Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-02-2022 - Lindbergh High School HEX Decision - LUA-22-0001061 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 Street Modification - 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Lindbergh High School Hearing examiner site plan and street modification. PR22-000101 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FINAL DECISION SUMMARY The Applicant is requesting approvals of hearing examiner site plan and street modification for site and building improvements at the Lindberg High School campus. The applications are approved subject to conditions. TESTIMONY Alex Morganroth, City of Renton senior planner, summarized the staff report. He noted that the overall proposed increase in building footprint was less than 1%. Laura Brent, Applicant representative, noted that the District used the City’s notification process (apparently for SEPA review), even though it wasn’t required to do so. DOE had commented on some groundwater issues and the District provided information to DOE to resolve their concerns. No further comment was received from DOE. The Applicant agrees with the findings and conclusions of the staff report. In response to examiner questions, an Applicant representative identified that although classroom space is increasing, that is only because of new educational requirements mandating more lab science classes for each student. The increase in science lab space will not be used to accommodate an 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 Street Modification - 2 increase in enrollment. EXHIBITS The 21 exhibits identified in page 2 of the May 10, 2022 staff report were admitted into the record at the May 10, 2022 hearing. The following exhibits were also admitted: Exhibit 22: Staff power point presentation Exhibit 23: Google Earth of project site. Exhibit 24: City of Renton COR Maps of project vicinity FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Owner/Applicant. Traci Brewer-Rogstad, Facilities Program Director, Capital Planning and Construction, 300 SW 7th St, Renton, WA 98057. 2. Hearing. A virtual hearing on the application was held on May 10, 2022 at 11:00 am, Zoom Meeting ID No. 946 7233 4580. Substantive: 3. Project Description. The Applicant is requesting approvals of hearing examiner site plan and street modification for site and building improvements at the Lindberg High School campus. Improvements include a 1,951-square foot addition near the existing main entrance, a 3,000-square foot second story addition (net) to the east facade, a 700-square foot addition near the northeast corner renovation of existing classrooms, and the repair and resurfacing of the existing 73,650-square foot parking on the southwest portion of the site. The existing building is approximately 229,000 square feet in size and is located across three (3) parcels totaling approximately 37.25 acres. The site is located at 16426 128th Ave SE (APN # 2823059004, 2823059042, 2823059093). Other work proposed on the site includes HVAC system upgrades, relocation of underground utilities near the main entrance, and a full upgrade to the gymnasium (interior only). The street modification is necessary because 128th Ave SE currently does not meet City standards and bringing it in conformance would necessitate the removal of numerous trees. 128th Ave SE is classified as a 2-lane Collector arterial with parking and flush 5’ sidewalks on both sides. The road has an existing right-of-way (ROW) width of approximately 60 feet. In order to meet the City’s complete street standards for Collector Arterial streets, the minimum ROW is 83 feet, necessitating approximately 11.5 feet of ROW dedication in front of the site for half-street improvements. In addition, half street improvements would include a pavement width of 46 feet (23 feet from centerline), a 0.5-foot curb, an 8-foot planting strip, an 8-foot sidewalk, 2 feet of clear space at back of walk, street trees and storm drainage improvements. 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 Street Modification - 3 The Applicant is proposing to install frontage improvements along a 600-foot section of 128th Ave SE between the two northern most driveways on site. The remaining frontage outside of the proposed improvement area would be dedicated but no improvements would be made. The cross-section for the 600 feet will include a total pavement width of 36.5 and would include a 12.5-foot travel (shared vehicle and bicycle) lane and 6-foot parking lane, 16-foot planting strip, 5-foot sidewalk, 1-foot clearance at back of walk and 0.5-foot curb. The proposed configuration results in a total right of way width of 83 feet, requiring a dedication of 11.5 feet depending on final survey. The modified street section allows for the retention of the existing street trees planted as part of a previous project (LUA11-012) and reduces the impacts to mature on-site trees to the north and south of the 600-foot section. 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 Soos Creek Water and Sewer. 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, if the Applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. 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. There is an 18-inch stormwater main in 128th Ave SE west of the subject property frontage located along the east flowline of the existing roadway. The stormwater main drains north to SE 164th St before extending west. The site contains a complex private storm drainage system consisting of conveyance pipes and detention/retention structures straddling multiple basins. The Applicant shall ensure that any connections to those systems do not cause the conveyance and detention capacities for the systems to be exceeded. The memorandum submitted by the Applicant states that a full drainage report was not provided as a part of the land use application due to time constraints that would prevent the Applicant from implementing the site plan review and meeting portions of the Summer 2022 construction window. According to the memorandum, the Applicant intends to continue gathering survey and design information for the frontage improvements during the site plan review process in order to submit the completed reports and engineering plans with the Civil Construction Permit application. Staff accepts the memorandum in lieu of a formal drainage report with the understanding that all phases of the improvements shall 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 Street Modification - 4 meet the requirements of the City of Renton’s adopted surface water design manual at the time of permit submittal, and that a complete Technical Information Report shall be provided at the time of Civil Construction Permit application. Therefore, a condition of approval, requires that the Applicant shall submit a Technical Information Report (TIR) with the Civil Construction Permit application that includes analysis for all phases of the project, including but not limited to, frontage improvements along 128th Ave SE, building additions, parking lot revisions and repairs, demolitions and changes to the onsite storm drainage conveyance system. The TIR shall be reviewed for compliance and approved by the Public Works Plan Reviewer prior to issuance of the Civil Construction Permit. D. Parks/Open Space. The project provides for adequate parks and open space because no open space is required of the project under City development standards. Open space is currently provided on the site via multiple elements including the track and field, grassy areas adjacent to the pedestrian walkways, an interior courtyard adjacent to the proposed Lincoln House addition, and existing trail easement on the far east side of the property. No new significant open space is proposed as part of the project and no existing open space would be eliminated. E. Pedestrian and Vehicular Circulation. The proposal provides for a safe and effective pedestrian and vehicular circulation system. The Applicant does not propose changes to the site’s existing vehicular and pedestrian circulation. Staff have determined that the existing site allows for adequate vehicle and pedestrian access via internal driveways and pedestrian linkages connecting the track area, pool building, both parking lots, and the main school building. F. Transportation. The proposal is served by adequate and appropriate transportation infrastructure. Overall, the proposal will not increase student enrollment or the number of school employees, so no increases in traffic and hence traffic impacts are anticipated given that the proposal will not affect the existing vehicular and pedestrian circulation of the project site, which staff have found to be adequate. The site is currently accessed via three (3) existing driveways off of 128th Ave SE, the site’s only street frontage. No changes to the access points on the site are proposed. No changes to the loading and delivery areas are proposed. As outlined in the staff report, the project site is served by extensive municipal transit services as well as school buses. 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 Street Modification - 5 G. Parking. The proposal provides for adequate parking as staff has determined that the proposal complies with applicable parking regulations. The parking regulations, RMC 4-4-080, require a specific number of off-street parking stalls be provided based on the number of employees and number of busses to b e parked onsite. According to RMC 4-4-080, the enlargement or remodeling of an existing building or structure by less than 1/3 of the total area of the building or structure is not required to comply with the parking, loading, and driveway standards. According to the Applicant, the total number of employees and students at the school would not change as a result of the project. Approximately 332 parking stalls on currently located on the site including 199 student stalls, 105 employee stalls, and 28 guest stalls. Based on a total of 111 employees and an average enrollment of 1,100 students each year, the Applicant is required to provide 226 total parking stalls in order to meet code. Existing parking spaces for bus drop off and pick up services are located near the main entrance of the school. The parking conforms to the minimum requirements for drive aisle, parking stall, dimensions and the provision of ADA accessible parking stalls. An existing school bus load and unload area is located off of 128th Ave SE between the south parking lot and pool building. The bus loading area would not be changed as a result of the project. Per RMC 4-4-080F.11 the number of bicycle parking spaces shall be at least equal to 10 percent of the number of required off-street vehicle parking spaces. The school has 24 existing uncovered bicycle parking spaces, exceeding the minimum requirement. 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. Pertinent impacts are addressed individually as follows: A. Critical Areas. Wetlands and geologic hazards are present at the project site. Staff have found impacts to the critical areas to be adequately mitigated pursuant to the requirements of the City’s critical area standards. Impacts to geologically hazardous areas was adequately addressed through the recommendations of the Applicant’s geotechnical report. The City’s COR mapping database identifies a High Seismic Hazard, sensitive slopes (15-40%) and protected slopes (>40%) located near the undeveloped area along the southeast edge of the project site. As such, the Applicant submitted a Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (Exhibit 17), prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc, dated October 1, 2021 with the project application. In the report, the consultant acknowledges the presence of a High Seismic Hazard and steep slopes on the site. 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 Street Modification - 6 The potential for liquefaction was analyzed and was determined to be unlikely due to the dense Vashon lodgment till found near the surface across a majority of the report and is considered to be the result of a very large and rare seismic event. The report provides standard recommendations for erosion control, but due to the lack of identified hazard, does not make specific recommendations for earth preparation outside of the standard control measures. The report also provides specific recommendations related to site preparation, building foundations, stormwater infrastructure design, and pavement design. Specifically, the consultant concludes that the south addition (the 700 sq. ft. mechanical addition might benefit from the use of pin piles or aggregate pier ground improvement). The report concludes that the other additions appear to have suitably bearing soils and therefore no specific recommendations were made. A condition of approval requires that the project construction comply with the recommendations found in Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (Exhibit 17), prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc, dated October 1, 2021 and future addenda. As to wetlands, there are four wetlands on the project site but the proposed improvements will not encroach into the wetlands or their buffers. A Wetland Delineation and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Report, prepared by Theresa R. Dusek, dated September 2010 and revised February of 2011 (Exhibit 18) was submitted with the application and identified the presence of four (4) wetlands on the site, identified as Wetlands A, B, C, and D in the report. The Applicant also submitted a Wetland Rating Update prepared by Theresa R. Dusek and dated December 30, 2021 (Exhibit 19). The Wetland Rating Update concurred with the delineations in the original report, but updated the categorizations based on the most recent 2014 Wetland System for Western Washington now incorporated into the City’s Critical Areas Code. According to the Applicant, the four (4) onsite wetlands were likely once a channel or swale that discharged to the Molasses Creek wetland complex located south of the site. All proposed works are located outside of the wetlands buffers and therefore no impacts to the wetlands are anticipated as a result of the project. However, as indicated in the report from the wetlands consultant, the on-site wetlands have been degraded over the past 50 years due to development on the site and alterations of the individual wetlands, in some cases completely severing them from the broader Molasses Creek wetlands system. To protect the wetlands in perpetuity, a condition of approval requires the Applicant to establish native growth protection easements that encompass all existing on-site wetlands and undeveloped land within their buffers and to install the protection fencing and signage as required in RMC 4-3-050.G.7. B. Tree Retention. The proposal provides for adequate preservation of trees because it is consistent with the City’s tree retention standards. For residential or institutional development, the City’s adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations (4-4-130) require the retention of 30 percent of trees in the R-6 zone. 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 Street Modification - 7 The Applicant submitted a tree assessment (Exhibit 12) prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants, dated November 18, 2021. Due to limited impacts to the majority of trees on the project site, staff authorized the Applicant to provide a focused tree assessment that only analyzed trees near the specific additions proposed instead of providing a site-wide analysis. The report identified 11 trees adjacent the proposed additions with the potential to be impacted by construction. The Applicant proposes removing three of the trees. The removal of the three trees represents a small proportion of the total number of trees on the site based on aerials and a staff site visit. In addition, the Applicant has proposed the potential removal of one 18-inch Norway Maple near the 3,000-square foot second story addition to the Lincoln House. The Applicant has proposed the installation of the three (3) new deciduous trees near the location of the trees proposed for removal including a Vine maple and two Queen Elizabeth hedge maples. Discrepancies between the Tree Assessment and the Landscape Plan prevent staff from determining compliance with the tree retention standards for the R-6 zone. Therefore, a condition of approval requires the Applicant to submit a detailed landscape plan that clearly indicates the specific trees on- site proposed for removal and shall demonstrate compliance with the tree retention standards for the R-6 zone. In addition, to increase the chance of survival for the replacement trees and to provide a larger future tree canopy, a condition of approval requires the Applicant to submit a detailed landscape plan that utilizes larger native species such as standard Western red cedar, Douglas fir, or an alternative approved by the Current Planning Project Manager. All retained trees (i.e., protected trees) would be required to be protected during construction pursuant to itemized standards set forth in RMC 4-4-130H.9. C. Compatibility. The proposal is compatible with surrounding uses. As testified by Mr. Morganroth, the improvements constitute less than 1% of the building space and those additions are separated from surrounding uses by hundreds of feet. Given that the additional uses will not generate any perceptible impacts to surrounding uses and the additional findings in Finding of Fact No. 5F below, the additions are considered fully compatible with those uses. D. Noise, Light, Glare and Privacy. The proposal will not create any noise, light or glare impacts. No lighting was proposed in the land use application submittal documents. If lighting is added to the project, lighting impacts would be evaluated at the time of building permit review. Staff have determined that the proposed additions represent a very small increase in the overall size of the existing building and therefore are not anticipated to create privacy or noise issues on the site. E. Views. All three proposed building additions are significantly smaller than the existing structures on the high school campus and would not result in a significant visual change to the building or site due to the small size and locations of the additions. 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 Street Modification - 8 F. Landscaping. Additional landscaping is not required to minimize aesthetic impacts under City regulations due to the small nature of the proposed additions. A conceptual landscape plan was submitted with the project application (Exhibit 3). Per RMC 4-4-080B.1, the landscaping requirements are not applicable to additions that increase the gross square footage of a building by less than one third, other changes in th e use of a property or remodel of a structure that requires improvements equal to or greater than fifty percent (50%) of the assessed property valuation. According to the Applicant, the total assessed value of the property is approximately $88,075,850 (Exhibit 13) and total estimated value of the work proposed is $26,500,000. The three (3) additions for the proposed project results in a building area increase of approximately 5,360 square feet, or 2.3% of the 229,000 square feet total. Therefore, the proposed additions do not trigger compliance with the landscaping regulations in RMC 4-4-080. G. Scale and Overconcentration. The scale and location of the proposal are fully appropriate for its location. The design and positioning of the existing multi-story building on the site is respectful of the neighboring residential-scaled properties through the use of step-down roof forms and open spaces/landscaping between the building and the adjacent residential areas. The primary building is sited approximately 53 feet from the nearest residential-zoned lot and approximately 70 feet the nearest residential structure. An existing vegetated buffer area with mature landscaping is located along the north and east shared property lines and provides a significant level of visual screening between the existing building and proposed additions, and the existing single-family neighborhood to the east and north of the site. None of the three additions would result in the existing building being located closer to a property line than is currently existing. The three proposed additions are significantly smaller than the existing buildings on campus. In addition, the largest proposed addition to the Lincoln House would not be visible from the street and would therefore not impact other properties in the vicinity. The use of orange-brown brick on the three additions ensures that the new additions do not visually stand out from the existing structure and ensures that the school will continue to integrate into the surrounding residential neighborhood and not result in an overscale structure or overconcentration of development on any portion of the site. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Procedural: 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 Street Modification - 9 1. Authority. RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies Hearing Examiner site plan applications1 as Type III permits. The modification request is 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 both 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 R-6 and has a comprehensive plan land use designation of Residential Medium Density (MD). 3. Review Criteria/Approval of Street Modification. RMC 4-9-200.E.3 governs the criteria for site plan review. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. Street modification standards are governed by RMC 4-9-250.D. The findings and conclusions of Finding No. 20 of the staff report are adopted by reference and it is concluded that the proposal meets the criteria for the street modification identified in Finding of Fact (FOF) No. 3. The modification identified in FOF No. 3 is approved on that basis. 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 17 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. For the reasons outlined in Finding 18 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with applicable land use regulations. The proposal is not subject to any design 1 RMC 4-9-200D2bvi requires hearing examiner site plan review for projects involving more than 10 acres of project area. 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 Street Modification - 10 regulations beyond those generally applicable to site plan review (addressed below) and is also not subject to any planned action ordinance. 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; 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 for views, FOF No. 5F 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 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 Street Modification - 11 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. 5C and 5D for structure placement; FOF No. 5G for structure scale and FOF No. 5F 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 the proposal will not adversely affect critical areas as outlined in FOF No. 5A. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users, including: 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 4G. Safe and attractive pedestrian connections are already provided on-site and are not affected by the proposal. 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. 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 Street Modification - 12 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. 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. DECISION The proposed site plan and street modification are approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures required as part of the Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance issued by the Renton School District on June 21, 2021 (Exhibit 5): a. The proposal will comply with street frontage improvement requirements along 128th Avenue SE as outlined by the City. The District is currently evaluating these improvements and the need for a modification to City standards. Any modification will require City approval. 2. The Applicant shall record a formal Lot Combination in order to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The instrument shall be recorded prior to Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 3. The Applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan that clearly indicates the specific trees on-site proposed for removal and shall demonstrate compliance with the tree retention standards for the R-6 zone. The detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil construction permit approval. 4. The Applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan that utilizes larger species such as standard Western red cedar, Douglas fir, or an alternative approved by the Current Planning Project Manager. The landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil construction permit approval. 5. The Applicant shall submit a revised site plan with the building permit application that identifies a refuse and recyclables enclosure compliant with the size requirements in RMC 4 - 4-090E.3 or obtain modification approval to reduce the minimum size requirements. The revised site plan or modification shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning 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 Street Modification - 13 Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 6. 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. 7. The Applicant shall 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. 8. The Applicant shall submit a Technical Information Report (TIR) with the Civil Construction Permit application that includes analysis for all phases of the project, including but not limited to, frontage improvements along 128th Ave SE, building additions, parking lot revisions and repairs, demolitions and changes to the onsite storm drainage conveyance system. The TIR shall be reviewed for compliance and approved by the Public Works Plan Reviewer prior to issuance of the Civil Construction Permit. 9. The project construction shall comply with the recommendations found in Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (Exhibit 17), prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc, dated October 1, 2021 and future addenda. 10. The Applicant shall submit the draft Native Growth Protection Easement documents with the construction permit application submittal. The documents shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to civil construction permit issuance. Additionally, the Applicant shall be required to record the easement and related documents, as well as install the required protection improvements (fence and signage), prior to issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. DATED this 2nd day of June, 2022. 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 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 Street Modification - 14 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.