HomeMy WebLinkAbout190708 LUA19-000090 Parks Responsea
King County
Parks and Recreation Division
Department of Natural Resources and Parks
King Street Center, KSC-NR-0700
201 South Jackson Street
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
206-477-4527 Fax 206-588-8011
TTY Relay: 711
TO: Hearing Examiner Olbrechts, City of Renton
Clark H. Close, Senior Planner, City of Renton
FROM: Brenda Bradford, Capital Project Manager IV
PROJECT: King County Parks - Renton Shop
SUBJECT: City of Renton Conditional Use Permit LUA19-000090 Response to
City of Renton Response issued July 2, 2019
DATE: July 8, 2019
Mr. Examiner,
Thank you for holding the hearing open until 5 p.m. July 8, 2019 to allow the County the ability to
respond to the City of Renton's July 2, 2019 response. The County and the City have agreed to
conditions previously negotiated and there remains one (1) issue that the City and County have
differences of opinion on.
We request that this response be entered into the Hearing record.
We have included some additional information for consideration with the Hearing
Examiner's pending decision. With regards to the item excerpted from the City's response
AV UVV, VVG IIQVG II IUII,.QIGU VVIL I ICU IIUIIIUGIJ I - J II It-, IVVI IIJ II IQI LUI IGJ
1)
D) Landscape Buffer: Staff is still recommending, as a condition of approval, that
Condition #7 include a minimum fifteen foot (15') fully sight obscuring landscaped visual
barrier between the Storage Building C and the north property line. The preliminary
composite site plan includes a separation distance of 54.5 feet between Buildings B and
C. This includes a 24 foot wide drive aisle, a truck parking stall depth of 25 feet, a two -
and -one-half foot (2.5') wide separation between Building 8 and the truck parking, and a
three foot (Y) separation between Building C and the drive isle. Per RMC 4-4-080.F.8 and
3) F.9.b, the minimum parking stall length is twentyfeet (20') for ninety degree (90°)
parking using a two (2) way circulation pattern with a drive aisle of twenty four feet
(24 ). Staff contends that the County employees could work together to coordinate
vehicle parking, loading, and maneuvering that would be required between Buildings 8
and C, particularly as it pertains to intermittent parking in the designated drive isle
alongside of Building C to load or unload stored items. Maintaining this condition would
improve the aesthetic quality of the built environment and ensure a higher degree of
compatibility between the subject property zoned Light Industrial (IL) and the property to
the north zoned Commercial Arterial (CA). Without this condition, the project would be
subject to minimum landscape code requirements under RMC 4-4-070.F.4. 1 )
response.
LUA19-000090, PR19-000190 King County Response to Staff Report Comments dated 7/8/219
pg. 1
1) Recommendation of fifteen foot (15') fully sight obscured landscape screen.
A. The County assumes that RMC CA and IL zone abutment requirements in RMC 4-4-
070.F.4.d were written, reviewed, deliberated, and adopted with specific language for a
reason.
1. RMC requires 1) A fifteen -foot (16) wide partially sight -obscuring landscaped visual
barrier, OR 2) A ten -foot (10') wide fully sight -obscuring landscaped visual barrier,
along the common property line.
2. The County agrees to provide a fully sight obscuring landscaped visual barrier but
believes that the RMC is clear that it corresponds to a ten foot (10') width rather than
fifteen feet (15).
3. The County asks for a decision consistent with the RMC rather than setting a
precedent that new CA/IL zone abutment requirements will be established on a case
by case basis through Conditional Use Permit.
4. Once the screening is at 100% at ten feet (10') of depth, the screen is achieved.
5. The City has not articulated why an additional five feet (5) of landscaping, which
would be blocked from view by the first ten feet (10'), is necessary, nor has it
articulated why the code as written is insufficient to achieve 100% screening within
the first ten feet (10') if properly designed.
B. Per RMC 4-4-070 the fencing can be considered part of the visual screen in conjunction
with the landscaping, which creates a performance requirement that can be achieved in
ways other than an increased width of landscape screening.
1. Definition from RMC - Fully Sight -obscuring Landscaped Visual Barrier: Such
landscaping or landscape plus fencing shall be, at minimum, six feet (6') high at
maturity and one hundred percent (100%) sight -obscuring.
2. The fence along the yard is eight feet (8') high, exceeding the vertical screening
requirement by 33%. The County should be able to do ten feet (10') minimum at the
yard area because the first barrier in the screen is sufficiently taller than required.
3. Fencing at the property line at the yard will obscure, to a degree, what lies beyond by
utilizing a more dense material. Within the property, the remainder of the 100%
screening requirement can be made up with landscaping within the first ten feet (10')
by landscape architecture design decisions such as:
a. Introduction of more evergreens.
b. Increased density in planting.
c. Increased initial size of selected species to achieve maturity earlier.
C. As mentioned previously, the CA zoned parcel to the north has an existing partially sight
obscuring visual screen along the common property line that will further obscure the
County's fence, landscaping, and buildings.
D. The County requests a decision consistent with the purpose and intent of RMC 4-4-
070.A rather than the application of a more rigid standard that results in the loss of
thousands of square feet of operational yard area which will have an impact to County
operations over the fifty (50) year design life of the project.
1. From RMC- "It is not the intent of these regulations that rigid and inflexible design
standards be imposed, but rather that minimum standards be set. It is expected that
LUA19-000090, PR19-000190 King County Response to Staff Report Comments dated 7/8/219
pg. 2
accepted horticultural practices and landscape architectural principles will be applied
by design professionals."
E. Per RMC 4-4-070 all landscaping shall be planned in consideration of the public health,
safety, and welfare.
1. The City's proposed increase of five feet (5) to the landscape screening creates a
tighter condition between Shop Building B and Storage Building C and increases the
likelihood for injury to individuals, vehicles, and facilities.
2. The design that offers the highest degree of safety is one where 100% screening is
achieved in the first ten feet (10') of setback and the maximum width possible
between Shop Building B and Storage Building C is allowed.
The County recommends the following decision:
1. Supporting the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants, vehicles, and the
public over the need for five feet (5') additional landscape screening.
2. Staggering the setbacks at Building C, D, and E per the County's July 2, 2019
proposal, OR
3. Ten feet (10') minimum fully sight obscuring screening along the common
property line utilizing a combination of fencing and landscaping consistent
with existing language in RMC 4-4-070.F.4.d.
2) Reference to two and a half foot (2.5') separation between Shop Building B and truck
parking.
A. This is a drawing error discovered when analyzing the ability of the County to move the
Storage Building C south five feet (5). Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) will require
that the trucks be parked five feet (5) from the Shop Building B in order to provide
accessible maneuvering clearances at the human doors to the shops. This was taken
into account during our mock up and the staggered setback condition site plan draft
submitted July 2, 2019 contained this update as well.
3) Reference to twenty foot (20') stall depth and twenty-four foot (24') drive aisle width
for two way traffic.
A. The code minimum stall depth does not work for the trucks parked at Shop Building B
which are on average more than twenty-three feet (23') long with the standard
equipment mounted on front and rear bumpers such as rear lift gates, hitches, winches,
rail wheels, and grill mounted safety cone storage.
B. A twenty-four foot (24') drive aisle is standard for two-way traffic provided that the
adjacent stalls are of sufficient length so that the traffic is not impeded by overhanging
vehicles.
Because of the need to increase the distance between Shop B and the parking for
ADA, the resulting impacts to the north leave insufficient space to push Storage
Building B south by five feet (5).
LUM 9-000090, PR19-000190 King County Response to Staff Report Comments dated 7/8/219
pg. 3