Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutKennydale Reservoir, Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit1 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 1 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Kennydale Reservoir Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit LUA17-000633, ECF, CU-A, SA-H FINAL DECISION Summary The City of Renton is requesting conditional use permit and site plan review for a fifty foot diameter, 103 foot high, 1.3 million gallon reservoir at 1404 N 30th St. in the Kennydale neighborhood. The applications are approved subject to conditions. Testimony Clark Close, City of Renton Senior Planner, summarized the proposal. In response to examiner questions, Mr. Close responded that the Arts Commission will take public comment on the mural design for the reservoir. Mr. Close confirmed that the black walnut tree referenced in Ms. Leiler’s email could not be retained because the area in which the tree is located is needed for a maintenance road. Mr. Close noted that replacement trees proposed for the site should make up for some of the lost aesthetics. An applicant representative, in response to examiner questions, acknowledged that there was no mechanism to notify the City if the air traffic lights went out, but that the lights are replaced every two years so it’s very unlikely they would ever go out. As to the current status of the mural development, the Applicant has hired a firm to design the mural. Exhibits 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 2 2 The November 21, 2107 Staff Report Exhibits 1-21 identified at page 2 of the Staff Report itself were admitted into the record during the hearing. In addition, the following exhibits were admitted during the hearing. Exhibit 22 Email from Tina Leiler dated November 14, 2017 Exhibit 23 Staff power point Exhibit 24 COR maps FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Applicant. City of Renton. 2. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on November 21, 2017 at noon in the City of Renton Council Chambers. Substantive: 3. Project Description. The City of Renton is requesting conditional use permit and site plan review for a fifty foot diameter, 103 foot high (top of vent to reservoir base), 1.3 million gallon reservoir at 1404 N 30th St. in the Kennydale neighborhood. The Kennydale Reservoir would have a footprint of 1,964 square feet. An auger cast pile foundation system is anticipated for the reservoir. Access to the site would be from a shared driveway along the west side of the property. The site topography is relatively level with slopes down to the south and overall vertical relief of approximately 18 feet. Construction of the water reservoir is scheduled to begin in June 2018 and end in December 2019. 4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate infrastructure and public services as follows: A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sewer will be provided by the City of Renton. B. Fire and Police. Police and Fire Prevention Staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development. C. Drainage. A Preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) has been submitted with the site plan application, prepared by Murray Smith, Inc. (dated September 2017; Exhibit 11). Both stormwater runoff from the northern parcel and overflow from the reservoir would be directed to a proposed flow control facility preceded by water quality treatment for surface runoff. At the proposed property line between the reservoir and fire station properties, a swale will be located to direct surface runoff from the northern site to the water quality manhole and flow control system. Runoff from the access road on the west side of the site would be directed 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 3 3 through sheet flow into the water quality facility. The project will continue to discharge to the existing conveyance system along N 30th St. The sheet flow discharge from the site would be replaced with a piped conveyance system as detailed in the drainage report. See Advisory Notes to Applicant (Exhibit 16) for more storm drainage comments. D. Parks/Open Space. City development standards do not require any set-asides or mitigation for parks and open space for the proposed use. E. Transportation and Circulation. Access to the site is proposed via N 30th St. It’s anticipated that there would not be an overall increase in traffic following construction. The reservoir would only be accessible to City operation and maintenance staff. Under normal reservoir operation conditions, City staff would visit the reservoir approximately once a month for routine maintenance. It is anticipated that temporary impacts to traffic would result from the proposed project during construction. Reservoir construction work is scheduled to begin June 2018 and end December 2019. The proposed work hours for the construction of the reservoir are between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Hauling hours shall be within the above working hours unless modified by the traffic control plan submitted by the contractor and approved by the City (Exhibit 9). A traffic control plan would be needed during the construction of utility improvements on N 30th St and Park Ave N. The proposal includes access links from N 30th St to the reservoir. The proposed circulation allows for safe vehicular ingress and egress movements to and from the site. Access to the facility would be limited by two successive gates along the shared access driveway, a sliding security gate for the fire station and a double swing gate for the reservoir. The reservoir improvements include enough roadway to allow for onsite turnaround movements. The new frontage improvements would provide desirable circulation for the users of N 30th St. The loading, delivery and parking areas would be universal in purpose for maintenance of the facility. No public or pedestrian access is allowed to the site. F. Parking. There are no specific parking regulations for public activities outside of schools, post office or cultural facilities. However, the use does require maintenance of the site so a minimum of one (1) onsite space would be necessary. The water reservoir would have one point of access near the western property boundary. Frontage improvements would include driveway cuts that is roughly 5 feet from the west property line and would be designed with a commercial approach up to 20-foot wide before widening to 24 feet past the fire station and then down to 16 feet at the reservoir gate access. Onsite the plans include a multiple hammerhead turnarounds on the west side of the lot and a 15-foot wide access road around the perimeter of the reservoir. Between the circular access road and the paved hammerheads there would be enough space for maintenance vehicles to park when visits are made to the facility. Therefore, ample space is available within the property limits to allow maintenance vehicles to park onsite. 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 4 4 5. Adverse Impacts. As conditioned, there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the project. Specific issues related to impacts are discussed below. A. Compatibility. The proposal is moderately compatible with surrounding residential use. Surrounding uses are a mix of residential and commercial use with a new fire station to be constructed immediately to the south. Interference with views and the scale of the project are two of the greatest challenges to compatibility. As to views, there are territorial views to the west of Lake Washington. The proposed reservoir would obstruct the views of the abutting residential development to the north, east and west sides of the site. The proposed reservoir would also obstruct the views to the proposed fire station to the south and the commercial development to the west and east of the tower. The visual impact would also include the loss of territorial views of the existing trees following their removal from the site. The applicant is proposing several site plan and construction techniques to minimize the structures visual impact to the neighborhood. The basic methods of improving views include, but are not limited to, maintaining a minimum 30-foot setback from any property line, applying low-glare paint on the exterior of the water tank, painting the steel tank with a mural or symbolic reference to the area, planting trees along the perimeter to minimize the light and glare, and maintaining a height that complies with the FAA’s Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation. The large scale of the project is mitigated to the extent reasonably practicable by the addition of the mural described above, the retention of trees addressed in Finding of Fact No. 5(B) below, and the addition of landscaping addressed in Finding of Fact No. 5(C) below. B. Tree Retention. As conditioned, the proposal will satisfy the City’s tree retention requirements. A Level 2 Tree Assessment Report was prepared by Urban Forestry Services, Inc. (dated September 13, 2017; Exhibit 13) and submitted with the land use application. The 1.09 acre site is largely open lawn with a total of 32 fruit and ornamental trees. The predominant species, included black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), flowering plum (Prunus cerisifera form), and various fruit trees. The tree structures range from fair to poor with many of the trees ranked with a present value of low. None of the surveyed trees were considered hazardous. According to the report, most of the trees were recommended for removal due to the construction impacts. The significant trees range in size from 7.2 to 24 DBH. Many of the trees surveyed by the arborist fall below Renton’s significant tree size thresholds to be considered for tree retention, as a result there are only a total of 21 significant trees onsite. The applicant is required to retain 30 percent (30%) of the trees located within the residential portion of the site that are not located within the proposed rights-of-way or access easements. Of the 21 significant trees within the project area, the applicant is proposing to retain one (1) out of the required six (6) retention trees. As a result, the applicant is proposing to replant the reservoir portion of the site with 64 trees in order to comply with the Tree Retention requirements of the code. During construction, trees required to be retained (i.e., protected trees, including off-site trees), would be required to comply with the tree protection measures during construction per RMC 4-4- 130H.9. The eight (8) central components of tree protection include defining and protecting 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 5 5 drip line, erecting and maintaining a temporary six-foot-high chain link construction fence with placards around the tree to be retained, protecting the tree from grade changes, keeping the area clear of impervious surface material, restricting grading within the drip line, providing three inches (3”) of bark mulch within the required fencing, retaining a certified arborist to ensure trees are protected from development activities, and alternate protection/safeguards as necessary. As testified by Mr. Clark, the black walnut identified by Ms. Leiler in Ex. 22 cannot be retained because the area in which it’s located needs to be used for a maintenance road. Black walnut trees are also not singled out for protection in the City’s tree retention standards. C. Landscaping. A conceptual landscape plan without irrigation was submitted with the project application (Exhibit 7). The conceptual landscape plan illustrates materials that would be used to enhance the visual character of the building. Together the retained and new landscaping would consist of a variety of trees, shrubs, groundcover, and mixed seed along the first 10 feet of the north and west property lines. This fully sight-obscuring landscaping would seek to reduce glare from the water tower, maintain privacy and add visual interest to the development. An automatic irrigation system has not been provided for the proposed landscape design. Drought-tolerant species and an 8-inch mat of moisture-retaining topsoil have been specified in lieu of an irrigation system. Contractor would be responsible for monitoring the condition of the plant material. The reservoir landscape plan proposes 64 new trees, including: 13 vine maple, 11 cornelian cherry dogwood, 27 Douglas fir, and 13 Western red cedar at either 2 gallon or 5 gallon in size. Shrubbery includes: salal, sword fern, tallhedge buckthorn, Japanese spirea, evergreen huckleberry and Bodnant viburnum. Groundcover includes: beach strawberry. Meadow seed mix includes: perennial ryegrass, creeping red fescue, chewing fescue, and hard fescue. An existing 8-unit residential multi-family property to the east is anticipated to be retained by the start of the construction and assembly of the water tower beginning in June 2018. Therefore, staff is recommending that the applicant include a ten-foot (10') wide fully sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier along the common property line to the east. In addition, the applicant shall plant two or three larger specimen trees at the top of the retaining wall between the fence and the pervious concrete road to provide a stand-alone landscape feature and increased screening of the reservoir from N 30th St and Fire Station 15. A specimen tree is a tree planted apart from other trees that is used as a focal point of a garden or backyard in order to provide interest. Therefore, a condition of approval requires that the applicant prepare and submit for review and approval by the Current Planning Manager, a final detailed landscape plan prior to construction permit approval. D. Critical Areas. The only critical areas on-site is Well Head Protection Area Zone 2. The overall purpose of the aquifer protection regulations is to protect aquifers used as potable water supply sources by the City from contamination by hazardous materials. The water reservoir portion of the lot is proposing permeable pavement. According to the geotechnical report (Exhibit 10), the site is underlain by recessional outwash soils over dense to very dense glacial till and advance outwash deposits. The report notes that there is about 5 to 7 feet of sandy silt soils with a high percentage of fines near the ground surface. The report recommends that these soils are over-excavated and backfilled with permeable ballast where pervious pavement is located. A pilot infiltration test 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 6 6 (PIT) was performed on the site in the location of the proposed infiltration pipe. The PIT was performed at a depth of 16 feet. The report notes that groundwater was encountered roughly 46.6 feet below the ground surface at the site of the PIT. Based on the test results, the geotechnical engineer concluded that a long-term infiltration rate of 2.5 in/hour be used at 16 feet below the ground surface. Approximately 1,600 cubic yards of fill would be brought to the reservoir portion of the site to enable the reservoir to be on a flat elevation of 219 feet. Such fill must be obtained from approved local fill sources. Since fill is proposed for project development, a fill source statement would be required to be submitted to the City to ensure clean fill is used. The fill source statement shall be submitted with the construction permit application. Impacts to the Wellhead Protection Area are not anticipated as a result of the subject project, provided the City of Renton codes are complied with. E. Noise, Light and Glare. Noise, light and glare impacts would be minimal. Noise impacts would primarily result from the construction of the proposed road improvements, foundation improvements (auger-cast piles) and new structures. Auger-cast in place concrete piles produce minimal vibrations and low noise. The construction noise generated by the project would be regulated through the City’s adopted noise level regulations per Chapter 8-7, RMC and permitted work hour regulations near residential areas per RMC 4-4-030C. Noise impacts anticipated from the maintenance and operation of the reservoir are anticipated to be impacts that would be commonly associated with a water reservoir. Other than the marking lights on the roof, no pedestrian lighting is planned for the reservoir portion of the site. Any lighting necessary for control panels or equipment would be directed downward to minimize spill over to adjacent properties. In addition, light glare impacts would be mitigated through a low-glare paint on the exterior of the water tank and landscape vegetative plantings. Conclusions of Law 1. Authority. Large utility facilities require a hearing examiner conditional use permit in the R6 zone as identified in RMC 4-2-060. RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies hearing examiner conditional use applications as Type III permits when Hearing Examiner review is required . Site plan review is required for all development in the CN zone by RMC 4-9-200(B)(2)(a). In the absence of the conditional use permit application, no Hearing Examiner review would be required for the site plan and it would be classified as a Type II permit by RMC 4-8-080(G). RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under “the highest-number procedure”. The conditional use and site plan applications are consolidated. The Type III conditional use review is the “highest- number procedure” and therefore must be employed for the consolidated conditional use, site plan and modification review. 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. 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 7 7 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. Approximately the first 120 feet of the property from N 30th St is located within the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zoning classification and the remainder is in the R6 zone. The comprehensive plan map designations are Residential High Density (RHD) and Residential Medium Density (RMD). 3. Review Criteria/Street Modification. Conditional use criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-030(C). Site plan review criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-200(E). All applicable criteria are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. Conditional Use The Administrator or designee or the Hearing Examiner shall consider, as applicable, the following factors for all applications: RMC 4-9-030(C)(1): Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning regulations and any other plans, programs, maps or ordinances of the City of Renton. 4. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan as outlined in Finding 16 of the Staff report, adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. The proposal is consistent with all applicable zoning and other development standards as outlined in Finding 17 of the Staff report, adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-9-030(C)(2): Appropriate Location: The proposed location shall not result in the detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the immediate area of the proposed use. The proposed location shall be suited for the proposed use. 5. The parcel is well suited for its intended use. The parcel was selected because it was already owned by the City of Renton. The property was purchased by the City for a future fire station and there is adequate space to locate both the fire station and reservoir on the same property. The property also has the proper topographical ground elevations to construct a reservoir to serve the existing water system 320-hydraulic pressure-zone. There is no overconcentration of use as there is no evidence of any other water towers within any proximity to the proposal. RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. 6. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5 and as conditioned, there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal, so it will not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 8 8 RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. 7. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(A), the proposal is compatible with surrounding uses. RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available. 8. The proposal will be served with adequate parking as identified in Finding of Fact No. 4(F). RMC 4-9-030(C)(6): Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area. 9. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4(E), the project will not have a significant impact on the general traffic in the vicinity and the proposal provides for safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular circulation. RMC 4-9-030(C)(7): Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated. 10. As stated in FOF 5(E), no significant impacts from noise, light or glare are anticipated. This criterion is satisfied. RMC 4-9-030(C)(8): Landscaping: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by buildings, paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adjacent properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use. 11. Tree replacement and landscaping would be provided for throughout the site including trees, bushes, rocks and groundcover. 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; 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 9 9 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. 12. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 4, as conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan, as well as development and design regulations. The proposal does not qualify as a Planned Action Ordinance, as outlined at Finding No. 21 of the Staff Report. The project location does not fall within one of the four (4) possible design districts nor does RMC 4 -2-115 Residential Design and Open Space Standards apply, see applicability. 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. 13. The proposal would not be an overscale structure as its scale has been mitigated to the extent reasonably practicable as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5(A) and its bulk and dimensions are consistent with all applicable zoning code standards. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, no lighting impacts are anticipated and landscaping is effectively used to protect adjoining properties from noise and glare and to maintain privacy and enhance the appearance of the project. This criterion is satisfied. View impacts have also been mitigated to the extent reasonably practicable as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5(A). RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 10 10 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. 14. As proposed and conditioned, native and planted landscaping has been well designed to provide for privacy and noise reduction. There is nothing in the record to reasonably suggest that the scale, spacing and orientation of the project could be modified to provide for more privacy and noise reduction without unreasonably interfering with the objectives of the facility. The scale of the facility will not create any adverse impacts as previously discussed and is compatible with vehicle and pedestrian circulation as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4(E). In addition, there is nothing in the record to reasonably suggest that the scale of the project is incompatible with sunlight, prevailing winds or natural characteristics. The criterion is met. 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. 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 11 11 15. The proposal provides for adequate and safe access and circulation as required by the criterion above for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4(E). 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. 16. No open space is required for this use 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. 17. There are no view corridors to Mt. Rainier affected by the proposal. The proposed structure would likely block view corridors to shoreline from upper story structures and would limit view as the site is located at a higher elevation than many of the surrounding properties. Mitigation efforts have been made to reduce the height and overall impacts of the structure on the landscape. In this respect, the criterion is met as view corridors have been maintained “when possible.” The public access requirement is not applicable to the proposal. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. 18. There are no natural systems at the project site. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. 19. The project is served by adequate services and facilities as determined in Finding of Fact 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. 20. No phasing is proposed. DECISION As conditioned below, the conditional use and site plan applications are consistent with all applicable criteria for the reasons identified above and are approved: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated October 23, 2017. 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 12 12 2. The applicant shall provide a final detailed landscape plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. The revised landscape plan shall depict the following on the reservoir portion of the site: ten-foot (10') wide fully sight-obscuring landscaped visual barrier along east property line, two or three specimen trees at the top of the southernmost retaining wall between the security fence and the p ervious concrete access road, and shrubbery in the terraced area between the southernmost retaining wall and the security fence. 3. The applicant shall submit a revised grading plan that identifies the elevations of the top and bottom of each retaining wall to verify the height complies with the 6-foot height limitation. Additionally, the plans shall contain a cut sheet of wall materials and areas for terraced landscaping. The revised grading plan shall be submitted with the construction permit application to be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 4. The applicant shall provide a revised architectural site plan identifying all utility equipment and screening. The architectural site plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 5. The applicant shall provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties. Pedestrian scale and down-lighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement. The lighting plan shall be submitted with the construction permit application to be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 6. The applicant shall submit a final public art plan for the reservoir’s exterior paint treatment. The final design work proposals shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager to be reviewed and approved by the Renton Municipal Arts Commission prior to building permit approval. DATED this 7th day of December, 2017. City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(C)(2) requires appeals of the hearing examiner’s decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner’s decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified 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 CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN CAO VARIANCE - 13 13 in RMC 4-8-100(I). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office, Renton City Hall – 7th floor, (425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.