Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and VarianceDEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Project Location Map D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance A. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT & DECISION DECISION: APPROVED APPROVED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS DENIED REPORT DATE: March 22, 2018 Project Name: Jones ADU and Variance Owner/Applicant: Matthew and Erika Jones, 1403 N 37th St, Renton, WA 98056 Project File Number: PR18-000077 Land Use File Number: LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Project Manager: Angelea Weihs, Associate Planner Project Summary: The applicant is requesting approval of an Administrative Conditional Use Permit, driveway Modification, and Administrative setback Variance for the conversion of an existing 720 square foot detached garage into a new Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) on the property located at 1403 N 37th ST (APN 3342700482). The site is 9,669 square feet in area and is within the Residential - 6 Zone (R-6). The project site contains an existing 2,470 square foot single family residence proposed to remain. The existing garage is located in the southeast corner of the site. The proposal is to convert the existing detached garage to a one bedroom, 552 square foot ADU, with a 168 square foot storage space. The applicant is requesting approval of a driveway Modification to retain the existing driveway servicing the existing detached garage (proposed ADU), which accesses from N 37th ST. The applicant is requesting approval of a 4.8-foot side yard setback Variance from RMC 4-2-110A, where a 5-foot setback is required, in order to keep the existing setback. Moderate Landslide hazards are mapped on the project site. Project Location: 1403 N 37th St. Renton, WA 98056 Site Area: 9,669 SF (0.22 acres) City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 2 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance B. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Administrative Report and Decision Exhibit 2: Site Plan Exhibit 3: Landscape Plan Exhibit 4: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit 5: ADU Floor Plans and Elevations Exhibit 6: Advisory Notes Exhibit 7: Site Photos Exhibit 8: Variance Request Justification Exhibit 9: Conditional Use and Modification Justification C. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner(s) of Record: Matthew and Erika Jones, 1403 N 37th St, Renton, WA 98056 2. Zoning Classification: Residential-6 (R-6) 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Residential Medium Density (RMD) 4. Existing Site Use: Single-Family Residential 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: a. North: N 37th St; Single-Family Residential, Residential-6 (R-6) Zoning Designation b. East: Single-Family Residential, Residential-6 (R-6) Zoning Designation c. South: Single-Family Residential, Residential-6 (R-6) Zoning Designation d. West: Single-Family Residential, Residential-6 (R-6) Zoning Designation 6. Site Area: 9,669 SF (0.22 acres) D. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Land Use File No. Ordinance No. Date Comprehensive Plan N/A 5758 06/22/2015 Zoning N/A 5758 06/22/2015 Kennydale Annexation N/A 2531 12/31/1969 E. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Existing Utilities a. Water: The proposed development is within the City of Renton water service area and in the Kennydale 320 pressure zone. There is an existing 6-inch water main in N 37th St. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 3 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance b. Sewer: The site is located within the City of Renton sewer service boundary. There is an existing 8- inch Gravity wastewater main located in N 37th ST. c. Surface/Storm Water: There is currently no connection to storm water on site or any on site BMP’s. If any site work outside of the building envelope is proposed, the project will be subject to the 2017 Renton Surface Water Design Manual (RSWDM). 2. Streets: The existing SFR and proposed ADU (currently detached garage) front N 37th ST along the north property line, which is classified as a Residential Access Road. To meet the City’s complete street standards for Residential Access streets, minimum ROW is 53 feet. Therefore, a ROW dedication of 1.5 feet would be required if the proposal exceeded the exemptions threshold for building improvements ($150,000), per RMC 4-6-060. 3. Fire Protection: Provided by Renton Fire Authority. F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-060: Zoning Use Table c. Section 4-2-080: Conditions Associated with Zoning Use Tables d. Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards 2. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards 3. Chapter 9 Permits – Specific 1. Section 4-9-030: Conditional Use Permit 2. Section 4-9-250: Variances, Waivers, Modifications, And Alternates 4. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element H. FINDINGS OF FACT (FOF): 1. The applicant is requesting Administrative Conditional Use Permit Review for the conversion of an existing detached garage into a new Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) on the property located at 1403 N. 37th St (APN 3342700482). 2. The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on February 12, 2018 and determined the application complete on February 21, 2018. The project complies with the 120 day review period. 3. The property is located within the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning designation. 4. The existing garage (proposed ADU) is currently located on the southeast corner of the property, on the east side of the existing single-family residence. 5. The existing garage is 720 square feet. The applicant proposes to convert the existing detached garage to a single-story 552 square foot ADU with a 168 square feet of storage space. The applicant is requesting approval of a 4.8-foot side yard setback Variance from RMC 4-2-110A, where a 5-foot setback is required, in order to keep the existing setback. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 4 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance 6. Access to the proposed ADU is provided via an existing residential driveway off of N 37th St. The site currently has two residential driveways. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080, Driveway Regulations, to keep the existing two driveways. 7. Moderate Landslide hazards are mapped on the project site. Because no exterior site work is proposed with this application, the Building Official waived the requirement for a geotechnical report. 8. The existing detached garage (proposed ADU) is approximately 16 feet, 10 inches (16’, 10”) at the tallest point of the pitched roof. 9. The proposal is SEPA exempt, per WAC 197-11-800. 10. No public or agency comments were received. 11. No tree removal, landscaping, or grading is proposed with the project application. Only interior and façade improvements are proposed. 12. Comprehensive Plan Compliance: The subject property is designated Residential Medium Density (RMD) on the City’s Comprehensive Plan Map. The purpose of the RMD designation is to encourage high-quality, compact, urban development with access to urban services, transit, and infrastructure. The proposal is compliant with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Compliance Comprehensive Plan Analysis  Policy L-3: Encourage infill development of single-family units as a means to meet growth targets and provide new housing.  Goal L-H: Plan for high-quality residential growth that supports transit by providing urban densities, promotes efficient land utilization, promotes good health and physical activity, builds social connections, and creates stable neighborhoods by incorporating both built amenities and natural features.  Goal L-I: Utilize multiple strategies to accommodate residential growth, including:  Development of new single-family neighborhoods on large tracts of land outside the City Center,  Development of new multi-family and mixed-use in the City Center and in the Residential High Density and Commercial Mixed Use designations, and  Infill development on vacant and underutilized land in established neighborhoods and multi-family areas.  Goal L-BB: Maintain a high quality of life as Renton grows by ensuring that new development is designed to be functional and attractive.  Goal L-FF: Strengthen the visual identity of Renton and its Community Planning Areas and neighborhoods through quality design and development. 13. Zoning Development Standard Compliance: The subject site is designated Residential-6 (R-6) Zoning on the City of Renton Zoning Map. RMC 4-2-110A provides the R-6 development standards, and RMC 4-2- 110B provides development standards for ADU’s within the R-6 zoning classification. The proposal is consistent with the following development standards if all conditions of approval are complied with: Compliance R-6 Zone Develop Standards and Analysis  Accessory Dwelling Unit: One ADU is allowed per lot and is limited to 800 square feet. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 5 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance Staff Comment: Only one ADU is proposed on the subject site. The proposed ADU is 552 square feet in size, with 168 square feet of attached storage space. RMC 4-2-080A.7 requires that the property owner file an affidavit affirming that the owner will occupy the principal dwelling or the ADU. Prior to the issuance of building permits the owner shall record a notice on the property title. The notice shall bear the notarized signatures of all property owners listed on the property title and include the legal description of the property, a copy of the approved site/floor plan, and the applicability of the restrictions regarding ADU’s in RMC Title IV. Compliant if setback variance is approved Setbacks: The required setbacks for Accessory Dwelling Units in the R-6 zone are as follows: front yard is 25 feet, side yard is 5 feet, and the rear yard is determined through administrative review to be no less than 5 feet and no more than 20 feet from the property line. Staff Comment: The site is an interior lot with frontage on N 37th St. The existing detached garage (proposed ADU) is located at the rear of the subject property on the southeast corner of the site. The proposed size of the ADU is 552 square feet (not including 168 square feet of attached storage space), which is compliant with the maximum size requirements of 800 square feet. The minimum front yard setback is 25 feet, and the ADU is set back approximately 46.3 feet from the front (north) property line. The proposed ADU is in conformance with the required front yard setback of the R- 6 zone for ADU structures. The required side yard (interior) setback is 5 feet for ADU’s. The applicant is requesting approval of a 4.8-foot side yard setback Variance from RMC 4-2-110A, where a 5-foot setback is required, in order to keep the existing setback. See Variance Criteria and Analysis under FOF 15. The existing structure is setback 6 feet from the rear (south) property line (See Exhibit 2). Rear yards for accessory dwelling units are determined through the administrative review process and are to be no less than 5 feet, and no greater than 20 feet. The proposed rear yard setback of 6 feet for the ADU appears to be sufficient to provide a buffer between the new ADU and the rear property line. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the existing rear setback of 6 feet for the proposed ADU (existing structure).  Building Standards: The R-6 zone has a maximum building coverage of 40% and a maximum impervious surface coverage of 55%. In the R-6 zone, a maximum building height of 2 stories with a wall plate height of 24 feet is permitted. Roofs with a pitch equal to or greater than 4:12 may project an additional six (6) vertical feet from the maximum wall plate height. If the height of wall plates on a building are less than the states maximum, the roof may project higher to account for the difference, yet the combined height of both features shall not exceed the combined maximums. Common rooftop features, such as chimneys, may project an additional four (4) vertical feet from the roof surface. Non-exempt vertical projections (e.g., roofs pitched less than 4:12, decks, railings, etc.) may extend up to six (6) vertical feet above the maximum wall plate height if the projection is stepped back one-and-a-half (1.5) horizontal feet from each minimum building setback line for each one (1) vertical foot above the maximum wall plate height. Wall plates supporting a primary roof surface that has only one (1) sloping plane (e.g., shed roof) may exceed the stated maximum if the average of wall plate heights is equal or less than the maximum wall plate height allowed. Staff Comment: The maximum wall plate height for ADUs in the R-6 zone is 24 feet. The proposed ADU structure is one story with a 5:12 pitched roof. The ADU is approximately City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 6 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance 16 feet and 10 inches in height at the highest point and is less than the primary single family structure. The ADU structure complies with the minimum height permitted for an ADU in the R-6 zone, and is compatible with the residential character of the surrounding neighborhood. The existing building coverage for the lot is 2,670 square feet (27.6%) and the existing impervious surface is approximately 5,298 square feet (54.8%). No changes to existing building coverage or impervious surface area are proposed. Therefore, the proposal complies with minimum building coverage and impervious surface regulations of the R-6 Zone.  Landscaping: The City’s landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) require a 10-foot landscape strip along all public street frontages. Additional minimum planting strip widths between the curb and sidewalk are established according to the street development standards of RMC 4-6-060. Street trees and, at a minimum, groundcover, are to be located in this area when present. Spacing standards shall be as stipulated by the Department of Community and Economic Development, provided there shall be a minimum of one street tree planted per address. Any additional undeveloped right-of- way areas shall be landscaped unless otherwise determined by the Administrator. Where there is insufficient right-of-way space or no public frontage, street trees are required in the front yard subject to approval of the Administrator. A minimum of two trees are to be located in the front yard prior to final inspection for the new Single- Family Residence. Staff Comment: A landscape plan (Exhibit 3) and site photos (Exhibit 7) were submitted with the project application depicting the existing landscaping on the site. The applicant does not propose any changes to existing landscaping. The existing landscaping includes groundcover (lawn), mature shrubbery and vegetation, and four on-site significant trees ranging from 8 caliper inches to 24 caliper inches. In addition to existing trees on-site, three significant trees are located within the public right of way. The existing mature landscape acts as a visual buffer between the proposed ADU and the street and complies with landscape code requirements.  Tree Retention: The City’s adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations (4-4- 130) require the retention of 30 percent of trees in a residential development. Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priority One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; significant trees on slopes greater than twenty percent (20%); significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and significant trees over sixty feet (60') in height or greater than eighteen inches ( 18") caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and other significant non- native trees. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained, unless the alders and/ or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or its buffer. A minimum tree density shall be maintained on each residentially zoned lot. For detached single-family development, the minimum tree density is two (2) significant trees for every five thousand (5,000) square feet. The tree density may consist of City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 7 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance 14. Conditional Use Permit: The proposal requires a Conditional Use Permit in order to convert and existing detached garage into a new Accessory Dwelling Unit at 1403 N 37th St. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with Conditional Use Permit decision criteria as related to the request to establish the use, as outlined in RMC 4-9-030D: Compliance Conditional Use Permit Criteria and Analysis  a. 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. existing trees, replacement trees, trees required pursuant to RMC 4-4-070F1, Street Frontage Landscaping Required, or a combination. Staff Comment: A total of four existing (deciduous) trees are located on the project site as depicted on the submitted landscape plan and photos (Exhibit 3 and Exhibit 9). Two of the on-site trees are located within the backyard, and two are located within the front yard. The on-site trees range in size from 8 caliper inches to 24 caliper inches. The applicant proposes to retain all existing trees and existing landscaping. In addition to existing trees on-site, three significant trees are located within the public right of way. The proposal complies with tree density requirements.  Parking: Each primary residence is required to accommodate off street parking for a minimum of two vehicles. Accessory Dwelling Units are required to provide off street parking for a minimum of one and a maximum of two vehicles. Staff Comment: The existing primary residence includes an attached two-car garage. Access to the site is proposed via two existing residential driveways off of N 37th St. The existing site improvements, include two existing driveways and 2-car garage, show sufficient room for up to six on-site parking spaces (four (4) parking spaces for the primary residence and two (2) parking spaces for the ADU). Sufficient area exists to accommodate off street parking for both the single family residence and the ADU. Per RMC 4-4-080I.4.b, there shall be no more than one driveway for each one hundred sixty five feet (165') of street frontage serving any one property or among properties under unified ownership or control. The existing site exceeds the maximum number of driveways. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080, Driveway Regulations, to keep the existing two driveways. See Modification Analysis under FOF 16. N/A Fences and Retaining Walls: In any residential district, the maximum height of any fence, hedge or retaining wall shall be seventy two inches (72"). Except in the front yard and side yard along a street setback where the fence shall not exceed forty eight inches (48") in height. There shall be a minimum three-foot (3') landscaped setback at the base of retaining walls abutting public rights-of-way. Staff Comment: The applicant has not proposed any new fences or retaining walls as part of the ADU project. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 8 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance Staff Comment: See FOF 12, Comprehensive Plan Compliance, and FOF 13, Zoning Development Standard Compliance.  b. 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. Staff Comment: The existing garage (proposed ADU) is currently located on a 9,668 square foot lot in the R-6 zone in association with an existing single-family house. The proposed ADU structure will have a smaller footprint (729 total square feet) than the single family residence (approximately 2,470 square feet), and is located within the back yard setback. The proposed ADU is single-story, while the new single family residence is two-story. The existing roof pitch of the garage (new ADU) is 5:12, which is consistent with the proportions of the existing single family residence. The siding materials and color are also consistent between the two existing structures. The ADU is placed away from the primary residence, with reasonable separation from property lines, and would be compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood. Based on the City’s permitting software, there are no other ADU’s within the immediate vicinity. Therefore, 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.  c. Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing detached garaged to a new ADU. Some minor modifications to the exterior façade are proposed for the ADU, including elimination of one of the existing garage doors, a new entry door, and a new window; however, no changes to the site outside the building footprint are proposed. The proposed project is compatible with existing scale and character of the neighborhood, and the proposed changes will not be particularly perceptible to the surrounding neighborhood. The surrounding neighborhood is made up of similar style detached single family homes within the R-6 zone. The proposed ADU would provide parking on-site and architecture compatible with the primary single family home. The proposed ADU has a lower maximum height than the existing home and would not interfere with sightlines of the other single-family homes in the neighborhood. Due to the small size of the ADU and the existing mature vegetation in the front yard of the property, the structure would be mostly obscured when viewed from the public street. Therefore, the proposed location would not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property.  d. Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. Staff Comment: The surrounding neighborhood is made up of similar style detached single-family homes within the R-6 zone. The ADU is required to be consistent with the architectural character of the primary structure. According to the applicant’s submitted elevations and photos of the existing single family residence, the proposed ADU is consistent with the siding materials, roof pitch (4:12), and most architectural details of the primary residence. The proposed ADU has low visibility from the public City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 9 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance street. Therefore, the proposed use is anticipated to be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood.  e. Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available. Staff Comment: See Parking discussion under FOF 13, Parking.  f. Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area. Staff Comment: Access to the existing single family residence and proposed ADU is provided via two existing residential driveways off of N 37th St. Vehicles related to a new single family residence and ADU would not cause traffic that would exceed the typical conditions of a residential street in a medium density residential area. No major change to traffic and circulation patterns of vehicles and pedestrians relating to the proposed ADU is anticipated in the surrounding area. Therefore, the addition of one new unit would not compromise the safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians.  g. Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated. Staff Comment: The proposed ADU is not anticipated to result in any light, glare, or noise impacts other than those typically associated with a residential use. The structure is single story and is designed with windows typical of a single family home. Noise volume will be consistent with typical residential volume, and is anticipated to be absorbed by the surrounding neighborhood. Light, glare or noise volumes would not result in an impact to the surrounding neighborhood.  h. 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. Staff Comment: See Landscaping discussion under FOF 13, Landscaping. 15. Variance Analysis: The applicant is requesting approval of a 4.8-foot side yard setback Variance from RMC 4-2-110A, where a 5-foot setback is required, in order to keep the existing setback. The proposal is compliant with the following Variance criteria, pursuant to RMC 4-9-250. Therefore, staff recommends approval with conditions of the requested Variance. Compliance Variance Criteria and Analysis  a. That the applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship and the Variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. Staff Comment: The applicant contends that practical difficulties and special circumstances exist on the subject property and a Variance from RMC 4-2-110B is needed for the side yard setback from the east property line in order to keep the existing garage structure (proposed ADU), in the existing location. The required side yard setback is 5 feet. The existing side yard setback from the east property line is 4.8 feet. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 10 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance Compliance with the current side yard setback requirement would require that the applicant move the eastern exterior wall by approximately 2.4 inches to meet the 5-foot setback requirement. The applicant contends that the structural change would unnecessarily increase the complexity of the project due to the engineering and structural changes involved in moving a load-bearing exterior wall 2.4 inches. The applicant further states that the existing structure has been in place for more than 30 years, and moving east exterior wall 2.4 inches would have no perceptible benefit for the neighbors to the east. Compliance with the required side yard setback may require removal of existing vegetation that acts as a visual barrier between the existing structure and neighboring property. Staff has reviewed the Variance request and concurs that, while the size, shape, topography, location and surroundings of the subject property do not prevent the strict application of the Code, practical difficulties exist on the project site, which prevent the applicant from reasonably complying with the required side yard setback. Compliance with the applicable setback would require unnecessary structural modifications to an existing structure, and would not result in a significant visual change that warrant the strict application of the Code. This proposal could be permitted without approval of a Variance if the structure was 2.4 inches to the west. Other property owners in the vicinity could apply for and receive Conditional Use Permit approval for new accessory dwelling units without the unnecessary burden of demolishing an existing exterior wall in order to move it 2.4 inches for compliance with setbacks. Strict application of the Zoning Code would add unnecessary complexity to the project that would deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. The applicant contends that practical difficulties and special circumstances exist on the subject property and a Variance from RMC 4-2-110B is needed for the side yard setback from the east property line in order to keep the existing garage structure (proposed ADU), in the existing location. The required side yard setback is 5 feet. The existing side yard setback from the east property line is 4.8 feet. Compliance with the current side yard setback requirement would require that the applicant move the eastern exterior wall by approximately 2.4 inches to meet the 5-foot setback requirement. The applicant contends that the structural change would unnecessarily increase the complexity of the project due to the engineering and structural changes involved in moving a load-bearing exterior wall 2.4 inches. The applicant further states that the existing structure has been in place for more than 30 years, and moving east exterior wall 2.4 inches would have no perceptible benefit for the neighbors to the east. Compliance with the required side yard setback may require removal of existing vegetation that acts as a visual barrier between the existing structure and neighboring property. Staff has reviewed the Variance request and concurs that, while the size, shape, topography, location and surroundings of the subject property do not prevent the strict application of the Code, practical difficulties exist on the project site, which prevent the applicant from reasonably complying with the required side yard setback. Compliance with the applicable setback would require unnecessary structural modifications to an existing structure, and would not result in a significant visual change that warrant the strict application of the Code. This proposal could be permitted without approval of a Variance if the structure was 2.4 inches to the west. Other property owners in the vicinity could apply for and receive Conditional Use Permit approval for new accessory City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 11 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance dwelling units without the unnecessary burden of demolishing an existing exterior wall in order to move it 2.4 inches for compliance with setbacks. Strict application of the Zoning Code would add unnecessary complexity to the project that would deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification.  b. That the granting of the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. Staff Comment: The applicant contends that the proposed Variance to the side yard setback requirements would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. As stated above, the existing detached garage has been at the existing location for more than 30 years. Retaining the existing setback, rather than moving the exterior wall 2.4 inches would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone. Staff concurs with the applicant that the proposal would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or surrounding neighborhood. The current side yard setback of the existing structure is consistent with other accessory structures in the project vicinity. It is not anticipated that the difference of 2.4 inches would cause harm to the surrounding neighborhood. In fact, the relocation of the wall would have more impact on neighboring properties due to increases in construction noise and removal of mature screening vegetation.  c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. Staff Comment: As previously discussed above under criteria a. and b., the applicant contends that the proposed Variance from RMC 4-2-110A to the side yard setback requirement would not be a special privilege inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. As stated above, other property owners in the vicinity could apply for and receive Conditional Use Permit approval for new accessory dwelling units without the unnecessary burden of demolishing an existing exterior wall in order to move it 2.4 inches for compliance with setbacks. The applicant’s proposal is to convert an existing structure, which has been in place for over 30 years, and moving the eastern exterior wall will add unnecessary complexity to the proposal. Staff concurs that the requested Variance would not be a special privilege inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity, as the current setbacks of the existing structure are consistent with other accessory structures in the surrounding neighborhood. Based on the analysis provided above, under criteria a. and b., staff believes that approval of a reduced side yard setback would not constitute a grant of special privilege and that other identical requests would be granted. Compliant if condition of approval is met d. That the approval is a minimum Variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. Staff Comment: The applicant contends that the requested 4.8-foot side yard setback Variance is the minimum Variance needed to accomplish the desired purpose. Approval of this Variance would allow the owners to retain the existing structure in its current location. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 12 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance 16. Modification Analysis: The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080, Driveway Regulations, to keep the existing two driveways that access from N 37th St. The two existing driveways exceed the limit of one driveway for each one hundred sixty five feet (165') of street frontage that is permitted by Code. The proposal is compliant with the following modification criteria, pursuant to RMC 4-9-250. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the requested modification: Compliance Modification Criteria and Analysis  a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives. Staff Comment: See FOF 16, Comprehensive Plan Analysis.  b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment. Staff Comment: The property currently has two driveways, one to access the primary residence and one to access the detached garage. The primary residence has an attached two-car garage and the driveway provides two additional off-street parking spaces. The driveway serving the existing detached garage provides off-street parking for two additional cars. The applicant is requesting a modification to allow for the driveway serving the detached garage (proposed ADU) to remain in place. The applicant does not propose any modifications to the existing driveway, and requests that the existing driveway stay in place due to benefits it provides to the property and neighborhood in terms of providing off-street parking for the ADU. The applicant contends that, while the garage and driveway for the primary residence provide space for four cars, it is likely that a tenant living in the ADU would park along the street rather than in the primary driveway so as not to block access to the primary residence. The applicant contends that keeping the existing driveway potentially prevents impact to the surrounding neighbors that may result from tenant vehicles that may be parked on the street. Staff concurs the proposed modification meets the objectives of function and maintainability intended by the Code requirements. North 37th Street is a dead-end street with limited width for on-street parking. Keeping both driveways could prevent parking conflicts on the street. In addition, the existing mature landscaping around the driveway serving the ADU currently acts as a visual buffer between the driveway and the street, which meets the appearance objectives and intent of Code requirements. Staff have reviewed the request and agrees that the 4.8-foot side yard setback variance from RMC 4-2-110A is the minimum Variance necessary to allow for the existing detached garage to be converted into an ADU. While moving the exterior wall of the ADU would satisfy the required side yard setback, the requested 4.8-foot side yard setback is the minimum Variance that would accomplish the applicant’s desired purpose of retaining the existing structure in its current location, which will have no effect on the current neighborhood character. Therefore, staff recommends approval of a Variance from RMC 4-2-110A for a 4.8-foot side yard setback for the proposed. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that this Variance only applies to the existing structure (proposed ADU) in its current location, and any future additions or expansions to the structure shall comply with current Code. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 13 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance  c. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Staff Comment: The applicant contends that the property is consistent with the immediate neighbors (1409 N 37th, 3709 N Meadow, 3713 N Meadow), which each have two driveways serving their properties. The applicant states that allowing for the modification would not be inconsistent with or negatively impact the immediate neighbors on the street. Staff concurs that retaining of the existing driveways would not be impactful for the surrounding neighborhood, or injurious to the other property owners on the street. The two driveways on the property are consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, and have been in place for more than 30 years. The proposal would not create adverse impacts to the neighborhood beyond what currently exists.  d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code. Staff Comment: See comments under criterion ‘b’.  e. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and Staff Comment: See comments under criterion ‘b’.  f. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Staff Comment: See comments under criterion ‘c’. 17. Availability and Impact on Public Services: Compliance Availability and Impact on Public Services Analysis  Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicates that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; subject to the condition that the applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. The 2018 Fire impact fees are applicable at $964.53 per new dwelling unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance.  Storm Water: An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Staff Comment: Based on the City’s flow control map, the site falls within the City’s Flow Control Duration Standard (Exist Peak), and within the Black River drainage basin. Currently, the project proposal does not include any changes to impervious surface area. If any site work outside of the building envelope is proposed, the applicant will need to refer to Figure 1.1.2.A of the 2017 Renton Surface Water Design Manual to determine what type of drainage review is required for this site. Drainage plans complying with the Renton Surface Water Design Manual shall be submitted with the building permit application, if the site work extends outside the building envelope. The applicant shall ensure that the proposed drainage for the ADU does not cause erosion on adjacent properties.  Water: Water service is provided by the City of Renton. A new 1-inch water meter will be required for the proposed ADU.  Sanitary Sewer: Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. The developer will need to show how they propose to serve the ADU with a sanitary sewer service with the building permit application. The development is subject to a wastewater system I i . C O N C L U S I O N S : 1 . T h e s u b j e c t s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n t h e R e s i d e n t i a l M e d i u m D e n s i t y ( R M D ) C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n d e s i g n a t i o n a n d c o m p l i e s w i t h t h e g o a l s a n d p o l i c i e s e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h t h i s d e s i g n a t i o n , s e e F O F 1 2 . 2 . T h e s u b j e c t s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n t h e R e s i d e n t i a l - 6 ( R - 6 ) z o n i n g d e s i g n a t i o n a n d c o m p l i e s w i t h t h e z o n i n g a n d d e v e l o p m e n t s t a n d a r d s e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h t h i s d e s i g n a t i o n p r o v i d e d t h e a p p l i c a n t c o m p l i e s w i t h C i t y C o d e a n d c o n d i t i o n s o f a p p r o v a l , s e e F O F 1 3 . 3 . T h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t c o m p l i e s w i t h t h e c o n d i t i o n a l u s e p e r m i t c r i t e r i a a s e s t a b l i s h e d b y C i t y C o d e p r o v i d e d a l l a d v i s o r y n o t e s a r e c o m p l i e d w i t h , s e e F O F 1 4 . 4 . T h e r e a r e a d e q u a t e p u b l i c s e r v i c e s a n d f a c i l i t i e s t o a c c o m m o d a t e t h e p r o p o s e d A D U , s e e F O F 1 7 . 5 . T h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e p r o p o s a l w a s e v a l u a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o V a r i a n c e c r i t e r i a a n d i s f o u n d i n t h e b o d y o f t h e s t a f f r e p o r t . T h e p r o j e c t w o u l d c o m p l y w i t h a l l f o u r V a r i a n c e c r i t e r i a i f a l l c o n d i t i o n s a r e m e t , s e e F O F 1 5 . 6 . T h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e p r o p o s a l w a s e v a l u a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o m o d i f i c a t i o n c r i t e r i a a n d i s f o u n d i n t h e b o d y o f t h e s t a f f r e p o r t . T h e p r o j e c t w o u l d c o m p l y w i t h a l l f i v e m o d i f i c a t i o n c r i t e r i a i f a l l c o n d i t i o n s a r e m e t , s e e F O E 1 6 . I i . D E C I S I O N : S t a f f r e c o m m e n d s a p p r o v a l o f t h e J o n e s A D U a n d V a r i a n c e , F i l e N o . L U A 1 8 - 0 0 0 1 1 1 , a s d e p i c t e d i n E x h i b i t 2 , s u b j e c t t o t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n : 1 . A n y a d d i t i o n s o r e x p a n s i o n s t o t h e A D U s t r u c t u r e s h a l l c o m p l y w i t h c u r r e n t s e t b a c k s o f t h e a p p l i c a b l e z o n e a s r e q u i r e d b y R e n t o n M u n i c i p a l C o d e . D A T E O F D E C I S I O N O N L A N D U S E A C f l O N : S I G N A T U R E : ( ‘ ) c J e n n i f e r H e n n i n g , P l a n n i n g D i r e c t o r T R A N S M I T T E D t h i s 2 2 t h d a y o f M a r c h , 2 0 1 8 , t o t h e O w n e r / A p p l i c a n t : O w n e r / A p p l i c a n t : M a t t h e w a n d E r i k a J o n e s 1 4 0 3 N 3 7 t h 5 , R e n t o n , W A 9 8 0 5 6 M a r c h 2 2 , 2 0 1 8 D a t e C i t y o f R e n t o n D e p a r t m e n t o f C o m m u n i t y & E c o n o m i c D e v e l o p m e n t J O N E S A D U A N D V A R I A N C E R e p o r t o f M a r c h 2 2 , 2 0 1 8 A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S i t e P l a n R e p o r t & D e c i s i o n L U A 1 8 - 0 0 0 1 1 1 , C U - A , V - A , M O D P a g e 1 4 o f 1 5 d e v e l o p m e n t c h a r g e ( S D C ) f e e . S D C f e e f o r s e w e r i s b a s e d o n t h e s i z e o f t h e n e w d o m e s t i c w a t e r t o s e r v e t h e p r o j e c t . T h e 2 0 1 8 s e w e r f e e f o r a ¾ ’ a n d 1 - i n c h m e t e r i n s t a l l i s $ 1 . 4 1 8 . 5 0 p e r m e t e r . T R A N S M I T T E D t h i s 2 2 t h d a y o f M a r c h , 2 0 1 8 t o t h e P a r t i e s o f R e c o r d : City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision JONES ADU AND VARIANCE LUA18-000111, CU-A, V-A, MOD Report of March 22, 2018 Page 15 of 15 D_Administrative Report and Exhibits_Jones ADU and Variance None TRANSMITTED this 22nd day of March, 2018, to the following: C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Amanda Askren, Property and Technical Services Manager Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Scott Warlick, Plan Review Fire Marshal K. LAND USE ACTION APPEALS, REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, & EXPIRATION: The administrative land use decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within 14 days of the decision date. APPEAL: This administrative land use decision will become final if not appealed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 PM on An appeal of the decision must be filed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680), together with the required fee to the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. RMC 4-8-110.B governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office, (425) 430-6510. EXPIRATION: The conditional use permit decision will expire two (2) years from the date of decision. A single two (2) year extension may be requested pursuant to RMC 4-9-030.F.9. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE: provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning the land use decision. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial decision, but to Appeals to the Hearing Examiner as well. All communications after the decision/approval date must be made in writing through the Hearing Examiner. All communications are public record and this permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence in writing. Any violation of this doctrine could result in the invalidation of the appeal by the Court. April 5, 2018. Site Plan: E X H I B I T 2 Landscape Plan – Existing Trees, Plants & Grass: RECEIVED 2/12/2018 AWeihs PLANNING DIVISION e x i s t i n g m a t u r e v e g e t a t i o n E X H I B I T 3 Neighborhood Map: EXHIBIT 4 Current Garage As-Built: RECEIVED 2/12/2018 AWeihs PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT 5 Proposed ADU Floorplan: Proposed ADU Floorplan: Current As-Built Elevations: Proposed ADU Elevations: Proposed Elevations: Proposed Elevations: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Page 1 of 1 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use action. Planning: (Contact: Angelea Weihs, 425-430-7312, aweihs@rentonwa.gov) 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o’clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o’clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o’clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o’clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. Development Engineering: (Contact: Scott Warlick, 425-430-7216, swarlick@rentonwa.gov) 1. See Attached Development Engineering Memo dated March 12, 2017 Technical Services: (Contact: Amanda Askren, 425-430-7369, aaskren@rentonwa.gov) 1. If approved, a new address will need to be assigned to the ADU. Please contact me prior to permit submittal to create. The new address will be 1405 N 37th St. Community Services: (Contact: Leslie Betlach, 425-430-6619, lbetlach@rentonwa.gov) 1. Parks Impact fee per Ordinance 5670 applies. EXHIBIT 6 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE:March 12, 2018 TO:Angelea Weihs, Planner FROM:Scott Warlick, Engineering specialist II SUBJECT:Jones ADU 1403 N 37th ST LUA18-000111 I have reviewed the application for the Jones ADU located at 1403 N 37th ST and have the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is approximately 9,669 square feet in size and is rectangular in shape. The site currently has a Single family home with a detached garage that the homeowner would like to convert into an ADU. The site is fronted by N 37th ST on the north side of the parcel. WATER: The proposed development is within the City’s water service area and in the Kennydale 320 pressure zone. There is an existing 6-inch water main in N 37th ST that can deliver a maximum flow capacity of 1600 gallons per minute (gpm). The static water pressure is about 64 psi at ground elevation of 172 feet SEWER: The site is currently hooked up to City of Renton sewer. STORM DRAINGE: There is currently no connection to storm water on site or any on site BMP’s. There is an existing 10” Stormwater main located in Meadow Ave N (Facility ID No. 120728) with a type 1 Catchbasin (Project File: SWP2703472) STREETS: At this location N 37th ST is a residential access road. Currently you have dedicated 25-feet of ROW. WATER COMMENTS Cherrie Lane Short Plat– LUA16-000964 Page 2 of 7 February 7, 2018 The following improvements are required to be provided by the developer for the proposed project to provide water service to each lot. 1. There is an existing ¾-inch domestic water meter serving the existing residence on the property. This meter cannot serve both the house and the ADU, city code requires the installation of a separate meter for each building. 2. A new water meter, 1-inch minimum will be required for the proposed ADU if it is detached from the proposed house, and it is subject to payment of water system development charges and meter installation charges. The 2018 SDC fee for a 1-inch meter is $1,863.50 and the 2018 fee for a new water meter installation is $1,425. City Crews will install the water service from the main to the property line and drop the in water meter. 3. Adequate separation between utilities as well as other features shall be provided in accordance with code requirements. a.7-feet minimum horizontal and 1-foot vertical separation between storm and other utilities is required with the exception of water lines which require 10-feet horizontal and 1.5-feet vertical. b. The stormwater line should be minimum 5 feet away from any other structure or wall or building. c. Trench of any utility should not be in the zone of influence of the retaining wall or of the building. 4. The water line and the Sewer line need to have a minimum separation of 10-feet from each other and have 1.5-feet of vertical separation as well. 5. Paving and trench restoration within the City of Renton right of way shall comply with the City’s Trench Restoration and Street Overlay Requirements. SEWER COMMENTS 1. The developer will need to show how they propose to serve the ADU with a sanitary sewer service. Depending on the size and material of the existing side sewer, ADU units are allowed to connect to the same side sewer as the dwelling. However detached ADU will be required to pay a SDC fee for sewer connection. 2. The development is subject to a wastewater system development charge (SDC) fee. SDC fee for sewer is based on the size of the new domestic water to serve the project. The 2018 sewer fee for a ¾’ and 1-inch meter install is $1.418.50 per meter. 3. Adequate separation between utilities as well as other features shall be provided in accordance with code requirements. a. 7-feet minimum horizontal and 1-foot vertical separation between storm and other utilities is required with the exception of water lines which require 10-feet horizontal and 1.5-feet vertical. b. The stormwater line should be minimum 5 feet away from any other structure or wall or building. c. Trench of any utility should not be in the zone of influence of the retaining wall or of the building. 4. The water line and the Sewer line need to have a minimum separation of 10-feet from each other and have 1.5-feet of vertical separation as well. 5. Paving and trench restoration within the City of Renton right of way shall comply with the City’s Trench Restoration and Street Overlay Requirements. Cherrie Lane Short Plat– LUA16-000964 Page 3 of 7 February 7, 2018 STORM DRAINAGE COMMENTS 1. If any site work outside of the building envelop is proposed, refer to Figure 1.1.2.A – Flow Chart to determine what type of drainage review is required for this site. The site falls within the City’s Flow Control Duration Standard (Exist Peak). The site falls within the Black River drainage basin. Drainage plans and a drainage report complying with the adopted 2017 Renton Surface Water Design Manual will be required. 2. There is a 2018 system Development Charge of $0.343 per sq foot of new impervious surface area. The fee shall not exceed $859.00. 3. Ensure that proposed drainage for the ADU does not cause erosion on neighboring properties. TRANSPORTATION/STREET COMMENTS 1. Frontage improvements are not required if the following criteria are met: 1. The New construction or addition with valuation less than $150,000. 2. Interior remodels of any value not involving a building addition. If frontage improvements are needed however N 37th ST is a residential access road. As per RMC 4-6-060, the ROW width for a two lane Residential Access road is 53’. Currently you have dedicated 25 feet and would require half street improvements that include a new 0.5 foot wide curb, 8 foot wide landscaped planter, and an 5 foot wide sidewalk. The project requires the dedication of 1.5 feet of right of way (subject to final survey). 2. A formal fee-in-lieu request may be submitted for the street frontage improvements along N 37th ST. See the wavier and fee-in-lieu request form using the following link: http://rentonwa.gov/uploadedFiles/Business/CED/FORMS/BPW.pdf 3. A fee-in-lieu can be paid at $107 per linear foot. 4. If you wish to construct the frontage improvements, a full utility construction permit will be required. Requirements for intake of a full utility construction permit are listed below. a. Payment of plan review / inspection fees. Plan review / inspection fees are based on the anticipated value of the construction of the frontage improvements. b. Survey prepared by a Professional Land Surveyor licensed in the State of Washington c. Civil Plans prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer licensed in the State of Washington. d. Survey and Civil Plans shall conform to the City of Renton attached survey and drafting standards. e. A written drainage and geotechnical assessment to account for the portion of right of way where work will be done. f. First review of utility permit plans takes approximately three to four weeks. 5. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable on the construction of the Accessory Dwelling Unit at the time of application for the building permit. The 2018 transportation impact fee is $1,679.28 per Accessory Dwelling Unit. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied, payable at building permit issue. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The fees listed are for 2018. The fees that are current at the time of the respective permit issuance will be levied. Please see the City of Renton website for the current fee schedule. Cherrie Lane Short Plat– LUA16-000964 Page 4 of 7 February 7, 2018 2. Retaining walls that are 4’ or taller from bottom of footing and stormwater detention vaults will require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans prepared by a licensed engineer will be required as part of the building permit review. 3. All civil plans shall conform to the current City of Renton survey and drafting standards. Current drafting standards can be found on the City of Renton website. 4. A separate plan submittal will be required for a construction permit for utility work and street improvements. All plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer in the State of Washington. 5. Please see the City of Renton Development Engineering website for the Construction Permit Application and Construction Permit Process and Submittal Requirements. Please contact the City to schedule a construction permit intake meeting. 6. All utility lines (i.e. electrical, phone, and cable services, etc.) serving the proposed development must be underground. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton inspector. Primary Residence: Detached Garage: RECEIVED 2/12/2018 AWeihs PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT 7 File No. 17-000435 Jones ADU – 1403 N 37th St Project Proposal: The subject property is located at 1403 N 37th St (APN #3342700482). The proposed project site contains an existing 2,470 sq.ft. single family residence with a built-in two car garage and driveway with parking for two cars which shall remain, and an existing 720 sq.ft. detached garage which shall remain. The proposal is to obtain a Side Setback Variance to allow for the conversion of the existing detached garage to a one bedroom, one bathroom 552 sq.ft. Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) with a 168 sq.ft. storage space. The site is 9,669 sq.ft. in area and is zoned R-6 (Residential 6). Variance Justification: The proposed accessory dwelling unit will be consistent with the architectural character of the primary home. As shown by the photographs of the primary residence and current detached garage, the garage is consistent with the architecture of the primary residence in terms of roof line, brick façade, etc. The brick facade will be retained as shown in the proposed front elevation and the only architectural change proposed to the exterior of the garage in the conversion process will be the removal of one of the garage doors to be replaced with three windows. At 552 sq.ft. meets the requirement that an ADU be maximum “800 sq.ft. or 75% of the primary residence, whichever is smaller” (RMC 4-2-110B). Additionally, as shown in by the elevation drawings, the building height is under the 24 ft from grade maximum allowed and has a 5:12 roof pitch. As shown by the included survey map (survey conducted by Terrane, January 8, 2018), the current detached garage (proposed ADU) is located over 6’ from the primary residence, and is located 6’ from the rear (south) property line and 4.8’ from the side (east) property line. According to RMC 4-2-110B of the city development code, the required minimum setbacks for ADU’s are 5’ from the rear and side. While the exterior wall of the existing detached garage is located 4.8’ from the side property line per the survey, the interior wall of the proposed ADU would be located approximately 5.2’ from the side property line due to exterior wall thickness. As previously stated, RMC 4-2-110B requires 5’ rear and side setbacks for Accessory Dwelling Units. We are requesting a variance to allow for the exterior wall of our ADU to be located 4.8’ from the side property line due to the location of the existing structure. Our proposal involves retaining the exterior shell of the existing garage (proposed ADU) and converting the structure into a 552 sq.ft. ADU with a 168 sq.ft. storage space. The proposal does not expand the footprint of the structure. Completing the conversion strictly according to the requirements of RMC 4-2- 110B would entail moving the eastern exterior wall by approximately 2.4” to meet the 5’ setback requirement. This structural change would significantly and unnecessarily increase the complexity of the project due to the engineering and structural changes involved in moving a load-bearing exterior wall. Since the existing structure has been in place for more than 30 years, the neighbors to the east are accustomed to the location of the structure and would see no perceptible benefit from the wall being moved 2.4”. Granting the variance would not have any negative impact on the neighboring property directly to our east. The existing detached garage (proposed ADU) was built in 1985 according to King County Assessor data and has not negatively impacted the neighboring property since that time. Because our construction would be on the interior with no expansion toward the property line, there would be no exterior change noticeable to the neighboring property. Moving the exterior wall of the structure by RECEIVED 2/12/2018 AWeihs PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT 8 2.4” would meet the strict standard for ADU setbacks but would provide no additional benefit to the neighboring property. If we were required to move the exterior wall by 2.4” the project would be more disruptive to the neighbors to the east due to the added noise and extensive work involved in exterior construction compared to that of our proposed interior remodel work. If our proposal involved building a new structure, we would take all necessary actions to ensure that the ADU would meet setback guidelines and we could apply for and receive conditional use permit approval without a variance. However, our proposal involves converting space in a detached garage which has been in place for more than 30 years. If the existing garage (proposed ADU) were located 2.4” to the west, the proposal could be permitted without a variance. The requested side setback variance is the only variance necessary for our proposed ADU to meet requirements necessary for further review and consideration for a conditional use permit. Other property owners in the neighborhood could apply for and receive conditional use permit approval for new accessory dwelling units without the burden of demolishing and moving an existing exterior wall 2.4” to comply with setback regulations. Considering that ADUs are permitted conditional uses in the zone and that our proposal is to convert an existing structure into an ADU without the impractical requirement of moving the exterior wall 2.4”, variance approval would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity. Conditional Use Permit Justification: The proposed accessory dwelling unit will be consistent with the architectural character of the primary home. As shown by the photographs of the primary residence and current detached garage, the garage is consistent with the architecture of the primary residence in terms of roof line, brick façade, etc. The brick facade will be retained as shown in the proposed front elevation and the only architectural change proposed to the exterior of the garage in the conversion process will be the removal of one of the garage doors to be replaced with three windows. At 552 sq.ft. meets the requirement that an ADU be maximum “800 sq.ft. or 75% of the primary residence, whichever is smaller” (RMC 4-2-110B). Additionally, as shown in by the elevation drawings, the building height is under the 24 ft from grade maximum allowed and has a 5:12 roof pitch. As shown by the included survey map (survey conducted by Terrane, January 8, 2018), the current detached garage (proposed ADU) is located over 6’ from the primary residence, and is located 6’ from the rear (south) property line and 4.8’ from the side (east) property line. The required minimum setbacks for ADU’s are 5’ from the rear and side. While the exterior wall of the existing detached garage is located 4.8’ from the side property line per the survey, the interior wall of the proposed ADU would be located approximately 5.2’ from the side property line due to exterior wall thickness. The effect on adjacent properties will be minimal as the immediate neighborhood is residential and the proposed ADU will be residential in nature, adding one small livable unit. The existing driveway used to access the current detached garage (proposed ADU) provides for two off-street parking spaces which is adequate to serve a 552 sq.ft. unit with one bedroom and one bathroom. A small ADU will not impact the surrounding area by adding significant traffic or creating significant noise, light or glare. The property is currently landscaped, and the landscaping will be maintained as-is since no additional exterior construction is proposed. Modification Request: Per the pre-application meeting notes, RMC 4-4-0801 currently allows no more than one driveway per one hundred sixty-five feet of street frontage for any one property. Our property currently has two driveways, one to access the primary residence and one to access the detached garage. The primary residence has an attached two car garage and the driveway provides two additional off-street parking spaces. The driveway serving the detached garage provides off-street parking for two additional cars. We are requesting a modification to allow for the driveway serving the detached garage (proposed ADU) to remain in place. We do not propose any modification to the existing driveway and are not proposing a newly added driveway, only that the existing driveway may stay in place because of the benefits it provides the property in terms of providing off-street parking and as part of the storm water drainage for the property. While the garage and driveway for the primary residence provide space for four cars it is likely that a tenant living in the ADU would park along the street rather than in the primary driveway so as not to block impact access to the primary residence. We do not want to impact our neighbors by potentially having a car parked on the street, something that has not been an issue while we’ve had the driveway. Based on meeting with a civil engineer who will provide the drainage plan and utility plan for the property (to be submitted with building permit application per waiver), the current drainage for the property makes use of the driveway to divert rain water to the street. If the driveway were to be removed it would lead to re-working the drainage on the eastern portion of the property to ensure that water is properly routed to the street and would not potentially impact our neighbor to the east. Retaining the existing driveway ensures that storm drainage continues to be properly routed to the street. Finally, our property conforms with our immediate neighbors (1409 N 37th, 3709 N Meadow, 3713 N Meadow) which each have two driveways serving their properties as ours does. Allowing for the RECEIVED 2/12/2018 AWeihs PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT 9 modification does not set us apart from the immediate neighbors on the street and will not negatively impact them, rather, it will be beneficial in providing parking and keeping our road free of parked cars.