Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJ_Topgolf_Renton_Written_Justification_190614_v1 OFFICE FAX WWW.ARCOMURRAY.COM Requested Conditional Use, Modification, and Variance Conditional Use Justification: Outdoor Recreational Facility Use A Conditional Use Permit is being requested to allow an Outdoor Recreational Facility Use within the Urban Center (UC) zone as permitted by Ordinance No. 5926. The proposed development shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into the overall mixed-use development. The following criteria are addressed as part of the Conditional Use Permit Justification. a. Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and standards of the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance and any other plans, programs, maps or ordinances of the City of Renton. Response: The proposed use is consistent with the ordinances within the City of Renton. The outdoor recreation use is complimentary to the surrounding uses within the project vicinity and complies with standards established in the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. 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. Response: The proposed location is an ideal location for the proposed use based on the character of the surrounding neighborhood. There is currently not another Topgolf venue in the state of Washington, let alone the City of Renton, and as such would not lead to an overconcentration of a particular use. The proposed use is located within a heavily commercial area and will be complimentary to the existing retail, office and manufacturing uses within the immediate vicinity. c. Effect on Adjacent Properties – The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. Response: The proposed use at this location will have a complimentary effect on adjacent properties. With the majority of the surrounding uses being manufacturing, office, multi- family and general commercial, an outdoor recreational facility functions as an amenity for the surrounding uses as opposed to competition. d. Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. Response: The Topgolf use is compatible within the surrounding neighborhood and the proposed height of the net poles is consistent with the height of other existing buildings within the vicinity. e. Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available. Response: Adequate parking has been provided to meet the City of Renton’s minimum parking requirements for the Topgolf use. f. Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area. Response: A Traffic Impact Analysis has been completed for the proposed Topgolf development. Topgolf’s traffic demands are off-peak in relation to surrounding uses and will not adversely impact traffic in the surrounding area as is evidenced in the provided TIA. g. Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated. PAGE 2 OFFICE WWW.ARCOMURRAY.COM Response: A photometric plan has been provided which indicates compliance with the City of Renton lighting standards. Outfield range lights are mounted beneath the roofline of the building and directed down so as not to have an impact on surrounding properties. Noise is mitigated by limiting access of guests to the building footprint itself and a house sound system which controls all music within the venue. 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. Response: Significant landscaping has been proposed between the proposed barrier net system and the adjacent 8th Avenue to function as a buffer between the net poles and the roadway. Enhanced landscaping has also been provided along Logan Avenue as well as the public plaza area. A comprehensive landscape plan has been submitted with the PUD application. Modification: Required Street Improvements A modification is being requested to exempt the development from constructing right-of-way improvements beyond what has already been completed along all three street frontages by the City of Renton. The project will, however, dedicate the required right-of-way as required. Renton Municipal Code requires street improvements to “ensure reasonable and safe access to public and private properties”, including “appropriately scaled sidewalks related to the urban context, a range of landscape buffers, curbs, gutters, street paving, monumentation, signage, and lighting, to be developed with complete streets principles.” All project frontages currently meet and/or exceed these requirements and do not require additional improvements as confirmed by the City in the pre-application meeting summary dated December 20, 2018 (PRE-18-000697). The proposed development will install curb cuts for vehicular access at all three frontages and will provide the required right-of-way dedication, but all existing right-of-way improvements will remain. Please see below for the justification for approval of this modification request. 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; Response: The existing right-of-way improvements were constructed as part of the City’s infrastructure upgrades to encourage the development of the area as a Regional Growth Center as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The existing right-of-way improvements, therefore, meet the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Community Design Elements and are sufficient as-is as confirmed by the City in the pre- application meeting summary dated December 20, 2018 (PRE-18-000697). Additional right- of-way will be dedicated to the City to accommodate future roadway widening and/or other improvements as deemed necessary by the City in the future. b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; Response: The existing right-of-way improvements were constructed per the City’s direction and oversight and, therefore, meet the objectives, safety, function, appearance, environmental protection, and maintainability as intended by the City code based on sound engineering judgment. Maintaining the existing right-of-way improvements as-is will not change the adherence to Code requirements. Additional right-of-way will be dedicated to the PAGE 3 OFFICE WWW.ARCOMURRAY.COM City as required to accommodate any future roadway widening and/or other improvements as deemed necessary by the City in the future. c. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity; Response: Maintaining the existing right-of-way improvements as-is will not be injurious to other properties in the vicinity as this is not the case in the existing condition. d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code; Response: The existing right-of-way improvements were constructed per the City’s direction and oversight and, therefore, meet the intent and purpose of the Code. Maintaining the existing right-of-way improvements as-is will not change the adherence to the Code. e. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; Response: The existing right-of-way improvements were constructed as part of the City’s infrastructure upgrades to encourage the development of the area as a Regional Growth Center, of which the project site is a part. The existing right-of-way improvements, therefore, were designed to accommodate build-out of the site and are sufficient as-is as confirmed by the City in the pre-application meeting summary dated December 20, 2018 (PRE-18-000697). Additional right-of-way will be dedicated to the City to accommodate future roadway widening and/or other improvements as deemed necessary by the City in the future. f. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Response: Maintaining the existing right-of-way improvements as-is will not create adverse impacts to other properties in the vicinity as this is not the case in the existing condition. Moreover, Additional right-of-way will be dedicated to the City as required to accommodate any future roadway widening and/or other improvements as deemed necessary by the City in the future. Variance: Parking within Front Setback A variance is being requested to allow parking between the building and Logan Avenue. A drive aisle with drop-off is necessary to provide a safe location within the property limits for guests to be dropped off at the main entrance. With the majority of parking being remote, use of shuttles onsite, and the increase in use of ride-share, and the regional draw of a Topgolf venue, it is not reasonable to assume that the majority of guests will be arriving on foot. While pedestrian access has been accommodated and is discussed further in this application, having this drive aisle between the building and Logan Avenue is essential. Along with the drive aisle, ADA parking spaces and a small percentage of the overall count have been provided to provide the shortest, safest route to the main entrance for those guests with limited mobility. Topgolf’s preference is for all parking to be located in front of the main entry, and the proposed plan represents a significant concession to accommodate the intent of the UC design regulations. a. 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, and 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. Response: The size and shape of the property do not allow the ADA and accessible parking stalls to be located proximate to the front door of the facility except in the location within the front setback. The elongated east-west dimension of the property requires the front PAGE 4 OFFICE WWW.ARCOMURRAY.COM door of the facility to be located on Logan Avenue, and therefore the accessible parking must be installed in this location. b. 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. Response: The granting of the variance will be an improvement to public welfare as it provides a safe place for guests to be dropped off at the main entrance outside of the public right-of-way. It also allows for accessible parking to be located as close to the main entrance as possible in spirit with ADA regulations. c. The 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. Response: It is commonplace, and the preferred practice, for commercial enterprises to locate accessible parking as close to the front door (or principal access location) as possible. There are numerous examples of this pattern in properties throughout the vicinity. In some cases, it is possible for such accessible parking to be located within a structure or in a side yard, yet still proximate to the front door. In this case, since the front door of the facility must be located on Logan Avenue, the provision of accessible stalls within the front-yard setback only allows the Property to adopt a preferred layout for accessible parking similar to other developments. This is not a grant of special privilege. d. The approval is the minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. Response: The proposed limited parking between the building and right-of-way is the minimum to accommodate a safe entrance to the venue. The vast majority of parking is proposed to be located to the side and rear of the Topgolf building as required by RMC 4-3- 100, Urban Design Regulations for District C. This parking is also screened by landscaping as required by RMC 4-3-100. Furthermore, a portion of the surface parking has been designed to facilitate future structured parking. The dimensions of the provided flex parking lot provide a minimum width of 200’ as required in the Urban Design Regulations with a perimeter area of approximately 850’. This area is less than the 1,500’ maximum perimeter area as designated in the Urban Design Regulations. This parking structure is anticipated to be constructed at a later date when details of the Phase 2 development are known and the required demand for the structure can be better defined. Variance: Structure Height A Variance is being requested for the height of the poles supporting the barrier netting for the Topgolf venue. The maximum building height in the UC district is ten (10) stories. The proposed Topgolf building itself is 46’, however the barrier netting necessary to contain golf balls without risk of damage to adjacent properties is up to 170’ above the FFE of the building. Each story of the Topgolf building is 14’ in height. With the threshold building height of 140’ based on ten (10) 14’ stories, the requested height of 170’ above the building FFE exceeds the permitted height by 30’. The proposed height of 170’ above the building FFE is the standard across all Topgolf locations and is the height determined necessary for public safety based on almost 20 years of operating experience. a. 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, and 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. PAGE 5 OFFICE WWW.ARCOMURRAY.COM Response: Reducing the height of the barrier netting is not an option due to the proximity of the project location to the surrounding streets. Proper containment of the golf balls from the Topgolf use cannot occur without the requested pole heights. The height of the primary structure is well within the allowable height for this location. b. 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. Response: The granting of the variance will be an improvement to public welfare vs. if it were not granted as it will prevent damage to property and/or injury to pedestrians/drivers by containing all of the golf balls within the Topgolf playing field. Numerous ball flight studies have been conducted to determine the required height of the barrier netting over 50+ operating venues. c. The 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. Response: Topgolf is a unique use with unique requirements to contain the activities of the use within the project footprint. This is not a grant of special privilege vs. other properties in the vicinity and zone as there are no other similar uses in the vicinity that would need to benefit from the granting of this variance. d. The approval is the minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. Response: The proposed height is the minimum height that has been determined to contain golf balls within the Topgolf footprint limits.