Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_HEX_SR_Exhibits_180109Denis Law Mayor City Clerk-Jason A.Seth,CMC lanuary 9, 2018 Lawrence Morris Lighthouse Baptist Church 25318 150th Place SE Covington, WA 98042 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision RE: Lighthouse Baptist Church Conditional Use (LUA-17-000741) Dear Mr. Morris: Enclosed please find the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision dated January 5, 2018. This document is immediately available: Electronically online at the City of Renton City Clerk Division website at www.rentonwa.ov/cityclerk. Click the "Hearing Examiner Decisions" link on the right side of the screen located under the section titled, "Helpful Links." The Hearing Examiner Decisions are filed by year and then alphabetical order by project name. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Jason A. Seth, CMC City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera,Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Katie Buchl-Morales,Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian,City Council Liaison Parties of Record(13) 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057 • (425)430-6510/Fax (425)430-6516 • rentonwa.gov 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 g BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON 9 10 Lighthouse Baptist Church FIDNINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF 11 Conditional Use LAW AND FINAL DECISION 12 LUA17-000741, CU-H 13 14 15 Summary 16 The Applicant has applied for conditional use permit approval for a change of use and tenant 17 improvements for 4,500 square feet of tenant space in a shopping center from a health and fitness club to a church for property located at 1222 Bronson Way N. The application is approved subject to 1 g conditions. 19 Testimony 20 Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner for City of Renton, summarized the proposal. In response to 21 Examiner questions, Mr. Herrera stated that staff construes the commercial building in which the 22 tenant space is housed to qualify as a shopping center under parking standards because it contains four or more commercial uses. Even if the building did qualify as a mixed use, the project site would still 23 satisfy parking standards. 24 Lawrence Morris, Applicant, thanked the property managers and church members for attending the 25 hearing. 26 Exhibits CONDITIONAL USE- 1 1 The December 19, 2017 Staff Report Exhibits 1-13 identified at Page 2 of the staff report were 2 admitted into the record during the hearing. The following exhibits were also admitted during the 3 hearing: 4 Exhibit 14: Staff PowerPoint Exhibit 15: City of Renton COR maps 5 6 FINDINGS OF FACT 7 Procedural: 8 1. Applicant. The Applicant is Lawrence Morris, PO Box 58367,Renton, WA 98058. 9 10 2• Hearin . A hearing was held on the applications on December 19, 2017 in the City of Renton Council Chambers. 11 3. Project Description. The Applicant has applied for conditional use permit approval for a 12 change of use and tenant improvements for a 4,500 square feet of tenant space in a shopping center 13 from a health and fitness club to a church for property located at 1222 Bronson Way N. The existing tenant space (Unit 250) is currently vacant and located in the northwest corner of the existing Village 14 Square Shopping Center. No exterior site construction improvements are proposed, and no change is proposed to the building's other existing tenant spaces. Proposed interior improvements for the 15 church tenant space include new demising walls, restroom upgrades, and raised platform area. The 16 tenant improvement would provide typical gathering spaces for church services and classrooms for the church's private K-8 school for up to 20 students. Primary access to the site will remain in the 1 existing locations along Garden Ave N and Bronson Way N. The subject property is approximately 2.75 acres comprised of six (6) contiguous parcels that contains an existing strip retail building with I g various commercial tenants and 174 surface parking spaces. 19 4. Surroundin Area. Single-family developed and zoned property is located to the north, mixed 20 use to the west, Liberty Park to the south and a vehicle service facility to the east. 21 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. Impacts are more specifically addressed as follows: 22 23 A. Compatibilitv. Since the proposal will not involve any exterior tenant improvements, it is compatible with the scale and character of surrounding uses. The use does not 24 involve any overconcentration of church use in the surrounding area. The nearest known church in the North Renton neighborhood is the Seed of Abraham Pentecostal 25 Church located near N 3rd and Wells Ave N approximately 1/3-mile northwest of the 26 site. There is no other church in the subject shopping center. CONDITIONAL USE-2 1 B. Light, glare and noise. The proposed use would not generate additional noise impacts to the existing shopping center. Activities and assemblies would be held indoors. Exterior2noiseimpactswouldbelimitedtovehiclesarrivinganddepartingthesite. The proposed 3 Lighthouse Baptist Church has not proposed and has not shown the need for any additional lighting to utilize the tenant space within the existing shopping center. The 4 shopping center main parking lot contains three (3) light standards approximately 20-feet high with cut-off shields. Building mounted lighting is located along the north farade. 5 Mature evergreen landscaping along the northern property line mitigates potential glare 6 impacts to abutting properties. 7 C. Critical Areas and Natural Features. The project area is mapped as a high seismic hazard and well head protection area. However, since no exterior tenant improvements are g proposed, and no hazardous material use or storage is anticipated for the proposed use, the 9 proposal is not subject to any critical area requirements. No other natural features are adversely affected since no exterior improvements are proposed. 10 D. Parkin . Parking was an issue raised by one of the project neighbors in written comment, 11 Ex. 9. The City's parking standards set the standard for adequacy of parking. As identified 12 at page 8-9 of the staff report, the proposal meets the City's parking standards. There is nothing unusual about the project that justifies requiring parking that exceeds City parking 13 standards, so the parking is construed as adequate. 14 E. Landscapin. It is determined that the proposal provides for adequate and appropriate landscaping. In the existing development, landscaping is provided in all areas not 15 occupied by buildings. The subject property contains perimeter landscaping between the 16 parking lot and street frontage along Garden Ave N and Bronson Way N. Additional perimeter landscaping is located along the northern property line that contains a row of 17 mature evergreen trees that reach 50+ feet in height. Landscaping within the parking lot is composed of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. 18 19 Conclusions of Law 20 1. Authori . RMC 4-2-060 provides that religious institutions are authorized in the CA zone by hearing examiner conditional use permit. A hearing examiner conditional use permits is a Type III 21 review pursuant to RMC 4-8-080(G). As outlined in RMC 4-8-080(G), the hearing examiner is 22 authorized to hold hearings and issue final decisions on Type III applications subject to closed record appeal to the Renton City Council. 23 2. Zonin Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is within the Commercial 24 Mixed Use (CMU} Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning classification. 25 3. Review Criteria. Conditional use criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-030(D). Applicable 26 standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. CONDITIONAL USE- 3 1 Conditional Use 2 The Administrator or designee or the Hearing Examiner shall consider, as applicable, the following factors for all applications: 3 4 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 5 zoning regulations and any other plans,programs, maps or ordinances of the Ciry of Renton. 6 4. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and development standards as outlined in Findings of Fact No. 17 - 19 of the staff report, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full. 8 RMC 4-9-030(C)(2): Appropriate Location: The proposed location shall not result in the 9 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. 10 11 5. The proposed use will not result in an overconcentration of use for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 5(A). The proposed location is suited for the proposed use because it doesn't 12 involve any exterior improvements and will not create any adverse impacts to the surrounding area for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 5. 13 RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location 14 shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent properry. 15 6. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned, there are no adverse impacts 16 associated with the proposal, so it will not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. 17 RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibi[ity: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and 1 g character of the neighborhood. 19 . As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposed use is compatible with the scale and 20 character of the neighborhood. 21 RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking:Adequate parking is, or will be made, available. 22 8. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal includes parking that is consistent with applicable parking standards, which sets a legislative standard for adequate parking. 23 24 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. 25 9. The development has already been reviewed for safety and circulation when the existing 26 building was originally approved. As there is nothing to suggest that the proposed change in use will CONDITIONAL USE-4 1 adversely change the safety impacts of the originally approved uses, there is no legal basis to require any more of the Applicant. See Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. App. 505, 516-17 (1998).2 3 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. 4 10. As conditioned, as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not result in any 5 adverse light, noise or glare impacts. 6 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 e,ffects of the proposed use. 8 1 l. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, all undeveloped portions of the site are landscaped. 9 DECISION lo 11 The conditional use permit application is consistent with all applicable review criteria for the reasons identified in the Conclusions of Law as conditioned below: 12 1. The subject site is located in the Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) Comprehensive Plan 13 designation and complies with the goals and policies established with this designation, see FOF 17. 14 2' The subject site is located in the Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designation and complies with the zoning and development standards established with this designation provided the applicant 15 complies with City Code, see FOF 18. 3. The proposed Conditional Use complies with the Urban Design Regulations provided the 16 applicant complies with City Code, see FOF 19. 4. The proposed Conditional Use complies with the Critical Areas Regulations provided the 17 applicant complies with City Code, see FOF 20. 1 g 5. The proposed Conditional Use complies with the Conditional Use Permit criteria as established by City Code provided the applicant complies alt advisory notes, see FOF 21. 19 6. There are adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed Conditional Use, see FOF 22. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CONDITIONAL USE - 5 1 2 DATED this 5th day of January, 2018. 3 f. 4 C::....,. Phi A.Olbrechts 5 City of Renton Hearing Examiner 6 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices 8 9 As consolidated, RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies the application(s) subject to this decision as Type III applications subject to closed record appeal to the City of Renton City Council. Appeals of the 10 hearing examiner's decision must be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the 11 decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14- day appeal period. 12 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes 13 notwithstanding any program of revaluation. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CONDITIONAL USE - 6