HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_HEX_Cedar_Ridge_Church_Expansion_1701252
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
• •
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
RE: Cedar Ridge Church Expansion
Conditional Uses and Variance
LUAl6-000128, ECF, CU-H, V-A
)
)
) FINAL DECISION
)
)
)
)
)
Summary
The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit application for a proposed 12,180
square foot addition to the Cedar River Church located at 114 I I SE 164th Street. The applicant
also requests a variance to exceed the 30-foot height limit applicable to the R-8 district with a
maximum height of 40 feet and one inch. The applications are approved with conditions.
Testimony
Jill Ding, City of Renton Senior Planner, summarized the proposal. In response to examiner
questions, Ms. Ding noted that stormwater regulations only vested for 180 days from the date of
application if no utility permit is filed and more than that time has elapsed so the new regulations
apply. Ms. Ding noted a traffic study had been prepared for the project. Less than 20 am/pm trips
will be generated by the proposal so no full traffic analysis was required.
Vanessa Dolbee, planning manager, clarified that typical single-family homes have the roof pitch
proposed by the applicant, but since the church has a much larger footprint additional height is
necessary to accommodate the roof pitch.
VARIAN CE AND CONDITIONAL USE -I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
• •
Russell Johnson, applicant, noted that the current capacity of the church is 120 and the proposed
capacity is 301. Part of the purpose of the addition is to bring the building up to ADA requirements.
Marlin Gabbert, project architect, noted that the roof pitch is necessary because churches historically
have high pitched roofs, it's consistent with neighborhood character and it prevents water pooling
problems. 6: 12 is fairly standard for buildings of this size.
Pat Paull, neighbor, testified he supports the expansion. He is concerned about the southern and
western borders of the property. Several years ago, the church filled the property with several
thousand cubic yards of fill and this fill introduced blackberry bushes. He and an adjoining property
owner had to remove several dumpsters worth of blackberry bushes. He wants to see more dedication
and restoration of plant species as well as clean-up of the invasive blackberry bushes. When the
property was filled, it was not graded very well and it's difficult to maintain with standard tools. He
believes there may be hazardous wastes in the fill area. He also noted there's a powerline easement
that will prevent the installation of some of the required landscaping trees.
In response to examiner questions, Ms. Ding noted that the southern portion of the property has
wetlands, so there will be no fill in that area. Ms. Ding noted that she doesn't anticipate any new
blackberry bushes would be generated by the project because the only cleared areas will be for the
new asphalted parking lot. She noted that the City's critical areas regulations allow for the removal
of blackberries within critical areas. In response to examiner questions, she confirmed that there was
no blackberry removal required of the proposal because the applicant was eliminating its buffer
averaging request. The recommendations of the critical areas report no longer apply.
Exhibits
Exhibits 1-19, identified at page 2 of the staff report were admitted into the record during the
hearing. The staffs power point was admitted as Exhibit 20.
Findings of Fact
Procedural:
I. Applicant. Cedar River Church.
2. Hearing. A hearing was held on the applications on January I 0, 2017 in the City of Renton
Council Chambers.
3. Project Description. The applicant requests approval of applications for a conditional use
perrnit and a height variance for a proposed 12,180 square foot addition to the Cedar River Church
located at 11411 SE 164th Street. The proposed addition would include a 3,237-square foot
VARIAN CE AND CONDITIONAL USE -2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
• •
basement, 6,210 square foot main floor, and 2, 73.3 square foot balcony. The proposal would increase
the existing total seating capacity within the church from 120 to 30 I. The existing original 2,540
square foot church building would remain and would be converted to classroom and fellowship hall
space. The project site totals 168,630 square feet (3.87 acres). The proposed addition would have a
maximum height of 40'-l ". The proposed project includes the addition of20 parking spaces, resulting
in a total of 60 parking spaces on site. Access to the site would remain off SE 164th Street via one
curb cut. A sensitive slope (grade between 25 and 40 percent) and two Category 3 wetlands have been
identified on the project site (Wetlands A and B). Wetland A would have a standard buffer of 100 feet
and Wetland B would have a standard buffer of75 feet.
4. Surrounding Uses. Surrounding land use is composed of single-family development zoned R-
6 and R-8.
5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the project.
Pertinent impacts are more specifically addressed as follows:
A. Aesthetic. The only impact of concern would be aesthetic caused by the proposed increase in
height and size. However, overall aesthetic impacts may actually be improved because the
City's landscaping standards require the applicant to surround the property with partially site
obscuring trees that will grow to heights that exceed the proposed height of the church addition.
On-site trees will also be retained in conformance with the City's tree retention standards as
outlined in the staff report, providing further aesthetic buffering.
B. Traffic. Traffic impacts caused by the increase in capacity from 120 to 301 are found to be
nominal enough under City regulations to not even trigger a level of service impact analysis,
since the proposal will not increase am or pm peak hour traffic by more than 20 trips per hour.
C. Critical Areas. A sensitive slope (grade between 25 and 40 percent) and two Category 3
wetlands have been identified on the project site (Wetlands A and B). Wetland A would have a
standard buffer of I 00 feet and Wetland B would have a standard buffer of 75 feet. The
proposal will not encroach into the sensitive slopes, wetlands or their buffers. Originally, the
applicant had proposed a larger development, which necessitated buffer averaging, which is
addressed in the critical areas report. The applicant has since reduced the size of the
development such that no reduction in critical area buffers is necessary. The conditions of
approval require a revised site plan to eliminate the proposed buffer averaging.
D. Blackberry Bushes. There was some concern expressed about the introduction of invasive non-
native blackberry bushes from filling activity associated with prior church development.
However, there is no evidence or reasonable basis to conclude that blackberry bushes would be
introduced by the proposed expansion as all proposed clearing will be developed with
impervious surface or landscaping. Beyond this, legally the applicant can only be required to
VARIAN CE AND CONDITIONAL USE -3
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
E.
I.
• •
m1t1gate impacts of the proposed development and not any problems caused by prior
development. See Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. App. 505 ( 1998).
Noise, light and glare. Noise, light and glare impacts are adequately mitigated as the proposed
addition, which would house the church sanctuary, would provide better sound containment
than the existing structure, due to improvements made in construction materials from the time
the original church building was built. Additionally, noise, light and glare impacts would be
mitigated through the planting of the proposed 15-foot wide landscape buffer around the
perimeter of the property. Further, the proposed addition has been oriented to shield neighboring
residential structures from any noise, light and glare that may be associated with the church use.
Conclusions of Law
Authority. RMC 4-8-080(0) provides that hearing examiner conditional use permit review
and variances are Type III applications. As Type III applications, RMC 4-8-080(0) grants the
Examiner with the authority to hold a hearing and issue a final decision, subject to closed record
appeal to the City Council.
2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The property is zoned Residential-8 (R-8). The
Comprehensive Plan designation is Residential Medium Density.
3. Review Criteria. Hearing examiner conditional use review is required by RMC 4-2-060(0)
for religious institutions. Conditional use criteria are set by RMC 4-9-030. A variance is required
because the proposed _40 foot one inch height exceeds the 30-foot building height set by Note 18 of
RMC 4-2-1 IO(D) for the R-8 zone. Variance criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-250(8)(5).
Applicable criteria are quoted below in italics and applied through associated conclusions of law.
19 Conditional Use
20 The Administrator or designee or the Hearing Examiner shall consider, as applicable, the following
factors for all applications: 21
22
23
24
25
26
RMC 4-9-030(C)(l): 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.
4. Except as to compliance with the height limits subject to the variance request, the proposal is
consistent with the City's development regulations and comprehensive plan for the reasons identified
in Findings of Fact 14 and 15 of the staff report.
VARIAN CE AND CONDITIONAL USE -4
• •
RMC 4-9-030(C)(2): 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 2 proposed use. The proposed location shall be suited for the proposed use.
3
4
5
6
7
5. The site is currently occupied by the Cedar Ridge Church. The proposal involves the
expansion of an existing use and not the establishment of a new use on the project site. The proposed
church expansion is located within an existing established single family neighborhood and would not
result in an overconcentration of a church use within this part of the City. No other churches appear to
be located nearby.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location
8 shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
6. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned and mitigated, there are no adverse
impacts associated with the proposal, so it will not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on
adjacent property.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and
character of the neighborhood.
7. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any adverse aesthetic
impacts or any other impacts that would create compatibility problems.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available.
16 8. The proposal complies with the City's parking standards. Parking regulations require that
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
religious institutions provide a minimum and maximum of I space for every 5 seats in the main
auditorium; however, in no case shall there be less than 10 spaces. For all existing institutions
enlarging the seating capacity of their auditoriums, 1 additional parking space shall be provided for
every 5 additional seats provided by the new construction. A minimum of 3 ADA spaces shall be
provided for parking lots with between 51 and 75 spaces. The standard stall dimensions for 90-degree
head in parking is 9 feet by 20 feet with a 24-foot wide aisle width. The proposal includes a total of
60 parking spaces, of which 56 would be standard stalls and 4 would be ADA accessible stalls. The
proposed parking would comply with the minimum/maximum stall requirements as well as the
minimum dimensional requirements.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(6): Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and
shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area.
9. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal provides for adequate off-site traffic
facilities as trip generation impacts are considered negligible under City standards. The proposal
includes the construction of a surface parking lot, which meets the parking standards as well as the
VARIAN CE AND CONDITIONAL USE -5
2
3
• •
emergency access requirements of the Renton Fire Authority. In addition, a pedestrian sidewalk is
proposed, connecting SE 164th Street to the front of the church. A transportation concurrency
review was completed (Exhibit 17) and the proposal passes the City's Transportation Concurrency
Test.
4 RMC 4-9-030(C)(7): Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the
proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated.
5
6
7
I 0. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(E), the proposal will not create any significant noise,
light and glare impacts.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(8): Landscaping: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by
8 buildings, paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required to
9 properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use.
buffer adjacent
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
11. As shown in the aerial photograph of the critical areas report, Ex. 3, the entirety of the
property is either landscaped or is developed or has critical areas. The site plans do not show any
change· in these circumstances. The criterion is met.
Variance
RMC 4-9-250(B)(S)(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;
12. The special circumstances are that the applicant cannot build a two-story structure with 6: 12
pitch roof as authorized for the majority of other structures in the zoning district (i.e. single-family
residences) because the comparatively large size of the church results in a roof of 6:12 pitch that
exceeds maximum height. The criterion is met.
RMC 4-9-250(B)(S)(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;
13. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, there are no significant adverse impacts associated
with the proposal. As a result, the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to surrounding properties as required by the criterion above.
RMC 4-9-250(B)(S)(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;
VARIAN CE AND CONDITIONAL USE -6
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
• •
14. As noted in Conclusion of Law No. 12, the height variance is only necessary to enable the
applicant to enjoy the same privileges as authorized for the predominant development pattern of the
area, i.e. two story structures with 6: 12 pitch roofing. No special privilege is associated with the
request.
RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(d): That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum
variance that will accomplish the desired purpose.
15. The requested height variance is the minimum necessary to enable a 6:12 roof pitch for a
modest sized two story church. The criterion is met.
DECISION
All applicable permitting criteria are met as outlined in the Conclusions of Law above. As
conditioned below, the Conditional Use and Variance applications are all approved subject to the
following condition of approval:
I. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted at the time of Utility Construction Permit
Review including:
a. Shrubs within the 10-foot onsite landscape strip required along SE l 64'h Street;
b. The required 15-foot wide landscape strip around the stormwater detention ponds.
The required landscape shall be located on the outside of any required fencing for
the stormwater ponds; and
c. Shall also demonstrate compliance with the parking lot landscaping requirements
outlined under RMC 4-4-070.
The detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to the Current Planning Manager for
review and approval. Landscaping shall be installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the proposed church expansion.
2. A landscape analysis demonstrating compliance with the parking lot landscaping
requirements, as outlined in RMC 4-4-070, be submitted at the time of Utility
Construction Permit application for review and approval by the Current Planning Project
Manager.
3. The applicant shall either submit plans to construct the required frontage improvements
along SE 1641h Street (including the required 8-foot wide landscape strip between the
curb and sidewalk) or shall submit an application for a modification and receive approval
from the required frontage improvements at the time of Utility Construction Permit
Review.
4. A final tree retention plan shall be submitted at the time of Utility Construction Permit
application. The plan shall evaluate whether under the revised expansion proposal any
VARIAN CE AND CONDITIONAL USE -7
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
I I
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
• •
additional trees located on the southeastern comer of the project site are now available for
retention. The final tree retention plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current
Planning Project Manager prior to Construction Permit issuance.
5. A revised site plan shall be submitted at the time of Utility Construction Permit
application demonstrating compliance with the standard wetland buffer requirements for
Wetlands A and B. Wetland A was identified as having a standard buffer requirement of
100 feet. Wetland B was identified as having a standard buffer requirement of 75 feet.
The revised site plan shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for
review and approval prior to Utility Construction permit issuance.
6. The applicant shall record a Native Growth Protection Easement (NOPE) over onsite
wetland and/or wetland buffer areas. The easement shall be recorded prior to the issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed addition.
DATED this 25th day of January, 2017.
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
RMC 4-8-080(0) classifies the application(s) subject to this decision as Type Ill applications
subject to closed record appeal to the City of Renton City Council. Appeals of the hearing
examiner's decision must be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the decision.
A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14-day appeal
period.
Affected property owners may request a change m valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
VARIAN CE AND CONDITIONAL USE -8