HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_HEX_Decision_Park5_2111221
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 1
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
RE: Park 5 Apartments
Hearing examiner site plan, conditional
use, density bonus and street
modification.
PR20-000100
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
FINAL DECISION
SUMMARY
The Applicant is requesting approvals of hearing examiner site plan, conditional use, density bonus
and parking and mixed-use development standard modification applications for a 69-dwelling unit 7-
story mixed use building to be located at the intersection of NE Sunset Boulevard and Harrington
Ave NE. The applications are approved subject to conditions.
TESTIMONY
Jill Ding, City of Renton senior planner, summarized the staff report. In response to Examiner
questions Ms. Ding clarified that the parking spaces in the proposed parking elevator are included in
the staff report’s identification of total number of proposed parking spaces.
EXHIBITS
The 22 exhibits identified at the Exhibit List prepared by staff were admitted into the record at the
November 16, 2021 hearing. The following exhibits were also admitted:
Exhibit 23: Staff power point presentation
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 2
Exhibit 24: City of Renton COR Maps of project vicinity
Exhibit 25: Google Earth of project site.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Owner/Applicant. Zamoor Associates, LLC, 5887 155th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98006.
2. Hearing. A hearing on the application was held on November 16, 2021 at 11:00 am on-line via
the Zoom meeting application.
Substantive:
3. Project Description. The Applicant is requesting approvals of hearing examiner site plan,
conditional use, density bonus and parking and mixed-use development standard modification
applications for a 69-dwelling unit 7-story mixed use building to be located at the intersection of NE
Sunset Boulevard and Harrington Ave NE.
The project site is currently developed with a 2,500 sq. ft. Pizza Hut and a 2,330 sq. ft. Subway.
Both existing structures are proposed for removal. The proposal would include 4,124 sq. ft. of
commercial space on the first floor and 60,300 sq. ft. of multi-family residential apartments. Of the
proposed multi-family units, a total of 8 units would be considered affordable housing units. A
Conditional Use Permit has been requested to exceed the zoning height limit of 70 feet with a
proposed height of 78 feet, 6 inches.
The Applicant requests a density bonus to increase the net density of the project site from the
maximum 80 dwelling units per acre allowed to the 102 dwelling units per acre proposed. This
translates to an additional 16 dwelling units for the 0.67-acre project site. The Applicant proposes
eight affordable housing units to qualify for the density bonus.
The mixed-use modifications are to RMC 4-4-150D.2.b to reduce the floor to ceiling height from 18
feet to 17 feet and to RMC 4-4-150D.1 to reduce the commercial gross floor area percentage from 50
percent to approximately 22 percent. The Applicant also requests a modification to RMC 4-4-150B.2
for an increase in the maximum percentage allowed for interior entrances, lobbies, and areas/facilities
developed for the exclusive use of the building’s residents along the Harrington Ave NE street
frontage. The proposal would increase the amount of allowable residential frontage from 25% to
31.9% of the overall façade frontage.
The parking modification is to RMC 4-4-150D.2.a to utilize the structured parking stall requirements
for all parking proposed on the project site. The Applicant also requests a modification to 4-4-
080F9b to reduce the drive aisle width from 24 feet to 20 feet. Finally, he Applicant also seeks a
modification to utilize a parking lift for required parking spaces. Parking lifts are not expressly
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 3
recognized in the parking standards of RMC 4-4-080. It isn’t immediately apparent if use of a lift is
inconsistent with any of the requirements of RMC 4-4-080. To avoid any potential argument that the
lift is not authorized, the lift is included in the Applicant’s request for parking modifications.
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.
There is an existing 12” water main on the north side of NE Sunset Boulevard and on the
east side of Harrington Avenue NE that can provide 4,000 gallons per minute (gpm). There
is an existing 8” lined concrete main sewer to the north on NE Sunset Boulevard, and a 15”
ductile iron main west of the site on Harrington Avenue NE. There is also an existing 18”
PVC trunk sewer west of the site running north to south down the middle of NE Sunset
Boulevard.
B. Police and Fire Protection. Fire protection would be provided by the Renton Regional Fire
Authority and police service by the Renton Police Department. Police and Fire Prevention
staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposal.
C. Drainage. In conjunction with the City’s stormwater regulations, the proposal mitigates all
significant drainage impacts and provides for adequate and appropriate stormwater
facilities. Public works staff have reviewed the Applicant’s preliminary drainage design,
Ex. 11, and found it to conform to the City’s stormwater standards.
Storm drainage improvements along all public street frontages are required to conform to
the stormwater standards. Any new storm drain installed on or off-site shall be designed
and sized in accordance with standards found in the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water
Design Manual (RSWDM).
The proposed project will be required to install a storm drain along Harrington Avenue NE,
200 feet north of the existing catch basin on the east side of Harrington Avenue NE, in
accordance with the RSWDM.
If the proposed project results in new pollution generating impervious surface (PGIS) that
exceeds 5,000 sq. ft., the Applicant will be required to provide enhanced basic water quality
treatment. Any proposed detention and/or water quality vault shall be designed in
accordance with the RSWDM that is current at the time of civil construction permit
application. Separate structural plans will be required to be submitted for review and
approval under a separate building permit for the detention and/or water quality vault.
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 4
The Applicant shall ensure that the proposed water quality facility is sized to accommodate
all PGIS, including the roof area. Roof runoff is not required to be treated if a leachable
materials covenant, that ensure that the roof will be constructed with non-leachable
materials, is provided.
Appropriate on-site Best Management Practices (BMPs) satisfying Core Requirement #9
will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development to the
maximum extent feasible. Permeable pavement is proposed to be installed as a BMP where
feasible as part of the development proposal.
Stormwater system-wide impacts will be mitigated by payment of a waster system
development fee, payable prior to issuance of the construction permit.
D. Parks/Open Space. The project provides for adequate parks and open space. The Design
District D standards of RMC 4-3-100E4 govern how much open space is required of the
project. The standard requires 50 square feet of common open space or recreation area per
dwelling unit for the proposal, which totals 3,450 sq. ft. for the proposal. The Applicant
proposes 3,500 square feet of open space comprised of an 800 sq. ft. lobby/waiting area on
the ground floor, a total of 1,800 sq. ft. of fitness and gathering areas proposed on the
second floor and a 900 sq. ft. recreational area on the sixth floor composed of outdoor patio
space adjacent to the corner of Harrington Ave NE and NE Sunset Blvd to take advantage
of the view of downtown Renton.
The sixth-floor outdoor patio area and landscaped commercial entryways along Sunset and
Harrington serves as focal points and social gathering places for the project site. The gym
and patio areas also serve as areas for active and passive recreation.
The proposed lobby/waiting area does not qualify as open space. To qualify, the
lobby/waiting area would need to include programming as approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager. A condition of approval requires that the open space
programming plan be submitted with the Building Permit application. The plan shall
provide clear details of all amenity spaces and the programming consistent with the
common open space standards.
E. Pedestrian Circulation. The proposal provides for a safe and effective pedestrian
circulation system. Pedestrian walkways are proposed to provide access from the public
sidewalk to building entries and to provide access from the structured parking to the public
sidewalk. The proposed sidewalks along the Harrington Ave NE and NE Sunset Blvd
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 5
Street frontages would be designed in accordance with the Capital Improvement Plan for
NE Sunset Blvd and for Harrington Ave NE the Sunset Area Surface Water Plan for Green
Streets.
F. Transportation. The proposal is served by adequate and appropriate transportation
infrastructure.
Access to the site is proposed via one existing curb cut off NE Sunset Blvd and via an
existing access easement over the property to the south off of Harrington Ave NE. There
are no side streets or alley ways available for access, so access via those routes is not
available as required by City design standards. However, the proposal would reduce the
number of curb cuts onto the project site by two (2). These abandoned curb cuts would be
replaced with curb and gutter, street frontage landscaping and sidewalk and would increase
the continuity of pedestrian circulation.
The proposal provides for desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets,
walkways and adjacent properties. The proposal includes building entries along the NE
Sunset Blvd and Harrington Ave NE street frontages with direct pedestrian connections to
the public sidewalk. In addition, the Applicant is required to construct frontage
improvements along the site’s street frontages NE Sunset Blvd and Harrington Ave NE,
which would include the construction of sidewalks.
The project proposal does not include a designated loading area with dock doors. It is
anticipated that any loading or deliveries would occur within the proposed parking garage,
adjacent to the back entry of the retail tenant spaces.
The City’s Transportation Department has a capital improvement project along NE Sunset
Blvd, fronting the project site. The City’s 30% preliminary design plans have delineated
additional right of way that is needed to construct the improvements. Right- -of-way on this
site that has been preliminarily determined as needed varies along the NE Sunset Blvd
frontage. Dedication would be required in accordance with the most current version of the
capital improvement project plans along the NE Sunset Boulevard frontage and at the NE
Sunset Boulevard and Harrington Avenue NE corner. Required frontage improvements
would require the installation of paving, curb and gutter, a street tree planting strip and
sidewalk all to be designed in accordance with the most current version of the capital
improvement plan.
To assess the need for any project specific off-site traffic mitigation, the Applicant prepared
a traffic impact study, Ex. 13. The study assessed congestion impacts to the intersection of
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 6
NE Sunset Boulevard and Harrington Avenue, as this was the only intersection that would
be impacted by more than 20 PM project generated trips. The study found that the trip
generation would not cause any reduction in level of service at the intersection, which
would remain at Level of Service A. Consequently, the proposal does not necessitate any
off-site traffic improvements. The proposal also meets the City’s concurrency (congestion
level) standards as determined by the City’s Development Engineering Manager in Ex. 16.
The Applicant’s proportionate share impact to system wide transportation impacts will be
mitigated by payment of traffic impact fees during building permit review as required by
the City’s traffic impact fee standards, RMC 4-1-190.
The project site is adjacent to a 240 metro transit bus stop that could provide transit service
to Bellevue for new residents living in the proposed dwelling units.
G. Schools. The proposal will be adequately served by schools.
According to the staff report, it is anticipated that the Renton School District can
accommodate any additional students generated by this proposal at the following schools:
Kennydale Elementary, McKnight Middle School and Hazen High School. A School
Impact Fee plus a 5% surcharge fee, based on new multi-family unit, will be required to
mitigate the proposal’s potential impacts to the Renton School District during building
permit review.
H. Parking. The proposal provides for adequate parking as staff has determined that the
proposal complies with applicable parking regulations.
For the proposal, City parking standards require that attached residential dwelling units
provide a minimum of 1 parking space per dwelling unit up to a maximum of 1.75 parking
spaces per dwelling unit. Attached residential low income dwelling units require a
minimum of 1 parking space per 4 dwelling units, up to a maximum of 1.75 parking spaces
per dwelling unit. Eating and drinking establishments require a minimum and a maximum
of 10 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of dining area.
Based on the uses, dwelling unit count, and square footage proposed, the proposal would
require a minimum of 61 parking spaces for the market rate attached dwelling units, two (2)
spaces for the low-income units, with a maximum of 121 spaces for all 69 proposed
attached dwelling units. Based on a total dining area of 1,200 sq. ft. the proposal would be
required to provide a minimum and a maximum of 12 parking spaces for the eating and
drinking establishments.
In total, the proposal is required to provide 73 parking spaces up to a maximum of 133
parking spaces. The Applicant has provided a total of 64 parking spaces, which is nine
short. A twenty five percent (25%) reduction or increase from the minimum or maximum
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 7
number of parking spaces may be granted for non-residential uses through site plan review
if the Applicant can justify the modification to the satisfaction of the Administrator.
Justification might include, but is not limited to, quantitative information such as sales
receipts, documentation of customer frequency, and parking standards of nearby cities. The
Applicant has requested a 25 percent reduction in the number of total spaces required for
the commercial uses proposed. The proposal requires 12 spaces for the commercial uses
and the requested 25 percent reduction would approve a decrease in 3 commercial spaces
on the project site. To justify the reduction, the Applicant submitted a parking analysis
(Exhibit 20). The submitted parking analysis utilizes the parking ratios within the ITE
manual as a justification for the proposed parking reduction. According to the ITE manual,
0.84 parking spaces would be required for the multi-family dwelling units and 6.47 spaces
would be required per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area for the restaurant use. Based on the
parking ratios identified in the ITE manual, the proposed project would generate a
maximum parking demand of 64 parking spaces.
In addition, in accordance with RMC 4-4-080E.3, the Applicant is proposing that the onsite
parking be considered as a joint-use parking facility. The area available for parking would
be maximized through the use of an automated parking lift that would provide storage for
eleven vehicles in an area where three (3) parking spaces could be accommodated. In
addition, the Applicant has indicated that the demand for residential parking would
decrease during the daytime, which is when the parking demand would increase for the
eating and drinking establishment. Conversely, the parking demand for the eating and
drinking establishment would decrease over night and the demand for the residential
dwelling units would increase at nighttime. Therefore, it is anticipated that there would be a
parking surplus during the daytime, available for use by the patrons of the eating and
drinking establishments. This surplus of parking would revert back to tenants of the
residential dwelling units at night when the eating and drinking establishments have closed
for the evening. Based on the justification provided, staff is in support of the requested 3-
space reduction in minimum number of required parking spaces as well as the approval of
the onsite parking as a joint-use parking facility. A condition of approval requires a parking
agreement ensuring that joint use parking is available for the duration of the uses be
submitted for review and approval at the time of building permit review.
For bicycle parking, City standards require 35 bicycle parking spaces for the residential
units and one (1) space would be required for the eating and drinking establishment. The
Applicant has proposed a secure bicycle parking area for the residential tenants that would
provide parking for 35 bicycles and an ADA accessible bike rack that would provide the
minimum 3 bicycle spaces for the commercial use, which complies with the bicycle parking
requirements.
5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal.
Pertinent impacts are addressed individually as follows:
A. Critical Areas. There are no critical areas mapped for the project site and it is currently
fully developed. The Applicant’s geotechnical report and SEPA review finds no critical
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 8
areas on-site. According to the geotech report, Ex. 12, most of the project site is covered
with asphalt.
B. Tree Retention. The proposal provides for adequate preservation of trees because it is
consistent with the City’s tree retention standards.
The City’s tree retention standards (RMC 4-4-130H1aiii) require the retention of 10
percent (10%) of significant trees in commercial development. There are three (3)
significant trees located on the project site, therefore, 0.3 trees rounding down to zero
trees would be required to be retained on the project site. The proposal to remove all
existing on-site trees complies with the City’s tree retention requirements.
C. Compatibility. The proposal is compatible with surrounding uses. All surrounding uses are
in the same CV zone. Mixed-use residential development is located to the north, a Safeway
shopping center to the east, multifamily to the south and a vacant lot to the west. The
proposed use is of similar character to these surrounding uses.
The City’s landscaping and design standards further enhance compatibility. The Applicant
has submitted a conceptual landscape plan, Ex. 4, to demonstrate compliance with the
City’s landscaping standards. The landscape plan includes the required minimum 10-foot
wide landscape strip along the project site’s Harrington Ave NE and NE Sunset Blvd
frontages outside of the areas to be utilized for pedestrian areas and entries. There is also a
minimum 8-foot wide planting strip proposed along the Site’s NE Sunset Blvd frontage and
a minimum 6-foot wide planting strip proposed within the public right-of-way between the
curb and sidewalk along Harrington Ave NE. These required landscape amenities provide
transitions between development and surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare,
maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project.
D. Noise, Light, Glare and Privacy. The proposed increase in height will not create any noise,
light or glare impacts.
None of the portions of the building proposed above the height limit would include light
sources that would generate excessive light or glare to adjacent neighbors or the public
right-of-way. There is nothing about the proposed uses that suggest any significant noise
impacts.
For the building overall, the Applicant has not submitted a lighting plan. Therefore, a
condition of approval requires that a lighting plan be provided at the time of building permit
review.
The proposed building has been configured to provide the commercial tenant spaces closest
to the intersection of NE Sunset Blvd and Harrington Ave NE. Upper -level building step-
backs are proposed for the residential dwelling units proposed on levels three through
seven, which would provide privacy for the residents as well as provide a noise buffer.
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 9
E. Views. According to uncontested findings of the staff report, the proposal will not block
view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier or any other natural features.
F. Shade and Shadow. It is not anticipated that the requested additional height would result
in excessive shade or shadows onto abutting or adjacent properties. A shade and shadow
study (Exhibit 21) was submitted with the application materials. The neighboring property
to the south of the project site is similar in scale to the proposed project and will not be
adversely affected for the additional height requested above the 70-foot height limit. In
addition, the use of the neighboring property to the east, abutting the project site is currently
a surface parking lot with no nearby buildings. Further, upper-level building step-backs
are proposed to mitigate the height impacts of the proposed building where it would abut
the public right-of-way.
G. Scale and Overconcentration. The scale and location of the proposal are fully appropriate
for its location. The use of building modulation and articulation adequately mitigates
against the scale of the proposal. Building modulation would be achieved at intervals of
less than 40 feet through changes in plane and depth as well as contrasting major massing
with minor/competing massing gestures and further enhanced through changes in building
color. In addition, levels three through seven have been stepped back from the first two (2)
stories, which further breaks up the size and scale of the proposed building.
The location of the building does not create an overconcentration of use. It is a use
specifically planned for and encouraged in the Sunset Area Planned Action Ordinance in an
area designated by that ordinance as Sunset Mixed Use. As previously noted, surrounding
uses are fully compatible with the proposed mixed use.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Procedural:
1. Authority. RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies Hearing Examiner conditional use and site plan
applications1 as Type III permits. The modification requests are classified by RMC 4-8-080(G) as a
Type I review. RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under “the
highest-number procedure”. The Type III reviews are the “highest-number procedure” and therefore
must be employed for all 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.
Substantive:
2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The project site is zoned Center Village (CV) and
has a comprehensive plan land use designation of Commercial & Mixed Use (CMU).
1 RMC 4-9-200D2biv requires hearing examiner site plan review for projects in the CV zone that are over four
stories in height
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 10
3. Review Criteria/Approval of Street Modification. RMC 4-9-200.E.3 governs the criteria for
site plan review. RMC 4-9-030(D) governs the criteria for conditional use permit review for height
increases. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding
conclusions of law. Parking and mixed use modification standards are governed by RMC 4-9-250.D.
The findings and conclusions of Finding No. 21-23 of the staff report are adopted by reference and it
is concluded that the proposal as conditioned meets the criteria for the parking and mixed-use
development standard modifications identified in Finding of Fact (FOF) No. 3. The modifications
identified in FOF No. 3 are approved on that basis.
Site Plan
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3): Criteria: The Administrator or designee must find a proposed project to be in
compliance with the following:
a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals,
including:
i. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives, and
policies, especially those of the applicable land use designation; the Community Design
Element; and any applicable adopted Neighborhood Plan;
ii. Applicable land use regulations;
iii. Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and
iv. Design Regulations: Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in RMC 4-3-
100.
4. The criterion is met. For the reasons outlined in Finding 16 of the staff report, the proposal is
consistent with the comprehensive plan. For the reasons outlined in Finding 17 of the staff report, the
proposal is consistent with applicable land use regulations. For the reasons identified in Finding 18
of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with the design regulations of RMC 4-3-100. For the
reasons identified in Finding No. 20, the proposal is consistent with the Sunset Area Planned Action
Ordinance. All aforementioned staff report findings are adopted by reference.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(b): Off-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and
uses, including:
i. Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a
particular portion of the site;
ii. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways
and adjacent properties;
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 11
iii. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities,
rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from
surrounding properties;
iv. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility
to attractive natural features;
v. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and
surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance
the appearance of the project; and
vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid
excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets.
5. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5G for structures, FOF No. 4F for
circulation and loading and storage, FOF No. 5E, FOF No. 5C for landscaping and 5D for lighting.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, including:
i. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement,
spacing and orientation;
ii. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural
characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian
and vehicle needs;
iii. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation
and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious
surfaces; and
iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide
shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to
enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection
of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian
movements.
6. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5D for structure placement; FOF
No. 5G for structure scale and FOF No. 5C for landscaping. The proposal provides for adequate
protection of natural features since trees are retained to the extent required by the City’s tree retention
standards as identified in FOF No. 5B and there otherwise are no natural features or any critical areas
as identified in FOF No. 5A.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all
users, including:
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 12
i. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets
rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the
site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties;
ii. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system,
including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points,
drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways;
iii. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and
pedestrian areas;
iv. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and
v. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas,
buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties.
7. The criterion is met. The proposal provides for safe and efficient access and circulation as
required by the criterion above for the reasons identified in FOF No. 4E and 4F. No loading or
delivery spaces are proposed. The facility will be served by adequate transit and bicycle facilities
(most notably bicycle parking spaces) for the reasons identified in FOF No. 4F and 4H. Safe and
attractive pedestrian connections are provided as outlined FOF No. 4E, along with the landscaping
provided for pedestrian entrances as depicted in the Applicant’s landscaping plan, Ex. 4.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(e): Open Space: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project
focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users
of the site.
8. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 4D.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(f): Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to
shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines.
9. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5E.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural
systems where applicable.
10. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5A.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and
facilities to accommodate the proposed use.
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 13
11. The criterion is met for the reasons identified FOF No. 4.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(i): Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development phases
and estimated time frames, for phased projects.
12. No phasing is proposed.
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.
13. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in Findings No. 16 and 17 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 maximum height less than the
subject property, increased setbacks and/or step-backs may be appropriate to reduce adverse effects
on adjacent or abutting property.
14. 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. The
increase in height also enhances the ability to further the objectives of applicable design guidelines.
The City’s Urban Design Regulations (RMC 4-3-100) require roofline variations. The additional
requested height with the requested Conditional Use Permit would also be utilized to provide
variation in the proposed roof line. The proposed design would provide shifting penthouse elements,
a continuation of the building’s play of modulation, and intriguing roof overhang elements. This
helps break up the massing scale and prevents the building from having an out of scale presence from
the human perspective.
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.
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 14
15. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5G.
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.
16. 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.
17. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5G.
RMC 4-9-065D1: One bonus market-rate dwelling unit may be granted for each affordable dwelling
unit constructed on site, up to the maximum bonus density allowed pursuant to subsection D3 of this
Section, Maximum Bonus Units. Affordable dwelling units shall conform to the following
standards:…
18. The criterion is met. The Applicant proposes eight affordable housing units to qualify for the
additional 16 units over the applicable density limit as outlined in FOF No. 3. The additional 16 units
over the maximum 53 units authorized for the project site is below the 30% maximum density
increase authorized by RMC 4-9-065D3 for the CV zone.
To ensure that the affordable unit remains affordable over time, the Applicant shall record an
agreement in a form approved by the City with the King County Recorder’s Office requiring that the
affordable housing unit remains affordable housing for fifty (50) years or the life of the development,
whichever is less. This agreement shall be a covenant running with the land, binding on the assigns,
heirs and successors of the Applicant to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. A condition of approval
requires that a draft agreement be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and
approval by the Planning Project Manager and the City Attorney at the time of Building Permit
review.
DECISION
The proposed site plan, conditional use permit, density bonus and development modifications
identified in FOF No. 3 are all consistent with applicable review criteria as identified by the
Conclusions of Law above, subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. A draft agreement in a form approved by the City with the King County
Recorder’s Office requiring that the one (1) affordable housing unit remain
affordable housing for fifty (50) years or the life of the development, whichever is
less, shall be provided for review and approval at the time of Building Permit
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 15
review to the Current Planning Project Manager and City Attorney. This
agreement shall be a covenant running with the land, binding on the assigns, heirs
and successors of the Applicant to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. Such
agreement shall be recorded prior to Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
2. The existing London plane street trees shall be retained. To ensure that these trees
are not adversely impacted during project construction, staff recommends that a
certified arborist be onsite during installation of utilities and frontage
improvements in the vicinity of these trees. Should it be determined that the trees
are not able to be retained due to utility conflicts or other construction impacts as
determined by the Current Planning Project Manager that would be detrimental to
the viability of the street trees, the Applicant shall replace the large mature species
trees with comparable species.
3. A detailed landscape plan shall be provided at the time of Construction Permit
review for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager. The
detailed landscape plan shall provide 15 sq. ft. of landscaping per parking space
(see RMC 4-4-070H.4 and 5 for additional requirements) for all proposed surface
parking lot spaces.
4. A parking agreement ensuring that joint use parking is available for the duration
of the uses shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review
and approval at the time of Building Permit review.
5. The Applicant shall be required to 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.
6. Details shall be provided on the floor plans submitted with the building permit
application including: ADA complaint bathrooms (common facilities are
acceptable), central plumbing drain line and grease trap and ventilation system for
a potential future commercial kitchen. The floor plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to permit issuance.
7. Weather protection shall be expanded to encompass all building entries and
outdoor pedestrian plaza areas.
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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 16
8. An open space programming plan shall be submitted with the Building Permit
application. The plan shall provide clear details of all amenity spaces and the
programming consistent with the common open space standards. The
programming plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning
Project Manager prior to permit issuance.
9. Details of proposed outdoor seating area furniture shall be provided at the time of
Building Permit Review for review and approval by the Current Planning Project
Manager. Proposed outdoor furniture shall be made of durable, vandal- and
weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably
maintained over an extended period of time.
10. Architectural detailing shall be added to the blank wall proposed on the south
portion of the west façade. The detailing shall be provided on the building permit
application’s elevation sheets to be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to permit issuance.
11. A materials board shall be submitted at the time of Building Permit Review for
review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager. The materials
board shall include materials that a durable, high quality and consistent with more
traditional urban development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry,
pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass and cast-in-place concrete.
12. A cohesive sign package for the retail and residential portions of the building
shall be submitted at the time of Building Permit Review for review and approval
by the Current Planning Project Manager.
13. A pedestrian scale lighting plan and light fixture details shall be provided at the
time of Building Permit Review for review and approval by the Current Planning
Project Manager.
14. Implementation procedures for each of the mitigation measures identified in
Attachment B of the Sunset Area Planned Action Ordinance #5813 or provide a
written narrative of how the particular measure is not applicable to the project
shall be provided. The Planned Action mitigation implementation procedures
shall be submitted at the time of Building Permit Review for review and approval
by the Current Planning Project Manager.
15. A pedestrian plaza exhibit shall be provided with the detailed landscaping plan
submitted with the civil construction permit application. The pedestrian plaza
exhibit and detailed landscaping plan shall remove the landscaping proposed
between the sidewalk and building along the site’s Sunset Blvd NE frontage and
portions of the Harrington Ave frontage and replace this landscaping with a
pedestrian plaza area that provides amenities including but not limited to street
furniture, planters, scored concrete, etc. to expand the commercial area in front of
the proposed building.
DATED this 22nd day of November, 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
Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 17
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies the consolidated 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:
Park 5 Apartments
Project Number:
LUA21-000323, SA-H, CU-H, MOD, MOD
Date of Hearing
November 16, 2021
Staff Contact
Jill Ding
Senior Planner
Project Contact/Applicant
Kyle Stevens
Grouparchitect
1735 Westlake Ave N, Suite
200, Seattle, WA 98109
Project Location
960 Harrington Ave NE,
Renton, WA 98056
The following exhibits are included with the Hearing Examiner Decision:
Exhibits 1-13: As shown in the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Report
Exhibits 14-22: As shown in the Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner
Exhibit 23: Staff PowerPoint
Exhibit 24: COR Maps, http://rp.rentonwa.gov/Html5Public/Index.html?viewer=CORMaps
Exhibit 25: Google Earth, https://www.google.com/earth/