 surrounded by commercial development; therefore, the temporary noise impacts are
25 anticipated to be minimal and limited in duration, and are not anticipated to be more
impactful then the existing rail noise.
26
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 5
1 The applicant has submitted a Construction Mitigation Plan (E�chibit 18), which provides
measures to reduce construction impacts such as noise, control of dust, traffic controls, etc.
2 Based on the provided construction mitigation description, the applicant has indicated that
3 construction is anticipated to begin in December of 2015 and complete in June 2017. At this
time, the applicant has indicated that construction work would occur from 6:00 am to 10:00
4 pm Monday through Friday and from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm on Saturday. The project's first
phase was granted approval of the requested construction schedule and hours for Longacres
5 Business Center Phase I. No public complaints have been received by the City for work
6 outside the approved construction hours. The City of Renton is anticipating approval of the '
requested construction schedule and work hours for Longacres Business Center Phase II. �
� Also, no excessive levels of noise are expected to be generated during the operation of the ',
completed project. '�
g Due to the requirement and need for parking, it is a challenge to limit the paved and/or �',
g impervious surfaces on the site. While there is an exceptional amount of parking the lot has '�
been sufficiently landscaped. The applicant is also taking special measures to protect �I
10 landscaping from damage by vehicles and/or pedestrian traffic by providing defined
11 Pedestrian and vehicular areas. If all conditions of approval are met, there will be adequate i,
provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement and the use of i,
12 landscaping. I
13 F. Natural Svstems/Critical Areas. There are no natural systems or critical areas on-site except
for a potenrial flood zone and a high seismic area, low erosion hazard area and low landslide
14 hazard area. The flood insurance rate map (FIRM) for the property identifies a 100-year
15 floodplain, Zone AE, in close proximity to the northwestern property boundary, which may
extend onto the property. The base flood elevation shown on the FIRM for Zone AE is 16 feet
16 above mean sea level. Southern portions of the site are located within Zone X, outside the
100-year or 500-year flood zones. According to the Flood Plain Hazard Data Map, the 100-
1� year flood plain encroaches roughly 4,400 square feet onto the northwest portion of the site
1 g (northwest of Building C) and 44,000 square feet within the stormwater detention pond
(Exhibit 8). The applicant is proposing to fill 2,500 cubic feet of fill within the northwest
19 portion of the site and remove approximately 250,000 cubic feet of the 100-year flood plain
from the stormwater pond. As such, the applicant is proposing compensatory volume in the
20 footprint of the combination wetpond in Tract B, at the elevations above the overflow
detention line. Staff have deternuned that this compensatory mitigation is adequate to
' 21 mitigate against any impacts to potential development in a flood zone.
22
As noted in the staff report, based on the soil and groundwater conditions onsite, the site
23 would be mapped as a high seismic hazard, a low erosion hazard area and a low landslide
hazard area. The applicant has prepared a geotechnical report that has been reviewed and
24 approved by staff, Ex. 11, which contains recommendations to assure safe construction in
25 these geological hazardous areas that are imposed by the conditions of approval.
G. Landscapin� and tree retention. The applicant's preliminary landscaping and tree
2( retention proposal has been found to comply with City standards by staff as conditioned
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 6
1 by this decision. The staff's analysis of applicable requirements, located at p. 8 of the ',
2 staff report, is adopted by reference.
H. Provision for Li�ht and Air.
3 The proposal provides for adequate provision of light and air. The proposed buildings would ��
be located central to the site with surface parking areas located along the perimeter of the site. '
4 The laxger setbacks of the building from the property line will provide for flow of sunlight,
5 winds,vehicle and pedestrian movement through most of the site. Prevailing winds in the area
are from the southwest during most of the year (fall, winter and spring) as well as the
6 direction of sunlight. The structures would cast various degrees of shade along the north
elevations throughout most of the day. The applicant should take measures to provide
7 ornamental lighting within the vicinity of the entrances and along the north elevations in order
g to adequately illuminate the area for pedestrians and bicyclists. The lighting plan required by
the conditions of approval will include ornamental lighting.
9 Proposed landscaping has been strategically placed on site in order take advantage of sun
10 exposure from the south and west most times of the year, and would likely only be shaded at
certain times of the day during the winter months.
11
12 Conclusions of Law
13
1. Authoritv. RMC 4-9-200(B)(1)(a)requires Level 1 site plan review for all development in the
14 CO zone, subject to various exceptions that don't apply to this proposal. RMC 4-9-200(D)(3)(b)
15 requires a public hearing before the hearing examiner because the proposed gross floor area exceeds
100,000 square feet. RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies hearing examiner site plan review as Type III
16 pernuts and modifications as Type I pernuts. The site plan and modification requests of this proposal
17 have been consolidated. RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed
1 g under "the highest-number procedure". The site plan has the highest numbered review procedures,
so the site plan and modification requests must be processed as Type III applications. As Type III
19 applications, RMC 4-8-080(G) grants the Examiner with the authority to hold a hearing and issue a
20 final decision on them, subject to closed record appeal to the City Council.
21 2. Zonin�/Comprehensive Plan DesiQnations. The subject property is zoned Commercial Office
(CO)and has a comprehensive plan land use designation of Employment Area Valley.
22
3. Review Criteria. Site plan review standards are governed by RMC 4-9-200(E) and (F) as
23 vested under a development agreement applicable to the project, Ex. 19. Modification criteria are
24 governed by RMC 4-9-250(D), as vested under the development agreement of Ex. 19. Applicable
criteria are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. The
25 criteria of RMC 4-9-200(F) are not quoted but instead summarized within the Conclusions of Law
26 due to their excessive length.
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 7
1
2 Site Plan
3 RMC 4-9-200(E): The Reviewing O�cial shall review and act upon site plans based upon
comprehensive plan considerations and the following criteria...:
4
1(a): Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements and policies;
5
6 4. The proposal is consistent with applicable comprehensive plan policies and zoning
regulations as outlined in Finding 20(a) of the staff report, which is adopted by this reference as if set
� forth in full,including the findings and conclusions.
8 RMC 4-9-200(E)(1)(b): Conformance with existing land use regulations;
9 5. The proposal is consistent with all applicable land use regulations as outlined in Finding
10 20(b) of the staff report, which is adopted by this reference as if set forth in full, including the
findings and conclusions.
11
12 RMC 4-9-200(E)(1)(c): Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses;
13 6. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any significant adverse
14 impacts, including any impacts to surrounding uses. As detailed in Finding of Fact No. 5, the
proposal is fully compatible with adjoining uses, does not impair any views, does not impair privacy
15 or generate unreasonable amounts of noise and light and has all mechanical equipment and the like
screened from view. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, off-site traffic and stormwater
16 impacts are fully mitigated as well.
17 7. RMC 4-9-200(F)(1) also provides for more detailed standards goveming impacts to
1 g surrounding properties and uses. Those standards are met by the proposal as well. In summary, the
proposal will not negatively interfere with use and enjoyment of surrounding properties and uses
19 because the proposal is fully compatible with surrounding properties and uses as determined in
Finding of Fact No. 5(A). The proposal does not create any undesirable scale impacts because as
20 determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(A) the proposal is fully compatible with surrounding uses. The
21 proposal provides for appropriate transition and linkage to surrounding uses and infrastructure
because the site provides for safe and efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation as determined in
22 Finding of Fact No. 4(H) and is accessed by a bicycle lane as noted in No. 4(L) and has pedestrian
access to the nearby Tukwila Sounder station as shown in Ex. 5. Perimeter landscaping serves as
23 effective buffering of the large parking areas of the proposal as shown in the landscaping plans, Ex.
5. The buildings are appropriately situated on the project site by centering them towards the middle
24 in order to provide for ma�cimum separation of the relatively large buildings from surrounding uses.
25 No views are impaired by the proposal as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(B). Refuse and
recycle areas as well as mechanical equipment will screened from view as required by City standards
26 as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(J). As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(C), excessive
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 8
1 glare and lighting will be adequately mitigated through staff approval of a lighting plan required by
the conditions of approval.
2
3 RMC 4-9-200(E)(1)(d): Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site;
4 8. All impacts to the proposed site have been mitigated by the staff recommended conditions of
approval adopted by this decision and the measures initially proposed by the applicant. As outlined
5 in Finding of Fact No. 5(F), the only critical areas on site are a potential flood plain zone and low
geologically hazardous areas, which will be fully mitigated by compensatory flood storage, a
6 biological assessment and adoption of the recommendations in the applicant's geotechnical report,
� Ex. 11. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(G), trees will be retained and replaced on-site to the
extent required by City development standards.
g 9. RMC 4-9-200(F)(2) also
9 provides for more detailed standards governing impacts to surrounding properties and uses,which are
met by the proposal as conditioned. In summary, building placement and spacing provides for
10 adequate privacy and noise reduction and for adequate passage of light and air as determined in
11 Finding of Fact No. 5(E) and 5(H) and for adequate accommodation of views as determined in
Finding of Fact No. 5(B). Structures are properly concentrated in the center of the site in order to
12 maximize separation of the buildings from adjoining properties as determined in Finding of Fact No.
5(A). Existing vegetation is retained to the extent required by the City's tree retention standards as
13 determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(G). No other vegetation retention is required or necessary. As
14 noted in the geotechnical report prepared for the project, Ex. 11,the project area is relatively flat with
only a 6-foot grade change so topography does not play a major role in dictating cut and fill plans.
15 Erosion impacts are addressed by conditions recommended in the geotechnical report for the project
as well as City development standards applicable to clearing and grading pernuts. Impervious
16 surfaces are difficult to limit due to the parking required of the proposal. Project site plans show that
the proposal limits impervious surface to that necessary to accommodate parking and other
1� requirements for the proposed buildings. There is no restriction on total amount of impervious
1 g surface imposed by vested zoning regulations. As determined in the staff report, the applicant is also
taking special measures to protect landscaping from damage by vehicles and/or pedestrian traffic by
19 providing defined pedestrian and vehicular areas. The proposal provides for adequate passage of
light and air as deternuned in Finding of Fact No. 5(H).
20
21 RMC 4-9-200(E)(1)(e): Conservation of area wide property values;
22 10. Given the compatibility of the site with surrounding uses and the absence of adverse impacts
23 as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, in the absence of any evidence that the proposal will
adversely affect property values it is determined that the proposal adequately conserves area wide
24 property values as required by the standard quoted above.
25 RMC 4-9-200(E)(1)(�: Safety and e�ciency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation;
26
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION-9
1 11. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4(H), the proposal provides for safe and efficient
vehicle and pedestrian circulation.
2
3 12. RMC 4-9-200(F)(3) also provides for more detailed standards governing circulation and
access. In summary, as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4(H), the proposal provides for safe and
4 efficient vehicle and pedestrian circulation as required by RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(a), (fl and (i). As
detailed in Finding of Fact No. 5(H), the 17.38-acre site only has two vehicular access points, which
5 limits ingress and egress movements as contemplated by RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(b). RMC 4-9-
6 200(F)(3)(c) requires the consolidation of access points with adjoining properties when feasible and
RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(d) requires the coordination of access on a block-wide basis. The conditions of
� approval require internal access roads to connect to adjoining parcels as depicted in Ex. 32 in order to
reduce the need for additional access points as contemplated in RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(c) and to
8 coordinate access points as contemplated in RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(d). RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(e)
discourages access points onto arterials. The project access points are on Naches Ave SW and
9 Oakesdale Ave SW, neither of which are arterials. RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(g) requires separation of
10 loading and delivery areas. The staff report does not address loading and delivery areas. The
conditions of approval require separation of loading and parking areas to the extent feasible with site
11 constraints. RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(h) requires provision for transit and bicycle access. As noted
previously, the Tukwila Sounder station is located just north of the project. The conditions of
12 approval require bicycle parking and the applicant is proposing a bicycle shelter.
13 �C 4-9-200(E)(1)(g): Provision of adequate light and air;
14 13. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(H),the proposal provides for adequate light and air.
15
RMC 4-9-200(E)(1)(h): Mitigation of noise, odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions;
16
14. As deternuned in Finding of Fact No. 5(E) the proposal will not generate any unreasonable
17 noise. As a proposed general office building, there is nothing inherent in the use or any indication in
the record that the proposal would generate any odors or create any other harmful or unhealthy
1 g conditions, given the findings of Finding of Fact No. 5 that the proposal will not create any
19 significant adverse impacts.
20 I RMC 4-9-200(E)(1)(i): Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed
use; and
21
15. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, as conditioned the proposal is served by adequate
22 public services and facilities.
23 RMC 4-9-200(E)(1)(j): Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight.
24 16. As is evident from the building elevations, Ex. 6, the applicant proposes a high quality office
25 park development that involves a substantial financial investment. There is nothing in the record to
suggest that the project could contribute to or harbor any neighborhood deterioration or blight.
26
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 10
1
2 Modifications
3 RMC 4-9-250(D)(2): Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the
provisions of this Title, the Department Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases
4 provided he/she shall first ftnd that a specific reason makes the strict letter of this Code
impractical, that the intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the
5 Comprehensive Plan is met and that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose
6 of this Code, and that such modification:
� a. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and
maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment;
8 b. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity;
c. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code;
9 d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and
10 e. N'ill not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity.
11 13. The criteria above are met for the requested modification identified in Finding of Fact No. 3
for the reasons identified at pages 23-25 of the staff report.
12
13
DECISION
14
The site plan and street standard modification identified in Finding of Fact No. 3 are approved,
15 subject to the following conditions:
16
1. The applicant shall comply with the one (1) mitigation measure issued as part of the
1� Determination of Nonsignificance-Mitigated(DNS-M),published on September 25, 2015.
1 g 2. The applicant shall maintain the proposed 32-foot wide private access roadway width as
19 provided for in the approved binding site plan, as follows and showing in Exhibit 32:
�
2p a. Along the main entrance from Oakesdale Ave SW to the first drive isle located
immediately east of Building D (approximately 391 feet). This east/west connection
21 shall include two 12-foot travel lanes with a center 8-foot wide raised planter island.
22 The center planter island may include breaks to allow for vehicular circulation.
23 b. Along the north/south driveway isle located immediately east of Building D
(approximately 380 feet). This driveway isle shall provide a direct connection to the
24 north and south property lines. The walking trail, landscaping and parking shall be
revised to allow future road connections for site-to-site vehicle access ways to allow a
25 smooth flow of traffic across abutting CO lots (or to Lots 18 &20)without the need to
26 use a public street.
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 11
1 c. Along the easdwest driveway isle located immediately south of Building C, west of
Naches Ave SW(approximately 212 feet).
2
3 d. Along the north/south driveway isle located immediately west of Building C
(approacimately 300 feet). This driveway isle shall provide a direct connection to the
4 north property line. The walking trail and landscaping shall be revised to allow future
road connections for site-to-site vehicle access ways to allow a smooth flow of traffic
5 across abutting CO lots (or to Lot 8) without the need to use a public street. A fmal
site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager
6 prior to building pernut approval.
� 3. The applicant shall be required to submit a detailed landscape plan that complies with RMC
g 4-8-120 to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction pernut approval.
9 4. The applicant shall be required to add a minimum of 40 bicycle parking spaces onsite.
Bicycle parking shall be provided for secure extended use and shall protect the entire bicycle
10 and its components and accessories from theft and weather. A fmal bicycle parking analysis
11 and bicycle parking plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to building permit approval.
12
5. The applicant shall be required to submit a conceptual sign package which indicates the
13 approximate location and size of all exterior building signage. Proposed signage shall be
compatible with the building's architecture and exterior finishes. Signage shall comply with
14 �C 4-9-200(F)(4). The conceptual sign package shall be submitted to, and approved by,
15 �e Current Planning Project Manager prior to building pernut approval.
6. The applicant shall be required to obtain and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean
16 sea level) of the lowest floor for the new structure. A flood elevation certificate shall be
1� submitted by the applicant to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to the building's
finished floor construction. The finished floor elevation would be required to be verified by a
1 g preconshuction elevation certificate at the time of construction of a substantial structural
element of the finished floor (i.e., foundation form for the concrete floor). An as-built
19 elevation certificate would be required to be provided prior to issuance of fmal occupancy.
20 7. The applicant shall be required to submit a biological assessment or BA, as required by the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The applicant shall be required to comply with
21 any unanticipated mitigation recommendations from the assessment. The BA shall be
22 submitted to the Cunent Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval.
23 8. The applicant shall provide a lighting plan which will adequately provide for public safety
without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit. The plan
24 shall indicate the location of exterior/ornamental lighting to be attached to the building, and
any surface parking lighting, including specifications of the light fixtures. In the plan the
25 a licant should take measures to rovide ornamental li htin within the vicini of the
P P g g tY
� p
26 entrances and along the north elevations in order to adequately illuminate the area for
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 12
1 pedestrians and bicyclists. The lighting plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the
Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval.
2
3 9. The applicant shall complete a lot combination or a lot line adjustment prior to building
permit approval. A cross access agreement and/or a shared parking agreement shall be
4 completed if the development is divided into two or more separate lots. If a cross access
and/or parking agreement is proposed, the document shall be reviewed and approved
5 concurrently with the two lot combination and approved by the Current Planning Project
6 Manager. The agreement shall be recorded concurrently with the lot combination.
� 10. The applicant shall provide direct pedestrian connections from Building D to the proposed
perimeter walking trail. In addition, the applicant shall provide a 5-foot wide paved walking
g trail from Oakesdale Ave SW to Building D. Final approval of materials and/or patterns shall
be reviewed by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval.
9
11. The applicant shall complete the on-site 12-inch water main loop around Buildings C & D by
10 connecting the water main to the existing onsite 12-inch water main and extending the south
11 Portion of the 12-inch looped water main to the intersection of Naches Ave SW and SW 27th
St. This 12-inch water main extension shall be installed prior to final building occupancy of
12. Longacres Business Center Phase I.
13 12. The applicant shall amend the Boeing Longacres Property Second Amended Binding Site
Plan (Exhibit 3) to reflect the approved Longacres Business Center Phase II Site Plan. The
14 applicant shall submit a timeline by which the reconfigurarion of the lots and transportation
15 system will be amended and the next amendment to the binding site plan shall be approved by
the City of Renton and recorded prior to building pernut issuance.
16
17 13.The applicant shall separate proposed loading and delivery areas (if any) from parking and
pedestrian areas as required by RMC 4-9-200(F)(3)(g) to the extent feasible and consistent
1 g with site constraints. All modifications necessary to accommodate the required separation
19 shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
building permit approval.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 13
1 14. The refuse and recycling area shall be screened from view as required by RMC 4-9-
200(F)(1)(g).
2
3 DATED this l Oth day of November, 2015.
4
.�.. ����; �' �_.::4..�-�'�
5 ���n;l'i\.c3lhfr.rhts
6 City of Renton Hearing Examiner
7
8
9 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
10 �C 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the
11 Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision
to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision.
12 A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal
13 period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13) and RMC 4-8-100(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day
appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information
14 regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall —
7�'floor, (425)430-6510.
15
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
16 notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
SITE PLAN AND MODIFICATION- 14