HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity's Response to Quadrants Recon Denis Law Mayor
City Clerk-Jason A.Seth,CMC
January 18, 2019
Jeremy Febus
KPFF
1601 5th Avenue, 1600
Seattle, WA 98101
Subject: City's Reply to Quadrant's Response to Reconsideration
RE: Solera Master Plan, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use and Street
Modification (LUA-18-000490)
Dear Mr. Febus:
Enclosed please find the City's Reply to Quadrant Corporation's Response to
Reconsideration on 1/16/2019) dated January 18, 2019.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov.
Sincerely,
Jas n S. eth, CMC
City Clerk
cc: Hearing Examiner
Matthew Herrera,Senior Planner
Jennifer Henning, Planning Director
Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager
Craig Burnell, Building Official
Kyle Wunderlin, Planning Technician
Julia Medzegian,City Council Liaison
Parties of Record(8)
1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057 • (425)430-6510/Fax (425)430-6516 • rentonwa.gov
lb sm
Denis Law Mayor i""
110
Community&Economic Development C.E."Chip'Vincent,Administrator
January 18, 2019
Mr. Phil Olbrechts
Hearing Examiner
City of Renton
1055 S Grady Way
Renton,WA 98057
SUBJECT: Reply to Reconsideration
Solera Master Plan,2902 NE Sunset Blvd,LUA18-000490,SA-M,PP,CU-H, MOD
Dear Mr. Examiner:
Please accept the City's following reply to the Applicant's January 16, 2019 Response to Reconsideration for the
Solera Master Plan. The City and Applicant appear to be in agreement on Conditions #12, #33, and #34,
recommended in the City's Request for Reconsideration,and therefore the City's reply will be limited to Condition
#18.
The City disagrees with the Applicant's assertion that Condition #18 lacks code or legal authority to impose the
condition on the land use decision.The performance measures(Condition#18)for the graphic representation of
the phasing plan(Exhibit 12)were recommended to the Hearing Examiner because Exhibit 12 lacked the specificity
needed to ensure compliance with applicable Renton Municipal Code (RMC) development regulations.The most
fundamental of those regulations is the allowance for attached dwelling units within the Center Village(CV)zone.
Pursuant to the project's vested Zoning Use Table RMC 4-2-060, attached dwelling units are permitted in the CV
zone based on condition#73. RMC 4-2-080A.73 states:
Garden style apartments are prohibited.Within the Center Village Zone,ground floor commercial
development at a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the frontage of the building is
required for all residential projects on parcels abutting NE Sunset Boulevard east of Harrington
Ave NE.
The garden style apartment prohibition is not applicable as the Applicant proposes flats and townhomes.
However,the remaining condition is relevant as the subject property abuts NE Sunset Blvd east of Harrington Ave
NE. Standalone attached dwelling units are not permitted in the CV zone at this location pursuant to the City's
Zoning Use Table.
1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057• rentonwa.gov
Additionally,the City's development regulations require projects to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
RMC 4-2-020A states:
Approval of projects in the zones is contingent upon the determination that the proposed developments
are consistent with the purpose of the zone and the purpose and intent of the land use designations and
guiding policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
The purpose of the Center Village(CV)zone as identified in RMC 4-2-020L.1 is:
The purpose of the Center Village Zone(CV) is to provide an opportunity for concentrated mixed-
use residential and commercial redevelopment designed to urban rather than suburban
development standards that supports transit-oriented development and pedestrian activity. Use
allowances promote commercial and retail development opportunities for residents to shop
locally. Uses and standards allow complementary, high-density residential development, and
discourage garden-style, multi-family development.
The City disagrees with the Applicant's assertion that Condition#18 lacks a nexus to a project impact. Condition
#18 ensures that the project does not result in a nonconforming land use should the Applicant not find a mixed
use development partner and develop the Phase II townhomes prior to Phase I. As provided in the above-
referenced RMC 4-2-060 and 080A.73, attached dwellings for the subject property are required to contain
commercial frontage.The Applicant's interest in the property lie in the non-commercial townhome component of
the project. Without the mixed use buildings on the subject property's frontage,the townhome element would
not be permitted. The townhomes are subordinate and ancillary to the master plan and provide a transition to
the land use pattern of the abutting properties.Condition#18 mitigates the development impact of removing the
existing 100,000+ square feet of commercial buildings on the subject property and constructing low density
residential-only development in a commercial zone that would otherwise not permit it.
Condition #18 ensures the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Center Village (CV) zone as
required in the above-referenced RMC 4-2-020A and 020L.1.The City's adopted legislative plan for the CV zone is
for a concentrated mixed use and commercial redevelopment of the existing single-story commercial strip malls
and surface parking lot dominated development pattern that currently exists. Mixed-use and high density
residential development that supports transit-oriented development are the types of private investment that the
City expects following the substantial public investment in the area, which not only included the actual
infrastructure improvements, but also the City adopted Planned Action EIS (Exhibit 30) that reviewed the
environmental impacts of the City's desire to increase the density of the neighborhood. Condition#18 mitigates
the development impact of not fulfilling the density and intensity that the CV zone and Planned Action Ordinance
require (Exhibit 29),should the applicant not find a mixed use development partner. Pursuant to RMC 4-2-120A,
the minimum density permitted in the CV zone is 20 dwelling units per net acre. Should the Applicant not find a
mixed-use development partner, one (1) block of townhomes would result in approximately eight (8) dwelling
units per net acre for the subject property and the project would fall well short of the CV zone's code required
minimum density.
The City disagrees with the Applicant's assertion that an unfounded fear drives the reasoning for Condition#18.
The Applicant has stated they have accepted the phasing plan and in their words"is binding on Quadrant and its
development partners." However, the Applicant's own requested relief in the form of a revised Condition #18
does not meet the intent of the phasing plan and further indicates the need for performance measures should the
applicant not find a mixed-use development partner. The Applicant's proposed condition allows the second
townhome phase to receive Certificates of Occupancy before substantial completion of the first mixe-use building.
This condition could result in one (1) block of townhomes to be completed with either significant delay of the
remaining phases or the Applicant walking away from the remaining phases with their costs recouped from the
1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057• rentonwa.gov
one(1)and only townhome block(Phase II).The City requests the Hearing Examiner deny the Applicant's proposed
revised Condition#18.
The Applicant's Reconsideration Request and follow up Response has indicated they do not have a development
partner for either of the mixed-use blocks. This admission is of fundamental concern to the City with how the
Applicant foresees their obligation in following through with the Phasing Plan and why performance measures of
Condition#18 are needed.The Applicant's Reconsideration filings suggest they would be ready to move on Phase
II townhome construction with no time horizon for the mixed-use blocks other than a commitment to hire
consultants to prepare building and construction permit documents.To this end,performance or surety is justified
as the Applicant has shown in their filings that the phasing numbers do not matter as they do not intend to follow
the sequencing of the Phasing Plan because they do not have a partner to do so.
In closing,the City does not intend to force an"extreme version"of the CV zone vision on the project applicant as
they claim, but instead the City aims to ensure the Applicant constructs the master plan in the order as identified
in Exhibit 12, thereby ensuring compliance with the use provisions of the CV zone. Condition #18 was
recommended to the Hearing Examiner to comply with the Zoning Use Table requirements (RMC 4-2-060),
compliance with purpose of the CV zone (RMC 4-2-020L.1), and compliance with the CV minimum density
requirement (RMC 4-2-120A). Condition#18 protects against the impact of a newly constructed townhome only
project that would not be compliant with the development regulations or comprehensive plan should the
Applicant be unable to find a mixed-use development partner. Furthermore, Condition #18 is reasonable as it
provides for three (3) options to comply with the phasing plan. The City requests the Hearing Examiner grant
approval of the proposed Conditions listed in the City's December 21, 2018 Request for Reconsideration.
Sincerely,
r /,r
Matt Herrera,AICP
Senior Planner
cc: Jennifer Henning,Planning Director
Vanessa Dolbee,Current Planning Manager
Leslie Clark,Senior Assistant City Attorney
Cynthia Moya,City Clerk Specialist
Ann Fowler,Civil Engineer
1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057• rentonwa.gov