Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_Reconsideration_Decision_191224 December 24, 2019 Eric Oehler CES NW 429 29th Street NE, Suite D Puyallup, WA 98372 SUBJECT: Request for Reconsideration – 7th Street Short Plat (LUA19-000185, SHPL-A) Dear Mr. Oehler: We received your timely request for reconsideration of the following: 1. Amending the setbacks for Lot 2 to be consistent with Lot 1, which would result in the front yard setback (20 feet) fronting the north property line and the secondary front yard setback (15 feet) fronting the east property line; 2. Amending the orientation of lot 1 and 2 so that Lot 1 would be oriented towards the north with a rear-loaded garage and Lot 2 would be oriented towards the east, with a side-loaded garage, both accessing from the proposed hammerhead turnaround; and 3. Removing condition of approval number seven (7) that would require the placement of the stormwater detention vault within a dedicated tract. As stated above, your first reconsideration request recommended amending FOF 14, Zoning Development Standard Compliance: Setbacks, of the Short Plat decision, which required that Lot 2 have the front yard setback (20 feet) front the east property line (along the proposed shared driveway tract) and the secondary front yard setback (15 feet) front the north property line: “In the case of Lot 1, the front yard setback shall front the north property line and the secondary front yard setback shall front the east property line. In the case of Lot 2, the front yard setback shall front the east property line and the secondary front yard setback shall front the north property line.” Your request for reconsideration asked that this setback requirement be amended to apply the same setbacks to Lot 2 as was applied to Lot 1, which required that the front yard setback (20 feet) front the north property line and the secondary front yard setback (15 feet) front the east property line. Your request stated that amending the required setbacks as requested would allow for adequate turning radii and allow for a uniform setback along the shared driveway for Lots 1 and 2. Per RMC 4-11-250, Definitions Y, for through lots, corner lots, and lots without street frontage, the front yard will be determined by the Planning Division Director. Your request for reconsideration of the front yard setback for Lot 2 is reasonable and not inconsistent with the intent of code requirements; therefore, staff recommends approval of requested reconsideration of the front yard and secondary front yard setbacks for Lot 2. Therefore, Lot 2 shall have the front yard setback (20 feet) front the north property line and the secondary front yard setback (15 feet) shall front the east property line (along the shared driveway tract). Your second reconsideration request recommended amending FOF 17, Compliance with Subdivision Regulations: Lots, of the staff report, which states the following: “Proposed Lots 1, 2, and 3 meet the minimum lot dimensional requirements in the R-8 zone, see FOF 14, Zoning Development Standard Compliance: Lot Dimensions. Lot 1 and 2 are proposed to be oriented towards NE 7th Street based on the lot width and depth dimensions.” Your request recommended amending the orientation of lot 1 and 2 so that Lot 1 would be oriented towards the north with a rear-loaded garage and Lot 2 would be oriented towards the east, with a side-loaded garage, with both lots accessing from the proposed hammerhead turnaround. However, this language regarding FOF 17, Compliance with Subdivision Regulations: Lots, pertained to the orientation of the lot in regards to compliance with lot width and depth, and does not impact the orientation of proposed buildings, or the proposed access for the lots. In addition, if Lot 2 were to be oriented to the east, the lot would no longer comply with lot depth requirements of RMC 4-2-110A. Orienting both Lots 1 and 2 (regarding lot depth) to the north, rather than to the east, serves to ensure compliance with lot dimensional requirements. In addition, the approved lot orientation would still allow for the applicant to construction a rear- loading single-family residence on Lot 1, and a side-loaded single-family residence on Lot 2 (with the front entry of Lot 2 facing the east), as indicated in your request. Therefore, staff recommend denial of the second request for reconsideration. Your third request for reconsideration recommended amending condition of approval number seven (7), which required that the proposed stormwater detention vault be located within a dedicated tract: 7. The applicant shall revise the proposal to include the stormwater detention vault within a dedicated tract. Compliance with this requirement shall be demonstrated at the time of Civil Construction Permit application. Your amendment request provided two options as alternative to the above referenced condition of approval. Your first option recommended amending the condition of approval to allow the proposed stormwater detention vault to be located with a tract or easement. Your second option recommended allowing for the location of the stormwater vault within Tract A (the proposed access tract), which subsequently would be revised to be an access and utility tract. Your recommended option number one would not comply with RMC 4-7-200B, which requires that drainage vaults, ponds, etc., be located within dedicated tracts. However, option number 2, which proposes to locate the proposed stormwater detention vault within Tract A, would be in compliance with the condition of approval number seven (7), which requires that the stormwater detention vault be located within a dedicated tract. Therefore, reconsideration of this condition of approval is not necessary to meet the needs or objectives of your option number two request. Decision: The reconsideration request for revision of the applied setbacks to Lot 2, referenced as request number one (1) above, for the 7th Street Short Plat, LUA19-000185, is approved. Therefore, In the case of Lot 2, the front yard setback (20 feet) shall front the north property line and the secondary front yard setback (15 feet) shall front the east property line. The reconsideration request for amending the orientation of lot 1 and 2, referenced as request number two (2) above, for the 7th Street Short Plat, LUA19-000185, is denied. The reconsideration request for revision of the condition of short plat approval, number seven (7), referenced as request number three (3) above, for the 7th Street Short Plat, LUA19-000185, isdenied.Therecommendedoptionnumbertwo(2)providedbyyourrequestisincompliancewiththeshortplatconditionofapprovalandwouldbeconsideredasapartoftheformalconstructionpermitreview.PleasefindenclosedamemorandumfromNathanJanders,CivilEngineerII,forfurtherinformationrelatedtooptiontwo.ThisdecisiontoreconsidertheoriginalVarianceDecisionissubjecttoa14-dayappealperiod.Theabovedecisionwillbecomefinalifnotappealedinwritingtogetherwiththerequiredfeeto:HearingExaminer,CityofRenton,1055SouthGradyWay,Renton,WA98057by5:00pmonJanuary7,2020.RMC4-8410governsappealstotheHearingExaminerandadditionalinformationregardingtheappealprocessmaybeobtainedfromtheCityClerk’sOffice,RentonCityHall-7thFloor,(425)430-6510.Sincerely,iJenniferHenning,AICPPlanningDirectorcc:.E.“Chip”Vincent,CEDAdministratorVanessaDotbee,CurrentPlanningManagerAngeleaWeihs,AssociatePlannerJagadeshwarGattu/Owner(s)Enclosure:MemorandumfromNathanJanders,datedDecember20,2019.1055SouthGradyWay,Renton,WA98057.rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE:December 20, 2019 TO:Angelea Weihs, Planner FROM:Nathan Janders, Civil Engineer II SUBJECT:7th Street Short Plat Reconsideration 3605 NE 7th Street LUA19-000185 I have reviewed the reconsideration request for the 7th Street Short Plat located at 3605 NE 7th Street and have the following comments: STORM DRAINAGE COMMENTS a. The proposed drainage facilities, a detention vault, shall be privately maintained pursuant to the 2017 RSWDM section 1.2.6 as the residential subdivision is nine lots or less. This section allows for drainage facilities to be contained within a tract or easement, however, subdivision regulations require installation of utilities such as a stormwater vault to be within a tract. As the subdivision regulations are more stringent the requirements set forth in the subdivision code shall be applied. The reconsideration request presents two potential solutions. Solution 1 requests that the detention vault be located within a tract or easement. Solution 2 requests that the detention vault be located within proposed Tract A. a.Per above, proposed solution 1 is not permissible as the detention vault is only allowed in a tract not an easement. b.Proposed solution 2 is acceptable and the following considerations shall be taken: i.Detention vault shall be designed in accordance with the surface water design manual current at time of construction permit issuance. ii.Water and sewer utilities proposed within Tract A shall provide code required separation. 7-foot minimum horizontal and 1-foot vertical separation between storm and other utilities is required with the exception of water lines which require 10-foot horizontal and 1.5-foot vertical. iii.If the above listed separation requires a utility to be on private property, or if a utility is close to the edge of a tract such that a standard easement would extend outside of the tract boundary, then a private utility easement shall be provided for any extent beyond the tract onto private property. iv.Building setbacks, as defined by code or the stormwater manual current at the time of construction permit issuance, shall be required from the detention vault and utilities.