HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_HEX Decision Watershed_2109281
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: Watershed Apartments
Preliminary and Final Planned Unit
Development and Conditional Use
LUA21-000239, CU-H, PPUD, FPUD
))))
)
))))
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND FINAL DECISION
BOLLARD CONDITION? TRAFFIC STUDY SAYS MEETS LOS – WHAT IS
ADOPTED LOS FOR CITY? TREE RETENTION, P. 13, SAYS “THREE
REQUIRED REPLACEMENT TREES” BUT ONLY PROTECTED TREES ON
SITE = ½ TREE RETAINED. REPLACEMENT RATE IS 12 CALIPER
INCHES PER TREE REMOVED = THREE TWO INCH CALIPER TREES?
ALL TREES LOCATED IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONE (10% RETENTION?).
WELLHEAD PROTECTION ANALYSIS SAYS GROUNDWATER
CONTAMINATION NOT AN ISSUE BECAUSE GROUNDWATER 8-10 FEET
BUT GEOTECH REPORT RECOMMENDS PILINGS 40 FEET DEEP.
MODIFICATION OF UPPER LEVEL SETBACKS REDUCE PRIVACY OF
ADJOINING MULTIFAMILY? ANY NATURAL FEATURES? CHIP
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
APPROVE DENSITY AVERAGING? BACK OF HOUSE UNITS???
SUMMARY
The Applicant is requesting Preliminary and Final Planned Urban Development (PUD) and conditional
use permit approvals for increases to height and density to construct a six (6) story, 66.5-foot tall
affordable housing apartment building at 615 and 617 Williams Ave S. The proposal is approved
subject to conditions.
TESTIMONY
Alex Morganroth, City of Renton planner, summarized the project. He confirmed that the community
development director had approved density averaging for the project site. He requested a condition of
approval requiring removal of the billboard prior to building permit issuance. Jonathan Chavez, from
Renton public works, requested a condition requiring some modification to the evaluation of
intersection level of service compliance.
Steve Dymoke, Applicant, noted that the project was located in an ideal location with direct access to
the adjoining park and proximity to employment centers. Great amenities such as the Cedar River Trail
and a transit center are also nearby. Several organizations had contributed to the financing of the
project, including authorizing tax-exempt bonds and granting a land loan by the Washington State
Housing Finance Commission with the assistance of Microsoft. Significant funding was also acquired
from the Evergreen Impact Fund. 70% of units will be at 50% median income and 30% at 60% median
income. He noted that complying with the new building permit condition will be tricky because the
lease requires showing a building permit. Mr. Morganroth agreed to revise his recommendation to
require removal of the billboard prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project.
Mr. Sandsmark, owner of multifamily housing on north side of project, testified in support of the
project. He’s happy to see that the land is being put to good use and appreciates that the parking area
will add some separation to his building.
EXHIBITS
Exhibits 1-23 listed on page 2 of the September 28, 2021 Staff Report were admitted into evidence
during the public hearing. Additional exhibits admitted during the hearing are as follows:
Exhibit 24 – Staff Power Point Presentation
Exhibit 25 – City of Renton COR maps
Exhibit 26 – Google Earth
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
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Applicant. The Applicant is Steve Dymoke, GMD Development, 520 Pike St, Suite 1010,
Seattle, WA 98101.
2. Hearing. A virtual hearing on the application was held at 11:00 am on September 28, 2021 via
Zoom, Meeting ID No. 827 9314 7815.
3. Project Description. The Applicant is requesting Preliminary and Final Planned Urban
Development (PUD) and conditional use permit approvals for increases to height and density to
construct a six (6) story, 66.5-foot tall affordable housing apartment building at 615 and 617 Williams
Ave S.
The project site is composed of four (4) parcels that total 1.34 acres in area. The site is developed with
an existing multi-family building located at 615 Williams S and a standalone billboard at 617 Williams
S. The ground floor of the proposed building would consist of 57 stalls of structured parking, a lobby,
and back of house spaces. The five (5) floors above would include 145 affordable housing units and
various amenity spaces. Approximately 45 surface parking stalls would be located along the north side
of the site. Primary vehicle access to the site is proposed via a driveway of Williams Ave S, with
emergency access provided via a secondary controlled-access driveway off S Grady Way. A pedestrian
promenade is proposed along the east side of the site that would provide a future connection from S
Grady Way to the Burnett Linear Park west of the site. Frontage improvements including a sidewalk,
planter strip, and curb and gutter are proposed along S Grady Way and Williams Ave S.
According to the Applicant’s geotech report, Ex. 13, the parcels of the project site are developed with
a single-family home and a billboard. The overall site topography is relatively flat with little discernible
elevation change and vegetation consists primarily of field grass with sparse trees near Williams
Avenue. Other than five protected trees detailed in the Applicant’s arborist report, Ex. 4, the aerial
photograph in the arborist report shows no natural features at the project site.
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 four (4) separate
tables dealing with the
various land use categories
and zones which contain the
minimum and, in some
The application of a single
zoning classification (CD) and
corresponding Design District
‘A’ for the entire site for the
purposes of review.
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
cases, maximum
requirements of the zone.
RMC 4-2-120B Special
Development Standards
Upper Story Setback
Requirements: None, unless
adjacent to and facing a
residentially zoned lot or if
the facade contains living
room windows – then 10 ft.
for the second story and 15
ft. for all upper stories.
No upper story setbacks for
floors two through six.
RMC 4-4-070 Landscaping Interior parking lot
landscaping required for all
surface parking lots with
more than 14 stalls
No interior parking lot
landscaping proposed meeting
the required dimensions.
The Applicant has submitted its application for a Type II conditional use permit to increase the allowed
density on the CD zoned portion of the project site. Per RMC 4-2-120B, the maximum net residential
density in the CD zone is 150 dwelling units per acre. The density can be increased to 200 dwelling
units per acre with a conditional use permit approval.
The Applicant has submitted its application for a Type III conditional use permit to increase the allowed
height of the project from 44 feet to 66.5 feet. Per RMC 4-2-120B, the maximum height for buildings
in the CD zone when abutting a residential zone is 20 feet more than the maximum height of the
abutting residential zone. Per RMC 4-2-120B, heights may exceed the maximum height with a Type
III CUP. The property to the north is in the R-14 zone with a maximum height of 24 feet, which allows
for a maximum building height of 44 feet on the project site.
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.
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.
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
A Fire Impact Fee based on new multi-family units is required to mitigate the proposal’s
potential impacts to City emergency services. The Fire Impact Fee, based on amount per square
foot per the City of Renton Fee Schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance, would
be applicable to the proposal.
C. Drainage. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate stormwater drainage facilities.
City public works staff have found the Applicant’s preliminary stormwater design to be
consistent with the 2017 Renton Surface Water Design Manual. Compliance with the manual
assures adequate stormwater facilities. According to the Applicant’s technical information
report (TIR), Ex. 15, the project includes more than 5,000 sf of new plus replaced impervious
surfaces, and so enhanced basic water quality treatment is required. Appropriate BMPs
satisfying Core Requirement #9 in the 2017 Renton Surface Water Design Manual are required
to mitigate the new runoff to the extent feasible. The Applicant proposes to use a BioPod system
to treat stormwater runoff for water quality. Three (3) BioPods are proposed on the site
including two near the pedestrian promenade and a third in the parking lot area. According to
the TIR, flow control would be provided via a 36-inch pipe tank below the proposed pedestrian
promenade on the west side of the site. The water would be conveyed south to a direct
connection to the existing 24-inch storm main in S Grady Way at the southwest corner of the
site. The development would be subject to a surface water system development charge (SDC)
fees. It is anticipated that the requirements set forth by the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water
Design Manual (2017 RSWDM) would be sufficient to mitigate stormwater impacts generated
by the proposed development.
D. Parks/Open Space. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate parks and open space.
The proposal’s added demand on the City’s park system is mitigated by the imposition of park
impact fees, which are due during building permit review.
To comply with the City’s PUD standards, the Applicant has proposed to disperse common
open spaces and recreation areas across several areas around the development. Additionally,
these areas are both interior and exterior to the project. The code required minimum open space
based on the gross land area is 5,870 sq. ft. (10% of 58,270 sq. ft. = 5,870 sq. ft.). Additionally,
approximately 7,250 sq. ft. of open space is required to meet a per-unit requirement of 50 sq.
ft. (50 sq. ft. x 145 units = 7,250 sq. ft.). Therefore, the Applicant is required to provide a total
of 13,120 sq. ft. As provided below, the Applicant proposes 18,190 square feet of open space.
The following is a breakdown of the proposed open space:
Ground Level Pedestrian Promenade: 11,880 square feet – An exterior at-grade space is
proposed along the western portion of the property between the adjacent property and the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
PUD AND CU - 6
proposed new residential building. The promenade would consist of a 25-foot stamped
concrete pathway with pedestrian scale lights, trees in street grates, integrated grasscrete
strips to assist with stormwater infiltration. The promenade would also serve as a secondary
emergency access connecting S Grady Way with the tuck-under parking area, allowing
emergency vehicles to circumnavigate the entire building during a fire or other emergency
event.
Second Floor Courtyard: 3,460 square feet – The elevated courtyard area on the second
floor is nestled between the two wings of the building that emanate northwest from the S
Grady Way and Williams Ave S interaction. According to the submitted Floor Plans
(Exhibit 8), the courtyard area would include a sandbox play area, dog run, seating, a fire
pit area, and abundant landscaping. Private patios for the second-floor interior units that
face the courtyard area would be separated from the common area via fiberglass planters.
Sixth Floor Roof Top Deck: 2,270 square feet – Exterior space is provided on the roof
stepped-down portion of the building’s fifth floor at the northeast corner of the building.
As shown on the Renderings (Exhibit 6), the rooftop space provides abundant space for
residents to gather and entertain and includes a variety of seating options with views of
downtown Renton and the Olympic Mountains. A small, covered area extends from the
interior amenity space providing cover from inclement weather during the winter months.
Interior Amenity Space: 580 square feet – Programming for the interior space was not
indicated on the floor plans. However, based on the connection to an outdoor dining table,
staff anticipates the amenity space would provide cooking accouterments for residents to
use.
The Applicant has elected to provide significantly more open space area than required by
code for the 145-unit development. Although not provided in a single, concentrated area,
providing multiple alternatives across three levels (ground, second floor, fifth floor),
residents will have a variety of options for passive and active recreation that allows them
to choose areas that work best depending on weather, time of year, and chosen activity. In
addition, the provision of multiple open space areas helps the project comply with the
Urban Design District A open space standards. Due to the conceptual nature of the plans
and limited details provided on how some of these spaces will be programmed, a condition
of approval requires that the Applicant submit detailed programming plans for each of the
common open space areas with the building permit application.
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
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
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 property is located at the intersection of Grady Way and Williams Avenue. Users of the
building and pedestrians alike can utilize Grady Way to connect with transit stops and other
commercial activities in the area to the west and northeast. Williams Avenue links with
downtown Renton, which has multiple recreational, transit and commercial activity hubs. The
project is creating a pedestrian promenade on the west portion of the site that will link Grady
Way, along with the residential users of the building, to Burnett Linear Park to the north, which
is a recreational area. The park is also a link to downtown Renton. There is also a bus stop
located in front of the development site. Emergency vehicles will be able to access the building
from both Grady Way and Williams Ave S connected by a fire lane loop around the building.
This will allow access around the entire perimeter of the building.
Considering the project is located at the intersection of S Grady Way and Williams Ave S, there
will be sufficient sidewalk circulation areas around those two facades of the building.
Landscaping and seating will also be incorporated around the street fronts in these locations.
The pedestrian promenade is located along the entire west side of the property and will allow
safe pedestrian circulation around the area, which would be a part of a future permanent
connection between S Grady Way to the Burnett Linear Park as well as to the building entrances.
Vehicular access is from Williams Avenue on the northeast side of the parcel, which allows
users to either park in the surface parking lot to the north of the property, or in the parking
garage within the building. All emergency vehicles will either access the site from Grady Way
or Williams.
Parking and site access points are designed to minimize circulation conflicts. The Williams
Ave S access point has significantly lower traffic volumes in comparison to Grady Way.
Sufficient site distances are provided from the curb cut off of Williams Ave S to minimize
traffic impacts when entering and leaving the subject property. The parking entrance is in the
north area of the site and all pedestrian access and circulation is located on the south, east and
west sides of the site, so there are no overlapping circulation patterns with pedestrians and
vehicles. The site is generally flat, no issues with steep gradients around the perimeter of the
building are anticipated.
The proposal will not significantly add to traffic congestion. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA),
prepared by Transpogroup and dated May 2021, was submitted with the project application
(Exhibit 15). The submitted report concludes that the proposed development is anticipated to
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
generate 758 average daily trips (ADT) with 50 new AM peak-hour trips and 62 PM peak-hour
trips. The analysis found that the proposal would not lower level of service for any affected
intersection.
Construction of frontage improvements along both S Grady Way and Williams Ave would
occur as part of the project. Improvements along S Grady Way would include the installation
of a an eight-foot (8’) planter strip and eight-foot (8’) sidewalk. In addition, as part of the SEPA
Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated issued for the project (Exhibit 22), the Applicant
would be required to provide pedestrian signalization and channelization elements be installed
for the crossing between the SE corner of the project site and SW corner of the S Grady
Way/Williams Ave S intersection. Pedestrian improvements along Williams Ave S includes the
installation of a 12-foot wide sidewalk with street tree grates starting at the corner of the
intersection and extending until side of the driveway off of Williams Ave S. Improvements
between the Williams Ave S driveway and the north property line would include an eight-foot
(8’) planter strip and five-foot (5’) sidewalk in order to provide a transition to the lower-intensity
development pattern to the north of the site. The landscape plan submitted with the land use
application does not provide a transition between the two frontage improvement sections
identified above, therefore, a condition approval requires that the Applicant shall submit a final
landscape plan that provides the transition on Williams Ave S between the 12-foot sidewalk
and the 5-foot sidewalk with 8-foot landscape strip
F. Parking. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate parking. The proposed
development includes 145 affordable (low income) attached-dwelling units. Per RMC 4-4-
070.F.10, the Applicant would be required to provide a minimum of one space for every four
(4) low income attached dwelling units and a maximum of 1.75 spaces per dwelling unit. Based
on a total of 145 - low income attached dwelling units, the Applicant is required to provide a
minimum of 36 spaces (145 / 4) and a maximum of 254 spaces (145 x 1.75). The Applicant
proposed a total of 99 parking spaces onsite including 69 standard stalls, 25 compact stalls (25%
of total stalls) and five (5) ADA stalls and therefore complies with the parking requirements. In
addition, the parking stall dimensions provided in the floor plans (Exhibit 8) and site plan
(Exhibit 2) conforms to the minimum requirements for drive aisle and parking stall dimensions,
including ADA requirements.
G. Schools. The proposal will be adequately served by schools. It is anticipated that the Renton
School District can accommodate any additional students generated by this proposal at the
following schools: Bryn Mawr Elementary School, Dimmitt Middle School, and Renton High
School. Due to the distance between the proposed development and the three schools, any new
students from the proposed development would be bussed to their schools. The Applicant will
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
be required to pay school impact fees during building permit review to off-set the additional
demand it placed upon school capital facilities.
H. Private Open Space. As conditioned, the project meets PUD standards for private open space.
The project Renderings and Elevations (Exhibits 6 and 7) identify private open space in the
form of balconies and private terrace space for those units located adjacent to the second floor
courtyard. However, it is difficult to determine whether the space meets mini mum PUD
dimensional requirements. Therefore, a condition of approval requires that the Applicant submit
revised floor plans with the building permit application that provides details and dimensions of
each unit’s private open space and provides calculations demonstrating compliance with the
private open space standards.
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.
The proposal is surrounded by commercially zoned property on three sides that are
commercially developed or vacant and multifamily development to the north. The type and
intensity of multifamily development is consistent with these surrounding uses.
The building’s six-story height is proportionate to the type of mixed-use development expected
and encouraged in the CD zone and within the TOD area. The scale of the building transitions
from six-stories to five-stories story through use of a step-back along the north property line to
provide a transition to the smaller building scales on properties to the north. At five-stories in
height, the rooftop deck on the step-downed portion of the north wing would be approximately
three (3) stories taller than the apartment building to the north. However, the non-stepped down
portion of the six-story building is setback approximately 65 feet from the north property line
and therefore would not significantly impede sunlight to the adjoining use. The development
will be taller than the one-story commercial buildings to the west of the project site, but future
redevelopment of the nearby sites, as encouraged in the Rainier/Grady Subarea TOD area,
would likely result in buildings of a scale like the subject proposal.
To further enhance compatibility, building mass is broken down through the modulation of
siding that is distinguished by separate materials, textures, and colors to create the feeling of
multiple buildings in place of one large mass. The two wings also help reduce the scale of the
building when viewed from properties to the north. Additionally, the building would be located
at the southeast portion of the site to provide a buffer to all adjacent development sites to
concentrate development towards the two streets and away from the neighboring properties.
Building articulation is provided along all facades to break down the massing and the roof lines
are broken up and change in height resulting in reducing the perceived scale of the building.
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
Overall, the surrounding neighborhood features a mixture of single family, duplex, multifamily,
and commercial buildings. The Watershed Apartments will be larger than the adjacent structures
but will be located along the S Grady Way corridor, an area where higher density is encouraged.
The project will provide a transition from the low-scale multifamily to the north and the higher
intensity commercial and multifamily uses extending west of the site along S Grady Way.
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 10 percent of protected trees in commercial zones. The arborist report identifies
five protected cottonwood trees ranging in diameter from 29.7 inches to 56.3 inches within the
commercially zoned parcels of the project site and none in the residential zone. All five trees
must be removed as they are within the footprint of the proposed building. 10% of those five
trees must be retained and any fractional amount of trees from ½ and above must be rounded
up. Consequently, one tree must be retained. The tree retention standards authorized
replacement of retained trees that must be removed at the rate of 12 caliper inches per removed
tree with a minimum diameter of 12 inches. The Applicant is authorized to use up to 50% of
the trees required by the City’s landscaping standards to meet this retention requirement. The
Applicant’s landscaping plan appears to satisfy the tree replacement requirement, but a
condition of approval requires further information to ensure that the standard is met.
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.
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 of Renton (COR) maps has identified the site
is within a High Seismic Hazard Area. As such, the Applicant submitted an Updated
Geotechnical Engineering Study, prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC, dated June
10, 2021. The Applicant’s geotechnical engineer completed an initial geotechnical
investigation on March 22, 2018 and an additional investigation on May 22, 2020.
According to the geotechnical engineer, soil erosion potential at this project site can
be reduced through landscaping and surface water runoff control. Normal erosion
control measures include such items as fences, hay bales, mulching, control ditched
and diversion trenches.
The Applicant’s geotechnical engineer recommends supporting the building on a
uniform subgrade and foundation support using either piles or a ground
improvement due to the presence of liquefiable soils to variable depths below the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
PUD AND CU - 11
property. Foundation options include the use of rammed aggregate piers, stone
columns, or other vibro-installed elements sunk to depth of at least 40 feet. If ground
improvement methods are used, the building slab should be underlain with a
minimum four-inch thick crushed rock layer. Alternatively, the Applicant may
utilize 18-inch diameter augercast piles driven to a depth of at least 40 feet. The
building slab should be structural supported by the pile foundation system if piles
are used. Additional recommendations related to retaining wall construction,
drainage, and paving. Earth Solutions NW, LLC recommends that their firm be
retained during construction and final design phase of the project. As such, two
mitigation measures related to the recommendations in the geotechnical report were
included as part of the DNS-M issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review
Committee on August 24, 2021 (Exhibit 22). Therefore, a condition of approval
requires that the Applicant comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of
the DNS-M issued by the Environmental Review Committee on August 24, 2021.
2. Wellhead Protection Area. The COR mapping system has identified that the site is
located in the Wellhead Protection Zone 2 due to its proximity to the City’s source
of drinking water. The site’s proposed residential use is not indicative of a type of
use that would potentially harm the City’s groundwater. Further, site excavations
are relatively shallow and likely would not encounter groundwater as it was found
to be eight (8’) to ten (10’) feet below grade. However, 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 imported fill greater than 50 cubic yards
within a Zone protection have a source statement certified by a qualified professional
or confirm the fill was obtained from a WDOT approved source.
D. Light and Glare. The proposal will not create any significantly adverse light and glare. All
exterior lighting in the parking lot would be designed to be down-lighting. Upper level
lighting from stairwells or accent lighting on the building façade would not impact any
public areas. Staff have agreed with the Applicant’s comments that the building materials
and windows were designed to not be reflective and would therefore not create impacts from
headlights or direct sunlight.
E. Privacy. The proposal provides for adequate internal and external privacy of proposed and
adjacent residential uses. The 145 proposed dwelling units are designed to face the streets
as well as the interior promenade/plaza spaces throughout the site. The units facing other
properties has been designed to be minimal, so as to have minimal impacts on neighboring
developments. The development to the west does not have residential uses, so this
development does not impact privacy on that site. The property to the north has residential
units, so this project incorporated a “step-down” that reduces the height of the north wing
to five (5) stories and provides a roof-top deck on the top level in lieu of additional units.
The majority of the units in the building do not face the north property in order to reduce
the impact on that development. Internal privacy between the units will be in the demising
walls and floor/ceiling assemblies, which will be designed the meet acoustical and
insulation requirements for dwelling units. This will include the ratings for the exterior
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
windows and doors. Storage and mechanical areas are designed to be inside the building or
on the roof top of the building so they will be screened from the pedestrian level and from
adjacent buildings. Sufficient light and air will be provided to all units through the provision
of large windows and balconies.
F. Building Orientation. The dwelling units are oriented to take maximum advantage of
available views. Given the location of the site, the best views for the dwelling units are out
towards both of Williams Ave S and S Grady Way, as well as towards the pedestrian
promenade area on the western portion of the site. For this reason, among others, the
building has been designed with two wings emanating out from the street intersection to
allow as many units as possible to maximize views of streetscape in the immediate area on
the lower levels and views of the overall urban area on the upper levels. One-bedroom units
facing the interior of the building towards the second floor courtyard area are designed to
take advantage of the interior views of the green spaces, while the units facing southwest
have views of the pedestrian promenade on the west side of the property. All units will have
views of either the immediate area, the greater surrounding urban area, or one of the green
spaces, if not both.
G. Shadow Impacts. The height of the proposal will not create significant adverse shadow
impacts. According to the Shade and Shadow Analysis (Exhibit 16) provided by the
Applicant, no significant shading impacts to existing adjacent pedestrian or residential areas
would occur as a result of the building height. While a small portion of the property to the
north’s yard space may be shaded for a few hours a day, the residential building would see
almost no shade impacts any time of year. The building is designed to be respective of
blocking sunlight to the adjacent developments to the north and west. The building will be
setback along the west property line to provide a pedestrian promenade, which would help
allow adequate sunlight to reach the development to the west. The building incorporates a
step-back along the northern-most portion of the building that reduces the height from six
(6) stories to five (5) stories and allows natural light to be maintained on the adjacent
commercial development across Williams Ave S.
6. Superiority in Design. The proposed Watershed Apartments is superior to that which would result
without using the PUD regulations through the ability to integrate an on-site public promenade that
provides a future direct connection between S Grady Way and the existing Burnett Linear Park. Without
the PUD, the connection would not be required and the park would dead-end to the north in perpetuity,
or until another nearby site redeveloped and agreed to provide access. In addition, while a large portion
of the site is zoned CD and allows a higher intensity of development and a significantly higher density,
the northern portion of the site includes a small R-14 zoned parcel that would only allow a lower density.
Due to the site’s location in the future TOD area, the maximum density allowed in the R-14 create
challenges for the project and would not allow for the number of units needed to ensure the project is
financially feasible. In addition, without the PUD, the code would require a 15 -foot-wide landscape
screen between the commercial-zoned and residential-zoned portions of the site. The screen would block
any integration of the two properties and ability to have a promenade amenity with a connection to the
park. The ability to design the two different zoning districts as one creates an integrated, singular project
instead of two separate developments with a significantly lower unit density on the R-14 property.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
PUD AND CU - 13
Finally, the project provides significantly more open space than is required by City development
standards, even those required by the PUD regulations. The PUD is required to provide for a minimum
of 13,120 sq. ft of open space and is providing 18,190 sq. ft.
7. Public Benefit. The proposal provides for numerous public benefits as outlined at pages 17-20
of the staff report.
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 three (3) southern-most parcels are located in
the Center Downtown (CD) zoning district and Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Designation. The northern-most parcel is located in the Residential-14 (R-14) zone and
Residential High Density (RHD) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. All four (4) parcels are
located in the City Center Sign Area overlay district, and three (3) of the four (4) parcels are located in
the Urban Design District A overlay districts.
3. Review Criteria/Adoption of Staff Findings and Conclusions on Modification Requests. 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 4-9-030G governs the conditional use criteria for density
averaging for the two conditional use permit applications identified in Finding of Fact No. 3.
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) and (3): 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 - 14
4. The criterion is met. As shown in Finding of Fact No. 3, the requested revisions are limited to
Chapter 4-2 regulations as authorized above.
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. 18 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 - 15
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 - 16
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. 4F.
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. 4F, as conditioned the proposal provides for a well-integrated
system of internal pedestrian improvements that ultimately connect to required frontage pedestrian
improvements and significantly to Burnett Linear Park.
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 - 17
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. Secondary emergency access is also available through the pedestrian
promenade as identified in FOF No. 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
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.
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
…
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. Most of the parking is provided in the enclosed parking garage on Level
1. The remainder of the parking is provided as surface parking on the north side of the site. The surface
parking lot is minimal compared to other projects of this size and is obscured by the presence of the
overhanging building as well as from the adjacent property to the north by robust landscaping.
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 CD and R-14 zones for the reasons identified in Finding No. 19 of the
staff report and Design District A for the reasons identified in Finding No. 24 of the staff report.
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
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.
a. Residential: For residential developments open space must equal at least ten percent (10%)
of the development site’s gross land area.
i. Open space may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(a) A trail that allows opportunity for passive recreation within a critical area buffer
(only the square footage of the trail shall be included in the open space area
calculation), or
(b) A sidewalk and its associated landscape strip, when abutting the edge of a critical
area buffer and when a part of a new public or private road, or
(c) A similar proposal as approved by the Hearing Examiner.
ii. Additionally, a minimum area equal to fifty (50) square feet per unit of common space or
recreation area shall be provided in a concentrated space as illustrated in Figure 1.
17. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5D.
RMC 4-9-150(E)(2): Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a planned urban development
shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) for
the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, wheth er attached or detached,
shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall be well
demarcated and at least fifteen feet (15') in every dimension (decks on upper floors can substitute for
the required private open space). For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there
shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet
(5'). … The minimum dimensional standards of this Section may be modified through the planned urban
development review process; provided, that the minimum area requirement is maintained.
18. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5H.
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
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
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.
19. As Conditioned.
RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): 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…
20. As Conditioned.
RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities:
…
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.
21. 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.
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
22. 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. 2 and described in Finding of Fact No. 3, subject to the conditions listed
in the Decision section.
B. Phasing. The proposal will be developed in a single phase.
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
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. 22 of the
staff report, Infrastructure an Services.
Conditional Use – Height Increase
RMC 4-9-030F. DECISION CRITERIA – HEIGHT INCREASES: In lieu of the criteria in
subsection D of this Section, Decision Criteria, the following criteria in subsections F1 through 5 of
this Section shall be considered in determining whether to issue a conditional use permit to exceed the
maximum height allowed when indicated as an option in the development standards for the particular
zone:
RMC 4-9-030F 1. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed height increase shall be compatible with the
general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning regulations
and any other plan, program, map or regulation of the City.
23. The criterion is met. The increased height of the project would allow the development to
maximize the quantity of new affordable housing units in an area where the City is actively encouraging
transit-oriented development and higher densities. For the reasons, the proposal is compatible with the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
PUD AND CU - 22
comprehensive plan and zoning regulations for reasons identified in Findings 18 and 19 of the staff
report.
RMC 4-9-030F 2. Effect on Abutting and Adjacent Properties: Building heights shall not result in
substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent and abutting property. When a building in excess of
the maximum height is proposed adjacent to or abutting a lot with a maxim um height less than the
subject property, increased setbacks and/or step-backs may be appropriate to reduce adverse effects
on adjacent or abutting property.
24. The criterion is met. The building height is compatible with adjoining properties and setbacks
and step-backs have been employed to mitigate against impacts as outlined in FOF No. 5A.
RMC 4-9-030F 3. Bulk and Scale: Upper floor step-backs, varied tower heights with separation,
and/or other architectural methods shall be integrated into the design to provide a human-scaled
building edge along the street with access to sky views. Bulk reduction methods such as varied building
geometry, variety in materials, texture, pattern or color, architectural rooftop elements, and/or other
techniques shall be provided.
25. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5A.
RMC 4-9-030F 4. Light and Glare: Building(s) shall be designed so that light and glare impacts upon
streets, public facilities, and public open spaces are minimized.
26. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5D.
RMC 4-9-030F 5. Shade and Shadow: Building(s) shall be designed so that shade and shadow
impacts on adjacent shadow-sensitive uses (e.g., residential, outdoor restaurants, open spaces, and
pedestrian areas) are minimized.
27. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5G.
Conditional Use – Density Increase
RMC 4-9-030G. DECISION CRITERIA – DENSITY INCREASES: In lieu of the criteria in
subsection D of this Section, Decision Criteria, the following criteria in subsections G1 through 5 of
this Section shall be considered in determining whether to issue a conditional use permit to exceed the
maximum net residential density allowed when indicated as an option in the development standards
for the particular zone:
RMC 4-9-030G 1. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed density increase shall be compatible with the
general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning regulations
and any other plan, program, map or regulation of the City.
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
28. The criterion is met. The increased density of the project would allow the development to
maximize the quantity of new affordable housing units in an area where the City is actively encouraging
transit-oriented development and higher densities. For these reasons, the proposal is compatible with
the comprehensive plan and zoning regulations for reasons identified in Findings 18 and 19 of the staff
report.
RMC 4-9-030G 2. Location: The surrounding street network contains sufficient capacity to
accommodate pedestrian and vehicle traffic. Public transit shall be accessible to residents.
29. The criterion is met. The proposal will be served by adequate vehicular and pedestrian
infrastructure as determined in FOF No. 4E.
RMC 4-9-030G 3. Diverse Unit Mix: The development shall not be limited to studio and/or one-
bedroom units and shall provide a mix of bedroom counts to accommodate families with more than two
(2) members.
30. The criterion is met. The proposed project consists of all affordable housing apartments in a
variety of variations including studio, 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom and 3-bedroom units. The Applicant
contends that since 3-bedroom units will be more than 20% of the units, the development would provide
housing opportunities for families within the downtown area, which is currently difficult due to the
high rents commanded for rental single-family homes.
RMC 4-9-030G 4. Light and Air: Units shall provide adequate access to light and air. Units shall
abut the building’s exterior walls and contain windows.
31. The criterion is met. all units will be provided with significant light and air access throughout
the building. The majority of units will face the streets that surround the building and the units that do
not face either the pedestrian promenade along the west property line or the residential courtyard in
middle of the building. All units would face either the public realm or greenspaces and all units would
have operable windows.
RMC 4-9-030G 5. Parking: The development shall provide adequate parking for residents and guests.
32. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 4F.
DECISION
The proposed preliminary and final PUD and two 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 following mitigation measures issued as part of the
Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated August 24, 2021.
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
i. The project construction shall comply with the recommendations found in the
submitted Updated Geotechnical Study, prepared by Earth Solutions NW,
LLC, dated June 10th, 2020, and future addenda.
ii. The Applicant’s geotechnical engineer shall review the project’s construction
and building permit plans to verify compliance with the geotechnical report(s).
The geotechnical engineer shall submit a sealed letter stating that he/she has
reviewed the construction and building permit plans and in their opinion the
plans and specifications meet the intent of the report(s).
iii. The Applicant shall install pedestrian signalization and channelization
elements for the crossing between the SE corner of the project site and the SW
corner of the S Grady Way/Williams Ave S intersection. The elements may
include, but are not limited to, a painted crosswalk, a pedestrian signal, or an
in-street crossing signs. The proposed elements shall be reviewed and
approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil construction
permit issuance.
2. The Applicant shall record a formal Lot Combination in order to ensure the proposed buildings
are not built across property lines. The lot combination shall include all four (4) parcels included
as part of the project (APNs 1723059069, 1723059136, 1823059115, and 1823059282). The
instrument shall be recorded prior to the issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
3. The Applicant shall utilize a species from the Approved Street Tree List and Spacing Guidelines
document for the Williams Ave S and S Grady Way ROW street trees and shall utilize the city-
approved tree grates as required in the Downtown Streetscape Design Standards and
Guidelines. The street trees and associated tree grates shall be shown on the Detailed
Landscaping Plan to be submitted with the civil construction permit application. The revised
street trees and grates shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to civil construction permit issuance.
4. The Applicant shall install a mix of ground cover, shrubs, and trees along the entire length of
the parking lot landscape strip along the north side of the site. The new plantings shall be
included on the Detailed Landscaping Plan to be submitted with the civil construction permit
application. The additional trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning
Project Manager prior to civil construction permit issuance.
5. The Applicant shall utilize large stature deciduous or evergreen trees for all trees in the
landscape strip along the north side of the site. The alternative tree species shall be included on
the Detailed Landscaping Plan to be submitted with the civil construction permit application.
The tree species and spacing shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to civil construction permit issuance.
6. The Applicant shall clearly indicate on the detailed landscape plan submitted with the civil
construction permit application how the plan meets the 10% tree replacement requirements
including but not limited to the 50% credit limitation provided for those trees that are required
pursuant to RMC 4-4-070. If onsite replacement for the trees is not practical, then payment into
the City’s Urban Forestry Program fund may be approved for those trees that cannot be
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
accommodated onsite. The detailed landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil construction permit approval.
7. The Applicant shall include a fence specifications sheet in the detailed landscaping plan to be
submitted with the civil construction permit application. All fences on the detailed landscape
plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil
construction permit approval.
8. 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 architecture of the buildings.
The exhibit shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager.
9. The Applicant shall provide details of the proposed off-street bicycle parking for review and
approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval.
10. The Applicant shall record a public access easement across the pedestrian promenade area on
the western portion of the site. Draft easement documents shall be submitted to and approved
by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil construction permit approval. The
easement shall be recorded with King County prior to issuance of a Temporary Certificate of
Occupancy.
11. The Applicant shall submit revised floor plans with the building permit application that
provides details and dimensions of each unit’s private open space and provides calculations
demonstrating compliance with the private open space standards. The revised plans shall be
reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
approval. Any modifications to the private open space standards with regard to dimensional
standards or substituting additional common open space may be considered as a minor
adjustment prior to building permit pursuant to RMC 4-90150J.2.a.
12. The Applicant shall provide a promenade exhibit as part of the final landscaping plan submitted
with the civil construction permit that identifies a distinguishing paving material for the access
driveway, as well as any landscaping, seating, artwork, and other programming in the
promenade. The promenade exhibit shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning
Project Manager prior to permit issuance.
13. The Applicant shall submit a final landscape plan that provides the transition on Williams Ave
S between the 12-foot sidewalk and the 5-foot sidewalk with 8-foot landscape strip north of the
proposed driveway. The final landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to 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
PUD AND CU - 26
14. The Applicant shall install a curb bulb at the northwest corner of the intersection of Williams
Ave S and S Grady Way near the southeast corner of the site in order to improve pedestrian
safety. The curb bulb shall be shown on the civil construction plans for review and approval by
the Current Planning Project Manager.
15. The Applicant shall submit detailed programming plans for each of open space/recreation areas
with the building permit application. The open space program plan shall provide details of
intended use, street furniture, landscaping, and other furnishings provided by the Applicant.
16. The Applicant shall submit revised exterior elevations with the building permit application that
provide additional primary entry elements at the southwest corner that are prominent and visible
from the street. Entry elements may include but are not limited to, a more prominent single
entry at the corner, additional architectural articulation, an alternate facade that provide
differentiation in material and/or color from other portions of the building, pedestrian level
lighting, or other identifying visual features as approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager. The revised elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning
Project Manager prior to building permit issuance.
17. The Applicant shall submit a plan for the artwork along the section of spandrel glazing shown
in the elevations (Exhibit 6) with the building permit application, as well as any other artwork
on the exterior of the site. All proposed artwork on the exterior of the building shall be reviewed
and approved by the City of Renton Arts Commission prior to issuance of a Temporary
Certificate of Occupancy.
18. The Applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan that identifies additional foundation-level
landscaping along the façade facing Williams Ave S. The landscape plan shall be submitted to
and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil construction permit
approval.
19. The Applicant shall submit detailed elevations of the west façade of the building at the time of
building permit submittal. The elevation shall contain details on the specific design features
such as artwork, material texturing, or lighting. In addition, the Applicant shall submit a 3D
rendering of the exterior wall as viewed from the sidewalk along S Grady Way adjacent to the
promenade. In addition to the façade wall, the 3D rendering shall show all pedestrian amenities,
landscaping, or other physical features in front of the façade. The final design of the wall and
associated design features shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to permit issuance. Any proposed artwork, including but not limited to, painted
murals, cut-out metal art panels, mounted sculptures, etc, on the exterior of the building shall
be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Arts Commission prior to issuance of a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
20. The Applicant shall submit a materials board with the building permit application that provides
samples of exterior cladding materials that are proposed on the building. The materials board
shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to permit
issuance.
21. The Applicant shall submit a lighting plan with the building permit application that adequately
provides for public safety and creates visual interest to the building and site. Pedestrian scaled
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 - 27
lighting shall be provided at the primary entrance and accent lighting on building facades. The
parking area shall also contain adequate lighting to ensure safety and security. The lighting plan
shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to permit
issuance.
22. Installation and maintenance of common areas and facilities shall conform to 4-9-150(E)(3) and
(4).
23. The on-site billboard shall be removed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any
portion of the project. Staff may extend this deadline as reasonably necessary to meet any legal
obstacles faced by the Applicant.
24. Update the Transportation Impact Analysis as outlined in Transportation Note 7b of Ex. 17.
DATED this 28th day of September 2020.
___________________________
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 closed record appeal to the City of Renton City Council. Appeals of the hearing
examiner’s decision must be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the decision.
A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 -day appeal
period.
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
EXHIBITS
Project Name:
Watershed Apartments
Land Use File Number:
LUA21-000239, ECF, CU-H, CU-H, PPUD, FPUD
Date of Hearing
September 28, 2021
Staff Contact
Alex Morganroth
Senior Planner
Project Contact/Applicant
Steve Dymoke
GMD Development
520 Pike St, Suite 1010,
Seattle, WA 98101Error!
Reference source not
found.
Project Location
617 Williams Ave S (APN
1723059069; 1723059136;
1823059115; 1823059282)
The following exhibits are included with the Hearing Examiner Decision:
Exhibits 1-18: As shown in the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Report
Exhibits 19-23: As shown in the Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner
Exhibit 24: Staff PowerPoint
Exhibit 25: COR Maps, http://rp.rentonwa.gov/Html5Public/Index.html?viewer=CORMaps
Exhibit 26: Google Earth, https://www.google.com/earth/